In Shirov-Kramnik my vote is for 44 Nc4+ Ke7 45 a4! with one idea being 45... b5 46 Nb6!?!

45 a5 b5 46 Nb6 that is of course

And another idea 45 ... N something 46 Nxb6!

But apparently that is not working, since Shirov just played the meek 44 kh2

Well Shirov should have done it on an earlier move, else it would have been a threefold repetition. But sacrificing knights is the way to go in this ending, for Kramnik just got rid of his and now allows Shirov another try with 51Nxb5, :-) but no, he just took the immediate draw.

Am I crazy, or missed something, or Shirov just had spoiled an easy win after 51 ..axb5 ...axb5 52..Nxb5..??

Yes u are crazy :)

Seems like Kramnik and Carlsen never play a bad tournament anymore. This will be the most exciting finish of a Corus tournament since.... 07 maybe? Maybe even better. Still, I would love it if they put on a tourney with the world's top ten players (all of them) playing two rounds against each opponent. Maybe Microsoft could put something like that on and make a competitive chess software to go with it? Or even better: apple?

@ Luis: Yes, I'm crazy...;) And at least a couple of moves earlier, with 49..Nc7+ and 50..Nb5, white could try a win...

Bravo Carlsen, he won today. Is he now leader? Kramnik played only draw.

@ Rothschild: I would prefer Linux...

@Rotschild

I second that! Kramnik and Carlsen are class.... pure class and the ones to beat in top chess nowadays...

Can anyone please film Sergej Tiviakov when he leaves the playing hall angry and quickly after having lost against Van Wely. And his mother watching in the background... Yes, thats great television!!!

It seems people don´t like Tiviakov anymore....
Did he throw the draw away today? (I suppose 78...Kg5 was bad).

Jesus Christ - Giri is really something!

Kramnik and Carsen.
Iceman and Wonderboy leading with two rounds left to play!!
Just one question:
What would be tiebrake situation in case these two Chess Titans end up sharing first place?

their individual game (C-K) ended in Kramnik's favour, so it's quite clear i think......

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neustadtl_score

@Jost

Stating that it`s clear that Kramnik will win is just redicilous! If you had watched the press conference you would have heard Kramnik himself saying that the game against Carlsen was one of his best games EVER.

Not long ago Carlsen beat Kramnik in London.... So if the situation comes along I am afraid that you might have to eat your words:)

We`ll see son....

Labelled,

my note was a reaction on the previous note. I meant that if Carlsen and Kramnik were to finish sharing first, I would suspect Kramnik to be proclaimed winner of Corus 2010, because of the result in their individual game. (but I'm not sure about this).
That's not too difficult to understand is it, son....

There are no artificial tie-breaks in Corus. Never were, and hopefully never will be. Players with the same amount of points simply share their places. 1st place is no exception to this rule.

While first place and prize money will be shared in case of a tie at the top, don't they still need to come up with an "artifical tie-break" to determine who qualifies for Bilbao? Last year @ Linares, Grischuk (more wins) was picked over Ivanchuk (better Sonneborn-Berger).

To my knowledge, Corus uses Sonneborn-Berger, which indeed should favor Kramnik over Carlsen (their direct result) as well as Shirov (very efficient against the lower half of the field, but two losses against the upper half).

Of course Carlsen already qualified by winning Nanjing - if he also wins Corus it would make more sense to pick whoever is second in Wijk (not far behind) than Topalov who was second in Nanjing, 2.5 points behind Carlsen. And all this assumes that Bilbao 2010 will actually take place, in Bilbao or maybe in another city. Any news on this? I find it a bit puzzling that "Grand Slam" and/or "Bilbao" wasn't even mentioned yet .... .

BTW, nice to see the picture of what seems a friendly and animated post-mortem between Shirov and Kramnik! Hard to imagine this between Kramnik and Topalov ... . And Shirov and Kramnik weren't exactly friends some years ago (I won't discuss reasons which should be widely known ...), I remember watching live at the venue in 2001 when they didn't shake hands with each other.

But what exactly are they discussing about the position on the board - after move 9, well within established theory?

"Last year @ Linares, Grischuk (more wins) was picked over Ivanchuk (better Sonneborn-Berger)."

That's different - Linares does have tiebreak criteria. Last years it was:
a) head to head (Grischuk and Ivanchuk drawn both their games)
b) number of wins (Grischuk had 3 wins compared to Ivanchuk's 2)
c) score against opponents who scored 50% or more

In Corus there has never been a tiebreak criteria.

But you do have a point: If two or more share 1st place, who qualifies for Grand Slam final (assuming there will be one)?

At Linares, does this also affect prize money - or only who gets the trophy and (more recently) the Bilbao invitation? Many years ago in Linares, Kasparov and Kramnik were tied for first, with all tiebreaks being equal. Rapid and/or blitz playoffs weren't common yet, apparently there were discussions (or jokes) about a coin throw, but then Kasparov decided that Kramnik could have the trophy because he already had several ones in his collection.

But Corus actually has tiebreaks, which were needed in 2006 in both the A and B groups - from the tournament report ( http://www.coruschess.com/report.php?year=2006&report=13 ):
"In an amazing photo finish, Vishy Anand managed to win today, and catch up with Topalov, share first place and take the trophy on tie breaks." [both scored 9/13 1.5 points clear of the field]
"Group B’s finish was also dramatic, when Almasi [leader before the final round] lost to Cheparinov, while both Motylev and Carlsen won, with Motylev taking first place on tie breaks."
Motylev got the "automatic" invitation to the A group in 2007, but Carlsen was also invited - a logical and, certainly in hindsight, "right" decision by the organizers.

It seems to be a moot point, because everywhere you look you will find both Anand and Topalov listed as the winners for 2006. (also for other years when more players shared 1st place)
For example: http://www.coruschess.com/standings.php?year=2006&group=1
It isn't even indicated that Anand was in some way ahead of Topalov, since Topalov is listed first.

Obviously since there is only one winner throphy, they can't give it to both, so it looks like this is the only thing for which tie-break criteria are used. But they still both won the tournament. Which is not the case in Linares and most other tournaments where they use tiebreaks. There is only one winner the one with the best tiebreakers , others are 2nd, 3rd, etc.!
Linares 2000 was a special case, since Kasparov and Kramnik were equal on all official tiebreaks criteria. When they tried to add either a blitz playoff or a coin flip Kasparov and Kramnik refused. Kasparov then ceeded the throphy to Kramnik, but not the tournament win! They were both winners! Here is the extensive report:
http://www.chesscenter.com/twic/event/linares2000/linares10.html

when are we going to have carlsen's press conference?

Anand is meditating for the world championship.

Anand himself said he is not saving his best game for the Topalov match, but that his game just wasnt optimal the last few days.

Well, Anand showed something today against Kramnik, I would say. Wow!

A very dubious move from Van Welly: 10. ..Be7?! he can only survive if he has prepared this move at home till move 25 like in the other Bg5 sicilian lines.

However, 10 ...b4 is interesting, and probaly he was afraid of the sac 11.Nd5.
Again one has to admit that only a home-Fritz preparation can defend against 11.Nd5.

This ends teh story that Bg5 line of the najdorf is a dead draw.