Chess Oscars 1967-2003

1967 - Larsen
1968 and 1969 - Spassky
1970, 1971 and 1972 - Fischer
1973, 1974, 1975, 1976 and 1977 - Karpov
1978 - Korchnoi
1979, 1980 and 1981 - Karpov
1982 and 1983 - Kasparov
1984 - Karpov
1985, 1986, 1987 and 1988 - Kasparov
(From 1989 through 1994 the Oscar was not awarded)
1995 and 1996 - Kasparov
1997 and 1998 - Anand
1999 - Kasparov
2000 - Kramnik
2001 and 2002 - Kasparov
2003 - Anand

Two Old Games

ALD-RMD [D55]

1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 d5 3.Nc3 e6 4.Bg5 Be7 5.Nf3 O-O 6.e3 = Nc6 {My wife often plays this in this kind of position. I personally don't like it because it closes off the possibility of playing ...c5.} 7.Bd3 h6 8.Bxf6 {Better is 8.Bh4 since this bishop should not be traded off in the QGD.} Bxf6 9.cxd5 {Like my eighth move, this is a move which could have been ruled out on general principles without calculation. In the QGD White does not play cxd5; better is 9.O-O.} exd5 = 10.Qc2 {10.O-O -0.15 CAP} Nb4 11.Qd2 {11.Bh7+!? Kh8 12.Qb3 Nxa2 13.Qxa2 Kxh7 14.Nxd5 Bg4 -0.10d14 Tiger 2004} Bg4 12.Be2 Bf5 13.O-O Qd6 {13...Qd7} 14.Nb5 Qe7 15.Nxc7 Rac8 {15...Qxc7 16.Qxb4} 16.Nb5? {16.Rfc1 hangs on to the extra pawn.} Rc2 17.Qd1 Rxb2 {17...Rxe2 18.Qxe2 Bd3 19.Qd2 Bxb5} 18.a3 Nc6 {Too passive; 18...Nc2!?} 19.Bd3? {It wasn't immediately obvious to me, but this loses a piece. My wife saw it almost instantly; 19.Nc3} Bxd3 20.Qxd3 Qe4 21.Qxe4 dxe4 22.Ne5 {22.Rfb1 Rxb1+23.Rxb1 exf3 24.gxf3} Rxb5 23.Nxc6 {Why trade another piece when I'm already down? This made no sense; 23.a4} bxc6 24.Rfc1 Rb6 {24...c5!} 25.a4 a5 26.Rc5 Ra627.Rac1 Rc8 {27...Rb8! defends the pawn indirectly.} 28.g3 Be7 29.Re5 Ba3 30.Rc3 Bb4 31.Rc4 Kf8 32.Rxe4 Ra7 33.Kg2 Re7 34.Rxe7 Kxe7 35.d5 {Premature; 35.Kf3} Kd6 36.dxc6 Rxc6 37.Rf4 f6 38.Rg4 g5 39.Rd4+ Kc5 40.h3 Rd6 0-1 {Maybe I resigned just a bit too soon, but Black's win is a matter of simple technique. 41.Re4 Rd2 42.Re7 Ra2 43.Rf7 Bc3 44.h4 Kb4 45.h5 Kxa4 -4.22/d14 Tiger 2004}

RMD-ALD [C68]

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Bc4 Nf6 = 5.Nc3 {5.O-O} Bc5 6.d3 O-O 7.O-O d6 8.h3 {8.Bg5; 8.Nd5=} b5 9.Bb3 {-0.52 CAP} Bb7 {9...Na5 is probably best here; 9...h6 is the most commonly played move.} 10.Ng5 Qd7 11.Nd5 Nxd5 12.Bxd5 h6 13.Nxf7?! {My wife loves to make this exchange whenever she has the opportunity, but seldom manages to achieve an advantage with it.} Rxf7 14.Bxf7+ Qxf7 15.Qg4 {15.Be3} Rf8! {Correctly calculating that there is nothing to fear from 16.Bxh6.} 16.Bxh6 Kh7? {A complete waste of time. Better to continue my own plans with 16....Bc8.} 17.Bg5 {17.Be3 is still best.} Qg6 {17...Bxf2+} 18.Kh2 Rxf2? {This exposes Black to an extremely deep winning combination by White, which fortunately for me my wife did not find. That is hardly surprising since even in analysis, it took me a very long time to work through all the complications.} 19.Qh4+ {19.Rxf2! Bxf2 20.Rf1! Qf7 (if the bishop retreats, then 21.Rf8 wins instantly for White) 21.Kh1! (to get the White King out of reach of the dark-squared bishop) Nd4 after which Black has no saving move, for example 22.Bh4 Qe6 23.Qh5+ Qh6 24.Qxh6+ gxh6 25.Bxf2 +-} Kg8 20.Rxf2 Bxf2 21.Qxf2 Qxg5 22.Rf1 Qe7 23.h4 Nd4 24.h5 Ne6 25.Qa7 {An odd move, taking the White queen away from the main action.} Qh4+ 26.Kg1 Nf4? {26...Bc8 27.Qa8 Qd8} 27.Qxb7??? {27.Rxf4! exf4 28.Qxb7 =} Ne2#

Two Games

RMD-ALD, 2/12/2005 [B20]

1.e4 c5 2.e5 Nc6 3.Nf3 e6 4.Bb5 Qc7 5.Qe2 {5.Bxc6 Qxc6 6.O-O ...1/2-1/2, Koc Przemyslaw 2330 - Bus Mariusz 2370, Wisla 1998} d6 {5...Nge7 ...1-0, Kuindzhi Alexander - Keogh Eamon, Hague 1961} 6.d4!? cxd4 7.Nxd4 dxe5 8.Nxc6 bxc6 9.Ba4 {9.Qf3!?} Qa5+ {9...Bc5} 10.Nc3 Nf6?? 11.Bxc6+ Ke7 {I might as well just have resigned at this point.} 12.Bxa8 g6 13.O-O? {13.Bd2 Qb6 14.O-O-O} Ba6 14.Qf3 Bxf1 15.Bg5 {A very good in-between move, so White can recapture Rxf1 instead of Kxf1. However, 15.Qb7+ was even stronger.} Bg7 16.Rxf1 {16.Qb7+} h6 17.Bh4 g5 18.Bg3 Rd8 19.h4 e4 20.Bxe4 Nxe4 21.Qxe4 Bxc3 22.bxc3 Qxc3 23.Qh7 {23.Be5!} Rh8 24.Qd3Qc6?? {Of course, trading queens loses. However, not trading queens loses even faster.} 25.Qa3+! 1-0 {25...Kf6 26.Qb2+ Ke7 27.Qxh8 Qd5 28.Qxh6 g4}

ALD-RMD, 4/24/2005, [D06]

1.d4 d5 2.c4 Nf6 {My wife's standard response to the Queen's Gambit, but not altogether satisfactory.} 3.Nc3 Bf5 {3...dxc4} 4.Bg5 Ne4 {4...e6} 5.Nxe4 Bxe4 6.f3 {As I played this, I had second thoughts about whether this was best. However, post-mortem analysis seems to indicate that this was ok after all.} Bg6 7.e3 {7.Qb3 ...1-0, Suabedissen R - Fischer Jakob, Wewelsburg 1996} Nc6 8.Bd3 {8.Qb3} Qd6 {8...dxc4 9.Bxc4 f6 =} 9.Qb3 {I couldn't see this at the time, but this move unleashes a quasi-forced sequence that leads to the loss of pawn; 9.c5!} Qb4+ 10.Qxb4 Nxb4 11.Bxg6 hxg6 12.Kd2 {My wife criticized this move, but analysis bears it out. This is the strongest way to prevent ...Nc7. However, now White goes down a pawn with no compensation.} dxc4 13.Nh3 {Right after I played this I spotted the stronger 13.e4.} f6 14.Bf4 {14.a3 Nd3 15.Bf4 c5} Nd5 {14...O-O-O} 15.Rac1 b5 16.e4 Nb4!? {16...Rxh3! 17.exd5 (17.gxh3? Nxf4) Rh5 18.Bxc7 Rxd5 but not 16...Nxf4? 17.Nxf4} 17.a3? {17.Bxc7 is the only reasonable move here.} Nd3 18.Rc2? e5? {18...Rxh3 19.gxh3 Nxf4} 19.dxe5? {19.Be3 O-O-O 20.d5} fxe5? {19...Rxh3 20.gxh3 Nxf4 21.exf6 gxf6} 20.Bg3 O-O-O 21.Ke2 Bc5 {21...Be7} 22.Rd1 {22.Ng5} Bd4 23.Rb1 Rh5 {A very odd position for the rook; 23...a6} 24.f4 {24.b3 g5 =} a6 {24...exf4! 25.Nxf4 Nxf4+ 26.Bxf4 Rf8} 25.fxe5 Nxe5 {25...Bxe5! 26.Bxe5 Rxe5} 26.Nf4 Rh6 {An even odder move than 23....Rh5 since the pawn is already defended by the knight; 26...Rhh8} 27.Ne6 Ng4 {Black has dissipated her advantage. Now despite the extra pawn, this position is equal or even microscopically in White's favor; 27...Rd6} 28.Nxd8 Kxd8 29.Rd2 c5 30.h3 {I worried about this move after making it, but analysis confirmed my over-the-board instinct.} Ne3? {30...Nf6} 31.Kf3? {31.Bf4 Nxg2 32.Bxh6 gxh6} Ke7? 32.Bf4 c3 33.bxc3 Bxc3 34.Bxe3 {34.Rd3 is even stronger.} Bxd2 35.Bxd2 {The rest of the game is just a matter of technique.} Rh8 36.Bg5+ Ke6 37.Kf4 {37.Rd1} Rf8+ 38.Ke3 Rc8 39.Rd1 a5 40.Bf4 Rc6 41.Kd3 b4 42.axb4 cxb4! {42...axb4? 43.Kc4! letting the king in next to the pawns, so in this case the general principle of recapturing towards the center has to be violated. - RMD} 43.Rc1 Kd7? {43...Ra6! not just avoiding the exchange of rooks but placing the rook on a strong square behind the passed pawn.} 44.Rxc6 Kxc6 45.Kc4 Kd7 46.Be5 Ke6 47.Bxg7 Kd7 48.h4 Ke6 49.g4 Kf7 50.Bd4 Ke6 51.h5 Kf7 52.hxg6+? {Prolongs the game unnecessarily; 52.h6!} Kxg6 {With my next move I embarked on a totally wrong strategic plan, leaving my king to deal with Black's two passed pawns while the bishop tried to help my own pawns advance. This is completely backwards. I should have played 53.e5 and prepared to move my king forward to help the pawn queen while my bishop dealt with the Black pawns.} 53.Be3 Kf6 54.Bf4 Ke6 55.g5 Kf7 56.Bc7 Kg6 57.Bd8 {57.Bxa5 was a quicker win.} Kh5 58.e5 Kg6 59.Kb3 {59.e6! and the pawn cannot be stopped.} Kf5 60.Bf6 Ke6 61.Ka4 {I don't understand why I was playing such a slow game. This game could probably have been won in 15 moves fewer than it took me; 61.g6} Kf7 62.Kxa5 b3 63.Kb4 b2 64.e6+ Kxe6 65.Bxb2 {Black should have resigned here.} Kf7 66.Bf6 Kg6 67.Kc5 Kf5 68.Kd6 Kg6 69.Ke7 Kf5 {White: 0:37, Black: 0:41} 70.Kf7 1-0

January Tournament Games Analysis

My original off-the-cuff analysis written the day after the tournament can be found here. The following is slightly more thorough (but not necessarily more accurate) analysis, performed with the help of Tiger 2004.

Round 1: Ananya Roy (1018) - ALD (1499), Giuoco Piano [C50]

1.e4 e5 {I pondered whether to play my usual 1. ... c5, but decided that a kid learning the game now would probably be much more up on all the latest Sicilian theory than I could hope to be, so I decided on 1. ... e5 instead. Of course, this could have backfired if my opponent had taken me down obscure Ruy Lopez variations.} 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 {Boy, did I luck out. My wife and I play the Giuoco often. I felt like cheering when I saw this.} Bc5 4.d3 Nf6 5.Bg5 {5.c3, 5.Nc3 and 5.O-O are all more common, but the text move is OK too. However, it turned out to be more successful for White than she had any right to expect simply because I failed to notice that anything unusual had happenedand that the line we were in was very different from what you usually see inthe Giuoco. Two thoughts: (1) I know I am out of practice and that's why I hadproblems navigating through this opening correctly, but (2) back in my day a1000 rated player could not have successfully done so either. The times, they are a-changing.} O-O {This is incorrect and is the cause of Black's future problems. The correct plan is 5.... d6 followed by 6.... Be6 and later ...Qe7, preserving the option to castle queenside depending on how things develop. Also 5. ... h6 is very playable.} 6.Nc3 {Not just the natural move, but clearly the strongest move in this position, with the strong threat of 7. Nd5.} Bb4 {The best might be 6. ... Be7 relieving the pin. I didn't want to pull the bishop back, but moving it again this way is no good either, especially since White is obviously just going to castle so that the problem of Nd5 is still not solved. Either 6. ... d6 or 6. ... h6 is also still good.} 7.O-O Bxc3 {The bishop has had to move three times to prevent Nd5. A wonderful illustration of Nimzowitsch's chess principle that the threat is stronger than the execution. White never got to play Nd5, yet Black's position is already somewhat inferior.} 8.bxc3 d6 9.d4 {Not the strongest move here, it allows Black to equalize.} Bg4 {9...h6 10.Bxf6 Qxf6 11.d5 Ne7 12.Rb1 a6 13.a4 b6 -0.08/d16 Tiger 2004} 10.Bb5 {10.d5} Bxf3 {Not best; not only does it bring the queen to bear on f6, but it leaves Blackwith two bad knights against White's two good bishops. 10....h6 is still the move.} 11.Qxf3 exd4 12.Bxc6 bxc6 13.Bxf6 gxf6!? {13. ... Qxf6 is objectively better and I even thought so at the time, but I thought that keeping the queens on the board gave me better practical chances. Elapsed times at this point were White 0:12 and Black 0:15.} 14.Qg4+ Kh8 15.cxd4 Rg8 16.Qf5 Rg5 17.Qf3 Qe7 18.h4 Rg619.h5 Rg5 20.Rfe1 c5 21.e5 Rag8 22.exf6 Rxg2+ 23.Kh1 Qd8 {By this point something interesting psychologically had happened. I had been under pressure for so long that I failed to realize that I had managed to equalize and was maybe even microscopically better now. Elapsed times at this point were White 0:23 and Black 0:32.}24.Re7?? R8g5?? {24...R2g4!! with the threat of 25....Rh4+, which can only be stopped by 25.Qxg4 Rxg4, and Black wins instantly.} 25.Rae1 Qg8 26.Re8 Rg1+ 27.Kh2 R5g2+ {Elapsed times at this point were White 0:30 and Black 0:40.} 28.Kh3 Black Resigns??? {Of course all I had to do is play 28....Rxe1 29.Rxg8+ Rxg8! (all I had seen was 29....Kxg8?? 30.Qa8+ Re8 31.Qxe8#) with approximate equality. Because of the disheveled pawn structure the queen might be slightly stronger than the two rooks, but there is still everything for me to play for. If only I had played one more move before resigning, I would surely have seen 29....Rxg8. Ouch!}

Round 2: ALD (1499) - Christopher Roberts (893), QGD Semi-Slav Defense [D43]

1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.Nc3 e6 4.Nf3 Nf6 5.Bf4 {5.Bg5} Nbd7 6.e3 Qa5 {6...Be7} 7.a3 {7.Nd2} c5 {This move is inaccurate.} 8.Bd3 {But this fails to take advantage of it. 8.dxc5! Qxc5? (8...dxc4!) ...1-0, Jackova Jana 2331 - Decka Eliska 2069, Chrudim 1993} cxd4 9.exd4 Nb6? {9...dxc4 10.Bxc4 Ne4} 10.b4 Qa6? {White: 0:06, Black: 0:07. 10...Bxb4 11.axb4 Qxb4 is actually the lesser evil here.} 11.c5? {I thought this won the queen; I overlooked Black's strong (but in hindsight obvious) reply. The rust continues to show. 11.Nb5!! with the threat Nc7 wins immediately.} Nc4 12.Qb3 {12.O-O} b5 13.cxb6 {Continuing to dissipate my advantage. This was a very strong pawn, which in addition to being passed is cramping Black's queenside. Correct was still 13.O-O.} axb6 14.O-O Be7 15.Rfd1 b5 16.Ne5 O-O 17.Be2 Bb7 18.a4 bxa4 {White: 0:22, Black: 0:21} 19.Rxa4 Qb6 20.Rxa8 {20.Nxc4 dxc4 21.Bxc4 doesn't work because after 21....Rfd8 White can't hold on to the extra pawn.} Rxa8 21.Nxc4 dxc4 22.Bxc4 Qc6? {Now Black is down a pawn for nothing. 22...Qxb4.} 23.d5exd5 24.Bxd5 Nxd5 25.Nxd5 Bf8 {White: 0:31, Black: 0:26. 25...Bxb4 26.Be5 (26.Nxb4?? Qxg2#; 26.Qxb4?? Qxd5!) Bf8 27.Qg3 Qg6 =} 26.h3 Rd8 27.Ne3 Bxb4?? {First the in-between move 27...Rxd1+ 28.Qxd1 and only then 28....Bxb4.} 28.Rxd8+ Bf8 29.Qd5 {29.Qa3 is a much faster win.} Qb6 30.Qd4 Qe6? {This allows a textbook finish, but due to the material deficit Black is lost in any event.} 31.Rxf8+ Kxf8 32.Qd8+ Qe8 {White: 0:37, Black: 0:35} 33.Bd6+ 1-0 {33...Kg8 34.Qxe8#}

Round 3: Harrison Ling (1116) - ALD (1499), Sicilian [B45]

1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 e6 6.Bd3?? Be7?? 7.O-O?? O-O?? 8.Re1?? d6?? 9.Be3 {Finally! The knight on e4 has been hanging for 3 moves. That's what happens when you play the opening by rote (both of us).} Bd7 10.Qf3 Rc8 11.Nxc6 Rxc6 {11...Bxc6} 12.Bxa7? {This pawn is poisoned. 12.Nb5 Ra6 13.a4 (13.Nxa7 Ra5) Qb8} b6 13.Bb5 {13.Nb5 is still better.} Rc5 {13...Rxc3! 14.Qxc3 Bxb5} 14.Bxd7? {14.Bxb6! Qxb6 15.Bxd7 Nxd7 16.Na4 Qb7 17.Nxc5 Nxc5 =} Nxd7 15.Qe3 {This position is deceptively complex. Navigating the thicket with the help of Tiger 2004, I found the following: 15.a4 Ne5 [15...Ra5 16.Nb5 Qa8 17.Qe3 Rxa7 18.Nxa7 Qxa7; 15...Qc7 16.Nb5 Qb7 17.Qe2 Ra8 18.b4 Rxb5 (18...Rcc8 19.a5 Rxa7 20.Nxa7 Qxa7) 19.axb5 Rxa7 (19...Bf6 20.Ra6 Bc3 21.Rb1 Rxa7); 15....Qa8 16.Nb5 transposes to the previous line] 16.Qe2 Ra5 17.Nb5 Nc6 18.c3 Bf6 (18...Nxa7? 19.b4 Ra6 20.Nxd6!) 19.b4 Rxa7 20.Nxa7 Nxa7 21.Ra3 Qc7 so that in all lines I ended up with B+N for R+P. A downright fascinating position!} Qa8 16.Na4 {16.b4} Ra5 {White: 0:05, Black: 0:10} 17.Nxb6 Qxa7 18.Nc4 Rxa2?? {18...Qxe3 19.Rxe3 Rc5} 19.Rxa2?? {19.Qxa7 Rxa7 20.Rxa7} Qxa2 20.Qc3 Rc8 21.b3 Qa6 22.Ra1 Qb7 23.f3? {23.Qe3} Bf6! {It's all over; or 23...d5! 24.exd5 exd5 25.Qe1 Bc5+ 26.Ne3 Re8} 24.Qe1 Bxa1 25.Qxa1 Ra8 26.Qb2 Qa7+ 27.Kf1 Qa1+ 28.Qxa1 Rxa1+29.Ke2 Ra2 30.Kd3 Nc5+ 31.Kc3 Nb7 32.Kb4 {32.b4} Kf8 {Not best (32...Rxc2!), but this is irrelevant. (White: 0:14, Black: 0:21)} 0-1

Round 4: ALD (1499) - Will Lugar (1115), QGD Slav Defense [D15]

{Going into round 4, I had 2 points and no other player in the Under-1500 category had more than that. So if I could win the last game, I would be assured of at least a portion of the prize.} 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Nf3 a6 5.Bg5 Nbd7 6.e3 e6 7.Bd3 Be7 8.O-O O-O 9.Qc2 h6 10.Bh4 Re8 11.Rac1 b5 {11...dxc4} 12.c5 Qc7 {White: 0:06, Black: 0:07} 13.Bg3 {This wasted a tempo. Where is the queen threatening to go? a5! So why just push it along in that direction? Better to just lock up the queenside with 13. b4.} Qa5 14.a3 Qd8 15.b4 a5 16.Ra1 a4 {White: 0:13, Black: 0:15} 17.Rfe1 Bb7 18.e4!? {18.h3} dxe4 {18...Nxe4 19.Bxe4 dxe4 20.Nxe4 Nf6} 19.Nxe4 Nd5 {19...Nxe4 20.Rxe4 Nf6 21.Re2 Qc8} 20.Bd6 Bf6 {20...N7f6 21.Bxe7 Rxe7} 21.Nc3 Nxc3 22.Qxc3 Be7 23.Bf4 Nf6 {White has had a small but definite advantage all game. At this point, I pretty much thought I had the game strategically won. I was now headed to the hole at d6 with my knight, but the move I selected was absolutely horrible tactically.} 24.Nd2?? Nd5! 25.Bh7+ {This bishop is less valuable than the other one.} Kxh7 26.Qd3+ Kg8 {White: 0:26, Black: 0:26} 27.Be3? {Duh! I played 25.Bh7+ in order to preserve this bishop. Why allow it to be traded now? Better is 27.Be5! not that the game can be saved in any event.} Nxe3 28.fxe3 Bf6 {28...e5!} 29.Ne4 e5 {29...Be5} 30.Nd6 {30.d5!} Re7 31.Re2? {31.Rf1} exd4 32.exd4? {The end; 32.Rf1 dxe3 33.Rxe3 Rxe3 34.Qxe3 held out longer.} Rxe2 33.Qxe2 Bxd4+ {White: 0:35, Black: 0:35.} 1-0 {And that was that. No prize for me.}

What are they smoking at FIDE?

I'd like some...

FIDE is pleased to announce that the World Chess Championship Tournament 2005 will take place 27 September - 16 October in the city of San Luis, Argentina, under the aegis of the Province of San Luis. The ongoing bidding procedure concerning the World Championship 2005 has been resolved in favour of the Luis candidacy, whose negotiation team in Athens offered on 15 April a prize fund of USD 1,000,000 for the event. The offer is backed by a financial guarantee and an agreement concerning further organizing details has been signed by Governor of San Luis, Alberto Rodriguez Saa, and FIDE President Kirsan Ilyumzhinov.

FIDE is positive that the games will be held successfully in San Luis and this year's World Chess Championship will further establish the image of chess as a competitive and educational sport not only in Argentina but in whole geographical region of South America. Towards this aim, the attractive image and the positive reputation the province of San Luis are considered as valuable assistance to FIDE’s efforts.

The format of the tournament will be an 8-player double round robin. The total prize fund of USD 1,000,000 be distributed to the players according to the final standings, as described in the official regulations, with the World Champion receiving the valuable title and the amount of USD 300,000. The final list of the 8 world-class Grandmasters who shall contend this year for the ultimate title of World Champion will soon be announced, in accordance with the official regulations of the World Chess Championship Tournament 2005.

(I tried to link directly to FIDE's website, but their server is down now.)

The eight players have been announced: Knock-out world champion Kasimdzhanov and runner-up Adams, Classical world champion Kramnik and challenger Leko, and four top players according to Elo rating - Kasparov, Anand, Topalov and Morozevich.

Some thoughts:
(1) "valuable title"? Ha ha!
(2) FIDE continues to create events without consulting players, as well as hallucinating bank guarantees on desks.
(3) Hasn't FIDE heard? Kasparov retired! (Would Svidler be offered his place?)
(4) Just a double round-robin to determine the world champion?
(5) Why would Kramnik agree to this psychotic plan?
(6) What happens after this event? There's no plan for a new cycle? Will the circus continue? Who cares if the title is "unified" if there's no system in place for finding the next challenger.
(7) Of course, Mig points out on his website that the the tournament regulations state that "The four top players will automatically qualify for the knock-out matches of the next cycle." If the knock-out format is still FIDE's idea of a world championship, then what's being billed as a unification event is nothing more than just a cheap attempt to absorb Kramnik's classical title in order to destroy it.

Book Review: The King in Jeopardy

The King in Jeopardy is the fourth book in Alburt & Palatnik's Comprehensive Chess Course. This book is better than its predecessor in the series, Chess Tactics for the Tournament Player, which I reviewed previously. However, given the particularly low bar set by Chess Tactics, that still means King in Jeopardy is a pretty weak book. Some observations:

• The collection of games and positions was HIGHLY unoriginal. In fact, in 247 pages, there were only FIVE games that I had not seen previously.
• The book in general consists of a series of vague generalities. For example, on page 99, the authors pose all of the following incredibly interesting questions, "When should the attack involve pawns, and when should it be led without them? Can we determine the proper role of pawns in an attack with kings castled on the same side? Is there a strategic basis for determining correct attacking methods?" Their reply to all of these questions -- and I am quoting IN FULL here -- "The character of an attack is determined by the nature of the position." They even italicize this sentence for emphasis; apparently they think this is some brilliant insight. Duh! Very helpful, thanks.
• Comments are still ridiculously scarce for many of the games. Concrete variations are even more scarce. Several of the games lack even ONE variation or alternative move.
• Analysis is always superficial, and sometimes incorrect. For example, in Alekhine-Asztalos, Kecskemet 1927, we are told "42.Nxf7! 1-0 (42....Qxf7 43.Bd3+ Qg6 44.Qf8!)." Well, that evaluation appears to have been uncritically copied from Alekhine's Best Games book. But in fact, this analysis is incorrect. Chess Life (May 1993) showed that the correct move is 42.Nf3! and 42.Nxf7 merits a ? not a !.
• In some cases essential analysis is missing altogether. One of the most debated moves in chess (17....Rxf2 in Bird-Morphy, London 1858) is given a !? without comment or analysis.
• Commentary when provided is as vague as the rest of the writing. Page 128 rambles on for three paragraphs about the position after White's 28th move in the game Euwe-Keres (World Championship Tournament Round 1, The Hague 1948). The three paragraphs contain absolutely nothing of value. The three questions to take away from the position are: who stands better? (Black) why? (The square e4 is weak, Black can quickly mass all his pieces for an attack, and the White queen is out of play on c4) what should he do about it? (improve the position of his pieces to go on the attack). The authors attempt to answer only the third question and don't answer even that one particularly clearly.

Conclusion: Stay away. You will learn very little from this book.

Draws Verboten

A new tournament is on the horizon, one that is set to challenge the supremacy of Wijk aan Zee, Linares and Dortmund. The M-Tel Masters Super Tournament is part of the ten-year anniversary of the Bulgarian mobile phone company Mobiltel, and is set to take place every year. For the inaugural event, from May 11 to 22 this year, the participants will be six top GMs, who will play a double round robin at classical time controls.

• Viswanathan Anand India 2785 2
• Veselin Topalov Bulgaria 2778 3
• Vladimir Kramnik Russia 2753 5
• Michael Adams England 2737 7
• Judit Polgar Hungary 2732 8
• Ruslan Ponomariov Ukraine 2695 20

An interesting twist, and in my opinion a very long-overdue one, is that draws by agreement are forbidden. I would really love to see this one catch on at the grandmaster level. It would do so much to revitalize our game.

• A draw by mutual agreement between the players is forbidden.
• No player is permitted to speak to his opponent or offer him a draw
• A player can claim the draw only in case of perpetual check, threefold repetition and if the position is a theoretical draw.
• The draw offer is made to the arbiter, who is the only person who can decide the outcome of the game.
• The arbiter will be advised by a strong Grandmaster.

New FIDE Ratings List

The new FIDE ratings list is out. Here are the top 20...
1 Kasparov, Garry 2812
2 Anand, Viswanathan 2785
3 Topalov, Veselin 2778 (+21)
4 Leko, Peter 2763 (+14)
5 Kramnik, Vladimir 2753
6 Ivanchuk, Vassily 2739 (+28)
7 Adams, Michael 2737
8 Polgar, Judit 2732
9 Bacrot, Etienne 2731 (+16)
10 Svidler, Peter 2725
11 Grischuk, Alexander 2724 (+14)
12 Morozevich, Alexander 2717 (-24)
13 Shirov, Alexei 2714
14 Gelfand, Boris 2713 (+17)
15 Bareev, Evgeny 2709
16 Dreev, Alexey 2705
17 Akopian, Vladimir 2703
18 Bologan, Viktor 2700 (+17)
18 Kamsky, Gata 2700
20 Ponomariov, Ruslan 2695

Some quasi-random observations...

[1] The 2700 Club has four returns (Polgar, Kamsky, Gelfand, Akopian), one new member (Bologan) and one drop-off (Ponomariov).

[2] Kasparov picked up 8 points and Anand droped 1, increasing the gap between them to 27. But I guess if Kasparov really is retiring, Anand should inherit the #1 spot.

[3] Leko picked up 14 points and Kramnik dropped 1, so Leko comes up to 4th place (his highest spot ever) and Kramnik drops to 5th place.