BBC Documentary on Fischer v Spassky 1972

As technology moves forward, it often reaches back. By that I mean that advances in technology often allow us to access information from the past. As an example, the BBC produced a documentary on the 1972 Fischer Spassky match, containing present day interviews, as well as archival footage from the match (and elsewhere). Now while this information has always existed, it hasn't always been available (unless you worked in a film archive). However, with the advent of Youtube/Google/Internet etc this sort of information is now available at the click of a button.
If you wish to watch the documentary on your PC, just click on this link. Although I haven't watched it all, the bits that I have watched are interesting, if only to place faces to many well known chess names.
BTW Many thanks to Stephen Mugford for sending me the link.

World Cup Winners

Tried to watch the start of the 2007 Cricket World Cup Final between Australia and Sri Lanka, but rain delayed the start, so I missed Adam Gilchrists spectacular 100. I almost missed the end of the Final as well, but this can be blamed on the decision to end the game in complete darkness.
The win by Australia is its 3rd in a row, and as usual there are those who say that this is bad for cricket. I guess the thinking is that sport is more interesting when it is a contest, and when it isn't a contest, it is no longer interesting. Personally I don't see it that way. To me competition is (mainly) about doing your best, and if one sides "best" is far superior to everyone else's, then I can enjoy watching the skill and abilities of the winners.
In one sense it brings to mind Bobby Fischer's run of 19 (or 20) straight wins during the lead up to the 1972 World Championship Match. While I was too young to remember comments at the time, reading the coverage of Fischer's run, both from that period, and in retrospect, no one seemed to think that this was bad for chess. The same goes for Fischers 11-0 win of the 64/64 US Championship. Rather than being bad for US chess, it inspired a generation of players to try harder to keep up.

BTW Both the Canberra Raiders and ACT Brumbies also won this weekend, so all in all it was a good sporting weekend.

Blayney Open

While it is still a fair way off, I'll put in an early plug for the 1st Blayney Open.
The tournament is to be held on the 8th & 9th of September, in the NSW country town of Blayney. Blayney is on the Mid-West Highway, between Bathurst and Cowra. It is about 2.5 hours from Sydney, and the same travelling distance from Canberra (although I do know a shortcut!)
This is the first time to Blayney Chess Club has put on a weekend event and hopefully it will have a successful beginning and continued success. Tournament first prize is $300 and there will also be a lightning tournament on the Saturday Night.

Live Game Broadcasts

Despite the advances in technology, broadcasting live chess games over the net is still a tricky undertaking.
For example this years Doeberl Cup was ready to broadcast the top 6 games live, until we discovered that the venue didn't have net access. The Sydney International Open had bigger difficulties, as despite having net access, they struggled to even get 1 game going.
However it isn't impossible to do, as both the 2006-07 Australian Open, and the 2007 Australian Junior were able to broadcast multiple games live to the net.
Based on my experience at the Australian Open you probably need the following things to make it happen.

1. Equipment that you know physically works (DGT Boards, power supplies)
2. The right set of connectors and cables
3. The correct computer equipment and software for net broadcasting
4. People with the right technical smarts to trouble shoot problems as they arise.

Both at the Australian Open and Junior, there were various problems with the equipment on Day's 0 & 1, but we were able to isolate the problems and find solutions. This is a function of point 4 on the list, something that organisers can overlook from time to time. Indeed in the case of the Sydney International Open, it appears Nicholas Chernih was a big help in this area, especially as the first couple of attempts at getting the boards working came to naught.

However, when talking to Brian Jones after the event, he also criticized the "old" DGT technology. The reliance on serial connectors rather than USB plugs made the task of setting up more difficult. Now DGT do produce a USB version of their board, but it is still quite expensive to buy.

But there may be a cheaper alternative. While looking at the Closetgrandmaster blog I saw a story on USB chess boards. The link to the post is here. Visiting the actual website I was surprised to find the cost of the USB chess board is only $45(US), which is amazingly cheap. What I couldn't find were the technical specifications for the device, including board and piece size. Nonetheless it does look promising, both in terms of price, and possibly hackability.

Papua New Guinea Chess

Due to my father serving in the Australian Army, my place of birth was Port Moresby, Papua New Guinea. Now at the time I didn't think this was important, but in later years this turned out to be quite useful. Especially when the PNG Chess Federation were looking to send a team to the 2000 Istanbul Olympiad.
I happily volunteered my services (despite not having lived there since 1977), and as the team only had 3 players at the time, my offer was accepted.
Since then PNG has sent a team to all subsequent Olympiads, and is planning to do so for Dresden 2008.
Due to the fact that we only have a small group of players to draw from, and for resident PNG players the travel expenses can be prohibitive, we often languish towards the rear of the tournament. Nonetheless playing is an enjoyable experience and as a team we look for victories over traditional rivals such as Fiji or Bermuda. As individuals we are also on the lookout for title opportunities (such as Rupert Jones earning an FM title in 2004), or just to play some good chess.
As an example PNG Board 1 Stuart Fancy (Olympiad Medalist in 1982 and 1992), scores a neat win over Octavio Croes from Aruba

Fancy, Stuart v Croes, Octavio
Turin Olympiad, 2006
1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 g6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Qxd4 Nf6 5. e5 Nc6 6. Qa4 Nd5 7. Qe4 Ndb4 8. Bb5 Bg7 9. a3 Qa5 10. Nc3 O-O 11. axb4 Qxa1 12. O-O d5 13. Qh4 Bf5 14. Nxd5 a6 15. Bxc6 bxc6 16. Nxe7+ Kh8 17. Bh6 Qxb2 18. Bxg7+ Kxg7 19. Qf6+ Kh6 20. Nxf5+ 1-0

New Australian International Master

Congratulations to new Australian International Master, Les Rowley. Rowley earned is second and final IM norm at the Cecil Purdy Centenary Correspondence Chess Tournament. A cross table for this event is here.
The actual title will be awarded at the ICCF Conference in October of this year.

Spoiling the Ending

Frequent contributor to this blog, Milan Ninchich, has sent me another item of interest. The Nalimov endgame tablebases can now be queried over the net. They are provided by the Knowledge4It website, and you can use them to query endgames involving 6 pieces (combined) or less.
For those that aren't aware of the Nalimov Tablebases, they provide a complete assessment (win, loss, draw) of every position involving 6 pieces or less. This task has been progressing for years, starting with 3 piece endings (eg K+PvK). As computing power has increased, positions with more material has been investigated. The method for generating these results is to start with the final position (and assessment) and then work backwards to generate a set of positions that lead to the final position.
Nalimov Tablesbases are much beloved by computer chess programmers as they can be incorporated into a chess program, removing the need to actually teach a program what to do in a number of endgame positions. Personally I find this a sign of laziness on behalf of a programmer, but it does make the program play perfect chess in these endings, resulting in better results.
Another use of Tablebases is to check endgame analysis from books like Basic Chess Endings (Fine) or Pawn Endings (Averbakh and Maizelis). Indeed in the later book the diagrammed position is of interest.

The book gives 1.d5! as winning, which it does, but states that White can also win with 1.a4. However the website states that this is a draw after 1. ... Ke4! 2.a5 Kd5 3.Ke2 Kc6 4.Ke3
At this point the book leaves off with an etc, implying that the win is a matter of technique, but the tablebase shows that every move for Black, with the exception of 4. ... e5, still holds the draw.