There is a mistake on the Football System Table.
I think Kramnik should be second and Aronian Third!

Looks like Aronian and Kramnik have been switched in the "Football System" Crosstable

amazing escape and ruturn by Alexei, this is his lucky tournament

I can't help feeling sorry for Wang Hao, especially after his game against Shirov.

In case of both draws in the last round, the football scoring may actually make a difference. With chess scoring, Kramnik's and Aronian's Berger would be exactly equal, but with football scoring, Shirov's +3 costs more than Wang's -3, so Aronian, who scored more against Shirov, has higher Berger.

What are you talking about??? Read the regulations on the official site.

Football table now corrected.

I think Shirov takes part in the Olympiad as Spain's #1, from 21/09 to 03/10 in Khanty-Mansiysk. And the 09/10 he starts playing the Masters Final in Bilbao. Wow !

Fortunately the Olympiad is not under the Sofia rule, so he can draw all rounds, as he did last week in the Spanish Teams tournament. It's a pity for Spain, because a fighting Shirov+Vallejo+Illescas+some young player would make a strong team.

Are Anand and Carlsen going to play the Olympiad? What about Aronian and Kramnik?

Big battle by Hao!!! He could easily drew by perpetual checks many times. For the beauty of the game, this was the most nicest and incredible tactical game in this tmt. It's not so important that he lost... but nice to watch such an incredible fighting spirit.

It's a pity for all of us, actually.
A fighting Shirov is one of the best things every chess fan can dream of, as this tournament is showing

"Read the regulations on the official site."

Might be a good idea :) In fact, "Reglamento del Torneo" regards tie for second place impossible but anyway, they don't seem to rely much on Berger.

I have been reading the rules and and regulation on the website but are still not sure who qualifies if Kramnik and Aronain both draw their game tomorrow. Anybody who knows?

Nobody talks about the blunder 54...Rh4?? and the draw Aronian missed? 55.Kxa3 instead of 55.Kb4?? is equal since the standard winning plan 55...Kc3 doesn't work now. White can even play 56.Be4 then if he wants. After 56...Rh6 57.Ka4 you don't need a tablebase so see the draw, you just need to know the technique. IMHO it's possible that Kramnik played 54...Rh3+ instead but the rook touched h4. Or is it really possible that both players missed the 'simple' draw?

Agent 00Peter, find it out! ;-)

Forgot a third possibility: I'm completely wrong and missed an obvious fact! But what is it?

Completely missed that. The fourth option is that it's a transmission error. Will ask the arbiter tomorrow (or one of the players at breakfast).

I vote for Rh3 as the move. It's a logical move in that position, and Kb4 then comes as a normal answer.

But still, don't get that we didn't spot that option earlier....

Sorry Peter but it's not fair to speak about chance to explain Shirov qualification !

The real thing is that he put the pressure during all the games since the begining of this very strong tournament

You don't finish ahead of the n°4 and 5 players in the world because you are lucky ;)

OK here it is: if Aronian and Kramnik finish on the same number of (football) points they will play two blitz games (4 minutes + 3 seconds increment) and in case of 1-1, an Armageddon with 5 against 4. So similar to Giri-Nakamura last month.

I posted the same query as Deep Mikey above as comment #85 in the current ChessNinja item, and at The Chess Mind blog's Shanghai round-4 item (now round-5 item too):

Did Kramnik really play 54...Rh4+? against Aronian today? It's plausible that both players missed the stalemate defense 55.Kxa3! Kc3 56.Bb1 Rg4 (Zugzwang? Nope...) 57.Be4!---or just 56.Be4! right away. However, the move 54...Rh3+ is a purposeful way to win (just 1 move worse than ...Rh6 right away), and White's 55.Kb4 could be a response to that. Anyone onsite?

@lemilourouge
I didn't write that luck explains Shirov's qualification. He has reacted well in situations where he was under pressure and indeed put pressure on his opponents with fighting chess, as always. But that doesn't mean he wasn't lucky at the same time.

Your last remark perhaps counts for a 13-rounder, but with this time control and only six rounds a bit of luck can bring you ahead of others.

But OK, Shirov's win against Kramnik and the second half of today's game looked pretty impressive. :-)

@Kenneth
See above.

Shirov pressed for his luck.

Korchnoi said something similar in his match against Petrosian. We were equal, but in the final stage, my tenacity prevailed and Petrosian collapsed. From the outside, it looked like it was pure luck.

This tournament had some really interesting games (perhaps the time control used had an influence on that , which encouraged aggressive play ) even though your Rybka might not agree , but i thought the drama and complex game were there .

Wang Hao has been very brave today when he could draw by repetition , even though the results have not been his way , in my eyes he has earned my respect with his fighting spirit , he was just unlucky in both games against Shirov , one he could have won with more time on the clock , and the other he could have drawn .

Speaking of Shirov , i'm delighted he qualified , he has not been done justice in the past so i'm really happy for him that he gets the chance to contend for a prime event again , congratulations Alexei ! :)

"[Wang] was just unlucky in both games against Shirov"

Especially in the first where he got a winning position because Shirov accidentally touched a bishop.

I Think there's a mistake on the football system point.If is 1 full point for a draw and Wang Hao has two draws,then he has 2 points right?Instead of just one?

I didn't consult any tablebase, but during the game Leontxo Garcia and lots of players were using it and nobody pointed an error in Aronian-Kramnik. In fact, trying to analyse by myself, it seems 54... Rh4 isn't a mistake after all: 55.Kxa3 Kc3 56 Be4 Rf4! (I'm not obliged to pick the bishop and stalemate!) 57 Bc2! (renewing the stalemate beautifully) 57... Rf2! (the point. now white's bishop is chased) 58 Bb1 Rf1! 59 Be4 Re1! and the bishop finally falls, for example 60 Bd5 Re5 61 Bc6 Ra5+ 62 Ba4 Kc4 and white is forced to drop the bishop with Kb2. But indeed, it's a very beautiful moment, deserving a commentary

correcting: after 57 Bc2 simply 57... Rf7, since white can't move the king with the bishop falling (in fact, after 57 Bc2 Rf7 white has 58 Bb3, and black is obliged to play 58... Rf4, to what white can answer 59 Bc2 again. it doesn't spoil anything, but waste time. to 59 Bc4 black only chooses a different square, 59... Rf5 for example). so 57 Bb1 is better, but then 57... Rf1 is correct, as 58 Bc2 simply hangs the bishop. then 58 Be4 Re1 and its over.

The Chessbase story gives 54...Rh3+ without any comment (as someone posted after my comment to the game at Chessgames.com), and now TWIC has amended their gamescore accordingly. So while Peter Doggers slumbers in Shanghai, I'm confident of my hunch! It's important because I'm using the policy voiced in my Chessgames.com comment to say when to amend historical gamescores, which no longer have players and arbiters able to tell what really happened...

Research by me and Guy Haworth suggests an overall error rate north of 1%, and independent of Elo in the 2000s--2400s range. That extrapolates to about 50,000 mis-transcribed games in the Chessbase or Opening Master collections. The game Sebag-Yang from the latest Women's Grand Prix is another example, where 34.Rxd8+ Qxd8 was undoubtedly left out of the gamescore, which miraculously remains legal to the end of the game. This is still uncorrected at the official site, TWIC, Chessgames.com, wherever...

Senhor Kowalczuk (silvakov), there is a free 6-piece tablebase online at http://www.k4it.de/index.php?topic=egtb&lang=en run by Eiko Bleicher, who is assisting the work by Haworth.

An example with Guy Haworth is http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1525898, where we think White really played 46.Qxg2 not the given 46.Kxg2.

Meant to put a smiley :-) after "slumber in Shanghai...

Slumber time is over! ;-)

While every now and then transmission errors pop up at tournaments, we shouldn't simply assume that such a move wasn't played. (Several media have even changed it to 53...Rh3.) I asked Levon this morning and he said he did play the move. He thought it was a draw anyway. As you'll see in the video, he basically thought he had set up a fortress.

Peter, thanks---but your correction is unclear. By "the move" do you mean 54...Rh4? was played after all? Guess I'll watch the video...

Yes, 54...Rh4.

Thanks! Well...that may undermine my historical-correction policy, and revise my "1%" down a couple tenths of a percent... I'll have to publish the ones we've found, as a collection of Raymond Smullyan-type chess puzzles for readers to ponder.

no offence to kramnik, but chess base has chosen him, among gk, and mc as one of their main media boys. if you read their articles involving any of these guys they most often strech the truth; sometimes going to extremes to make them look superior. flawless.

Wow, Peter's confirmation of 54...Rh4 causes the Chessbase report to lose many points of credibility. They called the game a "flawless technical win by Kramnik", boasting that he "displayed absolutely breathtaking technique", and that "even six-piece tablebases have no improvements to suggest", while at the same time they changed the actual moves (without even mentioning it!!) simply in order to beautify his technique and eliminate the mutual blunders on moves 54-55. Even when doing so innocently, this shouldn't happen in such a respected news site. They could at least mention that there might be an error which needs further investigation, but to rewrite the game for the purpose of glorifying Kramnik's technique (which everyone knows is excellent in any case) creates an impure news reporting.

Thats funny Peter. Chessbase puts its own analysis, Chessvibes mostly just quotes what the GMs say. There's a world of difference.

Just a while ago I also spoke to Kramnik, who agreed that 54...Rh3+ looked much more logical. "I thought I was winning after 55.Kxa3 Kc3 which is true when his bishop on my side of the board, but he can put it onto his side." Not just Chessbase, but some other journalists were almost convinced 54...Rh3+ was played. What surprised me more is how Chessbase described the opening phase, as it seemed they missed Khairullin-Alekseev completely, but OK, human mistakes happen all the time.