Kamsky Wins U.S. Championship in Playoff

Alejandro Ramirez had a great tournament and gave Gata Kamsky a run for his money, but in the end experience prevailed as Kamsky won the U.S. Championship by finally defeating his opponent, in the Armageddon game. Before that they played a pair of 25-minute games, and while Kamsky was better in each he simply couldn't put his opponent away. Ramirez proved himself an adept defender, as indeed he also did in their classical game in round 8.

After the draws, it was time for the Armageddon game, and as you may recall from previous U.S. Championships they do things with a twist there. As usual, the player getting Black receives draw odds, meaning that if the game finishes in a draw he wins the playoff. The twist comes in how they determine who gets what color. The player with White, whoever it ends up being, gets 45 minutes (plus a 5-second increment after every move; Black also gets the 5-second increment). But who gets Black and how much time Black will have is determined by a bidding process: both players secretly write down how much time they would be willing to have to play with the black pieces, and the low bidder gets his wish. Kamsky bid 20 minutes, and Ramirez, simulating ESP, bid 19 minutes and 45 seconds. (I suppose if he really had ESP he'd have gone for 19 minutes and 59 seconds, but the point was that it was a clever bid.)

In the rapid games Ramirez handled the concrete play quite well, and was able to move quickly in those situations. In the Armageddon game, Kamsky tried a different tack, basically holding the position, avoiding exchanges and trying to gently suffocate the black pieces. This proved very effective, as Ramirez lacked the time to keep solving the more vague problems being posed. Eventually Ramirez fell very short of time, and then the moment was right for Kamsky to initiate concrete play. Without enough time to work out the problems, Ramirez lost ground, lost material, and finally lost the game. Still, it was a great performance, and in addition to $20,000 and a bunch of rating points, he clearly earned Kamsky's respect, too.

As for Kamsky, he netted $30,000 and his fourth U.S. Championship title. Intriguingly, he was rather subdued after winning, and expressed himself as somewhat disappointed that one of the young guns didn't win. He still seems intent on retiring once he turns 40, and wants to see the future of U.S. chess in good hands. It seems to me that things are going in the right direction, but it will be a pity for American chess (though of course, not necessarily for Kamsky himself) if he really does follow through with his planned retirement. Anyway, congratulations to him, to Alejandro Ramirez, and to Irina Krush for picking up her 5th women's championship the day before.

U.S. Championships, Round 9: Krush Wins the Women's Title; Kamsky and Ramirez Need a Playoff

In the women's championship, Irina Krush came into the last round needing only a draw against Camilla Baginskaite to seal clear first, and that's just what she got. She played it safe, but even within those self-imposed parameters she managed to outplay Baginskaite and win a pawn. That should have been enough to win, and under normal circumstances I suspect she would have closed the deal. Perhaps overly excited about clinching tournament victory, she got a bit careless and allowed her opponent some counterplay. Wisely, she decided to regain her bearings, reset her sights, and offer a draw. It was accepted, and her resulting score of 8/9 won the event (and $18,000), half a point ahead of Anna Zatonskih, who defeated Sabina Foisor in the last round. Tatev Abrahamyan took third with 6.5 points. (Full standings here.)

In the main event, Gata Kamsky could have clinched clear first with a win over Ray Robson, but although he seemed close to winning Robson managed to keep just enough activity to sneak out with a draw. That left the door open for any one of three players to catch him: Alejandro Ramirez (who faced Larry Christiansen), Alexander Onischuk (facing Kayden Troff) and Conrad Holt (whose opponent was second-seeded Timur Gareev). Two failed, but one succeeded.

Onischuk had the white pieces and a big rating advantage against Troff, but despite that never came close to winning. The game was drawn, and Troff secured his first GM norm - not bad for anyone, especially for someone who turned 15 less than a week ago!

Holt had a crazy game with Gareev that should have ended in a draw, but perhaps Holt wanted so desperately to win that he rejected a simple drawing continuation a few moves before the finish. I don't know that it was the last drawing chance, but it was certainly the easiest: 77...Qxd5 78.Bxd5 Nf5+ followed by 79...Nd4 and then capturing the b-pawn. Maybe he missed it, or maybe he hallucinated and forgot that 78...Nf5 was check (if it weren't check, White would have Be4, pinning and winning). Or, as I suggested above, he wanted to go for the win at all costs. Whatever the story, he didn't manage to catch Kamsky.

Ramirez did, however, to his own surprise and delight, outplaying Christiansen and finishing with a nice attack in an ending with heavy pieces. Ramirez (who incidentally became a GM at 15) will have a playoff match with Kamsky tomorrow/today (Monday) at 12:00 noon St. Louis time, and they will play two 25-minute games. If it's tied after that, then they will have a bid Armageddon game.

(Full standings here.)

U.S. Championships, Round 8: Kamsky, Krush Lead Entering The Final Round

Gata Kamsky has been leading the U.S. Championship from the start, but hasn't quite managed to slam the door on his pursuers. Today he had the second seed, Timur Gareev, on the ropes thanks to a pair of sound extra pawns. Gareev shed them going for a desperate counterattack, and it worked well enough for him to save a draw. The key moment came on move 32, when Kamsky was faced with the threat of ...Nf3+. There were four sorts of ways to deal with the threat: move the king, move the rook, defend the f3 square or counterattack (e.g. the rook on c6 or the queen on e7). The third and fourth options were pretty good (e.g. 32.Re3 or 32.Qe7), and the second - moving the rook - was best of all, at least if the move was to d1. Kamsky chose the first option, which lost most of his advantage. It's a natural move, because then one no longer has to worry about ...Nf3+, whether it involves a fork or not. The drawback was that f2 lacked protection, and when Gareev finally managed play 36...Qxf2 the position was a forced draw, as was elegantly demonstrated in the game's conclusion. A good save by Gareev, but he remains a full point behind Kamsky.

Had there been a winner in the Alejandro Ramirez-Alexander Onischuk contest, that person would have caught Kamsky in first. They drew quickly though (not by design, I'm sure), and Kamsky kept his edge. They remain tied for second (half a point behind), and they were caught there by Conrad Holt. Holt beat Joel Benjamin, taking advantage of his passed c-pawn after Benjamin chose 22...Rf8(?) rather than the necessary 22...Rc8. Holt would have kept some chances after the latter move, but probably not enough to win. After 22...Rf8 the c-pawn survived, and Holt combined its advance with threats to the black king to finish the job.

Leading Round 9 Pairings:

• Robson (4.5) - Kamsky (6)
• Ramirez (5.5) - Christiansen (5)
• Gareev (5) - Holt (5.5)
• Onischuk (5.5) - Troff (4.5)

The women's championship saw Irina Krush face a major test, and she passed it convincingly. Tatev Abrahamyan was within a point and had the white pieces against Krush. Her big chance! Krush has long been a very well-prepared player though, and today she produced an early novelty in the trendy "Brazilian Taimanov" with 12...Bb7. (12...Ne5 is the usual move, though Black has tried several other moves as well.) Maybe White's best is to take on c6, but Abrahamyan's 13.Bd3 doesn't look ideal. White meets 12...Nxd4 with 13.Qxd4, but that's impossible here, so Krush took on d4, then kicked the bishop with ...e5 (and thanks to the bishop on b7, there's no Nd5 to worry about) and then planted the offside knight on f4. Maybe now Abrahamyan should have played 16.h4, keeping the g-pawn, but maybe she was worried about 16...Bb4. It's funny that in many Sicilians White is frightened, and properly so, of the exchange sac with ...Rxc3 - sometimes even when Black doesn't get a pawn for further compensation. In the Taimanov, however, exchanging lines of the form 1...Bxc3 2.Qxc3 Qxc3 3.bxc3 rarely concern White, even though Black ruins White's pawn structure without sacrificing anything.

Abrahamyan kept some compensation for a long time, though never quite enough, but then the game took a sharp tactical turn on move 41. Had Krush played the safe 41...Rg7 she would have maintained a large, probably winning advantage, but she thought she could get away with 41...g3. She did get away with it after the natural 44.e7(?); if, however, Abrahamyan played the cool 44.Qd5! she would have equalized the chances: 44...Qxd5 (forced) 45.exd5 g1Q 46.Bxh7+! Kf8 47.Rxg1 Rxg1+ seems to be a draw. Black has too much to worry about with White's e-pawn and possible c5 pawn sacs in the air.

Missing this one chance, Abrahamyan lost and fell out of the race for first. Anna Zatonskih won her game though (against Iryna Zenyuk), and remains alive in the race for first. Here are the crucial final round pairings:

• Krush (7.5) - Baginskaite (4)
• Zatonskih (6.5) - Foisor (3.5)

Norway Chess, Round 3: Karjakin Leads With 3/3

Six rounds remain in the Norway Chess super-tournament, and Sergey Karjakin has yet to play Magnus Carlsen, Levon Aronian, Viswanathan Anand or Veselin Topalov - four of the world's top five players. Still, he leads with a 3-0 score, and this after winning the blitz tournament too, which he concluded with a 4-game winning streak. So he seems to be in good form and should be full of confidence - just what every sportsman wants.

His third victory in the main tournament came at Wang Hao's expense. Karjakin enjoyed a slight but persistent advantage on the white side of an old Rauzer main line, thanks to the bishop pair and an apparently more useful pawn majority, but that's all it was until Wang Hao's 36...f5(?). This increased the power of White's bishops, and when Karjakin sealed up the kingside with 39.h4(!), preparing 40.Re5, Black gave up. White's pieces dominate and Black has nothing to do but watch his pawns drop and White's queenside majority advance.

Aronian and Anand are tied for second, a full point behind Karjakin. Levon Aronian was a little fortunate to play Peter Svidler, who has apparently been visiting doctors for a variety of ailments during the event. Svidler was better throughout, but offered a draw after his 31st move, just after the legal limit. (Here the rule is that draw offers are forbidden before move 30.) The main line Svidler considered after his final move, 31.a5, continued 31...Nc4 32.Rb7+ Re7 33.a6 Na5 34.Nd6+ Ke6, but here he missed that after 35.Rxe7+ Kxe7 he would have 36.Nc8+, winning the a-pawn. It may or may not be enough to win, but it's certainly worth trying, as White gets winning chances for free; i.e., with no risk whatsoever.

Anand joined Aronian in second by defeating Veselin Topalov on the white side of a Najdorf. He enjoyed the easier play in the quasi-ending/late middlegame with all the heavy pieces plus opposite-colored bishops, but had Topalov braved the risky-looking 28...Qxh4 he might have been alright. After 28...Bd6 Anand played 29.Bg2 and 30.Bxd5, when the beautiful bishop gave him an obvious, clear advantage. Black's pieces lacked coordination and f7 became a target, and the position became just about impossible to hold. Topalov couldn't, and with the flashy 35.Be6 Anand won material, and Black gave up after the first time control.

What about Magnus Carlsen? The world's #1 faced Hikaru Nakamura and, of all things, the Bishop's Opening (via a Vienna move order). As one would expect from two players who like to play and have great faith in their ability to win games at the board, the play quickly grew creative when Carlsen offered a pawn with 10...b5!? Nakamura might have improved slightly, by his own admission, with the (more) natural 16.Qg4, but even so the game was always about equal up until 29.Nc3?! (29.Ne3 was better and equal). Carlsen played 29...e3, and the game soon finished in a draw, but he missed an opportunity with 29...Qe5(!), seen by the computer but not the players. The idea is seen in the variation 30.b6 e3 31.b7 (losing; 31.Re1 is forced, but Black is better, but not winning, after 31...Rd2) and now 31...Bxg2+! wins: 32.Kxg2 Rd2+ 33.Kf3 Qxf5+ 34.Kg3 Qxf1! 35.b8Q+ Kh7 and despite White's large material advantage he is lost.

Finally, Teimour Radjabov won his first game by giving Jon Ludwig Hammer his third consecutive loss in an up and down game.

Saturday is a rest day, and on Sunday they will play round 4, with these pairings (player scores in parethenses):

• Carlsen (1.5) - Svidler (1.5)
• Topalov (1) - Hammer (0)
• Anand (2) - Nakamura (1.5)
• Aronian (2) - Karjakin (3)
• Wang Hao (1) - Radjabov (1.5)

U.S. Championships, Round 6 & 7: Kamsky, Krush Continue To Lead

Gata Kamsky still leads the U.S. Championship, but after three straight draws the field is closing in a bit. In round 6 he made a comfortable draw with Black against third-seed Alexander Onischuk, and was seemingly in control in round 7 against Alejandro Ramirez when he was hit by a brilliant shot: 30...Bh3!! This essentially forced a draw on the spot, and if Kamsky fails to win the title this year this game may loom large, as he could have maintained a serious edge earlier, e.g. with 29.Rff6. But then again, who couldn't miss a move like 30...Bh3, especially from a ways back?

Onischuk drew in round 7 with Conrad Holt (my dark horse contender for the title) with some difficulty, but a draw's a draw and he is tied with Ramirez, half a point behind Kamsky entering the penultimate round. They will play on board 2 today, with Ramirez getting White.

About Holt: if there was a prize for the "move of the tournament", he, like Ramirez, would be in the running. In round 6 against Larry Christiansen, there was a remarkable bit of tactical one-upsmanship. Holt's 43...Qc6 looked very strong, threatening both the rook on a8 and 44...Rg4+, picking off the queen. It looked like the move would net the exchange, as 44.Rxf8+ Kxf8 45.Qxf5+ seemed like White's best; White would keep some small chances, but Black would be winning. Instead, Christiansen uncorked the ingenious 44.Ra7! This not only saved the rook, but it saved the queen, too, as 44...Rg4+?? walks into 45.Nxg4 Qxf3 46.Nf6+ Kh8 47.Rh7#!

Holt admitted to missing that move, but he rose to the occasion and trumped it with the spectacular 44...Bc5!! (which Christiansen missed). This is a subtle double attack: the rook is attacked, of course, and so is White's queen. Black once again threatens ...Rg4+, because after Nxg4 Qxf3 Nf6+ the king can go to f8 rather than h8, and then there is neither mate nor perpetual check. (White could try to set up the perpetual, e.g. with 45.dxc5 Rg4+ 46.Nxg4 Qxf3 47.Nf6+ Kf8 48.Rd7 - a pattern worth remembering if you're not already familiar with it - but Black can break it up with 48...Qc6.)

Back to the standings: facing Kamsky in round 8 will be the second seed, Timur Gareev, whose performance has been sluggish, at least given what one might expect from his rating. Nevertheless, he has worked his way back into contention, and after defeating Ray Robson in round 7 he has closed to within a point of Kamsky. Unluckily for Gareev, while both he and Kamsky were due for Black this round, the color clash was resolved in Kamsky's favor, and he (Kamsky) will get the white pieces.

Key Round 8 Pairings:

• Kamsky (5.5) - Gareev (4.5)
• Ramirez (5) - Onischuk (5)
• Holt (4.5) - Benjamin (4.5)

In the women's championship Krush's run at perfection ended when she was held to a draw by Sabina Foisor in round 6, but she bounced back with a win in round 7. Tatev Abrahamyan closed to within half a point by winning in round 6, but then she drew in round 7 to again fall a full point off the pace. Also a point back is Anna Zatonskih, who has won her last two games. Round 8 is crucial, as Abrahamyan has White against Krush. (The women's event is a round-robin, as opposed to the Swiss system in the "men's" event.)

Key Round 8 Pairings:

• Abrahamyan (5.5) - Krush (6.5)
• Zenyuk - Zatonskih (5.5)

Norway Chess, Round 2: Karjakin Leads With a 2-0 Score

It is because of Magnus Carlsen that the Norway Chess tournament exists, but so far it's the Sergey Karjakin show. First he won the preliminary blitz tournament, and now he leads the main event with a perfect 2-0 score. There's a long way to go and his wins have come against the two players who seem likeliest to finish at the bottom, that's true: Teimour Radjabov, on account of his recent disastrously bad form, and Jon Ludwig Hammer, who is by far the lowest-rated player in the event. Even so, it's still a fine start.

Today's win over Hammer was a case of the superior player winning a little at a time. I'll mention some moments I found interesting. The first came after Hammer's 44.Rf5. At first it looks like Black can just take on a4, but after 44...Rxa4? 45.Rxc5! bxc5 46.b6 Ra3/2/1 47.b7 Rb3/2/1 48.b8Q Rxb8 49.Nxb8 White's knight can hold the pawns, e.g. after 49...a4 50.Na6! So Karjakin played the interesting waiting move 44...Rc4, with the neat idea of putting White into zugzwang. He needs his knight on c6 and his rook on the 5th rank for the combination we saw above, and he can't move his king or push the g-pawn because then Black will have a crucial tempo-gaining check - 45.g4? Rxa4 46.Rxc5 bxc5 47.b6 Rb3+ (check!) 48.Kg2 Rb3 (or even 48...a4 for that matter - the extra tempo can pay off in the pawns vs. knight ending as well) and game over.

So Hammer played 45.Rd5, letting Black's king into the game with 45...Kf7, and Karjakin won pretty easily. 45.Rf4 is an obvious move and one the players must have considered, but it seems that Black should win after 45...Rxf4 46.gxf4 Kf7 47.Kg4 Ke6. Black needs to respect White's kingside counterplay, but it seems that if he combines prophylaxis with the inevitable king invasion of White's queenside, the game will be over.

Levon Aronian is in clear second with 1.5 points after defeating Hikaru Nakamura in an Exchange Slav. Aronian has suffered on the black side of that variation against Vladimir Kramnik, so perhaps he thought it might be worth a try from the other side of the board. He may have enjoyed a slight edge in the middlegame, but it may not have been much had Black played something like 23...Rcd8, using the loose position of the bishop on d3 to gain a crucial tempo. If White tried to play as in the game with 24.Ne4, then after 24...Qxe3+ 25.Qxe3 dxe3 26.Nd6 (not attacking the rook, which has left c8) 26...b6! 27.Bxa6 Nb4 is at least equal for Black. After Nakamura's 23...dxe3(?), Aronian's 24.Ne4 followed by 25.Nd6 gave him a serious advantage, which he was able to convert in an endgame. It seems that Nakamura's 43...g4 may have been the decisive mistake, going two pawns down in a bid for some counterplay that didn't succeed. Nakamura eventually regained one of his pawns, but by then Aronian had consolidated and won pretty easily. (As an aside, I didn't see Aronian's press conference, but I'm curious if Nakamura's decision to play on a rook down for 11 moves came up.)

One last note on the game. Ken Regan sent me a beautiful and unusual little variation he found during the game. Had Aronian played 41.Rcc4, which at first glance looks more solid than 41.Rc2, he walks into a nasty tactical shot: 41...Nf6! 42.Rxe5 b5!!, which is not just a fork but a bizarre case where taking en passant leaves both rooks en prise! Odder still is that after 43.cxb6 White also attacks both of Black's rooks, but 43...Rd7+ clarifies matters from a material point of view: Black wins a rook. Ken stopped there, but although this line is certainly worse than Aronian's 41.Rc2, it's worth noting that after 44.Kc2 Rxe5 45.b4! Black may only be slightly better!

How about Carlsen? He had White against Viswanathan Anand, but although he got to do the pressing against the champ he was never able to turn it into anything serious. Although it was a different line than that played in a well-known win by Judit Polgar over Anand (that was a Najdorf that continued 6.Be3 e5 7.Nf3), Carlsen's approach was similar in principle to Polgar's. As noted above, what fun there was in the game was White's to enjoy, but Anand has learned his lessons from the Polgar game and defended successfully. (As he did recently in another tournament game in the aforementioned Najdorf line. People are checking Anand, and he's showing that he has done his homework.)

The game between Veselin Topalov and Teimour Radjabov was also drawn. Radjabov's 10...Ne5 was a new move and a new idea in the Rossolimo Sicilian, preparing to swing the knight to g6 (after White commits to h3). The knight has its pluses there, but it also gets it out of the way and takes away some of White's tactical ideas in the usual lines. Topalov may have earned a very small edge out of the opening, but growing it proved difficult. After the game Topalov thought 16.Nb6 would have been good for an edge, but he liked 16.Qb6 better. Radjabov's 16...Qe5 was a remarkable and surprising rejoinder, as in line after line Black's queen seems to be in trouble and ready to be victimized by some discovered attack. Radjabov admitted to being nervous about it, but neither player could find a concrete refutation, and the engine doesn't find one either. Maybe Topalov maintained a very small advantage, but Radjabov played well and drew. Hopefully this means he has finally regained his form and his confidence.

Finally, Wang Hao defeated Svidler in a 3.f3 Anti-Gruenfeld. Through 13.Qe2 the players followed the game Karjakin-Giri from the Wijk aan Zee tournament this January before Svidler varied. It's not clear where Svidler's preparation ended, but Wang Hao's had continued through 15.Kb1, when he had expected (and had analyzed) 15...Qb6. Svidler went instead for 15...Rd8, which looks objectively weaker but helps set up some tricky tactics.

After 16.Nf3 came the real shocker: 16...b5(?). 17.Nxb5 is of course impossible (it hangs a2), but 17.Bxb5 is possible though risky. What Svidler missed or at least underestimated was 17.a3, after which he was simply busted, bound to lose a pawn without any real compensation. Svidler resisted for a long time, but Wang Hao was up to the task and won the ending.

So what motivated 16...b5? The idea, as Svidler told Wang Hao after the game, was this: he wanted to play 16...c5, with the idea 17.d5 Bxc3. Here 18.dxe6?? loses to 18...Rxd1+, regaining the queen with a piece for interest, while 18.bxc3 is met by 18...Nxd5. What Svidler had missed beforehand was the nice intermezzo 18.Bc4!, when White is slightly better after 18...Qf6 19.bxc3 b5(!) 20.Be2. Getting b5 in for free would be nice, but White didn't have to play some sort of irrelevant move waiting for ...c5 to hit him on the next turn.

One other nice line pointed out by Wang Hao: In case Svidler met 17.a3 with the obvious, coffeehouse move 17...a5, then White should certainly avoid 18.axb4? axb4, when Black is better, and if 18.d5 it looks like Black can get away with 18...Bxc3. As before, 19.dxe6?? loses to 19...Rxd1+ while 19.bxc3?? again loses to 19...Nxd5. Again White has a little trick, but this time it's 19.axb4, winning a piece.

Standings After Round 2:

1. Karjakin 2
2. Aronian 1.5
3-8. Anand, Carlsen, Nakamura, Wang Hao, Topalov, Svidler 1
9. Radjabov .5
10. Hammer 0

Round 3 Pairings:

• Anand - Topalov
• Nakamura - Carlsen
• Svidler - Aronian
• Radjabov - Hammer
• Karjakin - Wang

Norway Chess, Round 1: The Big Four Draw Each Other; Karjakin, Nakamura and Svidler Win

It was an exciting first round at the Norway Chess super-tournament, and for those of us who like seeing decisive results (= all of us?) seeing three decisive games out of five must have satisfied our metaphorical blood lust. On the other hand, it didn't seem to be an especially well-played round, and that may be a partial function of just how much chess some of the participants have played lately.

Let's start with the world champion's. Viswanathan Anand had White against world #2 Levon Aronian, and found an interesting and rare way to handle the Ruy: 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.0-0 Be7 6.d3 d6 7.c4!? I have seen that idea before as a way of meeting the Delayed Steinitz (4...d6 5.c4, as played in an old Keres-Alekhine game), but never before in this line. It was an interesting idea, and one that will hopefully be explored further. Anand's subsequent play may not have been as resolute or precise as he may have liked, and he confessed to being surprised by 23...Bxf4! Fortunately for him, he was at most just a little worse after that and drew without too much trouble, but there was one fascinating possibility that went untried.

Aronian could have played 31...Re3, and after the obvious 32.Rf3 traded rooks. At first glance it would seem obviously good for White, who enjoys a clean extra, passed pawn on the kingside while Black's extra pawn on the queenside is doubled. Despite that, it is surprisingly White who must play accurately to draw.

Next up, the day's other draw, between Magnus Carlsen (the world's #1 player and Anand's pending challenger) and Veselin Topalov (#5 and quickly returning to the form that made him FIDE world champion and twice the barely failed challenger in world championship matches). This was a pretty sedate affair in a Symmetrical English. Carlsen, as is his wont, went for and achieved a position where he could simply play and press, and as Topalov is not exactly known as a technical specialist that seemed an especially good strategy in this case. If there is any truth to that stereotype, however, one wouldn't know it from this game, as he was never in any trouble, objectively speaking, and held convincingly.

Now for the wins. Sergey Karjakin won with relative ease against Teimour Radjabov, who has just come off of two disastrous tournaments. Radjabov fell far behind on the clock in a Rossolimo Sicilian, missed some tactics (e.g., he had planned 18...e4 before realizing that it was a blunder: 19.Nxe4 Bxa1?? 20.Ng5+, winning the queen), and soon lost a pawn. Maybe there were some chances to hold the ending, but if there were Radjabov didn't find them, and he resigned the hopeless rook ending after making the time control.

Hikaru Nakamura defeated Wang Hao on the white side of a 5.Nc3 Petroff. Wang Hao's 8...b6 was very unusual - generally Black plays 8...Nd7 or 8...Nc6, aiming to play ...Ne5 and keeping the queenside pawns free to fly. With White about to castle long, the most common plans for Black involve counterattacking the white king, and ...b6 makes that difficult. The bishop on b7 will be on a great diagonal, that's true; but that isn't the most important feature of the position.

From there things went smoothly for Nakamura, while his opponent, in his opinion, kept piling up the inaccuracies. When the players reached an ending with Nakamura's bishop and knight against Wang Hao's rook, it was just a matter of technique, and the American wrapped things up efficiently.

Finally, while Peter Svidler is a great specialist in the Gruenfeld Defense, he seemed to have trouble when facing it. Jon Ludwig Hammer got a very good position out of the opening, but the tables turned after 22...a5? If Black played 22...f5 instead White would have been playing for a draw (which he would likely have achieved); instead, it was Black who had to play for a draw in what was soon a pawn-down rook ending. The draw could have been held if Hammer knew that ...Kg8 (rather than ...Kf6) was correct and known to endgame theory - Carlsen pointed this out immediately while briefly commenting on the game. Missing that chance on moves 37, 39 and 42, Svidler finally struck on the right idea with h4-h5, and the rest was straightforward.

Round 2 is getting underway now, with the following pairings:

• Carlsen - Anand
• Topalov - Radjabov
• Aronian - Nakamura
• Wang Hao - Svidler
• Hammer - Karjakin

A Short Review of Chess Evolution (January 2013)

Arkadij Naiditsch, Chess Evolution (January 2013). 363 pp. €32.99/£28.99/$44.95. Reviewed by Dennis Monokroussos.

The Chess Evolution series was a remarkable experiment over the past couple of years, and the sad news is that with this issue, the ninth overall, it is coming to an end. A pity, but it isn’t surprising, as those features that make the books noteworthy also assured them of a limited audience.

This issue consists of 40 very heavily annotated games, with a small add-on section with four less deeply annotated games and one ending from this year’s super-tournament in Wijk aan Zee. That’s a nice little dessert and farewell, but the meat of the book, that which makes or breaks the series, consists of those 40 very deeply annotated games.

All the games feature at least one player over 2700, and two of the five annotators are themselves over 2700. Etienne Bacrot and Arkadij Naiditsch are both consistently 2700+, while the other three (Csaba Balogh, Kamil Miton and Borki Predojevic) are all solid citizens of the 2600 realm. Thus both the games and the annotations are at a very high level – at a height that matches their depth, to mix metaphors.

If you’re a theory lover, these books are definitely for you. The opening analysis goes very deep in all the games, and there is plenty of original analysis, too; one isn’t receiving a “database dump”. For example, opening the book at random to the game Adams-Andreikin from the European Club Cup last October, after the moves 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nd2 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Nd7 5.Nf3 Ngf6 6.Nxf6+ Nxf6 7.Be3 the commentary begins in earnest. Andreikin plays 7…Be7, but there’s a paragraph on 7…Bd6 and nearly two full, very dense pages on 7…Nd5 – very little of which is dedicated to game references. (There are four short game citations with 7…Nd5, totaling well under half a page.)

That is typical, but you would have the wrong impression if you thought that it was only the openings that received such careful attention. The analysis is perhaps deepest in that phase of the game, but they are thorough with the games in their entirety. The games make for excellent training material, and can of course be enjoyed for pleasure and passive instruction as well.

There are verbal explanations too, but while they are helpful they are also rather light and in general take a lot for granted. That’s a reasonable assumption, as these books are clearly if implicitly pitched at stronger players, but by the bell-curved nature of rating distributions, it means that their target audience is comparatively small. These books are too sophisticated and detail-oriented for all but the strongest and most dedicated club players (except those who play serious correspondence chess), and even for players rated over 2000 it’s always a difficult decision. There are so many books and websites and subscription sites offering theoretical information that only a professional can keep up, even assuming that money isn’t a concern.

So what I’m left saying is that these books are really terrific – great theory, great analysis, great games – the whole thing. Unfortunately the price is steep and going through the dense games is labor-intensive. There’s nothing wrong with a book that makes you dig in, but it’s a tough business model if you’re selling such works. To my mind, they priced themselves out of the market, and that’s too bad: they’re fine books and I recommend them to strong, serious students of the game!

Ordering info on the company site or here (a U.S. seller, offering a discount).

U.S. Championship: Kamsky Draws (But Still Leads); Krush Still Perfect

Looks like the "Fischer prize" to be awarded to any player who manages to achieve a perfect score in the U.S. Championship will go unclaimed another year, as the last player with a perfect score, Gata Kamsky, was held to a draw in round 5 by Joel Benjamin. Kamsky still leads, but Alexander Onischuk is nipping at his heels, half a point behind. They play in round 6, and Onischuk will have White. On board two Benjamin has White against Alejandro Ramirez, who defeated Sam Shankland to reach 3.5 points, the same score Benjamin has. Four others have 3 points, and down it goes from there.

In the women's championship Irina Krush won again (no Fischer prize for them, as far as I know), defeating the also perfect - in the opposite direction - Sarah Chiang. (Chiang is a first-timer and just 15, so this is a bit of a baptism by fire for her. On the other hand, while she's the lowest-rated player in the field, she's not so much lower-rated that she should go through the tournament without scoring. So let's hope she can stay mentally tough and pick up some points.) Krush is 5-0, now a point ahead of Tatev Abrahamyan, who drew with Anna Zatonskih (who now has 3.5). Krush defeated Zatonskih in round 3, and will play Abrahamyan (with Black) in round 8.

Karjakin Wins Norway Blitz; The Real Event Starts Tomorrow (Updated)

Normally I'd have waited until a bit later in the day to report on this, but as there is so much misinformation running around, thanks primarily to arbiters' incompetence (but I repeat myself), that I thought I'd write sooner rather than later. (Or at least that was the plan. Unfortunately, for only the second time since I've used this host, the server ate about 80% of my post without saving a copy. Ugh! The one bright side is that I became aware of and corrected an earlier error, and now have the main tournament's first round's pairings to report.)

A few days ago I offered high praise for the organization of the Norway Chess tournament's website. The website still deserves it, but today's coverage was pretty bad; certainly in comparison with what we've come to expect from super-events in Russia.

For starters, a little joke. On a flight a year or two ago, the flight attendant decided to liven up the usual pre-flight spiel with some humor, adding that the cabin lights would be dimmed "to enhance the beauty of the person sitting next to you." It seems the Norway organizers have taken that to heart in their use of cameras. There's one for every table, which is great, but they have the sort of resolution you'd expect from a cheap digital or web camera circa the mid-to-late 1990s. The angle and distance are poor too, so while you can kind of make out the position if you try hard and follow the game from the start, and can kind of make out the players' emotions, neither is easy or a pleasure. Maybe high-def cameras are expensive, but I think the typical iPhone camera could do a better job.

And then there are the arbiters. Where do they find these people, anyway? Errare humanum est and all that, and they may be the nicest people in the world. But seriously, can't they figure out how to operate a DGT board after all these years? They goofed up Svidler-Wang Hao in round 1, entering it as a draw when Black won, and they made a bookend goof in the last round, labeling Wang Hao-Karjakin a draw too. As a result, sites everywhere (including TWIC) left claiming the tournament ended in a five-way tie for first between Magnus Carlsen, Viswanathan Anand, Sergey Karjakin, Peter Svidler and Hikaru Nakamura. (That's at least better than the live commentary, when despite looking at and discussing the standings for the last several minutes of the broadcast, Dirk Jan ten Geuzendam repeatedly failed to notice that Nakamura's last-round win put him into the alleged tie.)

Only after everyone stopped watching and started posting erroneous reports did they correct their goofs. The first-round loss dropped Svidler out of the tie for first, and more importantly, Karjakin's last-round win meant there wasn't a tie to begin with: Karjakin took first all to himself!

Now a few words about the tournament.

First, Teimour Radjabov was the early hero, winning his first four games, including one over Carlsen. It looked like he had bounced back from his back-to-back disasters in London and Zug. A draw in round 5 kept him in good shape, but just when it looked like he'd be the hero of the event he lost three in a row before drawing in the last round. Plus-one was still a good result, but a disappointment after the early start and not enough to reach a position in the coveted top five. (Or is it "coveted"? More on that later.)

Having just the opposite sort of tournament was Jon Ludwig Hammer. Coming into the event he looks like the special du jour for whoever gets to play him, and it seemed that this would be true of the blitz event as well. After five rounds, going into the break, he had just half a point, and he was lucky to have that. (Topalov had a colossal advantage and missed several chances to mate him in round 2.) In a private conversation with live commentator (and his former trainer) Simen Agdestein over the break, he opined that he really hadn't played so badly in the first half, and in the second half he proved it. He won his next two and drew the last two to finish with a very respectable 3.5 points. (Especially considering that Veselin Topalov only scored one total point, with his second draw coming in the last round. Even Levon Aronian finished behind Hammer, scoring just half a point through four rounds and two and a half points in total.)

Of course most eyes were on the other Norwegian participant, Magnus Carlsen. Several of his games were especially worthy of note. First was the marquee matchup and world championship preview; to wit, his round 1 game with Viswanathan Anand. Anand had White in a Closed Ruy, and alas, there were no fireworks. Carlsen held, the game remained controlled, and it ended in a draw. Carlsen lost in round 2 to Radjabov, but soon, as always, he made a good run. He was certainly helped along by a massive gift from Nakamura in round 7. Carlsen had a large advantage that dwindled slightly but still remained serious prior to his blunder 29.Rd5?(?), after which Nakamura enjoyed the better chances. Soon they reached a position that was absolutely unloseable for Nakamura and almost surely for Carlsen as well. Unfortunately for Nakamura, in his desire to make "something" happen he chose a plan with ...g4-g3 followed by ...Kg4 and ...Kf3. The problem is that the plan simply couldn't work, and only managed to get Nakamura in trouble. As a practical matter, he should have tried to work out the details first, and if he lacked the time he could have made a long series of pointless moves to build up time using the increments. As it was, the plan was only dangerous for Nakamura, and when he failed to admit his mistake and retreat his king on move 53, the result was a routine rook ending win for the Norwegian.

What he received in round 7, however, he returned in round 8. Sergey Karjakin has been one of his regular "customers" for some time now, but today he held on as Carlsen started to build an advantage, kept in the game, and when Carlsen got a little careless with 39...Nxe3(?!) he pounced with 40.Bh5. Carlsen needed to play 40...Qe4!, when chances remain even, but surprised by Karjakin's move he played the "automatic" 40...Rf8?? and lost a piece and the game to 41.Re7 Qf5 42.Qxe3.

Carlsen bounced back in the finale though, with a small measure of revenge for the last round of the Candidates'. Carlsen beat Svidler, keeping up the pressure until the Russian finally cracked from move 39 on.

Karjakin was the hero of the day, however, vanquishing his tormentor and taking clear first with a four-game winning streak to end the tournament. Here are the final standings, and since the point of the exercise was to determine pairing numbers ties aren't listed:

1. Karjakin 6.5/9
2. Carlsen 6
3. Anand 6
4. Nakamura 6
5. Svidler 5.5
6. Radjabov 5
7. Hammer 3.5
8. Wang 3
9. Aronian 2.5
10. Topalov 1

Those who finished in the top five are thus guaranteed an extra White in the tournament. But is this in fact an advantage? Of course it is, all things being equal - White outscores Black in tournament chess by a roughly 55-45 margin. The problem is that not all things are equal - there are the accursed tiebreaks once again. It isn't the first tiebreaker, which is the highly unlovely Sonneborn Berger, and it isn't the second one; that's most losses wins. But the third tiebreak is most games with Black.

[UPDATE: This is incorrect; there will be a blitz playoff in case of a tie. The page with the regulations is rather odd though - have a look (it's linked in the previous paragraph). It says that tiebreaks don't matter, and then it lists tiebreaks for no apparent reason. At any rate, the argument below still has value, I think, as there are other tournaments where the number of games (and wins) with Black is used as a tiebreaker.]

Now, consider Armageddon games. Only very, very rarely does anyone choose the white pieces for such contests. It's almost universally accepted that Black is better off there, possibly much better off. If that's so, is it really better to have five Whites? Think about it this way: after eight rounds, let's say that all the key rivals have had four white games and four black games. The S-B tiebreaker is so random that we can disregard it, and in many cases the "most wins" criterion will be a push. So now you're choosing in round 9: White or Black? If you're Black, you essentially have draw odds (or more precisely, tie odds.) White wins more often than Black does, but the odds of White winning are greatly inferior to the odds of Black winning OR drawing. So wouldn't you choose Black in such a situation?

Once again, this strikes me as an argument for blitz playoffs. Or at the very least, considering that pairing numbers were determined here by skill rather than by a random process, let those players who did well here keep their advantage: an extra white game with no repercussion in the tiebreaks.

Enough ranting! On to the pairings for the classical tournament, which ought to be a great one.

Round 1 Pairings:

• Carlsen - Topalov
• Anand - Aronian
• Nakamura - Wang Hao
• Svidler - Hammer
• Karjakin - Radjabov