At the end of a long tournament nobody should be surprised mistakes were more frequent. Have mercy, they're human too.

Grischuk drew against Vallejo and Aronian beat Gashimov.

Topalov had a fair bit of luck in some games, although he still deserved to win since he was leading for just about the entire tournament. Now he is only one point off Carlsen's FIDE rating.

Also, Grischuk is now no.6 on live ratings, and Gelfand leaves the top 10 live rating list.

I see that Topalov was giving a simul on the free day (Monday). That strikes me as a bad idea as regards the actual tournament (I've lost count of the number of times I've seen strong players giving a simul in the middle of a tournament and then losing the next round). I suppose you can't fault him though as he was probably getting a few bob for doing it, and keeping the organizers happy.

TN wrote on 02/23/10 at 05:11:44:


That's now impossible. Magnus remains no. 1.

TN wrote on 02/23/10 at 05:11:44:


Two draws and one win is correct. However, it is Grischuk who won. This again makes for an interesting last round!

Pierre.

Agree, 34. Rxe4 was very tricky.

Giri no doubt a very strong player, but an absolutely awful commentator. Bright young lad, speaks multiple languages, strong GM. 

But he is a young boy still. Why have a young boy commentate? In his nth language?

extremely difficult to miss? Only if you are an engine I suspect, which means you're not human and wont be in the tournament.

TN wrote on 02/22/10 at 10:17:13:


If Grischuk wins his next game, they'll be tied for first.

Pierre.

Rd8 Standings: 
Topalov     5.5
Grischuk    4.5
Aronian      4.0
Gashimov  3.5
Gelfand      3.5
Vallejo       3.0 

So it looks like Topalov has essentially wrapped up the tournament, since he only needs 1/2 to secure first place and it's unlikely that Grischuk will win both of his next two games. 

Today is a rest day - Round 9 starts on Tuesday. 

There are reports at http://www.chess.co.uk/twic/twic.html and http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=6144 if anyone is interested. I'm still surprised that Topalov missed 34.Re4! against Aronian, although it shouldn't greatly alter the final standings.

Thx, TN!

Ok, we've reached the halfway point.  All of a sudden, the decisive games ratio is 4/15 (26 2/3%).  There are just too few games per round to get upset/excited by the number of draws.

Smyslov_Fan wrote on 02/18/10 at 18:27:13:


See post 57 in this thread (i.e 3rd last post on page 4).

Gashimov plays another Benoni, so we're at 20%.  We'll see whether the decisive game % goes up this round.  Topalov-Grischuk might have some potential.

Adding a new poll, which will close automatically in 48 hours.

For the record, Round 5 is starting in a few hours.

Sorry to be pedantic, but 10/12 = 83⅓%

I just want to see the percentage of Benoni's, now only 16⅔, back above 20!

TN wrote on 02/17/10 at 11:12:09:


Its hard to win if neither side get an advantage after the opening phase at this level, and it hard to get an opening advantage at this level, which again means that a lot of games will ended in draw. Fischer random chess is the future chess . I'm glad i spend more time studying the endgame than opening lately !

Round 4: All games ended in draws.

If the current trend continues, Linares 2010 could have the lowest percentage of decisive games of all Linares super-tournaments, and perhaps even for any 2010 super-tournament. 

The irony is that this extremely high percentage of draws (10/12, or about 84.7%) is occurring in a tournament with...the Sofia rules, which are aimed precisely against this occurrence.

TN wrote on 02/15/10 at 20:58:37:

Interestingly the Benoni percentage is also currently at 22%, which is about 22% higher than usual for Linares.  The Aronian-Topalov game today was a pretty exciting draw.

Topalov has another black, but after that....

I realise one game won't bring White back to the Nimzo, but a win here, a win there... 

Ok, I know I'm being optimistic.  I know there are plenty of lines that appear to give Black at least a comfortable equality.  But I can always hope.

I actually bet 100 € on Gelfand but it seems he is not in good form 

* toppace

13...ed has indeed been given as leading to equality; also 10...Qc7 (which books seem to regard as the main move) isn't mentioned by Giri.    

I wonder about the Grischuk-Gelfand game whether it portends to any larger issues in the Nimzo-Indian. GM Giri, commenting for ChessBase.com, didn't see where Gelfand went wrong, and I had the same sensation playing through the game live with several other titled players making comments. 

Black could certainly play differently, but White seemed to have pressure regardless of how Black turned.

Could this be a game that marks the resurgence of White in the Nimzo-Indian? 

Watching the Gelfand-Gashimov game live, I didn't think the compensation was there.  But the game was eventually drawn, so maybe you're right.  It seemed like a pretty good game anyway, worth a closer look.

Maybe they should have invited Kramnik...   

Just took a quick look:
Aronian-Grischuk already drawn
Vallejo-Topalov looks to be heading for a draw

Gelfand is a pawn up against Gashimov, and I don't see Gashimov's compensation.  Too soon to make a call but Gelfand, who got no votes in the poll, may take the lead with the first victory.

Well Carlsen is confirmed to participate in the 2011 Linares. It is odd to have this announced one full year ahead. I wonder if disappointment with this year's line up prompted the organizers to announce this ahead of time.

Lost in all these statistics on Kramnik's draw rate as black is that he has an overall plus score as Black, which is pretty rare at the top.

But focusing just on his performance as Black is not really a fair consideration anyway.  In order to deserve a drawing reputation, the draw ratio as white, when top players are expected to strive for the maximum, should be a more telling statistic.  But even more compelling than drawing statistics is the games themselves.  Kramnik fights hard to gain the maximum in almost every game.   

The top players today almost never play  against large fields the way Fischer did. Fischer rarely played in small, elite tournaments the way current players do.  Only Kasparov's generation and beyond has had such consistently high level competition, which raises the drawing chances for top players.

katar wrote on 02/11/10 at 17:47:18:


Again, this does not say what time frame these 46 games as black are from. And regardless of when they are, its only a 46 game sample, which hardly means all that much. My database, current through the end of 2009, shows this:

Kramnik all-time as black: 162 wins for white, 556 draws and 278 wins for black. 56% draw rate. 
2000-2009 as black: 70-250-83. 62% draw rate.
2005-2009 as black: 37-118-35.  63% draw rate. 

For comparison, Anand and Ivanchuk:
Anand: All time: 55% draw rate. 2000-2009: 60% draw. 2005-2009: 55% draw rate.
Ivanchuk: All time: 53% draw rate. 2000-2009: 56% draw rate. 2005-2009: 55%.

Kramnik's draw rate may be slightly higher, but it doesn't look out of line to me.

My point is responding to MNb's post directly above mine, as indicated by "@MNb".  The subject matter is whether Kramnik deserves his apparent reputation for making a disproportionate number of draws.  

I presented stats retrieved from Fide.com on the given date.  Presumably the stats cover games immediately prior to the retrieval date.  Since you asked for a comparison: Kramnik's draw frequency as Black simply dwarfs that of any other top GM.

Percentage of Games Drawn as Black, according to Fide.com as of 13th Mar 2009.
Kramnik 87%
Anand 66%
Aronian 66%
Carlsen 62%
Radjabov 61%
Ivanchuk 58%
Shirov 48%
Topalov 43%
Morozevich 41%

As of today, Fide.com indicates Kramnik's draw frequency as Black is 81%.  Based on the above statistics (notwithstanding Corus 2010), it appears there may be some basis for Kramnik's (former) reputation for making a disproportionate number of draws, at least as Black.

QUOTE: "Thus drawing percentage hardly matters as much as the overall score."
True enough, but drawing percentage matters when the issue being discussed is a player's reputation for making draws.

katar wrote on 02/11/10 at 14:20:10:


What is your point? That he should lose more with Black?  

An isolated statistic like this is meaningless without context. What time span does this cover exactly? And how does this compare with other elite players who play only on the super tournament circuit? In addition, it is well known that different players adopt different strategies with Black. Players like Shirov will obviously win more with Black, but lose more. Thus drawing percentage hardly matters as much as the overall score. 

Perhaps that had something to do with health issues? Seems enough justification to me.
The simple fact is that Kramnik's drawing rate is considerably lower than that of Spassky and about the same as Karpov's.
Not everybody can be like Kasparov, Tal or Shirov.
Fischer had an extremely low drawing rate. As he has played about 600 games in his entire career and Kramnik already 2000 that does not say too much.

Linares starting in 2-3 days!

http://www.chessvibes.com/reports/linares-2010-who-will-play-who-will-win/ is the most detailed news story I've found on the tournament so far.

When you field six players there's a pretty good chance some of the top ten will be missing.

Quote:



LOL WHAT? since when? lol.

There's a clear top 5 on the rating list and also in most people's mind, so when only two of those are in traditionally super-strong Linares, yes we feel that something is missing.

I'm pretty sure Kramnik, Anand and Carlsen were all invited. Carlsen has concluded that his schedule last year was a bit too full; for example he decided at the last minute to drop out of the European Team Championship. This year evidently he goes for quality instead of quantity!

I voted Topalov, but I'll be cheering for Gelfand!

Quote:


van Wely has also been over 2700. Btw, I said it was a weak Linares, not weak players.

It's as exciting as an Olympic hockey tournament without Canada and Russia...

trw wrote on 02/06/10 at 00:42:15:


If Kramnik was playing we'd be missing topalov instead, Anand is saving his strength for the match and I'd guess that Carlsen is training as he wasn't satisfied with his performance in Wijk...

I hope Aronian wins, though I don't think I'll be following the tournament much. 

Is this weak Linares a trickle down effect of the financial crisis? 

According to FIDE, Radjabov played 13 games in the latest rating period.  He's currently ranked 16th, one place behind Grischuk. That may be why he's not playing.

In Carlsen's defense, he needs to take a break some time, if only to let someone else win a tournament!

I voted for the weakest non-Spaniard, Grischuk.  I wonder why Shirov didn't play.  Was he not invited or was he too tired?  As the strongest Spaniard, he probably has a standing invitation.

No, you are not alone. I am totally underwhelmed. I expect Topalov's maximalist style to triumph in a field like this.

Linares is starting in a week from now! Who will claim the trophy?