Who was the person that beat Kramnik in a match??? --> Shirov, Kamsky

Now who beat Shirov in the FIDE Finals & Kamsky in PCA???

--> Anand

Now who beat Shirov in the FIDE Finals & Kamsky in PCA???

--> Anand

So what can we infer from all these statements?"

That Kramniks playing streight from 1998 to 2000 change radically.

wasnt doubting ya. more like, how come I didnt remember?

Yes, I thought Topalov *might* start getting his fan base back after his outstanding result at Bilbao, but then he has to go and shoot his mouth off again.

Not me. He had no legitimate reason to go after Kramnik, so why should it be a surprise that he'd also go after Anand without a legitimate reason? This is Topalov we're talking about.

<anand has been one of the most consistent players in chess history... topalov typically cant go 12 consecutive days without playing like a 2500 for some stretch.>

This is the only one I'm aware of.

personally I preferred Anand-Morozevich since it was not just a homecooked novelty prepared by a second, but just wonderfully creative OTB chess. It was courageous chess by Anand which defied pragmatism.>

I was quite sad to see Humpy exiting in the semi-finals. I was actually following the final tie-break, live. After the first classic game that ended badly she managed to win the second game. This really shows she has a lot of determination in her. When it came to shorter time controls there is an element of gamble and things can go wrong. From personal experience I can tell you that when you play tie breaks the advantage you have with an opponent keeps diminishing as time controls get shorter. I think Humpy played very good chess and clearly she has done a lot of work. She should just forget Nalchik, take a break from chess and enjoy the ECC in Greece. Knockouts are different from tournaments and require a different kind of play as one mistake can be costly and then there is no looking back. I don't think she should feel the pressure, rather she should be fairly confident that all the work she has done would help her in the next event. Sometimes, when you are not chasing something with obsession you suddenly find yourself winning it. >

I always thought Vishy resigned ini 6 moves against Zapata out of respect for hios opponent - looks like the guy was ctually trying to avoid being a losing stock.

<Anand does not shy away from presenting his losses, and he discusses several of them. Perhaps most embarrassing for him was the game Zapata-Anand, Biel-B, 1988 (when Anand was already a grandmaster) in which the game was over in an incredible six moves. 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Nxe5 d6 4.Nf3 Nxe4, producing the following position:

<figure>

Anand notes that his opponent had previously played 5.c4 in this position, for which Anand had prepared 5…Be7 6.Nc3 Bf5. In this game, however, Zapata played 5.Nc3, to which Anand responded 5…Bf5 without much thought. “But a few seconds later,” he says, “6.Qe2 dawned on me, and Alonso as well was really shocked. I think he thought that a strong grandmaster could not play such a move, so he sat there calculating himself.” The point is that after 6.Qe2 Qe7 7.Nd5 Qd8 8.d3 wins the black knight at e4.

“And now I had the choice,” Anand says, “which was to just make my move, play a piece down for another twenty moves so that none of these magazines could publish it as a miniature, and you don’t need to be reminded for the rest of your life that you lost a game in six moves. But that would mean that my fellow players in the tournament hall might come by and notice that I’m a piece down and start laughing … So I decided to go for Plan B, which was to resign and then get out of the hall as quickly as possible, so that nobody would notice. This worked successfully – for many days people thought I had agreed to a short draw with Alonso – a very short draw.”

>

http://www.chesscafe.com/Reviews/bo...

MOre interestingly, he talks about the turning point of his match against Kasparov:

<In Anand’s 1995 world championship match with Kasparov, the first eight games were drawn. The ninth game was won by Anand, and he provides extensive annotations. The game is interesting in itself, but Anand has some remarkable comments about what occurred the following day for the tenth game:

“He was so excited and so nervous. He was huffing and puffing. I wish I had had the agility to change my preparation.” Anand had come prepared with his Spanish again, “but clearly this was what he had prepared for … Perhaps if things had stabilized, I would have put on a much better show.” Instead, “I fell right into his preparation … The next day, with the initiative firmly on his side, I turned down a draw unnecessarily. It wasn’t that I was that ambitious – I wanted to make a solid draw – but I didn’t want to concede that easily. In a slightly better position, I blundered and lost the game. After that, my match pretty much went downhill. But at least it was a useful experience.” Regarding Kasparov, Anand says, “You can often read his emotions in his face. If he thinks a move is bad, you’ll know it right away.”