good rant on taking too much time. I love the rants and poker talk as much as the chess, keep them up.

off-tangent -

People often ask me (and I'm sure you've gotten the same question), if I had a kids -would I want them to become professional poker players? My answer is that I don't know if I'd necessarilly want them to play poker professionally or not for various reasons, but I'd definitely want them to learn to think like a poker player. As soon as they can multiply I'm gonna teach them expected value, variance, and how to apply it in life.

Life is full of so many things that need to be analyzed like a poker player, life ev decisions, but that type of thinking is much less obvious without a poker background -that intelligent people louse up so badly. A good illustration is brought up in your video with Grandelius taking so much time on move 6, when that time when compared to how it could be spent later is almost completely wasted. He essentially spotted his stronger opponent 30 minute time odds - when playing any normal move instantly (as you point out) would yield a higher ev in the game. And while Ev wise ....6. Nd7 was probably one of the worst moves in the game because of this, it wouldn't be brought up in a post-mordem by most players.

And I'd want my kids to get equally frustrated watching sports coaches, not foul early enough in basketball games or not go for 2 right away when down 14 late in football games or not pull the goalie early enough in hockey games.

Short missin Rxf7 mate (a forcing mate in 2, which you saw in 3 seconds)really shows how far he's fallen and how much better Kasparov is/was. Can u imagine yourself seeing something in 2 seconds that Kasparov missed in a 40/2?

Well Nc7 is completely and totally winning, maybe just saw it and decided not to waste time looking for checkmate in 2 Also everyone misses obvious stuff from time to time, even Kasparov. Kramnik is very good too and he missed mate in 1. I wouldn't hold this against Short too much since he was so completely winning it barely mattered what he did.

This video is why I like curtains videos. You don't get this @ game of the day from icc.
I can't believe Short missed mate in three. (Btw I like Short because he speaks his mind and when he does everybody else is up in arms being offended. )
Did you know Grischuk once sported dreadlocks? (http://www.coruschess.com/participants.php?year=2003&group=1&bio=7)

Hey, I do the same thing- I spot a winning continuation and I follow it. The search for beauty in practical chess is secondary to assuring the win, even if shorter/snazzier wins may be available. He won- I'm sure that is what ultimately mattered for him.

yo,yo,yo, thanks for the coverage

Sorry not doing video for Round 4. Long story!

Man do you never sleep??? I know you are in NJ, so same time zone as me! Of course, look who's talking it is 4:00

Philadelphia is where I'm at.

What?!?!???!!!

I liked this from the tournament website:
"In today's edition of Sydsvenskan, the biggest newspaper in southern Sweden, Lars Grahn noted that during the opening ceremony Nigel Short mentioned that if he played a single lifeless draw during the five rounds, the organisers should have the right to demand that the starting fee be paid back."

Would that more players would adopt Short's attitude!

Curtains - I enjoy your crazy comments and witty comments and analysis. Theasides etc are amusing - but I don't gamble myself. It's good to see these paleyrs overin Sweden or wherever.

And - yes - such along time on what is not a good (or critical move, in a non critical position) is ridiculous. Perhaps the young fellow felt a bit over awed - some players "mesmerised". Strange he played so slowly though.

Richard. N.Z.

thanks for the coverage