ANAND RETAINS WORLD CHESS CHAMPIONSHIP
and/or www.mantra.com/jai
PTI
The Pioneer
Wednesday, May 12, 2010
Sofia, Bulgaria - World champion Viswanathan Anand on Tuesday
retained his crown winning the World Chess Championship title by
wrapping up the final game against Veselin Topalov of Russia.
Anand achieved an improbable win playing with black in the final game
to retain the world title by 6.5-5.5 margin after the end of the 12th
and final game here.
Experts over the world had predicted that Topalov, at his worst, will
draw the last game under normal time control and then the match will
be headed in to the rapid tiebreaker.
However, it was not to be as Topalov, trying to look for
complications, went haywire in a slightly difficult position and
could not recover as Anand kept dealing one lethal blow after another
to notch up his fourth world title in 11 years to remain the
undisputed king of the game once again.
Earlier, in 2008 Anand had won the world title in a match against
Russian Vladimir Kramnik, in 2006 he had won the world championship
match tournament ahead of almost all top players in the world and in
the year 2000 he had won the championship when it was held on a
knockout basis.
Anand, thus became the first official world champion in recent
history to win two back-to-back matches in world championships
against different opponents.
Vladimir Kramnik can also lay his claims for that but for the fact
that the match he won against Garry Kasparov in 2000 was not played
under the official FIDE flag.
If the last game was any indication, Anand had indeed reserved his
best as he knew Topalov will go all out for a win.
The reason for Topalov's unwarranted aggression was probably based on
the fact that Anand is by far regarded as the best rapid chess player
in history and Topalov does not have any great reputation in the
faster version of the game. Naturally, the Bulgaria wanted to avoid
the tiebreaker.
Anand came up with another opening surprise as he went back to the
basics. The Queen's Gambit declined as black has a solid reputation
and it stood up for Anand's quest as the Indian ace went for the
rock-solid Lasker variation.
Topalov, tried to create complications earlier but when the game
headed towards a perfect balance, the Bulgarian lost his cool. The
decisive moment of the game came on the 32nd move when Topalov simply
lost his cool and blundered.
What followed was a feast for the Indian as he could attack the white
king at will. All Anand's pieces, joined the party and threats of
checkmate loomed large on Topalov. For once the support of the home
crowd did not matter too.
Anand, apparently, made a mistake on the infamous 40th move but his
position was so commanding that it did not spoil his game. Topalov
fought on for sometime before giving up as the Indian won in 56
moves.
http://dailypioneer.com/255339/Anand-retains-World-Chess-Championship.html
More at:
http://www.dailypioneer.com
Jai Maharaj, Jyotishi
Om Shanti
o Not for commercial use. Solely to be fairly used for the educational
purposes of research and open discussion. The contents of this post may not
have been authored by, and do not necessarily represent the opinion of the
poster. The contents are protected by copyright law and the exemption for
fair use of copyrighted works.
o If you send private e-mail to me, it will likely not be read,
considered or answered if it does not contain your full legal name, current
e-mail and postal addresses, and live-voice telephone number.
o Posted for information and discussion. Views expressed by others are
not necessarily those of the poster who may or may not have read the article.
FAIR USE NOTICE: This article may contain copyrighted material the use of
which may or may not have been specifically authorized by the copyright
owner. This material is being made available in efforts to advance the
understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic,
democratic, scientific, social, and cultural, etc., issues. It is believed
that this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as
provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title
17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without
profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included
information for research, comment, discussion and educational purposes by
subscribing to USENET newsgroups or visiting web sites. For more information
go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml
If you wish to use copyrighted material from this article for purposes of
your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the
copyright owner.
Since newsgroup posts are being removed
by forgery by one or more net terrorists,
this post may be reposted several times.
harmony
<use...@mantra.com and/or www.mantra.com/jai (Dr. Jai Maharaj)> wrote in
message news:20100511K689iL532CxQ43Em0der7QP@SsY65...
Andrew B.
Maharaj) wrote:
> Anand, thus became the first official world champion in recent
> history to win two back-to-back matches in world championships
> against different opponents.
>
> Vladimir Kramnik can also lay his claims for that but for the fact
> that the match he won against Garry Kasparov in 2000 was not played
> under the official FIDE flag.
If it's "official" matches then Karpov can also claim it - he beat
Timman in 1993, Kamsky in 1996 and Anand in 1998.
For that matter, Kramnik didn't win back-to-back matches - he beat
Kasparov, drew with Leko, then beat Topalov. (Kasparov did, of course,
against Karpov, Short and Anand).
Before that, you have to go back to Petrosian (Botvinnik 1963, Spassky
1966).
and/or www.mantra.com/jai
[ Subject: The Origin of Chess
[ From: Dr. Jai Maharaj
[ Date: January 27, 1997
Nagarajan Parthasarathy (n...@home.com) writes:
>
> I am unable to give you the exact source but I hope I can give you
> enough information to give you a rather early reference to _use_
> of chess.
> In the mahabharat, there is an incidence. I remember this
> because my mom taught me this as example of trust between
> good friends. It would be somewhere in 12-17'th chapters.
> It is a nice tale anyway and not too long ( about 10 lines).
>
> Karna and Duriyodhan's wife are playing chess. Duriyodana
> walks in, his wife hearing his foot steps gets up to greet him.
> Karna, reaches for her and tries to grab her to seat her
> because he thinks that she is leaving. He ends up grabbing her
> clothes and ripping them off. The string of pearls that
> Duriyohdan's wife is wearing breaks spewing pearls all
> over the floor. When Duriyodhan enters the room, he sees
> his wife with some of her clothes torn off which are in his
> friends hand! He also sees the pearls bouncing on the
> floor. He looks at his wife and asks her whether it is
> enough if he just picks up the pearls or should he also
> string it up for her. The moral of the story being that
> he doesn't even require a explanation to believe that
> nothing untoward had happened - he trusts his friend
> and wife a lot.
>
> Now, what don't ask me what other explanations can be
> given for Duriyodhan's words.. ;)
And, the Mahabharat war has been dated at 5,561 BCE -- please consult
THE SCIENTIFIC DATING OF THE MAHABHARAT WAR by Dr. Padmakar Vishnu
Vartak.
Here is an excerpt from it, courtesy of Shri Prasad Gokhale:
PLUTO (was also known to Vyas in 5561 BCE)
Krittikaam Peedayan Teekshnaihi Nakshatram......[30-Bheeshma.3]
Vyas states that there was one Nakshatra, i.e, some immobile liminary
troubling Krittika (Pleiades) with its sharp rays. This "star" in
Krit- tika must have been some "planet". It must have been stationary
for many years, that is why Vyas called it Nakshatra which means a
thing that does not move according to Mahabharat itself [Na Ksharati
Iti Makshatram]
Hence the Nakshatra was a planet moving very slowly like Pluto which
takes nine years to cross one Nakshatra of 13 degrees. My assumption
that this Nakshatra was Pluto gets confirmed by B.O.R.I (Bhandarkar
Oriental Research Institute?) Edition which states thus :
Krittikasu Grahasteevro Nakshatre Prathame Jvalan...... [26-
Bhishma.3]
Some editions mention 'Grahasteekshnah'. Thus Teevra, Teekshana and
Nakshatra are the names of one and the same planet (graha) which was
in Krittlka in 5561 BCE Let us see if Vyas has given these names to
Pluto and if Pluto was in Krittika. It is stated that Krittika was
troubled with sharp rays by that planet - this indicates that it was
Nirayan Krittika.
Pluto was at 175 degrees in 1979. It takes 248 years per rotation.
1979+5561=7540 years. 7540 divided by 248 gives 30.403223 turns.
0.403223 turn means 145 degrees. 175 - 145 = 30 degrees. This is the
site of Krittika. Thus it is proved beyond doubt that Vyas bas
mentioned the position of Pluto, which was discovered to the modern
world in 1930. Vyas could have used his Yogic Vision or mathematical
brain or a lens or some other device to discover Teevra, Teekshna' or
Nakshatra or Pluto.
Thus all the three so-called 'New' planets are discovered from
Mahabharat. It is usually held that before the discovery of Herschel
in 1781 CE, only five planets were known to the world. This belief is
wrong because Vyas has mentioned 'seven Great planets', three times
in Mahabharat.
Deepyamanascha Sampetuhu Divi Sapta Mahagrahah....[2-Bhishma.17]
This stanza states that the seven great planets were brilliant and
shining; so Rahu and Ketu are out of question. Rahu and Ketu are
described as Graha' 23 meaning Nodal points. (Parus means a node).
Evidently Rahu and Ketu are not included in these seven great
planets. The Moon also is not included, because it was not visible on
that day of Amavasya with Solar Eclipse. From the positions
discovered by me and given by Vyas it is seen that Mars, Sun,
Mercury, Jupiter, Uranus, Venus and Neptune were the seven great
planets accumulated in a small field extending from Anuradha to Purva
Bhadrapada. So they appeared to Ved-Vyas as colliding with each
other, during total solar eclipse.
Nissaranto Vyadrushanta Suryaat Sapta Mahagrahah....[4-Karna 37].
This stanza clearly states that these seven great planets were 'seen'
moving away from the Sun. As these are 'seen', Rahu and Ketu are out
of question. This is the statement of sixteenth day of the War,
naturally the Moon has moved away from the Sun. Hence, Moon, Mars,
Mercury, Jupiter, Uranus, Venus and Neptune are the seven great
planets mentioned by Vyas.
Praja Samharane Rajan Somam Sapta grahah Iva......[22-Drona 37].
Here again seven planets are mentioned, excluding the Moon.
Even if we do not consider the planetary positions, from the above
three stanzas, it is clear that seven planets are mentioned which do
not include the Sun, Moon, Rahu and Ketu. Naturally the conclusion is
inevitable that Vyas did know Uranus (Shveta) and Neptune (Shyama) as
planets.
If they were known from 5561 years BCE then why they got forgotten?
The answer is simple, that these two planets, Uranus and Neptune were
not useful in predicting the future of a person. So they lost
importance and in the course of time they were totally forgotten.
But, in any case, Neelakantha from 17th century knew these two
planets very weIl. Neelakantha is about a hundered years ancient than
Herschel, and he writes that Mahapata (Uranus) is a famous planet in
the Astronomical science of India. He also mentions the planet
'Parigha' i.e. Neptune. 22 So both were known in India, at least one
Hundered years before Herschel. Vyas is 7343 years ancient than
Herschel, but still he knew all the three planets Uranus, Neptune and
Pluto.
[...]
Jai Maharaj, Jyotishi
Om Shanti
In article <4be9bac9$0$12436$bbae...@news.suddenlink.net>,
"harmony" <a...@hotmail.com> posted:
>
> anand has an unfair advantage because chess is a hindu game.
> Dr. Jai Maharaj posted:
raylopez99
Jai Maharaj) wrote:
> Anand, apparently, made a mistake on the infamous 40th move but his
> position was so commanding that it did not spoil his game. Topalov
> fought on for sometime before giving up as the Indian won in 56
> moves.
That was not infamous nor a mistake. It was about equal with the
other move.
The mistake by Anand was 36...g5+ rather than 36....Qd8+ which wins
faster.
All in all, a brilliant game by the Indian separatist, Anand.
RL
micky
.
> Anand achieved an improbable win playing with black in the final game
> to retain the world title by 6.5-5.5 margin after the end of the 12th
> and final game here.
G'day Doc
Let me begin by disputing "improbable" as laid out in your partisan -
shall I say - propaganda "shout" ... the fact *is* I personally, am a
habitual winner when the black pieces belong to my camp .....
> Experts over the world had predicted that Topalov, at his worst, will
> draw the last game under normal time control and then the match will
> be headed in to the rapid tiebreaker.
Expurts ?
> However, it was not to be as Topalov, trying to look for
> complications, went haywire in a slightly difficult position and
> could not recover as Anand kept dealing one lethal blow after another
> to notch up his fourth world title in 11 years to remain the
> undisputed king of the game once again.
4'rth world title ?
> Earlier, in 2008 Anand had won the world title in a match against
> Russian Vladimir Kramnik, in 2006 he had won the world championship
> match tournament ahead of almost all top players in the world and in
> the year 2000 he had won the championship when it was held on a
> knockout basis.
What was the story again in the year 2000 ? wasn't Vishy effectively put
in the 'pig-pen' by Gars ~ this time - no ?
> Anand, thus became the first official world champion in recent
> history to win two back-to-back matches in world championships
> against different opponents.
>
> Vladimir Kramnik can also lay his claims for that but for the fact
> that the match he won against Garry Kasparov in 2000 was not played
> under the official FIDE flag.
Nah ! there was definitely something 'vishy' about that one Doc ....
> If the last game was any indication, Anand had indeed reserved his
> best as he knew Topalov will go all out for a win.
I have this 'game' I still haven't played it through, but be assured I'm
looking forward to doing so ...
> The reason for Topalov's unwarranted aggression was probably based on
> the fact that Anand is by far regarded as the best rapid chess player
> in history and Topalov does not have any great reputation in the
> faster version of the game. Naturally, the Bulgaria wanted to avoid
> the tiebreaker.
Uh-huh ...
> Anand came up with another opening surprise as he went back to the
> basics. The Queen's Gambit declined as black has a solid reputation
> and it stood up for Anand's quest as the Indian ace went for the
> rock-solid Lasker variation.
>
> Topalov, tried to create complications earlier but when the game
> headed towards a perfect balance, the Bulgarian lost his cool. The
> decisive moment of the game came on the 32nd move when Topalov simply
> lost his cool and blundered.
Dunno <yet..> I'll let you know, when I find out for myself, whether I
think Topo "blundered" or not <'course it is human to BLUNDER..> but
letz not get too carried away with inflated lingo or anythink - ok ?
Let me get back to you when I've decided whether Topo's 32nd was a
'blunder' - if you're interested that is ....
> What followed was a feast for the Indian as he could attack the white
> king at will.
This sounds disgusting ! "feast" in this context reads like a mob of
sheep polishing off an avocado salad < a tigre would break the neck of
it's victim cleanly - no ? > but we know the Topolov camp had elected
for a policy of 'no surrender' so I think the drawn out suffering is
cogent...
m..
>All Anand's pieces, joined the party and threats of
> checkmate loomed large on Topalov. For once the support of the home
> crowd did not matter too.
>
> Anand, apparently, made a mistake on the infamous 40th move but his
> position was so commanding that it did not spoil his game. Topalov
> fought on for sometime before giving up as the Indian won in 56
> moves.
>
> http://dailypioneer.com/255339/Anand-retains-World-Chess-Championship.html
>
> More at:
> http://www.dailypioneer.com
>
> Jai Maharaj, Jyotishi
> Om Shanti
.
raylopez99
> All in all, a brilliant game by the Indian separatist, Anand.
Correction: as I see this is cross-posted to sites other than
r.g.c.m, to avoid misunderstanding I should point out that actually I
don't know if he's a separatist, that was flame bait for Dr. Jai.
RL
P. Rajah
> harmony ji, your comment reminds me of this post of more than 13 years ago:
>
> [ Subject: The Origin of Chess
> [ From: Jay Stevens Maharaj
> [ Date: January 27, 1997
>
> [....]
>
> And, the Mahabharat war has been dated at 5,561 BCE -- please consult
> THE SCIENTIFIC DATING OF THE MAHABHARAT WAR by Dr. Padmakar Vishnu
> Vartak.
>
> Here is an excerpt from it, courtesy of Shri Prasad Gokhale:
>
> PLUTO (was also known to Vyas in 5561 BCE)
How was it known to Vyas?
> Krittikaam Peedayan Teekshnaihi Nakshatram......[30-Bheeshma.3]
>
> Vyas states that there was one Nakshatra, i.e, some immobile liminary
> troubling Krittika (Pleiades) with its sharp rays. This "star" in
> Krit- tika must have been some "planet". It must have been stationary
> for many years, that is why Vyas called it Nakshatra which means a
> thing that does not move according to Mahabharat itself [Na Ksharati
> Iti Makshatram]
Nakshatra means "star", not "some immobile liminary[sic]".
> Hence the Nakshatra was a planet moving very slowly like Pluto which
> takes nine years to cross one Nakshatra of 13 degrees. My assumption
> that this Nakshatra was Pluto gets confirmed by B.O.R.I (Bhandarkar
> Oriental Research Institute?) Edition which states thus :
>
> Krittikasu Grahasteevro Nakshatre Prathame Jvalan...... [26-
> Bhishma.3]
>
> Some editions mention 'Grahasteekshnah'. Thus Teevra, Teekshana and
> Nakshatra are the names of one and the same planet (graha) which was
> in Krittlka in 5561 BCE Let us see if Vyas has given these names to
> Pluto and if Pluto was in Krittika. It is stated that Krittika was
> troubled with sharp rays by that planet - this indicates that it was
> Nirayan Krittika.
>
> Pluto was at 175 degrees in 1979. It takes 248 years per rotation.
> 1979+5561=7540 years. 7540 divided by 248 gives 30.403223 turns.
> 0.403223 turn means 145 degrees. 175 - 145 = 30 degrees. This is the
> site of Krittika. Thus it is proved beyond doubt that Vyas bas
> mentioned the position of Pluto, which was discovered to the modern
> world in 1930. Vyas could have used his Yogic Vision or mathematical
> brain or a lens or some other device to discover Teevra, Teekshna' or
> Nakshatra or Pluto.
Circular nonsense being portrayed as science!
> From the positions
> discovered by me and given by Vyas it is seen that Mars, Sun,
> Mercury, Jupiter, Uranus, Venus and Neptune were the seven great
> planets accumulated in a small field extending from Anuradha to Purva
> Bhadrapada.
So Vyas couldn't detect the presence of Saturn, the second most massive
planet in our solar system and visible with the naked eye, but he saw
tiny distant Pluto which is only visible through a telescope? And he
categorized the sun as a planet?
harmony
playing field. there are probably too many moves in there that only anand
knows.
<use...@mantra.com and/or www.mantra.com/jai (Dr. Jai Maharaj)> wrote in
message news:20100511Pu5NdynfX616nP17w03OxL6@Ux08Z...
and/or www.mantra.com/jai
even take place.
Jai Maharaj, Jyotishi
Om Shanti
In article <4bec05d3$0$12447$bbae...@news.suddenlink.net>,
"harmony" <a...@hotmail.com> posted:
>
> i hope study of vedas is made integral part of chess training to level the
> playing field. there are probably too many moves in there that only anand
> knows.
> Dr. Jai Maharaj posted:
chip...@gmail.com
GitClub's analysis of the match. We all need a laugh, so come on,
Sanny! Go for it!