kasparov



FICGS - Search results for kasparov





There are 148 results for kasparov in the forum.


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-05-02 17:43:05)
Who beats Garry Kasparov ?

Funny :)

http://www.ibeatgarry.com/

A "Kasparov number" of 3 for Patrice Verdier, great ;)

Other winners : Janos Helmer, Christian Koch, Farit Balabaev, Marc Lacrosse, David Angeli... Finally everyone beats Garry :))


Per Lea    (2006-06-02 12:51:22)
Kasparov Number

Mine is 5


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-06-20 16:05:08)
Sicilian opening & Kasparov

I quote from Amir analysis : "But if you want to win, the Sicilian is really the best choice."

I fully agree, I'll just add: but Sveshnikov sicilian :)

Actually, (not a surprise) you just have to see how Black pieces are conducted by Garry Kasparov in sicilian opening to understand what lines to follow, why it is the best choice... and why he became the best player of all times.

He simply always wanted to win, never draw... It is an illustration of a quote in this interesting (but failed) movie by Guy Ritchie, "Revolver" : "To win against a weaker opponent, you have to extend the game field."

Finally, it's the exact opposite of what Bobby Fischer said : "I don't believe in psychology, I believe in good moves". That's not enough IMO, chess openings are a psychologic battle that reflect the state of mind and will. It often decides in a way the result of the game, not by moves, but by the intention.


Marc Lacrosse    (2006-07-08 11:08:51)
Modifying "rapid" tournament rules ?

Hello all,
Hello Thibault
As I already said in an earlyer thread, one of the reasons why I joined FICGS was the possibility to play fewer games simultaneously at a faster pace than in other corr. chess associations.
So I enrolled in a first rapid tournament where I find two things unpleasant for a so-called "rapid" category:
1. some of my opponents (and myself also) accumulated reflection time "reserves" of 40 or even 50 days in some cases, which is not appropriate for a "rapid" tournament IMHO.
2. my last unfinished game is completely won for more than ten moves now (it's K+pawns against K+pawns with an unstoppable passed pawn for me where computers announce forced mate in ... max 40 moves). My 2200+ opponent continues to play at a very slow pace. It's pretty annoying : I bet I could win my game at blitz tempo against Kasparov analysing for three days per move but I suppose I will have to play for weeks until his king is mated!

So I propose :
1. To have an absolute limitation of the time reserve a player can accumulate in rapid tournaments (30 ?)
2. To have a procedure allowing to call for external adjudication when a player refuses to resign a forcefully lost game.

Your opinion ?

Marc


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-07-24 13:03:25)
Future of correspondence chess......

That's a fine analysis, Glen.

However, it's legitimate to consider that chess at a higher level is becoming much harder so that some of the very best players may stop their career, thinking that it's no worth the energy anymore, for results more influenced by 'chance' in statistics...

How many "super-grandmasters" (2700+) said that each point over this mark represents more and more work ?

It's probably the same (and more) in correspondence chess. I do think that it's still possible to improve a lot ! .. but there's a lack of a higher class of players. That's a pity the very best correspondence chess players (ie. former ICCF world champions : Joop van Oosterom, Gert Jan Timmerman...) retire or at least don't defend their title since they achieved it. Of course it's a lot of time, but result is the top class appear to be bigger and there's no clear champion. That's not good IMO to popularize correspondence chess.

All games need champions. I read recently on a Go forum that the success of Chess nowadays was due to his champions (Go is not popular yet in the west because there's noone to represent it, except a manga [Hikaru No Go]..), Garry Kasparov, Bobby Fischer... That's true IMO, and that's what particularly misses to correspondence chess. Maybe things won't change in ICCF (maybe I should pretend to the board :)), but anyway that's why I chose the knockout system for the FICGS world chess championship, and the possibility for the winner to play a final against a challenger. We'll see...


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-09-06 23:44:33)
Vladimir Kramnik vs. Peter Leko

Hi Dinesh.

I still can't explain myself this incredible outcome in Brissago. First, this "extraordinary" Marshall gambit, Leko leading the whole match... At last Kramnik winning the very last game. Then Peter Leko smiling, just saying (~) : "I'm glad about my play." .. and that's finished.

It just reminded me the second match Kasparov vs. Deep Blue ...

Anyway, it's always time to be paranoid :-)


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-09-08 18:10:52)
Chess tournament : Zero-sum or not ?

While discussing about Sun Tzu's "The Art of War", and the question "Is the best player always the champion ?" (of course not IMO) , I was argued that any chess tournament "was" (actually could be "reduced to") a zero-sum game :

"In 1944 John von Neumann and Oskar Morgenstern proved that any zero-sum game involving n players is in fact a generalised form of a zero-sum game for two persons, and that any non-zero-sum game for n players can be reduced to a zero-sum game for n + 1 players; the (n + 1) player representing the global profit or loss. This suggests that the zero-sum game for two players forms the essential core of mathematical game theory."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero_sum_game

It seems to me that it's out of topic, but I couldn't say exactly why... In my opinion, a tournament is nearer life than game, at least quite far from it. Much more rules, often complex ones, and results that depend on many parameters you couldn't influence...

The word "champion" depends on accurate rules (the best player could finish 2nd, even if he wins all games ie. in an open tournament..), the "best player" depends on general opinion (most commonly through ratings), ie. Topalov vs. Kasparov ...

What do you think ? :-)


Where the discussion started from :

http://www.gamasutra.com/features/20060907/sirlin_01.shtml

I agree with many points about how to win, but the use of some words seems to be dubious...

I like much this quote :

"I was surprised to see that Capablanca did not initiate any active maneuvers and instead adopted a waiting game. In the end, his opponent made an imprecise move; the Cuban won a second pawn and soon the game. “Why didn’t you try to convert your material advantage straight away?” I ventured to ask the great chess virtuoso. He smiled indulgently. “It was more practical to wait.” "

—Mikhail Botvinnik, 6th World Chess Champion


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-09-20 05:05:54)
Chess world champions

New designs !

With photos of chess world champions : Topalov, Kramnik, Kasparov, Fischer, Tal, Alekhine, Steinitz, Capablanca, Botvinnik, Spassky, Karpov & Lasker.


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-09-20 07:39:09)
Wikichess - Famous chess games !

An interesting update in Wikichess : It's now possible to enter, locate, watch (with the javascript viewer) and comment famous chess games move by move !

You can now analyze the Immortal game, entered as an example.

The program simply locates the last articles (that should be entered at the very last move of the games) which start with "End of game : "

ie - "End of fame : G. Kasparov - A. Karpov (Moscow)"

All feedbacks welcome.


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-09-25 18:15:04)
Kramnik vs. Topalov

Benny, what did you think about the match Kramnik vs. Leko (with such fantastic games, ie. Marshall gambit) ? What about Kasparov vs. Deep Blue.. (only examples).. I prefer to see human chess with blunders at top level than to doubt.

Anyway, the match is not over yet, but Kramnik probably won the psychological battle already. Now Topalov must prove he plays the best chess...


Nigel Davies    (2006-09-30 09:07:48)
Legitimacy

This is (or should have been) the real point of these championships from FIDE's point of view. Rather than being seen as a banana republic with a paper champion their aim should have been to establish legitimacy for their cycle and organisation. FIDE established itself by taking over the World Chess Championships with the death of Alekhine. If it can no longer do that, a large part of its raison d'etre disappears, in my view. I'm not sure they realise it yet, but if Topalov 'wins' from his 1-3 position with some trumped up accusation of cheating, their legitimacy is not enhanced. Quite the opposite in fact. Kramnik goes home with a very strong claim to being the REAL World Champion (he beat Kasparov in a match) and having allowed FIDE to demonstrate its true colours. I think that the odds of him establishing his own cycle will have improved dramatically, he just needs a sponsor. Nigel


Rodrigo Jaroszewski    (2006-09-30 09:41:27)
Re: Legitimacy

Hey, you don't have the chance of asking a GM a question every day! :)

Nigel, since my limited database and research resources here didn't allow me to know if you played a game against Kramnik, much less if you ever had a nice chat with him, I'd like to know if you did and if you really believe that he'd be the kind of guy that would go out and organize a WC Cicle on his own, like Kasparov did (well, tried)?

I take this match as a display he is willing to expose himself in order to get things straight once and for all, but going to the business side of the game is for those that really want to risk a lot to get things done.


Rodrigo Jaroszewski    (2006-10-01 11:25:13)
LOL

I've been reading Mig's Daily Dirt so often that I'm beginning to get an unconscious feel of what he just posted before I read it! LOL

"As Kasparov just pointed out to me, Ilyumzhinov is about the only one in Elista without a vested interest in the match ending now."

http://www.chessninja.com/dailydirt/2006/09/whats_the_problem.htm


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-10-03 14:52:20)
Kasparov on the match

http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=3396

http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110009029


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-10-25 11:47:22)
Once upon a time in Kalmykia

An interesting interview of FIDE president Kirsan Ilyumzhinov about future of chess, reunification match and other things...

http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=3448


I can't resist this quote :


Misha Savinov : Bearing in mind successful unification, do you see a chance of Kasparov returning to chess?

Kirsan Ilyumzhinov : In my opinion, Garry will not return. His age will not permit him returning, chess advanced too far. But, of course, we would all be happy if he returns. Actually, I would be happy if not only Kasparov, but also Spassky and Fischer come back. If they do, I am ready to organize a supermatch of FIDE champions. A good idea, by the way! We’ll invite Vassily Vassilyevich Smyslov, Spassky, Fischer, Karpov, Kasparov, Khalifman, Kasimdzhanov, Topalov, Anand, Ponomariov… It is going to be a good supertournament!

Misha Savinov : In Elista?

Kirsan Ilyumzhinov : In Elista. And, probably, it will be 25-minute games, double round-robin. I wonder if Fischer accepts the invitation, what do you think? We will announce the winner a superabsolute champion (laughs)!

Misha Savinov : One can call it an open championship of Kalmykia…

Kirsan Ilyumzhinov : Are you suggesting inviting the Kalmyk champion of 1978? I think I could play 25-minute games…


.....


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-10-28 15:59:37)
Chess quizz :-)

I see the interview (1) was also published on Chessbase news..
http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=3454


Some other questions...


3/ Will Kasparov return at competitive chess ?

4/ Will Kramnik defend his new FIDE title ?

5/ How many years Kirsan Iljumzhinov will still remain FIDE president ?

6/ Will Fritz 10 beat Kramnik ??

7/ Will chess be solved by a super computer in the next 200 years ?

8/ Who will win the 1st FICGS world championship ? :)



... my answers :


2/ Boris Spassky

3/ Yes !

4/ No

5/ 8 years

6/ No

7/ No

8/ Joker :)


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-10-31 12:02:00)
Chess videos : Youtube

Some interesting chess videos on Youtube...


Sofia Polgar vs. Viktor Korchnoi (wow ! :))
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TxeiGipoFSE

Kramnik vs. Topalov (Elista, 2006)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=va9Hxr7bfEk

Kasparov simultaneous exhibition
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HqvMSgxj6O4

Game Over (Kasparov vs. Deep Blue) trailer
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ias_bmSCev4

Kasparov vs. Altavista :)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BPIpWMCKEbk


Elmer Valderrama    (2006-12-02 15:31:47)
On the subject of intuition

Just received an e-mail from a known online book dealer inviting me to order the fifth Volume of G Kasparov's My Great Predecessors(about Korchnoi and Karpov).

I had a look at the online pages of the book (first three or so) and there is a paragraph about a proposed (by G K) division of players according to -guess what- intuition:

1) those players without any intuition but hard work (Botvinnik, Fischer..)

2) those with strategical intuition (Capablanca, Petrosian, Karpov..)

3) those with non-balanced positional intuition (Alekhine, Tal, Korchnoi, Kasparov..)

Very interesting reading. I guess we have to place engines in group one ;)

However, I would place Kasparov in the same group one of those without intuition but hard work as the criteria shows that players from that group tend to quit chess earlier (Botvinnik was on/off through his reigning) than the intuitive players who last longer (with Korchnoi the Terrible heading by far the lot)


Elmer Valderrama    (2006-12-04 14:18:02)
intuition

I disagree, chess knowledge can't be equated to intuition, here is my long post about it (why am I writing about the same things all over and over and at the same time of year, I dunno ;)

1. Players without any intuition whatsoever but great working capabilitites (as Botvinnik, Fischer, Kasparov, ..engines..)

-they never relie on intuition (they dont have any at all after all) so everything must be subject to calculation, they have the "hardware" (perfect body and mental conditions, rigorous training, perfect visual/realistic representation of positions and a great chess knowledge which must be kept fresh in mind -if not, they wouldn't have reference points to judge/evaluate resulting positions.

When on top form they can beat anybody and I mean ANY body: human, extraterrestial, ultragalactic, trans-natural, hyper-divine,etc, and for an overwhelming score, like 6-0 ;)..well you know what I mean.

The drawback well you already know it, it last a mig, except for the engines, no-one can keep up with this regime (GK could for a long time, but resorting to short breaks (not playing for WC, choosing carefully where to play etc,) But most important it's impossible to implement for long if the "hardware" -see above- starts to "leak oil" then it's all over..

This can be brought up to an art, like Kasparov or Fischer, it is more powerful than understanding chess as a natural tongue (as intuitive players) because the "top-form" competitive element is always present and the "hardware" works in pristine conditions.

From the above it follows of course that engines are the ultimate chess warrior over the board at least (and only there, not in CC)

2. Those who have strategical intuition. (Capablanca, Petrosian, Karpov maybe Anand..)The general impression is that they are simply lazy people: not need to work out any thing as they just "know" where pieces should go and what the point is of their moves, usually there is no need for deep calculations, just two or three moves (4 to 6 plies) to corroborate the "feeling" and the game is won.

The "feeling" is hard to express in words, and usually is lost if expressed in words ;). It goes beyond a simply pattern recognition, or a full database of chess knowledge, it is about predicting the future possibilities (not having real positions in mind, just the "possibilities" or general lines of play in future positions which may or may not happen to appear for real in the game. They can play for long long time and win a lot of tournaments (Karpov I believe have the record of won tournaments)

3. Those who have special understanding in unbalanced positions (Alekhine, Tal, Korchnoi..) They are dynamic players who love to calculate but not for the sake of finding the best of the best of the best of the moves (as those in group 1 would do), they calculate SOME variations, those who have meaning to them I see them as players of group 2 with a more or less working "hardware" i.e they are not going to trust 2 or 3 moves variations neither they are going to speculate on the future possibilities without any ground/basic calculation under it. Their "feeling" is again hard to express in words, but I believe it is something like calculating a 10-12 plies variation with every position in-between being subconciously excrutinated for crushing unexpected turning moves (this is not done by players of group 1, they would calculate "normal replies" in that 10-12 plies variation and would have to go deeper (like 20-30 plies to see the point ;)

So that "feeling" is what enable us to compose music, create art etc but also it is something that enable us to err like fools :( Whether it can be mimicked by software or not it's an open question but as I said a calculation 40-50 plies deep it's practically equal to using intuition... Obviously the above classification of G Kasparov it's a bit rough in the sense that there are very few "pure intuitive" players (of either group 2 or 3) as mentioned by Don in his post most of the players is a mix of talent I believe, if I had to choose a pure intuitive player from those groups I would point Capablanca and Korchnoi, and of course Kasparov of group 1


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-12-04 16:45:00)
Knowledge

That's difficult IMO to distinguish "feeling" and knowledge.

Anyway I completely disagree when you say Fischer, Kasparov (and so on) could beat ANY body 6-0 when on top form... Such results could only happen with quite 'weak' opponents, particularly in the past.


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-12-24 17:25:20)
Karpov, Kasparov, Fischer play Go !

Just read this in IGN "Goama" newsletter (by Alexander Dinerchtein)

http://gogame.info/


"3. Both Karpov and Kasparov, former World Chess Champions plays Go on 10-kyu level."

"4. Somebody noticed, that Robert Fisher, the former Chess champion played Go a lot during his stay in Japan and reached the amateur 3-dan level."


Quite impressive. (particularly Fischer)


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-01-21 13:48:44)
Go and chess, IGN Goama newsletter

From IGN Goama newsletter by Alexander Dinerchtein - http://www.gogame.info


Go and Chess ­ Two Games, Shared Experiences

Chess and go show are similar in many ways, yet it's always strange to see how the masters of each game try to "invent the wheel", instead of benefiting from the knowledge of their colleagues.

Let's consider sharing experiences!

These ideas can be useful even for strong Asian Go professionals:

1. Currently, only a few pros use Go databases and programs for studying. It is easy to find commentaries, written by 9-dan masters, which state that a move is new and has never been played before. Yet if one checks such moves in Go databases, one can sometimes find up to 100 examples from professional games. How can they cheat the readers who study these commentaries?

Once in Korea, I showed the Bigo Assistant program (similar to GoGod, MoyoGo and SmartGo) to Lee Sedol's brother Lee Sanghun, 5-dan, who is the director of a large children's Go school. He was surprised and said that the program looked very useful, and he added that he had never met this kind of program before. He even suggested deleting all amateur games and games played on Go servers, because of their low quality. I promised to order the programs and to install them on the school's computers if he liked this idea, but he did not follow up. Lee Sanghun, 5-dan was not able to break the traditions of his forefathers …

2. Even such top chess players as Kasparov, Kramnik and Topalov enlist the support of trainers during important tournaments and matches. During the Communist era, almost every Russian grandmaster worked on behalf of world championship candidates. Our government forced them to help, to show them new moves and ideas. Those who refused to help were punished severely: for example, sometimes a player would be prohibited from playing in tournaments abroad and would be refused foreign visas.

We do not see this in Go. Everyone thinks only about his or her own self. Do you know who is currently assisting Lee Changho? I don't know, either!

3. I would like to say a few words about playing technique. Chess players often used to write the move on paper first and then make it on the board. This helps to avoid impulsive moves and to prevent blunders. Go masters record the game afterwards, and so one can often find terrible mistakes, such as overlooking ataris and recapturing ko without playing a ko threat first. As an example you may see Black's move number 271 from this game: http://www.go4go.net/v2/modules/collection/sgfview.php?id=10828 I am sure that if a player looked at their move at least twice ­ before they write it on paper and after ­ they would not make such mistakes.

4. Even top Go tournaments are usually run by the knock-out system so we often see sensational results. Mightn’t it be reasonable to think about increasing the number of games in each round? If rounds were best-of-three (in case of time constraints, it would be possible to use blitz time controls for the third game), it would help to minimize sensations.

How about organising a definitive World Go Championship? Chess players have contested one for more than 100 years, and competitions for this World Championship have revealed the very best players of each generation. In Go it's harder to tell which player is true champion. In 2006, for instance, one international tournament was won by Lee Changho and another one by Lee Sedol, while Cho U won the largest amount of prize money. Whom can we call the World Champion? Who can say which tournament is the most important : LG, Samsung, Fujitsu, Chunlan or another? We don't even have a unified rating system …

If we determined a single World Go Champion, he might earn the same degree of popularity as Garry Kasparov achieved in chess, and this could have a very positive influence on Go popularity around the world!


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-02-10 15:58:56)
King's indian

Radjabov's good score in Corus 2007 tournament (Wijk aan Zee) gave a second youth to King's indian after Kasparov dropped it about ten years ago. Chessbase now sells a dvd by ex-FIDE world champion Kasimdhzanov.

I still consider this opening as a good OTB weapon, but what do you think about it in modern correspondence chess, particularly after the nice victories by Christophe Léotard during last ICCF world championship.

I think it could be interesting to discuss this opening, why not in Wikichess... What would you play after 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 Bg7 4.e4 d6 5.Nf3 O-O 6.Be2 e5 7.O-O Nc6 8.d5 Ne7 (9.Ne1 and 9.b4) ?

http://www.ficgs.com/user_page.php?page=wikichess&article=4156


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-02-13 11:27:24)
Kasparov's last game

I quite like this one too :)

Kasparov vs. Topalov (Linares)


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ht_yJBU3C30&NR


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-02-23 11:54:47)
Kasparov

I wonder how Garry Kasparov would do in this tournament without any more preparation :)

This round 5 was full of surprises... I think Topalov will have a better 2nd part again, like Aronian. But Carlsen could make my predictions false :/


Nicola Lupinacci    (2007-02-23 13:19:20)
kasparov

In my opinion the best kasparov certainly could win all tournaments (also Morelia-Linares 2007) without any preparation

he is the best chess player of all time

he is the game of chess! :-D


Dinesh De Silva    (2007-02-23 13:28:31)
Re:

Nicola, I bet Kasparov will see your comments and will be mighty pleased! Who knows, he just might even give you some free chess lessons. One thing is certain., Kasparov will NOT give Vladimir Putin of Russia any free chess lessons. Haha!


Elmer Valderrama    (2007-02-23 22:02:35)
Oh my..

*in the same vein* I'd say Kasparov would score 4.5 given that he's younger than Fischer but equally out-of-form and with a bad record of blunders in his last couple of years..:P -somehow Kasparov's die-hards think that he retired in the 80's, lol, ...and that this year is 1987 :)


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-02-23 23:26:21)
Kasparov, Karpov, Fischer

Impossible to choose between Kasparov, Karpov and Fischer.

Three champions who completely dominated their chess world......

It won't happen again, I'm afraid.


Nicola Lupinacci    (2007-02-24 02:27:58)
3 genius

I think Kasparov is the best for his aggressivity, Capablanca for his semplicity, and Alechine for his tattics.


Marc Lacrosse    (2007-02-24 21:22:11)
not so simple ...

"I think Kasparov is the best for his aggressivity, Capablanca for his semplicity, and Alechine for his tattics."

This is way too simple...

Remember Kasparov drawing game after game for recovering after Karpov led by 5-0 in their match ...

Capablanca's play was full of tactics (I would better say full of sophisticated ways to avoid tactics - which _is_ tactics at a supreme degree).

Alekhine's tactics were most of the time allowed by too weak opposition. Among great tactical geniuses far stronger than Alekhine in this field I would cite Bronstein, Tal, Spassky, Nezmetdinov, Fischer, Shirov, Kasparov, Topalov ...


But there are also :
- Positional geniuses : Morphy, Capablanca, Botvinnik, Petrosian, and an entire class above them all Karpov, Ivanchuk, Kramnik.
- Opening prep geniuses : Botvinnik, Fischer, Kasparov
- Endgame geniuses : Rubinstein, Karpov, Korchnoi...

Well a difficult question because all top class players had several masterpieces in any of these fields ...


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-03-05 10:19:11)
Playchess Freestyle Tournament

Thanks for info, Samy...

What a crosstable, no less than 17 players finishing with 5,5 / 8

Petr, I understand your frustration, anyway that's why I play correspondence chess only over the internet. Losing a game thanks to a connection lost or strange rules is not interesting much :/


Several remarks while looking at the final crosstable :

The winner uses Rybka 2.3 mp, the others too :) .. Rybka's author (Rajlich) scores 5 out of 8 (pos. 18)

With Rybka getting stronger and stronger at fast time controls, Advanced Chess will probably become Computer Chess and finally Rybka Chess very soon. 1 hour + 15 sec is no more interesting.

I recognize some famous 'names' used on the defunct KasparovChess.com, King Crusher (5 / 8), Deep Thunder (3,5 / 8)... Correspondence Chess GM Mikhail Umansky scores 2,5 / 8... and last but not least, french forums superstar Olivier Evan scores 2,5 / 7 :)


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-03-26 14:58:25)
How Life Imitates Chess

Did you read this book by Kasparov, Elmer ? .. What do you think about ?


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-03-26 18:59:43)
How Politics Imitates Chess

Garry Kasparov is probably not a philosopher, however it is not obvious to me that Chess Imitates Life, as (you said it) there's nothing bigger than life... Chess is a part of life. On the contrary, we could say life imitates chess because some decisions, sometimes, can be reduced (as far as possible) to chess strategies like reality can be reduced to science. The same, How Reality Imitates Science makes sense to me, whereas How Science Imitates Reality doesn't.

"How politics finally does not imitate Chess" by Garry Kasparov should be much more interesting :-) .. with a preface by Vladimir Putin : "How life doesn't imitate politics" :>


In France, the election sometimes makes me think to a.. more than chess, a Go game... I think Nicolas Sarkozy uses some chess(Go)-like strategies and knows openings/Joseki & tactics best. At least he may know very well the work of Arthur Schopenhauer : "The world as will and representation" & "L'art d'avoir toujours raison". In comparison, Ségolčne Royal and other candidates seem to use faith and "religion". Anyway, the result should be quite the same as life doesn't imitate politics much nowadays :/


Elmer Valderrama    (2007-03-26 20:12:01)
The perfect title

As the title couldn't be more awefull, let's try to improve it:


"Decision Making: Invaluable Lessons Taken from Chess"
by G Kasparov


Instant best-seller.

Although the decisions of splitting from FIDE, creating a ghost GM association, not defending the WC in a proper Cycle, and....etc,etc..premature retirement, ..etc ..etc, don't speak too well about the lessons, let's try and improve it:


"Decision Making: Invaluable Lessons Taken from Chess, With Emphasis in What Not to Do"
by G Kasparov


A killer.


Nick Burrows    (2007-04-03 12:08:26)
future champ?

Everytime i have checked touny results Dmitri Jakovenko seems to be first! nice to see him shoot up to no.18
Who do people see as the future champ?
I agree with Thibault that the WC domination we have seen with Kasparov et al is unlikely in the modern era. However it seems likely to be contested between Radjabov, Carlsen and Karjakin.
As it looks right now, Carlsen just seems to have that extra bit of sparkle to his genius...


Alexander Shalamanov    (2007-06-20 16:44:27)
Junior my love!

He reminds me in style of the wonderful chess game knights of the past: Bronstein, Tal, Kasparov and the present: Shirov, Morozevich. Are brilliance of tactics and sacrificial chess more precious than cool and pitiless tecnique skills? Wait and see!


Ilmars Cirulis    (2007-06-23 10:00:51)
Nicknames

I don't care about it... I will play as good as I can and try to win. No care who is sitting against me. Even Kasparov with nickname Denis Kuznec. :)


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-07-15 14:17:47)
Rybka vs. Human

Hello Jason.

You are right, but I doubt this "war" will end soon. Unlike pure calculation, chess is a symbol of intelligence, even if it's said to be pure calculation since Deep Blue won the match over Kasparov 10 years ago. It will be always possible to draw against the best computers, so there will always be challengers to try to equalize in a match against the king Rybka or any other super-calculator. Some will succeed, undoubtly... That's a question of time. And they will be chess heroes :)

About Go, the same cars on another circuit are not so successful, so why not to continue the race championsip anyway ? .. There is life, so there's hope... :)


Wolfgang Utesch    (2007-07-15 14:55:22)
Rybka vs. Human

Thibault, in my oppinion problem is your definition of intelligence. Is Kasparov really more intelligent than i.e. Jean-Paul Satre (or Johann Wolfgang von Goethe)??? A man like Bobby Fisher was/is showing, that excellent specialised skill (of chess) nothing has to do with enough intelligence for life!


Dinesh De Silva    (2007-08-20 06:04:54)
Re: Your Best Quotes

"Kasparov's greatest move was showing the rest of the world that the darkest part of Rasputin still survives & terrorises Russian politics."


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-09-20 21:54:21)
WCH knockout vs. round-robin

I don't know about finished money tournaments at Chessfriend, this was just the available rules I read.

About FICGS & IECG WCH, the point is one don't play the same way a knockout or a round-robin tournament, this is not a question to play seriously or not. In every FIDE WCH (knockout) final match, Kramnik and maybe even Kasparov would accept an easy draw with Black, simply because they have to save energy, as chances of win are generally defended with White (actually Kasparov even offered a short draw with White against Kramnik's Berlin defence). In IECG or ICCF WCH round-robin tournaments, draws are to be avoided at any price but many strong players think the same way: White must win, Black must draw. That's very different in matches, so the strategy. I did not play drawish openings in IECG WCH, and I'll accept short draws if I can't expect more, but it doesn't mean I take it more seriously. According to the situation, these 4 draws were quite a good choice for both Farit & me... in a way :)


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-09-26 12:46:06)
Mexico, round 11

Unless an earthquake, Anand should win the FIDE WCH tournament... now leading with 7,5 / 11, by one point and a half, after another great game against Morozevich. That's a very impressive performance but not a real surprise, as he's always been able to play very well... and less sometimes (unlike Kasparov).

What could happen in a 12-games match against Kramnik if he plays at this level ?!


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-10-01 14:09:36)
Other Russia, Kasparov president ?

"The former world chess champion Garry Kasparov entered Russia's presidential race on Sunday, elected overwhelmingly as the candidate for the country's beleaguered opposition coalition (Other Russia)"

http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/europe/09/30/russia.kasparov.ap/index.html

This is a bit off topic but it could be interesting to know the view of our russian friends, from the inside, about this !?


Hannes Rada    (2007-10-01 19:10:42)
Kasparov for president ?

I would rather prefer to see Garry in a different race. Those for the correspondence chess championship (ICCF or FICGS :-) instead of becoming a stupid politician. :-(


Hannes Rada    (2007-10-01 19:21:49)
Chess Books

What is your favourite chess book ? I bought 6 volumes of G. Kasparov's 'My great predecessors' and I really like them. Quite interesting to see how the style of the champions changed during many years.


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-10-01 19:43:30)
Kasparov CC

I wonder what would look like a Kasparov correspondence chess game !? .. I think he would feel frustrated quite quickly :)

By the way, I remember that Peter Leko played some correspondence chess games at ICCF... Well, a first Google search "Peter Leko correspondence chess games" gives a thread at FICGS without the information.. those spammers are annoying :) .. Also this page with a CC game (unfinished) of Bobby Fischer :

http://www.uschess.org/cc/dunne/alexjul01.html


Hannes Rada    (2007-10-01 20:21:51)
Kasparov CC

If I remember correctly Garry once stated that he could win such a title easily, because he is superior in analyzing chess positions. Could be true, or not ? van Oosterom - Kasparov at CC conditions, what is your prediction ? Maybe Garry has an advantage because he can analyze deeper within a specific time unit due to his superior chess knowledge and experience.


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-10-01 23:32:17)
Kasparov vs. CC champion

That's a good question and it would be very interesting to see such a match.

Quite hard to say, it was probably true a few years ago, nowadays I'm not sure anymore...


Viktor Savinov    (2007-10-02 11:57:51)
Kasparov CC

Kasparov CC perfomans - 3126!! +56=2-0 (1979-1982 & 1992-9 - 1998)


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-10-02 13:11:47)
Kasparov CC

Hello Viktor ! So Garry Kasparov did play correspondence chess ?! Do you know where one can find some games (maybe you can post some here) ?


Viktor Savinov    (2007-10-02 13:21:59)
Kasparov CC

Almost all CC-games from tournaments in the USSR are lost.


Hannes Rada    (2007-10-02 16:06:09)
CC Kasparov and other OTB GM's

Viktor, What kind of Russian tournaments did he play ? I played at chessfriend against OTB Elo > 2600 GM Daniel Fridman from Latvia. At CC he was only around Elo 2300. But I could not communicate with him to ask about his motivation for cc


Hannes Rada    (2007-10-02 21:16:11)
GMs + engine vs amateur + engine

However it would be interesting to know if Kasparov or any other strong OTB GM + strong engine would play significant better chess than an amateur + strong engine at cc time control.


Francois Caire    (2007-10-03 04:36:31)
Kasparov vs the world

http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1252350


Viktor Savinov    (2007-10-03 12:13:26)
CC Kasparov and other OTB GM's

Hannes, I do not have information.


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-10-03 12:54:17)
Kasparov vs the world

The full & annotated story :

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kasparov_versus_The_World


Hannes Rada    (2007-10-03 19:49:56)
Kasparov vs the World

Thank you for the interesting link. It is quite an interesting game and when playing without further and depper analysing it looks like the World did a very good job, which should at least be sufficient for a draw.


Claude Brisson    (2007-10-11 09:05:06)
pinot noir

(he was speaking about the defeat of Kasparov by Deep Blue)


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-10-21 01:36:54)
Kasparov on Bill Maher

After Kasparov's win on Colbert, Bill Maher was checkmated also :)

http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=4194
http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=4191


Don Groves    (2007-10-21 04:46:54)
Garry Kasparov

One the video guests on Friday night's US television program, Real Time with Bill Maher, was Garry Kasparov who had been in New York (his family is still there for a while longer). Maher is a political comedian and most of his show revolves around anti-Bush humor. Everyone (including myself) was amazed at the knowledge (particularly of Middle East politics) and political maturity shown by Kasparov! In addition, he easily outdid Bill when it came to comedy, saying at one point that he was aiming quite a bit higher than simply being better than Bush. I wish we had him running for our president!


Dinesh De Silva    (2007-10-21 15:40:41)
Re:

Don, I think Kasparov didn't have much of a humour a few months back. But I guess he might have recently looked at the jokes we crack here regularly at FICGS & decided to join in the (humour) act at talk shows, joke shows, this show, that show etc. Hehe!


Don Groves    (2007-10-22 07:14:48)
Re: Kasparov and humour

Hi, Dinesh -- Kasparov seemed so relaxed and spontaneous with his humour on the show, it seemed like he had been that way all his life. Maybe he has been lurking on FICGS for quite a while ;-)


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-10-24 14:05:27)
Wolf Blitzer on CNN's Late Edition

Kasparov : "In Russia we are not fighting win elections, we are fighting to have elections."

http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=4198


Fighting from the opposite side of the earth, quite good strategy :)


Don Groves    (2007-10-26 01:29:15)
Elections...

And here in the US, we are fighting to have fair elections instead of stolen ones, so we have a lot in common with Kasparov. One difference between the two battles: in response to a question from Bill Maher, Garry said he had hired bodyguards for himself and his family. So his fight is more dangerous than ours -- so far...


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-11-09 01:05:28)
Chess sponsorship

An interesting discussion about chess sponsorship started on ChessDiscussions.com (Susan Polgar forums)

http://www.chessdiscussion.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=504

Several issues : "How to bring chess to the masses ?", "How to make chess a show ?", "What kind of sponsorship is possible ?"

Susan obviously thinks that OTB chess still has a great potential and that organizations could do much better to promote it... Here's my last response in the thread (reminds some old threads here) :

<<<

In other words, you say that chess has a show-potential like any other sport that could be used and that isn't...

For sure traditional marketing methods could help to promote OTB chess, and chess organizations could do much better... but is chess "bankable", just like an actor ? .. I just saw one more comparison between chess & poker in the thread "How to bring chess to the masses", but there's a major problem in chess that doesn't exist in poker or soccer : "everything can't happen", at least at a first sight, actually the way people can see it...

FIDE tried to change some things, ie. time controls, wch cycle but that's not enough, obviously. Anyone can win a lost hand at texas hold'em against any professional player, like any 2nd division soccer team can beat the Real Madrid once... Of course long-time statistics will be always favourable to the best players, but it takes a much longer time... Everything can happen in any event in these games (poker wch, soccer world cup). The probability for a real surprise that makes buzz is much lower at chess, the same best players invariably play the best tournaments, won statistically (ie.) 20% by Anand, 19% by Topalov, 18% by Kramnik and so on... quite boring.

The only interesting chess events follow the same scheme : David vs. Goliath, the buzz-genius 12 boy vs. Kramnik, mystery-Deep Blue vs. Kasparov, Anna Kournikova vs. Fischer & so on... nowadays the man vs. machine match is no more interesting since any home computer is stronger than HAL 9000 or Kramnik and there's no clear world champion (too many FIDE wch, different cycles..)

Chess needs real events and I'm curious to see the ones "that could bring chess to the masses" in the future... Maybe I'm a bit pessimistic, at least for OTB chess, but I'm very interested to see how good marketing methods will be able to transform our chess world... Just wait, hope & see :)

Best regards, Thibault

>>>


I'm now working again on SEO (Search Engines Optimization) for FICGS, more and more players find us via Google... Of course one next step is to sponsor the FICGS WCH & freestyle tournaments but it is a hard task for sure... All comment and suggestions on this issue are welcome :)


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-11-20 19:56:40)
Le Grand Journal de Canal+

Frenchies Michel Denisot and Ariane Massenet interviewed (during 5 minutes at most) former world champion Garry Kasparov.

He explained in a few words how life imitates chess and how the rest of the world help Putin to make russia a dictatorship.

During the rest of the show as usual full of nothing, Kasparov was obviously quite impatient to leave and I understand him :)


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-11-24 18:53:44)
Kasparov arrested in Moscow

A few days after his visit in France and once more, Garry Kasparov has been arrested, like other critics of President Putin, at a rally in Moscow organised by Kasparov's Other Russia coalition.

http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=4277


Mikhail Ruzin    (2007-11-25 20:51:40)
Other Russia, Kasparov president ?

Yes, of course. But, not now. =( 0-5 (much as it was Karpov-Kasparov) are still to come.


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-12-03 03:04:56)
"Chess is like" series

Just tried a Google search on "chess is like" :


- Chess is like life (Spassky, Kasparov, Polar or so.. Fischer said Chess IS life :))

- A game of Chess is like a sword fight ! You must think first, before your move...

- To some extent face to face chess is like poker in that it can help to "read" your opponent's body language.

- Chess is like a box of choclates, once you start a game you never know what your gonna get.

- Chess is like body-building. If you train every day, you stay in top shape.

- Chess is like marriage. You cannot have a mate without a check. (Brian Wood)

- To me chess is like a patient and faithful lover; I may not always be there for her - er, it - but it is always there waiting by the phone for me to call and start up with the affair all over again. (Graham Moore)

- Chess is like snooker: once you slip a little it is very hard to get back because there are so many good young players fighting their way up.

- Chess is like golf, 50 percent mental, 50 percent physical.

- Chess is like the saxophone. You can pick it up and learn it, but it takes a lifetime to become any good.

- Chess is like tug-of-war, but it's also like "a cork bobbing up and down."

- Playing chess is like looking out over a limitless ocean; playing checkers is like looking into a bottomless well.

- Chess is like a symphony. The first phase of this piece was a furioso, leading to a quiet second movement, a positional struggle between two very different personalities. (about a Fischer's game)


... and so on. Finally anything's like everything :)


Thibault de Vassal    (2008-01-08 00:50:55)
Incomes of top Go players

One more interesting article from the IGN "Goama" newsletter - http://gogame.info


Incomes of Top Korean Professionals in 2007:

1. Lee Sedol - $600.000
2. Lee Changho - $400.000
3. Park Yeonghun - $360.000
4. Cho Hanseung – $180.000
5. Kang Dongyun - $150.000
6. Mok Jinseok -$148.000
7. Lee Yeongku -$122.000
8. Won Sungjin -$116.000
9. Yun Junsang - $113.000
10. Kim Jiseok – $113.000

Japanese players, even who is not famous on international arena, makes more money, but it's still hard to compare their tournament incomes with top football or hockey players.

Maybe better to compare chess and Go players: "As sports go, chess is not lucrative for the average professional. The well known top players who have been able to achieve millionaire status (Karpov and Kasparov) are the exceptions. Aside from them, there are only about 20 players world wide who do well financially from chess ($100,000+ per year income), and another 100 or so that make a comfortable living ($50,000+). The next 1,000 players, on average, come out about even -- earning in prizes what they incur in entry fees and expenses. Then come perhaps 10,000 players who invest several thousand dollars more per year than they earn." -- from "GM RAM: Essential Grandmaster Knowledge" by Rashid Ziatdi and Peter Dyson, PROChess LLC, New York, 1998


Andrew Stephenson    (2008-05-01 19:50:21)
Marc

Thanks for the informative reply! I do the interactive walk thing you mentioned its very useful though you need reasonable power to have several engines running at once - this you have! I am afraid I dont know how to organise test matches but sounds good. same with Rybka randomiser I have the engine but no idea how to use the randomiser and get it to play itself. 2 wins from the c3 is good as I think it gives white nothing ..but in the line I chose I noticed that after Gelfand (as black) got a draw against Adams with this line Adams repeated it aginst Kasparov who varied. So I guess Adams had an improvement perhap it was what you played? - as black has to find some very accurate moves . Incidentally I very nearly played 5..g5!!? which is really interesting but as my other games were promising decided to settle for taking a draw I like the Basman-Sale and although I have given up e4 in cc will play e4 if we play again as I have some ideas against it. Thanks for the reply


Jason Repa    (2008-05-04 07:45:33)
From??

I agree with most of what you said, but I'm not sure I'd go so far as to conclude that all variations of the From's Gambit are busted. We might end up finding out that some variations of it are fine for Black.

I also disagree with your statement that "1 f4 at cc seems a waste of white". Assuming I'm willing to hypothetically go along with the argument that there's supposedly something "wrong" with 1.f4, even though it's at worst a Dutch Defense a move up......you're not taking into consideration the fact that some people actually do more than "play" correspondence chess and want to practice lines they play in live tournaments. 1.f4 has been played by many of the world's greatest players, and in serious competitive tournaments. Fischer, Kasparov, Lasker, and many others have played 1.f4 occasionally, and there are many current IM's and even a GM (Henrik Danielsen) who have played it quite frequently.

Perhaps your idea of "playing chess" is to simply plug a position into various chess engines and mindlessly relay the moves your program suggests, but as for myself, I use the data I acquire from my cc games to prepare for my real chess (chess between human mind vs human mind). Anything other than that is just analysis or group study at best.


Andrew Stephenson    (2008-05-05 12:50:53)
From here to eternity

Yes there might be some variations that are survivable especially OTB but at cc its tough to give up a pawn so early on. I think f4 is a perfectly ok first move (like b4) I just think it does not give any prospect of an opening advantage at cc because there is no surprise value and the black player has the time to research and find a response that equalises fairly quickly. That is why very few GM's have F4 as a main white weapon - it does not give enough prospects for an advantage - at the highest levels. Please note that qualification. I quite agree real chess is between people in real time and cc is a form of research competition. Getting experience for real world chess is a great reason to play a line at cc. There are exceptions OTB I often play the exchange french and have had good success (played by Kasparov Tal Morphy and others) I would not play it at cc though! In fact OTB I always play e4 but at cc gave it up because I see no way to get any adavantage against the caro kahn. Just relaying the moves the computer suggests does not, I think, give much chance of success against good players at cc. As for the From I do not believe in g5 white has to avoid the tricks and develop and is a pawn up. Not so easy otb!! - but at cc not so much of a problem. As for Nc6 yes I was talking about this move after 5 g3 and you are probably right I will try to look at the game you gave and do some analysis. As for the Mestel variation I thought black would get the pawn back unless e3 and d4 are played but again that was based on a quick look. Anyway perhaps the thematic tournament wil provide some answers.


Jason Repa    (2008-05-06 21:54:09)
Bird Brain loses in 33 Moves!

"Obviously playing the From or the approach adopted by black in these games is not an accurate response!"

That's not obvious at all. What's obvious is that I beat you quite easily when you and I played cc so you're far from being any kind of authority whatsoever!

"1f4 does not lose or lead to a worse gane for white - it just allows black to get equality very quickly and easily"

I just finished trying to explain to you, in the way a young child should be able to understand, that there is more to think about in chess than trying to play what current theory considers to be the best try for an opening advantage. Yet here you are rambling on about the same nonsense you were in your previous posts. Was Fischer's 2.d3 against the French the objectively strongest move? Even against (and perhaps especially against) computers, it can sometimes be better to play sidelines or moves which may serve to confuse an opponent. Is the King's Indian Attack the best try for an opening advantage for White? Probably not. But it was used by Kasparov to defeat Deep Blue. If you still can't understand the concept I've been trying to teach you, after several posts, I don't know what more I can do for you. Just keep mindlessly playing what established theory tells you are the strongest lines,(without having even the incipience of an understanding as to why) and keep mindlessly trusting the evaluations your program gives you, and you'll keep getting CRUSHED by guys like me.

"1 f4 doesnt develop any piece (except the king!) and is a bit committal and slightly weakening of the king side."

After this statement, if I didn't know better, I would have thought you were someone who just learned how to set up the pieces. It might be one of the dumbest things I've ever heard anyone say. Does 1.e4 develop a piece? How about 1.d4? I suppose those moves are "a waste in cc" as well. We should all be playing 1.Nf3 and 1.Nc3 according to you, lol.

1.f4 grabs space. It stakes out influence both in the center and on the kingside. It effectively prevents 1...e5 (lest White goes into a dubious gambit system) as an alternative to other moves which achieve this. There are also other intangibles that are part of the picture, such as the psychological effect the move may have, the lack of preparation an opponent may have against it, etc. If you ever began to understand chess at a level beyond just plugging moves into a program, you might start to appreciate that allowing concessions (such as the slight weakening of the White kingside resulting from 1.f4) is all part of the game. Fischer's famous quote: "you gotta give squares to get squares" is a famous example. If allowing static liabilities were something to be avoided at all cost, you'd never see a Sicilian Scheveningen. It allows all sorts of weaknesses.

As for your so called "analysis". It's a complete joke! For starters, you're "analyzing" a game resulting from the Leningrad Variation of the Bird's Opening. I line I've never played in my life, let alone here on FICGS. Is this how you try to win an argument/debate? By misrepresenting the facts? An intelligent person who genuinely felt that their argument had a leg to stand on, would simply take one of the 4 games I provided to you and do some analysis from there. Showing where Black could have improved. Then finally, after trying to "score points" with examples of the Leningrad Variation of the Bird's Opening, which I have never played, you post a game where White played poorly and lost to a lower rated player. As if that's never happened before in chess, lol. You don't even know enough to post the date of the game. I couldn't find this game on any of my databases(totally over 4,000,000 games), so if you didn't just make it up out of thin air, perhaps you got more wrong, such as the actual moves that were played, in addition to incorrectly stating:

"Look what happened to Evgeny Alexseev as black - a very strong 2600+ GM at the time - he continued 6 ..b6 7 h3 c5 8 Qe1 Bb7 9 g4 and lost to IM Sengupta."

Is it Black that lost here or White?

I took a brief look at the game, and it's hardly representative of proper play by White. 7.h3 was dubious at best. I prefer 7.Ne5. White then misses another opportunity to play the knight to e5 after 7...c5. Then 9.g4? is a gross thematic mistake. The only thing this game proves is that you're completely incapable of discussing chess in an intelligent way. Real chess players look for games that illustrate the critical lines for both sides, and try to arrive at some actual insights.

There is a reason I crushed you when we played cc last year.


Thibault de Vassal    (2008-07-01 17:10:49)
Big chess in russian forums

Quite funny to see a Big chess game (Lehnhoff - de Vassal :)) discussed in a russian forum, even if I don't understand a single word of the discussion - any help welcome :/

http://kasparovchess.crestbook.com/viewtopic.php?pid=181338

We definitely need more Big chess players, great game - let's have fun ! :)


Andrew Stephenson    (2008-08-09 21:49:23)
Marshall Fest

I guess so Thibault. Kasparov never accepted the Marshall - always anti marshall. Still couple of high level white wins recently and Aronian opted for the Berlin the other day....


Thibault de Vassal    (2008-10-03 21:37:20)
FIDE rating list oct. 2008

FIDE published the October 2008 rating list, the 5 top ranking players are in a 8 points range only...

I still wonder what would happen in case of a come back by the King (Gary Kasparov) .. Great thing to see a player like Morozevich at the 2nd place.

Rank Name Title Country Rating

1 Topalov, Veselin g BUL 2791
2 Morozevich, Alexander g RUS 2787
3 Ivanchuk, Vassily g UKR 2786
4 Carlsen, Magnus g NOR 2786
5 Anand, Viswanathan g IND 2783
6 Kramnik, Vladimir g RUS 2772
7 Aronian, Levon g ARM 2757
8 Radjabov, Teimour g AZE 2751
9 Leko, Peter g HUN 2747
10 Jakovenko, Dmitry g RUS 2737
11 Wang, Yue g CHN 2736
12 Adams, Michael g ENG 2734
13 Movsesian, Sergei g SVK 2732
14 Mamedyarov, Shakhriyar g AZE 2731
15 Karjakin, Sergey g UKR 2730
16 Kamsky, Gata g USA 2729
17 Svidler, Peter g RUS 2727
18 Shirov, Alexei g ESP 2726
19 Eljanov, Pavel g UKR 2720
20 Gelfand, Boris g ISR 2719
21 Dominguez Perez, Leinier g CUB 2719
22 Ponomariov, Ruslan g UKR 2719
23 Grischuk, Alexander g RUS 2719
24 Vachier-Lagrave, Maxime g FRA 2716
25 Alekseev, Evgeny g RUS 2715
26 Bu, Xiangzhi g CHN 2714
27 Polgar, Judit g HUN 2711
28 Ni, Hua g CHN 2710
29 Bacrot, Etienne g FRA 2705
30 Nakamura, Hikaru g USA 2704
31 Gashimov, Vugar g AZE 2703
32 Rublevsky, Sergei g RUS 2702
33 Cheparinov, Ivan g BUL 2696
34 Wang, Hao g CHN 2696
35 Sasikiran, Krishnan g IND 2694
36 Tiviakov, Sergei g NED 2686
37 Nisipeanu, Liviu-Dieter g ROU 2684
38 Najer, Evgeniy g RUS 2682
39 Bologan, Viktor g MDA 2682
40 Milov, Vadim g SUI 2681


Andrew Stephenson    (2008-10-14 22:01:56)
exchange slav

Difficult to know what Kramnik was up to in this game. 8 Qb3 has been regarded as pretty harmless and is not much played at GM level - he must have had some new idea - apparently 15 Qxb7 is new but black was always going to get the pawn back. After 6 months preperation and 3 full time seconds a bit strange! I am sure Anand will go full power for the point tomorrow - I still cannot quite believe that Kramnik will play the Petroff he avoided it against Kasparov and I am sure he will avoid it in this match also.


Thibault de Vassal    (2008-11-07 14:59:07)
Kamsky vs. Topalov

"Kamsky vs. Topalov" to sell...

Roustam Kamsky, father of world championship candidates Gata Kamsky had hard words against FIDE president Kirsan Ilyumzhinov : "I do not have any faith in FIDE and Mr. Ilyumzhinov who in front of the whole world breached his word, which is not the first time. Also, I do not have much faith in Mr. Makropoulos, a personal friend of Mr. Danailov."

More surprising, he said a few words about the former match Anand vs. Kasparov : "I would like to use this opportunity to congratulate Vishy Anand on his true victory. This is his third victory at the world championship. I think he could have achieved even more success if during his match against Kasparov he did not have as his trusted seconds grandmasters from the former Soviet Union. I was very impressed by the organization of Anand’s match in Bonn, Germany, except that the match should have been played between Kamsky and Anand. It was unjust to allow Russian GM Kramnik to play three world championship matches, in 2006, 2007, 2008, without a proper selection, just so Russia can maintain the world championship title."

The whole open letter is intersting to read...


Chessbase news :

http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=5002
http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=5000


Gultekin Gumusyazici    (2008-12-28 18:18:43)
Thibault de Vassal

Just Remember Kasparovs's complain about deepblue (bot-robot). He cried "This machine steals my photographic memory and plays as me." Chess game with common rulez has turned game determines winners whose memory realizes most likely picture of usual games. This is bot behaviour. Cheating is about neglecting improvements that is not common at pictures adopted as most likely winner moves. I always try unusual moves to surprize bots. At start I success but then bots leads game to other direction where most likely picture occurs by not doing move they fail. That is bot cheat. As Atalik has taken moves back.


Thibault de Vassal    (2009-02-08 17:26:09)
GM quotes trivia

Good idea, but no idea :/ .. maybe before the first game of a world championship. Spassky-Fischer or Karpov-Kasparov ? (so the quote would be from Spassky or Karpov ?)


Thibault de Vassal    (2009-02-14 13:29:46)
Topalov vs. Kamsky

The match between Veselin Topalov & Gataulla Kamskiy (Gata Kamsky) is about to start, a former challenger of Vladimir Kramnik and a former challenger of Anatoly Karpov in the FIDE World Championship, quite surprising.

Both usually make amazing performances in top chess tournaments, but not exactly as regularly as Garry Kasparov. Who do you expect to win such a match ?

The prize fund is $250,000, the winner should play current FIDE world champion Viswanathan Anand later this year.

More to read in an interview with Veselin Topalov in Chessbase news, particularly on the Lvov bid, originally of $750,000.

http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=5207


Anthony Jones    (2009-03-06 13:06:37)
Perverse poker

Its certainly gripping to watch, but the level of aggression he displays is borderline unethical due to the intimidation of his opponents.
As tournament director i'd offer him a single warning before booting him out.
Imagine the same actions in chess after winning a pawn! Although i do remember Nigel Short saying that in a world Junior champs when he was 15 he played a move and Kasparov laughed in his face before crushing him....


Thibault de Vassal    (2009-03-06 13:53:51)
Perverse chess & poker

Huh, I didn't hear about that story about Short & Kasparov but surely it reminds me one movie about chess.. maybe the one with Christophe Lambert.

Anyway you're right, such behaviour couldn't be tolerated, I'm quite surprised this guy can play in broadcasted tournaments. Maybe "special rules" for the TV show only, even explaining the behaviour in this case.


Arnab Sengupta    (2009-03-15 14:54:44)
Great player

Hello Guys Do you think that Anand is as great a player like Tal, Fisher, Kasparov...and i would really like to see Anand taking on deep bule or something like that...has he ever player any chess computer?


Thibault de Vassal    (2009-03-15 18:17:32)
Anand vs. Computer

I don't remember Anand playing a match against a computer like Deep Blue, Deep Fritz, Junior, Rybka & so on... But it is quite possible to find a few games like Anand vs. Fritz 3, 4 or other old programs in chess databases IMO.

Anyway, it is quite hard for me to answer your question as I still think the world is divided into 2 categories, Garry Kasparov and those who dig :) (The Good, The Bad & The Ugly, of course) .. More seriously, Anand is probably one of these 4 or 5 best players of all times, but who may be quite irregular (or just human), unlike Kasparov. Tal was another genius, maybe more a gambler, but none (Topalov, Anand, Kramnik...) ever reached the level of Garry Kasparov in my opinion.

I'm not sure Anand will be interested in losing to a chess computer, particularly as even Fritz is getting stronger & stronger.


Thibault de Vassal    (2009-03-17 22:58:05)
Anand too old ?

Kasparov on Anand and young grandmasters... Is 40 too old already to compete for the world chess champion title ?!

http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=5293


Thibault de Vassal    (2009-07-08 15:05:34)
Kasparov meets Obama

This is quite a surprise to me already, Barrack Obama met former chess world champion Garry Kasparov and other opposition leaders in Russia !

Nobody knows exactly what has been said during this meeting but the site Theotherrussia.org provided a full transcript of United Civil Front Chairman Garry Kasparov’s statement to president Barack Obama and an interesting interview of Garry Kasparov... The name of the forgotten Khodorkovsky appears several times.

http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=5562

A good summary could be : "Obama seems like a man who doesn’t try to solve problems that don’t have solutions. He saves his energy and political capital on realistic goals. If there’s a big obstacle he simply takes it off the table and deals with what can be done." (Garry Kasparov)


Don Groves    (2009-07-21 09:17:54)
K vs. O

I heard that Obama won a chess game between them but that Kasparov got even by beating Obama in 1-on-1 basketball.


Thibault de Vassal    (2009-08-04 19:02:35)
Kasparov vs. The flying phallus

Former world chess champion Garry Kasparov has found a new and strange opponent :)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dq_-Gf9rXhE


Thibault de Vassal    (2009-08-04 19:20:34)
Karpov vs. Kasparov rematch

You are probably aware of this promising rematch between former world chess champions Anatoly Karpov and Garry Kasparov. (Valencia - Spain, september 21-24, 2009)

What do you think about the possible games ? Is Karpov now too old, is Kasparov able to concentrate on chess only again ? What can be their state of mind during such a match, 25 years after their first match that became legendary... It should be a great event anyway, maybe even more interesting than the last FIDE chess championships. (By the way I don't know if there will be sponsors and/or prizes)


Rolf Staggat    (2009-08-06 18:20:56)
Valencia-match

I did not find a site about that match, but
<previews.chessdom.com/kasparov-karpov-valencia-2009>
is a report about it, also to find on the <fide.com> site


Thibault de Vassal    (2009-08-26 19:21:42)
Stan Vaughan vs. Varuzhan Akobian (WCF)

Many of you probably saw this strange banner in a Chessbase news article, with this title :

"THE WORLD CHESS CHAMPIONSHIP"
World Chess Federation, Inc.

WCF "WORLD CHESS CHAMPION" Stan Vaughan
vs. WCF official challenger Varuzhan Akobian in WCF TITLE MATCH 2009 (starting on December 1st, 2009 at Riviera Hotel Casino, Las Vegas)

http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=5717

The Chessbase article says that when FIDE stripped Fischer of the title in 1975, he set up the WCF which sanctioned his "World Championship" rematch with Spassky in 1992 (with a record of five million dollars prize). After winning the event, Fischer was scheduled to play WCF official challenger Stan Vaughan, but he retired.

Well well... I cannot even find a page on Wikipedia on Stan Vaughan, but the article on Chessbase also mentions that Vaughan would have been 29 time US Champion of the American Chess Association, retaining the title at 2008 Robert Fischer Memorial and also, but not least :

* 1988 US Correspondence Chess Champion
* 1989, 1995 Mensa World Correspondence Chess Champion
* 1995-2007 WCCF World Correspondence Chess Champion
* WCF “The World Chess Champion 2001-present 2009
* Retained the title in 2007 with an 11-0 title match victory over Francisco Metz, an International Master from Mexico and former 1975 USCF's US Amateur Chess Champion

To finish, Garry Kasparov would have turned down the opportunity to play him in a match for 5 million dollars in 2008 - not a big surprise.

Does anyone have more information on all this and eventually games played by this un-unknown correspondence chess champion ?


Nick Burrows    (2009-09-07 12:03:38)
Carlsen training with Kasparov!

Roll over Anand & Topalov!

http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=5742


William Taylor    (2009-09-07 14:57:28)
Good news

I'm glad to hear that. Hopefully Carlsen will be World Champ in a few years, and then Kasparov will take up competitive chess again to challenge his former pupil in a match! ;) Well, I can dream anyway.


Thibault de Vassal    (2009-09-07 21:51:31)
Carlsen number 1

Now that Carlsen is training with Kasparov, how much time before being ranked number 1 in FIDE ratings according to you ?


Nick Burrows    (2009-09-11 23:30:23)
Kasparov interview

Here he talks about Carlsen and their work together..

https://webcast.chessclub.com/blog/2009/09/11/kasparov-on-training/#more-1801


Thibault de Vassal    (2009-09-23 10:34:53)
Long interview

Kasparov : "I am more an aggressive player, Magnus is more of a Karpov-like player"

Full interview :

http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=5773

What do you think about that ? :)


Thibault de Vassal    (2009-09-23 11:12:43)
Kasparov leads 2-0

Too bad, I cannot find videos of the games on Youtube :/


Thibault de Vassal    (2009-09-24 01:00:06)
Games 1 & 2

What do you think about the final positions ?




Thibault de Vassal    (2009-09-24 13:35:23)
Kasparov vs. Karpov in Valencia, video

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fKxfN9SaikQ


Simultaneous games by Kasparov & Karpov :

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u23OFWxaowc


Thibault de Vassal    (2009-09-24 14:13:33)
Karpov wins game 3

.. but he lost game 4, Kasparov leads 3-1




Thibault de Vassal    (2009-09-24 14:43:00)
Kasparov wins 3-1

Oops, actually Kasparov won the match already.

The final score: 3-1, quite logical and a nice promotion for chess in the world !


Thibault de Vassal    (2009-09-28 17:31:29)
Final score 9-3

Kasparov beats Karpov 9-3 (as their ratings predicted).

Nice match, with quite few draws compared to their previous World Championship matches :)


Thibault de Vassal    (2009-09-29 20:17:35)
Carlsen leads the Nanjing tournament

The Nanjing tournament starts quite well for Magnus Carlsen, who won his first game with the scotch opening against Peter Leko (maybe the influence of Garry Kasparov), and won his second game against Veselin Topalov !






Thibault de Vassal    (2009-10-05 19:20:02)
Shaking hands with Kasparov

Obviously, there's at least one member of this small lucky club here :)

http://www.ficgs.com/player_767.html

Lucky Pablo ! (see bottom of page)


John Smith    (2009-11-13 18:19:12)
thanks for your responses

I see, it is a quite unexplored area.

Have engines advanced really that much though? Surely, there has been progress, but I did an experiment, I annotated some of my games using Fritz6 and Fritz 11. What caught me off guard was the fact that their 1st recommendation was the same everywhere, and in fact, oddly, Fritz 6 converged first to the "correct" reply.

They still sometimes fail to find some critical moves made by positional masters like Karpov or Kramnik. Of course they have also found many moves of their own (Bxh2!? vs Kasparov) which were not even considered by human masters.

Since my initial questions are probably on too abstract grounds, I'd like to ask a purchase question. I will buy Rybka soonish, however I was wondering if it is worth purchasing other engines as well.

- Is Shredder 12 worth it? are there some parts of the game where it does better than Rybka?

- Are they planning to release a new Deep Junior?

- Is the old Deep Junior 11 worth it, or because it hasn't been updated, even in positions where its strengths lie it has been surpasses by other engines?


Nick Burrows    (2009-11-29 03:19:18)
What would Kasparov's Ficgs rating be?

Just out of curiosity, are there any educated guesses as to what Gary Kasparov's Ficgs rating would be if he played seriously but without any computer analysis?

I noticed GM Nigel Davies played here and his rating was in the 2300's and i suspect without computer assistance, though i'm not at all sure about that.

Kasparov = 2500??


Thibault de Vassal    (2009-11-29 17:15:18)
Nigel Davies & Garry Kasparov

Hi Nick,

Nigel Davies played with computer assistance but IMO only to verify his moves, he was very creative in some games. As for Garry Kasparov, if I remember well, he said a long time ago that he could become easily the best correspondence chess player (if assisted by computers, I guess). However I'm not sure if his preparations for OTB chess would be useful here, but most probably he could achieve this. Hard to predict what rating he could reach as a centaur, maybe 2650-2700....... Without computer assistance, it would be much harder, maybe 2300-2350 ..

It seems to me that Peter Leko played some games at ICCF, without so much success also, right?


Daniel Parmet    (2010-01-22 21:44:09)
Quote festival, part 6

Check out this beauty: "Excelling at chess has long been considered a symbol of more general intelligence. That is an incorrect assumption in my view, as pleasant as it might be. But for the purposes of argument and investigation, chess is, in Russkin-Gutman's words, "an unparalleled laboratory, since both the learning process and the degree of ability obtained can be objectified and quantified, providing an excellent comparative framework on which to use rigorous analytical techniques.""-Kasparov


Don Groves    (2010-01-26 06:42:48)
Kasparov article on computers in chess

http://www.nybooks.com/articles/23592?utm_medium=email&utm_source=Emailmarketingsoftware&utm_content=854563622&utm_campaign=February112010issue+_+olrukk&utm_term=TheChessMasterandtheComputer


Thibault de Vassal    (2010-01-26 10:42:07)
Kasparov article on computers in chess

A must read...

The end of the article on computers & Poker is interesting too. Not a word on the game of Go, too bad.

I will quote this: "Perhaps chess is the wrong game for the times (Garry Kasparov, 2010)"


Simone Calvello    (2010-09-08 19:36:11)
Magnus Carlsen vs. The World

http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=6647

Here's Chessbase link. Here I saw that even Kasparov will give some tips to the World Team.


Daniel Parmet    (2010-10-12 01:40:51)
Road to Grandmaster

You know this little blog and chessbase article has sparked a debate on whether people believe in whether its possible for a 1900 21 yearold to ever make GM.

Despite the fact I've constantly said it is. I've been told i'm flat wrong again and again by every person i've talked to. But I don't understand why, Kasparov said Talent is all a matter of time and effort. I don't see why not. The reason kids excel at chess is because they have no responsibilities. They have PURE time and when a kid gets attached to something... their effort is also unwavering.

I have offered the answer that the problems with adults improving is mostly the fact they have too many demands on their time already (work, family, school, other hobbies) or lack proper motivation (getting too easily discouraged or not wanting to work on their weaknesses).

However, I've noticed the naysayers tend to fall into three camps. 1) The camp that says talent is genetic and you can't make up for it regardless of how much you work. 2) People that say 21 is too old, only kids can improve. These people irk me the most. I have only been playing chess for 2 years and I went from 1000 to 1900 in under a year because I spent alot of time on it. I see no reason why any other adult can't do the exact same. Granted 1000 to 1900 is not 1900 to 2500 + 3 norms... but the point remains the same: time and hardwork. I think here multiple studies about the 10,000 hours required to master an activity is relevant. 3) People that are flat out freaking jealous. They know they themselves won't make GM or maybe even IM so they decry anyone else that wants to try.

Anyways, curious what others peoples thoughts are?


Don Groves    (2012-02-10 16:16:53)
annotated games

The Wikichess rules state:

"To add a complete game in Wikichess, just enter all moves and a commentary at the very last move, starting with "End of game : ", in example...

End of game : G. Kasparov - A. Karpov : 1/2-1/2 (Moscow)"

So it seems it is possible to add any game.


Alvin Alcala    (2012-08-18 07:34:30)
This is Russia :(

The biggest blunder of Kasparov in his entire life is entering politics. It's simply not his game! :(


Rolf Staggat    (2012-08-18 17:56:35)
This is Russia :(

No sad day for me.....

This man still thinks, he is the most important person in the world.

He only went to "Pussy Riot", because he wants to be seen on TV. He hates people like the Pussies, but he thinks it is good for HIM to provocate in front of the cameras of west-medias.

He does not know, what is reality. So now some policemen have to show him, what is real. No average intelligent person would try to find that out.

He never will be president of Russia, to be against Putin does not mean to be for Kasparov.

Kasparov only thinks in "white" or "black", but there are many more colours in real life.

By the way, the Pussies would never be known outside Russia with the noise that they call music. Now they have the time to learn.

2014 number 1 in all charts:
"Pussy Riot featuring Grandmaster Garry" the new super-group with their new song "Who is the greatest idiot"

I more prefer Grandmaster Flash.....He knows about real life.


Thibault de Vassal    (2012-08-18 22:50:27)
This is Russia :(

I have no clear idea yet on Kasparov's way in politics & in Russia, but surely I agree with you Rolf on Grandmaster Flash vs. Pussy Riot feat. Grandmaster Gary !


Dmitri Mamrukov    (2012-08-19 03:29:18)
This is Russia :(

Both Kasparov and Ruzin are provocateurs. No sensible Russian citizen would write this title. It's like an American posting "This is America :(" just based on

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/07/14-specific-allegations-of-nypd-brutality-during-occupy-wall-street/260295/

http://www.chrgj.org/projects/suppressingprotest.pdf


Dmitri Mamrukov    (2012-08-19 03:56:37)
This is Russia :(

Kasparov is a well-paid shill of the globalist power.

"Is Kasparov an anomaly or does he fit right in with this coven of far-right loonies? And who are some of the prominent members of the Center for Security Policy? Richard Perle, Douglas Feith, Frank Gaffney, James Roche and Laura Ingraham. Oh, boy. The whole front office of the neocon’s cuckoo’s nest. Now tell me, dear reader, with friends like that; what should we really think about Kasparov’s performance in Moscow? Is he really interested in "democracy promotion" as he claims or is their acting out a script that was prepared in Washington?"

http://www.counterpunch.org/2007/12/05/why-murdoch-s-journal-loves-kasparov/


Mikhail Ruzin    (2012-08-19 09:33:40)
This is Russia :(

"Both Kasparov and Ruzin ..." it is fine! :)


Thibault de Vassal    (2012-08-19 14:07:45)
What happened to Boris Spassky?

After Kasparov vs. Putin, now Spassky vs. ??

A strange story... maybe we'll learn more soon on his last 2 years in french hospitals. Quite hard to conclude anything right now.

http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=8417


Vadim Khachaturov    (2012-08-19 22:32:38)
This is Russia :(

Rolf, pussies arent the matter. The matter is that its possible in Russia today to be prosecuted as criminal and adjudged that without commiting a crime. Today its PR, tomorrow it will be anybody who cares about freedom and says "wrong" words about putin.It is a pure political case and Kasparov just says about that. And , of course, Kasparov and many others, who there were at the court on Friday, know, Rolf, the bitter russian reality far and far better, than You can imagine.


Dmitri Mamrukov    (2012-08-19 23:04:16)
This is Russia :(

Vadim, you're right - "Pussy Riot" is a purely political case. But what are its roots?

The real reason why the Western media outlets have been so keen on covering the "Pussy Riot" trial has nothing to do with "free speech."

"Pussy Riot" and Kasparov are not victims. They are US State Department-backed instruments of corporate-financier hegemony, used as leverage against a Russian government standing in the way of Wall Street and London's order of international corporatocracy.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=32395


Dmitri Mamrukov    (2012-08-19 23:12:08)
This is Russia :(

EURO: I would like to move from chess to politics. What do you think about the proclamations of Garry Kasparov, do you see the Russian political reality in a similar light?

KRAMNIK: I disagree with him. It seems to me that his political opinions are empty. Garry is too destructive for my liking. According to him, everything in Russia is wrong, Putin did everything wrong. But that is simply not true. I am convinced that if Kasparov wants to be in politics he needs to offer something positive too, something constructive. Even in the field of human rights protection in Russia there are a number of people doing a lot. Apart from criticising, they create something positive too, by helping some people. Garry’s approach to everything is just demagogic and destructive. I disagree with his opinion that the situation in Russia is as critical as he sees it. I go there often, my brother and my parents live there, so I think I have a pretty good insight. If you want to judge the current situation in Russia you must not take single aspects of it out of the general picture. It is the same as judging a position during a chess game – you need to bear in mind an entire chessboard.

Of course Russia is not a democracy on the same level as countries such as Germany or France, but you cannot judge today’s situation without taking in the historical context. Russia had never been a democratic country in the past, so that is why the transition is not easy. Nevertheless, nowadays eighty percent of the Russian population is not forced to fight for their existence, as they had to, some ten, fifteen years ago.

http://www.kramnik.com/eng/interviews/getinterview.aspx?id=178


Thibault de Vassal    (2012-08-21 16:23:20)
This is politics

I remember this interview of Kramnik with very good things said (I have no idea on the last part though, even if I have no doubt that things went in the right direction... fast enough or not. Quote: "nowadays eighty percent of the Russian population is not forced to fight for their existence, as they had to, some ten, fifteen years ago.")

But if things must not evolve too fast (as it probably happened in Russia 15-20 years ago), it is likely that both US (or European countries) & Russia don't even envisage to go the right way these times on political issues, mainly because the ones who control it don't want it. There are many more or less complex & historical reasons to this of course, completely logical, but anyway it could be better and even if Kasparov was paid by US or whoever, it looks quite logical & reasonable to ask for some deep changes in Russia too...

I try to keep a sociological view rather than an ideological one. I do not defend one existing system more than other ones, but unfortunately in most situations the power tends to protect itself too much "in order to" protect citizens, that is true in a good part but there also start many problems. It is still fine to me when citizens have choice and can leave easily but that's not so easy in our world.


Thibault de Vassal    (2012-10-09 18:52:25)
WCH Final match

Of course this correspondence chess championship is very different from FIDE WCH, but it seems to me that 12 games is still enough (24 games would be quite inhuman by the way), the score in the latest final matches was not significant on the draws issue, particularly now that we all know how Eros deals with it (in a smart way that can be compared to Kramnik's strategy in his match vs. Kasparov: draw with Berlin's defence, fight with White if no risk). IMO the champion has nothing to prove as he made it in a whole cycle and by beating the previous one, while a challenger should at least be able to win one game out of 12.

Actually the real evolution should have been towards freestyle chess, but it has no success enough to organize a whole cycle and it looks like Eros is the king as well. Also I don't like the idea to melt different time controls like FIDE does. The whole challenge is about one thing, not 3 or 4 differents kinds of games.

I love the past tradition not because it is a tradition, but because I really think it is the best system so far! If a new system proves to be better to me (there will always be a question of taste though, of course) then we would have to discuss it here.

The only way to encourage players to try for wins is to go towards the ICCF format, that has other issues that I wanted to avoid at any price. And why to do the same?


Thibault de Vassal    (2013-01-16 17:14:06)
FICGS admin scam me

Well, obviously you do not have any idea about what computer chess is... there are thousands of fans all over the world, full forums only about that, even the very best chess players in the world like to play it (Kasparov, Anand, Polgar, Ivanchuk...)

You still do not understand that this has nothing to do with avarice. Noone here wants to see such a system to be implemented.... first of all because it cannot be 100% sure (it would be very easy to cheat anyway), then everyone would suspect everyone to cheat... FICGS is a peaceful place (without counting 2 or 3 players out of hundreds/thousands) so this is fine like it is. For information we also offer NO_ENGINES_TOURNAMENTS for those who want to play with their brain only, but it is not rated... for the same reasons.

We have no problem that a few players cannot understand it at the end, but we do not need to hear again and again that computer chess is "lazy" or "dishonest", that is just untrue and insulting.

About your 7 euros, all has been said, I've nothing to add. This is not a bank, if you want a money prize, you know what to do (starting to read the terms & conditions).


Horatiu Adrian Petrescu    (2013-01-16 17:56:29)
FICGS admin scam me

I was expecting at your shit answer,how else can think a man of greed carried to absurd.You are a man without morals and scruples.I cast pearls before swine.
Anand and Kasparov no play against computer for money stupido.You infantile ?
"None here wants to see such a system to be implemented":))) Hey arrogant boy I am nobody? I am member here since 2009.And how you know everybody else no wants ,you asked them ? Stupid and inflated admin.
And how many times you will repeat like a parrot that this site is not a bank so often I will say myself IS A BANK FOR YOURSELF. Everybody can see.


Thibault de Vassal    (2013-10-08 11:57:05)
Kasparov candidate for FIDE president

Is Kasparov back in the chess world?

"Six winning moves" is his program and obviously money is the key.

Do you think he has a chance to unseat 18-year incumbent Kirsan Ilyumzhinov in this 2014 election?

http://www.chessbase.com/Home/TabId/211/PostId/4011444/kasparov-for-president--2014-fide-campaign-081013.aspx


Bogoljub Teverovski    (2013-10-18 12:08:10)
Kasparov candidate for FIDE president

Garry has a chance. My estimation is 50/50.


Garvin Gray    (2013-10-18 14:37:25)
Kasparov candidate for FIDE president

Money has nothing to do with it at all. It all has to do with the votes of the dodgy african nations. You know. The ones who have one vote, the same number of votes as federations that have thousands of fide rated players, but do not have a single fide rated player.

One vote per federation, no matter how many fide rated players or members you have. So is it all a matter of how much you can bribe or offer the african nations.


Alvin Alcala    (2013-10-18 14:52:47)
Kasparov candidate for FIDE president

It's politics, he has no chance.


Dmitri Mamrukov    (2013-10-22 21:16:49)
Kasparov candidate for FIDE president

Evgeny Bareev: Subjective speculations on the strange Kasparov-Karpov tandem

http://www.onefide.com/2010/05/28/kasparov-and-karpov-are-playing-another-game-this-time-a-political-one-by-igm-evgeny-bareev/


Thibault de Vassal    (2016-07-03 02:06:18)
Chess World CHAMPIONSHIP

The rules specify that (in other words) "all games draw means retaining title". You may consider it as a win... or not. But in all cases, Eros did what was necessary to take then retain the title according to the rules.

Btw, it happened in 1987 with Kasparov vs. Karpov.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Chess_Championship_1987

"In modern times there will be no winner if there is no gain": That's a choice... but many people were deceived to see blitz games or so to decide championships initially played at classical time controls. As for me, I would feel the same if a correspondence chess champ was decided by a few advanced chess games.

Finally, I completely understand your point of view, but is this an absolute truth?


Jan Ohlin    (2016-08-09 11:52:23)
Chess World CHAMPIONSHIP

In WCH Quarter Final 000016 there will be more wins because this time we play more closed openings. It´s the best chance in advanced chess to win I think.
I will never forget last game Kasparov - Karpov 1987...


Thibault de Vassal    (2017-08-28 21:56:28)
Kasparovs comeback in chess

A summary of the former world champion's performance in St Louis tournament with Caruana, Anand, Navara, Aronian, Karjakin, Dominguez Perez, Nakamura, Le & a few others... and Garry Kasparov of course.

http://en.chessbase.com/post/kasparov-in-st-louis-a-closer-look

Well, it was just blitz & rapid but maybe a first step before a true comeback? Anyway, he did better than Viswanathan Anand (that's not meaningless) and a few games are worth a glance in my opinion.


Ilmars Cirulis    (2017-08-28 22:00:48)
Kasparovs comeback in chess

<< erreur requete related 2 >>

:(


Herbert Kruse    (2017-09-01 20:14:42)
Kasparovs comeback in chess

i didnt see any good theoretical choices from him, in my opinion he is far away from the state of the art theory

but he is a good fighter, if he can be more concentrated or physical strengh were better he could win, because the positions were chaotic and he is a still very good tactical player :)


Thibault de Vassal    (2017-10-19 20:05:55)
Morozevich speaking of chess & Go

An interesting interview from the now rare & still incredible Alexander Morozevich (well known for his creativity & spectacular chess), speaking about Go, Deepmind's AlphaGo, Kasparov's return (or not) & other things...

https://chess24.com/en/read/news/morozevich-on-go-computers-and-cheating


Thibault de Vassal    (2018-03-14 23:12:38)
A few questions to Nelson Bernal Varela

Nelson Bernal Varela is an early FICGS correspondence chess player, now rated 2277 but also rated 2359 at ICCF (Correspondence Chess Master - CCM).

Last but not least, and as all poker holdem players here probably noticed, he is also our ranked #1 for years, who just reached an outstanding poker rating of 2382, while number two is now rated "only" 2212. A good occasion to ask him a few questions, that he kindly accepted to answer.

-----------------------

- Hello Nelson! You are the 2nd most active player at FICGS for years now. Everyone here probably noticed your incredible results in poker tournaments. "Correspondence poker holdem" was probably a strange idea as it is very unusual and very different from "Internet poker". What's your opinion on this and on the presence of a card game (played without money) at FICGS?


NBV: There are more important things than money and one of those is HONOR; It is honorable to be a chess master, international master, grandmaster, world chess champion at ICCF and at FICGS and to be number one in the ranking. It is honorable to be a FICGS world champion at Go and to be first in the ranking, it is honorable to be poker world champion at FICGS poker and in my case, it is an honor to be number one at poker here at FICGS during the last years, understanding that our general level of play has improved remarkably. None of these activities produces money, but to achieve any of the mentioned titles, it is necessary to have extraordinary abilities.

When I was about 18 years old, I had the opportunity to meet a person with immense material wealth, we spent whole evenings playing chess and then I told him my perceptions about each movement of the game. He thanked me for my chess explanations and paid me with good money. That wealthy man in his turn told me about life and recommended that I should always be proud of the gifts I had, since he knew, with all the money he had and being able to hire the best grandmasters in the world, that it could hardly come at the level of chess master. That person told me that the intellect can be turned into money whenever you want.

Now, by playing poker without money at FICGS, I understood that it was my extraordinary and wonderful opportunity to study-learn-perfect and test my poker theories without costing me a single dollar. In FICGS there is no money, but thanks to the knowledge I gained playing poker in FICGS, today I can go after the money in online poker rooms and probably in OTB poker tournaments. I am studying the possibility of becoming a professional poker player.


- The understanding of your opponent's behaviour is usually quite important at Poker. Do you manage to establish some profiles while playing so many simultaneous hands & games? Did you build any method?


NBV: Today I am sure that the most important thing to raise, and keep raising my level in poker, has been to build a psychological profile of mine, to get to know Nelson Bernal Varela in depth and above all to understand me, accept me, love me and be work every day eliminating my technical errors, strategic, psychological that make me play badly. I am aware that in poker I can play perfectly and still lose, what I can not forgive me is playing badly, which is why I work hard correcting my wrong decisions.

Of course, there is a space in my brain where I have built a psychological profile of each contender, that profile I have been able to elaborate with all the information that is provided to me in each hand we play. The way each of us plays, gives reliable information about our personality.

About my method I can write the following: A few years ago, I created a table in excel, where I had all the games with each contender, I identified them with the FICGS numeration and each movement in each hand (preflop, flop, turn, river ) it I was writing and studying; I started to add technical-psychological variables that seemed important to me, resulting in 20 variables that I had to qualify in each movement. With the passage of time and my effort, I no longer needed the excel table and I did not use it again (it was exhausting and time consuming) because I was assimilating things faster and with greater depth. Today I can say that I evaluate these 20 variables in a natural way, as if I was breathing and that when I am at a poker table, online or real, after a few minutes I get the psychological profile of the table and each of my opponents. In the pocket of my shirt I keep a small paper with the list of variables, periodically reread it and I wonder if I should modify, remove or add something.


- You won 1007 poker games, and lost only 380, with a ratio usually going from 57% to 80% according to your best opponents. Undoubtly you know the mathematics hidden behind poker but that may not explain everything. How did you learn to play?


NBV: Mathematics is an ingredient in poker, in the same way that my psychological aspects and of my opponents (I recommend reading-studying about four times the book “The Poker mindset” of Ian Taylor and Matthew Hilger), it is vital to understand the Law of Large Numbers. Next I make a list of topics that I consider important to raise the level of poker; compete with EV+ cards, you have to know the small ball theory of Negreanu (but not apply it, hahaha) you have to always look at the texture of the board, you have to evaluate your reality and your future, also that of your opponents (act and power), the position to talk is important, the stack, the personality of the table, know who has the panic button on. All these and other variables must be evaluated in the few seconds they have to make a move and the only important thing is to make the right decision according to the circumstances. There is a good list of poker books to read... it is mandatory to have read about 15 poker books.


- As for me, I may be wrong but I can't imagine that you reached such a rating without special techniques & maybe by optimizing it in some ways... Of course, "rating management" is not a problem, and it is only one thing with a limited impact, but maybe you have some other secrets? What about this "+1" technique that I noticed in many of our games, if this is not a secret? :)


NBV: In these years I have used different techniques that I had to read, study, learn, repeat, modify, invent and sometimes eliminate. Poker is a sport that seems easy, with time one manages to understand that it has an amazing complexity, today I consider poker to be as complex as chess and I study them in a "similar" way. As an example, I have tried to create "openings in poker"; based only on probabilities I invented something that I called mirror theory and another "opening" that I called opposite outs. I am fascinated by mathematics and from the mathematical perspective they are perfect "theories-openings", but I have lost tournaments and a lot of money for applying such theories in mistaken emotional moments. In poker it is important to never lose sight of the Law of Large Numbers and be aware that this LAW likes to make fun of each one of us... I am working on giving an emotional nuance to my theories "mirror" and "opposite outs". There are moments when perfect mathematics becomes an unforgivable psychological error...

For the last few months I have modified my way of playing and my results have improved; Today it must be much more difficult to win a game me, thanks to small and imperceptible adjustments that of course only I know, because I have followed my mistakes-successes-evolution in the game over several years.


- Isn't it too frustrating for you to play heads up only (here at least) ? Of course it is a way to improve this important technical case but we know that many complexities come with 3 to 8 players on the table, which is the most common case in professional poker tournaments.


NBV: Currently I spend little time every day playing heads-up in FICGS, thanks to the fact that I have the profile of each contender. The 4-5 hours that I study poker daily, include practice in micro limits in cash tables of 6 players and tournaments in tables of 8-9 players. I think I'm covering the whole range of possibilities, experiencing game situations between 1 and 8 contenders.


- What do you think about computer analysis in poker? Do you think it could make a difference here just like the way we play advanced chess?


NBV: I think the algorithms are ready to be written in machine language and the question is where are those algorithms? Well, in the brains of the best players in the world and in their games compiled in huge databases. But programming language can be accelerated with artificial intelligence brains, making A.I. studying databases of the best professionals, playing with itself millions of games and building an invincible TACTIC-STRATEGIC SYSTEM, similar to chess software and GO... I think preflop and flop play would be very similar between humans and artificial intelligence, but on the turn and on the river artificial intelligence would take considerable advantage, but in the short time the level of human poker would rise because artificial intelligence would teach us to play poker, this event that would diminish the profits of the professionals. It will always be said in favor of poker that because it is an incomplete game of information, to make computer algorithms are quite complicated, but despite that, I am sure that artificial intelligence will far surpass the best human poker player. It is possible that an artificial intelligence that plays a perfect poker already exists, but unlike GO and chess, poker does produce a lot of money. Due to the money factor, in today's world, it is very difficult that there is a Prometheus willing to steal fire from the gods and give it to mankind...


- How would you describe your relation to games in general?


NBV: I can summarize it in one of the first chess books I had the fortune to read, by the great Danish master Bent Larsen, "I play to win"


- When did you start to play chess & poker? Do you play other games?


NBV: My first contact with chess was at the age of nine, it was love at first sight and until death separates us; I must confess that for some years we have been separated, due to my stupidity and my erroneous decisions. I have always been self-taught in any subject, my method is to buy about 10 to 15 books of the subject that interests me and I read them thoroughly, sometimes 3 or 4 times; already with that information in my head and thanks to the constant practice, I build MY SYSTEM (Nimzowitch) according to my personality, my dreams, my desires, my anguish, my fears... I was youth champion of Bogotá, for 4 years , my OTB level was strong, but I had to abandon chess because I had to work and survive; Being an athlete in Colombia is an absolutely difficult thing, but being a chess player is extremely complicated since there is no support or respect from society and you can not live by chess, because it does not produce money.

I met poker in 2009 in FICGS, at that time I was in a terrible emotional situation, trying to get away from a relationship with a woman that I should never approach and where I wasted valuable time and energy. In that context, looking for my thoughts to be occupied, I ended up playing the FICGS C-24 poker tournament and tied the first place with three more players; I kept playing, without understanding what was happening with the cards and obviously, losing, until in 2010 I won the FICGS D-21 tournament with perfect score, 6 out of 6. I had already bought-read my first beginner book: Poker for Dummies of Harroch and Krieger, but my poker was coarse, wild, street, intuitive, amateur, without dedication or study. In the background of this paragraph, the affection and gratitude that I have for FICGS is condensed, a place where I have been able to build-practice-study-test MY SYSTEM in poker.

I play Backgammon, I do not care that it may sound pretentious-petulant, but I have a very strong level and I have not read my first book yet. Hahaha. Any year I register as a participant in the world championship and I will cause disgust to more than one professional. Hahaha. Unlike chess and poker, backgammon does not cause me stress, on the contrary, I feel a lot of joy and pleasure when I play backgammon. I feel something similar with math, reading and music. It's true and I'm proud, I've always been a NERD.


- We all know how difficult it is to reach a number 1 rank but it is even more difficult to keep it during a long time. What is your motivation? Do you have more goals to achieve (chess & other games included) ?


NBV: My motivation in any activity I undertake in my life is to do it with absolute passion (passion is everything you would do to get a breath of air, in the second before dying by drowning or suffocation).

I have several goals to accomplish before December 2021; In the ICCF correspondence chess I must reach the 2400 elo and get the titles of International Master, SIM and Grand Master, also perform outstanding performances in world championships. In FICGS Chess I must complete my Master and International Master titles and overcome the 2450 elo, also snatch the title from our eternal champion Eros Riccio. You're warned Eros, hahaha. On the LSS site where I also play, www.chess-server.net I want to be a world champion.

In POKER I find myself playing micro limits bets in several online sites; in June 2018 I hope I have built some bankroll. In July of 2018 I must be evaluating my poker to know if my immediate goal is to become a professional poker player, that would completely change my chess goals and I would have to dedicate myself to OTB poker. At the moment I study and practice poker every day, about 4-5 hours a day. At this moment my poker is full of errors that I am eliminating one by one. MY SYSTEM needs to win and raise money in the micro limits, so that it can succeed in professional poker.
In chess OTB I should become a great master, but that topic should be left as a goal for after 2021. I could achieve the record of being the oldest human in getting the title of Grand Master OTB. Hahaha.

In backgammon I would like to play some important tournaments in USA and Europe and maybe to be OTB world champion, but at the moment I do not have clarity on how to do it. I must mature that idea.
I hope they invent immortality before I die and that I have enough money to buy it, because time is what I need to realize all these and other dreams...


- Finally, playing so many games on several websites (obviously with serious ambitions in each game & place) may look quite inhuman and exhausting, does your body or brain say "stop" sometimes? Do you train by melting sports and brain games just like Kasparov did in the past?


NBV: It's true, it takes willpower and a lot of resistance to sustain the pace that I carry. To take care of my body, I am doing daily exercise for 60 to 90 minutes, including routines of strength, elasticity, speed and endurance. I also practice table tennis to preserve the agility of my body. I'm also divorced and I do not have a girlfriend... Hahaha


- By curiosity, do you consider playing Go in the future, even after... 2021? (which would surely be an enormous charge more, but the game is really interesting)


I have a kind of commitment with the best Colombian GO player, exchange of classes, he makes me a competitive player of GO and I turn him into a competitive player of backgammon. But the truth is that I do not have time... it could be after 2021...


- Do you confirm that you are not (entirely or partly) AlphaZero or any kind of A.I. (yet) ? :-)


NBV: Hahaha, of course I would like to be a real centaur, human with machine power, I do not care what physical form I should adopt. I offer myself publicly as a guinea pig in projects of technological singularity. Hahaha


- Many thanks for your detailed and instructive (impressive as well) answers! My best wishes of luck in all your games and future tournaments.


Paul Larwinski    (2018-11-15 23:01:14)
Carlsen Caruana wch match

do you all think the wch matches between Kasparov and Karpov were more exciting ? not the first long match


Thibault de Vassal    (2018-11-17 18:56:30)
Carlsen Caruana wch match

As for me, I was not able to follow the 1st Kasparov-Karpov match, but well, it was a complete different context, with probably other kinds of excitement added to the chess thing. I can't really compare but a fact is that about noone is aware of this Carlsen-Caruana event. Finally, I'm not sure if it can be compared in any way.


Paul Larwinski    (2018-11-17 19:28:43)
Carlsen Caruana wch match

i meant the exciting chess games between Kasparov and Karpov in wch matches, they have both played other openings and mostly main famous lines.

everyone can see Kasparov-Karpov games in chess database

first game of Carlsen - Caruana wch match was exciting too , winning chances


Thibault de Vassal    (2019-03-27 21:05:13)
Leela Chess Zero & neural networks

... and I'm afraid that legislation advances much slower than research in A.I. fields :)

By the way, Gary Kasparov talking about artificial intelligence:

https://www.information-age.com/kasparov-and-ai-123481118/


Juri Eintalu    (2022-05-09 19:58:15)
FIDE BANS KARJAKIN

Karjakin's Appeal was Dismissed by FIDE

Thus, Karjakin still cannot play in the candidates tournament because he publicly approved the Russian invasion of Ukraine.

Karjakin, in turn, writes (on his Telegram channel) as a response that he is proud that his grandfather was a great soldier, also, that there are Nazis in Ukraine.

He criticises Kasparov.

Kasparov demands that Russian chess players who want to play in international tournaments should publicly disapprove Russian invasion of Ukraine.


Juri Eintalu    (2022-05-09 20:00:46)
FIDE BANS KARJAKIN

I am worried about Kasparov's demand that only those Russian players should be allowed to participate in international tournaments who publicly disapprove Russian invasion of Ukraine. This demand seems to be extremist, like Lenin's and Stalin's slogans.

First, not every Russian sportsman can have the luxury of being a dissident.

Second, Kasparov is notoriously inconsistent (outside of the chessboard). From his logic, it follows that FIDE should have banned all the US chess players who did not publicly disapprove of invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan.




There are 16 results for kasparov in wikichess.


Thibault de Vassal    (2407)
e4 e5 Bc4

The Bishop's Opening is one of the oldest openings to be analyzed; it was studied by Lucena and Ruy Lopez. Later it was played by Philidor. Larsen was one of the few grandmasters to play it often, after first using it at the 1964 Interzonal Tournament. Although the Bishop's Opening is uncommon today, it has been used occasionally as a surprise by players such as Kasparov and Nunn.

White attacks Black's f7-square and prevents Black from advancing his d-pawn to d5. By ignoring the beginner's rule, "develop knights before bishops", White leaves his f-pawn unblocked allowing the possibility of playing f4. This gives the Bishop's Opening an affinity to the King's Gambit and the Vienna Game, two openings that share this characteristic. In fact, the Bishop's Opening can transpose into the King's Gambit or the Vienna Game, and transpositions into Giuoco Piano and Two Knights Defense and other openings are also possible. In particular, White should remain alert for any chance to transpose into a favorable variation of the King's Gambit, but with careful play Black can avoid this danger.

According to Chessbase, white chances are about 55%

============

Contributors : Thibault de Vassal


Thibault de Vassal    (2407)
c4

The English Opening is the fourth most popular opening move in chess. White begins the fight for the center by staking a claim to the d5 square. Common responses are 1...e5 (which can lead to positions similar to the Sicilian Defence but with opposite colors), 1...c5 (the Symmetrical Variation), and 1...Nf6. Also perfectly playable are 1...e6 (often leading to a Queen's Gambit Declined after 2.d4 d5) and 1...c6 (often leading to a Slav Defence after 2.d4 d5, a Caro-Kann Defence after 2.e4 d5, or a Reti Opening after 2.Nf3 d5 3.b3).

The English is a very flexible opening. Although many lines of the English have a distinct character, it often transposes into other openings. If White plays an early d4, the game will usually transpose into either the Queen's Gambit or an Indian defence.

The English derives its name from the English (unofficial) world champion, Howard Staunton, who played it during his 1843 match with Amant. It fell out of favor (the opening was notably disdained by Morphy), but is now recognized as a solid opening that may be used to reach both classical and hypermodern positions. Botvinnik, Karpov, and Kasparov all employed it during their world championship matches. Bobby Fischer created a stir when he switched to it from the King's Pawn against Boris Spassky in 1972.

============

Contributors : Thibault de Vassal


Thibault de Vassal    (2407)
d4 Nf6 c4 g6

The King's Indian Defence is a chess opening that begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 followed by ...Bg7 and ...d6. The King's Indian is a "hypermodern" opening, where Black lets White take the center with the view to later ruining White's "wonderful" position, often by an attack on White's king. It is a risky opening, which has been a favourite of players such as former world champions Garry Kasparov, Bobby Fischer and Tigran Petrosian. Prominent grandmasters John Nunn, Svetozar Gligoric, Wolfgang Uhlmann, and Larry Christiansen have also played this opening frequently.

According to Chessbase, black chances are about 42%

============

Contributors : Thibault de Vassal


Thibault de Vassal    (2407)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 d4

The Scotch Game received its name from a correspondence match in 1824 between Edinburgh and London. Popular in the 19th century, by 1900 the Scotch had lost favor among top players because it was thought to release the central tension too early and allow Black to equalize without difficulty. More recently the Scotch has regained some popularity and it has been used by grandmasters Kasparov and Timman as a surprise weapon to avoid the well-analyzed Ruy Lopez.

According to Chessbase, white chances are about 57%

============

Contributors : Thibault de Vassal


Thibault de Vassal    (2407)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bc4 Bc5 b4

The gambit is named after Captain William Davies Evans, the first player known to have employed it. The first game with the opening is considered to be Evans - McDonnell, London 1827, although in that game a slightly different move order was tried (1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Bc5 4. O-O d6 and only now 5. b4). The gambit became very popular shortly after that, being employed a number of times in the series of games between McDonnell and Louis de la Bourdonnais in 1834. Players such as Adolf Anderssen, Paul Morphy and Mikhail Chigorin subsequently took it up. It was out of favour for much of the 20th century, although John Nunn and Jan Timman played some games with it in the late 1970s and early 1980s, and in the 1990s Garry Kasparov used it in a few of his games (notably a famous 25-move win against Viswanathan Anand in Riga, 1995), which prompted a brief revival of interest in it.

The Evans Gambit is basically an aggressive variant of the Giuoco Piano, which normally continues with the positional moves 4. c3 or 4. d3. The idea behind the move 4. b4 is to give up a pawn in order to secure a strong centre and bear down on Black's weak-point, f7. Ideas based on Ba3, preventing black from castling, are also often in the air. The most obvious and most usual way for Black to meet the gambit is to accept it with 4... Bxb4, after which White plays 5. c3 and Black usually follows up with 5... Ba5 (5... Be7 and, less often 5... Bc5 and 5... Bd6 are also played). White usually follows up with 6. d4.

============

Contributors : Thibault de Vassal


Thibault de Vassal    (2407)
d4 Nf6 c4 g6 Nc3 d5

The Grünfeld Defence is named after Ernst Grünfeld, the player who first employed the defence in the 1920s. The defence was later adopted by a number of prominent players, including Vasily Smyslov, Viktor Korchnoi and Bobby Fischer. Garry Kasparov has often used the defence, including in his World Championship matches against Anatoly Karpov in 1986, 1987 and 1990, and Vladimir Kramnik in 2000. In more recent years it has been regularly employed by Loek Van Wely, Peter Svidler and Luke McShane among others.

The opening relies on one of the main principles of the hypermodern school, which was coming to the fore in the 1920s - that a large pawn centre could be a liability rather than an asset. This idea is seen most clearly in the Exchange Variation of the defence: 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 d5 4.cxd5 Nxd5 5.e4. Now White has an imposing looking centre - and the main continuation 5...Nxc3 bxc3 strengthens it still further. Black generally attack's White's centre with ...c5 and ...Bg7, often followed by moves like ...cxd4, ...Bg4, and ...Nc6. White often uses his big centre to launch an attack against Black's king, which generally ends up on g8 after Black castles king-side.

============

Contributors : Thibault de Vassal


Thibault de Vassal    (2407)
d4 Nf6 c4 g6 Nc3 Bg7

The King's Indian defense is a "hypermodern" opening, where Black lets White take the center with the view to later ruining White's "wonderful" position, often by an attack on White's king. It is a risky opening, which has been a favourite of players such as former world champions Garry Kasparov, Bobby Fischer and Tigran Petrosian. Prominent grandmasters John Nunn, Svetozar Gligoric, Wolfgang Uhlmann, and Larry Christiansen have also played this opening frequently.

============

Contributors : Thibault de Vassal


Thibault de Vassal    (2425)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 Nf6

The Berlin Defence is logical and solid, although it can be hard for Black to generate winning chances. Arthur Bisguier played this line for decades, and it was later taken up by Alexei Shirov and other young grandmasters. Vladimir Kramnik used the Berlin Defence as a drawing variation against Garry Kasparov in their 2000 World Championship match.

After 4.0-0, Black can play either the solid 4...Nxe4 or the more combative 4...Bc5. After 4...Nxe4 5.d4 (5.Re1 Nd6 6.Nxe5 is also reasonable) Nd6 6.Bxc6 dxc6 7.dxe5 Nf5 8.Qxd8+ (8.Qe2?! Nd4! 9.Nxd4 Qxd4 favors Black. After 10.Rd1, Bg4!? 11.Rxd4 Bxe2 gives Black a pleasant endgame.) Kxd8 White is usually considered to have a small advantage in light of his somewhat better pawn structure and Black's awkwardly placed king, but Black, with a solid position and the bishop pair, has excellent drawing chances.

============

Contributors : Julien Baudement, Tim Bredernitz, Thibault de Vassal


Andrew Stephenson    (2000)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Bc4 e6 Bb3 Nbd7

At one time thought to be unplayable for black was the main choice of Kasparov when facing Bc4
============

Contributors : Rémi Marois, Andrew Stephenson


Normajean Yates    (1946)
e4 a6


Kasparov - Tony Miles 0-1 starting 1.e4 a6.

============

Contributors : Dirk Jan Van Dijl, Normajean Yates


Thibault de Vassal    (2514)
d4 Nf6 c4 g6 Nc3 Bg7 e4 d6 Nf3 O-O Be2 e5 O-O Nc6 d5 Ne7 b4

The move that frightened Kasparov ?!

============

Contributors : Thibault de Vassal


Adam Goodwin    (1365)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O Be7 Re1 b5 Bb3 O-O a4

Garry Kasparov's introduction into the Anti-Marshall Theory.

============

Contributors : Adam Goodwin


Benjamin Block    (1419)
d4 d5 Nf3 c6

Played by the computer Deep blue round 6 vs Garry Kasparov 1996.

============

Contributors : Benjamin Block


Benjamin Block    (1397)
e4 c6 d4 d5 Nc3 dxe4 Nxe4 Nd7 Ng5

Played by deep blue vs Garry Kasparov 1997 1-0.

============

Contributors : Benjamin Block


Dan Geana    (1921)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e5 Ndb5 d6 Bg5 a6 Na3 b5 Nd5 Be7 Bxf6 Bxf6 c3 O-O Nc2 Rb8 h4

Move of Kasparov

============

Contributors : Dan Geana


Telmo Escobar    (1929)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Bg5 e6 f4 Qb6 Qd2 Qxb2 Rb1 Qa3 f5 Nc6 fxe6 fxe6 Nxc6 bxc6 e5 dxe5 Bxf6 gxf6 Ne4 Qxa2 Rd1 Be7 Be2 O-O O-O Ra7 Rf3 Rd7 Rg3+ Kh8 Qh6 Rxd1+ Bxd1 Rf7 Qh5 Qa5 Kf1 Qd8 Qxf7 Qxd1+ Kf2 Qxc2+


This is same drawn position as the game Vallejo-Kasparov, where 23...Qd5 (not 23...Qa5) was played.

============

Contributors : Telmo Escobar






FICGS : kasparov ,   Wikipedia : kasparov ,   Dmoz : kasparov ,   Google : kasparov ,   Yahoo : kasparov




The older I grow, the more I value pawns. (Paul Keres)

Chess is life. (Bobby Fischer)

Chess is a part of culture and if a culture is declining then Chess too will decline. (Mikhail Botvinnik)




Back to FICGS , Wikichess




[Chess forum] [Rating lists] [Countries] [Chess openings] [Legal informations] [Contact]
[Social network] [Hot news] [Discussions] [Seo forums] [Meet people] [Directory]