The last great Soviet Championship took place in 1988, and finished in a tie between Garry Kasparov and Anatoly Karpov. (There was supposed to be a 4-game playoff, but it never happened, and contrary to what is says here Kasparov did want the playoff.)
The tournament was ridiculously strong, featuring a host of other greats including former world champion Vasily Smyslov, former FIDE world champion Alexander Khalifman, Artur Yusupov (three times a semi-finalist in the Candidates matches), Valery Salov (once rated #3 in the world), Vassily Ivanchuk (one of the greatest contemporary players never to become world champion), two-time Candidate Leonid Yudasin, 1987 Candidates finalist Andrei Sokolov, multiple-time Candidate and former 2700 Alexander Beliavsky, former top-5 player Jaan Ehlvest, former Candidate Rafael Vaganian, former 2700 player Ilia Smirin, and former Candidate Mikhail Gurevich. Of course not all of the players were at their peak then, but they were still (or already) very strong, and the two super-Ks had to play very well to share first.
Anyhow, for those of you who like old footage, here's an (almost) 15-minute clip with footage from the event, showing plenty of scenes from the playing hall followed by and commentator GM Sergey Makarichev's presentation of Kasparov's famous win from that event against Ivanchuk.
I'm still not completely sold on the draw problem, but I am sure that blitz chess is garbage chess, and it should have as little place as possible - preferably none - in events with a classical component. Don't get me wrong: I enjoy playing blitz chess as much as the next person, even bullet chess. It's fun to play and fun to watch. But it's garbage chess, or to coin a phrase here, it's slapstick chess. The ideas are shallow, and blunders and wild swings of fortune are commonplace. (This isn't the rant of a curmudgeon who wants three hours per move. I've always been a very good blitz player - certainly compared to my classical rating, and back when ICC was THE chess server I made it onto almost every one of their "best" lists.)
The latest confirmation of this obvious fact was today's play in the London Chess Classic. Both semis were tied 1-1 after draws on days 1 and 2 (but for those who say, "Seeeeeeeeeeeee? Draws are a problem!", I say the "problem" was great defense: three of the four games could have been decisive), so today's agenda was a pair of rapid games followed by four blitz slapstick games.
The rapid games made sense. Starting with the Fabiano Caruana vs. Hikaru Nakamura match, game 1 was well-played. Nakamura pressed with White, Caruana defended well, and it was a long draw. Game 2 was a little odd: Caruana had some deep prep and had an advantage and a nice lead on the clock after 22 moves. Unfortunately for Caruana, he blitzed out his 23rd move as well, and it was inaccurate. (Maybe he forgot his prep, or misremembered, or just thought it was a good move.) Perhaps out of psychological inertia he kept playing as if he had the advantage when he went for 25.Nd4, but 25...Bf6 was a cold shower. Nakamura played well after that, and gradually brought home the full point.
The first rapid game between Aronian and MVL was a repeat of the two classical games: Aronian had excellent preparation and obtained a serious advantage, but at some point let the advantage slip and Vachier-Lagrave escaped with another draw. Finally, in game 4, the first part of the script was repeated - but with the roles reversed: MVL won the theoretical battle; not to the point where he was winning, but enough to have some play. Aronian didn't play the defender's role as well as his opponent had, however, and eventually lost the game.
On the scoring system in play, both Nakamura and MVL led by four points, with four blitz games - each worth two points for a win and one for a draw - to go. In a heartening surprise, Caruana managed to win the first game against Nakamura, with Black, taking advantage of a rare tactical oversight by Nakamura. (That's blitz slapstick chess!) Game 2 was wonderful. The position was equal after the opening, but Nakamura's 16...Qe8 was an error, and White would have been clearly better after 17.Nxd7 Nxd7 18.b4. Instead, he played 18.Ne4??, and after 18...Rxc1 19.Rxc1 Black could win a piece with 19...e5 (20.Bg3 f5 21.Nd2 f4 is the basic idea). But he missed it (blitz slapstick chess) and the game was equal again. Both sides played well after that, with Nakamura pressing for the win until Caruana blundered with 43.Kf1; 43.Kg1 would have kept the result in doubt.
In the post-match interview Nakamura called games 3 and 4 "routine", and he's right about game 3. Needing to win twice to force a playoff Caruana took some excessive risks in the opening, and was duly punished. But game 4 wasn't routine at all: Nakamura was worse from the get-go, losing for a while, and stone cold absolutely busted for a few moves. The win was quite nice, and Caruana would have found it in classical or even in rapid. It was a big ask for a blitz slapstick game though, and he didn't manage.
Instead of the clearly bad 25.Qc1, the right way was 25.g5(!). Here's the point: 25.Qxg7+ almost works, but the Black king can escape to e8 if White keeps checking. For the attack to work, White needs to get the bishop to h5 (and ideally, g6). That gives rise to the idea of playing Nf5. But 25.Nf5 won't work, because 25...gxf5 26.gxf5 is illegal. Therefore 25.g5!, and after 25...fxg5 then 26.Nf5! gxf5 27.Bh5!, and it's mate in no more than four more moves. Beautiful, but hey, it's better to watch the players step on rakes repeatedly if the alternative is a time control that could result in a draw, right?
Caruana didn't find it, lost the thread of the game, and lost badly. On to the other match.
It wasn't completely clear who the favorite would be between Aronian and Vachier-Lagrave in the blitz. Yes, MVL came into the competition as #2 on the rating list in blitz, just two points behind Carlsen, but Aronian is a former world blitz champion who was #4 on the list and whose recent results in online blitz were as good as MVL's. (Plus, he won their rapid & blitz playoff in the 2017 World Cup, in an Armageddon game.) It didn't work out for Aronian: Vachier-Lagrave won games 1, 2, and 4 (and lost game 3) to win the match and take over the top spot on the blitz list. MVL is 2948.2 there, Carlsen "only" 2939. (Nakamura is third at 2895.4, and Aronian is #4 at 2846.8. And Caruana...#16. Go here and click on the blitz tab.))
The question, though, is how good the games were. Game 1: MVL was outplaying Aronian, but the game was far from decided until 31.Rf3?, blundering a second pawn. Game 2: MVL missed a pretty win in the early middlegame (it's blitz) and the game was equal for 23 moves or so, and then Aronian walked into a one-move knight fork. Blitz Slapstick chess. Game 3 was a normal blitz game: Vachier-Lagrave had no time to work things out at a critical moment, and his position immediately collapsed. Game 4 was another comedy: what was a good, clean win by MVL turned into a shambles in the time scramble. Aronian was two pawns down and completely busted, but soon had managed to win a pawn back and achieve objective equality. No matter: it was Aronian's turn to err - repeatedly - and Vachier-Lagrave again obtained a winning position. This time, he cashed in.
The blitz games weren't terrible. We can always see glimpses of what makes the great players great, their deep preparation, and their outstanding knowledge of the game. But they are blitz games, and so along with the glimpses of greatness we see moments of utter foolishness, too - not to mention countless missed opportunities and spoiled brilliancies. Again, don't get me wrong: I enjoy blitz, and after Christmas I'll spend as much time as I can watching the World Blitz Championship. But blitz is its own thing; it's weird to tack it on to a classical event, even a classical and rapid tournament.
Rant over - for now. The players are off tomorrow, and then on Saturday they'll do it all over again: Nakamura and Vachier-Lagrave will play for first, and Aronian and Caruana will play for third. The format is the same: a classical game on day 1, another classical game on day, and then two rapid and four blitz games on day three, with a two-game blitz tiebreaker followed by Armageddon if necessary. There's the drama of the event, and the rating drama remains, too: it's possible that the event will end with Caruana rated #1 in the world in classical chess and Vachier-Lagrave #1 in blitz. Carlsen will have a chance to fix the latter at the end of the year, but won't be in action in classical chess until Wijk aan Zee starting January 12.
Today's games were again drawn, so we'll have to rely on the faster games tomorrow to see some blood. Levon Aronian did have his chances today against Maxime Vachier-Lagrave, but the combination of MVL's fine defense and Aronian's hasty play allowed the Frenchman to survive. In particular, Aronian missed 28.Rc2!, with the idea 28...Kxe6 29.b3 and White picks up the knight without allowing as much counterplay as Black got in the game. Even after that Aronian had good chances, but didn't make the most of his chances.
In the game between Hikaru Nakamura and Fabiano Caruana, there were no chances. Nakamura took a page out of Magnus Carlsen's book and played a speedy and absolutely bloodless draw with White, counting on his chances against Caruana in the faster games. Nakamura is a great rapid and blitz player, and Caruana is going to have work hard to bring his rapid and blitz play closer to his classical level. The number of rapid and blitz events is increasing, not to mention the number of hybrid events, so Caruana has to do something about this. Being almost the co-number 1 in the world in classical chess doesn't matter if players like Carlsen, Nakamura, and Aronian can pummel him in rapid and blitz.
The Caruana-Nakamura and Vachier-Lagrave - Aronian matches both started with draws, but both games were interesting and close to finishing with a winner. Caruana went for an enterprising attack against Nakamura, and the latter's one slip in a very complicated position gave Caruana one chance to cash in. He missed his unobvious chance, and an otherwise very well played game by both sides finished in a draw. In the other semi, MVL was outplayed in the opening and early middlegame, and while Aronian may have been winning at one point his opportunity was also well-hidden, and Vachier-Lagrave managed his own Houdini act to escape.
The games are here. I haven't annotated MVL-Aronian at all, but the notes to Caruana-Nakamura are substantial. Enjoy.
Way back when, before the World Championship, there was the Grand Chess Tour. Four players qualified for the final of this year's new format, and starting Tuesday they'll fight for the title in a knockout format. Here's how it works.
The final four consists of Hikaru Nakamura, Levon Aronian, Maxime Vachier-Lagrave, and Fabiano Caruana, in order of their qualifying scores. As usual in a knockout event, 1 plays 4 and 2 plays 3, so it's a battle of the Americans (Nakamura vs. Caruana) and of the friends (Aronian and MVL). They will play a pair of classical games - one each on Tuesday and Wednesday, scored on a 6-3-0 basis. On Thursday they'll play two rapid games, scored 4-2-0, followed by four blitz games that count on a 2-1-0 basis. (If that's insufficient, there will be another pair of blitz games followed by Armageddon.)
For Caruana, there are (at least) two things to play for. There's victory in the Grand Chess Tour, and there's the possibility of finishing the year as the world's #1 player by rating. (It's possible he could achieve the latter even if he doesn't achieve the former.) We'll see how it goes tomorrow at 2 p.m. local time in London; 9 a.m. ET. The tournament website is here.
Other events are going on alongside the main event, and there were some exhibition games beforehand as well. A report on the goings-on, together with a preview of the final four, can be read here.
It was a year ago that AlphaZero took the chess world by storm, beating Stockfish in a 100-game match. AZ won 28 games and drew the remaining 72. This year, there was another match. The time control was slower than the minute-a-move control from last year; this time it was 3 hours for each side for the game, plus a 15" increment after each move. This time they played 1000 games, with 839 draws, six wins for Stockfish (yayy) and 155 wins for AlphaZero.
More about the match, including download links, here.
Here's another high-profile figure weighing in on The Match: Maxime Vachier-Lagrave on the Carlsen-Caruana match. (HT: Hal Bogner) For those who followed the match, his comments about the games will offer few revelations (if any). But he joins in the chorus suggesting changes to the format of the World Championship. His suggestions are sensible and lean in a conservative direction. They are:
1. Play 16 games rather than 12.
2. Have rest days after four games rather than two. (The four on, one off pattern is typical of international tournaments, and would allow for 16 games to be played almost as quickly as 12 on the current pattern - especially with the extra day off between the 11th and 12th games.)
3. Speed up the time control to 90' + 30", with a 30' bonus after move 40. (He doesn't explicitly say move 40, but it seems to be assumed.)
He adds a preference that squares with my own, that mixing time controls should be avoided as much as possible. He's not in favor of various suggestions that make rapid play a mandatory part of the match, though he understands the impetus for it.
Here's a nice, short article on chess improvement by IM Stany with some excellent advice for plateaued players of all ages and ratings. No magic foo-foo dust, which is wise; if there were easy solutions we'd have all become GMs by now. (And for those who can't do a training camp with Jacob Aagaard, I know another guy who gives chess lessons--feel free to use the Contact link on his page for more info.)
Friday, December 14, 2018 at 10:01PM