chessgames.com
Members · Prefs · Laboratory · Collections · Openings · Endgames · Sacrifices · History · Search Kibitzing · Kibitzer's Café · Chessforums · Tournament Index · Players · Kibitzing

🏆 NH Chess (2008)

  PARTICIPANTS (sorted by highest achieved rating; click on name to see player's games)
Fabiano Caruana, Wang Yue, Evgeny Bareev, Ivan Cheparinov, Viktor Korchnoi, Artur Yusupov, Erwin L'Ami, Ljubomir Ljubojevic, Daniel Stellwagen, Simen Agdestein

 page 1 of 2; games 1-25 of 50  PGN Download
Game  ResultMoves YearEvent/LocaleOpening
1. Ljubojevic vs Wang Yue 0-1752008NH ChessD16 Queen's Gambit Declined Slav
2. Yusupov vs Caruana 0-1332008NH ChessD12 Queen's Gambit Declined Slav
3. Korchnoi vs Stellwagen 0-1392008NH ChessD44 Queen's Gambit Declined Semi-Slav
4. Bareev vs L'Ami  ½-½332008NH ChessA19 English, Mikenas-Carls, Sicilian Variation
5. S Agdestein vs I Cheparinov  ½-½432008NH ChessB14 Caro-Kann, Panov-Botvinnik Attack
6. Stellwagen vs Bareev 1-0432008NH ChessB18 Caro-Kann, Classical
7. Wang Yue vs S Agdestein 1-0352008NH ChessA84 Dutch
8. Caruana vs Korchnoi 1-0632008NH ChessC80 Ruy Lopez, Open
9. I Cheparinov vs Yusupov  1-0282008NH ChessC80 Ruy Lopez, Open
10. L'Ami vs Ljubojevic  ½-½392008NH ChessE32 Nimzo-Indian, Classical
11. Korchnoi vs I Cheparinov 0-1272008NH ChessE99 King's Indian, Orthodox, Taimanov
12. S Agdestein vs L'Ami  ½-½422008NH ChessA19 English, Mikenas-Carls, Sicilian Variation
13. Ljubojevic vs Stellwagen  ½-½562008NH ChessD10 Queen's Gambit Declined Slav
14. Bareev vs Caruana  ½-½242008NH ChessD47 Queen's Gambit Declined Semi-Slav
15. Yusupov vs Wang Yue 0-1492008NH ChessD86 Grunfeld, Exchange
16. Stellwagen vs S Agdestein  ½-½422008NH ChessC99 Ruy Lopez, Closed, Chigorin, 12...cd
17. Wang Yue vs Korchnoi 1-0382008NH ChessD30 Queen's Gambit Declined
18. L'Ami vs Yusupov 1-0412008NH ChessD56 Queen's Gambit Declined
19. Caruana vs Ljubojevic  ½-½252008NH ChessB90 Sicilian, Najdorf
20. I Cheparinov vs Bareev 1-0892008NH ChessB12 Caro-Kann Defense
21. Korchnoi vs L'Ami 1-0592008NH ChessD43 Queen's Gambit Declined Semi-Slav
22. S Agdestein vs Caruana ½-½442008NH ChessA27 English, Three Knights System
23. Bareev vs Wang Yue 0-1712008NH ChessB13 Caro-Kann, Exchange
24. Yusupov vs Stellwagen  ½-½152008NH ChessD45 Queen's Gambit Declined Semi-Slav
25. Ljubojevic vs I Cheparinov  0-1402008NH ChessD76 Neo-Grunfeld, 6.cd Nxd5, 7.O-O Nb6
 page 1 of 2; games 1-25 of 50  PGN Download
  REFINE SEARCH:   White wins (1-0) | Black wins (0-1) | Draws (1/2-1/2)  

Kibitzer's Corner
< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 8 OF 8 ·  Later Kibitzing>
Aug-31-08  GeauxCool: <ex0dus> I agree. China has done extremely well, dominating world-wide sport after just 3 decades of training. They deserve credit for a job well done! Part of the bias against China appears to focus on whether agility is a demonstration of one's athleticism. But raw athletic ability is measured, among other things, in the attributes of STRENGTH, STAMINA, and AGILITY. China excels at sports that focus on agility. Examples include table tennis, diving, volleyball, and another is BADMINTON, an intense sport which is severely under-appreciated in USA.

<PP> When you watch this, try keep your eye on the birdie: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jXQr...

- BTW, <dumbgai> is right. Chinese women athletes have come along way. For example, <Iron Hammer> is widely-regarded as the greatest women's team volleyball participant in the World. She didn't just win Gold for China, she later coached USA to Silver!

Aug-31-08
Premium Chessgames Member
  Bobsterman3000: <dumbgai> You are very right. The Chinese basketball team is actually two teams: team #1 being their world-class (frontline) forwards and centers, and team #2 being their comically overmatched guards.

As soon as the guardplay gets up to par the Chinese team will start to press for a medal.

If teams like Puerto Rico, Slovenia and Greece can get good backcourt play there's no reason that China can't also.

Aug-31-08  PinkPanther: <chessmoron>
Just because new things are being built, doesn't really speak to the overall wealth of an average Chinese person. As I said somewhere else on this site before, the Chinese are still poorer than crap and will be for the foreseeable future. The only economic significance that country has is based on its population and not on its standard of living from person to person.

China has 4 times the population of the US and has about 1/4th of the GDP of the US. That means the average person in the US is 16 times more wealthy than his Chinese counterpart...have fun making up that gap, China. If China didn't have such cheap labor, they wouldn't even have a leg to stand on, because outside of food, cheap clothing and manufactured athletes, what do they offer the world in terms of services or products? Nothing.

And so you know, the second that the Chinese government backs off (which they probably won't do) and allows athletes to choose for themselves whether or not they want to be great, they will lose the biggest advantage they have: their "work ethic", that is to say being worked like slaves in the sport (or non-sport) that they are in.

Aug-31-08
Premium Chessgames Member
  chessmoron: <PinkPanther> Can we stop comparing China to developed countries like the US? You cannot compare a 58 years China to 300 years USA. Yes the standard is not there but China is HELLUVA developed than Africa.

And also China has given your Bush Administration trillions of dollars to cover their war cost and yes in return send exports their stuff to get their money back.

Now that cheap labor is nearly gone in China...Wal-Mart and several made-in-China products will be more expensive--this is of course a backlash against Western corporation to treat Chinese as s*it.

Chinese get s*it money from those Western hawks and their corporation get all that big bucks. No sir-re. Chinese workers is not going to be duped again.

Aug-31-08  PinkPanther: <chessmoron>
You shouldn't have to compare China with countries in Africa to make it look well off. That right there shows the nature of the argument. I'm pretty damn skinny when you compare me to the fattest man in the world, but I'm no underwear model.

I never said anything about George Bush or his policies or the economic ramifications of his policies. He has been a horrible president; most people are willing to admit that. Cheap labor in China isn't going anywhere anytime soon. They are one of the few countries in the world that is poor, and is yet not poor enough to where they can't get some things done. China puts itself in the position of allowing this to be done to it, and in fact, when it comes to being "abused" for the sake of other countries they even encourage it by devaluing their currency to keep their exports so high. The only way China is getting so big and "powerful" is because of stuff like this. As I said before, they don't really produce much of anything. They grow food and produce products for companies from other countries. The moment that they decide they don't want to provide cheap labor and act as a "sweatshop" for the rest of the world anymore, their economy will entirely collapse because those are the only legs that it is standing on.

Aug-31-08  sapfy: <Bobsterman3000: As far as Carl Lewis goes, he had already won 4 golds and 6 world championships by the time his positive test came along.>

So what? Unfortunately, not testing positive does not mean there is no doping.

That said, I have no opinion on whether Lewis ever intentionally used performance enhancing drugs.

<Apparently, the IOC accepted his explanation that the positive test came as a result of cold medications.>

The IOC? This case, along with dozens of others, were buried by the US Olympic Committee and was only years laters brought to light by a whistleblower.

Aug-31-08  sapfy: <PinkPanther: And so you know, the second that the Chinese government backs off (which they probably won't do) and allows athletes to choose for themselves whether or not they want to be great, they will lose the biggest advantage they have: their "work ethic", that is to say being worked like slaves in the sport (or non-sport) that they are in.>

Spot on. The people who are cheering on China should be aware of what exactly it is they're cheering for.

Aug-31-08  badest: <dumbgai: ... In athletics perhaps the sprint events will be the most difficult to improve, but Chinese women have already had great achievements in middle and long distance running and some of the field events, and I think the men will eventually improve in these disciplines as well.> Of course genes and environment play a major role in how much you can develop as an athlete. For the sprints the Chinese will have a hard time competing with runners from the Carribean and for the longer events with runners from Kenya, Ethiopia or North Africa (mostly for 800 and 1500m). The Chinese women did some very good results in the longer events (esp. 5000 and 10000m), but weren't some of them caught with doping (which of course frequent among other athletes too ... the US athletes just have more money so the doping is more sophisticated - not everyone can afford "designer-drugs").
Aug-31-08  Interbond: Please! Chessgames.com is about chess!!
Aug-31-08  ex0duz: <Interbond: Please! Chessgames.com is about chess!!>

Yeah.. because chess has never been intermingled with politics and between 2 superpowers(US vs Russia etc), and because we never talk politics on these forums.. -rolls eyes- :P~

<PinkPanther: You shouldn't have to compare China with countries in Africa to make it look well off. That right there shows the nature of the argument.>

The same way you have compared the U.S with China when you have also stated that China is a 'poor third world' country? It's pretty much the same thing.. talk about double standards. :p

<Just because new things are being built, doesn't really speak to the overall wealth of an average Chinese person. As I said somewhere else on this site before, the Chinese are still poorer than crap and will be for the foreseeable future. The only economic significance that country has is based on its population and not on its standard of living from person to person.>

As i've stated before, currently China cannot be compared with the U.S, or many other first world countries in many fields(gold medal count not being one of them). That is why i referred to it as still a 'third' world country, and why a few economically 'developed' cities like Shanghai, HK and Taiwan etc doesn't really make 'China' a developed country, and neither does having skyscrapers while the majority of the country lives in villages. It sort of parallels the U.S though, just that the U.S has had a big head start. Give it some time. I'm sure China will be able to keep up its current levels of infrastructural development, earthquakes and wars not withstanding.. 0_o

<China has 4 times the population of the US and has about 1/4th of the GDP of the US. That means the average person in the US is 16 times more wealthy than his Chinese counterpart...have fun making up that gap, China. If China didn't have such cheap labor, they wouldn't even have a leg to stand on, because outside of food, cheap clothing and manufactured athletes, what do they offer the world in terms of services or products? Nothing.>

Everyone has to start somewhere. They aren't a technologically developed country yet, and are still undergoing their industrial 'revolution', ie the reason why they are getting blasted by environmental activists. And FYI, China is having a ball 'making up that gap'. It will come sooner than you think, especially with the U.S wasting all it's money on unnecessary wars among many other things.. You say that China's economy will collapse, but the U.S is in the same bed as China, since they are one of the biggest recipients of Chinese goods. What's good for China also happens to be good for the U.S. Like you said, China has 4 times the population, so why wouldn't it make use of its cheap labor and focus on that for now? China is a big place, and also includes HK and Taiwan. Taiwan etc is well known for it's technological industry, and HK is also well known for it's trade and technology. Shanghai is also said to have 'overtaken' HK in terms of economy and being the centre for trade.. Honkies used to look down on Mainlanders(Shanghainese), but now the Shanghainese look down on Honkies(as the saying goes in China if i'm not mistaken).

Aug-31-08  ex0duz: <And so you know, the second that the Chinese government backs off (which they probably won't do) and allows athletes to choose for themselves whether or not they want to be great, they will lose the biggest advantage they have: their "work ethic", that is to say being worked like slaves in the sport (or non-sport) that they are in.>

They won't back off like you said until it's safe to do so, so that's pretty much a moot point.

<They are one of the few countries in the world that is poor, and is yet not poor enough to where they can't get some things done. China puts itself in the position of allowing this to be done to it, and in fact, when it comes to being "abused" for the sake of other countries they even encourage it by devaluing their currency to keep their exports so high. The only way China is getting so big and "powerful" is because of stuff like this. As I said before, they don't really produce much of anything. They grow food and produce products for companies from other countries. The moment that they decide they don't want to provide cheap labor and act as a "sweatshop" for the rest of the world anymore, their economy will entirely collapse because those are the only legs that it is standing on.>

That has some truth to it, but like i said.. until it is feasible to do so, they won't do it. That doesn't mean that it will never happen and China will always remain a 'sweatshop' country. Once their industrial 'revolution' and technological advancement reaches a sufficient level, they can start to diversify their economy and industries(if they aren't already doing so).

China has changed so much in the last 10-20 years, and i'm guessing that in another 10-20 years, the 'gap' that they are having so much fun in closing will be even smaller. Do you think the U.S will be able to increase the gap in terms of GDP or halt China's progress in that department? I doubt it, and i think China has the upper hand when it comes to that for now and the foreseeable future. It's much easier to play catch up(and steal/copy technologies/strategy) than it is to increase the lead and truly be innovative/revolutionary in business/technological ideas.. The U.S has too much red tape that China does not when it comes down to these things. This is why Chinese athletes have improved so much in the olympics, and it will also be for that reason that China will also close the gap economically, so to speak. I haven't even mentioned the 'big' state projects that China has undertaken that the U.S can only dream of. China has quite alot to offer the world i would think. To say it has nothing to offer other than it being a 'sweatshop' is simply selling China short. Every country wants a piece of Chinese pie, and it's been like that for a very very long time.. only now it's China that's the one who is in control and dividing up it's portions instead of being exploited and raped by foreign interests/nations.

Sorry for the long rant, but i'm sick of China bashing and simply getting misrepresented/misunderstood by the west powers. Go China. Go Wang Yue. Go Chinese chess/sports. Jia You! =]

Aug-31-08
Premium Chessgames Member
  chessmoron: <I never said anything about George Bush or his policies or the economic ramifications of his policies. He has been a horrible president; most people are willing to admit that.> That is not exactly what I meant. That China HAS the money to spent to give Bush what HE wanted.

<The only way China is getting so big and "powerful" is because of stuff like this. As I said before, they don't really produce much of anything. They grow food and produce products for companies from other countries. The moment that they decide they don't want to provide cheap labor and act as a "sweatshop" for the rest of the world anymore, their economy will entirely collapse because those are the only legs that it is standing on.>

I recommend YOU to see--
Koppel on Discovery: The People's Republic of Capitalism

Download it by torrents or whatever and you can see where China get 2/3 of the dough. Africa. Brazil. Cambodia. Of course the US. US needs China as well as China needs US

Aug-31-08
Premium Chessgames Member
  Bobsterman3000: Wang Yue for chess Oscar!

Aug-31-08  PinkPanther: <chessmoron>
Of course China has money for it. China has a massive surplus because of all the stuff they sell. It's also helped along, as I said before, by the fact that they have an artificially devalued currency which helps them keep their exports so high. Of course they are going to have a lot of money laying around. It's not because the country is rich, it's because of the nature of their economy and monetary system.

Pertaining to the second thing you mentioned, I have no clue what you are even talking about. What you said isn't even coherent English.

Aug-31-08
Premium Chessgames Member
  chessmoron: <Pertaining to the second thing you mentioned, I have no clue what you are even talking about. What you said isn't even coherent English.>

I recommend you to see "Koppel on Discovery: The People's Republic of Capitalism" because China's ALL of the money does NOT come from 'cheap labor.' It comes from elsewhere. Businesses in Africa. Building infrastructures and roads and schools and libraries in Africa. Soy beans from Brazil...etc....which US and Europe has failed to boast up their economy.

Sep-01-08  s4life: <PinkPanther: <s4life> China didn't dominate the Olympics. If I'm not mistaken, the US had more medals with 1/4th of the population. Furthermore, half of the things China is good at shouldn't even be in the Olympics. Trampoline? Air rifle? Air pistol? Ping pong? Badminton? Get real. For what it's worth, I think the synchronized sports are stupid, also. I have no problem with diving, but synchronized diving seems really stupid and pointless to me.>

China won like almost twice the number of US gold medals ... historically that's always been the accepted measure of success of any country in the olympics... NBC's stupid attempt to hide the sun with finger notwithstanding.

Those games have always been part of the olympics but China has never really gotten more than third place until recently... you just can't hide the fact that they are on the rise.

Sep-01-08
Premium Chessgames Member
  norami: Count 3 points for gold, 2 for silver and 1 for bronze and China finished ahead by exactly 3 points. Prove one of those Chinese gymnasts was under age and . . . USA #1!
Sep-01-08  GeauxCool: China reaps. America sleeps.
Sep-01-08  Xenon Oxide: <Furthermore, half of the things China is good at shouldn't even be in the Olympics. Trampoline? Air rifle? Air pistol? Ping pong? Badminton? Get real.>

Before anyone gets swayed by this ridiculous statement, note that those events have been in the Olympics for 50 years or more. It is only recently that China began to excel in them. <PinkPanther> wouldn't be raving about how useless these sports are if China didn't exist or excel in those sports.

Sep-01-08  protean: <Before anyone gets swayed by this ridiculous statement, note that those events have been in the Olympics for 50 years or more.>

How does this render PinkPanther's statement <ridiculous>?

<<PinkPanther> wouldn't be raving about how useless these sports are if China didn't exist or excel in those sports.>

True or false it would have no impact on whether those sports belong in the Olympics.

Sep-01-08  Appaz: Amusing to see an empire with 300 years of history mocking an empire with thousands of years of continous history. China took a little downturn when the Europeans showed them how to better use gunpowder, but that was just temporarily.

China is now independent and organized, and it is just a matter of time before they will be a (more) dominant world power.

I don't think they will have too few legs to stand on. Already Lenovo stands comfortable on the old leg of IBM, and if greedy and short-sighted CEO's and banks continue to scr.. up, companies may become very cheap over here in the west.

Sep-01-08  PinkPanther: <Xenon Oxide>
Uh, no, that's not true at all. The reason why I have gotten more involved in discussions about these Olympics is because for the first time in a while, I've had a chance to watch a good bit of them. There are plenty of stupid things that Americans and other countries are good at, and if you read my personal list of criteria for which sports should and shouldn't be in the Olympics, you'll see that many sports that Americans are good at would be removed. I don't care how long the sport has been a part of the Olympics, stupidity is stupidity.
Sep-01-08  amadeus: <stupidity is stupidity> e.g.: Racewalking
Sep-01-08  Pulse: <ex0dus> Speaking of double standards, as George Carlin once said, "this country was founded on double standards: slaveowners who want freedom?" Anyway, it's fun and all to bash China, but try existing for a few thousand more years and maybe then we'll see where you stand.
Oct-04-08  LaFreaK: In the midst of February,a couple shed tears.
The foundation has collapsed.
And the end is near.
<Dow Jones and the US>
Jump to page #    (enter # from 1 to 8)
search thread:   
< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 8 OF 8 ·  Later Kibitzing>

NOTE: Create an account today to post replies and access other powerful features which are available only to registered users. Becoming a member is free, anonymous, and takes less than 1 minute! If you already have a username, then simply login login under your username now to join the discussion.

Please observe our posting guidelines:

  1. No obscene, racist, sexist, or profane language.
  2. No spamming, advertising, duplicate, or gibberish posts.
  3. No vitriolic or systematic personal attacks against other members.
  4. Nothing in violation of United States law.
  5. No cyberstalking or malicious posting of negative or private information (doxing/doxxing) of members.
  6. No trolling.
  7. The use of "sock puppet" accounts to circumvent disciplinary action taken by moderators, create a false impression of consensus or support, or stage conversations, is prohibited.

Please try to maintain a semblance of civility at all times.

Blow the Whistle

See something that violates our rules? Blow the whistle and inform a moderator.


NOTE: Please keep all discussion on-topic. This forum is for this specific tournament only. To discuss chess or this site in general, visit the Kibitzer's Café.

Messages posted by Chessgames members do not necessarily represent the views of Chessgames.com, its employees, or sponsors.
All moderator actions taken are ultimately at the sole discretion of the administration.

Spot an error? Please suggest your correction and help us eliminate database mistakes!
Home | About | Login | Logout | F.A.Q. | Profile | Preferences | Premium Membership | Kibitzer's Café | Biographer's Bistro | New Kibitzing | Chessforums | Tournament Index | Player Directory | Notable Games | World Chess Championships | Opening Explorer | Guess the Move | Game Collections | ChessBookie Game | Chessgames Challenge | Store | Privacy Notice | Contact Us

Copyright 2001-2021, Chessgames Services LLC