Artwork created by Mster Eme on Facebook
Magnus Carlsen just won the London Chess Classic ahead of Kramnik, Adams, Nakamura and Short while solidifying his official world #1 ranking on January 1st. He becomes the youngest player in history to occupy the #1 spot.
Boris Gelfand, the oldest player and top seed in Khanty Mansiysk, survived a grueling and lengthy knockout event to capture the 2009 World Cup.
Wesley So, Jon Ludvig Hammer, and Ray Robson just confirmed their participation in the 2010 SPICE Cup A group. Two new rules will be implemented: 1. No draw offer before move 30 2. A win = 3 points while a draw = 1 point.
It’s Saturday Open Forum. The forum is yours. What would you like to discuss?
Chess Daily News from Susan Polgar
I would like to discuss Anand’s chances vs Topalov in Sofia next year. Now that both players are preparing (and will not face each other before the match)it’ll be interesting to talk about the outside actors in the matter. Leinier Dominguez is said to be part of Topalov’s fresh new team. What will be Anand’s surprises in return?
I could be wrong but I’ve never heard of a World Chess Hall of Fame. I think there should be one, and I suggest we call it the Hall of Greatness. There have always been debate on which players in chess history were great, and even some world champions may not be considered such. This Hall can settle which players should be accorded formal and lasting respect.
This may also be a bigger accomplishment for current players to aspire for, aside from superfluous GM and Super GM titles.
I knew Kasparov’s influence would help Magnus Carlsen greatly !
Only a matter of time till he’s the champion !!!!
As I watched SPICE2009 I noted the number of draws with a little dismay, although there was some very fine chess there was also more drawn games than attacking ones. I am delighted to see the 3 points for a win and the no draw offer before move 30 rules. It will lead to more attacking play – headlines like ‘So goes wild vs Robson’!
Nice picture. You look like a fairy. 🙂
Read it so many times, but how on earth could Gelf have been the oldest player in Khanty?? Definitely not, just take El Khalif, for example.
did your eyes turn blue?
I doubt that 3 point for a win will have an impact at the numbers of draws , draw is a natural result no need to devaluate it , though the 30 move rule is fine .
If you search for stats in Databases you can see that for example >2700 players have a quote of 56% draws .
If you take into account only games between 2006-2008 there are 55.5% draws , so its not getting higher.
Re: Anonymous Saturday, December 19, 2009 12:55:00 AM CST
Who’s going to decide who’s great? How will the hall maintain its standards of selection? Is greatness defined as say ‘the greatest of his or her generation’ or will the comparison be against the all time greats?
WOW great Forum today Susan, must be AMERI-CANS!!! I know when to SHUT UP, RIPLEY’S HAHAHA.
“I am delighted to see the 3 points for a win and the no draw offer before move 30 rules.”, so am I.
Those rules make chess more exciting. Hopefully, we will see more followers of chess.
I think the no draws before move 30rule is a great idea. I think the 3 points for a win, 1 point for a draw rule distorts play on the board and is a terrible idea.
Hey Rodolfo. Really! Topalov does not need Dominguez. All he needs is to play in Sofia and Danailov will do the rest! Nobody, I repeat Nobody can defeat Topalov in a match held within Bulgaria’s borders!
As to greatness:
Let the strongest Rybka-software measure the average strength in each move of f.ex. some 100 important matches of each candidate. Strength of a move may be defined as change in Rybka-rating; – the less the better.
Personally I like the 3/1/0 point system. London had its fair share of draws, but they were fighting games. The 30 move draw rule is also a good addition.
To Jacob:
I proposed the Hall of Greatness idea but I don’t have definite standards yet on how players throughout history will be evaluated and enshrined. I’m sure that in the same way that other sports have come up with rules for their own Halls of Fame, chess can form a “Nobel”-type commission to formulate its guidelines. Off-hand, greatness to me is based not just on tournaments won, but the impact that one’s brand of play and character will make on younger players.
My motive is simple: there have been many “great” players in the past 100 years that have largely been forgotten (unless an opening variation was named after them). Even recent “greats” like Korchnoi and Spassky may just be judged today based on their deteriorated levels of play, partly forgetting the big impact they had on chess during their prime. And wouldn’t it be nice for some current players to be called future Hall of Greatness members?
I think the large daily prize for Best Game had as much to do with the fighting chess as the 30-move rule and the 3/1/0.
Susan needs to put some serious cash on the line to follow LCC’s example.