< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 35 OF 36 ·
|Feb-25-10|| ||Eyal: <badest: Bear in mind that he [Topalov] didn't exactly play his favo openings or disclosed any "novelties"...>|
Yes, Topalov definitely seemed handicapped with regard to the openings in this tournament, especially with White (with Black it remains to be seen – in case Anand plays 1.e4 – whether he sticks to the Ruy Lopez, which became his main weapon since the match with Kamsky, or drops it). This makes his win the more impressive, especially since deep preparation in sharp and critical lines is many times an important part of his success, and here he didn't achieve so much objectively out of the opening in 3 of his 4 wins (except the one against Gelfand).
There's a short interview with Topalov on chessvibes - http://www.chessvibes.com/reports/v.... Among other things, he says about his tendency of playing quickly: "I enjoyed playing, and the reason I played so quickly was simply that I was in a good mood and sometimes just played immediately the moves I liked"…
|Feb-25-10|| ||csmath: I hate Topalov's chances on e4 since Anand, over the years, has shown he can bust any e4 response. In particular he has busted various Ruy-Lopezes quite a few times and since Topalov plays Berlin this is not going to work against Anand who has strong preference to fine manouvering. Hopefully Topalov will play closed which he employed successfully in the past although even here I would give Anand a clear advantage.|
Petroff is probably the best e4 opening against Anand as it yields nothing in general though Anand must have some stuff he prepared against Kramnik.
Just thinking about this it seems to me Topalov as black will have rather hard time against Anand.
|Feb-26-10|| ||frogbert: <Chess is not so hard to learn for a child age 5 or older, if it's taught in small chunks, and made to be fun (more than competitive) throughout.>|
my kid could set up the pieces correctly before he was 3, and was playing the game mostly correctly by 3,5 (except advanced stuff like e.p. captures which was too abstract), and he had no problems solving mate in 1 and mate in 2 puzzles (from fischer's book stuffed with such exercises) before he was 4, simply by looking at the diagrams in the book - abstracting real pieces on a physical board to figures on paper was almost instant and hardly needed explanation.
did this take lots of training? not at all - essentially nothing but answering his questions when he was wondering about things regarding this chess set his dad always had set up in the living room. until this day we've basically played around with chess whenever he feels like it - only after he turned 6 did we start to have one "weekly" session of 1 hour; that was when i started teaching him and 5-6 other kids at his school 7-8 monday afternoons last fall.
my son probably is a bit more than averagely talented regarding abstract stuff like chess - over the entire population - but it's interesting to see what simply being <exposed> to something (seeing a chess board in the living room and understanding that dad is interested in that "thing") can do for a kid's motivation. i fully believe that "inner desire" should lead any kind of training of young children, though - so even last year when he was 5-6 (born in june 2003) i think he and i only played like 15-20 games during the entire year.
there's no doubt in my mind that if i were the ambitious kind of father, my son could've been much, much further ahead in his chess development by today. the amount of stuff a child can pick up - even of rather abstract nature - between the age of 4 and 6 is quite astonishing. my wife and i have found it much more important to allow our son to develop his skills of all categories freely and naturally than focusing on something as limited as chess - he'll have plenty of time to play around with chess later, if he so desires. hence, chess "lessons" in our house are given on a request-only basis.
my son still prefers challenging my wife when he wants a game, though - he reckons it's easier to get a win that way... :o)
|Feb-26-10|| ||Chessforeva: 3D games: http://chessforeva.appspot.com/C0_p...|
|Feb-26-10|| ||badest: And the daily dirt ...
<Eyal> lol "just played immediately the moves I liked" ... that sounds like my chess-buddies in the 1800-range rather than 2800+ ...
|Feb-26-10|| ||moronovich: What a pleasant post of yours <frogbert> !|
It really reminds me of my own story with my son (who is 35 now).Also reminding about that the real motivation comes from within and that a certain amount of joy is the best fuel for further investigation.
One time I let him beat me on purpose,when he was around 10-11.Just to assure that it was not, him beating his father that was his maingoal,as it turns ot to be for some.
Years later we laughed about this incident as he allways thought there "was something fishy" about this game ;) Which there indeed were.
When he bacame older we played regularly and had oceans of beautifull games and memories , on the board, as well as many good coversations related to chess.
Now,he has a braindamage,but we still play once every week and I still let him win now and then on purpose,but now with another motive.It is quite moving and also interesting how chess sticks as one of the last resorts in the brain.Like an almost imortal lanquage I would say.
So I wish you and your son many good moments of chess in the future to come.Though being aware of that this is not the mainagenda for the moment.
|Feb-26-10|| ||frogbert: <What a pleasant post of yours <frogbert>>|
thanks, moronovich - i appreciate it.
i'm sorry to hear about your son's brain damage, though. what parents want most for their children is for them to remain healthy and happy, and it can be really hard to cope with it when sickness or accidents strike. it's good that you still can use chess to make him happy - and probably it helps to keep some remaining parts of his brain healthy too, for as long as possible.
if your son is 35, then you're around my parents' age i guess - or even older, as my dad was relatively young when i was born, in 1972. "naturally", he was the one who taught me chess, too - when i was around 5. he'd never been a club player, though, and i grew up on the countryside where no organized chess existed, so there wasn't even a chance for anyone to have ambitions for my "chess career" - which had a stand-still for almost 10 years between the age of 10 and 20, when i joined the university chess club. :o)
|Feb-26-10|| ||moronovich: <frogbert> Thanks for your kind words.And empathy.|
Like your dad I was also a young father 22 ( I am from 1953 )..which I found and still do,as a good age for (mine) fatherhood.And I see now that 1972 was a great year in several ways ... your birth..I went to France to start on something else and was inspired by Spakssky-Fischer the time I returned.Joining the local chessclub next year,like you at 20.Which must be considered late if one wants to go pro..But I am happy I didn´t take that path...and when I try to listen to how you describe you and your family life it seems to fit with
your need as well.
See you around.And now I´ll make some dumplings to mrs.moronovich ;)
|Feb-27-10|| ||percyblakeney: Chesspro's final Linares report:
|Feb-27-10|| ||Bondsamir: <badest: <hedgeh0g> I liked Gris too ... but Topa exploited time and errors in such a systematic way that it definitely seemed like a "plan". Bear in mind that he didn't exactly play his favo openings or disclosed any "novelties"...>|
this is excellent insight. and also he didn't hide his head in the sand like Anand in his last tournamant.
|Feb-27-10|| ||Bondsamir: It is very clear to anybody with alive conscience and sound mind that Mr.Vladimir Kramnik in his WCC match against Topalov was recieving remote assistance during the games and this thing was proved by FIDE investigators.
besides,he resorted to his former mentor G.Kasparov who taught him chess and cheating (everybody knows the ways kasparov was cheating especially in his famous game vs Judit Polgar) late in that match to save what was left from his face.|
|Feb-27-10|| ||Jim Bartle: What evidence is there that Kramnik received "remote assistance"?|
If it was proved by FIDE investigators, where can I read their presentation of the evidence?
I don't think that evidence exists.
And what evidence is their that Kasparov cheats? There is the possiblity he released a piece vs. Judith, then moved to a different square. A <possibility>. But anything else? I don't think so. (Being a jerk sometimes does not qualify as cheating.)
|Feb-27-10|| ||Bobby Fiske: <Bondsamir:...Mr.Vladimir Kramnik in his WCC match against Topalov was recieving remote assistance during the games and this thing was proved by FIDE investigators...everybody knows the ways kasparov was cheating especially in his famous game vs Judit Polgar.>|
Can you pls provide any links proving these heavy accusations?
|Feb-27-10|| ||acirce: <And what evidence is their that Kasparov cheats? There is the possiblity he released a piece vs. Judith, then moved to a different square. A <possibility>.>|
Actually, he did do that. It was caught on tape. What is not clear is if he knew he had released it. If you don't do it knowingly it hard to call it cheating.
Carlsen did the same thing against Aronian, and very few people thought he was trying to cheat, while almost everyone assume the worst about Kasparov.
|Feb-27-10|| ||Jim Bartle: I stand corrected.|
|Feb-27-10|| ||laskereshevsky: "It is very clear to" <<anybody with alive conscience and sound mind>>" |
( Of course here our friendly kibitzer was reffering to the bulgarians )
<that Mr.Vladimir Kramnik in his WCC match against Topalov was recieving remote assistance during the games>
(OK,... if i support a chess-player i can accept the fact he could lose.... but if I consider him a NATIONAL HERO..... The "stuff" is psigologically unacceptable )
<and this thing was proved by FIDE investigators.>
˙( I think that those "fantomatics" FIDE Functionary are the Aliens.... they gived evidences of the cheat directly to our MR. President Kirsan, during his permance in the UFO...
|Feb-27-10|| ||Bondsamir: <Bobby Fiske:>
Yes Sir, I will provide links and evidences.
I just need some time to finish some work I nave right now.
I will post the links here and on Topalov's profile page too.
|Feb-27-10|| ||Bondsamir: laskereshevsky: "It is very clear to" <<anybody with alive conscience and sound mind>>"
( Of course here our friendly kibitzer was reffering to the bulgarians )|
I apologize if made an offend.
|Feb-27-10|| ||Eyal: <Chesspro's final Linares report:
According to this report, Aronian vs Topalov, 2010 was chosen as the best game of the tournament (prize: 27 liters of high-quality olive oil). If one looks for a double-edged game it's a reasonable choice, but as far as the level of a single player is concerned I would have picked Grischuk vs Gelfand, 2010.
|Feb-27-10|| ||laskereshevsky: <Bondsamir> dont worry, no offense at all,
I was just a litle sarcastic... (Of course without any intention of offense by my side too!)|
|Feb-27-10|| ||MeatGrinder: Here is some hard evidence that proves Kramnik cheated in Elista:|
And here is a leaked photo of Kramnik's preparation plans for the match:
|Feb-27-10|| ||turbo231: <MeatGrinder>
You have a great sense of humor. That took alot of time and effort.
|Feb-27-10|| ||moronovich: <Meatgrinder> Lol!|
|Feb-27-10|| ||csmath: In the match in Elista Topalov's nerves cracked. It was due to 2 quick losses in unfortunate positions. This is probably why his camp was looking to find external reasons for the losses. Unfortunately it turned into a scandal with preposterous acussations. |
Nevertheless, the possibility of cheating in high level chess is quite clear now that the engines like Rybka are significantly superior to human players. Even in the case of Elista the idea of having a player retreating often in private premises during the game should not have been tolerated regardless of medical conditions that player could have, which I believe is the case with Kramnik.
The possibility of Topalov's team cheating in San Luis should have been investigated as well.
FIDE choses to do nothing as usual and that is the part of the problem.
|Feb-27-10|| ||csmath: The effect of appearance of impropriety on participants is significant. Moro in San Luis decided to offer a draw to Topalov repeatedly in the early stage of game and has not played with full energy. Topalov in Elista acted paranoid with all the acussations. |
Any possibility for cheating should be eliminated.
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 35 OF 36 ·