The Philadelphia Open is in full swing (March 31st-April 4th) and the open section is norm eligible. Quite a few of US's top players are playing, Ray Robson, Jaan Ehlvest, Alexander Shabalov, Joshua Friedel, Varuzhan Akobian, and the biggest one of all, Gata Kamsky. Norms are available in the 123-player open section. Lower sections have only seven rounds.
Philadelphia now has four major tournaments, three of them norm events. The Liberty Bell (January), Philadelphia Open (April), Philadelphia International (June), World Open (July). All of that chess in one location is taking a toll on attendence, only 413 entries and re-entries (the tournament was based on 650), so it looks like CCA will be paying out the minimum 70% they advertised. In past years, the tournament had been at Foxwoods in Conneticutt, but excessive hotel prices ($179/night) forced the tournament elsewhere.
Friday, April 2, 2010
Thursday, April 1, 2010
April Fools!
It seems there is something of an April Fool's Tradition on chess news sites. Chessbase has come up with a false chess-related story for the last six or seven years or now. Eventually, as people were getting wise (and eagerly anticipating what the next ruse would be) they changed the format somewhat and now list three bizarre stories every April 1st, one of which is a complete fabrication. Since only one of the stories is false, it keeps readers guessing until the next report a couple days later. This year's three are:
1) LHC (Large Hadron Collider) goes online, chess grandmasters worried
2) Fischer's remains to be exhumed
3) Magnus Carlsen's cousin in America (Matt Damon)
I'm actually not sure if the joke is story #1 or #3, I have heard of the ongoing court battles between Fischer's Japanese widow and (alleged) Phillipino daughter, so I'm not even surprised by that news story. If I had to guess, I'd pick the proton collider, since it seems very strange that top grandmasters would sit around the banquet discussing minature black holes with physicists.
US Chess has also gotten into the April Fool's Act (I think), by announcing that one of the four wildcard spots in the 2010 US Championship will be going to the famous shock-jock Howard Stern. Stern is reportedly about 1800 or 1900 strength and would be severely overmatched in a high caliber tournament such as the US Championship, so this is almost assuredly a joke.
On Susan Polgar's Website, it is reported that Lady Gaga and her biggest fan, GM Benjamin Finegold, will sing a duet on her new album debuting in 2011. This has to be the most bizarre one of them all!
1) LHC (Large Hadron Collider) goes online, chess grandmasters worried
2) Fischer's remains to be exhumed
3) Magnus Carlsen's cousin in America (Matt Damon)
I'm actually not sure if the joke is story #1 or #3, I have heard of the ongoing court battles between Fischer's Japanese widow and (alleged) Phillipino daughter, so I'm not even surprised by that news story. If I had to guess, I'd pick the proton collider, since it seems very strange that top grandmasters would sit around the banquet discussing minature black holes with physicists.
US Chess has also gotten into the April Fool's Act (I think), by announcing that one of the four wildcard spots in the 2010 US Championship will be going to the famous shock-jock Howard Stern. Stern is reportedly about 1800 or 1900 strength and would be severely overmatched in a high caliber tournament such as the US Championship, so this is almost assuredly a joke.
On Susan Polgar's Website, it is reported that Lady Gaga and her biggest fan, GM Benjamin Finegold, will sing a duet on her new album debuting in 2011. This has to be the most bizarre one of them all!
Saturday, March 27, 2010
Carlsen and Ivanchuk win Melody Amber.
I wonder, when was the last time a player lost six games but still managed to at least share the lead for the tournament?
Magnus Carlsen won thirteen games, lost six, and drew only three (!) in the 2010 Melody Amber tournament. He tied with Vassily Ivancuk for 1st with 14.5/22. In Bilbao points (three points for win, one point for draw), he scored 42 to Ivanchuk's 36.
Looking at the extended standings makes the feat less impressive. Against the bottom six in the standings, Carlsen scored 11.5/12, but against the top five, he only scored 3.0/10. By contrast, Ivanchuk did not lose a single game and finished 7.0/10 against the top 5.
Vladimir Kramnik finished in 3rd place with 13.0/22. Usually regarded as a careful and pragmatic player, like Carlsen, Kramnik finished with just a few draws, only five.
Magnus Carlsen won thirteen games, lost six, and drew only three (!) in the 2010 Melody Amber tournament. He tied with Vassily Ivancuk for 1st with 14.5/22. In Bilbao points (three points for win, one point for draw), he scored 42 to Ivanchuk's 36.
Looking at the extended standings makes the feat less impressive. Against the bottom six in the standings, Carlsen scored 11.5/12, but against the top five, he only scored 3.0/10. By contrast, Ivanchuk did not lose a single game and finished 7.0/10 against the top 5.
Vladimir Kramnik finished in 3rd place with 13.0/22. Usually regarded as a careful and pragmatic player, like Carlsen, Kramnik finished with just a few draws, only five.
Tuesday, March 23, 2010
Class Norms and Titles
This is a cool thing I learned about a couple weeks ago. USCF is implimenting new lifetime titles for players both masters and amateurs. The highest title is Senior Master, followed by National Master, Candidate Master, and then 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and 4th category.
Players can earn norms by playing well in tournaments with at least four games.
A norm is achieved if a player scores more than one point more than what the performance is suggested (National Master level is 2200, 1st category is 1800, 4th category is 1200). If a player earns five norms at that level, they earn the life-time title. Here's the formula.
Norm is achieved if S > X + 1
Where S is the score of the player in the tournament and X is the expected score of all games at norm level N.
X = X1 + X2 + ... Xa where a is the number of games in the tournament. a > 3
If Rz > (N + 400), Xz = 0.0
If N < Rz < (N + 400), Xz = 0.5-(Rz-N)/800
If N = Rz, Xz = 0.5
If (N - 200) < Rz < N, Xz = 0.5+(N-Rz)/400
If Rz < (N - 200), Xz = 1.0
Where Xz is the expected score of a game with opponent z at norm level N and Rz is the rating of said opponent.
As can be seen by the formula, players are punished for playing players below the norm level. A player trying to get a 1800-norm who plays a 1600 player, the expected score is 1.0, even though his true expected score is really only about 0.75. If the same player played a 2000 player, the expected score for that game is 0.25. So a player who played two games, one against a 1600, one against an 2000 (an average of 1800), his expected score for an 1800 norm is 1.25.
It is somewhat easier to score norms in longer tournaments, as the one point barrier that a player must exceed the norm by becomes less and less important. A player playing in a 4 round A section (1800-1999) basically needs to score 4.0/4 (100%) to earn a Candidate Master Norm. However, a player in a 9 round A section could earn said norm with a more modest 7.5/9 (83%)
To date I've earned the 2nd category (1600) title with one 1st category (1800) norm.
Players can earn norms by playing well in tournaments with at least four games.
A norm is achieved if a player scores more than one point more than what the performance is suggested (National Master level is 2200, 1st category is 1800, 4th category is 1200). If a player earns five norms at that level, they earn the life-time title. Here's the formula.
Norm is achieved if S > X + 1
Where S is the score of the player in the tournament and X is the expected score of all games at norm level N.
X = X1 + X2 + ... Xa where a is the number of games in the tournament. a > 3
If Rz > (N + 400), Xz = 0.0
If N < Rz < (N + 400), Xz = 0.5-(Rz-N)/800
If N = Rz, Xz = 0.5
If (N - 200) < Rz < N, Xz = 0.5+(N-Rz)/400
If Rz < (N - 200), Xz = 1.0
Where Xz is the expected score of a game with opponent z at norm level N and Rz is the rating of said opponent.
As can be seen by the formula, players are punished for playing players below the norm level. A player trying to get a 1800-norm who plays a 1600 player, the expected score is 1.0, even though his true expected score is really only about 0.75. If the same player played a 2000 player, the expected score for that game is 0.25. So a player who played two games, one against a 1600, one against an 2000 (an average of 1800), his expected score for an 1800 norm is 1.25.
It is somewhat easier to score norms in longer tournaments, as the one point barrier that a player must exceed the norm by becomes less and less important. A player playing in a 4 round A section (1800-1999) basically needs to score 4.0/4 (100%) to earn a Candidate Master Norm. However, a player in a 9 round A section could earn said norm with a more modest 7.5/9 (83%)
To date I've earned the 2nd category (1600) title with one 1st category (1800) norm.
Monday, March 22, 2010
25th North American Masters
The World Amateur has been a disapointment, but the accompaning master tournament is fairly strong and may result in a norm or too.
The 9-round swiss has twenty players participating, including five grandmasters and four international masters. Untitled player Mackenzie Molner (although he has met the requirements for FIDE Master), is well on his way to a 3rd IM norm and perhaps his first GM norm. He's scored 5.0/6, including two defeats of GMs. His FIDE rating is already over 2400 so barring a complete collapse he should earn the IM title at the end of this tournament.
There's not too many swiss tournaments in the US that have norm possibilities (Philadelphia Open, Chicago Open (this year), Philadelphia International, and the World Open), so it's good to see there's another chance for norm-hunters.
25th North American Masters
The 9-round swiss has twenty players participating, including five grandmasters and four international masters. Untitled player Mackenzie Molner (although he has met the requirements for FIDE Master), is well on his way to a 3rd IM norm and perhaps his first GM norm. He's scored 5.0/6, including two defeats of GMs. His FIDE rating is already over 2400 so barring a complete collapse he should earn the IM title at the end of this tournament.
There's not too many swiss tournaments in the US that have norm possibilities (Philadelphia Open, Chicago Open (this year), Philadelphia International, and the World Open), so it's good to see there's another chance for norm-hunters.
25th North American Masters
Sunday, March 21, 2010
World Amateur Championship
World Amateur Championship began this week, and ouch! Somebody's taking a bath.
The $20,000 guaranteed prizes were based on hopefully an attendance of 400, with an extra $10,000 in prizes for each additional 200 players.
However, only 124 players showed up to play, and not all of those paid their entire ($120) entries, as each country was allowed one male and one female entry free of charge.
Shouldn't be too surprised that not many players are playing, the tournament is seven days long (longer than the normal three day and four day tournaments that CCA runs, and even longer than the 6-day and 5-day schedules that both the US and World Opens run), top prize is only $3,000, and top class prize is $1,000. With the hotel fees and travel costs, it's just too darn expensive for a mediocre tournament.
The $20,000 guaranteed prizes were based on hopefully an attendance of 400, with an extra $10,000 in prizes for each additional 200 players.
However, only 124 players showed up to play, and not all of those paid their entire ($120) entries, as each country was allowed one male and one female entry free of charge.
Shouldn't be too surprised that not many players are playing, the tournament is seven days long (longer than the normal three day and four day tournaments that CCA runs, and even longer than the 6-day and 5-day schedules that both the US and World Opens run), top prize is only $3,000, and top class prize is $1,000. With the hotel fees and travel costs, it's just too darn expensive for a mediocre tournament.
Tuesday, February 9, 2010
CC Update
I finished my USCF-CC tourney in last place with 1.0/6 (=2, -4). My rating declined from 1655 to 1632 during this period, despite a win from another tournament.
I now have twelve games active, 6 in USCF, 6 in ICCF, none of which are past 20 moves yet.
The semi-finals of the Colorado Championship are taking longer than I expected. I thought webserver was faster than email, but no games have finished yet. The 2009 Final had the exact same number of games as the semi-finals this year (36) but two games had already finished by this time last year. Still, it's only been 40 days since the start of the tournament. Even if nobody had used any vacation, players could still be on the first time control.
I now have twelve games active, 6 in USCF, 6 in ICCF, none of which are past 20 moves yet.
The semi-finals of the Colorado Championship are taking longer than I expected. I thought webserver was faster than email, but no games have finished yet. The 2009 Final had the exact same number of games as the semi-finals this year (36) but two games had already finished by this time last year. Still, it's only been 40 days since the start of the tournament. Even if nobody had used any vacation, players could still be on the first time control.
Monday, February 1, 2010
Linares 2010: Preview
Linares 2010 is coming up (actually only a week and a half away). Unfortunately, since it is so close to Corus, none of the participants at Corus will be playing at Linares this year. Apparently they have had some sponsorship problems as well this year, so instead of the tournament being an 8-player double round robin (the only super tournament with 14 or more rounds), it has been downgraded to a 6-player round robin.
Favorite: Levon Aronian. At 2782, he is the highest rated 5th ranked player in history and has been on an upswing lately with having already clinched the Grand Prix top spot with an event to go. Estimate: +3 6.5/10
Also Strong: Veslin Topalov. The top rated seed at 2805, normally he'd be the favorite but with his upcoming match with Anand in less than three months, he will be saving novelties and will probably just be looking to stay sharp and not embarrass himself. Estimate: +1 5.5/10
Alexander Grischuk. Recently won the super-final tournament in Russia and also did well at the World Team Championships, and yet he's actually the 5th seed out of 6. 50% should be considered a victory for him. Estimate: = 5.0/10
Boris Gelfand. Has reached the top 10 again but was disapointing at the world team championships and has already lost 10 rating points this supplement. This tournament is like a fore-runner to the upcoming longer and stronger 2010 Candidates tournament, so it will be interesting to see how he holds up. Estimate: -1 4.5/10
Vugar Gashimov. He's probably the least known of all of the top 10 players (maybe even the top 30) probably because he has not participated in any of the classic super tournaments, although he has done well in the Grand Prix series, which are category XIX tournaments. Scoring 8.0 (tied for the win), 6.5, and 7.5. This will be some valuable experience for him. Estimate: -1 4.5/10
Francisco Vallejo. At 2705, he's quite a bit lower rated than anybody else on the list but he's quite a bit stronger than Smeets and Van Wely, the Dutch players at Corus. A victory for him would be to get not last place, but considering his accomplishments and those of his rivals, it's doubtful that this will happen. Estimate: -2 4.0/10.
How does strength compare to Corus?
Corus Average: 2713 (Category XIX)
Linares Average: 2758 (Category XXI)
However, Top 6 Players at Corus Average: 2767
Favorite: Levon Aronian. At 2782, he is the highest rated 5th ranked player in history and has been on an upswing lately with having already clinched the Grand Prix top spot with an event to go. Estimate: +3 6.5/10
Also Strong: Veslin Topalov. The top rated seed at 2805, normally he'd be the favorite but with his upcoming match with Anand in less than three months, he will be saving novelties and will probably just be looking to stay sharp and not embarrass himself. Estimate: +1 5.5/10
Alexander Grischuk. Recently won the super-final tournament in Russia and also did well at the World Team Championships, and yet he's actually the 5th seed out of 6. 50% should be considered a victory for him. Estimate: = 5.0/10
Boris Gelfand. Has reached the top 10 again but was disapointing at the world team championships and has already lost 10 rating points this supplement. This tournament is like a fore-runner to the upcoming longer and stronger 2010 Candidates tournament, so it will be interesting to see how he holds up. Estimate: -1 4.5/10
Vugar Gashimov. He's probably the least known of all of the top 10 players (maybe even the top 30) probably because he has not participated in any of the classic super tournaments, although he has done well in the Grand Prix series, which are category XIX tournaments. Scoring 8.0 (tied for the win), 6.5, and 7.5. This will be some valuable experience for him. Estimate: -1 4.5/10
Francisco Vallejo. At 2705, he's quite a bit lower rated than anybody else on the list but he's quite a bit stronger than Smeets and Van Wely, the Dutch players at Corus. A victory for him would be to get not last place, but considering his accomplishments and those of his rivals, it's doubtful that this will happen. Estimate: -2 4.0/10.
How does strength compare to Corus?
Corus Average: 2713 (Category XIX)
Linares Average: 2758 (Category XXI)
However, Top 6 Players at Corus Average: 2767
Corus Finishes
Corus finished yesterday
Winners: Shirov started out 5/5 but ran out of steam, going -2 the rest of the way to finish at a still very good 8.0/13. Pretty good for somebody seeded near the middle. Kramnik also managed a solid 8.0/13, including a win over the winner, Magnus Carlsen, who won with 8.5/13.
Also did well: Hikaru Nakamura managed a very respectable 4th-5th with a plus 2 score. Against 2700+ rated players he did less well, 3.5/8, but the overall performance of 2774 is a good sign. He'll be invited back next year. Visi Anand drew his first nine games but won twice in the last four games, including a win over Vladimir Kramnik.
Also rans: Karjakin and Ivanchuk finished in 6th-7th at '+1'. Although Karjakin actually gained some rating points from this finish, it has to be a bit of a disapointment since he was the defending champion. Leko and Dominiguez finished at an even score. Caruana was in 10th place with -2, not bad considering his rating. The lowest rated player, Van Wely, actually scored three wins (more than Anand!) and actually broken even on rating despite a low score (5.0/13)
Disapointing: Nigel Short also scored 5.0/13 but with his recent tournamnet successes this is a little disapointing. Tiviakov and Smeets both finished at the bottom 4.5/13. All three should be demoted to Corus B next year.
Corus B:
The Winners: Anish Giri scored a very impressive 9.0/13 with a 2773 performance. This is higher than Anand's performance at 2768! Making it even more impressive was that he was only the 12th out of 14 seeds. He well deserves the promotion to corus A next year. The German Champion Naiditsch finished clear second with 8.5 with a 2735 performance, and Ni Hua finished third with 8.0 and a 2708 performance.
Also Did Well: teenager Wesley So had a solid performance tied for 4th with '+2', it'll be interesting to see what he can do next year.
Also rans: English player David Howell performed almost exactly to his rating at '-1', hopefully he'll be given another chance next year.
Disapointing: Akopian finished dead last with just one win and 4.5/13 overall. Hopefully this is just a momemntary setback for him, but this means he probably won't be invited back next year to B, and his rating will be too high for group C.
Group C:
Winners: Li Chao grabbed the lead several rounds ago from Ray Robson, but has really put an exclamation point in the last rounds, finishing strong with 10/13! He was the top seed, so his victory wasn't too surprising. It'll be interesting to see how he does in Corus B next year.
Also rans: After a strong start, Ray Robson finished with only 7.5/13 and a 2501 performance, losing to all top four players on the leaderboard. For those hoping that Robson would pass 2600 soon, it looks like they'll have to wait a little longer.
Winners: Shirov started out 5/5 but ran out of steam, going -2 the rest of the way to finish at a still very good 8.0/13. Pretty good for somebody seeded near the middle. Kramnik also managed a solid 8.0/13, including a win over the winner, Magnus Carlsen, who won with 8.5/13.
Also did well: Hikaru Nakamura managed a very respectable 4th-5th with a plus 2 score. Against 2700+ rated players he did less well, 3.5/8, but the overall performance of 2774 is a good sign. He'll be invited back next year. Visi Anand drew his first nine games but won twice in the last four games, including a win over Vladimir Kramnik.
Also rans: Karjakin and Ivanchuk finished in 6th-7th at '+1'. Although Karjakin actually gained some rating points from this finish, it has to be a bit of a disapointment since he was the defending champion. Leko and Dominiguez finished at an even score. Caruana was in 10th place with -2, not bad considering his rating. The lowest rated player, Van Wely, actually scored three wins (more than Anand!) and actually broken even on rating despite a low score (5.0/13)
Disapointing: Nigel Short also scored 5.0/13 but with his recent tournamnet successes this is a little disapointing. Tiviakov and Smeets both finished at the bottom 4.5/13. All three should be demoted to Corus B next year.
Corus B:
The Winners: Anish Giri scored a very impressive 9.0/13 with a 2773 performance. This is higher than Anand's performance at 2768! Making it even more impressive was that he was only the 12th out of 14 seeds. He well deserves the promotion to corus A next year. The German Champion Naiditsch finished clear second with 8.5 with a 2735 performance, and Ni Hua finished third with 8.0 and a 2708 performance.
Also Did Well: teenager Wesley So had a solid performance tied for 4th with '+2', it'll be interesting to see what he can do next year.
Also rans: English player David Howell performed almost exactly to his rating at '-1', hopefully he'll be given another chance next year.
Disapointing: Akopian finished dead last with just one win and 4.5/13 overall. Hopefully this is just a momemntary setback for him, but this means he probably won't be invited back next year to B, and his rating will be too high for group C.
Group C:
Winners: Li Chao grabbed the lead several rounds ago from Ray Robson, but has really put an exclamation point in the last rounds, finishing strong with 10/13! He was the top seed, so his victory wasn't too surprising. It'll be interesting to see how he does in Corus B next year.
Also rans: After a strong start, Ray Robson finished with only 7.5/13 and a 2501 performance, losing to all top four players on the leaderboard. For those hoping that Robson would pass 2600 soon, it looks like they'll have to wait a little longer.
Sunday, January 24, 2010
USCF Lawsuits Settled!
Good news for both USCF and Susan Polgar, the lawsuits between the two have finally been settled. USCF released a statement which suggests that the settlement was mostly in USCF's favor. Here are some main points.
1) All named parties except Gregory Alexander and Sam Sloan have agreed to dismiss all claims and counter-claims.
2) Polgar and Truong acknowledge that they are no longer USCF EB Board Members, they will not contest the decision of the board of delgates to expel them, and in the future will not run for or accept a leadership position in the USCF.
3) USCF receives $131,000 from their insurance company to help pay legal bills.
4) Susan Polgar's attorneys receive $39,000 from the same (USCF's) insurance company
In a lawsuit like this, everybody loses. Neither Polgar or the USCF will be receiving enough money to cover even half of their legal fees, so both are worse off then when they started. Time to put this huge mess behind us.
1) All named parties except Gregory Alexander and Sam Sloan have agreed to dismiss all claims and counter-claims.
2) Polgar and Truong acknowledge that they are no longer USCF EB Board Members, they will not contest the decision of the board of delgates to expel them, and in the future will not run for or accept a leadership position in the USCF.
3) USCF receives $131,000 from their insurance company to help pay legal bills.
4) Susan Polgar's attorneys receive $39,000 from the same (USCF's) insurance company
In a lawsuit like this, everybody loses. Neither Polgar or the USCF will be receiving enough money to cover even half of their legal fees, so both are worse off then when they started. Time to put this huge mess behind us.
Saturday, January 23, 2010
Corus Round 7
I scored 50% on yesterday's predictions, so not too good. Carlsen won but Anand did not. Short-Kramnik was a draw, although it was Short who was actually close to winning, and Nakamura defeated Shirov.
A little more than half-way through, the race has tightened up.
Shirov: 5.5/7
Carlsen, Nakamura, 5.0/7
Kramnik: 4.5/7
Dominiguez, Ivanchuk: 4.0/7
Anand, Karjakin, Leko: 3.5/7
Shirov now faces the unenviable task of playing Anand, Kramnik, Carlsen, and Ivanchuk all in a row! I'd be very surprised if he keeps the lead through that!
Round 8 Games:
Anand vs Ivanchuk
Shirov vs Carlsen
Kramnik vs Nakamura
Predictions: Carlsen and Kramnik will win.
Ray Robson suffered a set back when he lost his round 7 game to Vocaturo, but remains in sole lead of group C with 5.5/7. Four players are breathing down his neck though, two at 5.0, two at 4.5
Akobian is not doing nearly as well as his compatriots, and is sitting last but one in group B with just 2.0/7. Wesley So, the Phillipenne teenager that impressed at the World Cup has now won a couple games, and is sitting tied for 2nd place with 4.5/7, a point behind the leader.
A little more than half-way through, the race has tightened up.
Shirov: 5.5/7
Carlsen, Nakamura, 5.0/7
Kramnik: 4.5/7
Dominiguez, Ivanchuk: 4.0/7
Anand, Karjakin, Leko: 3.5/7
Shirov now faces the unenviable task of playing Anand, Kramnik, Carlsen, and Ivanchuk all in a row! I'd be very surprised if he keeps the lead through that!
Round 8 Games:
Anand vs Ivanchuk
Shirov vs Carlsen
Kramnik vs Nakamura
Predictions: Carlsen and Kramnik will win.
Ray Robson suffered a set back when he lost his round 7 game to Vocaturo, but remains in sole lead of group C with 5.5/7. Four players are breathing down his neck though, two at 5.0, two at 4.5
Akobian is not doing nearly as well as his compatriots, and is sitting last but one in group B with just 2.0/7. Wesley So, the Phillipenne teenager that impressed at the World Cup has now won a couple games, and is sitting tied for 2nd place with 4.5/7, a point behind the leader.
Friday, January 22, 2010
Corus Round 6
All Predictions from yesterday came true! Shirov [finally] drew a game, as did Nakamura, Carlsen, and Ivanchuk. Kramnik beat Van Wely to join the chase pack.
Robson has improved to 5.5/6 in group C and still holds the lead.
Round 7 Leaders' Games:
Caruana-Anand
Short-Kramnik
Nakamura-Shirov
Carlsen-Ivanchuk
Anand is finally through most of his tough games, maybe he can start to win some games now. Nakamura can pull within a half point of the lead with a win, but I think a draw is the most likely result.
Predictions: Anand and Carlsen will both win. Short-Kramnik, and Nakamura-Shirov will be drawn.
Robson has improved to 5.5/6 in group C and still holds the lead.
Round 7 Leaders' Games:
Caruana-Anand
Short-Kramnik
Nakamura-Shirov
Carlsen-Ivanchuk
Anand is finally through most of his tough games, maybe he can start to win some games now. Nakamura can pull within a half point of the lead with a win, but I think a draw is the most likely result.
Predictions: Anand and Carlsen will both win. Short-Kramnik, and Nakamura-Shirov will be drawn.
Thursday, January 21, 2010
Corus Round 5
Shirov wins again to move to 5.0/5! Nakamura, Ivanchuk, and Carlsen all drew to fall to a point and a half back at 3.5/5. Kramnik won his first game and is now sitting in 5th place with 3.0/5.
Round 6:
Shirov vs Short
Anand vs Carlsen
Ivanchuk vs Nakamura
Kramnik vs Van Wely
Prediction: Shirov will draw to rise to 5.5/6. Kramnik will win to join the chase pack at 4.0/6. The other leaders' games will draw.
Shirov is enjoying "relatively" easy players in the first half of the tournament. Of his opponents so far, only Peter Leko is rated above 2700. His next round (Rd 6) is against a sub 2700 (Nigel Short), but then he has murder's row in rds 7-13! Nakamura, Carlsen, Ivanchuk, Anand, Kramnik, Karjakin, and Dominguez. 2700s all! (except Carlsen, who's a 2800). Rounds 8-11 look especially hairy. Still, if Shirov just manages an even score from here on out, he'll finish with 9.0/13. That's a point more than Karjakin won with in 2009.
Round 6:
Shirov vs Short
Anand vs Carlsen
Ivanchuk vs Nakamura
Kramnik vs Van Wely
Prediction: Shirov will draw to rise to 5.5/6. Kramnik will win to join the chase pack at 4.0/6. The other leaders' games will draw.
Shirov is enjoying "relatively" easy players in the first half of the tournament. Of his opponents so far, only Peter Leko is rated above 2700. His next round (Rd 6) is against a sub 2700 (Nigel Short), but then he has murder's row in rds 7-13! Nakamura, Carlsen, Ivanchuk, Anand, Kramnik, Karjakin, and Dominguez. 2700s all! (except Carlsen, who's a 2800). Rounds 8-11 look especially hairy. Still, if Shirov just manages an even score from here on out, he'll finish with 9.0/13. That's a point more than Karjakin won with in 2009.
Wednesday, January 20, 2010
Corus Chess Rds 1-4
Alexi Shirov is off to a great start at Corus with 4/4, mostly against the the lower-rated players in the tournament, but also includes a win off 2739-Peter Leko. Magnus Carlsen, Vassily Ivanchuk, and Hikaru Nakamaura are in the chase pack with 3.0/4. Vladimir Kramnik, Visi Anand, and last year's winner Sergey Karjakin have an uninspiring 2.0/4.
Anand may be saving all his theoretical novelties for his upcoming match with Topalov, so his lackluster performance is not too surprising, but I was hoping that Kramnik would be joining Topalov and Carlsen above 2800 after this tournament, after coming off a fine performance at the Tal Memorial.
The B group is being led by Hua and Giri with 3.0/4. The lone american, Vladimir Akopian, is way back in 13th place with 1.0/4.
The C group ("dubbed the kindergarten group") is being led by Li Chao and Ray Robson, two of the top three seeds, with 3.5/4.
The winner of group C will be invited to the B group the following year, likewise the winner of group B is invited to the A group. Robson will be following Carlsen's footsteps if he manages to win group C.
Carlsen's Progress.
2004: Group C: 10.5/13 1st
2005: Group B: 7.0/13 7th
2006: Group B: 9.0/13 1st-2nd
2007: Group A: 4.5/13 13th-14th
2008: Group A: 8.0/13 1st-2nd
2009: Group A: 7.0/13 5th-6th
Anand may be saving all his theoretical novelties for his upcoming match with Topalov, so his lackluster performance is not too surprising, but I was hoping that Kramnik would be joining Topalov and Carlsen above 2800 after this tournament, after coming off a fine performance at the Tal Memorial.
The B group is being led by Hua and Giri with 3.0/4. The lone american, Vladimir Akopian, is way back in 13th place with 1.0/4.
The C group ("dubbed the kindergarten group") is being led by Li Chao and Ray Robson, two of the top three seeds, with 3.5/4.
The winner of group C will be invited to the B group the following year, likewise the winner of group B is invited to the A group. Robson will be following Carlsen's footsteps if he manages to win group C.
Carlsen's Progress.
2004: Group C: 10.5/13 1st
2005: Group B: 7.0/13 7th
2006: Group B: 9.0/13 1st-2nd
2007: Group A: 4.5/13 13th-14th
2008: Group A: 8.0/13 1st-2nd
2009: Group A: 7.0/13 5th-6th
Friday, January 15, 2010
2010 Election Updates
The deadline for the $250 filing fee and signatures for the executive board passed on January 11th, so nominations are now closed. Although there are two spots open on the board, there are only three candidates that will get statements in Chess Life. This is the lowest # of candidates, special election or not, since OMOV (One Member, One Vote) was enacted in 2003. Whether people were afraid of being sued, wer not interested in the only 1-year term (they would have to run for re-election in 2011 since they are completing Susan Polgar and Paul Truong's terms [2007-2011] in order to stay on the board], or something else entirely, the choices are very limited this year barring a write-in campaign.
The three Candidates are (in alphabetical order):
Mike Nietman: He's been president of the Wisconsin Chess Federation for 20 some odd years now, and is (was?) the chair of the Scholastic Committee. He is a life member and has by far the most impressive purely chess experience of the three. My one criticism is that he is neither active in the USCF forums, nor has a website or blog of his own.
Nietman run for the executive board once before, in 2009. He finished a distant 6th out of 11 candidates with 732 votes (Mike Atkins finished in 4th place with 2672)
Sam Sloan: He is a former executive board member (2006-2007). He sued the USCF and the members of the Executive board shortly after the 2007 election over the "Fake Sam Sloan (FSS)". Someone (allegedly Paul Truong, another nominee in 2007) posted hundreds of online defamtory comments online claiming to be Sam Sloan. I'm not sure of most of the details, but the deal-breaker for me is that he sued the organization and as a result thousands of dollars that could have been spent on chess were instead spent on litigiation.
Sloan has run every election year since OMOV started in 2003. He finished 5th (top 3 elected) in 2003, 3rd (top 2 elected) in 2004, 8th (top 4 elected) in 2005, 2nd in 2006 (elected), 9th (top 4 elected) in 2007, and 9th in 2009.
Gary Walters: Like Nietman and Sloan, he is a class A player. Unlike them though, he is a very active correspondence player, he is currently playing in the 2009 Absolute Championship, 2010 Absolute Championship, 18th United States Correspondence Chess Championship (USCCC), and a preliminary section of the 33rd world championship. He has a very active blog and is also active on the USCF Forums. He has little or no experience organizing or directing tournaments, but his experience as a lawyer could prove valuable with all of the suits that USCF is involved in.
This will be the first time that Walters has run for the Executive Board.
With three candidates and only two spots, unless Nietman or Walters decides to sue the USCF, it looks like I'll be voting for them in June.
The three Candidates are (in alphabetical order):
Mike Nietman: He's been president of the Wisconsin Chess Federation for 20 some odd years now, and is (was?) the chair of the Scholastic Committee. He is a life member and has by far the most impressive purely chess experience of the three. My one criticism is that he is neither active in the USCF forums, nor has a website or blog of his own.
Nietman run for the executive board once before, in 2009. He finished a distant 6th out of 11 candidates with 732 votes (Mike Atkins finished in 4th place with 2672)
Sam Sloan: He is a former executive board member (2006-2007). He sued the USCF and the members of the Executive board shortly after the 2007 election over the "Fake Sam Sloan (FSS)". Someone (allegedly Paul Truong, another nominee in 2007) posted hundreds of online defamtory comments online claiming to be Sam Sloan. I'm not sure of most of the details, but the deal-breaker for me is that he sued the organization and as a result thousands of dollars that could have been spent on chess were instead spent on litigiation.
Sloan has run every election year since OMOV started in 2003. He finished 5th (top 3 elected) in 2003, 3rd (top 2 elected) in 2004, 8th (top 4 elected) in 2005, 2nd in 2006 (elected), 9th (top 4 elected) in 2007, and 9th in 2009.
Gary Walters: Like Nietman and Sloan, he is a class A player. Unlike them though, he is a very active correspondence player, he is currently playing in the 2009 Absolute Championship, 2010 Absolute Championship, 18th United States Correspondence Chess Championship (USCCC), and a preliminary section of the 33rd world championship. He has a very active blog and is also active on the USCF Forums. He has little or no experience organizing or directing tournaments, but his experience as a lawyer could prove valuable with all of the suits that USCF is involved in.
This will be the first time that Walters has run for the Executive Board.
With three candidates and only two spots, unless Nietman or Walters decides to sue the USCF, it looks like I'll be voting for them in June.
Tuesday, January 12, 2010
Corus Chess
The first super-tournament is the A-section of Corus in the Netherlands, a fourteen-player round robin. The favorites are #1 ranked Magnus Carlsen, world Champion Visi Anand, and former world champion Vladimir Kramnik. The tournament is actually weaker than it has been in the past with only four players from the top 10 and 6 from the top 20, still with the avg rating at 2719, this a category XIX tournament and definitely classifies as a 'super'
A big story for the American crowd is how is US Champion Hikaru Nakamura going to do in this field. Hikaru is rated 2708, but has had little success in the international field. Arguably, this will be the first super-tournament that he has even participated in. Here is his record against 2600+ competition.
December 2003: 13th Ciudad de Pamplona IO (3.0/7 against 2611 opp)
June 2004: FIDE World Chess Championships (4.5/8 against 2665 opp)
July 2005: Biel International GM (4.5/10 against 2633 opp)
February 2006: Cuernavaca Young Masters (6.0/9 against 2627 opp)
October 2007: Magistral Ciudad de Barce (7.0/9 against 2602 opp)
November 2008: Olympiad (6.5/10 against 2608 opp)
July 2009: G.P. Donostia Capital (6.5/9 against 2679 opp)
August 2009: NH Chess Tournament (3.5/10 against 2658 opp)
December 2009: London Chess Classic (3.0/7 against 2694 opp)
One tournament a year until 2009 where he's played in three strong tournaments. He tied for 1st in the G.P. Donostia tournament, but was disapointing at both the NH Chess Tournament and the London Chess Classic. He is playing quite well at the World Team Championships, however, with a specactular win over Boris Gelfand in the King's Indian.
Anything north of an even score should be considered a success, but a top 3 finish is necessary in order to be considered in the world's elite.
A big story for the American crowd is how is US Champion Hikaru Nakamura going to do in this field. Hikaru is rated 2708, but has had little success in the international field. Arguably, this will be the first super-tournament that he has even participated in. Here is his record against 2600+ competition.
December 2003: 13th Ciudad de Pamplona IO (3.0/7 against 2611 opp)
June 2004: FIDE World Chess Championships (4.5/8 against 2665 opp)
July 2005: Biel International GM (4.5/10 against 2633 opp)
February 2006: Cuernavaca Young Masters (6.0/9 against 2627 opp)
October 2007: Magistral Ciudad de Barce (7.0/9 against 2602 opp)
November 2008: Olympiad (6.5/10 against 2608 opp)
July 2009: G.P. Donostia Capital (6.5/9 against 2679 opp)
August 2009: NH Chess Tournament (3.5/10 against 2658 opp)
December 2009: London Chess Classic (3.0/7 against 2694 opp)
One tournament a year until 2009 where he's played in three strong tournaments. He tied for 1st in the G.P. Donostia tournament, but was disapointing at both the NH Chess Tournament and the London Chess Classic. He is playing quite well at the World Team Championships, however, with a specactular win over Boris Gelfand in the King's Indian.
Anything north of an even score should be considered a success, but a top 3 finish is necessary in order to be considered in the world's elite.
Sunday, January 3, 2010
Mike Nietman announces candidacy
Mike Nietman who finished 6th in the 2009 Executive board election, has announced on the USCF forums that he is running again in 2010.
It's a little early for endorsements, as the entire field of candidates have not been announced yet, but I voted for Nietman in 2009, and unless two other candidates completely blow me away I'll be voting for him in 2010 too.
It's a little early for endorsements, as the entire field of candidates have not been announced yet, but I voted for Nietman in 2009, and unless two other candidates completely blow me away I'll be voting for him in 2010 too.
Al Ufer Memorial
I played in my first tournament in nearly five months at the 5th Al Ufer Memorial tournament. In the first round, against a 1620, I got a great attack going which was only stopped by winning the exchange, and then proceeded to pick off several pawns in the late middle-game. By the time I gave the exchange back, I was three passed pawns ahead and won easily in the end game. In the second game, against a 2030, I was worse all game but sacrificed a pawn in order to get into a fairly equal queen and opposite-bishop endgame. After the trade of queens, a draw became inevitable. In round 3, I played a 1880 and won the exchange with a great attack on the queen. Unfortunately I drifted in the middle-game, and my opponent found a good combination to win a piece and a pawn, and won the two pieces vs rook endgame fairly easily. My last game against a 1750 also had a strong attack that I sacrificed a rook for. I didn't get the mate I was looking for, but I managed to decimiate the kingside and win four pawns, making material almost even. The position was about equal when I tried to activate my king, but instead walked into a forced mate by two bishops and a rook.
All in all, even though I scored only 1.5/4 and lost 15 rating points to 1843, I felt pretty good about my games. I had chances in all four games, emerged from the opening with honor in all my games, and took advantage of many tactical chances. Four weeks til the Portsmouth open.
All in all, even though I scored only 1.5/4 and lost 15 rating points to 1843, I felt pretty good about my games. I had chances in all four games, emerged from the opening with honor in all my games, and took advantage of many tactical chances. Four weeks til the Portsmouth open.
Friday, January 1, 2010
Happy New Year 2010.
As expected, Magnus Carlsen topped the 2010 FIDE list at 2810. Current world championship challenger Veselin Topalov is five points behind at 2805.
As it turns out, I will not be playing the 2010 Colorado Correspondence Semi-final after all. Fourteen players signed up this year, a 50% increase from last year. Jeff Baffo, the 2009 champion, automatically received a bye to the final, leaving thirteen. Six the budget only allows for six or at the most seven games per person in the semi-finals, the semi-finals were organized into 3 groups of four. As the 2009 runner-up, I also received a bye to the final. Jeff and I will be joined in the final by the three group leaders, and at least the top two scoring 2nd place finishers (creating a seven-player round robin). If all three 2nd place finishers score 4.5 or more points, then all three 2nd place finishers will advance and it will be an eight-player round robin.
In related news, the January 2010 Check is in the Mail has the full standings for the 2009 Colorado CC Championship!
Since I'm not participating in the Colorado Semi-finals, I elected to start in an earlier section of the 2010 Electronic Knights instead. The Knights have three sections, preliminaries, semi-finals, and finals. In order to progress to the next stage, players need to score at least 4.5 points in the final, or win their section with at least 4.0. A weighted score is calculated to determine the winner. The 2006 winner, GM Cesar Augusto Blanco-Gramajo, was just announced, so the entire tournament takes approximately four years, about half of the time that it takes the postal championship, the Golden Knights.
Last year I scored 3.5/6 in my preliminary section, a full point short of the goal. Hopefully this year I can improve upon it.
As it turns out, I will not be playing the 2010 Colorado Correspondence Semi-final after all. Fourteen players signed up this year, a 50% increase from last year. Jeff Baffo, the 2009 champion, automatically received a bye to the final, leaving thirteen. Six the budget only allows for six or at the most seven games per person in the semi-finals, the semi-finals were organized into 3 groups of four. As the 2009 runner-up, I also received a bye to the final. Jeff and I will be joined in the final by the three group leaders, and at least the top two scoring 2nd place finishers (creating a seven-player round robin). If all three 2nd place finishers score 4.5 or more points, then all three 2nd place finishers will advance and it will be an eight-player round robin.
In related news, the January 2010 Check is in the Mail has the full standings for the 2009 Colorado CC Championship!
Since I'm not participating in the Colorado Semi-finals, I elected to start in an earlier section of the 2010 Electronic Knights instead. The Knights have three sections, preliminaries, semi-finals, and finals. In order to progress to the next stage, players need to score at least 4.5 points in the final, or win their section with at least 4.0. A weighted score is calculated to determine the winner. The 2006 winner, GM Cesar Augusto Blanco-Gramajo, was just announced, so the entire tournament takes approximately four years, about half of the time that it takes the postal championship, the Golden Knights.
Last year I scored 3.5/6 in my preliminary section, a full point short of the goal. Hopefully this year I can improve upon it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)