World Cup

[Jonathan Rogers]

Just starting a thread in case anyone cares about the World Cup (held in the usual place and on the usual KO formula) and its possible World Championship consequences, likely though they are to change by Christmas. Apparently the two finalists qualify for ... a candidates event?. At present.

Nice to see a former British Champion hold Shirov to a draw in the first leg of their match ....

http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=5931

[Leonard Barden]

It is unclear whether both World cup finalists qualify for the Candidates or only the winner. Shirov beat Kunte in their second game. The only big upset so far has been 15-year-old Yangyi Yu knocking out Movsesian. The fastest results source is probably www.chessdom.com

[Alex Holowczak]

Well, two were supposed to qualify from the Grand Prix too, but what is happening with the sixth event in it?

[Simon Spivack]

The only big upset so far has been 15-year-old Yangyi Yu knocking out Movsesian.

Well Movsesian is only a tourist. At least according to Kasparov.

A non sequitur. That was quite a nice problem in yesterday's FT. Shades of Rubinstein's famous wins over Lasker and Capablanca. I wasted a minute looking at the recapture on f3 with the queen, the possible further annexation of b7 then highlighted the c8 weakness. At which point the solution dawned on me.

[Mike Truran]

Simon

With neither the position nor the solution to hand it's a bit tricky to congratulate you on your solving skills. Why don't you at least provide the former?

No doubt Qc1 is a splendid move in general, but without a context its lustre can but shine less brightly.

Mike

[Jonathan Rogers]

Qc1 works particularly well when played by Rubinstein, on the White side of a Tarrasch (v Lasker and in a different position, Capablanca) - See Kasparov, Vol 1 at 191-199.

So there you are.

Really, does no one know whether there are one or two qualifiers from the World Cup - this is pushing it a bit, even by FIDE standards. Normally it would be quite clear at this stage, only to change months after the event.

[Mike Truran]

Jonathan

Sorry, the context for Qc1 that I was hoping to be enlightened on was not the Rubinstein-Capablanca and Rubinstein-Lasker games (which are as well known to me as they are to you), but the contents of the FT article which Simon in his usual playful manner did not disclose in his post.

Mike

[Alex Holowczak]

Really, does no one know whether there are one or two qualifiers from the World Cup - this is pushing it a bit, even by FIDE standards. Normally it would be quite clear at this stage, only to change months after the event.

This shows just the winner of the World Cup qualifies for the Candidates series. Two players qualify by rating now, instead of just one before. Basically, this lets in Carlsen and Kramnik, who haven't bothered to take part in any of the qualifying events.

I think the bigger issue is the unfinished Grand Prix, which still needs to yield another qualifier.

[Mick Norris]

I think Aronian has won the GP regardless of who wins the 6th event (if it happens)

The World Cup winner qualifies for the candidates

I think Kramnik has almost certainly qualified by rating after the Tal Memorial, so presumably Carlsen has too

[Leonard Barden]

Two match losers Kamsky and Anand/Topalov

Two rating qualifiers Carlsen and Kramnik

At least one Grand Prix qualifier Aronian

At least one World Cup qualifier ?

One organiser (Azerbaijan) wildcard Radjabov or Gashimov

I think the problem is that Azerbaijan is only organising half the candidates (because Armenian Aronian won't play in Baku)
which means that the other half organiser, as yet unknown, may also demand a wildcard, which would mean house full.

[Mick Norris]

http://www.fide.com/FIDE/handbook/regscandidates.pdf

You may have better things to do than read all of this, but the key part is at the start

[Scott Freeman]

.....and I thought I was running the World Cup! None of the players you mention are in mine...... Our trophy actually looks like the football world cup - fantastic what you can get on ebay!
http://www.ccfworld.com/Chess/ChessClub ... xplain.htm
Sorry!

[Simon Spivack]

Sorry, the context for Qc1 that I was hoping to be enlightened on was not the Rubinstein-Capablanca and Rubinstein-Lasker games (which are as well known to me as they are to you), but the contents of the FT article which Simon in his usual playful manner did not disclose in his post.

The puzzle takes up roughly one third of Leonard's article. However, the amount of real estate occupied is not necessarily a reliable guide to its significance. I have the impression that Leonard devotes a lot of time to finding suitable challenges. I don't wish to reproduce his comments, certainly not without obtaining the necessary permissions. Leonard's column was on page fifteen of the Life and Arts section of Saturday's FT.

The question posed in the column was not difficult, I am far from being a good solver, yet it is aesthetic. The game was Gamback-Dochev, Greece, 2001. It can be found on

http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgam ... e=1#reply1

It is possible that others have used it, or seen it before.

I have spent up to half an hour at a time on some of Leonard's Saturday problems, before giving up. Nowadays, they seem to be easier, or, at least, I give up earlier.

In case I am overstepping the mark. I have sent Leonard a combination I played in the Essex-Middlesex match (sorry Jonathan, it's the only decent one I've played so far this season) by way of apology.

[Mike Truran]

Simon

Very nice too! Thanks for enlightening me.

Mike

[Jonathan Rogers]

It is "OK" to mention Essex defeats you know

....It would be hard to mention anything else these days, in the Open section ....