|Isle of Man Open (2017)|
The Chess.com Isle of Man Open was one of the strongest open events in chess history, with top seeds that included Carlsen, Kramnik, Caruana, Anand, Nakamura, Adams, Gelfand, Eljanov, Naiditsch, Short, Rapport, and many more. It had a €133,000 prize fund.
Magnus Carlsen won the first place prize of £50,000 with 7.5/9.
Official Site: http://iominternationalchess.com/. Crosstable: http://chess-results.com/tnr303618....
| page 1 of 27; games 1-25 of 653
|1. Daniel Fischer vs Aron Thor Mai
||1-0||28||2017||Isle of Man Open||B18 Caro-Kann, Classical|
|2. M Panchanathan vs Johannes Paul
|| ||1-0||36||2017||Isle of Man Open||A30 English, Symmetrical|
|3. J Rapport vs I Khmelniker
|| ||½-½||31||2017||Isle of Man Open||A17 English|
|4. A Hambleton vs S Fenil
|| ||½-½||38||2017||Isle of Man Open||A06 Reti Opening|
|5. Tarjan vs J Salomon
|| ||½-½||73||2017||Isle of Man Open||A20 English|
|6. N Batsiashvili vs K Arakhamia-Grant
|| ||1-0||53||2017||Isle of Man Open||E61 King's Indian|
|7. Sundararajan vs M Zumsande
|| ||½-½||50||2017||Isle of Man Open||A14 English|
|8. P L Basso vs K F Kiewra
|| ||½-½||42||2017||Isle of Man Open||D83 Grunfeld, Grunfeld Gambit|
|9. Anand Pranav vs N R Visakh
|| ||0-1||60||2017||Isle of Man Open||E46 Nimzo-Indian|
|10. D Kolbus vs R Praggnanandhaa
||0-1||66||2017||Isle of Man Open||D44 Queen's Gambit Declined Semi-Slav|
|11. H Olafsson vs A Byron
|| ||1-0||36||2017||Isle of Man Open||B06 Robatsch|
|12. J S Christiansen vs A Pichot
|| ||1-0||65||2017||Isle of Man Open||E62 King's Indian, Fianchetto|
|13. B D Deac vs W Prueske
|| ||1-0||32||2017||Isle of Man Open||D07 Queen's Gambit Declined, Chigorin Defense|
|14. G Kjartansson vs P V Vishnu
|| ||½-½||20||2017||Isle of Man Open||B90 Sicilian, Najdorf|
|15. Y Shvayger vs S D Swapnil
|| ||0-1||47||2017||Isle of Man Open||B10 Caro-Kann|
|16. D Harika vs A Oyama
|| ||1-0||44||2017||Isle of Man Open||C10 French|
|17. G P Jonsson vs E Perelshteyn
|| ||0-1||32||2017||Isle of Man Open||E73 King's Indian|
|18. N Lubbe vs E Player
|| ||1-0||30||2017||Isle of Man Open||A45 Queen's Pawn Game|
|19. L Trent vs J Lampert
|| ||0-1||48||2017||Isle of Man Open||C76 Ruy Lopez, Modern Steinitz Defense, Fianchetto Variation|
|20. E Paehtz vs Harshit Raja
|| ||½-½||40||2017||Isle of Man Open||B92 Sicilian, Najdorf, Opocensky Variation|
|21. A Enkhtuul vs M Swayams
||1-0||79||2017||Isle of Man Open||D02 Queen's Pawn Game|
|22. R Bellin vs T Frank
|| ||1-0||44||2017||Isle of Man Open||A04 Reti Opening|
|23. M Burrows vs S Jessel
|| ||0-1||60||2017||Isle of Man Open||B00 Uncommon King's Pawn Opening|
|24. R Vaishali vs M Babar
||0-1||44||2017||Isle of Man Open||B07 Pirc|
|25. Janik Kruse vs Paul Zwahr
|| ||0-1||58||2017||Isle of Man Open||E81 King's Indian, Samisch|
| page 1 of 27; games 1-25 of 653
TIP: You can make the above ads go away by registering a free account!
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 25 OF 28 ·
|Oct-04-17|| ||evlozare: <rapport as wild card> hmmm... he is so wild he couldn't even reach fide rating qualification for wild cards - 2725. not even listed in 2700 list.|
|Oct-04-17|| ||nok: <This way of qualifying after ducking a qualifying event is unimaginative, unfair and stinks of rating nepotism.>|
Nepotism is the wildcard going to Ian.
|Oct-04-17|| ||Sally Simpson: Hi Nok,
Fun with the auto-correct.
Ian Nepotism.v Mickey Adamant
Magnus Carlsberg v Tigran Petroleum
|Oct-05-17|| ||Atking: <Willber G: I just hope MVL does enough in the final GP round next month to guarantee his place in the candidates.> My hope too. Especially a World Cup in which he proved to be at least as good as Ding Liren by the way showing a very impressive performance. Indeed losing in the very hazardous way of an amargedon game a match of 10 games with the winner (Ding Liren lost the math against the same player in 6 games.).|
|Oct-05-17|| ||Sally Simpson: MVl will be in the frame for the wildcard if the does not make it via the G.P.|
However the grapevine is leaning towards Kramnik (if he fails) or Svidler.
Peter has already been a wildcard World Chess Championship Candidates (2014) this may be taken into consideration if it is between him and MVL. Wes So will also be considered if Kramnik overtakes him in the rating race
The last two wildcards (Aronian and Svidler) were named in the November before the candidates.
|Oct-05-17|| ||tuttifrutty: <MVl will be in the frame for the wildcard if the does not make it via the G.P.>|
MVL will get in via GP...Like Hatton said: bet your house on it. Seriously, he will get in the candidates...
|Oct-05-17|| ||AylerKupp: <<Sally Simpson> In the three horse rating race between Wes So, Caruana and Kramnik where only 1st and 2nd win a prize>|
At the risk of being accused once more of running over a dead cat, it may be presumptuous to say that these 3 are in a race where 1st and 2nd win a prize. The reason is that Carlsen will most likely have the highest average rating for 2017 when the Dec-2017 rating list comes out. And he will have met the other requirements for qualifying to the Candidates Tournament by rating. So those 3 players may be fighting for one place, not two.
Note that I said <qualify>, not <play>, so arguments as to whether Carlsen can be his own challenger are not relevant, nor are arguments as to whether <playing> in the Candidates Tournament is restricted to those who could be challengers.
The reason that the distinction is important is that the Candidates Tournament Rules and Regulation (CTR&R) 2.6 indicates that “If any replacement is needed due to withdrawal or refusal of participation, the first reserve player from the final standings of the FIDE Grand-Prix 2016/2017 will be invited.” Not, as I would think is logical, that if any of the top 2 players that qualify for the Candidates Tournament do not participate, then his replacement would be the player that finished with the 3rd highest rating for 2017. But then, that’s FIDE for you.
My lawyer friend says that CTR&R 1.1 “explicitly” (our definition of “explicitly” is apparently different) restricts both qualification and participation in the Candidates Tournament to those players that can be challengers for the title. Therefore CTR&R 2.6 does not apply to Carlsen because he will not have withdrawn or refused to participate. His definition of “withdrawal” is also apparently different than mine, to me “withdrawal” could involve the removal of a player from the Candidates Tournament by a 3rd party, e.g. a ruling by FIDE that Carlsen cannot qualify for the Candidates Tournament.
Clearly this could be a legal matter if the 3rd place finisher in the Grand Prix decides to press the issue. Since FIDE’s headquarters are in Lausanne, Switzerland I would assume that Swiss courts would have jurisdiction over any potential case, but I don’t really know that.
I readily acknowledge that this discussion is off-topic for this page but until <chessgames.com> creates either a 2017 Palma de Majorca Grand Prix or a 2018 Candidates Tournament page, this is the best I can come up with, namely addressing someone’s post on this page.
|Oct-05-17|| ||AylerKupp: <<beatgiant> Wikipedia's article on the 2018 World Chess Championship is tracking it and says it is Caruana 2808.58, So 2806.42 and Kramnik 2803.92 as of Oct. 1.>|
That’s odd. Plugging those players’ ratings from the Jan-2017 through Oct-2017 rating lists into an Excel spreadsheet I get averages of 2810.50 for Caruana, 2810.10 for So, and 2807.50 for Kramnik, using Excel’s full precision for calculating averages and an integer to reflect their ratings. I don’t know how the WikiPedia author got his/her numbers.
|Oct-05-17|| ||AylerKupp: <<Sally Simpson> Too many games in the Grand Prix. Too many games = a higher percentage of accidents.>|
I think that what you don’t have that quite right. “Accidents” need to be considered relatively. The more games played the lower the probability that the better/higher rated player will have an “accident” compared to the worse/lower rated player, and the higher the probability that the better/higher rated player will win or place higher in a tournament (and earn more Grand Prix points) than the worse/lower rated player. Just ask Carlsen relative to his World Cup results, Kramnik relative to his Isle of Man results, and (if you can reach him), Fischer.
And I don’t think that qualifying by rating means “sneaking” in since that reflects a player’s performance over a greater number of games (and therefore more accurately) than either the Grand Prix or World Cup (the latter if you discount Rapid and Blitz game results).
|Oct-05-17|| ||beatgiant: <AylerKupp>
<I don't know how the WikiPedia author got his/her numbers>
Did you look at the article? It has a table with the monthly ratings they used, and a citation for the sources of those ratings (FIDE rating lists).
|Oct-05-17|| ||beatgiant: <AylerKupp>
And there is a discussion on the talk page about the rating computations. If you think they made a mistake, post your correction there!
|Oct-05-17|| ||cro777: Strong players problems in open tournaments.
GM Alex Colovic: "The problems a strong player faces in an open tournament are all too-well known to me. Having to win and win quickly, but the guy just won’t fold. Thinking you deserve to be playing on the top boards, yet you’re stuck on board 50. 'What am I doing here?'"
Colovic addresses these issues in his latest video:
He analyses "Kramnik's disaster" in Isle of Man and his game against Tarjan in particular.
|Oct-05-17|| ||AylerKupp: <beatgiant> Did you look at the article?>|
Of course not! :-) I was rushing to have my breakfast at a friend's home (and getting pressure from my wife to get off the computer!) and I had previously triple checked the monthly ratings and formulas in my spreadsheet to make sure that they were correct. That doesn't necessarily mean that they were, only that I thought it odd that the author's numbers in WikiPedia and my spreadsheet did not agree.
But now I have looked at the WikiPedia article. And it's not the rating numbers that are incorrect, it's the author's projection of those numbers through Dec-2017 by using their current live ratings, something that I've said many times in the past is misleading so I'm not going to waste my time saying that again and pointing out this mistake. Projection of live ratings instead of using official FIDE ratings seems to be an article of faith for many people more than anything else.
The author does correctly point out that these are projections through Dec-2017 using the current live ratings. But, unfortunately, you didn't, saying only "Wikipedia's article on the 2018 World Chess Championship is tracking it and says it is Caruana 2808.58, So 2806.42 and Kramnik 2803.92 as of Oct. 1." Which is not correct, their averages as of Oct. 1 (without the Isle of Man results reflected) are Caruana 2810.50, So 2810.10, and Kramnik 2807.50. Lesson relearned, go to the source and check the data before opening your mouth (or posting).
I do want to note that while these projections would be accurate for Caruana and So who are not scheduled to play any more games this year and whose live rating results will be reflected in the Nov-2017 and Dec-2017 rating lists but they definitely not necessarily accurate for Kramnik who potentially has up to 9 more games to play in the 2017 European Cup Challenge later this month, and whose results will be reflected in the Nov-2017 rating list. And I had earlier calculated that if Kramnik gained 16 rating points in that tournament (to 2802 from his current live rating of 2786), not likely but not impossible, he would pass So in the average rating race, 2806.58 vs. 2806.42. And that’s also what the WikiPedia’s article says.
So, as far as I'm concerned, these projections are interesting but nothing more.
|Oct-05-17|| ||Sally Simpson: Hi AylerKupp,
Maybe get you lawyer to look for a precedent where a current champion has insisted on playing in the candidates.
I'll save him the bother, there is not one. Carlsen could have got in on rating in 2014 and 2016 , he did not nor was any attempt made to question why not.
Then perhaps invest in a dictionary and find the difference the word 'Champion' and 'Challenger.'
Enough of this. It is not going to happen. Carlsen will not be nor apply to be in the Candidates.
Yes a high rating "reflects a player’s performance over a greater number of games." but as I have ready said the players have been rewarded twice for having a high rating by gaining automatic entry into two tournaments that lead to the candidates.
I'm thinking using the rating 3 times is just too much.
The big three ducked the grand prix because they would have to play in 3 tournaments = 27 games.
It was a wise choice, do you think it's a sheer coincidence that all three vying for the vacant two spots never played in the grand prix.
Now we are left with two players sitting on the bench waiting to see what a third player will do in events that have nothing to do with qualifying for the 2018 candidates other than make his number higher.
The Farce Waiting to Happen.
Kramnik is playing in the European Team Championship. If he has a reasonable mathematical chance of catching Wes what are the odds he will be fed the White pieces and should he suddenly overtake Wes by one decimal point he will not play anymore.
You cannot wangle to take White in all games in The Grand Prix or World Cup the two main qualifying events. Yet by a flick of the wrist you can start working on the magic number in a non-qualifying tournament where you can enlist the help of your fellow countrymen to give you a leg up.
I'm not saying it will happen, but the fact is it can. This route via a rating alone to the candidates should be closed. An extra spot in both the World Cup or Grand Prix should be made available.
|Oct-06-17|| ||Sokrates: My respect to our learned friends, <AylerKupp> and <Sally Simpson>, for their sophisticated discussion about fairness in the qualifications to become the challenger to Carlsen. Personally, I think ratings in chess are like democracy: the least evil of bad systems. |
Looking at the end result of this tournament and recalling those of the last two years or so, it seems to me that there is a corrolation between those tournament upper ends and rating upper ends. But I gladly stand corrected, since it's not a resurce but a lazy draw on my memory.
However, what seems most interesting to me is the end goal of the whole process: to produce the challenger, who for the moment is 1) the strongest among his peers, 2) who has the best chances in a match versus the world champion. As you know very well, it's not evident or perhaps even likely that a one person might have both virtues. Only the first virtue can be objectively obtainable - the latter is far more subtle and tricky. An example: Carlsen has always had great trouble in beating Anish Giri. But who would expect this entertaining fellow to become the next candidate?
In my very humble opinion, only these players have a decent chance in a match with Carlsen: MVL, Aronian, Caruana and perhaps So. The "old" guys, Anand and Kramnik have had their heydays and while still being very strong they couldn't stand a chance for several reasons. Anybody here think they could? Mamedyarov, Nakamura and now also Ding Liren are sort of odd men out IMO. Highly surprising if any of them made to the seat opposite Carlsen.
I regard MVL and Aronian to be the strongest players on both above mentioned accounts. Poetically and sentimentally I root for Aronian, who after many years of ups and downs deserves a chance to conclude his enormous talent. MVL has shown that he has the nerves and skills to beat the champ and he has significantly increased the level of his play.
|Oct-06-17|| ||SugarDom: If Carlsen chooses to play in the Candidates, FIDE should refuse.|
That's a total mockery of the system. By the very name itself the purpose of the Candidates tournament is to find a challenger.
By participating in the Candidates tournament Carlsen would be influencing the results and the participants, preventing at least one worthy candidate of challenging him.
|Oct-06-17|| ||WorstPlayerEver: Carlsen's done that already. Just make chess like tennis. Stupid closed tournaments and matches are a thing from the 19th century.|
|Oct-06-17|| ||Sally Simpson: Hi Sugardom,
Carlsen cannot play in the candidates even if he wanted to.
The fact FIDE added play off rules to find a 3rd place qualifier in the World Cup should Carlsen have made the final makes that very clear.
They had the same rule in place should Karjakin make the final (the draw was such it was impossible for them both to reach the final.) The rule was clear if both players made the semi-final. The other two semi-finalists are in the candidates.
Karjakin was already in the candidates (loser of the last world championship) and at that time he was listed as the only player so far in the candidates. He has infact been in the 2018 candidates since the 30 November 2016. (the day he lost the W.C. Match)
The proof is there Carlsen would not have been allowed in the Candidates had made the final the World Cup. A 3rd place play-off was in place to cover such an eventuality.
Why people still think he will be allowed in due to his rating after being denied a legitimate spot should he have made the final of the World Cup is beyond me.
|Oct-06-17|| ||Sally Simpson: Hi Sokrates,
We all have out favourites for the candidates but who ever wins it deserves it.
Remember the outcry and the predictions of doom when Karjakin won the Candidates. And yet he took Carlsen right down to the wire.
Karjakin in yet another recent interview.
Talks about he will be preparing for the Candidates.
"I have stable results in the Candidates Tournament. I’ve taken part twice and finished second once, while the other time I was first."
<When will you start preparation? >
"Given that the whole preparation will take around four months, my coaches and I will conduct our first serious session in November. We’ll get together for two weeks and answer our phones less often.
In January I’ll play my last tournament before the Candidates Tournament and then February has been completely freed up. Naturally I’ll spend it entirely on preparation."
|Oct-06-17|| ||Sally Simpson: See above.
Where Karjakin is laying out his candidates preparation plans.
Watch with interest over the next few months this site:
Where Magnus will NOT be explaining his candidates preparation plans because he will not be playing in the candidates.
Also you will notice.
"During Isle of Man, the World Cup finished. I’d like to congratulate Levon Aronian on winning his 2nd World Cup and him and runner-up Ding Liren for qualifying for the Candidates 2018!."
if only he had added: '...and looking forward to meeting them in the candidates."
But he didn't, because he can't so he won't.
Enough of this nonsense. Please.
|Oct-06-17|| ||chancho: I'm listening to AM radio (whaddaya expect no electricity!) and i find a C7uban radio station talking about chess. The host of the show talks about the only real 2800 playerin the world, namely Magnus Carlsen. He said the only player with a chance at the title was Aronian, and then mentioned Dominguez because you gotta mention the Cubano ajedrezista... Then some Cuban music, and I quickly changed to another station. Missing my old pal the computer. *sigh*|
|Oct-06-17|| ||WannaBe: <chancho> You can only get FM when there's electricity?|
|Oct-06-17|| ||chancho: <WannaBe> i was using a small transistor radio.|
FM maybe two stations at minimum.
To get a wifi signal I had to travel 22 miles to find it.
Going to home depot to buy an inverter if I can find it. 😣
|Oct-06-17|| ||Sokrates: Hi, <Sally S.>,|
You're right that it was quite unexpected that Karjakin won the last candidates. IMO his success was caused by an extremely strong will to win rather than pure chess talent & strength. Which, btw, he proved isn't enough to get to the very top. You've got to have the nerves, the stamina, the passionate drive.
Can he do it again? I don't think so. Last time he was the dark horse who somehow took the others by surprise. This time the pack of wolves won't let the horse pass them so easily. :-)
But let's for the fun of it say he actually did it again. In that case I am sure Carlsen would really forge and sharpen his weapons and be extremely prepared. He wouldn't let Karjakin off the hook again in the classical games.
All this, evidently, pure speculation and hypothetical spin. :-)
|Oct-06-17|| ||starry2013: Was it unexpected though? He had been in form. Letting the last losing finalist automatically in seems to me a throwback to an earlier era.|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 25 OF 28 ·
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, 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, or profane language.
- No spamming, advertising, or duplicating posts.
- No personal attacks against other members.
- Nothing in violation of United States law.
- No posting personal information of members.
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.
posted by Chessgames members do not necessarily represent the views of Chessgames.com, its employees, or sponsors.|
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 2001-2018, Chessgames Services LLC