Wednesday, April 12, 2006

Recent Annotations and Analysis on the Web

There are a number of recent articles on the web featuring game annotations and opening analysis that I thought I'd alert you to:

1) There has been lots of excellent coverage of the Topalov - Nisipeanu match, especially at ChessBase, which has recruited "ChessCafe Book of the Year" winner Mihail Marin to do its annotations (which offer a wonderful advertisement of his talents). Here are the four games from that match with links to at least two articles with annotations:

Game 4: Topalov - Nisipeanu (Sicilian Defense), 1-0
Mihail Marin at ChessBase, with excellent photo-report (or go right to the java version with notes).
Mikhail Golybev annotates, in Russian at ChessPro.

Game 3: Nisipeanu - Topalov (Sicilian, Najdorf), 1/2-1/2
Mihail Marin at ChessBase (also with java board)
Mikhail Golybev annotates, in Russian at ChessPro

Game 2: Topalov - Nisipeanu (Queen's Gambit, Orthodox), 1-0
Mihail Marin at ChessBase (also with java board)
Jose Luis Fernandez at InforChess in Spanish
Mikhail Golybev at ChessPro in Russian

Game 1: Nisipeanu - Topalov (Ruy Lopez / Spanish, Berlin Defense), 1/2-1/2
Mihail Marin at ChessBase (also with java board)
Mikhail Golybev at ChessPro in Russian

2) Tim Harding's Kibitzer #119 analyzes the Evans Gambit and looks at several very recent GM games in the critical lines while giving a review of Jan Pinski's recent Italian Game and Evans Gambit.

3) Derek Grimmell gives a positive review of Chess for Zebras, which I have discussed on these pages. If you have not yet gotten a copy, this thoughtful review may convince you it's worth nearly $30.

4) The premiere issue of The Underground Review is available online as a PDF. The work of Chess Underground blogger Petros Karagianis, it features an article by life master Brian Wall about GM Ivanchuk that analyzes some of his shorter wins; an interesting story and transcript of a Karagianis chess lecture; an essay on style in chess; and a personal essay of a "chess hobbyist." It also has quite a bit of chess-related art and photography, all with the same edginess as the prose, which should appeal to a hip college-age male readership.

5) Aronian - Anand, Amber Rapid 2006, annotated by Boris Schipkov. Excellent notes on a wild and wide open game. It begins 1. e4 e5 2. Bc4 Nf6 3. d3 Bc5 4. f4?! and features very sharp play by both sides ending in a draw.

6) Last week I annotated the game Spraggett-De La Villa, Dos Hermanas 2006. I find that there are some excellent notes on that game by FM Antonio Torrecillas at the InforChess site.

7) Also at InforChess you can find Nisipeanu - Prie, Montpellier 2006 annotated by Hector Leyva. It's a very recent and nice attacking game against the Scandinavian by Topalov's challenger.

8) In his Washington Post column of two weeks ago, Lubomir Kavalek annotated the excellent game Najer-Shirov, Siberia 2006, which featured a great tactical win for Black in the Rubinstein Variation of the Four Knights. This past Monday's column featured some great games by Pawel Blehm, first board for University of Maryland Baltimore County from the recent College Team competition. The first features an attack as White against the Scandinavian that may be better than Nisipeanu's above. I hate playing against the Scandinavian and am always glad to see it get crushed like this.



Patrick said...

I hate playing against the Scandinavian
I find this very encouraging.
Besides, both of those attacks were against the Qa5 variation which nobody plays anymore anyway.
Thanks for the digest of links.

Icepick said...

Small correction: GM Silvio Danilov is Topalov's manager. Other than the recently completed match, I don't think Topalov and Nisipeanu have any working relationship.

Michael Goeller said...

Icepick -- I am not responsible for errors in other people's stuff. I just link to it. :-)

As for the Qa5 -- I actually see it the most myself, though most people seem to want to play the Portuguese, but then I play 3.Nf3! and generally force their hand toward Qxd5 and Qa5.

Icepick said...

Okay! I would have emailed but I didn't see that the address was in your profile until this morning. Anyway, it was a small thing. It's not like you got the ratings list wrong. (FIDE, I'm looking at YOU!)

Michael Goeller said...

Icepick -- I still don't know the specific "error" you're referencing. Perhaps you misinterpret where I refer to N. as the recent "Topalov challenger" to mean that he has a "working relationship" with the champ rather than just that he has recently played him a challenge match.... In any event, I now think the error is your own.... I think I will post another piece of reader mail I received recently that amused me.... :-)

Icepick said...

'S okay, Michael. It's almost certainly me who is confused. I've been playing a lot of variants lately, and I'm getting mixed up about all sorts of things. A recent game of mine went

White: NN
Black: Icepick
2 6 r

1. c3?! Nf6
2. e3?? Ne4
3. d3 ...

Other moves also lose. For example, if 3. f3 Nxd2# wins.

3. ... Nxf2#

And at this point, I was stunned when my opponent, whose King HADN'T disappeared in a cloud of nuclear ash, calmly played 4. Kxf2. It took me about about 40 seconds to figure out what was going on. We weren't playing Atomic Chess, as I had thought, we were playing Losers Chess! Fortunately, I recovered my wits (such as they are) and went on to win. I'm just glad that didn't happen in a regular game of Chess....

So yes, I'm deeply confused and I apologize for any inconvenience.

Yours etc.,
Marcel Duchamp