When a player competes in this level of competition, any small thing can change the entire outcome. If the same 8 players compete in the same format 10 times, I bet that the results will be totally different all 10 times.
I will take game one as an example. Topalov walked into a bad line against Leko. He would have been lucky just to survive such a position. Not only that he survived, he won. That “luck” is what many players talked about in the pre-tournament interviews. To win a tournament this caliber, you have to be good AND lucky.
However, good players don’t need that much luck. That one game gave Topalov the momentum to dish out one of the greatest chess performances in history. That same one game had the absolute reversed affect on Leko.
I know I said this before but I cannot stress enough the philosophy of taking one game at the time, especially after a loss. This World Championship may not be the greatest event ever but it will be an event that will be remembered for a long time. I personally have enjoyed it as a fan. I hope you have too. 
Hi Susan, you use the cutest graphics! lion king etc. Where do you get them??
Dear Susan,
I notice from your posts that you work with young children, and I have read that you learned chess at the age of 4. I think I also remember reading that Bobby Fischer learned chess when he was 8. Is there an optimal age at which to begin teaching children chess? How much can be learned, for example, between 4 and 8? And what is the outside age at which a child could learn chess and still reach their full potential? Are there any grandmasters who learned chess at, say, 17? I ask this because I have a number of young nieces and nephews and am wondering when the best time to introduce them to chess is–but I think the question has a lot of general interest.
Yours,
Doug
1o times -> 10 times
Dear Doug,
Each child is different. Some can start at 4 and some at 5 or 6. I think the optimal age is around 5 or 6. The most important thing is to make it fun and exciting for children. If they like it, they will stay with it. Wins and losses early on is not important.
Best wishes,
Susan Polgar
http://www.PolgarChess.com
http://www.SusanPolgar.com
Some of the graphics came from my best friend. Some came from a talented artist from Canada. Some came from graphics I have collected in the past few years. I try to match the graphics with the headlines the best I can.
Best wishes,
Susan Polgar
http://www.PolgarChess.com
http://www.SusanPolgar.com
Who is Judit playing today??? Any exciting games by Topolov happening this afternoon??? I’m going through withdrawal.
I have to admit that one good thing about roudn -robinds is that there are FOUR great matches every day!
Oh well, can’t wait until October 29. It’s amazing that GM Karpov decided to start a chess in a little town like Lindsborg Kansas!
It seems ridiculous to me to maintain that replaying the FIDE World Championship 8 times would yield a different result each time. This statement would only make sense if the final result was a close outcome. Since Topalov essentially dominated the field I would be more inclined to think that he would prevail if the tournament were replayed. To pretend otherwise undermines his performance. What is the point in having any tournament decide a title if one can just say that the outcome was determined by something that happened to one player in the first round. Ludicrous! If you adopt that line of reasoning be sure to apply it to your own results so that we understand that when you have a dominating result it was just one possible outcome of many.
I agree with Susan. The rating system is based on large number samples and 16 games is too small to be “statistically significant” for a group of 8 competitors.
Also I might add, that in one of Susan’s earlier blog posts (I wish that I could locate it but there are so many!) she states that in a candidate match in which she participated she had an early string of wins but that did not necessarily mean that she was the dominant player.
* mikeyb: It seems ridiculous to me to maintain that replaying the FIDE World Championship 8 times would yield a different result each time. This statement would only make sense if the final result was a close outcome. Since Topalov essentially dominated the field I would be more inclined to think that he would prevail if the tournament were replayed. *
So you think that Leko would finish at -1 again and Topalov would go +6 again? You also think that Anand would have minus score at some point of the tournament again? Do you know how ridiculous you sound?
Personally i am a bit bored about unification intrigues and politics. In my perception Topalov is the clear world champion whose calibre is similar to other greats (spassky,smyslov,tal etc).He is WC not only for his formal title, but (mainly) because of his general presence in modern chessworld (He plays exciting agressive chess and most of all he is a real fighter)
I also think that it is meaningless to chat about kramnik immediately after the end of world championship. Ok he won Kasparov once (in a very boring match). But what does it mean??? Please no more kramnik anymore!!!
Posted by christos k
i totally agree that if you repeat San Luis, a different result is likely. The only thing we can say for certain is Topalov and Anand will be near the top.
Another thing I would have liked to see in San Luis is to have the top two square off in longer match (8-10 games) after a couple of months. Topalov is champ because he beat Moro 1.5-0.5 and Kasimdzhanov 1.5-0.5 while Anand could only manage 0.5 – 1.5 and 1 – 1 respectively. How does that prove Topalov is better than Anand? Even their mini-match was drawn 1-1.