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

Dortmund Sparkassen (2009) The 37th Dortmund Sparkassen Chess-Meeting took place in the Dortmunder Theater in Dortmund, Germany 2-12 July 2009. Rest day: July 7. Players received 100 minutes for 40 moves, then 50 more minutes for the next 20 moves, then 15 more minutes for the rest of the game, with a 30-second increment from move one. Games started at 3 pm, Round 10 at 1 pm local time. Vladimir Kramnik won the event for the 9th time with 6.5/10. 01 02 03 04 05 06 1 Kramnik 2759 ** ½½ ½1 ½½ ½½ 11 6½ 2 Leko 2756 ½½ ** ½½ ½½ 1½ ½½ 5½ 3 Carlsen 2772 ½0 ½½ ** 1½ ½½ 1½ 5½ 4 Jakovenko 2760 ½½ ½½ 0½ ** ½1 1½ 5½ 5 Bacrot 2721 ½½ 0½ ½½ ½0 ** ½½ 4 6 Naiditsch 2697 00 ½½ 0½ 0½ ½½ ** 3 Category: XX (2744). Chief arbiter: Andrzej Filipowicz The Helmut-Kohls-Turnier (Cat. V round robin) was won by Markus Schaefer ahead of Thomas Trella, both with 6/9. The Open A swiss tournament was won on tiebreak by David Baramidze with 7/9. Wikipedia: Wikipedia article: Dortmund Sparkassen Chess Meeting#2009 Dortmunder Schachfreunde: http://schachfreunde-brackel.de/sch... Chess.com: https://www.chess.com/news/view/kra... ChessBase: https://en.chessbase.com/post/dortm... TeleSchach: http://teleschach.com/aktuelles/dtm... TWIC: https://theweekinchess.com/html/twi... FICS: http://freechess.org/Events/Relay/2... FIDE: https://ratings.fide.com/tournament... Previous: Dortmund Sparkassen (2008). Next: Dortmund Sparkassen (2010)  page 1 of 2; games 1-25 of 30  Game   Result Moves Year Event/Locale Opening 1. Carlsen vs Jakovenko 1-0 49 2009 Dortmund Sparkassen C67 Ruy Lopez 2. Leko vs Kramnik ½-½ 24 2009 Dortmund Sparkassen E04 Catalan, Open, 5.Nf3 3. Naiditsch vs Bacrot ½-½ 42 2009 Dortmund Sparkassen C89 Ruy Lopez, Marshall 4. Leko vs Carlsen ½-½ 25 2009 Dortmund Sparkassen A32 English, Symmetrical Variation 5. Kramnik vs Bacrot ½-½ 30 2009 Dortmund Sparkassen E15 Queen's Indian 6. Jakovenko vs Naiditsch 1-0 62 2009 Dortmund Sparkassen B90 Sicilian, Najdorf 7. Bacrot vs Jakovenko ½-½ 22 2009 Dortmund Sparkassen C67 Ruy Lopez 8. Carlsen vs Kramnik ½-½ 19 2009 Dortmund Sparkassen E32 Nimzo-Indian, Classical 9. Naiditsch vs Leko ½-½ 29 2009 Dortmund Sparkassen B13 Caro-Kann, Exchange 10. Naiditsch vs Kramnik 0-1 27 2009 Dortmund Sparkassen C42 Petrov Defense 11. Bacrot vs Carlsen ½-½ 46 2009 Dortmund Sparkassen D44 Queen's Gambit Declined Semi-Slav 12. Jakovenko vs Leko ½-½ 22 2009 Dortmund Sparkassen E49 Nimzo-Indian, 4.e3, Botvinnik System 13. Carlsen vs Naiditsch 1-0 60 2009 Dortmund Sparkassen C67 Ruy Lopez 14. Kramnik vs Jakovenko ½-½ 19 2009 Dortmund Sparkassen D38 Queen's Gambit Declined, Ragozin Variation 15. Leko vs Bacrot 1-0 39 2009 Dortmund Sparkassen E15 Queen's Indian 16. Jakovenko vs Carlsen ½-½ 45 2009 Dortmund Sparkassen B33 Sicilian 17. Kramnik vs Leko ½-½ 25 2009 Dortmund Sparkassen E55 Nimzo-Indian, 4.e3, Gligoric System, Bronstein Variation 18. Bacrot vs Naiditsch ½-½ 24 2009 Dortmund Sparkassen E17 Queen's Indian 19. Naiditsch vs Jakovenko ½-½ 70 2009 Dortmund Sparkassen B30 Sicilian 20. Carlsen vs Leko ½-½ 22 2009 Dortmund Sparkassen C84 Ruy Lopez, Closed 21. Bacrot vs Kramnik ½-½ 38 2009 Dortmund Sparkassen C42 Petrov Defense 22. Kramnik vs Carlsen 1-0 36 2009 Dortmund Sparkassen D37 Queen's Gambit Declined 23. Jakovenko vs Bacrot 1-0 81 2009 Dortmund Sparkassen C89 Ruy Lopez, Marshall 24. Leko vs Naiditsch ½-½ 27 2009 Dortmund Sparkassen D39 Queen's Gambit Declined, Ragozin, Vienna Variation 25. Jakovenko vs Kramnik ½-½ 54 2009 Dortmund Sparkassen C42 Petrov Defense  page 1 of 2; games 1-25 of 30    REFINE SEARCH:   White wins (1-0) | Black wins (0-1) | Draws (1/2-1/2)   < Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 76 OF 77 ·  Later Kibitzing> Jul-13-09    alexmagnus: <visayan> You are reported. Jul-13-09    visayanbraindoctor: <alexmagnus> Just using your own words and technique. Too bad it pissed you off. Jul-13-09    alexmagnus: my own words? Did I <ever> tell you to discuss with yourself? And what about my technique? I just post my points, in a totally <neutral> shade. Jul-13-09    alexmagnus: Did I ever attack you before you started attacking me? Jul-13-09    alexmagnus: Compare my last posts (about human limit) with your posts. Just compare. I see neither my own words no " my technique", whatever it's supposed to be, in your posts. Jul-13-09    visayanbraindoctor: See, getting to be an eternal argument already, which is one of your techniques. I've got other things to do, such as replaying some games, so I will have leave you for now. Jul-13-09    alexmagnus: Compare my last three posts before you started your attacks posts (about human limit) with your posts. Just compare. I see neither my own words nor " my technique", whatever it's supposed to be, in your posts. Do the same on the Kramnik page. Compare your attacks to my posts. You'll be stunned to see the difference. Jul-13-09    alexmagnus: <Eternal> argument? Did I ever post about human limits before? And what does "eternal argument" have to do with open personal attacks? You violated posting guideline 3 at least 50 times when talking to me, I violated it only a couple of times in response to your attacks. And what do you mean by an eternal argument anyway? As long as my points remain unanswered, I may post them if the topic comes up. Or do you think only you can state your points for 1000 times (search for "human limit", "human stonewall", "stonewall of chess abilities" etc. and see how many times you posted about it. Compare with my own posting rate on this topic - and see who <really> eternally posts the same thing). Jul-13-09    dumbgai: Whoa whoa children... both of you need to take a nap! :-) Jul-13-09    siamesedream: Roma locuta - causa finita... ;) Jul-13-09    alexmagnus: Just the last thing - no othr user had ever problems with me. Neither I have some "techniques". I debate as much as I think there exists a room for debate and the topic is interesting, no way "eternally". I got better things to do than eternal arguments. Jul-13-09    dumbgai: There are some true idiots on this site, but I've had no problems with either <alexmagnus> or <visayanbraindoctor>. :) Jul-13-09    aragorn69: doc visayan's brain seems a bit tired, that's all. Jul-13-09    Bradah: <alexmagnus: <visayan> You are reported.> Geesh, I'm telling. HAHAHAHA Nice one. Jul-15-09    vishaya: hmnnn, a good incision on the doc's brain... -bisdak- Jul-15-09    dehanne: "This victory ends the illusion that Kramnik is a bad tournament player." - Garry Kasparov Jul-15-09    KamikazeAttack: <"This victory ends the illusion that Kramnik is a bad tournament player." - Garry Kasparov > Hahahahaha nice one. Kasaparov has always been full of hot air. Jul-15-09    visayanbraindoctor: <bisdak- Bisayang Dako> Unsay gipangutana nimo? May ginapamangkot ka? May ginapamangkot timo? Yaoy pangasubo mo? What are you trying to ask? <dehanne, KamikazeAttack: "This victory ends the illusion that Kramnik is a bad tournament player."> Where did Kasparov say this? It seems like an awfully loaded 'praise'. Jul-15-09    timhortons: <visayanbraindoctor> doc ,check this link. http://www.chessninja.com/dailydirt... Comments from Garry Kasparov Game 11: "A difficult position for Kramnik to be in after 1.e4. Final games like this have their own logic so you cannot compare it to his attempts to play the Sicilian in 2004. 12..f5 was suspect, not something I would have considered. That's what can happen when you are in openings that aren't yours. You want to play by instinct but they are not used to these positions and this leads to poor decisions. After the Berlin and the Petroff, playing a Rauzer is a shock to the system. He looked very uncomfortable, but of course the match situation was close to impossible. The final position was unpleasant for Black and this Kramnik understands." Match in general: "It was a very well-played match by Vishy. Except for the loss of concentration in the 10th game, he played consistently and managed to enforce his style. His choice to open with 1.d4 was excellent. He reached playable positions with life in them so he could make Kramnik work at the board. Anand outprepared Kramnik completely. In this way it reminded me of my match with Kramnik in London 2000. Like I was then, Kramnik may have been very well prepared for this match but we never saw it. I didn't expect the Berlin and ended up fighting on Kramnik's preferred terrain. [In this match] Kramnik did not expect tough, sharp challenges with white and this was the key for Anand. He kicked some sand in Kramnik's face and hit Kramnik's weakness: his conservative approach to the game itself. Suddenly Kramnik had to fight in these sharp positions and he wasn't able to do it. <This result ends the illusion that Kramnik is a great match player.> London was a unique occurrence and I still stand with Leonid Yudasin as the only players Kramnik has ever beaten in a match! Kramnik now has some work to do. His overly-defensive play seems to represent a general decline in strength. A great result for Anand and for chess. Vishy deserved the win in every way and I'm very happy for him. It will not be easy for the younger generation to push him aside." <anyways kaspy wait for fischer to die before he say good things to fischer.> Jul-15-09    visayanbraindoctor: <timhortons> I found the endgame in Granda - Nakamura very interesting. What does your computer say about it? Thanks for the link. If Kasparov really said that <"This victory ends the illusion that Kramnik is a bad tournament player">, well... useless to speculate why he said that. Could just start another flame war. <his conservative approach to the game itself> Many of his supporters are glad Kramnik has resurrected his fighting chess. It's what got him to the top; and if he wishes to get there again, this is the way to do it. I have little doubt he can. He is the only chess player in the world who could duke it out on at least an equal basis with Kasparov in his prime in complications, which must mean something. No other player could even come close to Kasparov. If you think about it, the next generation after Vishy (and the Ivanchuk, Gelfand group) is actually Kramnik's cohort of Topalov, Svidler, Morozevich, Leko. In the 'normal' course of things, Anand's group would have given way slowly to Kramnik's group. As it is, things have reversed. Kramnik's age group has given way to a rejuvenated Anand's group. I don't think there has been anything like this in chess history. Jul-15-09    timhortons: <I found the endgame in Granda - Nakamura very interesting. What does your computer say about it?> doc as what percyblakeny said though the engines is giving plus 2 eval in grandas position but still naka hold it in a draw ,so maybe such position is the one where human GM's had better understanding than engine. in days to come lets see how top GM would analyze that game. in nakamura -vallejo pons game, in the 34th position caruana at icc kibitz "naka seen deeper" few move after the 34th naka is winning, but mind you prior to that kibitz of caruana the rest of GM's at icc say that position is dead equal/dead draw. <in the granda -naka game Gm's kibitz at icc that naka is lossing, they kibitz in unanimous evaluation that naka is lossing the position,this are caruana, rustemov,buffon, and few IM's and FM...but naka draw the game> i find it exciting because when the GM's say naka is drawing , naka actually wins, when they say Naka is lossing , actually naka draw.... icc kibitzing is full of crap especially on patzers side, but GM's know what they talkin. only one thing that matters among the patzers at icc is that there fully armed to the teeth with strong engines and most say they kibitz using there brain.. Jul-15-09    timhortons: <doc> i read GM rustemov kibitz that GM in todays generation play better endgame than those GM in the 60's but time control as this one in nakas game wont help you so much... Jul-15-09    visayanbraindoctor: <timhortons> I posted two possible variations for White in the Granda-Zuniga vs Nakamura, 2009 page that I believed would have given Naka some trouble. Does your computer have any clear drawing lines for these variations? Sorry but I don't have an engine. You don't have to answer this, of course, if you are busy. Jul-15-09    theagenbiteofinwit: <I don't think there has been anything like this in chess history.> If you discount 1958 and 1961, this statement would be correct. Jul-15-09    KamikazeAttack: <Kramnik now has some work to do. His overly-defensive play seems to represent a general decline in strength. > -- G Kasaparov LMAOOO Jump to page #    (enter # from 1 to 77) search thread:    < Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 76 OF 77 ·  Later Kibitzing> NOTE: Create an account today to post replies and access other powerful features which are available only to registered users. Becoming a member is free, anonymous, and takes less than 1 minute! If you already have a username, then simply login login under your username now to join the discussion. Please observe our posting guidelines: No obscene, racist, sexist, or profane language. No spamming, advertising, duplicate, or gibberish posts. No vitriolic or systematic personal attacks against other members. Nothing in violation of United States law. No cyberstalking or malicious posting of negative or private information (doxing/doxxing) of members. No trolling. The use of "sock puppet" accounts to circumvent disciplinary action taken by moderators, create a false impression of consensus or support, or stage conversations, is prohibited. Do not degrade Chessgames or any of it's staff/volunteers. Please try to maintain a semblance of civility at all times. See something that violates our rules? Blow the whistle and inform a moderator. NOTE: Please keep all discussion on-topic. This forum is for this specific tournament only. To discuss chess or this site in general, 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 ultimately at the sole discretion of the administration. Spot an error? Please suggest your correction and help us eliminate database mistakes! Home | About | Login | Logout | F.A.Q. | Profile | Preferences | Premium Membership | Kibitzer's Café | Biographer's Bistro | New Kibitzing | Chessforums | Tournament Index | Player Directory | Notable Games | World Chess Championships | Opening Explorer | Guess the Move | Game Collections | ChessBookie Game | Chessgames Challenge | Store | Privacy Notice | Contact Us Copyright 2001-2025, Chessgames Services LLC