I think he means the <DUBAI OPEN>.

Dossier -> http://www.chess.co.uk/twic/chessne...

Live Games:

Looking over the historically significant game, Botvinnik vs Bronstein, 1951, I was perplexed that the caption does not give the match game number (The above-linked game was #<23>, of course.) instead just having a "?" in the field for round number.

<It's not the kind of thing we'd typically put on the homepage but we'll be happy to upload the games.>

In the Opening Explorer Help Page there is a section that reads <When I add up the number of games in the moves column, it's bigger than the total number of games that contain the position shown. How can that be?> and a little example where From's gambit overlaps with the King's gambit.

Unfortunately the answer given is not 100% clear and doesn't cover every case of transposition, but it gives a thumbnail view.

If his schedule permits, is there any chance we can have <Nigel Short> on live commentary for the World Championship Match?

Could we make him an offer he can't refuse?

Thanks to Nigel's past efforts as guest expert, <CG.com> remains the only chess website in history to host an analyst who refers to the Black pieces as "The Brothers" and the White pieces as "The Honkies."

You can't really put a price on that eh?

In 2012, more than ever before, people will be watching the match on their and pads and kindles etc. While our live page actually works fairly well on most mobile devices, it might be more useful to some people if a simplified version appeared instead. (Of course, mobile users will always be able to turn off the simplified view if they need to.)

Regarding Sicilian Distinctions - telling apart the Kan from the Taimanov

The reason I bring this pedantic point up is I am doing a Sicilian Taimanov Youtube playlist ( http://www.youtube.com/playlist?lis... ), and noticed actually that the following Fischer Spassky game is listed as a Sicilian Paulsen (Kan):

Spassky vs Fischer, 1972

According to Wiki, when Nc6 is played, it transposes from the Paulsen (Kan) into the Taimanov variation. To keep the Kan being a Kan, black plays 5..Qc7

Am I correct in thinking that this Fischer Spassky game should be Sicilian Taimanov ?!

I think to get a correct opening classification it is important to go from the very last move of the game backwards and match the positions against an Opening reference. If this method is used then 5... Nc6 going in reverse would get the correct Sicilian Taimanov identification.

It is funny though because B46 has been assigned to this game which is Sicilian Taimanov:

Sicilian, Taimanov Variation (B46)

In fact also this Fischer Spassky page has Sicilian Taimanov for game 21 on the overview:

Fischer-Spassky World Championship Match (1972)

but on the game header it has:

I am hardly an expert on what constitutes a Taimanov Sicilian so I don't feel qualified to exactly say what is correct or incorrect, but I can tell you what our files say. If our data are to be believed, it seems that the Taimanov is in fact a subset of the Paulsen Sicilian. (Historically this makes sense, as Paulsen lived a century prior to Taimanov.)

In fact one of our FEN positions in the master file says that this position, after 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 e6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nc6 5.Nc3 a6 6.Be2 Nge7

click for larger view

is <Sicilian Defense: Paulsen Variation. Taimanov Variation>. It is labelled B46.

Perhaps a contradiction, is that this position after 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 e6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nc6 5.Nc3 a6 (also a B46)

click for larger view

is dubbed simply <Sicilian Defense: Paulsen Variation.> I would think that it's the ...a6 that makes it a Taimanov, but it seems that Dr. Schiller believes that the ...Nge7 is part of what makes a Taimanov distinct. Or if it's an error, we will fix it and inform Dr. Schiller.

In short, perhaps we need to add a new FEN to cover this transposition, or perhaps we just need to relabel that Paulsen Variation above to read "Paulsen Variation: Taimanov Variation" just like the other one.