If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Policy / Politique
The fee for tournament organizers advertising on ChessTalk is $20/event or $100/yearly unlimited for the year.
Les frais d'inscription des organisateurs de tournoi sur ChessTalk sont de 20 $/événement ou de 100 $/année illimitée.
You can etransfer to Henry Lam at chesstalkforum at gmail dot com
Transfér à Henry Lam à chesstalkforum@gmail.com
Dark Knight / Le Chevalier Noir
General Guidelines
---- Nous avons besoin d'un traduction français!
Some Basics
1. Under Board "Frequently Asked Questions" (FAQs) there are 3 sections dealing with General Forum Usage, User Profile Features, and Reading and Posting Messages. These deal with everything from Avatars to Your Notifications. Most general technical questions are covered there. Here is a link to the FAQs. https://forum.chesstalk.com/help
2. Consider using the SEARCH button if you are looking for information. You may find your question has already been answered in a previous thread.
3. If you've looked for an answer to a question, and not found one, then you should consider asking your question in a new thread. For example, there have already been questions and discussion regarding: how to do chess diagrams (FENs); crosstables that line up properly; and the numerous little “glitches” that every new site will have.
4. Read pinned or sticky threads, like this one, if they look important. This applies especially to newcomers.
5. Read the thread you're posting in before you post. There are a variety of ways to look at a thread. These are covered under “Display Modes”.
6. Thread titles: please provide some details in your thread title. This is useful for a number of reasons. It helps ChessTalk members to quickly skim the threads. It prevents duplication of threads. And so on.
7. Unnecessary thread proliferation (e.g., deliberately creating a new thread that duplicates existing discussion) is discouraged. Look to see if a thread on your topic may have already been started and, if so, consider adding your contribution to the pre-existing thread. However, starting new threads to explore side-issues that are not relevant to the original subject is strongly encouraged. A single thread on the Canadian Open, with hundreds of posts on multiple sub-topics, is no better than a dozen threads on the Open covering only a few topics. Use your good judgment when starting a new thread.
8. If and/or when sub-forums are created, please make sure to create threads in the proper place.
Debate
9. Give an opinion and back it up with a reason. Throwaway comments such as "Game X pwnz because my friend and I think so!" could be considered pointless at best, and inflammatory at worst.
10. Try to give your own opinions, not simply those copied and pasted from reviews or opinions of your friends.
Unacceptable behavior and warnings
11. In registering here at ChessTalk please note that the same or similar rules apply here as applied at the previous Boardhost message board. In particular, the following content is not permitted to appear in any messages:
* Racism
* Hatred
* Harassment
* Adult content
* Obscene material
* Nudity or pornography
* Material that infringes intellectual property or other proprietary rights of any party
* Material the posting of which is tortious or violates a contractual or fiduciary obligation you or we owe to another party
* Piracy, hacking, viruses, worms, or warez
* Spam
* Any illegal content
* unapproved Commercial banner advertisements or revenue-generating links
* Any link to or any images from a site containing any material outlined in these restrictions
* Any material deemed offensive or inappropriate by the Board staff
12. Users are welcome to challenge other points of view and opinions, but should do so respectfully. Personal attacks on others will not be tolerated. Posts and threads with unacceptable content can be closed or deleted altogether. Furthermore, a range of sanctions are possible - from a simple warning to a temporary or even a permanent banning from ChessTalk.
Helping to Moderate
13. 'Report' links (an exclamation mark inside a triangle) can be found in many places throughout the board. These links allow users to alert the board staff to anything which is offensive, objectionable or illegal. Please consider using this feature if the need arises.
Advice for free
14. You should exercise the same caution with Private Messages as you would with any public posting.
It appears that Leon has withdrawn from the tournament. Unfortunate.
Leon is paired tomorrow so he didn't withdraw. When Shankland had to withdraw from the tournament, there was an odd number of players and thus a forced 1 point bye. Being in last place at the time, Leon was the first 'beneficiary' of the dreaded one point bye ):
N R Vignesh (2422) continued his amazing run with a draw against Yifan Hou today. The 17-year-old Indian IM has now played 6 strong/elite GMs, all more than 200 ELO points higher rated, except for GM Mateusz Bartel who was 'only' 198 ELO points better, and has yet to lose a single game, with 2 wins and 4 draws. His TPR of 2809 will drop back into the 2700's after today's game is factored in. Nonetheless, he's now guaranteed a GM norm tomorrow regardless of how he fares (:
Oddsmakers don't think Vignesh can run his undefeated streak to 7. Despite having White (against Chucky!), he's the 79/10 dog with 31/20 draw odds. Chucky is the solid 79/100 favourite.
Oddsmakers don't think Vignesh can run his undefeated streak to 7. Despite having White (against Chucky!), he's the 79/10 dog with 31/20 draw odds. Chucky is the solid 79/100 favourite.
Lol, somebody (and it wasn't me!) must have placed a bet on Vignesh because the odds just dropped to 67/10. Draw odds also decreased to 71/50. You can now get 23/25 on Chucky (:
Granted, Sjugirov (2646) has White tomorrow against Jakovenko (2737). But given the 91 point ELO differential and the fact that Jakovenko has owned him, +3, -0, =2, how can Sjugirov be the 13/4 betting favourite? Jakovenko is the 21/5 dog and I really can't understand why. I also don't believe those odds will hold since the smart money has to go to Jakovenko (:
Granted, Sjugirov (2646) has White tomorrow against Jakovenko (2737). But given the 91 point ELO differential and the fact that Jakovenko has owned him, +3, -0, =2, how can Sjugirov be the 13/4 betting favourite? Jakovenko is the 21/5 dog and I really can't understand why. I also don't believe those odds will hold since the smart money has to go to Jakovenko (:
I'm even more dumbfounded since the first bet has clearly been placed on Sjugirov since the odds changed to 16/5 and 47/10 respectively. I do believe it's now betting time (:
I’d like to clear something up here. I have never forfeited a game in my life until now, and I feel I owe the chess world an explanation. I had to withdraw from the Qatar Masters Open for health reasons and bought a same-day ticket home at great personal expense to recuperate in more familiar surroundings. I informed one of the organizers but had neglected to inform the TD staff. As a result, I was paired for a round that I was unable to participate in. This is highly embarrassing, both to me and the tournament, and entirely my fault. The Qatar Masters Open is the strongest open tournament of all time and a spectacularly-run event, and they did not deserve to have their reputation tarnished by a forfeit game. For this I can only offer my deepest and most sincere apologies, and my gratitude to the tournament organizers and staff for being so understanding and accommodating. I very much hope to play in any and all subsequent editions. 2015 has been by far the toughest year of my career and has just felt like one sucker punch to the face after another, but what doesn’t kill us makes us stronger, and I hope to be back with a vengeance in the near future.
(Bryon Joseph Doyle) - As a senior TD I see hundreds of forfeited games a year without the players giving a single thought to how it effects the tournament or the player who received the gift point. As a player i have personally received at least 10 forfeit points in my career. The fact that you recognize this shows how much of a gentleman and amazing sportsman you truly are. Don't put all the blame on yourself. The organizer sounds partially responsible as well as he or she should remain in good communication with their Td Staff at all times. You have always been an amazing example to all chess players
(Gregory Jones) – Sam, You are the man. These words alone reflect that character that is a rarity.
May your recovery be quick and may your rest be renewing and may you find the new year ahead full of dynamic positions with winning chances and may your vision be clear to see the way forward in those positions!
- David Howell trying to win a theoretical draw (move 104)
- Oooh, he's managed (just squeaking inside the fifty-move rule to capture White's last pawn) to get himself an Arkell Ending.
- Problem is Bartel has about 20 mins. while Howell has a bit more than one min. (both + inc.)
- At move 125, the Shredder tablebase is saying "Draw" for any move that doesn't put the defending Rook en prise. If you go a few moves deeper, there are plausible moves that are claimed to lose. With increment, you may as well play these out unless you have better things to do. Without increment, you risk your flag falling with your opponent still having enough material to deliver mate.
- David Howell about to win this KRB V. KR ending (move 143) which is generally considered a draw. However, I read a few years ago that Keith Arkell had won it 18/18 times !
- How do you figure that?
Howell did not win and I don't see why you think there was a missed win at move 143. The tablebase doesn't agree with you.
- It was great technique from Bartel who knew exactly what he was doing in that ending. On move 118 he started using the Cochrane defensive method and on move 151 the Second Rank defensive method found by Nunn.
________
Not long before Keith agreed to chat with us I’d played an email game where I stumbled into defending a KR v KRB ending. Although I didn’t have the slightest clue how to play these positions I did at least know that for the most part such positions are theoretically drawn. Necessity being the mother of getting off my lazy arse, I settled down for some endgame study – and one of the first things I learned was that theoretical draw notwithstanding, Keith wins this endgame time and again.
Keith Arkell:
… yes it's true. I have won the ending of R+B v R 17/17 times, but I have yet to play it against a GM; although I have beaten IM Lawrence Cooper in it twice.
When I mentioned Keith's response to my fellow bloggers EJH immediately responded that getting KRB v KR on the board 17 times in a single lifetime is almost as impressive an achievement as going on to win every one of those games. He inspired me to ask a question that otherwise simply wouldn’t have occurred to me - how does Keith get the ending so much more frequently than everybody else?
KA:
I've wondered that myself. I guess that the chances are increased because I am not averse to exchanging pieces in order to maintain or play for an edge. Rather a lot of my 6000 games have wound up in an endgame. The crucial explanation may be this though: it became clear during many of my post mortems that both my opponent and I were playing for the same ending - R+B v R! This was certainly the case for example in both of the games against Lawrence Cooper, and the games v Gayson, Lewyk and Daly.
To my eyes that answer makes Keith’s perfect record in KRB v KR even more remarkable. Not only is he cocking a snook at theoretical evaluations he’s also managing to outplay his opponents in positions they are deliberately heading for, hoping (expecting?) to be able to secure the draw. How is that possible? I can understand a GM notching some positive results against weaker (relatively speaking) opponents through sheer persistence but to do so as often as Keith manages it? How to explain that?
Carlsen is still looking for his first win against Giri. That's 6 consecutive draws this year and 11 in total after Giri's 22-move win at Tata Steel in 2011.
Carlsen will have at least one co-leader, the 33rd seed, Sanan Sjugirov, and possibly two if Shakh can bring home the full point in what's likely to be a long endgame.
The pack chasing Carlsen, Sjugirov, and likely Mamedyarov, continues to grow. Seven of the players with 4 won their games to close to within a 1/2 point of the lead. They would be
Vitiugov, Ivanchuk, Akopian, Nguyen, Grandelius, Lin Chen, and Xu Yinglun. Given only Jackovenko and likely Ganguly didn't make it to 5 points with draws, that makes 16 players now sitting on 5/7.
Last edited by Jack Maguire; Sunday, 27th December, 2015, 03:24 PM.
The team of Ramirez and Svidler is giving very smooth commentary. They mesh well together and Alejandro is not dominated in any way by Peter.
Peter, introducing the games, talks about Alexei Shirov and Ruslan Ponomariov as two giants of the game especially in the World Cups. Ponomariov’s activity has lessened these days and he hasn’t really played a lot of today’s top players. He doesn’t appear to have met So before.
Peter talks about playing a King’s Indian against Simon Williams in 2009 at the Bunratty Chess Festival in Ireland, about petting Irish wolfhounds through the fence at the Castle and how much he likes dogs.
He is actually very relaxed and expansive today. Commentating on Carlsen-Giri, he mentions that he once lost four games in a row, at Linares and it was just that once in his whole career and not a good feeling.
One viewer tweets this: Was that Linares 1999? The players he lost to were reasonably decent: Kasparov, Kramnik, Anand and Topalov.
Peter is a fan of all things British and mentions Kingpin, the satirical chess magazine. He says he has a few numbers but British Magazines are still difficult to get in the Soviet Union.
I myself have tried to get all the back issues to present but was unable to buy anything before 1987. A lot of the time the magazine bashes Raymond Keene, a particularly enjoyable pastime. See:
Shakh did indeed win so we do have 3 players at 5.5/7 and 18 at 5/7. Carlsen, Shakh, and Sjugirov are all due Black tomorrow so it will be interesting to see the pairings. I'm rather hoping Shakh gets White against Carlsen since Shakh is a perfect 4/4 with White in Qatar (:
The betting public does not seem convinced that he can continue to channel Alan Trefler, the #115 seed, rated only 2075, who won the 1975 World Open (along with GM Pal Benko), and who also went on to become a billionaire through his Pegasystems. Xu Yinglun is still the decided dog tomorrow in his game with Yu Yangyi. You can get 7/2 draw odds and 10/1 win odds (:
Shakh is the 11/2 dog tomorrow against Carlsen. While I hate to admit it, probably deservedly so. His create the biggest mess possible on a chess board style seems to work against all GMs not named Carslen. Shakh has plus scores against the number 2 (Giri) and 3 (Kramnik) players in the world, but is a rather dismal +1 -4 =6 against Carlsen. I find it interesting that Carlsen has little or no trouble against against both Shakh (little) and Nakamura (no) whereas Giri has losing records against both these players, yet no trouble with Carlsen. The odds will likely change but Carlsen opens at 74/25 with 13/25 draw odds.
Tweet
Comment