Anand on Memory, Preparation and Other Chess Skills
Here's a good lecture by the world champion, designed for a non-chess audience but useful for most of us, too.
Here's a good lecture by the world champion, designed for a non-chess audience but useful for most of us, too.
After taking some time off from the "Quick Ruy" series, this week I've resumed with the final episode on the Neo-Archangelsk system (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.0-0 b5 6.Bb3 Bc5). It looks like it isn't doing very well in the main line at the moment, but sooner or later I'm sure Shirov or Caruana (or both) will come to its rescue. In the meantime, this week's video should give you a decent overview of where things currently stand.
As always, the video is free (free registration required) and is available on-demand for the next month or so.
Ali Nihat Yazici is a FIDE Vice-President, the long-time head of the Turkish Chess Federation (TCF), and the main organizer of the upcoming Chess Olympics in Istanbul. He recently came under fire for his decision to reject arbiters from any of the seven countries involved in lawsuits against FIDE, both past and present, that he deemed inappropriate. The criticism has only grown, and now he has responded - and decided to resign his Vice Presidency from FIDE. (As far as I know, this will have no effect on his position with the TCF or the Olympics.)
(HT: Nate)
A few weeks ago I mentioned that players in or near Chicago had the chance to play English super-GM Mickey Adams in a clock simul. The event has passed (but may happen again next year???), but you can read a short article on the event by Adams himself and download an excellent, much longer report by organizer Daniel Parmet.
Gelfand's birthday was yesterday and Kramnik's is today, and only one of them at most will get what he really wants between now and his next birthday. (It's about 10 months until the next Candidates' event.)
Maybe he didn't quite get what he wanted this year, but the last few years offer grounds for hope that life as a 44-year-old chess professional won't be so bad.
I assume they'll play the fourth game in any case, but in the Cez Trophy match in Prague between Peter Svidler and David Navara victory has already gone to the former. He drew the first game and won both games two and three to clinch the match ahead of schedule.
Magnus Carlsen only won two games in the just-completed 2012 Tal Memorial, but both, especially his early-round win over Teimour Radjabov, were of instructive value. About the win over Radjabov, I had a feeling of deja vu when I replayed it that the fundamental outline of his winning plan was very similar to an old victory of Jose Capablanca's. When I read Carlsen's comments in the post-game press conference to the same effect I had to find the game in question, and it wasn't too difficult: Ilya Kan-Capablanca from the same city (Moscow) in 1936.
So in this week's ChessVideos show I present both games, hopefully with enough clarity and depth to help you pressure and (generally) defeat your opponents from similar structures. If Kan and especially Radjabov failed to hold, our everyday opponents at the club level are really going to be in trouble!
The show is free, as always (one-time only free registration is required) and will be available on-demand for the next month or so.
Most of this Frontline interview with world champion Viswanathan Anand repeats familiar ground, but this interchange offers something new:
Your take on Kasparov's remarks?
Of course, some people, like Kasparov, really wanted me to lose. He was even clearly trying to cause it. He was trying to come there, see if he could get under my skin and somehow negatively impact my play. For me, it was especially important not to give him that satisfaction.
I found Kasparov's timing extremely surprising. He came during the sixth round. He was so clearly trying to stir something up about my play. I felt his sympathies were obvious.
It's an interesting reaction from Anand to remarks from Garry Kasparov that were implicitly complimentary: it's because of Anand's usual high level that Kasparov found Anand's play in the first half of the match to (ostensibly) reveal a lack of motivation and subpar play. Maybe the current champion simply used Kasparov's remarks as "bulletin board" material, the same way a strong, widely praised sports team might take an article claiming their next opponent is a slight favorite and then cultivate a defiant attitude of us against the world on the grounds that "no one believed in us". It's a bit silly, but maybe it works.
Still, in this case I think Anand would be better served taking the high road. In the big picture, Kasparov has done more for chess than Anand has, but Anand has displayed as much resilience over the long haul as his great predecessor and infinitely more class. (Kasparov's fighting spirit was incredible in the first half of his career, but went AWOL in the Deeper Blue, Kramnik and X3D matches. Anand's trajectory was the opposite: he looked psychologically vulnerable against Kamsky in their first Candidates' match, against Kasparov in 1995 once things started going wrong and against Karpov in Lausanne, but in many events since then, notably his world championship matches against Topalov and Gelfand, he has shown a great deal of toughness.)
Anand should just laugh Kasparov off in such a way as to suggest that Kasparov was a really great player whose relevance - in the distant past - was tremendous. If he wants to throw in a dig, he could note that a player who quit chess because he didn't have a rematch handed to him on a silver platter shouldn't question the motivation levels of those who are still in the ring slugging it out. (Yes, Anand is too classy to say that, but is it a fair point?)
HT: Brian Karen