Hikaru Nakamura plays Ivan Sokolov during Round 2 |
Tata Steel Tournament organizers have done a great job to show the world high caliber players and how the games progress. If you visit the Tata Steel Tournament website, you are able to get a gander at how all the grandmaster games unfold as they happen live. You can also see live video images of the games and get an evaluation of each move by a chess engine, Houdini 2.0cx64. If the number is positive, that means that white has the advantage. If the number is negative, that means that black has the advantage. The closer the number is to 0, the closer the two positions and material gains are. This can be a guide as to the player most likely to win. However, in the Nakamura/Sokolov game, Sokolov was in the lead (according to the chess engine) by nearly 5 points, but the game ended in a draw. To me it seemed that Nakamura saw the ultimate outcome of the game around move 50, but he looked visibly nervous just prior to 47. ..f4. GM Sokolov could not pry Nakamura's bishop away from the advancing pawn on the e-file or from the a-file. So, evaluations don't necessarily determine the outcome of a game, but they provide a guide to the best possible moves (if you were a computer!).
Round 2 Report
Time Controls: 40 moves in 100 minutes, 20 more moves in 20 minutes, with the game ending after 15 more minutes with 30 seconds added for each move.
My Favorites:
H. Nakamura 1.0/2.0 pts.
L. Aronian 1.0/2.0 pts.
J. Smeets 1.0/2.0 pts.
L. Schut 0.5/2.0 pts.
A. Goryachkina 0.5/2.0 pts.
Group A
|
|||||||||||||||||
Score
|
Rating
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
12
|
13
|
14
|
||
1
|
Karjakin, S.
|
1.5 / 2
|
2780
|
½
|
1
|
||||||||||||
2
|
Harikrishna, P.
|
1.5 / 2
|
2698
|
½
|
1
|
||||||||||||
3
|
Caruana, F.
|
1.0 / 2
|
2781
|
½
|
½
|
||||||||||||
4
|
L'Ami, E.
|
1.0 / 2
|
2627
|
½
|
½
|
||||||||||||
5
|
Nakamura, H.
|
1.0 / 2
|
2769
|
½
|
½
|
||||||||||||
6
|
Wang, H.
|
1.0 / 2
|
2752
|
½
|
½
|
||||||||||||
7
|
Leko, P.
|
1.0 / 2
|
2735
|
½
|
½
|
||||||||||||
8
|
Sokolov, I.
|
1.0 / 2
|
2663
|
½
|
½
|
||||||||||||
9
|
Carlsen, M.
|
1.0 / 2
|
2861
|
½
|
½
|
||||||||||||
10
|
Aronian, L.
|
1.0 / 2
|
2802
|
½
|
½
|
||||||||||||
11
|
van Wely, L.
|
1.0 / 2
|
2679
|
½
|
½
|
||||||||||||
12
|
Anand, V.
|
1.0 / 2
|
2772
|
½
|
½
|
||||||||||||
13
|
Giri, A.
|
0.5 / 2
|
2720
|
0
|
½
|
||||||||||||
14
|
Hou, Y.
|
0.5 / 2
|
2603
|
0
|
½
|
||||||||||||
Group B
|
|||||||||||||||||
1
|
Tiviakov, S.
|
2.0 / 2
|
2655
|
1
|
1
|
||||||||||||
2
|
Rapport, R.
|
1.5 / 2
|
2621
|
½
|
1
|
||||||||||||
3
|
Timman, J.
|
1.5 / 2
|
2566
|
½
|
1
|
||||||||||||
4
|
Nikolic, P.
|
1.5 / 2
|
2619
|
½
|
1
|
||||||||||||
5
|
van Kampen, R.
|
1.0 / 2
|
2581
|
½
|
½
|
||||||||||||
6
|
Grandelius, N.
|
1.0 / 2
|
2572
|
½
|
½
|
||||||||||||
7
|
Smeets, J.
|
1.0 / 2
|
2615
|
½
|
½
|
||||||||||||
8
|
Dubov, D.
|
1.0 / 2
|
2600
|
½
|
½
|
||||||||||||
9
|
Movsesian, S.
|
1.0 / 2
|
2688
|
½
|
½
|
||||||||||||
10
|
Turov, M.
|
1.0 / 2
|
2630
|
½
|
½
|
||||||||||||
11
|
Edouard, R.
|
0.5 / 2
|
2686
|
0
|
½
|
||||||||||||
12
|
Naiditsch, A.
|
0.5 / 2
|
2708
|
0
|
½
|
||||||||||||
13
|
Ipatov, A.
|
0.5 / 2
|
2587
|
0
|
½
|
||||||||||||
14
|
Ernst, S.
|
0.0 / 2
|
2556
|
0
|
0
|
||||||||||||
Group C
|
|||||||||||||||||
1
|
Brunello, S.
|
2.0 / 2
|
2572
|
1
|
1
|
||||||||||||
2
|
Peralta, F.
|
2.0 / 2
|
2617
|
1
|
1
|
||||||||||||
3
|
Gretarsson, H.
|
1.5 / 2
|
2516
|
½
|
1
|
||||||||||||
4
|
Mekhitarian, K.
|
1.5 / 2
|
2543
|
½
|
1
|
||||||||||||
5
|
Romanishin, O.
|
1.0 / 2
|
2521
|
½
|
½
|
||||||||||||
6
|
van der Werf, M.
|
1.0 / 2
|
2450
|
½
|
½
|
||||||||||||
7
|
Bitensky, I.
|
1.0 / 2
|
2400
|
½
|
½
|
||||||||||||
8
|
Admiraal, M.
|
1.0 / 2
|
2321
|
½
|
½
|
||||||||||||
9
|
Klein, D.
|
1.0 / 2
|
2445
|
0
|
1
|
||||||||||||
10
|
Goryachkina, A.
|
0.5 / 2
|
2402
|
0
|
½
|
||||||||||||
11
|
Schut, L.
|
0.5 / 2
|
2295
|
½
|
0
|
||||||||||||
12
|
Kovchan, A.
|
0.5 / 2
|
2579
|
0
|
½
|
||||||||||||
13
|
Swinkels, R.
|
0.5 / 2
|
2508
|
0
|
½
|
||||||||||||
14
|
Burg, T.
|
0.0 / 2
|
2492
|
0
|
0
|
No comments:
Post a Comment