First of all a big thank you to the unknown
chess player who got me out of the dog house.
On Wednesday the 28th Nov. Bells 1 played Edin West 1.
We won 4-2 and there followed the end of match win, lose or draw
celebrations in Bells. I arrived home (eventually) very much the
worse for the wear. Nag Nag Nag Nag...
On Thursday some great lad pops into my wife's shop,
buys a CHESS and leaves her a wee Christmas present.
She is convinced I set it up and I am forgiven. Cheers mate.
They (who ever they are?) only sent two CHESS'S she asked for six.
She is trying to get more. She is fed up with the sad look Chess
players are giving her when she says the magazine has been sold out.
One instructive position from Bells v Edin West.
M.Chisholm v M.Robinson
White has just played 18 g5 and Black could find nothing better
than 18...Nd7? losing the exchange and a pawn after 19 Nxd6.
White then went onto win quite comfortably.
Black could have avoided losing material with 18...Nfd5.
The planet has been making merry at the expense of Vladimir Kramnik
who missed a mate in one in his match v the computer Deep Fritz.
Everyone has seen it but I must show it for completeness.
Kramnik played 34...Qe3 and Deep Fritz mated by 35 Qh7.
I would not be too bothered about being mated when you
consider the amount of money that Kramnik is being paid.
We are laughing at him, but he is laughing all the way to the bank.
Here is the full game.
[Click here to replay the game]
Deep Fritz - V.Kramnik
1.d4 d5 2.c4 dxc4 3.e4 b5 4.a4 c6 5.Nc3 b4 6.Na2 Nf6 7.e5 Nd5 8.Bxc4 e6 9.Nf3 a5 10.Bg5 Qb6 11.Nc1 Ba6 12.Qe2 h6 13.Be3 Bxc4 14.Qxc4 Nd7 15.Nb3 Be7 16.Rc1 0-0 17.0-0 Rfc8 18.Qe2 c5 19.Nfd2 Qc6 20.Qh5 Qxa4 21.Nxc5 Nxc5 22.dxc5 Nxe3 23.fxe3 Bxc5 24.Qxf7+ Kh8 25.Qf3 Rf8 26.Qe4 Qd7 27.Nb3 Bb6 28.Rfd1 Qf7 29.Rf1 Qa7 30.Rxf8+ Rxf8 31.Nd4 a4 32.Nxe6 Bxe3+ 33.Kh1 Bxc1 34.Nxf8 Qe3 35.Qh7
So how come a player of Kramnik's class can miss a mate in one?
Jonathan Rowson in The Herald tries to explain by stating in
normal mating patterns when a Queen delivers mate on h7 the
Knight is on f6 or g5 but not on f8.
Jonathan then adds:
"Kramnik will have been caught up in his own exquisite narrative
of events, peppered with concepts such as 'outside passed pawn',
'bishop versus knight', 'back rank', 'queen exchange', so he
played a well-motivated move."
I totally agree but already the conspiracy theories have started.
Kramnik chucked the game because the Fritz team have something
on him following the toilet fiasco in his match v Topalov.
Quick recap here:
In the recent Kramnik-Topalov match, during game 3, Kramnik
visited the toilet, the only place obviously not covered
by video cameras, no less than 50 times. (CHESS Dec. 2006).
The Topalov camp claimed he may have been consulting a computer.
So Kramnik wanted the Chess World to know he was under instructions
to take a dive and by playing such a move he highlighted the fact.
(I wonder if Kramnik was on the Grassy Knoll...)
So what took him so long?
He could have followed Von Heydebrand - Hensel, Berlin, 1836.
[Click here to replay the game]
Von Heydebrand - Hensel
1.d4 d5 2.c4 dxc4 3.e4 b5 4.a4 c6 5.axb5 cxb5 6.b3 Ba6 7.bxc4 bxc4 8.Rxa6 Nxa6 9.Qa4+ Qd7 10.Qxa6 Qxd4 11.Qxc4 Rd8 12.Qc6+ Rd7 13.Qc8+ Rd8 14.Bb5+ Qd7 15.Bxd7
There were other chances for a quick end.
Here Kramnik played 5...Nd5.
Missing 7...Qa5 8.Qg4 Qxa4 9.Qxc8 mate.
In this position Kramnik played 20...Qxa4.
Why not 20...Kf8 21 Qxh6 Qxa4 22 Qh8 mate.
And finally here Kramnik played 25...Rf8
Why not 25...Bb6 26 Qe4 Bd8 27 Rf8 mate.
So having discovered these quicker ways to lose, I think
we can safely assume that Kramnik did not take a dive.