Homenajes a Bobby Fisher: links

http://www.lemonde.fr/web/article/0,1-0@2-3382,36-1001176@51-1001173,0.html


http://www.lemonde.fr/web/article/0,1-0@2-3382,36-1001172@51-1001173,0.html


http://echecs.blogs.liberation.fr/echecs/2008/01/bobby-fischer-7.html


http://www.elpais.com/articulo/deportes/Rebelde/jaque/perpetuo/elpepudep/20080118elpepudep_11/Tes


http://www.elpais.com/articulo/deportes/Muere/genio/ajedrez/Bobby/Fischer/elpepudep/20080118elpepudep_6/Tes


http://www.elpais.com/fotogaleria/Muere/Bobby/Fischer/4969-5/elpgal/


http://www.elpais.com/static/misc/ajedrez/11marzo.htm


http://lacomunidad.elpais.com/ichbinderalte/2008/1/18/el-rey-ha-muerto-viva-rey-

Mail de mi padre - viernes 18 de enero del 2008

Après Pavarotti qui chante avec les anges, le grand BOBBY FISCHER joue avec Dieu, en lui donnant l'avantage d'une tour... l'hommage de Kasparov est émouvant et j'avoue, que cela m'a beaucoup attristé. Je t'embrasse .Papa.







Despues de Pavarotti que canta con los ángeles, el gran BOBBY FISHER juega con Dios, dejandole la ventaja con una torre...
El homenaje de Kasparov es conmovedor, y debo de admitir, que esta noticia me entristecio mucho. Te mando un beso. Papa

www.panic-magazine.com

De l'autre cote du mirroir

www.panic-magazine.com

- 1 día

Wittgenstein Re-Considered: The Chess Piece

Wittgenstein: This is a chess piece. It is called the King.

Belcher: I see this piece in your hand. But what are the King's properties? That is, how do you define the King?

Wittgenstein: The definition of the piece depends on how you use the piece. The King is a piece in the game of chess, it's use is how it's defined. The use of the King is to move one space on this 8 x 8 two dimensional board, you see. I will move him one space as so, you see, this is what a King is. The function is the definition, the use determines its meaning.

Belcher: But how do you know that this use is appropriate for this piece in the game? In other words, how do you determine that some uses are valid while others invalid? I can use the King to move seven spaces, like so. You see, I can move the King to leap across the board and take your Queen. How are these not uses of the piece?

Wittgenstein: The King is following certain rules, these rules are what define the game and the King. What you propose are not uses of the piece because they do not follow the rules of the game. It is an explicit rule of the game chess that the King can only move one piece, just as it is a special explicit rule that if the King has not moved in the game yet, and the bishop and knight are out of the way, and if the rook has not been moved, you can use the "Castle rule", which is the rule that the King moves not one but two spaces and the rook moves to the adjacent side of the King. These are the explicit rules that the use of pieces make possible. A King cannot move seven spaces as you have done, because doing so is not a rule of the game.

Belcher: But, then, how do you define the rules? What determination goes into rule-legislating? How is it that the special "Castle" move is allowed while not a "Queen Castle" move?

Wittgenstein: Rules depend on their uses, the context of their employment, the purposes they fulfill when you prescribe them. Just as the rule for greeting someone in a social context is to say "Hello!" or "Hey" or "Good morning", one has to be in the appropriate context of greeting with the appropriate social dispositions for these words to be meaningful. The chess rules for the King only make sense when one has the King in hand, when one is in the appropriate context of chess playing. To know the context of application is to know the uses of the word, just as know the uses of the King.

Belcher: So how do you know the context of application? If the rules are determined by the use of the word and if the use of the word is determined by the rule, how is this not a vicious semantic circle? If a rule is contingent upon its context of application, how do you know the uses of the King? To know the uses of the King you have to know how to define the King!

Wittgenstein: Indeed, you would need to know what the function of a King is. You need to know its uses in the game.

Belcher: But then we are back at the original question! How do you define the King? If this is a King, how are its properties known? We are back at the beginning, that a piece is known through its use! But now we are using this as determination of the rules and usage, while the rules and usage depends on its functional definitions! You sir, are engaged in circular logic. No wonder you are so hard to defeat, your theory of meaning is viciously circular!

Chess

‘I am always being asked, What kind of a brain must a chess champion possess? What qualities are essential? What relation is there between chess and other mental activities? What about Englishmen? etc. To begin with, I can only say that I have today a rather poor memory, though as a child I could remember anything with ease. My record is to have repeated, when a small boy, three pages of history after I had read them once, without missing a single word. But as I have grown older – in fact since I became a first-class chess player – I have always tried to forget everything which I have not considered essential to remember, and I have succeeded so well in my training that I now have difficulty in remembering things in general. It so happens, now, that while there are several experts who remember every serious game I have played in the last 22 years, I can hardly remember a single one of them. A game played today I may hazily keep in my head for a few weeks, but after that it is gone forever. No doubt my present poor memory is a cultivated one. I have been influenced to adopt this system in order to avoid loss of sleep after a hard struggle at night. Thus I can go to sleep right after a game, whether I win or lose, and one hour after a long, strenuous, simultaneous séance against any number of opponents I may be found peacefully sleeping in my bed.

In a general way the memory of chess experts is like the memory of the great musicians. Just the same as a great pianist, for instance, can sit down and play for hours without looking at the score of any of the works he plays, a chess master can go through endless games and variations which he has unconsciously stored in his mind. The great musicians see the notes in their minds’ eyes as though they were in front of them. In just the same way the chess master sees the moves and positions. If momentarily they forget a note or a move, the previous note or move, as the case may be, will remind them of the one to follow. There is a logical sequence that helps the expert to overcome his difficulties. In fact, it should be noticed that there must be some analogy between the minds of a musician and a chessplayer. I know several eminent musicians who are very fond of chess, and on the other hand nearly all the expert chessplayers are very fond of music. We must mention as the most striking case that of Philidor, the pioneer of the modern theory of chess, a chess genius, the strongest player of his epoch, who was also one of the eminent French musicians of his time. What kind of brain is required to be a chess champion I could not say, but I hold that outside whatever natural gifts in that direction one may possess it is very important, if not altogether essential, to have a fairly good general education, so that having a greater outlook one may look upon the so-called game from a broader point of view. This should be more true now than formerly, since chess has progressed enormously during the last 60 years, and to become the champion is a far more difficult task now. In this respect it would be well to call attention to the fact that while it is true that there have been in the past, as there are at present, some great chess players who are nonentities at anything else and who have very little culture of any kind, on the other hand all the world’s champions of the last 60 years, not including myself, have been men with more than a common general culture. That was the case with Anderssen, Steinitz, and Lasker. In this respect I can lay no claim to pre-eminence of any sort. All that can be put forth on my behalf is that I have read and seen a great deal, that I have an open mind, and that I am ready to learn anything on any subject. It might be well to call attention to the fact that chess as generally played by the large majority of players is merely a game more difficult than other games, but when played by the leading masters it ceases to be a game and becomes what might be called a minor scientific art. At its present stage of development it has a great deal of a science, but it has also a great deal of an art. Whether it will ever become an absolute science is only a matter of speculation. With regard to the essential qualities in the make-up of a champion it is difficult to lay down a dictum. It might be possible for a player to attain the highest place through the unusual power of one or two qualities that might be merely normal in another player fully as strong through the development of other qualities, which in their turn are only normal in the first case. There are, however, two qualities which seem to be absolutely essential in order to obtain pre-eminence in chess. They are: unusual powers of concentration and the power to visualize positions which may arise from the position in front of the player. It has often been stated that a mathematical brain was required in order to excel as a chessplayer. While it is true that Anderssen was a professor of mathematics and that Lasker is a mathematician, we find that Morphy was a lawyer and Philidor a musician. That so far as champions are concerned. With regard to other players who have never been champions, but who have become world’s figures in chess, we may mention, amongst others, Tarrasch, a physician; Pillsbury, a lawyer; Alekhine, a lawyer; Zukertort, a physician. In England itself we have in the 50s Howard Staunton, a Shakespearean scholar, and Buckle, an historian. Surely there is enough variety in the mentalities of the few men we have mentioned. At present the only eminent players with mathematical brains are Dr E. Lasker, ex-world’s champion, and Dr M. Vidmar. Incidentally, we may add that Dr Vidmar is a well-known authority amongst electrical engineers, as he has published some excellent treatises on the subject. He is also a professor at the University of Ljubljana, Czechoslovakia [sic – Yugoslavia], and at the same time managing director of some engineering works in the above-named city, all of which does not prevent him from being one of the foremost chessplayers in the world, which shows that excellence in chess is not incompatible with excellence in other directions.

We come now to the point regarding the country and the people most adept at the game. While in the past the Jews and the Slavs have been most prominent, I do not believe that it is necessarily a matter of race. On the other hand, as chess has progressed and to excel at it has become more difficult, the question of climate has, in my opinion, come in more as a determining factor. Evidently, since chess is by its nature an indoor game, it should be played more in countries with cold climates and long winter nights than in countries where the weather is always inviting the individual to go outdoors. Englishmen are generally patient, determined, and serious-minded. These are excellent qualifications for chess. Unfortunately in their schooldays they spend most of their spare time outdoors, hunting during the winter. Chess is consequently not generally learned at an early age, which is the proper time to learn in order to become a good player. There are, nevertheless, throughout England a very large number of very good players, and if there is not at present anyone of them who ranks amongst the best in the world, it is mainly due to lack of proper support in the form of international contests. It is only through close contact with the best experts that the standard of play can be raised. There has been only one big international tournament in England in the last 23 years. I hope that in the future more support will be given for such contests, so that England may soon occupy once more a leading position in chess.

There are some considerations in regard to chess as an educational force that might be interesting to consider. Chess with regard to the mind might be said to be what sports or athletics are with regard to the body: a way to exercise and give pleasure at the same time. Morally, it tends to keep away those who play it from other dangerous indoor activities. Betting is uninteresting; more, betting is practically out of the question, because of the very nature of the game, a fact which should commend it to the attention of educationists. As a social factor it occupies a unique position. It brings together men from all stages of the social scale, regardless of creed or religion. The game is the same all over the world. In travelling from one place to another one can have no better recommendation to assure him a warm welcome than to be a chessplayer. All one has to do anywhere throughout the world is to find out where the chessplayers meet and to go there. Many a time I have seen a stranger come into a leading chess club and ask for one of the officials. His statement that he was a chessplayer visiting the town and his address was all that was required. He was promptly asked to make himself at home. If he wanted an opponent one was soon found for him, and thus he soon became acquainted with people whom he could not perhaps have met in any other way."

Jose Raúl Capablanca. English Review, November 1922.

Chess Fever

The power of mathematics to devise actions for reason as subtle, witty, manifold as any offered by sensory experience and to move forward in an endless unfolding of self-creating life is one of the strangest, deep marks man leaves on the world. Chess, on the other hand, is a game in which thirty-two bits of ivory, horn, wood, metal, or (in stalags) sawdust stuck together with shoe polish, are pushed around on sixty-four alternately coloured squares. To the addict, such a description is blasphemy. The origins of chess are shrouded in mists of controversy, but unquestionably this very ancient, trivial pastime has seemed to many exceptionally intelligent human beings of many races and centuries to constitute a reality, a focus for the emotions, as substantial as, often more substantial than, reality itself. Cards can come to mean the same absolute. But their magnetism is impure. A mania for whist or poker hooks into the obvious, universal magic of money. The financial element in chess, where it exists at all, has always been small or accidental.

To a true chess player, the pushing about of thirty-two counters on 8 x 8 squares is an end in itself, a whole world next to which that of a mere biological or political or social life seems messy, stale, and contingent. Even the patzer, the wretched amateur who charges out with his knight pawn when the opponent’s bishop decamps to R4, feels this deamonic spell. There are siren moments when quite normal creatures otherwise engaged, men such as Lenin and myself, feel like giving up everything – marriage, mortgages, careers, the Russian Revolution – in order to spend their days and nights moving little carved objects up and down a quadrate board. At the sight of a set, even the tawdriest of plastic pocket sets, one’s fingers arch and a coldness as in a light sleep steals over one’s spine. Not for gain, not for knowledge or reknown, but in some autistic enchantment, pure as one of Bach’s inverted canons or Euler’s formula for polyhedra.

George Steiner in ‘A Death of Kings’, Extraterritorial, 1968

"Your move"

Litografía a color 1890

:)

A chess master died - after a few days, a friend of his heard a voice; it was him!
"What's it like, where you are now," he asked.
"What do you want to hear first, the good news or the bad news."
"Tell me the good news first."
"Well, it's really heaven here. There are tournaments and blitz sessions going on all the time and Morphy, Alekhine, Lasker, Tal, Capablanca, Botvinnik, they're all here, and you can play them."
"Fantastic!" the friend said, "and what is the bad news?"
"You have Black against Capablanca on Saturday."

Jeu d'echecs et Mathematiques

http://www.avancement-sciences.org/fichiers/2006_4_Senechaud.pdf

Une simple association d'idees

Films et Echecs (d'ordre dramatique ou symbolique)

La Fièvre des échecs de Vsevolod Pudovkin, 1925

La légende de Zatoïchi: Voyage en Enfer de Kenji Misumi, 1964

Les Joueurs d'échecs (Shatranj Ke Khiladi), de Satyajit Ray, 1977

L'Échiquier de la passion de Wolfgang Petersen, 1979

Jouer sa vie de Gilles Carle, 1982

La Diagonale du fou de Richard Dembo, 1984

Face à face (Knight Moves), thriller de Carl Shenkel, 1991

À la recherche de Bobby Fischer de Steven Zaillian, 1993

La Partie d'échecs, d'Yves Hancha, 1994

La Défense Loujine de Marleen Gorris, 2001

Geri's Game, court-métrage d'animation des studios Pixar, 1997

*********************

K, d'Alexandre Arcady

Blade Runner de Ridley Scott

Le Septième Sceau d'Ingmar Bergman

Les Visiteurs du soir de Marcel Carné

L'Affaire Thomas Crown de Norman Jewison

2001, l'odyssée de l'espace de Stanley Kubrick

Harry Potter à l'école des sorciers de Chris Colombus

Revolver de Guy Ritchie

Superfinale du Championnat de Russie du 17 au 30 décembre 2007

Ronde 11: Alexander Morozevich 2755 - Ernesto Inarkiev 2674

Vainqueur incontestable de ce championnat: Alexander Morozevich avec 8 points sur 11.
Felicitations!

Le portrait psychologique du maître d'échecs

En 1925 Diakov, Petrovsky et Rudik ont testé douze forts joueurs du Tournoi international de Moscou, la conclusion générale de leur étude a abouti au portrait psychologique du maître d'échecs qui possède les qualités suivantes :

Bon état de santé,
Des nerfs solides,
Maîtrise de soi,
Faculté de distribuer son attention à des objets relativement sans liens,
Sensibilité à des situations dynamiques,
Esprit de type contemplatif,
Haut degré de développement intellectuel,
Caractère logique de la pensée mais dans le domaine expérimental,
Objectivité et réalisme,
Mémoire spécialisée,
Puissance de pensée synthétique et «sens positionnel»,
Facilité de combiner,
Volonté disciplinée,
Grande activité des processus intellectuels,
Discipline des émotions et de l’affectivité,
Confiance en soi.

Ce travail a posé le jeu d’échecs en activité sérieuse, en méthode d’auto-développement des capacités intellectuelles et d’autodiscipline.
Edward Lasker a proposé de substituer aux seize points ci-dessus les sept conditions:
Haut degré d’intelligence (la culture est accessoire, mais un fort joueur, même illettré, ne saurait être stupide) ;
Capacité de penser objectivement (la subjectivité est interdite car l’adversaire est censé être toujours objectif) ;
Capacité de penser abstraitement ;
Capacité de distribuer son attention à plusieurs facteurs ;
Volonté disciplinée (le joueur doit pouvoir, à volonté, accentuer vitesse et concentration de son esprit) ;
Nerfs solides et contrôle de soi ;
Confiance en soi.

Alekhine contra Capablanca

El automata de Maetzel

Damir Levacic - Entrenador 1984-1986

L'encyclopedie des echecs

Thinking Machine

Le prisonnier

Echec et mat

Legendes

Les origines du jeu d’échecs se perdent dans la nuits des temps.

En fait, les historiens et spécialistes sont preque d'accord pour fixer le premier jeu d'échecs en Inde au VI éme siècle de notre ère. Néanmoins, aucun écrit ne permet d'affirmer ces hypothèses.



Si l'origine du jeu est difficile à fixer avec précision, de nombreux pays (Egypte, Grèce, Chine) revendiquent l’invention car il existe plusieurs jeux anciens voisins de l’actuel jeu d échecs.



La plupart des historiens sont maintenant d’accord pour dire que les pièces les plus anciennes datent environ de l’an 600. C’est également la date approximative des premières références au jeu d’échecs dans la littérature.



Connu tout d’abord sous le nom de Chaturanga (jeu qui se jouait avec 4 armées), il se propagea sur les routes du commerce et des conquêtes d’abord en Perse puis dans l’empire byzantin et dans le reste du continent asiatique.



L'Europe découvrira le jeu aux alentours de l'an mil grâce à l'influence arabe exercée tout autour de la méditérannée et plus particulièrement dans la péninsule ibérique.

Les croisades auront également un rôle important car malgré l'atrocité des combats et les milliers d'innocents morts, l'apport des échanges entre l'Occident et l'Orient furent particulièrement nombreux et importants.



De nombreuses légendes racontent la naissance du jeu d'échecs, voici les plus connues :





La légende du brahmane Sissa

Au Vème siècle de notre ère, vivait en Inde
un jeune monarque très puissant,
d'un excellent caractère au demeurant,
mais que ses flatteurs corrompirent.







Ce prince en oublia bientôt que les rois doivent être les pères de leurs peuples, que l'amour des sujets pour leur roi est le seul appui solide du trône, dont ils font toute la force et la puissance.

Les brahmanes lui rappelèrent ces importantes maximes. Mais énivré de sa grandeur qu'il croyait inébranlable, il méprisa leurs sages remontrances.



C'est alors que selon la légende, le brahmane Sissa entreprit indirectement de faire ouvrir les yeux au jeune prince. Dans ce but, il imagina et inventa le jeu d'Echecs, où le Roi, bien que la plus importante de toutes les pièces, est impuissant pour attaquer et même pour se défendre contre ses ennemis sans le secours de ses sujets.



Le nouveau jeu, rapidement, devint célèbre. Et le roi qui en entendit parler voulut l'apprendre.

En lui expliquant les règles, le brahmane Sissa lui fit goûter des vérités importantes qu'il avait refusé d'entendre jusque-là. Le prince, sensible, changea petit à petit de conduite, et, reconnaissant de lui avoir ouvert les yeux il laissa au brahmane le choix d'une récompense.



Celui-ci demanda, à la surprise du prince, qu'on lui donna le nombre de grains de blé que produirait le nombre de cases de l'échiquier, un seul pour la première, deux pour la seconde, quatre pour la troisième, et ainsi de suite en doublant jusqu'à la soixante-quatrième.



Aucune difficulté pour accèder sur le champ à la modicité apparente de cette demande.

Mais quand ses trésoriers en eurent fait le calcul, ils arrivèrent au chiffre de :

18.446.744.073.709.551.615 (soit toute les moissons de la Terre pendant environ cinq mille ans).



Pour pouvoir se former quelque idée d'un nombre aussi prodigieux de grains de blé, il faut savoir que l'hectolitre de blé contient environ 1.530.000 grains.



Le roi s'était donc engagé à une chose pour laquelle tous ses greniers et ses trésors ne suffiraient pas.

La légende raconte que le brahmane Sissa se servit encore de cette occasion pour faire sentir au prince combien il importe aux rois de se tenir en garde contre ceux que l'on abuse de leurs meilleures intentions.



Cette légende est la plus célèbre concernant l'origine du jeu d'échecs et elle était déjà connue au Moyen- Âge puisqu' on la retrouve dans les oeuvres *d'Averroès et de *Leonardo Fibonacci.



* Averroès : Philosophe arabe qui a vécu de 1126 à 1198, et qui est surtout connu pour ses commentaires sur les oeuvres d'Aristote.



* Léonardo Fibonacci de Pise (1170-1230) très grand mathématicien. Connu également comme spécialiste des algorithmes à la cour de Frédéric II à Palerme, il a écrit le "Liber abaci" et la "Practica geometriae".







Firdusi nous raconte dans Le Livre des Rois qu'un souverain indien, très riche et très sage, mourut subitement. Comme son fils, appelé Gav, n'était âgé que de quelques années, c'est le frère du roi défunt qui prit le pouvoir.



Le nouveau roi épousa la veuve de son frère dont il eut un fils appelé Talhend, mais le souverain mourut également au bout de quelques années. Comme les deux enfants avaient respectivement sept et deux ans, c'est la mère qui devint reine de son peuple.



Elle gouverna avec justice et sagesse, et essaya d'élever ses deux fils de façon qu'il n'y ait pas de brouilles ne de différends entre eux, en les confiant à deux prêtres.

Les deux précepteurs, contrairement à ce que souhaitait le reine, alimentèrent la haine et l'hostilité chez les deux frères, hostilités qui se transforma rapidement en lutte ouverte.



Tous les deux aspiraient au trône, Gav en tant qu'aîné, Talhend en tant que fils du dernier roi, et ils prirent chacun la tête de deux factions opposées. Mais, sourd aux prières de sa mère, il refusa la tentative de paix proposée par son frère aîné et rassembla d'autres soldats pour une nouvelle bataille.



Alors Gav, conseillé par son ministre, proposa que les deux armées se rencontrent dans un fossé profond, rempli d'eau, afin qu'aucun combattant ne puisse s'enfuir : ainsi, la victoire reviendrait définitivement à l'un ou l'autre frère. Talhend accepta la proposition et les deux armées s'affrontèrent sur le lieu choisi.



La bataille fit rage, l'armée de Talhend céda progressivement et ce dernier, immobilisé sur son éléphant, sans nourriture, accablé par le vent et le soleil, mourut lentement. Son frère victorieux rendit à la dépouille les honneurs funéraires les plus solennels.



La mère, apprenant la mort de son fils cadet, se désespéra, persuadée qu'il avait été assassiné par son frère et, selon les contumes des femmes indiennes, se fit préparer un bûcher.

Gav accourut et essaya d'apaiser la colère et le désespoir de sa mère qui, peu convaincue, voulut connaître les moindres détails de la mort de Talhend.



Tous les rescapés de la bataille furent alors convoqués et, pour donner une représentation visuelle et donc plus expressive du combat, on prépara une table carrée, divisée en plusieurs cases, sur laquelle on disposa des pièces taillées dans le bois qui représentaient les deux armées adverses.

La bataille fut reconstituée et la reine, finalement convaincue, régna à nouveau avec son fils Gav.



Cette légende est très évocatrice et nous fournit une explication sur l'origine et la nature de chaque pièce, modelée, selon le schéma de l'armée indienne.



Dans le Livre des Rois de Firdusi, on parle également beaucoup de l'introduction du jeu dans l'ancienne perse, à l'époque du grand roi sassanide Khosroe "à l'âme immortelle", qui a vécu de 531 à 579.



* Fidursi (environ 935-1020), appelé aussi l'Enchanteur, se nommait en réalité, Abu al-Qasim Mansur, et il était le fils d'un petit propriétaire terrien.

Il fut longtemps poète de cour du sultan Mahmud, mais tombé en disgrâce, il dut s'enfuir.

Son oeuvre majeure fut le Shah-Name, Le Livre des Rois, qu'il rédigea en trente ans environ.

Composé de 50 000 distiques, cette oeuvre, écrite dans une langue néo-persane colorée et harmonieuse, rassemble toutes les légendes concernant l'histoire de l'Iran, depuis son origine.

Citation

«Vouloir jouer aux échecs contre soi-même est aussi paradoxal que vouloir marcher sur son ombre.»
Stefan Zweig - Extrait de Le Joueur d’échecs 


Khrishna- Radha

Cortesia: Jeannine Diego Medina desde New Delhi

Campeonato Mundial de Ajedrez Ciudad de Mexico 2007

RONDE 14
Ultima ronda




El nuevo campeón del mundo : Viswanathan Anand



Ranking final despues de la ronda 14

1. Anand, Viswanathan IND (2792) 9.0
2. Kramnik, Vladimir RUS (2769) 8.0
3. Gelfand, Boris ISR (2733) 8.0
4. Leko, Peter HUN (2751) 7.0
5. Svidler, Peter RUS (2735) 6.5
6-7. Aronian, Levon ARM (2750) 6.0
6-7. Morozevich, Alexander RUS (2758) 6.0
8. Grischuk, Alexander RUS (2726) 5.5
Résultats de la ronde 14

Viswanathan Anand (2792) - Peter Leko (2751) : ½-½ (20) Gambit Marshall
Vladimir Kramnik (2769) - Levon Aronian (2750) : 1-0 (35) Oeste-India
Alexander Morozevich (2758) - Boris Gelfand (2733) : ½-½ (45) Petrov
Peter Svidler (2735) - Alexander Grischuk (2726) : 1-0 (42) Najdorf

Es la última ronda del campeonato del mundo de Ajedrez 2007, y Vishy Anand esta aun paso del título de campeón del mundo, enfrentando a peter Leko con los blancos.



Viswanathan Anand (2792) - Peter Leko (2751) : ½-½
En menos de una hora, Anand esta consagrado campeón del mundo, escogiendo el gambit Marshall. Los 2 jugadores concluyen con una nula en 20 golpes.

Vladimir Kramnik (2769) - Levon Aronian (2750) : 1-0
Una Catalana (otra)! La ventaja es muy notable desde la apertura, Kramnik gana con mucho estilo este último juego.





Alexander Morozevich (2758) - Boris Gelfand (2733) : ½-½
Gelfand, que estaría feliz con una 'nula" hoy, escoge la defensa Petrov. Morozevich juega una linea "tropical" y logra a salvar el juego, logrando una nula al final.

Peter Svidler (2735) - Alexander Grischuk (2726) : 1-0
Los 2 rusos aplican una larga linea teórica de la siciliana Najdorf. Svidler presiona con sus alfiles, y termina ganando.

Campeonato Mundial de Ajedrez reglas y rondas

Los jugadores: Vladimir Kramnik, Viswanathan Anand, Peter Svidler, Alexander Morozevich, Peter Leko, Boris Guelfand, Levon Aronian y Alexander Gristchuk.



El ritmo del juego: 40 golpes en 2 horas, seguidos de 20 golpes en una hora, y para concluir 15 minutos más un incremento de 30 segundos.


Los premios : 1,3 millones de dolares de dotación.

El calendario:

1era ronda (13 sept 2007)
Anand, Viswanathan - Gelfand, Boris
Grischuk, Alexander - Leko, Peter
Kramnik, Vladimir - Svidler, Peter
Morozevich, Alexander - Aronian, Levon

2da ronda (14 sept 2007)
Aronian, Levon - Anand, Viswanathan
Gelfand, Boris - Grischuk, Alexander
Kramnik, Vladimir - Morozevich, Alexander
Svidler, Peter - Leko, Peter

3ra ronda (15 sept 2007)
Anand, Viswanathan - Kramnik, Vladimir
Grischuk, Alexander - Aronian, Levon
Leko, Peter - Gelfand, Boris
Morozevich, Alexander - Svidler, Peter

4ta ronda ( 16 Sep 2007)
Aronian, Levon - Leko, Peter
Kramnik, Vladimir - Grischuk, Alexander
Morozevich, Alexander - Anand, Viswanathan
Svidler, Peter - Gelfand, Boris

5ta ronda (18 sept 2007)
Anand, Viswanathan - Svidler, Peter
Gelfand, Boris - Aronian, Levon
Grischuk, Alexander - Morozevich, Alexander
Leko, Peter - Kramnik, Vladimir

6ta ronda (19 sept 2007)
Aronian, Levon - Kramnik, Vladimir
Gelfand, Boris - Morozevich, Alexander
Grischuk, Alexander - Svidler, Peter
Leko, Peter - Anand, Viswanathan

7ma ronda (20 sept 2007)
Anand, Viswanathan - Grischuk, Alexander
Kramnik, Vladimir - Gelfand, Boris
Morozevich, Alexander - Leko, Peter
Svidler, Peter - Aronian, Levon

8va ronda (21 sept 2007)
Aronian, Levon - Morozevich, Alexander
Gelfand, Boris - Anand, Viswanathan
Leko, Peter - Grischuk, Alexander
Svidler, Peter - Kramnik, Vladimir

9na ronda (23 sept 2007)
Anand, Viswanathan - Aronian, Levon
Grischuk, Alexander - Gelfand, Boris
Leko, Peter - Svidler, Peter
Morozevich, Alexander - Kramnik, Vladimir

10ma ronda (24 sept 2007)
Aronian, Levon - Grischuk, Alexander
Gelfand, Boris - Leko, Peter
Kramnik, Vladimir - Anand, Viswanathan
Svidler, Peter - Morozevich, Alexander

11va ronda (25 sept 2007)
Anand, Viswanathan - Morozevich, Alexander
Gelfand, Boris - Svidler, Peter
Grischuk, Alexander - Kramnik, Vladimir
Leko, Peter - Aronian, Levon

12va ronda (27 sept 2007)
Aronian, Levon - Gelfand, Boris
Kramnik, Vladimir - Leko, Peter
Morozevich, Alexander - Grischuk, Alexander
Svidler, Peter - Anand, Viswanathan

13va ronda (25 sept 2007)
Aronian, Levon - Svidler, Peter
Gelfand, Boris - Kramnik, Vladimir
Grischuk, Alexander - Anand, Viswanathan
Leko, Peter - Morozevich, Alexander

14va ronda (29 sept 2007)
Anand, Viswanathan - Leko, Peter
Kramnik, Vladimir - Aronian, Levon
Morozevich, Alexander - Gelfand, Boris
Svidler, Peter - Grischuk, Alexander

Vista de la Torre Latino al salir de unas rondas

Foto Véronique Ricardoni - Panic Magazine

Vishy Anand, #1 de la FIDE

Foto Véronique Ricardoni - Panic Magazine

Tres GM

Foto Javier Belmont - Panic Magazine

Kramnik

Foto Javier Belmont - Panic Magazine

Anand

Foto Javier Belmont - Panic Magazine

Grischuk

Foto Javier Belmont - Panic Magazine

Svidler

Foto Javier Belmont - Panic Magazine

Morozevich

Foto Javier Belmont - Panic Magazine

Leko

Foto Javier Belmont - Panic Magazine

Gelfand

Foto Javier Belmont - Panic Magazine

Aronian Triangle

Foto Javier Belmont - Panic Magazine

Anand vs Svidler

Foto Javier Belmont - Panic Magazine

Anand vs Grischuk (gestalt)

Foto Javier Belmont - Panic Magazine

Peter Leko

Foto Javier Belmont - Panic Magazine

Vishy Anand

Foto Javier Belmont - Panic Magazine

Vladimir Kramnik

Foto Javier Belmont - Panic Magazine

Levon Aronian

Foto Javier Belmont - Panic Magazine

PETER SVIDLER

Foto Javier Belmont - Panic Magazine

ALEXANDER MOROZEVICH

FOTO. JAVIER BELMONT - PANIC MAGAZINE

ALEXANDER GRISCHUK

FOTO. JAVIER BELMONT - PANIC MAGAZINE