Scacchierando.it
Sinquefield_Cup _2022

Firouzja vince la Sinquefield Cup 2022!

Nepo superato negli spareggi. 3° Caruana. Carlsen ritirato dopo sconfitta con Niemann. Al francese anche il GCT!

Dopo il tradizionale antipasto del Saint Louis Rapid&Blitz sotto il Gateway Arch arriva la Sinquefield Cup, giunta alla nona edizione. Si tratta anche dell’ultima tappa del Grand Chess Tour, che dopo quattro mesi arriva al suo compimento.

Riassunto delle puntate tappe precedenti

La prima tappa, giocata a tempo classico in Romania, vede la vittoria di un terzetto composto da Vachier-Lagrave, So e Aronian con il primo che la spunta agli spareggi.

MVL CHAMPION

Per Vachier-Lagrave è già turno di riposo, quindi nella seconda tappa Aronian (2°) e So (5°) allungano. In Polonia è però il beniamino di casa Duda a trionfare, con un sorprendente Anand che arriva secondo ex-equo vincendo la sezione rapid.

Jan Duda Gladiator WINNER

Nella terza tappa il turno di riposo tocca a Aronian ed il copione si ripete: MVL si piazza al secondo posto (ex-equo con Firouzja) e So al quarto (ex-equo con Nepo). Anche questa tappa croata è appannaggio di una wild card, seppur sui generis: il campione del mondo dimissionario Magnus Carlsen!

Carlsen Winner

Si varca l’oceano e la questione è storia recente: vince Firouzja con una straripante prestazione che lo incorona con 4 blitz d’anticipo. Il franco-iraniano vince entrambe le sezioni e si issa sopra i 2900 nel rating blitz FIDE (2903). Una vittoria così schiacciante mette in ombra quella di Nakamura (che arriva a 2909!) nonché quella di Caruana e Vachier-Lagrave, che con questo dignitoso terzo posto (ex-equo) si riporta al comando della generale.

pasted image 0

Partecipanti

Rispetto al Saint Louis Rapid&Blitz i cambiamenti sono pochi ma significativi. Rientra WC (da intendersi sia come Wild Card che come World Champion!) Magnus Carlsen, rientra il papabile vincitore Wesley So, ed esordisce in tornei di questo livello l’enfant du pays (più o meno, è californiano…) Hans Niemann. Lasciano loro il posto Shankland, Xiong e Nakamura.

ParecipantsSinq22

Il favorito d’obbligo è il campione del mondo, ma Vachier-Lagrave è campione uscente nonché leader del Tour. L’altro francese, Firouzja, è chiamato a confermare a tempo classico quanto fatto vedere a tempo veloce, ed il solo punto di distacco dal parigino potrebbe ingolosirlo. Per Aronian e So i punti di distacco sono quattro, quindi è imperativo concludere nella parte altissima della classifica. Caruana e Nepomnjaščij sono ancora in corsa, ma per mere questioni matematiche. Per Mamedyarov e Dominguez Perez il tour non è una preoccupazione, mentre per Niemann l’obiettivo sarà superare i 2,5/9 ottenuti da Swiercz l’anno scorso.

Di seguito la classifica con cui partono:

GCTStanding

Regolamento

Si gioca con lo stesso criterio del torneo romeno, incluso il montepremi da 350000€. Quindi:

Girone all’italiana semplice con tempo di riflessione 90′ minuti per 40 mosse + 30′ con 30″ a partire dalla prima mossa. Il vincitore porterà a casa 100000$ e 13 punti (12 se dopo spareggi). Più dettagli qui.

In caso di arrivo a pari punti in vetta si disputerà un minitorneo tra i giocatori coinvolti: se sono due sarà un minimatch rapid (10’+5″) di due partite, se sono di più si giocherà un girone all’italiana blitz (5’+3″). In caso di ulteriore pareggio si giocheranno delle partite armageddon. Le posizioni diverse dalla prima non verranno risolte ed i punti/premi verranno spartiti.

Turni

Le partite effettivamente giocate da Carlsen sono riportate con il risultato valevole per le variazioni Elo FIDE, mentre ai fini della classifica vanno considerate come non giocate. Per comodità riporto le partite non giocate come sconfitte a forfait (e non come bye).

1. Turno il 2022/09/02 alle 13:00 (20:00 italiane)
Mamedyarov Shakhriyar So Wesley 1/2 – 1/2
Dominguez Perez Leinier Vachier-Lagrave Maxime 1/2 – 1/2
Firouzja Alireza Caruana Fabiano 1/2 – 1/2
Carlsen Magnus Nepomniachtchi Ian    1 – 0
Niemann Hans Moke Aronian Levon 1/2 – 1/2
2. Turno il 2022/09/03 alle 13:00 (20:00 italiane)
Niemann Hans Moke Mamedyarov Shakhriyar    1 – 0
Aronian Levon Carlsen Magnus 1/2 – 1/2
Nepomniachtchi Ian Firouzja Alireza    1 – 0
Caruana Fabiano Dominguez Perez Leinier 1/2 – 1/2
Vachier-Lagrave Maxime So Wesley 1/2 – 1/2
3. Turno il 2022/09/04 alle 13:00 (20:00 italiane)
Mamedyarov Shakhriyar Vachier-Lagrave Maxime 1/2 – 1/2
So Wesley Caruana Fabiano    1 – 0
Dominguez Perez Leinier Nepomniachtchi Ian 1/2 – 1/2
Firouzja Alireza Aronian Levon    1 – 0
Carlsen Magnus Niemann Hans Moke    0 – 1
4. Turno il 2022/09/05 alle 13:00 (20:00 italiane)
Carlsen Magnus Mamedyarov Shakhriyar    0 – 1F
Niemann Hans Moke Firouzja Alireza 1/2 – 1/2
Aronian Levon Dominguez Perez Leinier 1/2 – 1/2
Nepomniachtchi Ian So Wesley 1/2 – 1/2
Caruana Fabiano Vachier-Lagrave Maxime    1 – 0
5. Turno il 2022/09/06 alle 13:00 (20:00 italiane)
Mamedyarov Shakhriyar Caruana Fabiano 1/2 – 1/2
Vachier-Lagrave Maxime Nepomniachtchi Ian 1/2 – 1/2
So Wesley Aronian Levon 1/2 – 1/2
Dominguez Perez Leinier Niemann Hans Moke 1/2 – 1/2
Firouzja Alireza Carlsen Magnus    1 – 0F
6. Turno il 2022/09/08 alle 13:00 (20:00 italiane)
Firouzja Alireza Mamedyarov Shakhriyar 1 – 0
Carlsen Magnus Dominguez Perez Leinier    0 – 1F
Niemann Hans Moke So Wesley 0 – 1
Aronian Levon Vachier-Lagrave Maxime 1 – 0
Nepomniachtchi Ian Caruana Fabiano 1/2 – 1/2
7. Turno il 2022/09/09 alle 13:00 (20:00 italiane)
Mamedyarov Shakhriyar Nepomniachtchi Ian 1/2 – 1/2
Caruana Fabiano Aronian Levon 1/2 – 1/2
Vachier-Lagrave Maxime Niemann Hans Moke 1/2 – 1/2
So Wesley Carlsen Magnus    1 – 0F
Dominguez Perez Leinier Firouzja Alireza 1/2 – 1/2
8. Turno il 2022/09/10 alle 13:00 (20:00 italiane)
Dominguez Perez Leinier Mamedyarov Shakhriyar 1/2 – 1/2
Firouzja Alireza So Wesley 1 – 0
Carlsen Magnus Vachier-Lagrave Maxime    0 – 1F
Niemann Hans Moke Caruana Fabiano 0 – 1
Aronian Levon Nepomniachtchi Ian 0 – 1
9. Turno il 2022/09/11 alle 13:00 (20:00 italiane)
Mamedyarov Shakhriyar Aronian Levon 1/2 – 1/2
Nepomniachtchi Ian Niemann Hans Moke 1/2 – 1/2
Caruana Fabiano Carlsen Magnus 1 – 0F
Vachier-Lagrave Maxime Firouzja Alireza 1/2 – 1/2
So Wesley Dominguez Perez Leinier 1/2 – 1/2

Classifica Finale dopo 9 turni

Come stabilito dal direttore del torneo le partite di Carlsen sono annullate ed escluse dal computo della classifica, che quindi è qui riportata ristretta a nove giocatori.

1 Firouzja Alireza 2778   5 vince 1,5-0,5 lo spareggio Rapid con Nepomniachtchi  
Nepomniachtchi Ian 2792   5
3 Caruana Fabiano 2758   4,5
So Wesley  2772   4,5
5 Dominguez Perez Leinier 2745   4
6 Niemann Hans Moke 2688   3,5
Aronian Levon 2759   3,5
8 Vachier-Lagrave Maxime 2757   3
Mamedyarov Shakhriyar 2757   3

Link utili

Principali dirette:

Lichess Chess24 Chesscom

Sito ufficiale

Articolo di presentazione del tour

142 Commenti a “Firouzja vince la Sinquefield Cup 2022!”

  1. Lorenz
    6 settembre 2022 - 10:39

    Nakamura sostiene che Carlsen non abbia mai giocato 4. g3. Cercando nel database interno di lichess non si trova la partita del 2018 contro So (come detto da Niemann) ma comunque se ne trova una del 2020 contro il GM americano Akshat Chandra: https://lichess.org/oejekISi
    È curioso notare che esiste una partita di So del 2018 con 4.g3, però era Caruana (e non Carlsen) a condurre i bianchi: https://lichess.org/jLcHp98y

    Se inganno è stato, sono più propenso a pensare che si sia trattato di una “fuga di notizie” che non un’assistenza informatica. Vista la mole di arbitri presenti, immagino serva un metodo simil-Feller per farla franca. Mi pare invece che si possa escludere che lo proteggano, altrimenti non avrebbe riservato parole dolci per il SLCC.

    Comunque per adesso sposo la linea Aronian: “All my colleagues are paranoid”.

  2. arturo
    8 settembre 2022 - 13:47

    E’ difficile non essere d’accordo con Aagaard, non solo per le cose che dice su Niemann, ma specialmente per i remarks che fa su Carlsen (e i suoi doveri di campione del mondo, non scordiamocelo).

    #################
    Paranoia and insanity – by Jacob Aagaard
    News
    hans
    calrsen

    JacobAagaard
    Trainer

    1
    10h
    I believe a lot of you will have seen the crazy events in St Louis over the last 48 hours. I felt an obligation to share facts and thoughts with you, and then allow you to make up your own mind.

    The background is that Magnus Carlsen lost a not-too spectacular game against Hans Niemann on Sunday. Magnus is the GOAT, Hans is 19 and rated just under 2700. With the win, he passed the mark for the first time.

    Monday Magnus did not show up to the game and released a tweet with a Mourinho comment of “if I say what I want to say, I will be in big trouble – and I don’t want to be in big trouble.” Quickly the team of internet detectives combined this and increased anti-cheating

    First of all, my personal relationship with Hans Niemann: I met him at a camp in St Louis in 2019. He was about 2450 and clearly a socially awkward character that had a feeling that all eyes were on him all the time. But he was smart, funny, and likeable. It was a good camp and we had some laughs. At the time he was talking about quitting chess a lot, but it was clear that the issue was he cared so much and had not found a mental position that worked for him.

    We were sort of in contact on and off over the next two years. He was 2500 18 months ago and playing all the time. His attitude had changed. Instead of being scared of admitting that he wanted to be great, he now gave it his all. Traveling from event to event. Playing good games, bad games. Uncompromising. His rating increased a lot over the summer. Over 100 points. He reached 2630 or so by the autumn when he came to visit in Glasgow. At that time, he had also joined our academy, although I doubt he ever got around to using it much (and did not renew in 2022).

    Our training session was a week. It was meant to be a camp, but no one else could make it. Hans was difficult to train. I tried to do calculation and endgame training with him (he had requested endgame training). At first, I showed exercises from recent games (last 18 months) that I really liked. He knew them ALL. I was astonished by his memory. I was astonished by his intuition. Both were off the charts for what I have seen training Shankland, Gelfand, and other 2600+ and a few 2700s.

    There were obvious big holes in his chess, but to be honest, I see big holes in the game of Giri, Aronian, Mamedyarov, Firouzja, and other top players. When I get a 2650 student, I usually try to find out what part of their game is at a much lower level. There is always some area of chess where they are just blank. Maybe they cannot really visualise. They don’t know how to make simple decisions. They cannot calculate a line till the end. All three examples of real 2650 players I have worked with.

    Hans’s confidence in his own intuition and his surprise when it was wrong was a recurring theme of the week he was here. Another was that whenever I came to his room, he was looking at chess. Playing through ALL games from all tournaments on Follow chess.

    I have seen nothing out of the ordinary in the last two days. Hans playing reasonably well against opponents that are not playing that well. His big confidence. His awkwardness in front of the camera. His highly intuitive way of thinking. His lack of accuracy in variations. Him blundering when suggesting things, he thinks he might have looked at.

    I also did not see anything out of the ordinary from Carlsen. Entitlement. Lack of responsibility. Lack of accountability. A Norwegian troll army ready to defame a man who only 400 days ago was a minor. Carlsen has acted badly in many situations after losing in the past. In that way, he reminds me of Federer, who was a badly behaved teenager. Become the best player in the world and behaved excellently. Then started losing to Djokovic and needed a period to adjust to reality.

    People say that Carlsen does not behave badly when he is losing in his Meltwater Tour to Praggnanandhaa. It is partly because it is like Federer losing a set. It is partly because Praggnanandhaa is deferential to Magnus. Hans is not. Hans wants to kill the king. Wants to take the throne. He has no remorse over this at all.

    Some people on Twitter is saying that Nakamura and Nepomniachtchi are backing up these accusations of cheating. I watched the Nakamura YouTube video and found it to be ridiculous, but also void of an actual accusation of cheating. When Nakamura is saying that no 2700 calculates this poorly, he is flat out wrong. I can also show positional mistakes from Nakamura that undermines the credibility of the playing strength of the former no. 2. Mistakes that Hans would simply not believe a GM had made. Because they are his strengths and Nakamura’s weaknesses.

    There are many GMs who are suspicious. There are also many GMs who think this is ridiculous. There are also many GMs that are without real skills outside playing chess in exactly one way.

    ” This guy doesn’t look like cheater doesn’t behave like cheater and doesn’t play like cheater. Altogether this doesn’t provide 100% guarantee but still…” – Alexander Khalifman

    “…It was more than impressive.” – Ian Nepomniachtchi

    Comments about the preparation for the game with Carlsen were bizarre. Hans gave the reason he anticipated a g3-line. Which for me is already reason enough to check various g3-lines. He showed additional moves he remembered from his preparation. Sure, one of them was a blunder and his memory was inaccurate regarding the actual evaluation. The narrative for this being indications of cheating must include an explanation of how the game reference came in. First, it was that there was no such game. Then it was some other nonsense.

    We all know that it is possible to send signals of moves in a highly sophisticated operation. It requires technology. It requires an accomplice. It requires a high level of risk-taking and stupidity. But what it does not offer is a reasonable way for a game reference to be conveyed. This is a sign of preparation.

    So far, what we have seen is a case of a young man overperforming and being awkward. Especially, in the situation where he is asked about the game with Firouzja. Trying to point out that he looked and felt awkward in the situation created by Carlsen’s withdrawal.

    My main argument is that it always has to be about the moves. The moves were nothing special. The thinking was fully consistent with what I have seen when discussing chess with Hans.

    “Magnus behaved like an entitled brat” is at least an equally reasonable theory. This is not new behaviour. Those saying he has never accused anyone of cheating, never withdrawn and never behaved badly (as if this alone would be evidence of anything), are simply underinformed. I don’t want to be a part of a smear against anyone, but to me, it is incredible that all just assume that Carlsen is a good guy. And this after 20 years of seeing how bad a loser can be.

    There are people online who say that “Niemann almost definitely cheated” based on just utter rubbish. From those with little knowledge or competence, you will get the greatest certainty. It is called Dunning-Kruger.

    Obviously, I do not have certainty that Hans did not cheat. Nor do I have certainty that Carlsen has never cheated. It is reasonably well established that Hans cheated online at some point. This is simply a different thing. Compare it to cheating in Homework Club. There are times when people have cheated on their homework and I ignore it. Because it is not a big thing. It does not make me believe that they will start on advanced Mission Impossible-style careers as advanced cheaters. It is of course possible to do it, but it requires advanced behaviour to beat top tournament security far beyond what we have seen from people cheating, which is usually compression socks and phones in the toilet, to point to a famous case.

    What I have seen when people are cheating, is a loss of confidence in themselves and an acceleration in the cheating behaviour. And when accused, they usually get angry and go on the offensive. The innocent are confused and saddened.

    In this case, I have not seen moves or behaviour that are out of character for Hans, nor have I seen anything that looks like computer-influence moves. I have not seen behaviour typical of losers.

    What I have seen is the nasty side of the Internet and poor behaviour from various individuals, who are totally within my experience of them as human beings. You may disagree with my presumptions of what happened here, but the simplest explanation is often the right one. Magnus could not accept that he could lose to someone he thinks of as “a joke” and came up with a different explanation. And the internet is full of his fans, happy to make meat out of it and they all know that Hans’ hair works as an antenna. And they know it with certainty.

    Jacob Aagaard

  3. Lorenz
    8 settembre 2022 - 21:03

    Aggiungo anche il parere di Daniel King (PowerPlayChess su YouTube). Commentando, prima delle accuse, la Carlsen-Niemann (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n27zd_dVtFw) sostiene che il primo non sia un grande difensore e che quindi abbia esagerato nel cercare attività in una posizione invece da difendere passivamente. Alla fine del video sulla Niemann-Firouzja (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZmLBAhxVoo4, dopo 20/21 minuti) sostiene che sia abbastanza facile trovare elementi per incolpare Niemann guardando le interviste e le partite, ma allo stesso tempo che sia facile trovare elementi a sua discolpa, quindi si tratta del classico caso di confirmation bias (ovvero ognuno trova prove per la sua tesi, indipendentemente dalla stessa), di conseguenza considera Niemann innocente fino ad indizi ben più probanti.

  4. Lorenz
    11 settembre 2022 - 15:35

    I calcoli per la vittoria del GCT si complicano.
    In testa alla Sinquefield per il momento ci sono Firouzja e Nepo, con Caruana che oggi riposa. So insegue a mezzo punto.
    La situazione più caotica dovrebbe essere: Firouzja e Nepo pattano (con MVL e Niemann), So vince (con Dominguez Perez). Gli spareggi vanno a So (12 punti) mentre gli altri si consolano con 9 punti a testa (10+8 divisi in due). In questo modo So recupera esattamente i tre punti, costringendomi a verificare cosa avviene in caso di arrivo a pari punti in vetta nella generale. 😀
    (
    https://grandchesstour.org/sites/default/files/2022%20GCT%20Tiebreak%20Regulations%20Revised_0.pdf dovrebbero essere degli spareggi tenuti domani con gli stessi criteri degli spareggi “di tappa”)

    Riassumendo la situazione GCT Firouzja deve amministrare 3 punti su So, quindi:

    Firouzja vince se:
    – vince;
    – pareggia, ma So non vince;
    – pareggia, So vince, Nepo non perde;
    – perde, ma Nepo vince;
    – perde, Nepo non perde;
    – perde, Nepo perde, So non vince.

    So vince se:
    – vince e gli altri perdono;
    – vince e gli altri pareggiano, con lui che vince gli spareggi;
    – pareggia e gli altri perdono, con lui che vince agli spareggi.

    Spero di non aver perso nulla per strada.

Lascia un commento

Devi essere loggato per lasciare un commento. Clicca per Registrati.