Selected Comments from "Chess Clash" Voters


Name = jesse
Country = usa
VOTE =
Harper
Comments = He's almost as good at chess as he is a juggling!

Name = patrick li ying
Country = mauritius
VOTE =
Solomon
Comments = Well Kenny wins this one for me as his annotations are less technical and clearer and more pleasing to the amateur chessplayer.

Name = Lars Stark
Country = Germany
VOTE = Solomon
Comments = very entertaining and amusing analyses by Kenny although he misses some important key points when white played e4 for example but I could see that he worked really hard on his analysis! Gringo wasn't bad but I missed the comments which make an analysis more vivid!

Name = Giorgos
Country = Greece
VOTE =
Harper
Comments = Both were good. Ryan had more creative ideas though.

Name = Mark Goodwin
Country = United States
VOTE =
Solomon
Comments = I liked the historical context of the game. More importantly, the annotation explained the nature battle and the importance of the move Qc7 and the stratigic aspects of the resulting play.

Name = julian wan
Country = usa
VOTE =
Solomon
Comments = Two contrasting styles of analysis: FM Harper favors showing more possible lines - some are very interesting! FM Solomon uses more words, and tries to explain using prose rather than just lines of play. I think strong players FIDE 2000+ would like FM Harper's approach, but lower rated fans would get more out of FM Solomon's approach.
GREAT SITE!

Name = David Steer
Country = Canada
VOTE = Solomon
Comments = I enjoyed Solomon's historical approach in addition to the thorough analysis.  Nice job by both, but Solomon gets my vote.

Name = danny quang
Country = united states of america
VOTE =
Solomon
Comments = Very good to read, i like his introduction before the annotations.  This shows soloman has knowledge of both players during their earlier years of kramnik and kamsky. Maybe he'll write a book in the future? good job!

Name = Nicklas Skjoldager
Country = Denmark
VOTE =
Solomon
Comments = Nice with a background story about the game, but it should have been shorter and more precise. I also love to have text explaining the moves rather than only variations.

Name = Hugo Miguel da Silva Machado
Country = Portugal
VOTE = Harper
Comments = A linear, simple and direct analysis. FM Ryan Harper is not poetical at all but he is precise and very mature in his analysis.

Name = Magi
Country = USA
VOTE =
Harper
Comments = Harper annotations were more deeper, and showed he understood the position better. But Solomon's annotations were useful for somone who plays chess for fun, but does not show a deeper understanding of the position. Harper did not spend too much time on the opening, but rather indentified the important moments where white, and did a good job analyzing the position at hand.

Name = Ken Voss
Country = USA
VOTE = Solomon
Comments = I liked the personalization and verbal descriptions provided by FM Solomon. He made the game seem more like an exciting story than a series of move sequences. Very nice!

Name = Niki Fish
Country = USA
VOTE =
Harper
Comments = They both suck, Harper a bit less.

Name = David Kvatadze
Country = RUSSIA
VOTE =
Harper
Comments = Kenny Solomon analysis sounds better but its worse because he doesnt prove half the things he says, so to a player rated under 2200 it might be kinda hard to understand, while Ryan Harper explains worse but in the lines he shows its clear to understand whats going on.

Name = dennis vikman
Country = sweden
VOTE = Solomon
Comments = nice and clear annotations combined with an interesting background story of the players made me choose Solomon as the winner.

Name = R. Fenton
Country = USA
VOTE = Solomon
Comments = Barring of course, some technical flaw of reasoning that I have yet to uncover, I thought Mr. Solomon's annotation was far superior.  The judicious use of diagrams was most appreciated and the step-by-step analysis was helpful for the average player.  [Great Concept!]

Name = Pradeep Nag
Country = India
VOTE = Solomon
Comments = Both are bad but Solomon is less bad.The annotation should be brief,witty,humerous to the point,revealing and lucid in language.No one shows these qualities.

Name = Hector Perez
Country = Mexico
VOTE =
Solomon
Comments = Much better friendly writing and explaining moves with interesting introduction. I didnt like Harper cause he writes too many variations, no fun, no interesting. I guess this is because I'm not such a high level player.. 2000 elo.

Name = Molteni Costantino
Country = italy
VOTE =
Solomon
Comments = solomon comments are telling more about the battle that is going on

Name = Terry vd Veen
Country = Netherlands
VOTE =
Harper
Comments = Solomon is only talking about Kramnik "then" vs Kramnik "now". This is irrelevant to the game at hand. Harper is also more to the point.

Name = Denix
Country = Kuwait
VOTE = Harper
Comments = This analysis is better among the two, unbiased and purely concentrated on the board and not on the persons, but there are a lot of improvements to be made.

Name = Andrew Stephenson
Country = Mauritius
VOTE =
Harper
Comments = Kenny's notes were very good and instructive in the opening BUT  Ryan's notes showed had the better middlegame unedrstanding he had penetrated into the position and found the trappy 17 Bb4 which would have probably let white escape to a drawn ending (opposite bishope doubled extra pawn) or allowed repetition draw or compensating King side initiative. Kenny did not really bother to analyse the middle game to much.

Name = Franco Milocco
Country = Italia
VOTE = Harper
Comments = I prefer Ryan Harper.
Solomon did not study long the most interessant positions, he was too gossip. :-)

Name = Karl-Johan Olsen
Country = Greenland
VOTE =
Harper
Comments = Nice history and games waypoints!

Name = John Massa
Country = Scotland
VOTE =
Harper
Comments = They are both good annotators.

Name = Doug Suerich
Country = Canada
VOTE = Solomon
Comments = Kenny has better commentary by far, though he missed on bringing in a guest quote....also, he should have been explicit (as Ryan was!) and mentioned the intended bishop mate on f1...us low FIDE patzers can't always see such moves.

Name = Mehul Gohil
Country = Kenya
VOTE = Solomon
Comments = Very nice annotations. They explained with clarity all the mst imporatant points of the game...plus they were entertaining. The other annotations (of Ryan harper) were confused and haphazard.

Name = Creighton Sanderson
Country = USA
VOTE =
Harper
Comments = Analysis should be concrete and written in annotated form.  Kenny Solomon based his analysis more on opinions and emotions than facts.  This serves well from an entertaining standpoint, but not if you are seeking the truth over the board.  Harper's analysis is clear, concise, and to the point.

Name = Maliq Adonai Soter
Country = USA
VOTE =
Harper
Comments = Harper had the most substance to his analysis, hitting all the critical points of the game and identifying branch variations which Solomon, apparently, felt self-explanatory.  Harper also used the guest comment option, although it did not play a huge role in the analysis, while Solomon was confident enough to go it alone, but may have been able to score some points with one.  Finally, Solomon seems to suffer from that plague of annotators, the tendency to be loathe to credit the ideas of the losing player, while Harper acknowledges their strengths and their flaws.  Harper's analysis is simply more complete and more reliable for the studying player, who must learn of the ebbs and flows of a game rather than to imagine that the winner always dominates from beginning to end.

Name = Kimani Stancil
Country = USA
VOTE = Solomon
Comments = In chess, space, time, material, and position are key concepts.  And Mr. Solomon provided a good balance of similar concepts though maybe following from a slightly different interpretation.  Space equals as an indication of a readerís attention span as it translates with the choice of content into real pedagogical value. Time is viewed as an interesting historical perspective on former states of chess development and psychology (match preparation) of the players, and material reflects a good number of key variations illustrating conceptually based plans.  Additionally, position is illustrated by the use of diagrams that highlight and frame the principal plans of both players.  Mr. Harper shows great energy and fighting spirit in his annotations (noteworthy is the discussion alternative of 17. Bb4) but I think he missed an opportunity to really address the opening play (moves 1- 11) which I consider the main drawback of Mr. Harper's presentation since I believe itís inclusion makes the entire analysis more inviting. Overall, I appreciate the positional nature of Mr. Solomon's comments which are further emphasized by the straightforward (but no less difficult to see) nature of the final tactical sequence. [Comments made based on one reading in the same day of each author's work -K.A.S.]

Name = Nurkut Inan
Country = Turkey
VOTE =
Solomon
Comments = FM Solomon's analysis and comments are easier to understand for mediocre chess amateurs like my self.

Name = Gabi Julien
Country = Canada
VOTE =
Harper
Comments = He has the Quantity and Quality of variations on his side witch makes his annotations more professionnal. Solomon could use a computer!

Name = Bruce Humphrey Ventura
Country = Spain
VOTE = Solomon
Comments = Both analysis are good. I like them both, but Solomon's gets the vote in the end is for the extended options: introduction, comments on the opening.

Name = Swaminathan
Country = India
VOTE =
Harper
Comments = nice anlaysis done
the game is dramatic
and i think ryan's analysis is inetresting than kenny

Name = Mus Tab
Country = usa
VOTE =
Harper
Comments =   FM Ryan Harper had good comments at key points like sacrificing c4 pawn. After white king get exposed there is no need to fancy analysis.

Name = Jack Dempsey
Country =
VOTE =
Solomon
Comments = commentary would have benefited from tactical analysis towards the end of the game

Name = Neil; Blackburn
Country = England
VOTE =
Solomon
Comments = Nicely done Kenny. Doesn't over do the analysis, and talks about the game and the players in an interesting way. That made his work enjoyable to follow, although many would pragmatically prefer the 'more detailed' notes.

Name = Aaron Peeks
Country = United States
VOTE =
Solomon
Comments = Long lines of analysis are nice but for the typical player looking to understand a game of chess, it is nice to be able to talk through the positions and understand what is happening in words, not lines of analysis!

Name = Okechukwu Iwu
Country = USA
VOTE =
Harper
Comments = Ryan's work "felt" more professional, though for a lazy man like me, a bit detailed at times. Kenny's use of the "Kramnik94" and "working horse" stylistic devices felt like he was flogging a dead horse! It was really distracting/annoying, and I have to admit, I couldn't give his actual analysis as much attention.
Cya on ICC!

Name = Isabelo Melendez
Country = Puerto Rico
VOTE =
Harper
Comments = Now I prefer Harper but I think both analysis are complementary.
1/2.

Name = Jeremy
Country = USA
VOTE = Solomon
Comments = I thought Kenny covered the more imperative areas of analyses and also that he had better grammar and diction.

Name = Ilya Bolshevch
Country = USA
VOTE = Solomon
Comments = i liked it more because of diagrams insered after certain numbers of moves made and i think comments and analyses made are better and sounds interesting.

Name = A.J. Goldsby I
Country = USA
VOTE =
Solomon
Comments = The music is a bit much. Both did an excellent job. Kenny won out because of his style and verbiage and pre-game comments.

Name = Kim Commons (IM)
Country = USA
VOTE = Solomon
Comments = Very amusing idea. Kenny had won by the end of his first paragraph. The way he explained where Kramnik and Kamsky were in the chess world at the time of the game was classic.

Name = Llewellyn Adamson
Country = South Africa
VOTE = Solomon
Comments = Clearly Kenny's analysis is the best.

Name = Jan Peter Baark
Country = Denmark
VOTE = Solomon
Comments = My ELO is ca. 1400 and to me Harpers annotations are too difficult to follow, but if I was stronger, I would problaby vote for him.

Name = adam
Country = United States
VOTE = Harper
Comments = Although Solomon gives the requisite introduction and includes diagrams in his analysis, the overall clarity of his annotations do not match those of Harper.  Harper did manage to get his one allowed outsider quote in (although it wouldve been better had he made an exact quote).  Overall, both showed a high level of skill in their annotations, leaving out obvious combinations and extraneous possibilities.

Name = Brian Cottle
Country = Montserrat
VOTE = Harper
Comments = Clear and concise annotation.

Name = Don Pilgrim
Country = USA
VOTE = Solomon
Comments = It wasn't even close. Out of the starting gate Mr. Soloman leaped ahead and never looked back. And that was that ladies and gentlemen.

Name = tom turnbull
Country = usa
VOTE = Solomon
Comments = This contest is a cool idea.
And Kenny should write a book, I'd buy it instantly!

Name = Colya
Country = USA
VOTE = Solomon
Comments = Although harper extensively discussed some key points in white's potentials, this leads away in black's cunning which solomon picked up and beautifully displayed.

Name = Matthew Klahn
Country = USA
VOTE = Solomon
Comments = Very good annotations, very interesting insight. The only nit-pick that I have as an amateur is that some of the tactical themes could have been more clear at the end of this game. For example, ... d2! was also a deflection from the g4 pawn, which black needs to attack in order for many of his threats to work. FM Harper mentioned this, but FM Soloman did not.

Good job by both annotaters!

Name = Blair Machaj
Country = USA
VOTE = Harper
Comments = Without a doubt FM Harpers analysis clear shows not only his strength but also his analytical skills needed to annotate. His lines are precise, and give the reader the information needed to figure out many of the sidelines in this game. He did not give us a story, like FM Solomon but instead decided to focus on the game and gave a fair overview of the game. FM Solomon seemed happy to condemn white from the start but FM Harper stayed very firm in his fair analysis throughout the game.

Name = Bevan Edwards
Country = New Zealand
VOTE = Solomon
Comments = I found Solomon's analysis easier to follow and it seemed to be more inline with what was happening on the board.  Harper tended to go into long combinations when a simple one line description would have sufficed.  However, I did feel that Solomon's analysis was a bit light on content towards the end.
Name = Dimitris Skyrianoglou
Country = Greece
VOTE = Solomon
Comments = I didn't have enough time to run through the whole analysis but I prefered the verbal explanations and comments from Mr. Solomon to the somewhat dry presentation of long variations from Mr. Harper.
Name = Carsten Hansen
Country = Denmark
VOTE = Harper
Comments = The analysis and annotations by Harper are far more thorough and insightful than those made by Solomon, whose annotations though still are quite interesting and worth going through.
Name = Ian Wilkinson
Country = Jamaica
VOTE = Solomon
Comments = FM Solomon's analysis was definitely superior from the perspective of :(a) more attractive use of the language, (b) Providing useful background information on the gladiators and (c) a more personal, hands-on touch or understanding of the game/opening/variations.

FM Harper's analysis, though very good, lacks the "total" feel present in Solomon's.
Name = Malaku Lorne
Country = Jamaica
VOTE = Solomon
Comments = Quite evident both players did a good job. My vote is for Solomon because his views were more in line with what I was thinking while going through the game.
Name = Alex Livingston
Country = Canada
VOTE = Harper
Comments = Cuts to the point, solid, irrefutable analysis
Name = Brian Hartman
Country = Canada
VOTE = Harper
Comments = Tough choice, I enjoyed both approaches.

Name = Joseph Christian M. ViŮegas
Country = Philippines
VOTE = Harper
Comments = I found Harper's analysis close to mine.  It is not wordy unlike Solomon's annotation but give a vivid view of a complete if not exact analysis.
Name = Valentino P. Pecaoco
Country = Philippines
VOTE = Solomon
Comments = I choose FM Kenny Solomon because of his clear-cut and simplified analysis highlighting positional and strategic themes leading to the winning tactical combination in the end.
Name = antony jacobson
Country = england
VOTE = Harper
Comments = Harper outlined the important technical points which were vital to understanding the opening and how it was crucial to the outcome of the game.
Name = Larry Wolfley
Country = USA
VOTE = Harper
Comments = Ryan's annotations seemed more to the point. A few key positions displayed in the body (like Kenny did) would have made the document look a lot better, and easier to read.

Name = M. Solomon
Country = South Africa
VOTE = Solomon
Comments = Kenny's comments immediately captures the reader's attention and keeps it. I enjoyed going through the game being aware of the main themes. My strategic sense improved by following both players commentary. A great idea of Chessdrum!!
At the end of the day we wonder what both Kramnik & Kamsky think of the dissection of their beautiful game. Will they get back to Chessdrum in this regard?

Name = Dr. Philip Corbin FM
Country = Barbados
VOTE = Harper
Comments = Both analyses were quite good, especially at the start of the game, where impressive background research was done by both commentators and where I rated both highly, giving a slight edge to Kenny at the onset because, unlike Ryan, he gave some insight into the personalities of the combatants. Nevertheless, Kenny's analysis, although it began well, was lacking somewhat in analytical detail in the middle and especially towards the end of the game compared to Ryan's, so I cast my vote for Ryan who I feel overall edged Kenny by giving generally more analysis and also by being fairer and more balanced in his commentary. My congratulations however to both annotators on a job well done!
Name = Peter Dawson
Country = Barbados
VOTE = Solomon
Comments = FM Solomon showed depth and understanding of the position, his comments took the struggle for the center into consideration and showed he did his homework.  Harper the one I would have liked to have voted for was too casual with his comments and seemed not to see where the struggle realy took place. good luck to both.

Name = stanley chumfwa
Country = zambia
VOTE = Solomon
Comments = i chose Kenny because i think his analysis is more clearer though i had great difficulties choosing

Name = John C. Fernandez
Country = USA
VOTE = Solomon
Comments = I liked Ryan's analysis which was more thought out and deeper than Kenny's, but I like the fact that Kenny explains things more. Actually, would be great if the analysis was merged!

Name = Mislav Kovacic
Country = Croatia
VOTE = Harper
Comments = Analysis of FM Kenny Solomon are more interesting ,and thats why people might like him more ,but in fact if you look behind there analysis deeper ,you can see that Solomons analysis are more entertaining.BUT not deep at some points.So my vote goes to FM Ryan Harper for his great job and really GREAT analysis.

Name = StephenG
Country = USA
VOTE = Harper
Comments = My vote goes for Mr. Harper. 

Mr Solomon's coverage of historical background, Opening theory and use of diagrams made the analysis look impressive at first ( When I first loaded them up I was like .. WHOA!)  but in reality it was just meaningless fluff.  Mr. Solomon never really addresses the intracacies of the position, and prefer to fill up space by talking about how Kramnik of 9 years apart would have played it different.  Mr Solomon did hit on 2 good moments 12. Rb1 (Even this was a bit fluffish) and  19. Rf3, but outside of those 2 moves, his anaysis falls flat on its face, especially when you remove all the meaninless yammering.

Mr. Harper did an excellent job in explaining the battle on the board, not a physcological comparison of Kramnik 94 vs Kramnik 2K+3. While Mr. Harper decided to forego opening line anaysis, (If you are THAT interested in knowing this very well studied opening, there is a TON of resources one can refer to), he focused more on the meat of the game where you can get in good detail how GM Kamsky dismantled GM Kramnik.  Mr. Harper hit an excellent point in regards to 17. e4?! and showed how this really move was a critical position that White misplayed.  His alternate line of 17. Bb4! really put in light how White could have played for a solid draw.  Mr Harper seemed to put more into acually looking at the game did Mr. Solomon did.  Mr Solomon's game looked like the work of of a kid that waited to do his homework on the busride to school instead of the night before.

Name = Nasmichael Farris
Country = U.S.A.
VOTE = Solomon
Comments = Both versions are enlightening for me.  Having been on the run, it was more accessible for me to review Solomon's version; the diagrams allowed me to move forward with the text and practice using my visualization muscles moreso than Harper's version.  Harper's commentary and suggestions were very deep and helpful, but having had to review in motion, I grasped the ideas more readily with Solomon at the wheel.

Many thanks to both men for putting forth magnificent efforts and commentaries. 

Chess Drum, keep this beat going!

I am pleased to have been exposed to this level of commitment.  I will be showing this to my kids in East Point, GA.  We love you!