chessgames.com
Members · Prefs · Collections · Openings · Endgames · Sacrifices · History · Search Kibitzing · Kibitzer's Café · Chessforums · Tournament Index · Players · Kibitzing

🏆 World Cup (2017)

  PARTICIPANTS (sorted by highest achieved rating; click on name to see player's games)
Magnus Carlsen, Fabiano Caruana, Levon Aronian, Wesley So, Maxime Vachier-Lagrave, Vladimir Kramnik, Viswanathan Anand, Hikaru Nakamura, Shakhriyar Mamedyarov, Alexander Grischuk, Anish Giri, Teimour Radjabov, Sergey Karjakin, Vassily Ivanchuk, Ding Liren, Boris Gelfand, Peter Svidler, Ruslan Ponomariov, Ian Nepomniachtchi, Pentala Harikrishna, Pavel Eljanov, Michael Adams, Evgeny Tomashevsky, Li Chao, Wei Yi, Richard Rapport, Wang Hao, David Navara, Radoslaw Wojtaszek, Yu Yangyi, Etienne Bacrot, Nikita Vitiugov, Le Quang Liem, Dmitry Andreikin, Baadur Jobava, Ernesto Inarkiev, Vladimir Fedoseev, Maxim Matlakov, Francisco Vallejo Pons, Bu Xiangzhi, Laurent Fressinet, Alexander Areshchenko, Lazaro Bruzon Batista, Ivan Cheparinov, David Howell, Alexey Dreev, Sergei Zhigalko, Alexander Motylev, Maxim Rodshtein, Liviu Dieter Nisipeanu, Jan-Krzysztof Duda, Evgeny Najer, Boris Grachev, Igor Kovalenko, Alexander Onischuk, Vidit Santosh Gujrathi, Vladislav Artemiev, Baskaran Adhiban, Yifan Hou, Bassem Amin, Aleksej Aleksandrov, David Anton Guijarro, Hrant Melkumyan, Gawain Jones, Jeffery Xiong, Varuzhan Akobian, Yuri Kuzubov, Daniel Fridman, Daniil Dubov, Martyn Kravtsiv, Kacper Piorun, Sandro Mareco, Ngoc Truongson Nguyen, Mikhael Mchedlishvili, Luka Lenic, Viktor Erdos, Sethuraman P Sethuraman, Axel Bachmann Schiavo, Emilio Cordova, Alexandr Hilario Takeda dos Santos Fier, Murtas Kazhgaleyev, Ivan Salgado Lopez, Anton Demchenko, Anton Kovalyov, Matthias Bluebaum, Jorge Cori, Johann Hjartarson, Alexey Goganov, Robert Hovhannisyan, Aleksandr Lenderman, Neuris Delgado Ramirez, Dimitrios Mastrovasilis, Levan Pantsulaia, Samuel Sevian, Mladen Palac, Benjamin Bok, Diego Flores, Julio Catalino Sadorra, Kaido Kulaots, Aryan Tari, Deep Sengupta, Vitaly Kunin, Jahongir Vakhidov, Mikhail Antipov, Murali Karthikeyan, Yusnel Bacallao Alonso, Kirill Stupak, Nana Dzagnidze, Bator Sambuev, Yuri Gonzalez Vidal, Helgi Dam Ziska, Tsegmed Batchuluun, Leandro Krysa, Al Rakib Mollah Abdullah, Essam El Gindy, Amirreza Pourramezanali, Felipe de Cresce El Debs, Mohamed Amine Haddouche, Anton Smirnov, Li Tian Yeoh, Kenneth T Solomon, Muhammad Khusenkhojaev, Guanchu Liu, Daniel J Cawdery, Changren Dai, Joshua Daniel Ruiz Castillo, Oluwafemi Balogun

Chessgames.com Chess Event Description
World Cup (2017)

128 of the world's strongest players meet in Tbilisi, Georgia to compete in a knockout event, starting on Sep 3rd, through to Sep 27th. Top seeds include Carlsen, So, Caruana, Kramnik, Aronian, Mamedyarov, Nakamura, Vachier-Lagrave, Anand, Ding Liren, Grischuk, Karjakin, Giri, Wei Yi, Svidler, et al.

Official Site: http://tbilisi2017.fide.com

Pairings Tree: http://tbilisi2017.fide.com/wp-cont...

Wikipedia page (including results): Wikipedia article: Chess World Cup 2017

ChessBookie Action:
FIDE World Cup Semifinals: So vs Ding
FIDE World Cup Semifinals: Aronian vs Vachier-Lagrave

 page 1 of 17; games 1-25 of 411  PGN Download
Game  ResultMoves YearEvent/LocaleOpening
1. Areshchenko vs A Demchenko 1-0762017World CupB51 Sicilian, Canal-Sokolsky (Rossolimo) Attack
2. Ding Liren vs M Haddouche 1-0462017World CupE60 King's Indian Defense
3. Li Tian Yeoh vs Anand 0-1662017World CupB22 Sicilian, Alapin
4. Grischuk vs E El Gindy 1-0472017World CupC24 Bishop's Opening
5. Changren Dai vs Kramnik 0-1512017World CupC95 Ruy Lopez, Closed, Breyer
6. A Bachmann vs Dreev 0-1412017World CupB13 Caro-Kann, Exchange
7. K Piorun vs Yifan Hou  ½-½402017World CupE06 Catalan, Closed, 5.Nf3
8. L Bruzon Batista vs D Anton Guijarro 1-0452017World CupC67 Ruy Lopez
9. D Dubov vs D Fridman  ½-½362017World CupE04 Catalan, Open, 5.Nf3
10. R Rapport vs E Cordova 1-0332017World CupE01 Catalan, Closed
11. S Sevian vs Nisipeanu  ½-½212017World CupC42 Petrov Defense
12. A Tari vs D Howell  ½-½292017World CupC45 Scotch Game
13. E Inarkiev vs M Mchedlishvili 1-0292017World CupB09 Pirc, Austrian Attack
14. D Sengupta vs Wang Hao  ½-½342017World CupC50 Giuoco Piano
15. Bu Xiangzhi vs D Flores 1-0232017World CupA04 Reti Opening
16. A Giri vs N Dzagnidze 1-0672017World CupA27 English, Three Knights System
17. Adams vs T Batchuluun  ½-½572017World CupC50 Giuoco Piano
18. Eljanov vs Lenderman 0-1572017World CupE32 Nimzo-Indian, Classical
19. J Cori vs G Jones 1-0972017World CupE60 King's Indian Defense
20. I Kovalenko vs M Kravtsiv 0-1712017World CupC89 Ruy Lopez, Marshall
21. F Vallejo Pons vs M Karthikeyan 1-0642017World CupE10 Queen's Pawn Game
22. Li Chao vs L Krysa  ½-½1132017World CupD25 Queen's Gambit Accepted
23. A Pourramezanali vs Yu Yangyi  ½-½712017World CupA45 Queen's Pawn Game
24. L Lenic vs Fressinet  ½-½442017World CupD52 Queen's Gambit Declined
25. Y Kuzubov vs S Zhigalko  ½-½542017World CupD32 Queen's Gambit Declined, Tarrasch
 page 1 of 17; games 1-25 of 411  PGN Download
  REFINE SEARCH:   White wins (1-0) | Black wins (0-1) | Draws (1/2-1/2)  
 

Kibitzer's Corner
< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 102 OF 102 ·  Later Kibitzing>
Sep-19-17
Premium Chessgames Member
  Pedro Fernandez: <Tabanus>! Were you lost? Where is <WinKing>? Do you know?

My first three friends here: <MarmotPFL>, <WinKing> and <Tabanus>. After my great friend <AylerKupp>.

Sep-19-17
Premium Chessgames Member
  jith1207: <Can you imagine to organisers and sponsors faces when their prize catch was knocked out in round 3>

Karma Kovalyov struck 'em hard for their Gypsygate on the same day in round 3.

Sep-19-17
Premium Chessgames Member
  Pedro Fernandez: Also <Kwid> and the "Gallo Pataruco" <Cro777>. BTW, this two guys will be undefeated vs any other couple in any other club, I guarantee it!
Sep-19-17
Premium Chessgames Member
  jith1207: I could not dust off the evaluations, did Wesley So miss some significant advantage by not playing 41. Rxb3!?

To be fair, a difficult move to discover, when the mind is set for a draw in sight. A move that might meander to a drawish result or might take more efforts and hours to get a victory. But that's how World cups are won or lost.

Sep-19-17
Premium Chessgames Member
  Domdaniel: <jphamlore> - < Aronian's amazingly creative. But he can't beat both MVL and MVL's computer in a line of the Exchange Gruenfeld that MVL specializes in.>

True. If he gets White again he should revert to playing 1.Nf3, and avoid transposing to regular d4 openings.

Sep-19-17
Premium Chessgames Member
  Tiggler: A very interested onlooker tomorrow will be Kramnik. The result he does not want is another draw between So and Ding. If So wins then Kramnik can withdraw from Isle of Man and coast into the Candidates on rating. If So loses he can do the same unless So plays in the Isle of Man. If So and Ding draw, then he has to wait for their playoff, because if So loses that then Kramnik will need to gain 8 rating points before the November ratings list.
Sep-19-17
Premium Chessgames Member
  Tiggler: <jith1207: I could not dust off the evaluations, did Wesley So miss some significant advantage by not playing 41. Rxb3!?>

I'm guessing that he saw it and decided it was not enough, and the alternative was a quick draw.

Sep-19-17  BOSTER: So had already withdraw from Isle of Man. So Kramnik can go there.
Sep-19-17  Chuckles: <Tiggler> <If So loses he can do the same unless So plays in the Isle of Man.> If So loses tomorrow, his rating goes to 2783. If he then doesn't play for the rest of the year, the total of his 12 monthly ratings is <33662>. Average: 2805.17.

If Kramnik doesn't play for the rest of the year, the total of his 12 monthly ratings is <33663>. Average: 2805.25.

The rating qualifier creates some <very> strong incentives for players to drop out of an event or play a few extra games to try to manipulate their rating.

Sep-19-17
Premium Chessgames Member
  Boomie: <beatgiant: <Boomie> (In response to whether you count FIDE knockout champions) <No.>

Then doesn't that somewhat undermine your earlier statement that <No matter what the process, the best players will find a way to win it>?>

I was hoping nobody would notice. Heh.

Those KO tourneys don't count because so many top players didn't play. But it does seem that KO's offer the best chance for the underdogs.

Sep-19-17  LameJokes55:

So Vs Ding 40...Nb3 41.Rb3 ab3 42.gf6 gf6 43.Rg7 threatens 44.Rc7. Black can't allow Rc7, since b6 pawn becomes weak. If black defends with 43...Ra7, f6 falls by force. Now, white has a pawn for exchange, marauding knight at d5, solid pawn chain and black pawns at b3 as well as c7 are constantly threatened.

Black rooks can't harass white king, since there is nice shelter on queen-side. Even exchange down, white doesn't seem to be at any risk at all. Whereas black got to work very hard to draw the game.

Sep-19-17
Premium Chessgames Member
  Tiggler: <Chuckles> Yes, and if So draws, his 12 month total will be 33677 and Kramnik would need to gain 8 points in the November list to get to 33679. If he only gains 7 points, then both will have the same total, and the tiebreaker would be who played the most rated games. I think that would be So.
Sep-19-17
Premium Chessgames Member
  alexmagnus: <The only real surprise was Khalifman's win in 1999. Several of the world's top players didn't play in the 2004 tournament. Also, didn't Andreikin reach the finals in 2013? I wonder if alexmagnus considers him a "top player" or not.>

Kasimdzhanov was seeded 27th in the event he won. For comparison, the lowest seed World Cup winners (Kamsky and Karjakin) were seeded 11th. And Andreikin was 23rd seed IIRC, but he was quite chanceless in the final against Kramnik.

Sep-19-17
Premium Chessgames Member
  alexmagnus: Also, Ponomariov was seeded 19th. Khalifman 36th.

All players who were seeded 36 or lower who reached <quarterfinal> after rebrainding:

2005: Gurevich (38) and Rublevsky (39), both lost their quarterfinals (to Aronian and Bacrot respectively)

2007: none (lowest seed quarterfinalist 31)

2009: none (lowest seed quarterfinalist 22)

2011: none (lowest seed quarterfinalist 33)

2013: none (lowest seed quarterfinalist 32)

2015: none (lowest seed quarterfinalist 26)

2017: Rapport (51), lost his quarterfinal

Final seedings (winner vs loser):

2005: 3 vs 9
2007: 11 vs 5
2009: 1 vs 7
2011: 9 vs 6
2013: 3 vs 21 (not 23 as posted above)
2015: 11 vs 16

For comparison, FIDE world championship finals:

1998: 2 vs 9
1999: 36 vs 31
2000: 1 vs 4
2002: 19 vs 4
2004: 27 vs 2

Sep-19-17
Premium Chessgames Member
  WorstPlayerEver: <LameJokes55>

Totally agree. Even if So didn't spot a win, he had to play on; his opponent lie on the ropes, while he had still enough punches left to floor him.

Missed opportunity.

Sep-19-17  nok: <The only real surprise was Khalifman's win in 1999.>

Not really. Khalifman had been top 10, and a fixture of the top 20 for a decade. In Game Collection: Biel interzonal 1993, he finished ahead of Anand, Kramnik, Shirov and Ivanchuk.

Note that Kasparov called Akopian a tourist, but said Khalifman was a very strong player.

Sep-19-17  tomhau: gg good afternoon
Sep-19-17  fisayo123: <nok> From wikipedia: Winner Khalifman was rated <44th> in the world at the time, which some compared unfavourably to PCA champion Kasparov being ranked No. 1.

Khalifman said after the tournament, "Rating system works perfectly for players who play only in round robin closed events. I think most of them are overrated. Organizers invite same people over and over because they have the same rating and their rating stays high.

Sep-19-17
Premium Chessgames Member
  AylerKupp: <<nok> The chances of the stronger player grow slowly with the number of games, which means the difference between 12 and 24 is quite small.>

Not quite, it depends on the number of games that are being played.. The chances of the stronger player do grow slowly with the number of games, but only if the number of games is large. If the number of games is small, the chances of the stronger player grow quickly.

Sep-19-17
Premium Chessgames Member
  AylerKupp: <<beatgiant> A rating is only a model estimated with sampling, so it makes sense to speak of an error margin. I'm not sure what that margin is, but for sure it's more than 1.0 rating point.>

There is always an error margin but in the case of ratings calculation it is not due to sampling. The model was developed first and then verified (in a limited way) by looking at actual game results. And in the case of ratings calculation the error margin is due to the limited number of digits carried in the calculations. And the rating calculations are performed over the entire population, so there is no sampling involved.

I also don't know what the error margin is but if you are also not sure then, unless you calculate it, I don't see how you can be sure that it's more than 1.0 rating points. And, as I said, it all depends on the number of digits that you carry in the calculations.

<Does it make sense to say a person with 2802 is more worthy than 2801 to play in the Candidates?>

If you are trying to make a decision based on ratings, average or otherwise, then I would say definitely yes. Likewise for 2801.6 over 2801.5 or any number of decimal points you choose, provided that the difference are greater than whatever the margin of error is. And, since we've both admitted that we don't know what the margin of error is, we can't be sure what the cutoff is for the number of decimal places.

Also remember that that the intent of qualifying by rating is to determine which of two players will advance to the Candidates Tournament on the basis of their rating (whether that makes sense or not is a different issue) and the choice is a practical one. What would you suggest as an alternative, flipping a coin? Assuming, of course, that the coin is a fair one.

Sep-19-17
Premium Chessgames Member
  AylerKupp: <<nok> It's neither tradition nor practicality. Elo used only 3 significant digits, even though he had access to a computer from 1969.>

What makes you think that he had access to a computer from 1969? In his book "The Rating of Chessplayers Past & Present" Elo mentions the use of computers only once, for the initial calculations of ratings for players in 1970 using the method of successive approximations. Other references were to desk calculators for calculating performance measures and ratings for USCF members using linear approximations.

I suspect that he used good old pencil and paper for his calculations, possibly supported by desk calculators, and this was the reason why the number of digits were restricted since all operations required manual entry. The following sentence might be significant:

"Should computerization of the FIDE ratings become advantageous, table 2.11 could be replaced by table 8.46 with little apparent consequence."

Table 2.11 is the familiar table 8.1b in https://www.fide.com/fide/handbook.... and previous version of the FIDE rating regulations listing the P(Win or Draw) as a function of the rating differences between the players and based on the Normal distribution. Table 8.46 is the similar table but based on the Logistic SQRT(10)-based distribution. But the statement seems to indicate that no computers were used in rating calculations except the initial one, at least not as a matter of course.

I also believe that lack of access to computers is true since I started my professional career as a programmer in 1970, and I have an idea of how much computers, even mini-computers, cost then. The first affordable microcomputer with enough memory and reasonable computing power to do the necessary calculations was the Apple II, first available in 1977.

And it was not just the availability of hardware that was an issue but the availability of appropriate, user friendly software that was important as well, otherwise you would have to do all the programming yourself. And the first software application probably suitable for these types of calculation was the VisiCalc spreadsheet, first released in 1979.

<You're a loony>

No argument there.

One suggestion. If you quote from a kibitzer's post and you would like a response from that person, add their user name to the quote. This makes it easier to find the post if you are searching for your name and increases the chances that the person will find it in order to respond.

Sep-19-17
Premium Chessgames Member
  AylerKupp: <<PedroFernandez> After my great friend <AylerKupp>.>

There is an old saying in Latin, De gustibus non est Disputandum (there is no accounting for taste). :-)

But I have often seen it expressed as De gustibus non Disputandum est. Are there any Latin –knowledgeable kibitzers out there who can resolve this?

Sep-19-17  not not: As in german, the verb stands last.

But it can be omitted - elipsis.

De gustibus non disputandum (est)

About the taste, no disscusion (to be).

Sep-19-17  not not: This gm or that one, the rating, the world cup, the candidates... But who can knock Carlsen off his perch? There is noone, it seems

They are all fighting for right to lose vs Magnus

Sep-19-17
Premium Chessgames Member
  Domdaniel: <AylerKupp> Excuse me for disagreeing with you, but ... you're not a loony.

I also remember 1970s computers.

Jump to page #    (enter # from 1 to 102)
search thread:   
< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 102 OF 102 ·  Later Kibitzing>
NOTE: You need to pick a username and password to post a reply. Getting your account takes less than a minute, 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 login now.
Please observe our posting guidelines:
  1. No obscene, racist, sexist, or profane language.
  2. No spamming, advertising, or duplicating posts.
  3. No personal attacks against other members.
  4. Nothing in violation of United States law.
  5. No posting personal information of members.
Blow the Whistle See something that violates our rules? Blow the whistle and inform an administrator.


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, you might try the Kibitzer's Café.
Messages posted by Chessgames members do not necessarily represent the views of Chessgames.com, its employees, or sponsors.
Spot an error? Please suggest your correction and help us eliminate database mistakes!


home | about | login | logout | F.A.Q. | your profile | preferences | Premium Membership | Kibitzer's Café | Biographer's Bistro | new kibitzing | chessforums | Tournament Index | Player Directory | World Chess Championships | Opening Explorer | Guess the Move | Game Collections | ChessBookie Game | Chessgames Challenge | Store | privacy notice | advertising | contact us
Copyright 2001-2017, Chessgames Services LLC