...and that the game was called WORLD PEACE.

Now I'm even more confused. Are you saying that what you were saying is: "I'm still waiting for confirmation that it is customary in CC games to offer a draw based on [a draw offer that] will happen 3 plies later."

GMAN considered the position "very complicated" after our <10...h5!?> but said he needed more time to be able to find the best lines and consequently played cautiously not to lose after he gained the advantage that made him confident he was going to win.

So understandably he must feel some disappointment that he did not press his advantage and was forced to offer the draw.

On the other hand, after 10...h5, the World team had to find the most accurate defensive moves to secure the draw.

I am happy with securing a win and a draw in our 2 encounters against such a formidable CC grandmaster as Arno.

Again, congratulations to both sides!

Here is my analysis of your game (I followed parts of it, enjoying and also learning on the way)

1) it is a very good result considering the position in the early middle game .

2)Black played the opening and early middlegame very weakly, and should have lost this game. (Black crossed the safety of drawing line due to 3-4 mistakes).

3)White did not make any important mistakes, but his 16 h3?! was a slightly weak move, (black should have played 16...h4, immediately equalizing) But he also did not take the responsability of complicating the game when he had a large advantage.

4) Mistakes: 15...Nd7, and especially 16...Bb7? were weak moves. There were a couple of second best moves in the following moves until move 24 also.. At the end, all white needed was a single second best move from black and it would be all over. This did not happen due to excellent defense in the later stages of the game.

5)White did not act on time, and waited for black to make another mistake to win (this was white's biggest mistake, he was not decisive enough even though he had a winning advantage)

6)Starting from 24...Re8, I believe that black's play was at a very high level. it was a very difficult position to save, and the team analyzed this difficult position very well.

7) Both sides analyzed (mainly) with Rybka, world team was able to find some important moves that were not Rybka's first choice to draw the game. GMAN mostly copied Rybka, and did not add much from himself.

8) GMAN was happy with a draw, and did not take action when he had a significant advantage, allowing you to equalize.

9) Both sides thought Rybka was "god", and did not give enough attention to other engines (which depending on the type of position are stronger than Rybka). World team did not know in what position Rybka was not the best engine. GMAN did not have the time to analyze with other engines (because of his other important games).

10) Overall, this is a very good result (considering the position after 18...Qxg5).

11)Ending was not a dead draw, it should have been played a little longer.

12)In my opinion, this was the weakest game by the World team in 3 games I witnessed. At least, you now know that it may be very difficut to draw with black.

13) Umansky game: You will be facing one of the most creative cc player alive. His computer skills, and strength will not match yours, but his positional understanding and intuition will be at a much higher level. In my opinion advantage is with the world team due to stronger computer skills.

Good luck!

Here is what he posted:

<Well now, I prefer to discuss about good and bad moves first, anyway which engine may play these moves or not. And I prefer to discuss plans, not only single moves. Here I am really amazed about endless repeated statements in the chat, saying that I, GMAN, had spoiled my advantage and missed a win – endless repeated! – BUT never I found any ANALYTICAL PROOF for such statements. Some guys think, they even know the reason, why I failed – of course because I followed Rybka and didn’t understand the position! LOL. As far as I could see by the chat, that’s all pure speculation and some kind of self-fullfilling prophecy. (‘We felt, Nickel should win, but as he did not, he must have committed mistakes.’) Sorry, but’s a shame to read such rubbish things even from players, who are strong enough to know the difference between an “analysis” and an unproven statement. I will wait for your concrete analysis, before I am going to provide more of my views, especially regarding Rybka and other engines. Regards, Arno >

I do not recall any such winning line analyzed during the course of the game (although all our engines evaluated his position as superior until the last moves when it became [+0.00]) and that has been confirmed by checking back on the previous postings on this forum.

Were there any such analytical proof posted on the Sticky forums or our analysis tree?

2)With "Intution" and "chess understanding" is enough to see that black should have lost this game: (margin of error has been exceeded). black made at least 4-5 second best (or worse) moves. (In my opinion black can afford only 1 second best move to draw (white can afford 3 and can still draw))

3)The position should have been won for white. White had to seek immediate cirisis when there was an advantage. Instead, GMAN played like Karpov: "little moves", keeping the advantage and waiting. This lead to gradual disappeance of the advantage. How he played was: Sound: for a draw at hand with good chances of a win. But not aggressive or risky enough. (he probably saw draw as a success considering your previous matches, and did not want to risk losing the game, which is also understandable.)

4) My style is different: I believe that one needs to act like a Boa constrictor when he has the advantage! As soon as a positional advantage is achieved, material is no longer important, and very aggressive play is required. You can see this in my games. (This way i scored 10.5/11 with white in my last 2 iccf tournaments with a performance rating close to 3200!). Not letting an advantage disappear is very important in cc. (I would expect to score 90% against GM level after Qxg5).

5) GMAN is a strong cc GM, but if he wants to improve, he also needs to analyze what he did wrong ,letting the advantage disappear. (I am also very critical of myself, even in games I have won, I try to find if i did something wrong)Overall he played very well, and he was never in danger of losing. But in order to win heavily, you need to be on the edge of the cliff, where only single one can stand! In a way, you have to be ready to die in order to kill! That was missing...

very good game overall. very bad play in the opening and early middle game by black deserving of the game. (i don't think there are more than 10 people in the world who could save that position). Sound play by white, never letting the advantage disappear with a draw at hand always.