OK, I'm sure this has been discussed over and over, especially those who follow the Corus tournament, but I've just found a sickening new angle to approach this.

I just looked through some of his games at chessgames.com... He has a plus score against 2 (ONLY 2!) top players that I could find (And I searched gamnes with almost every 2700+ player) and those two were Bacrot (Against whom he played only a couple games) and Timman (Who was quite old). Even against the so-called 'weak champions' Khalifman and Khasimdzhanov he was negative.

Even against Dominguez, one of the newest arrivals to the 2700 club he's only scored 0.5/3, against Segrye Karjakin he's -2.

And against the really strong players he's generally around -20 (no exagerration, against Shirov, Kramnik, Topalov, Ivanchuk etc... he was at around -20)

So my question... What's the deal. I don't begrudge the Dutch their National Champ at their most famous tournament, nor am I saying he's a poor player. He's clearly a genius, just...not as genius as, say, Anand.

And it's not just that he gets so many top flight invitations, but that he gets them over other promising Dutch players like Stellwagen or Smeets (Who finally debuted at Corus, and lived up to Van Wely's standard, but I'm sure they'll do much better next year).

So, anyone have an opinion on this? Any Van Wely fans out there who want to step up to the defence?

Edit: He also has +1 scores against Radjabov, Rublevsky and Alekseev (Against whom he played once), and an even one against Jakovenko.

He even has a negative score against modern chess's top drawing master Wang Yue.

Of the 35 or so 2700+ players he played against that I could check he had negative scores.

i think the reason is quite simple :Van Vely is a uncompromising player,thus a goldmine for organisators.I think he'd be strong enough to act like a "meek little boy" and gather dozens of tasteless draws,even against the world's elite.But he chooses to fight in most of his games,always ready to defend his ideas.Furthermore he's well respected by his fellow grandmasters for his creativity in the theoretical field.And eventually,from what I saw,read and heard....he seems to be quite a friendly chap

You've definitely got a point there, I don't know about uncompromising player, though he's not one to back down (A happy middle ground I think he's found). However, I have heard of the work he's done in the realm of openings, especially working with Kramnik.

 And poor Loek was born in 1972.... Hard to get a sunny place when you have to cope with slightly older Anands,Ivanchuks or Gelfands or slightly younger Kramniks or Topalovs