nobody hated Queen like Fischer...
and nobody hates rooks like Topalov!
compliments!

A petition for next year, The perfect tournament, Linares 2011, should have: Topalov, Aronian, Ivanchuk, Grischuk, Kramnik, Anand, Leko. (7 past winners) of Linares and Linares-Morelia. Special guests and commentators: Kasparov and Karpov.

Could also consider Carlsen but he is not a winner yet. Maybe they can add something extra to the tournament like a blitz match (rematch): Nakamura-Carlsen.

Why isn't the game of (your own) Arne mentioned?
See the analyses of Monokroussos and on chessok.

@Radical Caveman

Ok, maybe one can also think of bias from me. I don't think so, but ok.
That's nothing wrong in having some personal favorite, but I don't have problems in showing it.
Here the case is different.
First, I don't agree with your "he and Topalov would both draw in the last round. That’s just the way high-level chess is". Not only there was "a high likelihood" that Topalov won, but also some great chances for Grischuk to loose (of course any other results were posible, though).
Second, I repeat (and because of what I said and aparently some bias didn't allow YOU to consider) that I think Topalov should always unpasionately be considered favorite for last round.

I think I'm a lot more based on facts (and figures) than you and Peter, in this, but I respect opinions.

@T. Goto

I respect the way you interpret or understand "luck", for me is like others have said :"luck is probability taken personally".

@What-I-Think-Is
By the way, I agree with your perception of Topalov.

@What-I-Think-Is
Well, your position regarding the notion of 'luck' is defensible. My position is that 'luck' is only conceived subjectively, and thus it is not a kind of entity that exist in the world as a ball exists (I am not a Platonist). However, it is nevertheless an entity which does have a meaning regarding the way we experience the world. I do favor the synthesis of subjectivity and objectivity, therefore I think that it is perfectly permissible to speak of 'luck' in our statement. So, from my standpoint, your example is purely objective, and thus insufficient in addressing the problem of 'luck'. That being said, your position is widely accepted and perfectly defensible.

Go Levon!))
Great player and very kind person))))

congratulations to Topalov, hope he'll be number one on the live list now.... until Carlsen takes the lead again:-)

bravo Topa ... I so want to hear Topalov's comments about the game. Especially about 32.Rxf6 which made no sense to me. I have no idea how he managed to beat Gelfand from then on, but it was a thril worth watching.

Nothing better than winning this for a huge future against ANAND

It will be a tough match but my fingers are crossing for ANAND, neverthless if Topalov win the world of chess will not lose nothing.

GENS UNA SUMUS

PAIS PINTO

@pete You'll hear it soon, as I did an exclusive video interview with him!

Congrets to Topalov what a great spirit!!! Anand and Topalov are great players but the latter is a much better (street)fighting man...so this will be decisive if Anand tries to chicken-out in complicated positions (to play a defendable but slightly worse endgame). If Topalov would get rid of Danialov and the (his) pimp-like suits en ties(the observations of my wife) he could be a real Chess King!

Congratulations to Topalov. Although I don't like him personally, he deserves great credit for beating Gelfand's Petroff. Gelfand rarely does anything exciting and although usually plays very accurate chess, he does little memorable for these tournaments. Same with Wang Yue.

Congratulations to Topalov!

This tournament reminds me of why I was such a *huge* Topalov fan before Elista: Topalov's fighting spirit is second to none!

And what is better than beating the Petroff in the final round to win a supertounament?

@pete

32.Rxf6 was a choice, aimed at avoiding what would be, at least, a very difficult ending, with black pushing his g pawn, which I think would be easily enough for a draw. Of course the rooks ending may also have been equal at some point, but most certainly not.

@Peter

Indeed, by "your" yesterday's criterium (encounters Grischuk-Topalov), they would NOT untie, because they remained 1-1.
And so, your consideration of Grischuk favorite because of that was wrong.
BTW, on the contrary, Topalov would always be favorite. Not only he has 70 more elo points (and circa 40 more than his today's opponent, against Grischuk's 30), but also he was playing white, whereas Sasha played black.
The only handicaps Topalov could have were 1. Too agressive, too daring, but that is also why he is as strong as he is; 2. If he was a player of the kind of being too afected by pressure or yesterday's defeat. But he isn't!
So, could it be that your judgment was influenced by some personal preference?

Did you also read that I already corrected it, Castro?

@Castro: I am just a patzer mate, but my engine was totally aginst 32.Rxf6. I personally think Topa chose the more dificult path, but lets hear what he has to say about the game :)

@Peter: c'mon I can't wait for the video :D

No, in fact I read it, and wrote exctly that yesterday, but my browser freezed, and I posponed to today.

@Peter

Yes, now I read your correction. But that corrects indeed the hypotesis, you didn't adress the rest of what I said. Even if Grischuk had a direct plus against Topalov (but anyway tied overall), it would be dubious to consider him favorite before the last round, except for someone rooting for him, right?

@Castro,

You didn't have to be rooting for Grischuk to think there was a high likelihood that he and Topalov would both draw in the last round. That's just the way high-level chess is, unfortunately. If Grischuk had the tiebreak edge going in, it was perfectly reasonable to consider him the favorite to win the trophy.

If anyone has a bias here, it's you.

bias??? never have seen that on this site!!

Carlsen remains number one, looking at the Live ratings. But it is so close!

Topalov has burnt all his luck here. Anand will be happy!

The real big news is that Boris 'The Professor' Gelfand lost a drawn endgame after fighting his way back into the game. Unbelievable!

Congratulation to Topalov!

I know you can do it and you prove it. keep it up and now you have a big challenge to meet Anand. Wish you luck.

@SanChess

Gelfand commits the weak move Nxh2, when he has Ne5 available.

He later plays Qe2, and simplifies in Topalovs favour by move 24. Sacrificing the exchange in the process.

This is Gelfand, mind you, who tossed everyone on their heads in the World Cup, and who was also too timid to capture Nakamura's knight.

He then manages to get back into the game, after having thrown Topalov two life buoys. But Gelfand manages to find the only losing move in an endgame where the king had five drawing moves. This after Topalov shot himself in the foot with Rxf6.

Yeah, great game!

"The perfect tournament, Linares 2011, should have: Topalov, Aronian, Ivanchuk, Grischuk, Kramnik, Anand, Leko. (7 past winners) of Linares and Linares-Morelia. Special guests and commentators: Kasparov and Karpov.

Could also consider Carlsen but he is not a winner yet"

It would be more perfect with Carlsen instead of Leko.

@Nader

Carlsen will play in next year's Linares - that was confirmed. And Topalov as the defender also.

@:Nader: as a top GM Leko plays ocasionally a good (even great) games, but the majority is just boring chess to be honest. He should not be invited.

@Nemozyne:

You're absolutely right.

No one would normally expect Gelfand to be intimidated by any player to the point of blundering that bad. But it looks he might have some sort of psychological difficulty with Topalov. The only other time he lost a Petrov against him was at Corus 2008 and it was far worse, e.g. he blundered the queen on move 27! {http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1482219} The overall score favours Topalov +12 -8 =27, according to Chessgames.

Anyway, has anyone heard Gelfand explaining what happened this time around?

You say everyone expected the ending to be drawn. That wasn't the view of Alex Yermolinsky commentating for the ICC on chessfm.
He analysed very deeply and found winning line after winning line. There was so much analysis it was hard to get an overview but one can certainly conclude that Gelfand would have had to play very exactly to find the drawing line...if there was one.

If it was such clear draw why did Topalov give the exchange back to go into that rook and pawn ending 4 to 3 with the bishop pawns being doubled. He must have thought it was won or very difficult for Gelfand to defend.
** ** ***
Tx again for your work Pete!

Yeah Meppie, I contacted Vesselin before the game and advised him to play 11.h5, since I was pretty sure Gelfand wouldn't be able to come up with Hopman's way of drawing the game ;-)

For some reason the game didn't show up in my database. I immediately added it to the game annotations!

Peter where is the video?

Working on it right now. Had an excellent Spanish lunch after the closing. ;-)

Wasn't 40...a5 a bad move? Don't think white can make progress if the pawn stays at a7.

great :) ... how was the paella

Congratulations to Topalov! We can argue that he was lucky in a few occasions, but great Capablanca said that a good player has a luck on his/her side. So what can I say? Anyhow, he may have had some shaky moments, but they sure made this tournament entertaining! Grischuk seems to carry his new form this year as well, and keeps pushing to realize his early promise. That's a great news, because he is a dynamic player to bring a lot of interesting chess. If only he can avoid time troubles... Personally, I think he was a bit better deserved to win this tournament, but Vallejo was, unlucky he may have been, really great as well: he stood firm at the last round. I think he deserves kudos from chess fans!

I wont use the word luck, luck doesn't exist. In 1999, Pedro Martinez pitching a 95mph would get anyone out, If I threw that same ball at 95mph following the same direction, to the same baseball player, probably the ball would still be in the air. This is because they know I am amateur and have confidence to hit it relaxed, and well. What I mean is that Topalov might be getting the aura of a killer, of Kasparov, or Fischer. He looked like a lion in this tournament. Yes he made mistakes, but he was not afraid of jumping over his opponents and hurt himself doing it. Nervous players will blunder more frequent against him, and others, the more confident, would be shy in front of them. Topalov knows how to make a psychological war, he did it with Kramnik and the toilet; even Kasparov, although in a different situation, suffered from this in his very last game. The clothes he uses, usually white and brilliant colors, have a purpose. I think he would even smoke in the table if he could. The problem with him is overconfidence, this is where I think Anand is better than him. And he wont be afraid of the lion, because he is a tiger.

I agree radically with Radical Caveman on this one. Before the 10th round there weren't 'great chances' for Grischuk to lose, against lowest seeded Vallejo, and there wasn't a 'high likelihood' Topalov would win, against the solid, Petroff playing Gelfand.

(off-topic) The Reykjavik tournament is already "current" since yesterday.

Agree with "What-I-think-Is" about the aura stuff

The problem with today chess is that everything that is not frybkable seem to be a blunder. It may be true from computer perspective, but wait a minute, we are still humans and it is easy to critize GM performance when you're looking at the game with a engine that don't dare about time, pressure and position from human perspective.

Topalov is old school, he is not born with a chess program. He don't count only on engines to play chess lines, he have a good instinct and if he have a good idea, he isn't affraid of playing "weaker moves" to apply his plan. So far it seem to confused opponents, maybe because they are studying just the "strongest frybkable lines", who knows!

His games don't let me indifferent, and that rather rare in the 2750+ pool.
Nice to see a player with attitude (on board).

@Peter

OK, my "‘great chances’ for Grischuk to lose" was exagerated, but you "radically agree with Radical Caveman"?? "a high likelihood that he and Topalov would both draw"?? By that logic, all rounds would just have draws ("high likelihood").
That's not counting with Topalov nor Vallejo, nor elo, nor colours, or maybe it's the old belief about the Petroff being extra-solid (and boring)...
I must say you're a pair of radicals! :-)

"The twelve participants are (in alphabetical order): Levon Aronian (Armenia), Magnus Carlsen (Norway), Leinier Dominguez (Cuba), Vugar Gashimov (Azerbaijan), Boris Gelfand (Israel), Vasily Ivanchuk (Ukraine), Sergey Karjakin (Russia), Vladimir Kramnik (Russia), Alexander Morozevich (Russia), Ruslan Ponomariov, Jan Smeets (The Netherlands) and Peter Svidler."

A good field for the Melody Amber.

go Topalov, Anand, Grischuk, Carlsen !
good chess.
and others