Chess photo of the day

SPRAGGETT ON CHESS

''The move that brought down the SOVIET SCHOOL of chess...''

SPRAGGETT ON CHESS

The world's oldest practicing MD

SPRAGGETT ON CHESS

100 years old and still practicing medicine!

_________________________________________________________________________

LIFE IS ...100%  ATTITUDE!

''When I was young I was called a rugged individualist. When I was in my fifties I was considered eccentric. Here I am doing and saying the same things I did then and I'm labeled senile.''

-George Burns (1896-1996)

SPRAGGETT ON CHESS

Maybe we're ready to stop and think.

SPRAGGETT ON CHESS

Does the Internet Make You Dumber?

The cognitive effects are measurable: We're turning into shallow thinkers

By NICHOLAS CARR

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704025304575284981644790098.html

The Roman philosopher Seneca may have put it best 2,000 years ago: "To be everywhere is to be nowhere." Today, the Internet grants us easy access to unprecedented amounts of information. But a growing body of scientific evidence suggests that the Net, with its constant distractions and interruptions, is also turning us into scattered and superficial thinkers.

The picture emerging from the research is deeply troubling, at least to anyone who values the depth, rather than just the velocity, of human thought. People who read text studded with links, the studies show, comprehend less than those who read traditional linear text. People who watch busy multimedia presentations remember less than those who take in information in a more sedate and focused manner. People who are continually distracted by emails, alerts and other messages understand less than those who are able to concentrate. And people who juggle many tasks are less creative and less productive than those who do one thing at a time.

The common thread in these disabilities is the division of attention. The richness of our thoughts, our memories and even our personalities hinges on our ability to focus the mind and sustain concentration. Only when we pay deep attention to a new piece of information are we able to associate it "meaningfully and systematically with knowledge already well established in memory," writes the Nobel Prize-winning neuroscientist Eric Kandel. Such associations are essential to mastering complex concepts.

When we're constantly distracted and interrupted, as we tend to be online, our brains are unable to forge the strong and expansive neural connections that give depth and distinctiveness to our thinking. We become mere signal-processing units, quickly shepherding disjointed bits of information into and then out of short-term memory.

In an article published in Science last year, Patricia Greenfield, a leading developmental psychologist, reviewed dozens of studies on how different media technologies influence our cognitive abilities. Some of the studies indicated that certain computer tasks, like playing video games, can enhance "visual literacy skills," increasing the speed at which people can shift their focus among icons and other images on screens. Other studies, however, found that such rapid shifts in focus, even if performed adeptly, result in less rigorous and "more automatic" thinking.

56 Seconds

Average time an American spends looking at a Web page.

In one experiment conducted at Cornell University, for example, half a class of students was allowed to use Internet-connected laptops during a lecture, while the other had to keep their computers shut. Those who browsed the Web performed much worse on a subsequent test of how well they retained the lecture's content. While it's hardly surprising that Web surfing would distract students, it should be a note of caution to schools that are wiring their classrooms in hopes of improving learning.

 

Ms. Greenfield concluded that "every medium develops some cognitive skills at the expense of others." Our growing use of screen-based media, she said, has strengthened visual-spatial intelligence, which can improve the ability to do jobs that involve keeping track of lots of simultaneous signals, like air traffic control. But that has been accompanied by "new weaknesses in higher-order cognitive processes," including "abstract vocabulary, mindfulness, reflection, inductive problem solving, critical thinking, and imagination." We're becoming, in a word, shallower.

 

In another experiment, recently conducted at Stanford University's Communication Between Humans and Interactive Media Lab, a team of researchers gave various cognitive tests to 49 people who do a lot of media multitasking and 52 people who multitask much less frequently. The heavy multitaskers performed poorly on all the tests. They were more easily distracted, had less control over their attention, and were much less able to distinguish important information from trivia.

The researchers were surprised by the results. They had expected that the intensive multitaskers would have gained some unique mental advantages from all their on-screen juggling. But that wasn't the case. In fact, the heavy multitaskers weren't even good at multitasking. They were considerably less adept at switching between tasks than the more infrequent multitaskers. "Everything distracts them," observed Clifford Nass, the professor who heads the Stanford lab.

Amid the silly videos and spam are the roots of a new reading and writing culture

 

It would be one thing if the ill effects went away as soon as we turned off our computers and cellphones. But they don't. The cellular structure of the human brain, scientists have discovered, adapts readily to the tools we use, including those for finding, storing and sharing information. By changing our habits of mind, each new technology strengthens certain neural pathways and weakens others. The cellular alterations continue to shape the way we think even when we're not using the technology.

The pioneering neuroscientist Michael Merzenich believes our brains are being "massively remodeled" by our ever-intensifying use of the Web and related media. In the 1970s and 1980s, Mr. Merzenich, now a professor emeritus at the University of California in San Francisco, conducted a famous series of experiments on primate brains that revealed how extensively and quickly neural circuits change in response to experience. When, for example, Mr. Merzenich rearranged the nerves in a monkey's hand, the nerve cells in the animal's sensory cortex quickly reorganized themselves to create a new "mental map" of the hand. In a conversation late last year, he said that he was profoundly worried about the cognitive consequences of the constant distractions and interruptions the Internet bombards us with. The long-term effect on the quality of our intellectual lives, he said, could be "deadly."

 

What we seem to be sacrificing in all our surfing and searching is our capacity to engage in the quieter, attentive modes of thought that underpin contemplation, reflection and introspection. The Web never encourages us to slow down. It keeps us in a state of perpetual mental locomotion.

It is revealing, and distressing, to compare the cognitive effects of the Internet with those of an earlier information technology, the printed book. Whereas the Internet scatters our attention, the book focuses it. Unlike the screen, the page promotes contemplativeness.

Reading a long sequence of pages helps us develop a rare kind of mental discipline. The innate bias of the human brain, after all, is to be distracted. Our predisposition is to be aware of as much of what's going on around us as possible. Our fast-paced, reflexive shifts in focus were once crucial to our survival. They reduced the odds that a predator would take us by surprise or that we'd overlook a nearby source of food.

To read a book is to practice an unnatural process of thought. It requires us to place ourselves at what T. S. Eliot, in his poem "Four Quartets," called "the still point of the turning world." We have to forge or strengthen the neural links needed to counter our instinctive distractedness, thereby gaining greater control over our attention and our mind.

It is this control, this mental discipline, that we are at risk of losing as we spend ever more time scanning and skimming online. If the slow progression of words across printed pages damped our craving to be inundated by mental stimulation, the Internet indulges it. It returns us to our native state of distractedness, while presenting us with far more distractions than our ancestors ever had to contend with.

—Nicholas Carr is the author, most recently, of "The Shallows: What the Internet Is Doing to Our Brains."

________________________________________________________________________

Nicholas Carr writes on the social, economic, and business implications of technology. He is the author of the 2008 Wall Street Journal bestseller The Big Switch: Rewiring the World, from Edison to Google, which is "widely considered to be the most influential book so far on the cloud computing movement," according the Christian Science Monitor. His earlier book, Does IT Matter?, published in 2004, "lays out the simple truths of the economics of information technology in a lucid way, with cogent examples and clear analysis," said the New York Times. He is working on a new book, The Shallows: What the Internet Is Doing to Our Brains, which will be published in 2010. Carr's books have been translated into more than a dozen languages.

Earlier in his career, Carr was executive editor of the Harvard Business Review and a principal at Mercer Management Consulting.

Carr has been a speaker at MIT, Harvard, Wharton, the Kennedy School of Government, NASA, and the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas as well as at many industry, corporate, and professional events throughout the Americas, Europe, and Asia. He holds a B.A. from Dartmouth College and an M.A., in English and American literature and language, from Harvard University.

http://www.roughtype.com/
http://www.nicholasgcarr.com/



Maybe we're ready to stop and think.


SPRAGGETT ON CHESS

Today's game: the fatal pin

SPRAGGETT ON CHESS

The 11th  annual Poikovsky Tournament  is being held between June 2 and June 13.  The participants are Karjakin, Jakovenko, Jobava, Vitugov, Motylev, Rublevsky, Onischuk, Naiditsch, Ryasantsev, Bologan, Sutovsky, Ivan Sokolov.

http://www.admoil.ru/chess_2010.html

The tournament is named after Anatoly Karpov.  Poikovsky is located in the Nefteyugansk region of the Khanty-Mansiysk autonomous area. It’s about 150km eastern of Khanty-Mansiysk. Its name comes from the nearby river Poyka. The population is close to 30,000 people and the main economic drive is the extraction of oil and gas.

Karpov is the guest of honour

The cross table after 5 rounds of play

There is some very interesting chess in this tournament so far.  The game I present below is between the Israeli grandmaster Sutovsky and the American grandmaster Onischuk.  The opening is a rarely played line of the Spanish, and this game should do much to keep it that way!  Apparently Sutovsky was well prepared for this encounter (his opponent had played this line once before) and after only 12 moves Black already has an unpleasant defence.

This game is an excellent example of the kind of damage a pin can do to your position.  Onischuk must have underestimated the power of the White Bishop, and the middlegame revolves around White's attempts at exploiting the pin.

_________________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________________

Sutovsky, E - Onischuk, Al

 4- 6-2010.

POSITION AFTER WHITE'S 12th MOVE (12.Nbd2)

Onischuk

Sutovsky

The pin of the White Bishop is very annoying. Black's risky opening has the downside that e5 is a constant threat that Black must watch out for. With White's last move e5 is now a real threat. If now 12... Bg4 13. e5 de 14. de Bxf3 15. Nxf3! (15. Qxf3 is not so clear after 15... Qxd2 16. ef g5 17. Bg3 Qxb2 18. h4 Rae8) 15... Qxd1 16. Rfxd1 Ne4 17. Rac1 when the ending is very unpleasant because of the Queen-side pawn weaknesses.

Black therefore decides to take the bull by the horns

12...g5!?

13. Nxg5!

Sharpest! White risks very little with this sacrifice as he not only gets two pawns and opens up the Black King position, but also maintains the same threats as before.

13...hg 14. Bxg5

Still threatening e5

Relatively best is now 14... Bxd4 though Black still has problems: 15. Nf3! Bxb2 (worse is 15... c5 16. Nxd4 cd 17. Qf3 Kg7 18. e5 de 19. Qxa8) 16. Rb1 (16. e5?! is met simply with 16... de) 16... Bc3 17. Rb3!  (Diagram,below right)

This Rook often threatens to go to g3 and join in the attack against the Black King (17. e5 allows Black to simplify after ... Bxe5 18. Nxe5 de 19. Qxd8 Rxd8 20. Bxf6 Rd2) 17... Qd7!? Probably best 18.Rxc3 Nxe4 19. Re3 f5 20. Rfe1 Qg7 21. Bf4 Rf6  (Diagram, below right)

22. Ng5! (22. Qb3 is less clear after ... Be6 23. Qb7 Raf8 24. Qxc6 Rg6 although White is still on top after 25. g3) 22... Rg6 23. h4 Be6 24. f3 and Blacks position is very difficult.

RETURNING TO THE GAME CONTINUATION:

14... Re8?

This natural move does not really have the desired effect of preventing e5 and should be seen as a loss of tempo for the defence.

Here Sutovsky must have thought a long while before rejecting the natural (and strong) 15.e5. After the forced 15...de 16. Ne4!

(Diagram,right)  16... Nxe4 forced as 16... Re6? 17. Bxf6 Rxf6 18. de! wins material 17. Bxd8 Rxd8  (Diagram,below right)

We have an interesting position where Black has 3 minor pieces for his Queen. Perhaps Sutovsky felt that Black could put up stiff resistance here and therefore he chose to avoid this. However, White is much better in this position: the Black pieces lack coordination , his King position is wide open and the Black pawns are weak and vulnerable to attack. After 18. Qh5! ed (18... Bxd4?? 19. Rae1 Nc5 20. Qg5) 19. Qe5 Blacks position is simply depressing.

15. Qa4!?

A very interesting move that poses Black with some new problems. Black still has to worry about the constant e5-theme (immediately or prepared with f4 first) and now he will have to watch out for a later transfer of the White Queen to h4 intensifying the pin.

Wrong now would be 15... Bd7? 16. e5! de 17. Ne4 Nxe4 18. Bxd8 Raxd8 19. de Rxe5 20. Rad1 andBlack hás na even worse version of the previous variation because of the unpleasant pin along the d-line.

The toughest defence is 15... Re6! (Diagram, right) after which White would have to play very precisely to get the upper hand. For instance, wrong would be 16. e5? de 17. Ne4 ed! and Black is better!

 And if instead 16. d5 then Black has 16...Re5! (Diagram, below right) 

17. Nf3 (17. Qxc6 Rxg5 18. Qxa8 Rxg2!) 17... Rxg5! 18. Nxg5 cd and again Black is better.

Relatively better than the previous two lines is 16. Qxc6 Bd7 17. Qc3 (with threats on f6) but after 17... Qe8! (Diagram,right)

 18. Qg3!? Nh5! (18... Nxe4?! 19. Nxe4 Rxe4 20. Rae1!) 19. Qh4 f6! White would have nothing better than to retreat 20. Be3 and hope to later re-group. Or if 18.Bf4 Nh5! and ...Rg6 is similar.

However, White has a strong continuation at his disposal: 16. f4!? which sets Black real problems. After 16... Rb8! (not 16... Bd7 17. e5!) 17. f5 (Diagram,right)  17...Re8 18. Kh1! Renewing the e5 theme 18... Rxb2 ( much worse is 18... Bd7 19. e5 de 20. de Rxe5 21. Qh4! with a winning attack) 19. e5! de 20. Ne4 (20. de Rxe5 21. Qh4 Qd4! allows Black to turn the tables) 20... Nxe4 21. Bxd8 Rxd8 22. de

(Diagram,below right)

The position is very sharp. White must constantly worry about the ...Nf2ch theme. 22...Bd4 (22... Nf2? 23. Rxf2 Rxf2 24. Qg4 Kf8 25. Qh4 Rfd2 26. Rf1 Rd1 27. Qh8 Ke7 28. f6 Ke6 29. Qh3) 23. Qd1! Nf2 (23... c5 24. Qg4 Kf8 25. Qh4! (25. Qxe4?! Bb7) 25... Ke8 26. Rae1 Nf2 27. Rxf2 Rxf2 28. e6 appears to be a winning attack) Diagram,below right

24. Rxf2 Rxf2 25. Qg4 Kf8 26. Qg5 Rd5 27. Qh6 Ke8 28. Qxc6 Bd7 29. Qa8 Bc8 30. Qxd5 Bxa1 31. g4 (Diagram,right) and while the material count is almost even, Black can not easily get his pieces coordinated. Black is definitely struggling.

RETURNING TO THE ACTUAL GAME CONTINUATION

15... Rb8?!

After this move White finds it less difficult to find the right moves

Here Sutovsky once more rejected the idea of winning the Black Queen for 3 minor pieces: 16. e5!? de 17. Ne4 Nxe4 18. Bxd8 Rxd8

(Diagram, right)

19. Qxc6 Bb7 20. Qxc7 Bxd4 21. Rad1 Ba8 22. Rd3

 (Diagram, below right)

A move that is difficult to see over the board.  The Rook threatens to switch to the King-side and, together with the White Queen, create mating threats.

22... Rbc8 23. Qe7 Re8 24. Qd7 Red8 25. Qg4 Kf8 26. Qh4! and White is clearly on top.  (Diagram, below right)

The open position of the Black King and the exposed position of the Black pieces makes life difficult for Black.  The Black pieces look active but can not create any real threats.

RETURNING TO THE GAME CONTINUATION:

16. Rae1!?

Sutovsky is not interested in the Queen. He simply completes his development and threatens e5.

Now 16... Rxb2 is met by 17. e5! Rxd2 18. Bxf6 Rxd4 19. Qa3 Qd7 (Diagram, right) Here Black is hoping for 20. Qg3? Qg4!. However, White can proceed strongly with 20. e6! and the attack pays dividends 20... fe 21. Qg3 Kf8 22. Bxd4 Bxd4 23. Qf4 picking up the Bishop and keeping a clear advantage.

16... Re6

It is remarkable how useless the Rook is on the e-file!

17. e5!

Finally Sutovsky gets to play this move

17...de 18. de!

The whole point of Sutovskys play.

If Black tries to simplify with 18... Qd4 White still maintains strong chances against the Black King in the ending: 19. Qxd4 Bxd4 20. Bxf6 Rxb2 21. Nf3 (21. Rd1 is worth consideration) 21... c5 22. Re4 ! and this Rook will worry the Black King for quite some time.

 (Diagram, right)

18... Rxb2

There is really nothing better.  Black must try to create threats himself.

19. Bxf6

If now 19... Rxf6 20. ef Rxd2 21. Qh4 wins.  The f-pawn will help mate Black.   (Diagram, right)

19...Qd4

20. Qa3!

A very fine move. The White Queen will transfer over to the King-side. Wrong now would be 20... Rxd2 as after 21. Qg3! Black is getting mated in just a few moves.

20...Rxf6!?

The White Bishop had to go!  But now the e-file gets open for White's Rook...but what to do?  Sometimes the defender must choose the lesser of 2 evils!

21. ef

Black's tragedy is that he can not build enough threats to distract White from his attack.

21...Rxd2  What else?

Now White's final wave of attack is about to strike

22. Re8! Kh7

Here Sutovsky does not fall for the transparent trap: 23. Rxc8?? Qxf2!! and Black mates White!

23. Rh8!

A neat move that forces the Black King forward-- into the open, since capturing the Rook will give White mate in 2 moves.

23... Kg6

Both sides have active pieces, but it is White to play and this is the decisive factor.

24. Qg3!

Relatively best is 24... Bg4 though after 25. h3 White should win easily enough

24... Kxf6?!

A minor imprecision that changes nothing....

25. Rxc8

Good enough, but a bit more precise is 25. Rh6! Ke7 26. Qxc7 Bd7 27. Re1 and the end is near: 27... Kf8 28. Qd8 Kg7 29. Qh8#

25... Rd3 26. Qg8

Black resigns. There is little to do about the combined attack of the White Queen and Rook. Black can not defend the many threats.  Tempting might seem 26...Qf2ch and 27...Rd1 mate, but unfortunately when White captures the Black Queen he is giving check!

[1:0]

A well played attack by the Israeli grandmaster (left)

SPRAGGETT ON CHESS