No. Korchnoi won the 1978 Oscar despite losing to Karpov in the Danneman... er, Campomanes Championship Match.

>

he did? well then alter my post to .. "it would have been the second time..."

apart from the aforementioned Korchnoi and Bent Larsen, there has been no other Oscar winner without a / the World title.

His play has been phenomenal, but I doubt he will win the Oscar because of the Kramnik-Anand match, coupled with the fact that Anand has already beaten him 3 times in classical games this year, twice with black. So if Anand wins the match I don't think many people will give Carlsen the nod over him.

http://www.hindu.com/thehindu/holnu...

the man is humble enough to admit that he got a bit lucky when he became no. 1 last April. I doubt we would find Kasparov or Kramnik making statements like that.

<"Anand also disclosed how he had almost given up on becoming world number one last year.

"For a moment I had given up on reaching number one last year. I had to be 30 points ahead of Veselin Topalov of Bulgaria which not only meant I had to earn but that he had to lose. There was a difference of 5 to 35 points.

"But things started falling in place unexpectedly. so it was a very special year," he said.

>

also on the loss with Radjabov:

<He also shared his feelings on his first loss after all the glory.

"There was a cold shower when I lost my first game in the Wijk Aan Zee and then I drew some 5-6 games after a gap of couple of months. So it is very important to have memories and experience and the feel of the tension of the big chess events," he said. >

I have been thinking about the optimal number of games a top GM should play. Clearly, if you play too much .. you are tired and you have not spent time studying new things and homecooking novelties. At the same time, having long layoffs can affect your playing strength since you are not used to the tension. These contrasting effects are brought out by the following examples ...

1. Anand took two mini breaks from Chess - one in 2002 after his Dortmund debacle and the other in 2006 after the Olympiad performance and came back stronger.

2. In contrast, Kramnik did not play at all in 2002 and clearly from 03-05, he was playing very badly for someone of his ability (of course the illness also had something to do with it). While he did go +2 in Linares 03 and 04, the other results were pretty ordinary (Corus, Dortmund, Brissago).

3. Radjabov has been doing pretty badly the past 3 tournaments .. obviously he is tired from playing too much.

I agree. There are also differences in training. Karpov, Kasparov and Kramnik went into formal training at a very early age. Guys like Anand and Fischer were largely self taught and made it to the top DESPITE the environment not BECAUSE of it.

I guess, in the Steintitz / FIDE line Topalov is #19 & Kramnik #20. Of course, in the Steinitz /FIDE /PCA/Braingames/Danneman/FIDE line, Topalov doesnt find a place .. while Kramnik would be #14.

MUMBAI: Elizbar Ubilava was believed to be the man responsible for Viswanathan Anand’s transformation from a rookie to a world champion.

The Georgian-born Spanish Grandmaster was Anand’s second for nearly 10 years. During the period, the Indian maestro won the world championship, the world cup and rose to World No 1 position. Ubilava is now the coach of Indian women’s team. DNA caught up with him at the GM tournament in the city. Excerpts:

How do you analyse Anand as a person, player and a professional? He is well organised and disciplined. Mainly, he makes himself. He is a world champion and that speaks for itself. His greatness is his ability to maintain the highest standard for a long time. He is an absolutely exceptional talent.

The chess players world over respect him. He never looks for any artificial advantage world champions like Karpov tried to obtain at different times. He wants to achieve across the board. He is also a great human being. I was lucky for my association with him. My contribution to his growth, though, is modest.

How did it all start?
It started in Spain through some common friends. We still stay in the same city in Spain, which is very close to Madrid. Vishy invited me once in 1994.

We played some rapid games. Then he asked me to join him for the world championship cycle in Hyderabad against Gata Kamsky. We worked for about 10 days before coming to Hyderabad. That was the starting point.

It was not the best start right? Vishy lost to Kamsky 3.5-1.5. That’s right. Anand should have won all those five games. But he made errors here and there and then went on to lose it. It was a big setback for the Indian fans but I thought he had a home disadvantage.

A lot of people would interrupt his preparation, to convey their best wishes. It was not an ideal situation for him. However, our association continued. I took a break in 2001. The last tournament was 2005 Linares.

How do look back at the time you spent with Vishy? Any highpoints that you recall? We had fantastic time together travelling all over the world. It is difficult to nominate one or two watershed moments. Probably, the 2000 world championship was a milestone. Then the 2001 World Cup.

In 1997, he practically won the world championship. It was unjust of Fide to ask Anand to play Karpov after he came though knock-out system in the Netherlands. Two days after winning the knock-out tournament, he had to play Karpov. In the championship match, he made it 3-3 before losing in the additional game.

It was completely unjust. Karpov was very fresh and Vishy was totally exhausted. He was the best player in the Fide cycle. He proved that by ripping apart Karpov some months later 5.5-.5. But what I would like to stress is that we always tried to do different and new things. In that sense, it was a successful collaboration.

What are the areas you helped him develop?
Mainly opening. It is a huge, huge area. Today Vishy’s opening range is unbelievable. When we started, his opening repertoire was not as vast. There is a marked improvement in his middle and end games too. He is now a complete player. Psychologically he is very strong. He handles success and failure perfectly.

Ok, how do you rate Vishy of 1994 and 2008?
Now, he is a 2800 player, the best player in the world. What else one wants? I’m sure he will stay there for some more years. He stabilised himself as the highest level player. When we started, he was 2700 player.

http://www.dnaindia.com/report.asp?...

<Finally, do you think Vishy was unlucky to have played in Kasparov’s era? In another generation, he would have would have had more world titles.

I don’t think so. What would have happened if Fischer had played Karpov? We’ll never know. Vishy needed Kasparov’s greatness to be recognised as a great player. Anand is one of the three best players I’ve seen (Kasparov and Magnus Carlson are the other two). Today Vishy is a world champion, world No. 1 and a 2800 player. What else would he want? History will give Vishy an honourable place. >