|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 43 OF 44 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Jul-16-09 | | princeali123456: timhortons: <alexmagnus> <ok so the relay is scrwed up... will wait fo chessgames.com upload...>
YEAH! Chessgames hasn't even uploaded the regulation games (2 games from R9) |
|
Jul-16-09
 | | Peligroso Patzer: <ToTheDeath: It was their first tourney- the organizers learned a lot from it and the next one will undoubtedly be better.> My displeasure with the official site expressed above relates very specifically to grievances with the live game viewer. My experience was that (1) the live game viewer did not auto-refresh; (2) when I tried a manual refresh, I almost always got only a blank chessboard on my screen; and (3) when I tried to start over again on the live viewer site, as often as not, I got an error message. How much experience do organizers need to understand that a so-called live game viewer with these characteristics is wholly unacceptable? |
|
| Jul-16-09 | | visayanbraindoctor: Who are the strongest rapid and blitz players has Nakamura ever played? Has Naka ever played in a blindfold tournament? I would love to see him play in Amber.. |
|
| Jul-16-09 | | amadeus: Congrats to Nakamura and Ponomariov.
<Fusilli>, I hope they keep the round robin format -- without tiebreakers of any sort (but this is probably asking too much). One problem with short draws, in my opinion, is that most of them are not real games, just simulacra. But I don't want to go into that endless discussion. I think a 30 moves rule is ok: the players will be able to shake hands and make their GM draws, and the spectators will be a little more satisfied than with a 12 moves draw. No big deal. |
|
| Jul-16-09 | | DCP23: <visayanbraindoctor: I would love to see him play in Amber..> So would I, and he might have a chance to get there too! He will play in the 'Youth vs Experience' later this year and the winner from the Youth side is traditionally invited to next year's Amber. |
|
| Jul-16-09 | | timhortons: <visayanbraindoctor> naka is lucky he didnt face svidler in blitz playoff. karjakin is s strong blitz player too winning the aeroflot blitz 2009, svidler go nowhere near the top if my memory serve me right. svidler is a no easy opponent for naka in blitz.
magnus is a atrong blitz player too. |
|
| Jul-16-09 | | dx9293: <visayanbraindoctor: I simply can't regard winners of two rounder mini-match KOs as real world champions; they have a real credibility problem for probably the large majority of the chess world.> We even see this bias by Chessgames.com in its presentation of "HIstory of the World Chess Championship." They place a higher value on Kasparov's World Championships than on FIDE's. Problem is, Kasparov chose Short (who we can say earned a World Championship match by winning the Candidates cycle), ran a PCA cycle with Anand that had much fairness to it, but then chose Kramnik in 2000! He seemed determined to not play a match with Shirov, despite having a bunch of wins (can't remember how many at the time) and zero losses against him. Kasparov wasn't afraid, I don't think, I think he said "well, Kramnik is higher up on the rating list, so he should get the match." I love Kramnik, but that's not right. It's true that for the 1999-2004 World Champions (other than Anand), winning the Title was their greatest achievement up till now. That doesn't in any way detract from their accomplishment: there's no rule that says World Champions have to hold their title for, example, 10 years like Karpov did. Those Champions were the best players in the Official Championship held, no more, no less. |
|
| Jul-16-09 | | timhortons: karjakin, radja, caruana,naka and the rest of young guys play blitz online even wesley so pop up at icc and play blitz... |
|
| Jul-16-09 | | dx9293: Nakamura should be invited to Amber whether he wins the Youth vs. Experience tournament or not! He's got the Elo points now, so there's no excuses anymore. |
|
| Jul-16-09 | | suenteus po 147: Nakamura might play at Amber if he participates (and wins) in the next Youth vs. Experience tournament. |
|
Jul-16-09
 | | alexmagnus: It were not two-rounder knockouts BTW. The Semis were 4 games. The final 6 or 8 (they changed it all the time). Also, between teh semi and the final there was a large pause, giving both finalists preparation time. |
|
Jul-16-09
 | | JointheArmy: That is ridiculous, just invite Nakamura already. Anand vs. Nakamura in rapid would be epic. |
|
| Jul-16-09 | | Blunderdome: <dx9293>, you're right that Garry's selection of opponents is a blemish on his championships 1993-2000, so surely you can see why the FIDE championship also diminished in value. Neither the PCA nor FIDE had all the world's best players. No one could say with certainty that he was the best or even that he had beaten the best. IDK if you follow American football, but imagine if they canceled the Superbowl and simply had two conference champions -- neither would be as great as a Superbowl champion. Now, I'm too young to know the circumstances of Garry's split with FIDE, but I don't think it matters who was in the wrong. It was unfair to the FIDE loyals that they didn't get a shot at Kasparov, but that doesn't change the fact that they never beat him. Again, you use the term official championship, but the PCA's championship was official too. Adams and Morozevich could schedule an official championship, as could my local club. A chess organization gets its power by having the best players among its members, not by its bureaucracy. |
|
| Jul-16-09 | | visayanbraindoctor: <timhortons> I think you are right. Svidler isn't easy for Naka in blitz. I recently watched a video in the internet of Svidler beating Naka in blitz. I hope to see Naka play Anand in blitz and rapids soon. <dx9293> Please read my profile. I also placed my views on Kasparov's treatment of Shirov there. <It's true that for the 1999-2004 World Champions (other than Anand), winning the Title was their greatest achievement up till now. That doesn't in any way detract from their accomplishment> As I have said, this is in dispute. The fact that we disagree bespeaks of the reality of this dispute. |
|
| Jul-16-09 | | Landman: Anyone have the full pgn for the second blitz game? Transmission error seems likely. |
|
| Jul-16-09 | | timhortons: <landman>
check this out...this is playchess.com transmission.
[Event "European Cultural City 2016 Tournament-T"]
[Site "Donostia-San Sebastian/Spain"]
[Date "2009.07.16"]
[Round "1.2"]
[White "Ruslan Ponomariov"]
[Black "Hikaru Nakamura"]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "D18"]
[Annotator "Robot 3"]
[PlyCount "60"]
[EventDate "2009.??.??"]
[TimeControl "300"]
1. d4 d5 2. c4 c6 3. Nf3 Nf6 4. Nc3 dxc4 5. a4 Bf5 6. e3 e6 7. Bxc4 Nbd7 8. O-O
Bb4 9. Qe2 Bg6 10. e4 O-O 11. Bd3 Bh5 12. Bf4 c5 13. e5 Bxc3 14. bxc3 Nd5 15.
Bd2 cxd4 16. cxd4 Nb8 17. h3 Nc6 18. g4 Bg6 19. Bb5 Rc8 20. Rfc1 Nde7 21. Kg2
Nxe5 22. dxe5 Qd4 23. Qe3 Qxe3 24. Bxe3 a6 25. Bf1 Bc2 26. Kg3 Nd5 27. Bd2 Rc7
28. a5 Rd8 29. Ra2 Rdc8 30. Rb2 h6 black wins. ♘akamura wins the tiebreak 2-0.
0-1 |
|
| Jul-16-09 | | Landman: Thanks. So the presumably corrected pgn (moves 21-22) would be 1. d4 d5 2. c4 c6 3. Nf3 Nf6 4. Nc3 dxc4 5. a4 Bf5 6. e3 e6 7. Bxc4 Nbd7 8. O-O Bb4 9. Qe2 Bg6 10. e4 O-O 11. Bd3 Bh5 12. Bf4 c5 13. e5 Bxc3 14. bxc3 Nd5 15. Bd2 cxd4 16. cxd4 Nb8 17. h3 Nc6 18. g4 Bg6 19. Bb5 Rc8 20. Rfc1 Nde7 21. Kg2 Nxd4 22. Nxd4 Qxd4 23. Qe3 Qxe3 24. Bxe3 a6 25. Bf1 Bc2 26. Kg3 Nd5 27. Bd2 Rc7 28. a5 Rd8 29. Ra2 Rdc8 30. Rb2 h6... In the earlier diagrams White's Nf3 should be removed. As I recall, in the concluding combo Naka had Bc6, Re2, Nd2 vs. Pono's Bb6, Bg2, Rg1 and Kh2. Then Nf3+ won shortly. |
|
| Jul-16-09 | | timhortons: <Landman>
whats the machine evaluation in the final position of game 2? |
|
| Jul-16-09 | | Landman: More data: Short had defeated first Timman and then Karpov in FIDE Candidates matches. Short was the designated FIDE challenger to Kasparov in 1993. So the subsequent Karpov-Timman FIDE championship was tarnished, even though the FIDE World Champion title was fully legitimate. As I recall, no sponsors could be found for Kasparov-Shirov, owing in part to Kasparov's dominant record against him up until that point. |
|
| Jul-16-09 | | RonB52734: Has anyone noticed that cg has the tournament score wrong at the top of the page? (Naka 7/9, Pono and Svidler tied at 5.5/9) Sorry if I'm the millionth person to point this out... |
|
| Jul-16-09 | | timhortons: im waiting for cg to post the games...
i caught the qxg5 of naka in the act!
as i posted it here...its brutal..i thought at first he blundered. |
|
| Jul-16-09 | | Landman: <RonB52734> I noticed also - you're the first to point it out.
<timhortons> That I don't know. Pono ran low on time, his position collapsed (Nf3+ Kh1 Nxg1), then he lost (probably on time). After Bxc6 bxc6 Kxg1 White's down an exchange and a pawn. R on the open 7th, King trapped on the first rank, no counterplay, Black passer on c6 - the eval would probably be -5.00 or so. |
|
| Jul-16-09 | | parmetd: I don't think karpov has ever gone winless in a tournament. |
|
| Jul-16-09 | | SetNoEscapeOn: <dx9293>
<Problem is, Kasparov chose Short (who we can say earned a World Championship match by winning the Candidates cycle), ran a PCA cycle with Anand that had much fairness to it> So really, Kasparov did not chose Short, or Anand. They both qualified. Short did so entirely from within the traditional FIDE system. <Blunderdome>, the PCA/FIDE cycle split was not really analogous to conference championships, because the strongest challengers (at least, judging from the results) played in both cycles. Kramnik, Kamsky, Anand, Adams, and Gelfand all participated. Anand and Kamsky (the eventual winners) each knocked each other out in one of the cycles. They were not perfect, but were certainly much closer to the traditional candidtate's matches than anything we've seen since. <but then chose Kramnik in 2000! He seemed determined to not play a match with Shirov, despite having a bunch of wins (can't remember how many at the time) and zero losses against him. Kasparov wasn't afraid, I don't think, I think he said "well, Kramnik is higher up on the rating list, so he should get the match." I love Kramnik, but that's not right.> What actually transpired was somewhat different. Please read: Check out http://www.mark-weeks.com/chess/989... Quite recently, Kramnik himself has addressed the situation and its aftermath: http://kramnik.com/eng/news/viewart... |
|
| Jul-16-09 | | VaselineTopLove: Why did they go into rapid tiebreaks if Pono already had a higher tie-break score? It sucks that classical tournaments have to be decided in such a manner. I can understand it if the same is deployed in a world championship match, as a world champion is required to prove his superiority in all areas against his opponent, but tournaments that are based on classical time controls should not be decided in such fashion. |
|
 |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 43 OF 44 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
