< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 5 OF 5 ·
|Jan-30-11|| ||Eyal: <kellmano> If I'm not mistaken, the first tiebreak is head-to-head result and the second is Sonneborn-Berger Points. The only way it can matter is, of course, if Navara-McShane is drawn. In that case, if Efimenko wins he should be 1st because he won against the other two. If he doesn't win this should depend on Navara's and McShane's SB points, which you can't know in advance because it's calculated according to the overall results of their opponents (but right now McShane's is better).|
Even though Navara is playing White I would pick McShane as favorite, because somehow he seems more mentally tough. I actually like Navara, though, so hopefully he will prove me wrong...
|Jan-30-11|| ||ketchuplover: Navara appears winning...so far.|
|Jan-30-11|| ||Peligroso Patzer: <47. ... Kf7> by McShane (instead of 47. ... Kf6) is surprising. Seemingly, it gives up the g- and h-pawns for the sake of eliminating White's advanced passer on the b-file, but it does not look like his best chance to hold.|
|Jan-30-11|| ||fixingguru: <Peligroso Patzer: <47. ... Kf7> by McShane (instead of 47. ... Kf6) is surprising. Seemingly, it gives up the g- and h-pawns for the sake of eliminating White's advanced passer on the b-file, but it does not look like his best chance to hold.> you are a patzer indeed. the idea behind Kf7 is to "trap" the rook with Nf6 after Rg5.|
|Jan-30-11|| ||Peligroso Patzer: After <50. Bb5>, the minor piece ending in Navara-McShane now looks drawn. The only winning idea I see for White is to trade off the minors and then bring his King to the 6th rank (a6, b6, or c6), but Black should be able to prevent this.|
|Jan-30-11|| ||crazybird: And Luke, welcome to group A|
|Jan-30-11|| ||Peligroso Patzer: Re: Navara-McShane:
< *** the idea behind [47. ...] Kf7 is to "trap" the rook with [48. ...] Nf6 after [48.] Rg5.>
But would that really have worked since (after 48. Rxg5 Nf6) White could have played 49. Rf5 followed by 50. g5, opening a line (through the g4-square) for the LSB to use eventually?
|Jan-30-11|| ||Peligroso Patzer: The following line seems to confirm that if Navara-McShane had continued <48.Rxg5 Nf6>, the result would still have been a draw: 49.Rf5 Kg6 50.Kf2 [but not 50.g5? Nxd5! 51.Rf8 Ne3! (only move) 52.Kf2 Rxb7 53.Rf6+ Kxg5 54.Rxd6 Rb1 55.Be2 Rh1 ] 50...Rxb7 51.Bh3 Rb2+ 52.Kg1=.|
|Jan-30-11|| ||Eyal: <And Luke, welcome to group A>|
Yes, McShane wins on Sonneborn-Berger points - his win over So in the penultimate round turned out to be decisive in this regard (Navara didn't score a win against any of the other top 6 - those that finished with 7.5 points and more).
|Jan-30-11|| ||Peligroso Patzer: Here are the actual final standings for the "B" Group:|
1-2. L. McShane 8-1/2
1-2 D. Navara 8-1/2
3. Z. Efimenko 8
4-6. L. Liem 7-1/2
4-6 G. Sargissian 7-1/2
4-6 W. So 7-1/2
7. V. Tkachiev 7
8. R. Wojtaszek 6-1/2
9-10. L. Fressinet 6
9-10. Li Chao 6
11. S. Ganguly 5-1/2
12. W. Spoelman 5
13. J. Hammer 4
14. F. Nijboer 3-1/2
|Jan-30-11|| ||AdrianP: Well done to Luke. He deserves a good tournament win after missing out a little after a very good start at the London Chess Classic.|
|Jan-30-11|| ||me to play: It's a bit of a shame that both McShane and Navara can't get the invite to the "A" group. You could reasonably, I think, reduce the "local" players down to two and make room for Navara.|
|Jan-30-11|| ||siamesedream: Congratulations to Luke McShane!|
|Jan-30-11|| ||Eyal: In fact, both McShane and Navara will be invited to Group A next year: |
<McShane was declared Group-B winner on Sonneborn-Berger but the tournament organizers decided both players would receive an invitation to compete in Group A next year.> (http://www.tatasteelchess.com/tourn...)
Btw, the same thing happened when Motylev & Carlsen finished at the top of Group B with the same number of points in 2006.
|Jan-30-11|| ||Eyal: ...So congrats to Navara as well!|
|Jan-30-11|| ||virginmind: congratulations to both winners.|
|Jan-30-11|| ||Everett: Will McShane and Navara replace the Dutch or Grishuk and Shirov?|
Is there anyone besides Giri coming up in the Dutch ranks? I know he's older, but isn't Ivan Sokolov tough?
|Jan-30-11|| ||Eyal: Grischuk and Shirov don't have any "spots" of their own, the organizers can invite them or not each year as they please... The only "officially" certain invitees to next year are Nakamura (as the winner of Group A), McShane & Navara. Among the Dutch Giri is practically certain as well, I suppose. In recent years they consistently had 3 Dutch players, though this year Giri actually earned his place as the winner of Group B, rather than playing on a "Dutch ticket".|
|Jan-30-11|| ||Everett: Thanks <Eyal>
Who are the other top Dutch players besides the recent one's we've seen? I'll assume the organizers will insist on at least two.
|Jan-30-11|| ||waustad: <Everett>See: http://ratings.fide.com/topfed.phtm...|
|Jan-30-11|| ||HeMateMe: Why not put Smeets or Van Wely in the B group and let both Navara and McShane play group A?|
|Jan-30-11|| ||me to play: <Eyal: In fact, both McShane and Navara will be invited to Group A next year:|
<McShane was declared Group-B winner on Sonneborn-Berger but the tournament organizers decided both players would receive an invitation to compete in Group A next year.>>
That seems fair. Thanks for the info !
|Jan-30-11|| ||pulsar: Skywalker marches to Group A, a well deserved opportunity. Same goes for David who managed to crawl back to the top after a shaky start.|
|Jan-30-11|| ||Don Cossacks: Nice comeback by McShane and Navara.Congratulations to both!!|
|Feb-01-11|| ||Troller: <Who are the other top Dutch players besides the recent one's we've seen? I'll assume the organizers will insist on at least two.>|
If Daniel Stellwagen would do a "McShane" and turn to chess full-time, he would be a natural choice. He seemed stronger than l'Ami and Smeets some years back and has played the A group before. Of course VW & Sokolov are known names as well; among the up-and-coming one should mention Benjamin Bok (apart from obviously Giri).
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 5 OF 5 ·