CHESS MUSINGS

A 2 min game on uchess.com

2011-10-26T21:29:00.000-07:00

http://members.shaw.ca/alysshaes/greatgame.htm

Chess – Talent vs. Experience

2011-06-17T10:20:00.001-07:00

With most competitive activities, hard work and experience tends to outweigh raw talent. Of course natural ability is always important, but in what arena do you routinely find dignified and serious adult competitors, many of whom who have dedicated their lives to practice and study in their chosen field, routinely get decimated by children, who have yet to enter puberty. In what other field is the person with the number one ranking in the world still in their teens?

World chess champion Viswanathan Anand was publicly quoted as saying "Nowadays, if you're not a grandmaster at 14, you can forget it." He was of course referring to those who intend to make a living as a chess player. Or a decent living anyway. Only in the world of competitive tournament chess can reality be so cruel.

Susan Polgar, who is a far cry from being as strong as her younger sister Judit, won the Budapest Chess Championship for girls under 11, with a 10-0 score, at the age of four!

To those who are into chess, this is a well-known bit of trivia -- but others might find it surprising to hear that Bobby Fischer became the United States chess champion at the ripe old age of 14. We're not talking junior champion here. We're talking about the overall United States chess champion ahead of numerous talented, skilled, and experienced adult Grandmasters. And this was in 1957; a time when it was a much more difficult task to do at such a young age due to the difficulty involved in obtaining critical games and analysis. This was long before chess computers or the public internet, whereby multi-million game databases could be downloaded upon a whim.

At this point many of you are probably thinking, well that's because we're talking about Bobby Fischer, a one in a billion. While this might be true, it doesn't explain away the hordes of young players who have taken the chess world by storm since then. Even at the amateur level, in most chess clubs you will find some teenager who is able to beat the majority of adult players, if not all of the adult players, and often without having spent much time studying and with limited playing experience.

The talent vs. experience debate seems to be overwhelmingly in favor of talent.

Bullet Chess – Adrenaline and Addiction

2010-12-04T22:20:00.000-08:00

Of all forms of chess, this is the fastest and most nerve wracking. It is not for the weak or faint of heart. Entire games are played with only 1 or 2 minutes being allotted to each player. Blunders and mouse-slips are commonplace. Time forfeitures in won positions may be frequent as well. The depth of calculation is compromised and there is rarely an opportunity to double-check your plans. So why do we play it? The answer, as any bullet player can tell you, lies in the rush one gets from crushing an opponent under such draconian conditions. It also provides an opportunity to play a large number of games in a short period of time. This makes it ideal for busy people with only a few minutes to spare, but also for addicts who want to get the maximum number of games in per session.

There has been much debate as to whether or not playing bullet chess can be harmful to your slow and serious game. Chess coaches have been known to advise students to avoid it in favour of playing only active or regular tournament time control games. The argument is that the student will carry their ‘bullet-thinking’ over to their tournament games and make more mistakes. My personal opinion is that it could scarcely cause harm to play fast games of chess. After all, you are getting exercise and practice in many of the areas that are applicable in slow chess. There is no question that the faster the game, the more demanding it is of intuition and knowledge, in contrast to calculation and planning, but bullet chess also forcefully teaches you how to prioritize and manage your time in a way that slow chess cannot possibly do. There are also times when a player in a slow tournament game might get into time trouble and find themselves in a predicament where the conditions are similar to a bullet game. They might have only a few minutes to make a series of moves. In this case their bullet experience is directly beneficial and those without it are at a marked disadvantage.

Aside from the conceivable practical benefits playing bullet chess may offer, in terms of developing your ability as a chess player in general, it is just plain fun. It seems like the ideal graduation from real-time video games, where hand-eye-coordination, quick decision making, and mental agility are just as important. But in the case of chess, you are immersed into a limitless labyrinth of theory and complexity, with a global following and universal rule set. Also, with video games a bright and avid player soon achieves mastery and must move on to a new conquest. But in the world of chess, mastery is only a relative thing, and even the best players in the world are continuously learning and improving. It is highly doubtful that a human mind will even completely conquer chess.

When someone first asked me if I played it, back in 2002, I thought they were crazy. My idea of speed chess was 5 minutes per side and anything less was tantamount to a ‘mouse-race’. Now, many thousands of games later, the roles have been reversed and I find myself in the position of defending bullet chess from the criticism of others. I’ve often wagered to take 1 or 2 minutes while giving my opponent 20 or 30, just to prove my point. I have not lost such a wager yet, although, to be fair, my opponents in this type of contest, thus far, ranged from casual players to moderately above-average tournament players. Admittedly, I would not be able to make such a concession to an opponent of equal level to myself.

Political Negotiations

2010-11-03T16:52:00.001-07:00

SCREW YOU REUBAN!!

2010-04-07T23:19:00.000-07:00

Chess is a contest between two men in which there is considerable ego-involvement. In some way it certainly touches upon the conflicts surrounding aggression, homosexuality, masturbation and narcissism which become particularly prominent in the anal-phallic phases of development. From the standpoint of id psychology, Jones' observations can therefore be confirmed, even enlarged upon. Genetically, chess is more often than not taught to the boy by his father, or a father-substitute, and thus becomes a means of working out the son-father rivalry.

The symbolism of chess lends itself to this rivalry in a most unusual way. Central to it is the figure of the King. [In chess literature it is customary to capitalize the names of the pieces, and I shall adhere to this practice.] The King occupies a crucial role in the game in all respects. It is the piece which gives the game its name; for, chess is derived from the Persian shah meaning King, and is more or less the same in all languages. In fact, the three universal words in chess are chess, check, and King, all of which derive from shah. All other pieces have varying designations in different languages. Thus, Queen in Russian is Fyerz, which has nothing to do with woman; Bishop is Fou or jester in French, Laufer or runner in German.

Except for the King chess is a simple logical construction on the board. There is one piece which moves along diagonals (the Bishop), one which moves along ranks and files (the Rook), one piece which moves only forward (the Pawn), and when it can no longer move forward turns into another piece which allows it mobility (promotion), one piece which moves any number of squares in any straight-line direction (the Queen), one piece which moves one square in any direction (the King), and a piece which combines the vertical-diagonal movement L-with the power to jump over other pieces (the Knight). It would be possible to devise new pieces, or to divide their powers, and this has been done from time to time; for example, a piece combining the movement of Knight and Queen has been suggested. Or one could have two kinds of Rooks, similar to the two kinds of Bishops, one that moves along ranks, and another that moves along files. All of these alterations would be direct extensions of the rules we now have; they would not alter the basic character of the game.

Board games essentially consist of placing the pieces on a board in such a way that one can capture the enemy's men, as in checkers, or get one's men to a predetermined position, as in chinese checkers. Once this is accomplished the game is won. Here the unique feature of chess comes in: the goal is to checkmate the King. A completely new set of rules is drawn up, governing the manner in which this checkmate may or may not be effected, and these rules are the ones that give chess its distinctive cast. Of course, the capture of the enemy's men is still there, but unlike other games one can capture almost all the enemy's men and still lose.

The King is thus indispensable and all-important. It is also irreplaceable. Theoretically it is possible to have nine Queens, ten Rooks, ten Knights or ten Bishops, as a result of Pawn promotion, but only one King.

All these qualities of indispensability, all-importance and irreplaceability make one think of the supreme rulers of the Orient. Here, however, enters a vital difference: the King as a piece is weak. Its powers are greatly limited. Approximate equivalents can be set up for the other pieces; for example, three Pawns are worth a piece, two pieces are worth a Rook and a Pawn, etc. Because of the nature of the King it has no real equivalents. Roughly, however, the King is a little stronger than a Pawn, but not as strong as any of the pieces. As a result the King must hide (castling) during most of the game. He can sally forth only when many exchanges have take place, particularly when the Queens are gone. Despite the fact that he is all-important, the other pieces have to protect him not he the others.

As far as I have been able to ascertain, [endnote] no other board game has a piece which so radically alters its entire nature. In checkers, for example, the King is simply an extension of the powers of the men, and can be captured just like the others. It is the King which makes chess literally unique.

Consequently, the King becomes the central figure in the symbolism of the game. To recapitulate briefly: the King is indispensable, all-important, irreplaceable, yet weak and requiring protection. These qualities lead to the over-determination of its symbolic meaning. First of all, it stands for the boy's penis in the phallic stage, and hence re-arouses the castration anxiety characteristic of that period. Second, it describes certain essential characteristics of a self-image, and hence would appeal to those men who have a picture of themselves as indispensable, all-important and irreplaceable. In this way it affords an additional opportunity for the player to work out conflicts centering around narcissism. Third, it is the father pulled down to the boy's size. Unconsciously it gives the boy a chance to say to the father: To the outside world you maybe big and strong, but when we get right down to it you're just as weak as I am and you need protection just as much as I do.

Games inherently involve a leveling-off process; on the track, on the baseball diamond, on the chessboard all men are equal. In chess, however, there is an additional factor which differentiates it from other games: there is a piece which is different in value from all the others and around which the game revolves. The existence of the King allows an identification process which goes far beyond that permitted in other games. [Dr. Theodor Reik has pointed out that the rules surrounding the chess King are strikingly similar to many of the special taboos surrounding primitive chieftains. See section (b) The Taboo of Rulers in Part II of S. Freud, Totem and Taboo.] In this way chess allows for a strong assertion of game individuality.

Rook, Bishop, Knight and Pawn also frequently symbolize the penis. In addition they may have other meanings. To one player the Bishop was libidinized as a superego figure-the name was taken literally. The Knight may symbolize a horse, which it is also sometimes called.

The Pawns symbolize children, particularly little boys. They can grow up (promote) when they reach the eighth rank, but it is again significant that they may not become "King." Symbolically, this restriction on Pawn promotion means that the destructive aspect of the rivalry with the father is emphasized, while the constructive side, which would allow the boy to become like the father, is discouraged. We would, therefore, anticipate on the one hand a very critical attitude towards authority in the chess player, and on the other an inability or unwillingness to follow in the same direction as his father [It has been my observation that very few chess experts have sons who are also strong chess players; unconsciously the father does not permit the identification to take place.] The contrast between the mighty King and the lowly Pawn again comes to symbolize the ambivalence inherent in the chess player's self-image, an ambivalence which is also apparent in the figure of the King himself.

The Queen will, as might be expected, stand for the woman, or the mother-figure. It was not until the introduction of chess into Europe in the thirteenth century that the Queen became the powerful figure she is today. This is evidently a direct reflection of the differing attitudes towards women in east and west. Jones comments that psychoanalysts will not be surprised to learn that in the attack on the King (father), the most powerful support is provided by the Queen.

Put together, the chess board as a whole may readily symbolize the family situation. This would explain the fascination of the game. Lost in thought, the player can work out in fantasy what he has never been able to do in reality.

If we turn now to the ego of the chess player, we note to begin with that he uses primarily intellectual defenses. In chess, thought replaces action. As contrasted with other sports such as boxing, there is no physical contact whatsoever. There is not even the intermediate form of contact found in tennis or handball, in which both men hit the same object. The chess player is permitted to touch his opponent's pieces only for purposes of a capture, when, according to the rules, the piece must be removed from the board.

As the players become more expert, the taboo on touching becomes even stronger. In master chess the rule of "touchmove" is observed. If a player touches a piece he must move it. If he touches it by accident he must say "j'adoube", which means "I adjust" in French. Those who play by the rules are required to say this in French.

In one form of the game, known as correspondence chess, the distance between the two men is carried even further, in that the opponents never see one another. Tle entire game is played by mail. Here it is permissible to touch the pieces, but of course the players never meet.

In view of the profuse phallic symbolism of the game, the taboo on touching has unconsciously two meanings, or, put another way, the ego wards off two threats. One is masturbation (do not touch your penis; do not touch your pieces, and if you do, have an excuse ready). The other threat is homosexuality, or bodily contact between the two men, especially mutual masturbation.

The Psychology of the Chess Player by Reuben Fine, Dover Pub. NY (1956)

Susan Polgar BANNED from the USCF!

2009-08-10T17:18:00.000-07:00

By Bill Hall
August 10, 2009

The United States Chess Federation Executive Board voted Friday night to revoke the memberships of Susan Polgar and her husband Paul Truong. Polgar and Truong appealed the revocations to the Board of Delegates on Saturday and the revocations were upheld by a vote of 55-21 (Polgar) and 58-18 (Truong).

Susan is a chronic frivolous litigator and opportunist who couldn't care less about the welfare of the uscf or it's members. Fame and her own material success are all that is important to her. As for her husband Truong, he has a long history of being a con man who has declared bankruptcy twice. These two make Bonnie and Clyde look like a virgin nun and altar boy.

Some USCF members wrote in with comments:

Jonathan Hilton - My only regret is that this did not happen at last year's meeting. Anyone who sues the USCF for $10 million should have his or her membership from the organization revoked, and certainly should not serve on the Executive Board. I am happy that the bylaws amendments along those lines passed more or less unanimously during open session.

Harry Payne - The People who tried (and failed) to destroy the USCF was none other than Susan Polgar and her hubby. They received what was just, and I am sure there is more(much more) justice to come from the Courts.

Michael Aigner - Anyone who sits on the Executive Board of a non-profit organization while suing the organization for $25 Million (later reduced to $10M) deserves the wrath of the Delegates. There is simply no way you can effectively lead the organization while suing it for nearly 10 times its annual budget. Fortunately, the vast majority of Delegates present in Indianapolis understood this concept. The appeals were rejected by about a 3:1 margin.

The action by the Delegates mirrors the results of the recent election, when the candidates endorsed by Polgar were defeated by a similar margin. Except for a few vocal dissidents, I think we can safely say that the USCF members have spoken loud and clear.

Jonathan Hilton - Actually, the "punishment" for Susan and Paul was very, very light. They were simply removed from the Executive Board in the most harmless way possible. They are no longer allowed to be USCF members, but they are still allowed to play in rated tournaments via the Tournament Membership route. That said, Polgar has played in only one serious USCF tournament in three years. Even if we hadn't allowed them to continue playing in rated events, it would not have been a tremendous loss to the chess world (in my opinion).

Looks to me like the people (and the United States Chess Federation) have spoken!

Shirov wins with the Black end of a French Defense Advance Variation in 20 moves!

2009-07-12T23:23:00.000-07:00

position after 13.e4??

[Event "2009 Canadian Open Chess Championship"]
[Date "2009.07.12"]
[White "Kagramanov, Dina"]
[Black "Shirov, Alexei"]
[Result "0-1"]
[WhiteELO "2140"]
[BlackELO "2748"]

1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 (defining the 'Advance Variation' of the French Defense. Not the most ambitious line for White, but an understandable choice against such a strong opponent.)3...c5 4.c3 Nc6 5.Nf3 Bd7 6.Be2 Nge7 7.O-O Nf5 8.Be3?! (the main line here is 8.Bd3 and after 8...cxd4 9.Bxf5 exf5 10.Nxd4 Be7 11.Re1 0-0 12.Qd3=. In this position as white, Shirov played 8.Na3 cxd4 9.cxd4 Bxa3 10.bxa3=) 8...Qb6 9.Qd2 Nxe3 10.fxe3 Be7 11.Bd3 O-O 12.Kh1? (Completing development of the queenside with 12.Na3 f6 13.exf6 Bxf6 14.Nc2 was in order. The text is preparation for the White's next and more serious mistake) 12...f6 (13.e4?? a tactical oversight) cxd4 14.exd5 Nxe5 15.Nxe5 fxe5 16.Re1 exd5 17.Rxe5 Qf6 18.Re1 Bd6 19.cxd4 Qh4 20.g3 Bxg3 0-1

Chess Politics

2009-07-10T09:15:00.001-07:00

World Chess Championship 2008 (Game 7)

2008-10-23T13:46:00.000-07:00

(7) Anand,Viswanathan - Kramnik,Vladimir [D19]

World Chess Championship 2008 Bonn (7), 23.10.2008

[Repa,Jason]

1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.Nf3 Nf6 4.Nc3 dxc4 Kramnik opts for the relatively harmless Slav (proper). This position has been reached in their previous encounters on two ocassions, although with Anand on the Black side. Both games, predictably, resulted in draws. 5.a4 Bf5 6.e3 [Marin,M: Also slightly unexpected. Topalov usually plays the more straightforward 6.Ne5 Nbd7 7.Nxc4 Qc7 8.g3 e5 9.dxe5 Nxe5 10.Bf4 Nfd7 11.Bg2 g5 12.Nxe5 gxf4 13.Nxd7 0-0-0 14.Qd4 Qxd7 15.Qxf4 Bd6 16.Qc1 (16.Qh6 Qe6 (16...Be5!?) 17.Qxe6+ Bxe6 18.a5 a6 19.Be4+/= 1/2-1/2 Stern,R-Lamprecht,F/Germany 2000/CBM 75 ext (42) . (41)) 16...Kb8 17.0-0 Qe7?! Eine plausible Fortsezung besteht in (17...h5 18.h4 Qe6 19.Rd1 Rhg8 mit Ausgleich.) 18.a5?! (18.b4 lohnte einen Versuch: 18...Bxb4 Wenn Schwarz b4-b5 zuläßt, bekommt Weiß mit dem Springer Zugang zum Feld d5 und Angriff zu seinem Mehrbauern. 19.Qf4+ Qd6 (19...Ka8 scheitert an 20.Na2) 20.Qxf5 Bxc3 21.Rab1 , und die Stellung des Schwarzen ist äußerst unbequem.) 18...a6 19.Ra4 Bc7 20.Ne4 Es ist schwer, dem Weißen etwas Besseres zu raten; die Schwäche des Bauern auf a5 sichert dem Schwarzen genügend Gegenspiel. 20...Rd5 21.Rc4 Rxa5 22.Nc5 Bc8 23.Qc2 Rb5 24.e3 1/2-1/2 Kramnik,V (2807)-Anand,V (2755)/Moscow 2002/CBM 091/[Huebner,R] Mir gefällt nach 24...h5 eher die Stellung des Schwarzen etwas besser.] 6...e6 7.Bxc4 Bb4 8.0-0 Nbd7 [8...0-0 9.Nh4 Nbd7 10.Nxf5 exf5 11.Qc2 Nb6 12.Bb3 Qd7 13.a5 Nbd5 14.f3 Rfe8 15.Nxd5 Nxd5 16.e4 Nf6 17.Qc4 Bf8 18.exf5 Rad8 19.Kh1 Re7 20.Qc2 1/2-1/2 Kramnik,V (2758)-Anand,V (2769)/Linares 2000/CBM 076] 9.Qe2 Bg6 10.e4 0-0 11.Bd3 Bh5 12.e5 [From the point of view of the general laws of development, 12.Bf4 looks slightly more consistent and only if 12...Re8 , then 13.e5 . However, after 13...Nd5 14.Nxd5 Black can try 14...exd5!? already, with interesting play.] 12...Nd5 13.Nxd5 cxd5 14.Qe3 Marin,M: 'Topalov switches back to the classical main line of the Slav, which brought him close to what could have easily been his best achievement in the whole match (see the tragically ended second game).' 14...Re8 Topalov - Kramnik, World Ch. game#2, (Elista, 2006) continued; [14...Bg6 15.Ng5 Re8 Marin,M: 'would just transpose to the second game.' 16.f4 Bxd3N In spite of the fact that the previous games played from this position did not justify any special worries for Black, Kramnik decides to restrict White's attacking chances to the minimum. a) 16...Nf8 17.g4 Bxd3 18.Qxd3 Qc7 19.f5 Qc4 20.Qd1 f6 21.Nf3 Rac8© 1/2-1/2 Donner,J-Teschner,R/Bamberg 1968/MCD (33); b) 16...Rc8 17.g4 f6 18.Bxg6 hxg6 19.Nf3 Qc7 20.Qd3 Nf8 21.f5 gxf5 (21...Qc2!<=> Deviatkin) 22.gxf5 fxe5 23.Nxe5 exf5 24.Qxf5 Bd6 25.Nf7 Re7 26.Nxd6 Qxd6 27.Qxc8 Qg6+ 28.Bg5 Qxg5+ 29.Kh1 1-0 Pelletier,Y (2624) -Deviatkin,A (2487)/Moscow RUS 2003; 17.Qxd3 f5 Starting from this moment, I expected that Topalov would sacrifice the knight on e6 in one way or another. However, Topalov had other plans. By gradually concentrating all his forces on the king side, he will aim to create very dangerous threats. This was to a certain extent in accordance with his general match strategy. Instead of rushing in, he mostly preferred to take his chances in long battles. 18.Be3 (Taking into account Black's possible improvements on the 19th move, 18.g4 deserves serious attention. 18...h6[] (18...g6?! 19.gxf5 gxf5 (19...exf5 20.Qb5+-) 20.Qg3+- for instance 20...Qe7 21.Nxe6+ Kh8 22.Ng5 h6 23.Qh3! and White avoids any inconveniences along the g-file.) 19.Nxe6! (19.gxf5 hxg5 20.fxe6 Rxe6 21.f5 Nxe5!=/+) 19...Rxe6 20.gxf5 Re7 21.Kh1©) 18...Nf8 19.Kh1 (Now, it is too late for 19.g4 already because of 19...Qd7 20.Kh1 Be7 21.Nxe6 (21.gxf5 exf5) 21...Nxe6 22.gxf5 Nc7 23.Rg1 Kh8 and White's attacking chances are questionable.) 19...Rc8?! Black systematically prepares his queenside counterplay, but tolerates the knight on g5 for too long. a) True, 19...h6?! would have been risky by weakening the g6-square unnecessarily. 20.Nxe6!? (20.Nf3 Rc8 21.Rg1) 20...Nxe6 21.Qxf5©; b) However, 19...Be7! as recommended by several commentators was better. 20.Nxe6?! (20.Nf3 is safer, but then White should abandon his attacking ideas, since 20...Rc8 21.Rg1 Qc7 22.g4?! is met by 22...fxg4 23.Rxg4 Qc2=/+) 20...Nxe6 21.Qxf5 Qd7! (21...Nf8 22.Qg4 Qd7 23.f5->; 21...Qb6 22.a5 Qa6 23.Qg4->) 22.Qh5 (22.Qg4?! Nc5!; 22.Qh3 Rf8 23.Rf3 Rac8 24.f5 Ng5) 22...g6 23.Qh3 Rf8 24.Rf3 (24.g4 Ng7!) 24...Rac8 25.g4 Rc4-/+ and Black's counterplay is faster than White's attack.; 20.g4 Qd7 21.Rg1 Be7 22.Nf3 Shattering my last illusions about a possible Nxe6. True, I felt fully rewarded for it by the spectacular sequence starting with the 28th move. (However, 22.Nxe6!? might have been a more dangerous continuation of the attack. 22...Qxe6 (22...Nxe6 23.gxf5+/- Nc7 24.f6->) 23.gxf5 Qa6 (23...Qf7 24.Rg4 Rc6 (24...Rc4 25.Rag1 g6 26.fxg6 hxg6 27.Rxg6++-; 24...Kh8 25.Rag1 g6 26.fxg6 hxg6 27.f5+- gxf5?! 28.Qxf5!) 25.Rag1 g6 26.fxg6 hxg6 (26...Rxg6 27.f5 Rxg4 28.Rxg4+ Kh8 29.Bh6+-) 27.f5 Rec8 28.Bh6->) 24.Qxa6!? The following lines are suggestive of the dangers facing Black even in the endgame. (However, the simple 24.Qd2-> might be just better.) 24...bxa6 25.f6 Bxf6 26.exf6 Rxe3 (26...g6 27.Ra3 Kf7 28.Rg5 Red8 29.Re5+/=) 27.Rxg7+ Kh8 28.Rag1 Ne6 29.R7g4 h5 (29...Rb3 30.f5 Nc7 31.Rg7+/- Rbb8?! 32.R1g4+-) 30.Rh4! Rc7 31.Rxh5+ Rh7 32.Rxh7+ Kxh7 33.f5 Nf8 34.Rg7+ Kh8[] (34...Kh6 35.Rg8 Re8 36.f7 Rb8 37.a5 Kh7 38.Kg2+-) 35.Rxa7 Re4 (35...Rf3 36.Rxa6 Rxf5 37.b4 Kh7 38.b5 Kg6 39.a5+-) 36.Rxa6 Rxd4 37.a5 Rb4 38.Rd6 Rxb2 39.Rxd5 Ra2=) 22...Rc4 23.Rg2 fxg4 24.Rxg4 Rxa4 25.Rag1 g6 26.h4 Dark clouds have gathered around the black king. Without calculating too much, it is obvious that the position becomes very dangerous and that Black needs to play very accurately in order to avoid disaster. 26...Rb4! The only way to stay alive is to question the stability of the white queen along the b1-h7 diagonal. 27.h5 Qb5 28.Qc2!! (The only way to keep the attack going. 28.hxg6? was premature because after 28...Qxd3 29.gxh7+ Kxh7 30.Rg7+ Kh6 31.f5+ the bishop is hanging.) 28...Rxb2! For the time being, Kramnik finds the only path through the jungle of variations, most possible by intuition. (28...Rb3?! has been unanimously recommended as a safer defence, but it allows White to retain an advantage. 29.hxg6 h5 (29...Qd3? 30.gxh7+ Kh8 31.Rg8+ Kxh7 32.Qh2++-) 30.R4g3! (30.g7 hxg4 31.gxf8Q+ Kxf8 32.Qh7 Qd3= and White has not more than perpetual, as pointed out by Svidler.) 30...Qd3 (30...h4 31.g7 hxg3 32.gxf8Q+ Kxf8 33.Qg6 Qd3 34.f5! Qxe3 35.Rxg3+-) 31.g7!! Quite similar to the game continuation. 31...Nh7 (31...Qxc2? 32.gxf8Q+ Kxf8 33.Rg8+ Kf7 34.R1g7#) 32.Qc7 White's army is much better coordinated. Several of Black's pieces are passive or even vulnerable. (If White fears the queenside passed pawns from the main line, he can also choose the safer 32.Qxd3 Rxd3 33.Bd2) 32...Qc4 (32...Qb5 33.Nd2+/-) 33.Qxc4 dxc4 34.Nd2 Rxb2 35.Nxc4 Rc2 36.Nd2+/- and White's kingside pressure is hardly bearable. With four rooks on the board, Black's queen side pawns are much less dangerous than in the game. Still, the position would remain complicated and difficult to handle in an over-the-board game.) 29.hxg6! Now, capture of the queen leads to mate, so Black has to keep the g-file closed, at least for a while. 29...h5[] (29...Rxc2? 30.gxh7+ Kxh7 31.Rg7+ Kh6 32.f5+ Kh5 33.f6+-) 30.g7! hxg4 31.gxf8Q+ Bxf8? This move should have led to an abrupt end. (Both players started missing things by this moment. This is easy to spot when assisted by Fritz, but in conditions of over-the-board play things are different. About the previous day's game it has been said that 57...f5 was a terrible blunder and that 57...Nxf2 would have drawn easily. I do not feel that this is really so obvious without an engine by one's side. Anyway, I suppose that Kramnik considered the line 31...Kxf8 32.Qg6 Qe2 33.Qxg4 as completely hopeless for him, overlooking the unexpected resource 33...Bg5! when White has to insert 34.Re1 before he captures the bishop. 34...Qc2 35.Qxg5 (35.fxg5 Kg7 36.Rc1 Rh8+ 37.Kg1 Rb1 38.Rxb1 Qxb1+ 39.Kf2 Rf8~~ Svidler 40.Bd2 Qe4 41.Qh3 Qxd4+ 42.Kg3 Rxf3+ 43.Kxf3 Qxd2 44.Qh6+ Kg8 45.Qxe6+ Kf8 46.Qf6+ Kg8=) 35...Re7 36.Rc1 Rh7+ 37.Kg1 Rg7 38.Rxc2 Rxc2~~ Svidler) 32.Qg6+? (Both players must have had their eyes focused on the king side, which made them overlook that after 32.Rxg4+ Bg7 White can attack the g7-bishop from the other side with 33.Qc7 preventing ...Re7 (which could follow after 33. Qg6) and leaving Black with the possibility of giving just one last check with 33...Qf1+ when 34.Ng1 ends the day. Although Topalov's move does not let the win slip away yet, it surely marks the start of his gradual decline, after a brilliantly conducted first part of the game. This seems to be a hidden weakness of the FIDE World Champion. Sometimes, if the opponent gets some symbolic counterplay in a basically lost position, Topalov starts becoming less confident. (To a certain extent, this was also typical for Fischer, with whom Topalov has been frequently been compared for his uncompromising style). In Topalov-Leko Linares 2005 and Topalov-Anand San Luis 2005 he just missed relatively simple wins but in Aronian-Topalov Morelia 2006 he even came close to losing at a certain moment. This game continues this unfortunate tendency: he will eventually lose the full point...) 32...Bg7 33.f5! Re7 (33...exf5? 34.Ng5! (34.Bh6 Qd7 35.Ng5 Rb6~~) 34...Qc6 (34...Re7 35.Qh7+ Kf8 36.Qxf5+ Kg8 37.Rc1+-) 35.Qf7+ Kh8 36.e6+-) 34.f6 Qe2 35.Qxg4 Rf7 36.Rc1? a) 36.Bh6 Rb3 37.Rg3 Rb1+ 38.Ng1?! (38.Rg1=) 38...Qxg4 39.Rxg4 a5<=>; b) Computers suggest 36.Qh5! as stronger and they seem to be just right, but this is pretty hard to spot during the game by a mere mortal, be he even a World Champion. Topalov's choice is perfectly understandable, humanly speaking, but from objective point of view it should have led to a draw. 36...a5 (36...Qxe3 37.Ng5+-; 36...Rb3 37.Rxg7+ Rxg7 38.fxg7 Rb1+ 39.Bg1 Kxg7 40.Qg5+ Kh7 41.Qe7+ Kh8 42.Qf6+ Kg8 43.Qxe6+ Kg7 44.Qf6+ Kg8 45.e6+-) 37.Rg3 Qxe3 (37...a4 38.fxg7 Rb1+ 39.Bg1+- Lui) 38.fxg7 Rb1+ 39.Kh2 Rb2+ 40.Kh3 Rxg7 41.Ng5 Qf4 (41...Rxg5 42.Qe8+ Kh7 43.Qf7+ Kh8 44.Rxe3+- Lui) 42.Qe8+ Qf8 43.Qxf8+ Kxf8 44.Nxe6++-; 36...Rc2 37.Rxc2 Qd1+? Kindly returning the favour. Black should not help the enemy king get centralized. (Kramnik was probably afraid that after 37...Qxc2 White would get a decisive tempo with 38.Ng5 In fact, now that the king's defence has been somewhat weakened, the checks would have allowed him save the game. 38...Qb1+ 39.Kg2 Qc2+ and White should probably accept a draw by perpetual check or repetition somewhere. 40.Kh3!? (40.Kf3 Qd1+ 41.Kf4 Qf1+ 42.Qf3 Qxf3+ 43.Kxf3 Bxf6 44.Nxf7 Kxf7 45.exf6 Kxf6= see the notes to White's 41st move) 40...Qd3 (40...Bxf6 41.exf6 Qf5 42.Qxf5 exf5 43.Nxf7 Kxf7 44.Bg5 a5 45.Kg3 a4 46.Bc1 Kxf6 47.Kf4+- see the notes to White's 42nd move) 41.Qf3 Bh6 42.Nxf7 Qxe3 43.Qxe3 Bxe3 44.Nd8 b5! (44...a5 45.Kg4! a4 46.Nxe6 a3 47.Kf5! Kh7[] The difference compared to 44...b5 is that with the b-pawn on the third rank Black would win with 47...b2 now, because he would promote with check. 48.Nf8+ Kh8 49.e6 a2 50.e7 a1Q 51.e8Q Qb1+ 52.Ke6 Qe4+ 53.Kf7 Qxe8+ 54.Kxe8+-) 45.Nxe6 b4 and White is in trouble.) 38.Kg2 Qxc2+ 39.Kg3 Qe4 A culminating moment. Black desperately tries to simplify the position, even if this would imply making some positional or material concessions on the kingside since his apparently inoffensive queenside pawns will be a terrible weapon in the ending. White faces now a very difficult choice right before the control. (39...Qf5 40.Qxf5 exf5 41.Ng5 Rc7 (41...Bxf6 42.Nxf7 Kxf7 43.exf6 Kxf6 44.Kf4 transposes below to a subline from the comment to White's 42nd move.) 42.Kf4+-) 40.Bf4? (It required a lot of analytical effort to prove which exactly is the move that turns a better (or winning) position into a worse (or losing) one, but it is obvious that we are getting close by now. 40.Qxe4 dxe4 41.Ng5 would have lead to relatively similar positions as in the game, with the difference that White could put his pawns into motion more quickly. For instance 41...Bf8 a) White wins after 41...Bxf6 42.Nxf7 Kxf7 43.exf6 Kxf6 44.Kf4 although some elementary technique is still needed. 44...a5 45.Bd2 b6 46.Kxe4 Ke7 47.Ke5 Kd7 48.Bc1 (48.Bh6 Ke7) 48...b5 49.Bd2 b4 50.Bg5 a4 51.Bd2 b3 (51...a3 52.Bxb4 a2 53.Bc3 Ke7 54.Ke4+-) 52.Bc1 Ke7 53.Bb2 Kd7 54.Ba3(.)+-; b) 41...Bh6 42.Nxf7 Bxe3 43.Nd8 a5 (43...Bxd4? 44.f7+ Kf8 45.Nxe6+ Kxf7 46.Nxd4 a5 47.Kf4 a4 48.Nb5+-) 44.d5!+-; 42.Nxe6 a5 43.Ng5 Bh6 (The pawn race favours White after 43...a4 44.Nxf7 Kxf7 45.d5 a3 46.Bd4 followed by e6+) 44.d5 when the white pawns look pretty awesome.) 40...Qf5 41.Qxf5 (41.Ng5!? Qxg4+! (41...Rc7? 42.Qxf5 (42.Nxe6?! Rc3+ 43.Kh4 Qh7+ 44.Kg5 '=' Marin,M. Marin,M: 'Svidler' 44...Bh6+ 45.Kh5+ Bg7+ 46.Kg5= Svidler) 42...exf5 43.Ne6+- transposes below.) 42.Kxg4 Bxf6! 43.Nxf7 Kxf7 44.exf6 Kxf6 45.Bd6 Kf7 46.Kf4 Ke8 47.Ke5 Kd7 48.Bb4 b6= For once, this type of ending is drawn, as pointed out by Luiza Marin. The importance of the d5-pawn (compared to the note to White's 40th move) becomes clear after 49.Bd2 a5 50.Be1 a4 51.Bb4? (>=51.Bc3 a3 52.Kf6 a2 53.Ke5 b5 54.Kf6 b4 55.Ba1 Kd6=) 51...Kc6! 52.Kxe6 Kb5-+ when White has no time to unblock his own d-pawn.) 41...exf5 42.Bg5? a) Topalov likes to do things in a systematic way, approach with the king, maintain the chain of pawns intact, and so on, but there is simply not enough time for it! There are two enemy passed pawns on the other wing! Capturing the bishop with 42.fxg7 Rxg7+ 43.Kf2~~; b) or 42.Ng5! would have been better. 42...Rc7 b1) 42...Bf8 43.Kh4! a5 44.Kh5 a4 45.Kg6 a3 46.Nxf7 a2 47.e6 a1Q 48.e7 Qg1+ 49.Bg5+- Deviatkin; b2) 42...Rxf6 43.exf6 Bxf6 With chances for a draw according to Deviatkin, but White seems to be just in time to eliminate the central pawns and block the queenside pawns, for instance: 44.Be3 a5 (44...Bxg5 45.Bxg5 transposes below) 45.Kf4 a4 46.Nf3 a3 47.Bd2 b5 (47...Kf7 48.Kxf5 b5 49.Ne5++-) 48.Kxf5 Be7 49.Ke6 Kf8 50.Kxd5 b4 51.Bh6+ Ke8 52.Nd2+-; 43.Ne6 '+-' Marin,M. Marin,M: 'transposes below.' 43...Rc3+ 44.Kh4 Bxf6+ 45.exf6 Kf7 46.Nc7 Rxc7 (46...Rb3 47.Kg5 a5 48.Kxf5 a4 49.Ne6+- Rb6 50.Ng5+ Kg8 51.Bc1 Rb3 52.f7+ Kg7 53.Bf4 Rb6 54.Be5+ Kf8 55.Bf6+-) 47.Bxc7 Kxf6 48.Bf4 a5 49.Bd2 b6 50.Kg3 Kg6 51.Kf4 Kf6 52.Bc3 Ke6 53.Kg5 Kd6 54.Kxf5 Kc6 55.Ke6 a4 56.Bb2 Kb5 57.Kxd5 Kb4 58.Kc6 Kb3 59.Kb5+-; 42...a5-/+ 43.Kf4 (43.fxg7!?) 43...a4 44.Kxf5 a3 45.Bc1 (45.Nd2 Rc7 46.Nb3 a2 47.e6 Bxf6 48.Kxf6 Kf8 49.Ke5 Rh7 50.Bd2 Rh3-+) 45...Bf8 46.e6 (46.Bxa3 Bxa3 47.Ke6 b5 48.Kxd5 b4 49.Nd2 Rd7+ 50.Kc4 Kf7-+) 46...Rc7 47.Bxa3 Bxa3 48.Ke5 Rc1 49.Ng5 Rf1 (Allowing the transposition to a problematic ending. 49...Rg1!? would have probably been simpler.) 50.e7 Re1+ 51.Kxd5 Bxe7 52.fxe7 Rxe7 53.Kd6 Humanly speaking, this position looks close to a draw. White's forces are perfectly coordinated and the elimination of the b-pawn should not be a problem. Dr. John Nunn and the tablebases seem to have a different opinion, though... 53...Re1 (When Nunn announced that 53...Re3 is here the only winning move, I could not spot the reasons behind that immediately. Apparently, it has something to do with the restriction of the knight, but the real explanation will be revealed slightly later. Here follow Nunn's analysis and comments: " 54.d5 Kf8 55.Kd7 b5 56.Ne6+ Kg8 57.d6 b4 58.Nc5 the rook controls b3 and is therefore ready to support the b-pawn without wasting a tempo. Then the continuation 58...Kf7 59.Kc6 Rc3 60.Kb5 b3 61.Na4 Rc2 62.d7 Ke7 leads to a ar win. It is interesting to note that all Black's moves from move 53 to move 62 are unique winning moves (apart from a possible repetition at one point). Of course this would be tough to find in a game. I think the hardest part is the manoeuvre ...Kg8-f8-g8-f7, which looks quite paradoxical. (Nunn)") 54.d5 Kf8 55.Ne6+ (But now, 55.Kd7 , preventing the approach of the enemy king, looks better for human standards and it is the only saving move according to the tablebases, too. So, humans and computers can have common views sometimes... 55...b5 56.Ne6+ Kf7 (56...Kg8 57.d6 b4 58.Nc5=) 57.Nd8+ Kf6 58.Nc6 Rb1 59.Kd6! b4 60.Kc5!=) 55...Ke8 56.Nc7+ Kd8 57.Ne6+ Kc8 Now that Black has managed to regroup, it is all over. 58.Ke7 Rh1! Probably missed by Topalov. (58...b5? 59.d6 Rd1 60.Nc5 b4 61.d7+ Kc7 62.Na6+ or 62.Ne6+, with a draw.) 59.Ng5?! (59.Kd6 would be more stubborn.) 59...b5 60.d6 Rd1 61.Ne6 b4 62.Nc5 Re1+ 63.Kf6 Re3 0-1 Topalov,V (2813)-Kramnik,V (2743)/Elista 2006/ CBM 115/[Marin,M]] 15.Ne1 '!?' Marin,M. [15.Bd2 Bxd2 16.Nxd2 Rc8 17.a5 Nb8 18.Bb5 Rf8 19.Nb3 Qe7 20.Nc5 Bg6 21.Rfc1+/= 1-0 Berkes,F (2578) -Portisch,L (2583)/Heviz 2003/CBM 096 (47); 15.Ng5 Nf8 (15...Bg6 would just transpose to the second game.; 15...h6? 16.Qh3!+-) 16.Nxh7 Nxh7 17.Bxh7+ Kxh7 18.Qh3 g6 19.g4 Rh8 20.gxh5 Kg7 21.h6+ Kh7 22.Kh1 Rc8 23.f4 Rc2 24.f5 exf5 25.Rxf5 Qd7 1/2-1/2 Santoro,G-Sommovigo,A/corr 1970/Corr 2000 (35). and Black managed to repel the attack.] 15...Bg6 Marin,M: 'allows White keep his knight with' [15...Rc8 16.f4 Bxe1 17.Rxe1 Bg6 18.Bf1 Rc2 19.b3 Qa5 20.Bb5 Rd8 21.Re2 Rcc8 (The hidden strength of the pair of bishops can be seen in the variation 21...Rc3? 22.Bd2! Rxe3 23.Bxa5 Rxe2 24.Bxd8+-) 22.Bd2 Qb6 23.Rf2 a6 24.Bf1 Rc6 Each player has his own trumps. White has the pair of bishops and an advantage of space, while Black controls the only open file and has a fantastic bishop. 25.b4 Rc2 26.b5 a5 27.Bc3 Rxf2 28.Qxf2 Qa7 29.Qd2 Ra8 30.Rc1 Nb6 31.Bb2 Nxa4 32.Ba3 h6 33.h3 Be4 34.Kh2 Nb6 35.Bc5 a4 36.Ra1 Nc4!? The start of an interesting tactical phase, leading to complete simplification and an inevitable draw. 37.Bxc4 b6 38.Qe3 Rc8 39.Bf1 bxc5 40.dxc5 Qxc5 41.Qxc5 Rxc5 42.b6 Rc6 43.b7 Rb6 44.Ba6 d4 45.Rxa4 Bxb7 46.Bxb7 Rxb7 47.Rxd4 1/ 2-1/2 Topalov,V (2813)-Kramnik,V (2743)/Elista 2006/game#13] 16.Bxg6 hxg6 17.Nd3 Qb6 [17...Be7 18.Bd2 1/2-1/2 Banusz,T (2389)-Erdos,V (2454)/Budapest 2004/CBM 102 ext (26) although this did not offer him much.] 18.Nxb4 Qxb4 After these further exchanges, there is little in the way of winning chances for either side. 19.b3 Rac8 20.Ba3 Qc3 21.Rac1 Qxe3 22.fxe3 f6 23.Bd6 g5 24.h3 Kf7 25.Kf2 Kg6 26.Ke2 fxe5 27.dxe5 b6 28.b4 Rc4 29.Rxc4 dxc4 30.Rc1 Rc8 31.g4 a5 32.b5 c3 33.Rc2 Kf7 34.Kd3 Nc5+ 35.Bxc5 Rxc5 36.Rxc3 Rxc3+ 37.Kxc3 1/2-1/2

World Chess Championship 2008 (Game 6)

2008-10-21T20:55:00.000-07:00

(6) Anand,Viswanathan - Kramnik,Vladimir [E34]

World Chess Championship 2008 Bonn (6), 21.10.2008

[Repa,Jason]

1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.Qc2 The "classical" variation. A change from game 2 of the match in which Anand played 4.f3!? 4...d5 Anand is normally on the Black side of this position. It's the first time he has faced this move as White. While playing as Black, he has an excellent record in this line, with several nice wins, many draws, and only a single loss, which was against Ivanchuk last year in Monte Carlo [4...0-0 5.a3 Bxc3+ 6.Qxc3 b6 (6...Ne4 7.Qc2 f5 8.Nh3 d6 9.f3 Nf6 10.e3 e5 11.Be2 c5 12.d5 Qe8 13.0-0 Kh8 14.Nf2 Na6 15.b3 Bd7 16.Bb2 b5 17.f4 e4 18.h3 Rb8 19.Kh2 Qg6 20.Rg1 bxc4 21.bxc4 h5 22.Bc3 Nc7 23.Rab1 Na8 24.a4 Nc7 25.Rxb8 Rxb8 26.Rb1 Rxb1 27.Qxb1 Bxa4 28.Qb8+ Nce8 29.Qxa7 Bd7 30.Kh1 h4 31.Qb8 Kh7 32.Qd8 Ba4 33.Qe7 Bc2 34.Qb7 Bd3 35.Bxd3 exd3 36.Qb1 d2 37.Bxd2 Ne4 38.Be1 Qh5 39.Kh2 Ng3 40.Qd1 Kg6 41.Qxh5+ Kxh5 42.Nd1 Ne4 43.Kg1 N8f6 44.Kf1 g5 45.fxg5 Kxg5 46.Ba5 Nd7 47.Bd8+ Kh5 48.Nb2 Ne5 49.Ke1 Ng3 50.Bf6 Nd7 51.Be7 Ne4 52.Kd1 Ne5 53.Kc2 Ng6 54.Bd8 Ne5 55.Ba5 Kg5 56.Kb3 Kh5 57.Ka4 Kg5 58.Kb5 f4 59.Bd8+ Kf5 60.exf4 Ng6 61.Nd3 Nd2 62.Bc7 Ne4 63.Kc6 Nd2 64.Nb2 Nxf4 65.Bxd6 Nxg2 66.Bxc5 Nf4 67.Be3 Ne4 1-0 Anand,V (2769)-Psakhis,L (2599)/Haifa 2000/CBM 074 ext) 7.Bg5 Bb7 (7...Ba6 8.Nf3 d6 9.e3 Nbd7 10.Bd3 c5 11.b4 cxd4 12.exd4 Rc8 13.Qb3 h6 14.Bh4 e5 15.dxe5 dxe5 16.Be2 e4 17.Nd2 Ne5 18.Rd1 g5 19.Nxe4 Qe7 20.Nxf6+ Qxf6 21.Bg3 Bxc4 22.Bxc4 Nxc4 23.0-0 b5 24.h3 Rcd8 25.Rfe1 Rxd1 26.Qxd1 Rd8 27.Qc2 a6 28.a4 Qb2 29.Qxb2 Nxb2 30.axb5 axb5 31.Re5 Rd1+ 32.Kh2 Nc4 33.Rxb5 Nd2 34.h4 g4 35.Bf4 1/2-1/2 Anand,V (2764)-Izeta Txabarri,F (2470)/Santurtzi 2003/CBM 093 ext) 8.f3 h6 9.Bh4 d5 10.e3 Nbd7 11.cxd5 Nxd5 12.Bxd8 Nxc3 13.Bh4 Nd5 14.Bf2 c5 15.Bb5 Rfd8 16.e4 Ne7 17.Ne2 cxd4 18.Nxd4 a6 19.Be2 Nc5 20.b4 Na4 21.0-0 e5 22.Nb3 Nc3 23.Rfe1 Nxe2+ 24.Rxe2 Rd6 25.Rd2 1/2-1/2 Anand,V (2781)-Karpov,A (2710)/Monte Carlo 1999/CBM 069 ext] 5.cxd5 Anand varies from Ivanchuk's 5.a3. Playing with the Black pieces, Anand has scored victories against Topalov, Nyback, and Gagunashvilli in recent years. [5.a3 Bxc3+ 6.Qxc3 Ne4 7.Qc2 c5 8.dxc5 Nc6 9.cxd5 exd5 10.Nf3 Bf5 11.b4 d4 12.g4 Bg6 13.Qb2 0-0 14.Bg2 Re8 15.0-0 Nc3 16.Re1 h5 17.g5 Be4 18.Bd2 Ne5 19.Bxc3 Bxf3 20.exf3 dxc3 21.Qxc3 Qxg5 22.f4 Qxf4 23.Re4 1-0 Ivanchuk,V (2750)-Anand,V (2779)/Monte Carlo 2007/CBM 117 ext] 5...Qxd5 6.Nf3 Qf5 7.Qb3 Anand avoids the queen exchange, which is the most common continuation in this line. This is new territory for Kramnik. [7.Qxf5 exf5 8.a3 Bd6 (8...Be7 9.Bg5 Be6 10.e3 c6 11.Bd3 Nbd7 12.0-0 h6 13.Bh4 a5 14.Rac1 0-0 15.Ne2 g5 16.Bg3 Ne4 17.Nc3 Nxc3 18.Rxc3 Nf6 19.Rcc1 Rfd8 20.Rfd1 Rac8 1/2-1/2 Kasparov,G (2812)-Kramnik,V (2751)/Linares 1999/CBM 070) 9.Bg5 Nbd7 10.e3 c6 11.Bd3 h6 12.Bh4 g6 13.Nd2 Be7 14.f3 Nd5 15.Nxd5 Bxh4+ 16.g3 Bxg3+ 17.hxg3 cxd5 18.Rc1 Kd8 19.e4 fxe4 20.fxe4 dxe4 21.Nxe4 f5 22.Nd6 Ke7 23.Nb5 a6 24.Nc7 Rb8 25.Nd5+ Kd6 26.Nf4 g5 27.Ng6 Re8+ 28.Kd2 Nf6 29.Rxh6 Ng4 30.Rh5 Rg8 31.Rxg5 Be6 32.Re1 Nh6 33.Nf4 Bd7 34.Rh5 Ng4 35.Bxf5 Nf6 36.Rh6 Rbf8 37.Bxd7 Kxd7 38.Ng6 Re8 39.Ne5+ Ke6 40.Ng4+ Kf5 41.Nxf6 1-0 Kasparov,G (2815)-Kramnik,V (2780)/Moscow 1998/CBM 067 ext] 7...Nc6 8.Bd2 0-0 9.h3N Anand played this move immediately during the game, so he is obviously well within his preparation. This position does not occur in Mega Database 2008 or Chesslive.de
Ivanchuk - Anand, Monte Carlo, 1996 continued: [9.e3 Rd8 10.Be2 e5 11.Nxe5 Be6 12.g4 Qxe5 13.dxe5 Bxb3 14.exf6 Be6 15.f4 gxf6 16.0-0-0 Kg7 17.Rhg1 Na5 18.b3 Nxb3+ 19.axb3 Bxb3 20.Nb5 Bxd1 21.Rxd1 Bxd2+ 22.Rxd2 Rxd2 23.Kxd2 c6 24.Nd4 a5 25.Kc3 a4 26.Kb2 c5 27.Nf5+ Kf8 28.Ka3 b6 29.Bc4 Ra5 30.Nd6 Ra8 31.h4 h6 32.h5 Ra5 33.e4 Ra8 34.Bd5 Ra7 35.Nf5 b5 36.Nxh6 c4 37.Nf5 b4+ 38.Kxb4 a3 39.Bxc4 a2 40.Bxa2 Rxa2 41.g5 Rf2 42.h6 Kg8 43.Ne7+ Kh7 44.Nd5 fxg5 45.fxg5 Kg6 46.Kc5 Kxg5 47.h7 Rh2 48.Kd6 Rxh7 49.e5 Kf5 50.Ne7+ Ke4 51.Ng8 Rg7 52.Nf6+ Kf5 53.Nd7 Rh7 54.Nf8 Rg7 55.Nd7 Rg1 56.Ke7 Kg6 57.Nf8+ Kg7 58.Nd7 Re1 59.Kd6 Kg6 60.Nf8+ Kf5 61.Ke7 Ra1 62.Kxf7 Ra7+ 63.Ke8 Kxe5 64.Nd7+ Kd6 65.Nf8 Rg7 66.Kd8 Re7 67.Ng6 Re1 68.Nf8 Re2 69.Ng6 Re6 70.Nf8 Re2 71.Ng6 Re1 72.Nf8 Re3 73.Ng6 Ke6 74.Nf8+ Kf7 75.Nd7 Rc3 76.Nb6 1/2-1/2 Ivanchuk,V (2735)-Anand,V (2725)/Monte Carlo 1996/CBM 052 ext] 9...b6 10.g4 The idea of 9.h3. Despite his 2 point lead in the match, Anand is still playing for the win. 10...Qa5[] Essentially forced. [10...Qg6? 11.Bg2 Bb7 12.Ne5 Nxd4 (12...Nxe5 13.Bxb7+-) 13.Qc4 Qc2 14.Bxb7+-] 11.Rc1 Bb7 12.a3 Bxc3 13.Bxc3 Qd5 14.Qxd5 Nxd5 15.Bd2 Despite the exchange of queens, White's bishop pair and expansion on the kingside provide chances for a decisive result. Black is not in any immediate danger, however. 15...Nf6 16.Rg1 [16.g5!?] 16...Rac8 17.Bg2 Ne7 18.Bb4 c5!? Kramnik opts to sacrifice the weak backward c-pawn. GM Illescas suggests: [18...Rfe8 19.Ne5 Bxg2 20.Bxe7 Rxe7 21.Rxg2 c5 22.dxc5 Rxc5 23.Rxc5 bxc5 as a "safer" alternative for Black. But after: 24.Rg3 Rb7 25.g5! The combination of Black's weak queenside pawns and White's well placed knight on e5, gives him reasonable chances at the full point.] 19.dxc5 Rfd8?! [19...bxc5 20.Bxc5 Ne4 21.b4 Nxc5 22.bxc5+/=] 20.Ne5!+/- Bxg2 21.Rxg2 bxc5 22.Rxc5 Ne4 23.Rxc8 Rxc8 24.Nd3 Nd5 25.Bd2 Rc2 26.Bc1 f5 27.Kd1! Now Black must vacate the 2nd rank, and with it any hopes of an initiative to compensate him for the pawn deficit. 27...Rc8 28.f3 Nd6 29.Ke1 a5 30.e3 e5?! This move is applauded by GM Illescas as a "stubborn" defense by Kramnik. But I think, conversely, that it perhaps seals his fate instead. After the more natural looking: [30...a4 clamping down on the b3 square, White has a less obvious route towards making progress. For example; 31.Bd2 Nc4 32.Ke2 Ndb6 33.e4 fxe4 34.fxe4 Nxd2 35.Kxd2 Kf7 With reasonable chances for a draw.] 31.gxf5 e4 32.fxe4 Nxe4 33.Bd2 a4? But now White's plan is too fast. More prudent was: [33...Re8 preventing an immediate: 34.Nf2? Nxd2=] 34.Nf2! challenging the e4 square and preparing to push the center pawn. 34...Nd6 35.Rg4 Nc4 36.e4 Nf6 37.Rg3 Nxb2 Gaining back some material, but the White pawnroller is decisive. 38.e5 Nd5 39.f6 Kf7 40.Ne4! Anand demonstrates fine technique! [The more natural looking: 40.Rxg7+?! Ke6 41.Rxh7 Nc4 is probably still winning, but gives Black better grease opportunities.] 40...Nc4 41.fxg7 Kg8 42.Rd3 Ndb6 43.Bh6 Nxe5 44.Nf6+ Kf7 45.Rc3 Rxc3 [45...Ra8] 46.g8Q+ Kxf6 47.Bg7+ 1-0

World Chess Championship 2008

2008-10-18T10:36:00.000-07:00

Anand is leading 2.5 - 1.5 after 4 rounds!

I'm posting all of the games, as they are played, in an online viewer here: World Chess Championship 2008

and giving some analysis and commentary at my facebook chess group here:
CHESS OPENINGS

Death by Bunga Bunga!

2008-10-08T08:55:00.000-07:00

The slaying of a Dragon!

After Qxg6+, Black can safely resign.

Getting Screwed at ChessPark

2008-05-15T17:29:00.000-07:00

ChessPark is the WORST chess site I have ever come across. Firstly, they start hounding you to pay right from the get go for the so called "upgraded account" as soon as you register. After declining to pull out my Visa for a server I know nothing about, I go to the game room and see only a few dozen players, most of which have paltry ratings in the 1100 to 1600 range. The highest rated player in the room is only 2100 and change, so I accept his waiting game challenge to a 5+2 blitz game. It turns out this patzer is nowhere near 2100 in strength, perhaps only a 1600 or so player as I easily obtain this position without even having to think for very long. Then instead of resigning, the idiot just stops moving. I have a rook and bishop against his lone king and he won't resign. He won't move either and lets his clock run down. After he runs out of time(I have over 2 minutes left on my clock), instead of being awarded the win the server says DRAW and I'm immediately bombarded with more encouragement to "upgrade" my account to that of a paid membership. Do the fair rules of chess only apply to those who pay???

A Missed Opportunity

2008-04-08T15:34:00.000-07:00

Movsesian in contemplation

There was a recent game in the Russian Team championship: GM Volokitin vs GM Movsesian which ended in a 160 move draw. The opening was a Sicilian Scheveningen: Keres Attack

View the Game
Download pgn

However, in the position achieved after 47.Kb1, the 6-piece tablebases reveal a forced mate in 33 moves.

Here Movsesian played 47...Kf5 which doesn't make any progress. But after: 47... Qf5+ 48. Ka2 Qa5+ 49. Ra4 Qd2+ 50. Kb1 Qc3 51. Ka2 Qc2+ 52. Ka3 Qb1 53. Ra5+ Kf6 54. b4 Ke6 55. Rc5 a6 56. Rc6+ Ke5 57. Rc8 Qd3+ 58. Kb2 a5 (temporarily giving up the pawn in order to create a high class zugzwang) 59. bxa5 Qb5+ 60. Kc2 Kd4 61. Rh8 Qc6+ 62. Kb3 Qc3+ 63. Ka4 Qc4+ 64. Ka3 Qe6 65. Kb2 (65.Kb4 ?? Kc3 and mate soon follows) Kd3 66. Rh7 Qf5 67. Rh1 Qe5+ 68. Ka3 Qxa5+ (with a pure queen vs rook ending where the defenders rook is completely out of position and vulnerable). 69.Kb3 Qc3+ 70.Ka4 Qxh8 etc.

A superb example of the might of technology in chess.

The Legend has Died

2008-01-31T01:46:00.000-08:00

On January 17-2008, former world chess champion Bobby Fischer passed away at his residence in Iceland. Whether or not you agree with his political or other views, one thing you must agree to, is that Bobby Fischer was a man of incredible courage, integrity, and honesty. He has demonstrated this truth many times over the course of his life, from his unwillingness, early in his career, to accept sponsorship from a company becaus he didn't use their product, to his highly controversial radio interviews where he candidly voiced his opinions, even though it was certain he would encounter great consequences as a result. Bobby Fischer was afraid of nothing. His way of life, as well as his chess, has made that clear.

Cheating allegations against Kramnik

2007-12-22T11:17:00.000-08:00

Notice how his eyes shift and break contact with the interviewer as he denies the cheating allegations, yet he maintains good eye contact as he answers the other interview questions.

Kasparov Arrested (again).

2007-11-26T00:13:00.000-08:00

From world chess champion to common criminal. The scofflaw from Baku made headlines again as he was arrested and sentenced to five days in prison for causing yet another disturbance at a Moscow political rally.

The Bird Flies High..... or .....No Roast Chicken for Carl

2007-08-23T00:00:00.000-07:00

Excellent attacking game by Chanda Sandipan

2007-07-15T19:41:00.000-07:00

This game was played yesterday at the Canadian Open 2007 in Ottawa Canada. At 23, Chanda shows he has what it takes to defeat GM's with nearly +100 elo.

FM John D. Bick

2007-07-15T18:41:00.000-07:00

Despite his simpleton appearance, Mr. Bick is a FIDE master. After seeing the tattoo of a knight on his hand I felt compelled to take a look at some of his games. I found a nice Nimzo-Indian played in Reykjavik last year.

Swiss bank UBS plunders Bobby Fischer's savings account

2007-07-12T12:53:00.000-07:00

Having already stolen a large portion of Bobby's cash and assets in his UBS savings account in the year 2005 UBS now freezes all the rest.

UBS in their February 26, 2007 letter to Bobby's attorney Mr. Arni Vilhjalmsson of LOGOS legal services has announced that unless Bobby knuckles under and accepts and cooperates with UBS's thievery and dictate that Bobby will never see a penny of the rest of his money at UBS. Of course UBS knows that Bobby will never go along with this outrage. So all of the remainder of Bobby's money at UBS is frozen--actually stolen for good.

Turning a Win into a Loss!

2007-06-25T13:03:00.000-07:00

Carl Pottinger gets Mated!

2007-05-09T00:13:00.000-07:00

I can't believe that came out so clear from my cell phone camera! Anyway, Black resigned due to ....Kf5(box) --> g4# He'll think twice before trying to hold his extra pawn next time.

Beating a GM with Black!

2007-04-29T22:27:00.000-07:00

Schachspieler oder Verbrecher?

2007-04-19T07:31:00.000-07:00

"Mama, don't let your babies grow up to be Grandmasters. Don't let 'em push pieces and read Russian Informants. Make 'em doctors and lawyers and such. Mama, don't let your babies grow up to be Grandmasters. They'll never stay home and they're always alone. Even with someone they love.
Grandmasters ain't easy to love, and they're harder to hold. And they'd rather give you a theoretical novelty than diamonds or gold...."

Kasparov Busted!

2007-04-14T19:04:00.000-07:00

Former world chess champion Garry Kasparov, who heads the United Civil Front opposition organization against the Putin government, was trying to attend an oppositional protest rally at Pushkin Square, Moscow. The government had mobilised 9,000 police to block the march. Kasparov was arrested on site and detained for 10 hours before being released.

His arrest has made the news in almost every Western TV channel, and has been reported in all major news agencies and newspapers.

My conversation with Nigel Short

2007-04-13T00:24:00.000-07:00

Playchess.com server at about 1:30 am Friday April 13-2007

Me: Hi Nigel, I look forward to seeing you at the Canadian Open
NS: Who are you?
Me: My name is Larry Page (a fictitious name)
NS: ok
Me: I'll also be playing in the Canadian Open in July. I guess you will be a favourite to win it.
NS: The odds against a player winning an open are high, even if he is the highest rated.
Me: True, but your odds must be better than everyone else's.
NS: If I am the highest rated.
Me: By the way, have you seen this blog: http://www.chesswhore.blogspot.com
NS: Never heard of it.
Me: It purports to be a blog by Susan Polgar. Anyway, I just thought you should know about it as they are talking about you.
NS: It does not look like a much visited site.
Me: On a different topic, I haven't seen any top GM's play the Winawer French anymore. It's usually a mccutcheon or classical.
NS: Why are you a guest?
Me: Well, I'm not really a guest. I just named myself "guest9210" as a gag. I don't think real guests can chat, nor play rated games.
NS: That is why I was confused. Mind you, I managed to play a totally illegal move in one game on this server, so I was starting to believe anything was possible.
Me: That's interesting. I've never heard of something like that happening on this server. The main problem here is the lag. But I prefer this interface to what ICC has, especially for bullet chess. The ICC version of premove is still quite choppy.
NS: The ICC is ancient, and it shows it.
Me: Yes
NS: First-mover disadvantage
Me: Yes, the clock runs immediately.
Me: So do you have any wisdom for my French Defense? I play it pretty much exclusively against 1.e4.
NS: The winawer loses to Qg4!
Me: White has too much pressure eh?
NS: No, He annihilates the kingside or Black has to castle into a mating attack.
(after a lull of about a minute, waiting for Nigel to provide more "wisdom" on the French)
Me: Well, it was nice chatting with you Nigel. And thank you for the advice. Hopefully we'll talk more in July, in Ottawa.
NS: I will be there. Unless I am ill.

Kasparov's Last Game (part 1)

2007-04-10T01:20:00.000-07:00

Kasparov's Last Game (part 2)

2007-04-09T01:14:00.000-07:00

Garry Kasparov's foray into Politics

2007-02-14T04:58:00.000-08:00

Kasparov checkmated by Putin supporter!

How to Drink like a Grandmaster!

2007-01-15T01:20:00.000-08:00

After having a "few" celebratory cocktails on his birthday, IM Michael Schleifer made it on time to his round 3 game in an Ottawa tournament, and then proceeded to pass out, head on hands at the board. A cell phone rang which startled the IM to awake.
Immediately after awakening he stood up, unzipped his pants, pulled out his manhood, and urinated all over the table, the chess pieces and board, and on the floor. Some people have speculated that his actions were not the result of intoxication, but a complete disdain for his opponent's choice of opening and resultant position.

The Fruits of being on top!

2007-01-12T01:14:00.000-08:00

2004 Canadian Chess champion Pascal Charbonneau cops a feel of Ontario chess association president Barry Thorvardson's ass as he prepares to defend his title.

Thorvardson seems surprised, yet not displeased!