English Chess Forum

NickFaulks wrote: ↑

Mon Oct 21, 2019 5:17 pm

David Robertson wrote: ↑

Mon Oct 21, 2019 5:09 pm

Pfft! Pretty undignified from Howell. I'll be interested to hear his post-match explanation

You had a better winning attempt in mind?

The dignity to which I refer, resides in the recognition that he simply hadn't done enough hitherto in the game to create winning chances. So accept that: the position was stone-cold drawn. The lack of dignity flows from the frivolous Bd5, seeking advantage where none existed. Indeed, it comes close to an insult to Wang Hao; and otherwise distorts the 'natural' outcome of the game - other players are involved. Howell may have a different take, so I'll see

Now that Alekseenko has a good chance to win, that does put Howell's decision in a new light.

It does, and I'm thinking it's not something that'll quickly be forgotten

JustinHorton wrote: ↑

Mon Oct 21, 2019 5:47 pm

It does, and I'm thinking it's not something that'll quickly be forgotten

Do explain, Justin. I can understand that Alekseenko might be a bit fed up with Howell's play if he wins but you seem to be suggesting something deeper.

No, not really. It's the history rather than the controversy I'm thinking of: the day a complete outsider would have qualified for the Candidates, but missed out because of somebody else's bizarre and unnecessary aberration.

At the end of a long tournament a tired player made a bad blunder.

Nothing sinister and no story, in my opinion.

(Duplicate post removed)

Hmm. Was distracted by work for a couple of hours, and seems my predictions have fallen apart completely. This is why I don't gamble...

I guess, as a young Russian, Alekseenko will have a more than decent chance of a wildcard if he finishes =1 but loses on tiebreak.

Nepo though

Luke clearly suffering from tiredness - missing tactics in the last two rounds.

Euro Teams starting in a couple of days. Any predictions for the board order? I would go Adams (not tired), Jones (needs to prove something), Howell (will do well on Board 3), McShane (needs to recover a bit from the IOM). Nick Pert, of course, as reserve.

JustinHorton wrote: ↑

Mon Oct 21, 2019 6:15 pm

No, not really. It's the history rather than the controversy I'm thinking of: the day a complete outsider would have qualified for the Candidates, but missed out because of somebody else's bizarre and unnecessary aberration.

No more bizarre and unnecessary than the shambles at the end of the London Candidates.

And I'd add, wouldn't it be nice to see these top 4 just once with Sadler available.

Anyway Alekseenko v Vitiugov ends in a draw, so no damage done (except to David's bank balance)

Meanwhile Gawain bashes on with all 16 pawns still on the board.