|Women Grand Prix Geneva (2013)|
Played in Geneva, Switzerland, 3-15 May 2013, as the first of six events in the Women's Grand Prix series 2013-2014. FIDE page: http://geneva2013.fide.com/. Overview: Wikipedia article: FIDE Women's Grand Prix 2013%E2%80%9314.
Bela Khotenashvili won with 8/11. She got 160 Grand Prix points (GPP), and took her 3rd GM norm. Crosstable (http://chess-results.com/tnr100114....) :
Next event: FIDE Women's Grand Prix Dilijan (2013)
Elo 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 GPP
1 Khotenashvili 2505 * ½ 0 1 1 ½ 1 0 1 1 1 1 8 160
2 Muzychuk 2585 ½ * 1 ½ ½ ½ ½ 1 ½ ½ 1 1 7½ 130
=3 Kosintseva 2517 1 0 * ½ 0 ½ 1 ½ ½ 1 ½ 1 6½ 100
=3 Dzagnidze 2545 0 ½ ½ * 1 ½ 0 1 ½ ½ 1 1 6½ 100
=5 Ju Wenjun 2544 0 ½ 1 0 * 1 ½ ½ 0 ½ 1 1 6 75
=5 Ushenina 2491 ½ ½ ½ ½ 0 * ½ 1 1 ½ ½ ½ 6 75
7 Lahno 2548 0 ½ 0 1 ½ ½ * 0 1 ½ ½ 1 5½ 60
=8 Yifan Hou 2617 1 0 ½ 0 ½ 0 1 * ½ 1 0 ½ 5 45
=8 Kosteniuk 2491 0 ½ ½ ½ 1 0 0 ½ * ½ 1 ½ 5 45
10 Cmilyte 2522 0 ½ 0 ½ ½ ½ ½ 0 ½ * ½ 1 4½ 30
11 Batchimeg 2298 0 0 ½ 0 0 ½ ½ 1 0 ½ * ½ 3½ 20
12 Girya 2463 0 0 0 0 0 ½ 0 ½ ½ 0 ½ * 2 10
| page 1 of 3; games 1-25 of 66
|1. T Kosintseva vs Yifan Hou
||½-½||33||2013||Women Grand Prix Geneva||B97 Sicilian, Najdorf|
|2. A Muzychuk vs O Girya
||1-0||52||2013||Women Grand Prix Geneva||B18 Caro-Kann, Classical|
|3. N Dzagnidze vs Kosteniuk
|| ||½-½||49||2013||Women Grand Prix Geneva||D31 Queen's Gambit Declined|
|4. V Cmilyte vs Lagno
|| ||½-½||31||2013||Women Grand Prix Geneva||D71 Neo-Grunfeld|
|5. B Khotenashvili vs Ju Wenjun
|| ||1-0||37||2013||Women Grand Prix Geneva||E90 King's Indian|
|6. T Batchimeg vs A Ushenina
|| ||½-½||65||2013||Women Grand Prix Geneva||D83 Grunfeld, Grunfeld Gambit|
|7. N Dzagnidze vs T Kosintseva
|| ||½-½||43||2013||Women Grand Prix Geneva||E56 Nimzo-Indian, 4.e3, Main line with 7...Nc6|
|8. Ju Wenjun vs T Batchimeg
||1-0||72||2013||Women Grand Prix Geneva||A07 King's Indian Attack|
|9. Kosteniuk vs O Girya
|| ||½-½||58||2013||Women Grand Prix Geneva||B12 Caro-Kann Defense|
|10. Lagno vs A Muzychuk
|| ||½-½||40||2013||Women Grand Prix Geneva||A04 Reti Opening|
|11. Yifan Hou vs B Khotenashvili
||1-0||41||2013||Women Grand Prix Geneva||B11 Caro-Kann, Two Knights, 3...Bg4|
|12. A Ushenina vs V Cmilyte
||½-½||32||2013||Women Grand Prix Geneva||E10 Queen's Pawn Game|
|13. O Girya vs Lagno
|| ||0-1||72||2013||Women Grand Prix Geneva||D94 Grunfeld|
|14. A Muzychuk vs A Ushenina
|| ||½-½||52||2013||Women Grand Prix Geneva||B23 Sicilian, Closed|
|15. V Cmilyte vs Ju Wenjun
|| ||½-½||60||2013||Women Grand Prix Geneva||C41 Philidor Defense|
|16. T Kosintseva vs Kosteniuk
|| ||½-½||46||2013||Women Grand Prix Geneva||B12 Caro-Kann Defense|
|17. B Khotenashvili vs N Dzagnidze
||1-0||34||2013||Women Grand Prix Geneva||E11 Bogo-Indian Defense|
|18. T Batchimeg vs Yifan Hou
||1-0||41||2013||Women Grand Prix Geneva||A46 Queen's Pawn Game|
|19. T Kosintseva vs B Khotenashvili
|| ||1-0||68||2013||Women Grand Prix Geneva||B12 Caro-Kann Defense|
|20. N Dzagnidze vs T Batchimeg
|| ||1-0||65||2013||Women Grand Prix Geneva||D85 Grunfeld|
|21. A Ushenina vs O Girya
||½-½||126||2013||Women Grand Prix Geneva||D11 Queen's Gambit Declined Slav|
|22. Kosteniuk vs Lagno
|| ||0-1||47||2013||Women Grand Prix Geneva||B84 Sicilian, Scheveningen|
|23. Yifan Hou vs V Cmilyte
||1-0||35||2013||Women Grand Prix Geneva||B52 Sicilian, Canal-Sokolsky (Rossolimo) Attack|
|24. Ju Wenjun vs A Muzychuk
|| ||½-½||39||2013||Women Grand Prix Geneva||A30 English, Symmetrical|
|25. T Batchimeg vs T Kosintseva
||½-½||61||2013||Women Grand Prix Geneva||D38 Queen's Gambit Declined, Ragozin Variation|
| page 1 of 3; games 1-25 of 66
TIP: You can make the above ads go away by registering a free account!
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 4 OF 5 ·
|May-14-13|| ||knt980: You go Bela! She is playing great.|
|May-14-13|| ||dx9293: I didn't know Hou was attending university. For someone with so much promise that is, in my opinion, A BIG MISTAKE.|
What are the chances someone that good in chess will be as good in something else? Very small.
|May-14-13|| ||John Abraham: <dx9293> Nonsense. The skills that are necessary to achieve a high level in chess (such as concentration, discipline, and abstract thinking) can be applied to other pursuits as well. Bobby Fischer once said, "I do not consider myself a chess genius, but a genius who happens to play chess".|
|May-14-13|| ||keypusher: <John Abraham: <dx9293> Nonsense. The skills that are necessary to achieve a high level in chess (such as concentration, discipline, and abstract thinking) can be applied to other pursuits as well. Bobby Fischer once said, "I do not consider myself a chess genius, but a genius who happens to play chess".>|
He concealed his non-chess genius well. A philosopher or mathematician could speak to Lasker's achievements in those areas, an engineer or computer scientist could speak to Botvinnik's. But it seems clear that neither man's non-chess renown is even in the same realm as his chess fame. Capablanca was a diplomat, but no Kissinger; Kasparov seems to be an extremely unpopular politician.
|May-15-13|| ||HeMateMe: Did Tal finish his university degree in journalism? Maybe Spassky was also in college getting a journalism degree.|
|May-15-13|| ||Nerwal: <But it seems clear that neither man's non-chess renown is even in the same realm as his chess fame. >
Well Lasker isn't Hilbert fame-wise, still his work in algebra is quite important. His name certainly appears even nowadays in academic courses about rings and modules and Bourbaki described his 1905 dissertation as an important step in this field that led to new investigations by others like Noether and Krull. While chess as a whole is hardly an academic topic... Lasker's fame in chess might be a case of being a big fish in a small pond; chess just wasn't as developed as mathematics in 1900...|
|May-15-13|| ||northernfox: <Nerwal>
Is not reference from Bourbaki a bit questionable, as it turns out he did not exist?
See: "The Artist and the Mathematician" by Amir D. Aczel (New York: Thunder Mouth Press, 2006)
|May-15-13|| ||nok: He did exist, albeit multicore.
<Capablanca was a diplomat, but no Kissinger; Kasparov seems to be an extremely unpopular politician.> You mean Kasparov rivals Kissinger?
|May-15-13|| ||northernfox: <nok> "Multicore" is not, to my knowledge, a form of existence recognized for human beings. There was no human being Bourbaki, which leaves "him" as a doubtful reference, as I noted.|
|May-15-13|| ||Nerwal: <Is not reference from Bourbaki a bit questionable, as it turns out he did not exist?>
<There was no human being Bourbaki, which leaves "him" as a doubtful reference, as I noted.>|
That's a very strange conception. What matters is what is written in books, not what is written on the cover.
|May-16-13|| ||Kanatahodets: I agree that for Hou it would be better to concentrate on chess; she has comparative advantage in this matter. she will never be as good as in chess in any of profession. Lasker was a decent mathematician, but not of Poincare or Hilbert dimension. moreover, he knew that he will never reach such heights in math as he did in chess.|
|May-16-13|| ||Kanatahodets: Karyakin also tried to be someone except chess but he failed. McShane changed his focus from chess just because he cannot live on chess only. he is also smart and he knows that he cannot reach magnus' level. he can be one of the best, say like Karyakin,Radjabov, Nakamura. But effort is high and the outcome is uncertain. that's why he changed his profession to one where it is easier to make a living.|
|May-16-13|| ||Kanatahodets: Nicholas cited Lasker, it is true. Emmanuel could be of the level of great Noether, but still this is not the Hilbert's level. It is true that competition and level of math is much higher than of chess. i would compare the first one with NBA and the second one with NHL. more players in math, higher stakes. Someone said, if chess would be popular as math we would have 20 MC! I would add than 10 of them would be from China! I've checked recently the faculty at Princeton math - I haven't found a single Russian but many Chinese. This is very serious, it is no chess.|
|May-16-13|| ||HeMateMe: What is Yifan studying, in school? What if she discovers biology? Will her chess suffer?|
|May-16-13|| ||Kanatahodets: regardin Lasker math. there's a notion of lasker ideal. as far as i remember it is an intersection of prime ideals. i think lasker proved that factorization of any PI ring by such an ideal is a direct sum of prime rings. Then any prime PI ring, at least finite -dimensional, to my knowledge is easily describable. Say for finite dimensional prime ring is a simple ring and thus can be characterized as a sub ring of nxn matrix ring.|
|May-16-13|| ||Kanatahodets: it is a hardly difficult result, but at that time it was something taking into account their cumbersome notations. Even Hilbert theorem 90 can be proved now by any grad student. So lasker worked in abstract algebra. In this field Goettingen school started its spur with Emmi Noether and her students. So lasker couldn't compete with great Emmi and he realized that it is safer to come back to the pastures where he was unbeaten.|
|May-16-13|| ||norami: < Kanatahodets> I've read that the chance that a number is prime is the inverse of it's natural log, but that hasn't been proven and proving it is the most important problem in mathematics. Any truth to that?|
|May-16-13|| ||Kanatahodets: <norami: < Kanatahodets> I've read that the chance that a number is prime is the inverse of it's natural log, but that hasn't been proven and proving it is the most important problem in mathematics. Any truth to that?> NO!!! It was proved in XIX century by Hadamard and VPoussen. Truly genius result! But Laster's theorem is related to prime ideals of non-commutative rings (he could consider commutative rings - I don't know). It is an analog of a prime number. For example for Z all ideals are pZ where p is a prime number. When you factorize Z/pZ you get Z_p - the field which is very easy to analyze.|
|May-16-13|| ||Kanatahodets: Norami, you may have in mind the Riemann hypothesis. This is truly THE MOST important problem in all math. BTW, prime number theorem and the Riemann hypo are related but for the theorem you need a much weaker version of RH. RH is the behemoth of all problems.|
|May-16-13|| ||norami: I thought the prime number theorem was that as x approaches infinity the percentage of integers less than x that are prime approaches the inverse of the natural log of x. But that's not the same thing as RH which says prime numbers form a random sequence over the integers under the probability model of the inverse of the natural log. In plainer but less precise English, the probability a number is prime is the inverse of the natural log. At least, that's the way to bet.|
|May-16-13|| ||Kanatahodets: < norami: the probability a number is prime is the inverse of the natural log. At least, that's the way to bet.> That is true and it was proven long time ago!|
|May-16-13|| ||Kanatahodets: < norami: ...RH which says prime numbers form a random sequence over the integers under the probability model of the inverse of the natural log.> This doesn't make any sense. Sorry.|
|May-16-13|| ||norami: Whatever RH is, I have one more question. WHY is it the most important problem in mathematics?|
|May-16-13|| ||Catholic Bishop: <I haven't found a single Russian but many Chinese. This is very serious, it is no chess.>|
Russians and Eastern Europeans usually do very well at the International Maths Olympiad. Chinese and other East Asians also do pretty well. The only slightly curious exception is India, ranking consistently lower than little countries like Taiwan and Hong Kong at these competitions.
|May-16-13|| ||Kanatahodets: <Catholic Bishop: Russians and Eastern Europeans usually do very well at the International Maths Olympiad. Chinese and other East Asians also do pretty well.> This is very old data; China has 10-15 teams of equal strength and it dominates IMO. Still I don't take IMO seriously. Who cares about fast problem solving?|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 4 OF 5 ·
Spot an error? Please suggest your correction and help us eliminate database mistakes!
NOTE: You need to pick a username and password to post a reply.
Getting your account takes less than a minute, is totally anonymous, and 100% free—plus, it
entitles you to features otherwise unavailable.
Pick your username now and join the chessgames community!
If you already have an account, you should
Please observe our posting guidelines:
- No obscene, racist, sexist, profane, raunchy, or disgusting language.
- No spamming, advertising, duplicate or nonsense posts.
- No malicious personal attacks, including cyber stalking, systematic antagonism, or gratuitous name-calling of any member Iincludinfgall Admin and Owners or any of their family, friends, associates, or business interests. If you think someone is an idiot, then provide evidence that their reasoning is invalid and/or idiotic, instead of just calling them an idiot. It's a subtle but important distinction, even in political discussions.
- Nothing in violation of United States law.
- No malicious posting of or linking to personal, private, and/or negative information (aka "doxing" or "doxxing") about any member, (including all Admin and Owners) or any of their family, friends, associates, or business interests. This includes all media: text, images, video, audio, or otherwise. Such actions will result in severe sanctions for any violators.
- NO TROLLING. Admin and Owners know it when they see it, and sanctions for any trolls will be significant.
- Any off-topic posts which distract from the primary topic of discussion are subject to removal.
- The use of "sock puppet" accounts to circumvent disciplinary action taken by Moderators is expressly prohibited.
- The use of "sock puppet" accounts in an attempt to undermine any side of a debate—or to create a false impression of consensus or support—is prohibited.
- All decisions with respect to deleting posts, and any subsequent discipline, are final, and occur at the sole discretion of the Moderators, Admin, and Owners.
- Please try to maintain a semblance of civility at all times.
NOTE: Keep all discussion on the topic of this page.
This forum is for this specific tournament and nothing else. If you want to discuss chess in general, or
this site, visit the Kibitzer's Café.
Messages posted by Chessgames members do not necessarily represent the views of Chessgames.com, its employees, or sponsors. All Moderator actions taken are at the sole discretion of the Admin and Owners—who will strive to act fairly and consistently at all times.
your profile |
Premium Membership |
Kibitzer's Café |
Biographer's Bistro |
new kibitzing |
Tournament Index |
Player Directory |
Notable Games |
World Chess Championships |
Opening Explorer |
Guess the Move |
Game Collections |
ChessBookie Game |
Chessgames Challenge |
privacy notice |
Copyright 2001-2019, Chessgames Services LLC