NH Chess Tournament 2010

[Christopher Kreuzer]

Just noticed the Chessbase article on the NH Chess Tournament 2010:

http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=6607

http://www.nhchess.com/index.html

David Howell seems to be doing well so far. Lost to Gelfand in round 1, but then beat Ljubojevic and van Wely to reach 2/3. Playing Nielsen today in round 4 of a double round-robin 5-player team Schveningen.

[Alex Holowczak]

Ljubojevic is crazy. Against Howell, he lost on time on move 30, needing to make 40 moves in 2 hours...

[Matt Mackenzie]

Not crazy, just waaay past his best, sadly

In contrast to the other "Experience" players - Svidler a "veteran" now, is he?? Bloody hell

[Matt Mackenzie]

Having said that, Ljubo rolled back the years today with a nice win

[Christopher Kreuzer]

Someone mentioned Howell's nice technique to draw his round 8 game against van Wely, and Howell's game was the first to finish in round 9, a win against Nielsen:

http://www.nhchess.com/scores.html

At this rate, the Rising Stars will win with a round to spare.

[Jonathan Rogers]

Yes, I referred to it in the Junior section. Excellent result for Howell today though I imagine that he isn't gaining many points overall - much will depend on his result in the last round with Black. Still, he does often finish events strongly, even if they have not been very successful events.

Nielsen did play shockingly today, though - the game reminded me of another miniature that he lost against the Ruy Lopez (McShane at Hastings some six or so years ago). They were saying on the live commentary yesterday that Nielsen is vastly over-rated, something on which I had no opinion, but now ...

Anyway, we should add Giri to our list of players will be in the top ten (maybe higher) for much of this decade.

[Christopher Kreuzer]

Yes, I referred to it in the Junior section. Excellent result for Howell today though I imagine that he isn't gaining many points overall - much will depend on his result in the last round with Black. Still, he does often finish events strongly, even if they have not been very successful events.

Nielsen did play shockingly today, though - the game reminded me of another miniature that he lost against the Ruy Lopez (McShane as Hastings some six or so years ago). They were saying on the live commentary yesterday that Nielsen is vastly over-rated, something on which I had no opinion, but now ...

Anyway, we should add Giri to our list of players will be in the top ten (maybe higher) for much of this decade.

Was Giri the one who did lots of Chessbase commentary on the Anand-Topalov match? I was impressed with that. And what's the story with Howell losing twice to Gelfand? Did he just get outplayed both times? (Gelfand, being of course, the strongest player there).

[Jonathan Rogers]

Yes, the same Giri. One very bright young man.

Gelfand won the first game from a position where many would have agreed a draw (to say nothing of the fact that when one plays the Petroff, one is assumed not to be too adverse to a draw). It was a remarkable grind, and Mig said that it was games like this (rather than the prospect of dying poor) that might encourage the likes of Howell to give up chess at some point! If you want to improve your technique in Q + Q + P v Q + Q +P (!!) here it is

http://www.nhchess.com/PGNViewer/archive.html

But Gelfand was always the deserved winner in the return, which he annotated on chessbase.com

Gelfand is still a class above, one feels.

[LozCooper]

Yes, I referred to it in the Junior section. Excellent result for Howell today though I imagine that he isn't gaining many points overall - much will depend on his result in the last round with Black. Still, he does often finish events strongly, even if they have not been very successful events.

Nielsen did play shockingly today, though - the game reminded me of another miniature that he lost against the Ruy Lopez (McShane at Hastings some six or so years ago). They were saying on the live commentary yesterday that Nielsen is vastly over-rated, something on which I had no opinion, but now ...

Anyway, we should add Giri to our list of players will be in the top ten (maybe higher) for much of this decade.

Looked to me like black was caught out in the opening. Let's not assume players are vastly overrated just because an English player beats them

[Christopher Kreuzer]

Yes, the same Giri. One very bright young man.

Gelfand won the first game from a position where many would have agreed a draw (to say nothing of the fact that when one plays the Petroff, one is assumed not to be too adverse to a draw). It was a remarkable grind, and Mig said that it was games like this (rather than the prospect of dying poor) that might encourage the likes of Howell to give up chess at some point! If you want to improve your technique in Q + Q + P v Q + Q +P (!!) here it is

http://www.nhchess.com/PGNViewer/archive.html

But Gelfand was always the deserved winner in the return, which he annotated on chessbase.com

Gelfand is still a class above, one feels.

Agreed about Gelfand. That game was very instructive. I really liked the way Gelfand went to d3 with his king! And I'm still trying to work out what was going on when the pawns were queening (maybe 52.Kg3, but then Qd6+ stops White playing Qg6 later to get a pair of queens off). Once the checks started with the two queens, it looked finished to me. The White queen on h8 simply doesn't have enough influence as it only controls the diagonal and one file and one rank.

About deciding to go (fully) professional or not, I noticed the NH website has this for Howell:

http://www.nhchess.com/participants.html

"Of late Howell has been playing semi-professionally and he is still hesitating if he should put his money on chess or follow his friends who are studying at university. Perhaps the NH Tournament can help him to find an answer to this question."

This seems to be a perennial debate, but with Sadler having played a few tournaments recently, and McShane being more active again, it might be worth discussing. Obviously it is a personal decision at the end of the day, but what factors influence such decisions?

Possibly a subject for a new thread, though.

[Jonathan Rogers]

Loz, I said nothing at all to suggest that Nielsen is over-rated because he lost to an English player. I commented on his actual play, which today really spoke for itself.

The commentators yesterday were saying that he earned his high rating some years ago but is now relatively inactive and it is now rather high. Makes sense, doesn't it?

[LozCooper]

Loz, I said nothing at all to suggest that Nielsen is over-rated because he lost to an English player. I commented on his actual play, which today really spoke for itself.

The commentators yesterday were saying that he earned his high rating some years ago but is now relatively inactive and it is now rather high. Makes sense, doesn't it?

Well at worst he's still a strong 2670+ GM who got caught out by good preparation. I'm very pleased to see David on 50% against such tough opposition and hope he can carry this good form into the Olympiad

[Jonathan Rogers]

Nielsen has had trouble defending the Ruy before (see earlier post) and so we can certainly give Howell credit for switching to this opening. He is more dangerous than he used to be against 1...e5, now that he is playing Scotch and Ruy instead of just 3 Bc4, d3 etc, in which he used to lose a number of games (Leonard and I both used to say on this forum that he would need to sharpen up here. Are we allowed to feel smug now? I also thought that he needed to be less reliant on 2 c3 v Sicilian).

I don't claim to have studied Nielsen in detail, but the only other 2650+ player whom one sees losing in the way he did today is Van Wely... (and no I am not just thinking of Gawain and Luke's wins over Van Wely, seemingly every August when Simpsons used to run)!

[Matt Mackenzie]

Given the praise Gelfand is (rightly) getting here, it is worth remembering he got mashed in 15-odd moves last year.......

(in a Petroff, to boot )

[Jonathan Rogers]

Actually, since most of the "Experience" team are higher rated than I had assumed (!), Howell would pick up quite a few points if he makes a draw tomorrow (let alone a win, but Black v Svider is the second hardest game of this tournament).

Going back to quick losses - almost anyone can have them. I don't remember Gelfand's loss but am happy to take Matt's word for it. But I singled out Nielsen and van Wely as being very prone to suffering them (and not just against players over 2700 either). Not that it matters greatly.