Not 'van Geuzendam', but 'ten Geuzendam'.
GREAT EIGHT in WORLD CUP
Sort:
I thought Peter Svidler might play on for the win, but he repeats the position 3 times and plays on with white tomorrow.
| 1 | GM Tomashevsky (0) 2709 | GM Kamsky, G. (0) 2763 | ½-½ | 16. dxc5 |
| 2 | GM Vachier-La. (0) 2719 | GM Caruana, F. (0) 2796 | 0.16 | 41. f3 |
| 3 | GM Kramnik, V. (0) 2784 | GM Korobov, A. (0) 2720 | 4.80 | 39... Nd6 |
| 4 | GM Andreikin (0) 2727 | GM Svidler, P. (0) 2746 | ½-½ | 30... Rh3 |
Kramnik might be blowing this game, lol.
Check out Houdini 3 analysis:
| 1. | d4 | 0.14 | d5 | 0.17 |
| 2. | Nf3 | 0.05 | Nf6 | 0.15 |
| 3. | c4 | 0.18 | c6 | 0.21 |
| 4. | Nc3 | 0.14 | dxc4 | 0.16 |
| 5. | a4 | 0.13 | e6 | 0.34 |
| 6. | e3 | 0.28 | c5 | 0.24 |
| 7. | Bxc4 | 0.27 | Nc6 | 0.27 |
| 8. | O-O | 0.31 | cxd4 | 0.26 |
| 9. | exd4 | 0.28 | Be7 | 0.33 |
| 10. | Qe2 | 0.27 | O-O | 0.27 |
| 11. | Rd1 | 0.27 | Nd5 | 0.28 |
| 12. | Bd2 | 0.36 | Ncb4 | 0.44 |
| 13. | a5 | 0.31 | Bd7 | 0.40 |
| 14. | Nxd5 | 0.39 | Nxd5 | 0.41 |
| 15. | Ne5 | 0.37 | Be8 | 0.38 |
| 16. | Qf3 | 0.27 | f6 | 0.23 |
| 17. | Nd3 | 0.30 | Bf7 | 0.34 |
| 18. | Qg4 | 0.37 | Kh8 | 0.36 |
| 19. | Nc5 | 0.41 | Bxc5 | 0.35 |
| 20. | dxc5 | 0.36 | Qc7 | 0.37 |
| 21. | a6 | 0.37 | bxa6 | 0.98 |
| 22. | b4 | 0.93 | Rfd8 | 0.89 |
| 23. | Rxa6 | 1.00 | h5 | 1.56 |
| 24. | Qf3 | 1.00 | Rab8 | 1.20 |
| 25. | Be1 | 1.04 | Nxb4 | 1.03 |
| 26. | Rxd8+ | 0.97 | Qxd8 | 0.93 |
| 27. | Rxa7 | 0.98 | Kg8 | 1.37 |
| 28. | c6 | 1.32 | Nd5 | 1.18 |
| 29. | Rb7 | 0.05 | Rc8 | 0.00 |
| 30. | Bb5 | 0.04 | Qd6 | 0.04 |
| 31. | Qe4 | 0.00 | Qc5 | 0.00 |
| 32. | h3 | -0.01 | g6 | 0.94 |
| 33. | Bd2 | 0.83 | Rxc6 | 1.51 |
| 34. | Bxc6 | 1.45 | Qxc6 | 1.48 |
| 35. | Qb1 | 1.36 | g5 | 1.32 |
| 36. | h4 | 1.34 | gxh4 | 7.06 |
| 37. | Bh6 | 5.82 | Nc7 | 16.96 |
| 38. | Ra7 | 4.27 | Nb5 | 5.09 |
| 39. | Qb4 | 4.49 | Nd6 | 4.80 |
| 40. | Qb8+ | 4.46 | Ne8 | 4.86 |
| 41. | Re7 | 1.87 | e5 | 2.34 |
chuckfloyd2011 wrote:
molokombo wrote:
who is the guy commentating with nigel short?
I don't know. I've seen him comentating on several chess events in the past. He was the guy that commentated during the Anand vs. Gelfand championship. Sorry, I don't know his name. Do you have an opinion?
He seems to be lost lol...
drcloak333 wrote:
chuckfloyd2011 wrote:
molokombo wrote:
who is the guy commentating with nigel short?
I don't know. I've seen him comentating on several chess events in the past. He was the guy that commentated during the Anand vs. Gelfand championship. Sorry, I don't know his name. Do you have an opinion?
He seems to be lost lol...
I'm not going to lie, I think chess could use more charasmatic commentators. Why do the commentators have to know chess that well? Baseball announcers don't get their job for how well they play baseball. They get paid because they're exciting for the fans to listen to. We need commentators that put fans on the edge of their seats. Too bad their can't be money lines put on these games like professional baseball games. I think then, it'd improve. Chess needs to enter the world of gambling. Having said that, I'd almost be losing my wager on Korobov beating Kramnik. But still have the white pieces to win in game #2 round 5.
i think lawrence trent is a great commentator. and it's pretty obvious why they need to know chess, the whole reason for having commentators for the games is to explain and analyse what is going on in the positions - how would this be possible if the person doing it was not a strong chess player?
i'd rather just follow the game with an engine than have some "presenter" type saying inane crap trying to fill space for hours.
i don't like this dutch guy though and nigel short gets a little annoying if he doesn't have a good foil to bounce off / keep him in check.
I think that it is very good when the commentators are explaining moves. That is what can make chess spectacular and as a chess player you can learn a lot of it.
Dirk Jan ten Geuzendam has a lot of knowledge about the chess players themselves and I think that it would have been nice if Nigel Short and he would have started the tournament to introduce the players as the persons they are. When the stakes are not that high and there are still a lot of games in which Nigel Short can easily say something interesting. Nigel Short has now to work for two.
chuckfloyd2011 wrote:
Veselin Topolov was absent from the starting 128 players in the World Cup. I wonder why?
Because he is already qualifyed for the candidates tournament in 2014
shepi13 wrote:
Nakamura tweeted that he could have drawn Korobov with 18...Nxe5, but he incorrectly assessed the position and tried to play for a win even though he was worse.
Kamsky's play hasn't been that great in this event, regardless of what most people will say about his games vs Mamedyarov, he has not played at his level. I'm not sure he will take out Tomashevsky, who has been playing pretty well.
Many players have said that they believe MVL has great chances to win the entire event.
Svidler is in great form.
My predictions:
Tomashevsky
Svidler
Kramnik
I have no clue who will win the MVL vs Caruana match, and am interested in watching this one closely.
Nice picks! You were right about Kamsky. I think I got wowed by all his sacrifices in the last round and foolishly thought he could do it again. Kramnik gets a day off after taking care of business. You're 2-0 so far. I'm 0-2 ,lol. Svidler and Caruana will have to prove themselves in the tiebreaks.
Estragon wrote:
chuckfloyd2011 wrote:
Veselin Topolov was absent from the starting 128 players in the World Cup. I wonder why?
Topalov has already qualified for the next Candidates' by winning the Grand Prix tour.
Kramnik and Aronian had to play because they avoided the Grand Prix, and the rule is you can't qualify for two consecutive Candidates' tournaments by rating unless you play in either the Grand Prix series or the World Cup in one of the cycles.
Thanks for the information.
Tomashevsky is awesome. He won with the Caro-Kann in 169 moves.
chessman1504 wrote:
Tomashevsky is awesome. He won with the Caro-Kann in 169 moves.
Today, it looked like Kamsky blundered on move 36.Qd4? But that's part of the game, and I don't want to slight Tomashevshy for advancing.
Estragon wrote:
chuckfloyd2011 wrote:
chessman1504 wrote:
Tomashevsky is awesome. He won with the Caro-Kann in 169 moves.
Today, it looked like Kamsky blundered on move 36.Qd4? But that's part of the game, and I don't want to slight Tomashevshy for advancing.
Kamsky should have played 35 Qd4 and it would be a quiet ending as the competing chances fizzled. After playing b4, he had to play 36 b5 and pitch the pawn to be able to get around on Black's h-pawn without leaving his King too exposed, the Q exchange was needed. Those little passed h-pawns have a way of moving really fast once they cross the middle of the board, it's amazing to watch sometimes (mainly when it is your h-pawn).
Against Grischuk, Tomashevsky had a little time left when Grischuk was living on the increment and milked it until he finally cracked. Which is pretty amazing when you consider Grischuk is one of the world's best blitz players and was the World Blitz Champion in 2012.
The World Cup has a long history of there always being a dark horse underdog in the semi-finals, and sometimes they win the whole thing. Khalifman, Ponomariov, and Adams were all strong players but not among the favorites. Kamsky also won one just after he began his comeback after an eight-year layoff from chess, it is what earned him the challenger match against Topalov a few years back.
When was Tomashevsky against Grischuk?
chessman1504 wrote:
Estragon wrote:
chuckfloyd2011 wrote:
chessman1504 wrote:
Tomashevsky is awesome. He won with the Caro-Kann in 169 moves.
Today, it looked like Kamsky blundered on move 36.Qd4? But that's part of the game, and I don't want to slight Tomashevshy for advancing.
Kamsky should have played 35 Qd4 and it would be a quiet ending as the competing chances fizzled. After playing b4, he had to play 36 b5 and pitch the pawn to be able to get around on Black's h-pawn without leaving his King too exposed, the Q exchange was needed. Those little passed h-pawns have a way of moving really fast once they cross the middle of the board, it's amazing to watch sometimes (mainly when it is your h-pawn).
Against Grischuk, Tomashevsky had a little time left when Grischuk was living on the increment and milked it until he finally cracked. Which is pretty amazing when you consider Grischuk is one of the world's best blitz players and was the World Blitz Champion in 2012.
The World Cup has a long history of there always being a dark horse underdog in the semi-finals, and sometimes they win the whole thing. Khalifman, Ponomariov, and Adams were all strong players but not among the favorites. Kamsky also won one just after he began his comeback after an eight-year layoff from chess, it is what earned him the challenger match against Topalov a few years back.
When was Tomashevsky against Grischuk?
I'm just scrolling through the rounds right now:
Round #1 Tomashevsky beat Alejandro Ramirez in 9 games 5-4.
Round #2 Tomashevsky beat Wesly So, 1.5 to 0.5.
Round #3 Tomashevsky beat Levon Aronian 1.5 to 0.5
Round #4 Tomashevsky beat Alexander Morozevich 4.5 to 3.5
Round #5 Tomashevsky beat Gata Kamsky 1.5 to 0.5
So, it appears Tomashevsky didn't play Grischuk in this tournament, but Estragon probably just confused the names Morozevich and Grischuk.
Just a confirmation that all my Great Eight picks were wrong. I went 0-4. This is good news though for my future betting. I'll copy what George Castanza on the former show "Seinfeld" did. George did the opposite of everything he thought, and things worked out great. So, I haven't decided on my picks yet for the final four here in chess, but I'm seriously considering fading my own picks.
who is the guy commentating with nigel short?
Dirk Jan van Geuzendam