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).

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.

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.

http://www.chessninja.com/dailydirt/

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.

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.

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.

http://chesspro.ru/_events/2010/lin...

If it was proved by FIDE investigators, where can I read their presentation of the evidence?

I don't think that evidence exists.

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.

( 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.>

http://images.paraorkut.com/img/fun... http://media.techeblog.com/images/s...
http://www.coolfunnycomments.com/im... http://www.chessbase.com/news/2007/... http://www.chessbase.com/news/2007/...

And here is a leaked photo of Kramnik's preparation plans for the match:

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.