A vintage year.

by Jonathan Tisdall (Twitter: @GMjtis)

We’ve been spoilt with top quality and drama in this chess year so far, at least it seems that way to me. 2017 has rocketed by, and this is a good time to take stock, as we hurtle past the always riveting Sinquefield Cup, and prepare for the most exciting FIDE World Cup ever. Yes, I said ever, and I don’t even expect to get much argument about that superlative. For the first time a reigning world champion is taking part, and this was so unexpected that the organizers hadn’t even considered the possibility when preparing their pre-event information. But first, the buildup.

2017 – The Year of not-Carlsen

Things have not been great for the undisputed champ and number one this year. There have been signs of his frightening, nearly superhuman potential in the faster disciplines, but 2017 has been noteworthy as a year free of classic tournament victories for the Norwegian. Debate points are predictable: Is he in crisis? Is it temporary? Is he jaded? Distracted? Over the hill, even?

I still stick to my stance that he is simmering, and in the process of becoming stronger than ever. The longer this last bit fails to appear, the harder this is to argue, but the idea goes like this.

Magnus appears just as determined and motivated as ever. (I think I have seen this with my own eyes.) He has been broadening and sharpening his opening repertoire for some time, answering a main critique against his style. His rapid and blitz form show signs of domination I associate with the alpha champions Fischer and Kasparov. His classical form has become peppered with odd errors – relatively crass blunders, and fumbling in the kind of technical positions that were his greatest strength. This last item is most significant to me.

Players don’t forget how to do the things they do best. This sudden storm of atypical bumbling is very commonly seen when a player is concentrating hard on other aspects of their game. You see this often in young players just before a sudden leap in strength. So I am expecting the same from Carlsen. It might just take some kind of focal event. A new challenge. Something like … the knockout format of the World Cup?

One other possible factor in the Carlsen doldrums – perhaps everyone else is just getting better. The rating gap between Magnus and his rivals may be shrinking largely through his own lull in form, but breaking the 2800 barrier is becoming an increasingly popular sport. Will having more guys near him make it easier to eventually start earning major Elo points again, or does it mean that dominant results are a thing of the past?

Nearly Carlsen

The champion’s result at Sinquefield was finally better than his expected rating performance. His ability to squeeze and conjure dynamic advantages from nothing was back, but … tournament victory was decided in a blunderful encounter that summed up the arguments above. In what would prove to be the pivotal game of the event, Magnus did his old trick of magicking up a crushing position, only to throw the entire point away to Vachier-LaGrave with his new trick of erring on the verge of victory. To his credit, he managed to shrug this off with a successful ‘rage win’ the next day, unsettling an out of form So by taking manic risks with black, and put pressure on MVL by beating rival Levon Aronian in the final round. This last game was an important statement, with Levon’s steady and majestic return to the world number two spot having included a series of wins over Magnus.

Shaken?

There was one subtle moment in St. Louis that did make me wonder if perhaps the harrowing defence of his title in New York may have put a lasting dent in Carlsen’s psychological armor, though. After the MVL-So sequence of decisive games, Magnus said something in an interview about these results balancing each other out. Chessplayers often do this kind of abstract math when seeking mental calm after particularly turbulent results, but I had several problems with this equation coming from the champ. Did he mean he should have beaten MVL and lost to So? Or did he see both games as likely draws, but which had included unnecessary swings? But most of all, the comment seemed out of place for the maximalist Carlsen that was pushing the heights of 2900 a few years ago. Wasn’t it really ‘normal’ for him to create something from nothing, as he did against MVL and then cash in, and take big risks with black and succeed against Wesley? I really wonder if the 2014 version of Carlsen would have seen two games with chances for him as ‘balancing out’ at 1-1, no matter the adventures involved.

[Event "5th Sinquefield Cup 2017"] [Site "Saint Louis USA"] [Date "2017.08.05"] [Round "4"] [White "Carlsen, M."] [Black "Vachier Lagrave, M."] [Result "0-1"] [ECO "A34"] [WhiteElo "2822"] [BlackElo "2791"] [Annotator "jt"] [PlyCount "142"] [EventDate "2017.08.02"] [EventType "tourn"] [EventRounds "9"] [EventCountry "USA"] [EventCategory "22"] 1. Nf3 Nf6 2. c4 c5 3. Nc3 d5 4. cxd5 Nxd5 5. e3 Nxc3 6. dxc3 Qxd1+ 7. Kxd1 Bf5 8. Nd2 {Carlsen’s opening choice recalls the philosophy of a great Scandinavian predecessor, Ulf Andersson, who delighted in protracted lessons in the art of subtle torture. White will play e4, preparing a shelter on c2 for his king, expand a bit on the flanks, and just play and play.} Nc6 9. e4 Bg6 10. Bb5 Rc8 11. h4 h5 12. Re1 e6 13. a4 Be7 14. g3 O-O 15. a5 {Engines aren’t terribly impressed by White’s plan but I don’t think this matters. This is very much close human combat, and this expansion creates perforations in the black queenside that will be a long-term distraction.} Rfd8 16. a6 b6 17. Kc2 Ne5 18. f4 Ng4 19. Kb3 f6 20. Nc4 Nf2 21. e5 Ne4 22. Be3 Bf5 23. Rg1 Rd5 24. Rae1 Kf7 25. Bc1 {White is finally fully coordinated and even if the position remains roughly balanced, a Black plan is hard to find.} Bh7 26. Re3 ( 26. g4 $5 {would sharpen and clarify play, but Carlsen prefers to keep the tension – and the pressure – since his position has more ideas.}) 26... Rcd8 $5 {With very dynamic defence in mind.} 27. Bc6 Nf2 {Black wants to lose the exchange for a mobile pawn mass and a monstrous grip on the light squares – a transaction White will not really consider. A materialistic course loses nicely:} (27... Rd1 28. Rxd1 Rxd1 29. Bxe4 Bxe4 30. Rxe4 Rxc1 (30... f5 31. Kc2 $1 Rxc1+ 32. Kxc1 fxe4 33. Nxb6) 31. Nxb6 $1 axb6 32. Ra4 b5 33. a7 bxa4+ 34. Kc4 {and White wins.}) 28. Re2 (28. Bxd5 $2 exd5 {would be begging for trouble. Black’s bishops come to life, d3 is a massive outpost and White’s forces will be passive and uncoordinated.}) 28... Nd3 29. exf6 gxf6 30. Bb5 Rg8 31. Bd2 Rgd8 32. Be3 Be4 33. Rd2 Rg8 34. Ka4 Rgd8 35. Kb3 Rg8 36. Ka2 f5 37. Rh2 Rc8 38. Rd2 Rg8 39. Re2 $2 {This jockeying phase seems marked by time pressure – the players miss the sudden possibility of} Bf3 $2 (39... Bxh4 {since} 40. gxh4 {is impossible:} Rxg1 41. Bxg1 Nc1+) 40. Rh2 Bf6 41. Nd2 {With time control passed, the game resumes, and Carlsen has managed an advantage since Black’s light-squared bishop is unhappy.} Bg4 42. Rf1 {Keeping the Bg4 offside when the Nd2 returns to more active play.} Rgd8 43. Nc4 {Suddenly Black’s position is terribly difficult – Bc6 is a recurring threat, and there are ideas of Rd2 and Kb1-c2 embarrassing the Nd3 if black isn’t doubled on the d-file. MVL decides to hit the eject button.} e5 44. fxe5 Bxe5 $5 45. Bg5 Bxg3 46. Rg2 $2 { A surprising error. After} (46. Rd2 {Black’s pieces are horribly placed and a very straightforward idea is something like} Rb8 (46... Rc8 47. Nxb6 $1 axb6 48. Bc4 $1) 47. Ne3 Nb4+ 48. cxb4 Rxd2 49. Nxg4 {and White wins.}) 46... Bh3 47. Rxg3 Bxf1 48. Rf3 $4 (48. Bxd8 Rxd8 49. Rf3 Be2 50. Rxf5+ {is about equal.} ) 48... Be2 49. Bxd8 Bxf3 $1 (49... Rxd8 50. Rxf5+ Kg6 {transposes into the previous line, but MVL has calculated precisely and goes for more.}) 50. Bxb6 axb6 51. Bc6 Be4 $1 52. a7 Rd8 53. Nd6+ Rxd6 $1 54. Bxe4 (54. a8=Q Rxc6 { is not a more attractive transaction.}) 54... Rd8 55. a8=Q Rxa8+ 56. Bxa8 Ne5 { This ending is hopeless for White.} 57. Kb3 f4 58. Kc2 (58. Ka4 {is no better; For example} f3 59. Kb5 Ke6 $5 (59... c4 60. Kxb6 Ke6 {also wins.}) 60. Kxb6 f2 61. Bg2 Nc4+ 62. Kxc5 Ne3 63. Bh3+ Ke5 64. b4 Kf4 65. b5 Kg3) 58... Kg7 59. Kd2 Ng6 60. Kd3 Nxh4 61. Ke4 f3 62. Ke3 Kf6 63. b4 c4 64. Bd5 Kf5 65. Bxc4 Kg4 66. Kf2 Ng6 67. Be6+ Kf4 68. Bf7 Ne5 69. Bxh5 Nd3+ 70. Kf1 Kg3 71. Bf7 Nf2 (71... Nf2 72. Bc4 Ne4 73. Ke1 f2+ 74. Kd1 Nxc3+ 75. Kd2 Nd5 76. b5 Kh2) 0-1 You must activate JavaScript to enhance chess game visualization.

Annotating games?

In my day – those days known as olden – annotating games was one of the key ways to build your chess character – and strength. It was something that took ages, as much time and effort as you were willing to invest. It taught you about the hidden depths in positions, it put you on public record. Your work was scrutinized by your peers and betters. It could provoke fascinating discussions that could go on for months or more, as ever more people delved deeper and more inventively into a game’s mysteries.

Now, anyone can just flick on their engine of choice, and they’re an expert. A guru even. I often wonder about the point of annotating games at all in the age of engines, except to argue about hardware and cores and such. Today’s superhumans reveal just how much they need to prepare, remember and calculate – which is fascinating – but how does the engine-armed public digest this, when they can so easily think they know even better, and are gradually forgetting how to think for themselves?

To me, there are still a few useful angles to tackle, and they all relate to not using engines: examining critical moments; pointing out the natural human considerations; and discussing why people tend to think the way they do. I assume that readers in general want to improve, and to beat their fellow humans. Who else is there for us to beat?

With this in mind, and with the proliferation of excellent sites, commentators, and video reporters, my ‘coverage’ of events will try to fill the philosophical and psychological gaps in the market. I’ll check my actual variations with engines, but try to come at the games and events from unusual angles, and keep the human aspects central. They will be the key factors, at least until the singularity.

Speaking of cyborgs

Which is not to say that I totally hate the intervention of engines. It’s fascinating to try and gauge the way they are changing the frontiers of the game. I don’t want to go into too much detail all at once about my theories of the different ways there are of working with engines, and how various top players tackle this differently, but I will say that I have a feeling that Aronian’s recent surge back to his familiar spot right behind the world champion on the rating list is because he’s the best cyborg. Hear me out.

First, a graphic demonstration of the level of current opening preparation, which reflects the man-machine fusion. The following game was played without real hesitation by White, though Karjakin took ages starting around move 26. From the comments of other elite players it became quite clear that this position – or game – was an open secret to them. That is, the line is so topical that they had all worked it out with their engine/team, and were expecting a draw with correct play. Sergey eventually explained that he was thinking only due to his shaky recall.

[Event "5th Sinquefield Cup 2017"] [Site "Saint Louis USA"] [Date "2017.08.09"] [Round "7.1"] [White "Vachier Lagrave, M."] [Black "Karjakin, Sergey"] [Result "1/2-1/2"] [ECO "C67"] [WhiteElo "2791"] [BlackElo "2773"] [Annotator "jt"] [PlyCount "90"] [EventDate "2017.08.02"] [EventType "tourn"] [EventRounds "9"] [EventCountry "USA"] [EventCategory "22"] 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 Nf6 4. O-O Nxe4 5. d4 Nd6 6. Bxc6 dxc6 7. dxe5 Nf5 8. Qxd8+ Kxd8 9. h3 Ke8 10. Nc3 h5 11. Bf4 Be7 12. Rad1 Be6 13. Ng5 Rh6 14. Rfe1 Bb4 15. g4 hxg4 16. hxg4 Ne7 17. Nxe6 Rxe6 18. Kg2 Bxc3 19. bxc3 Rd8 20. Rxd8+ Kxd8 21. Rh1 Nd5 22. Bg3 Rh6 23. Rxh6 gxh6 24. Kh3 Nxc3 25. Kh4 Nxa2 26. Kh5 {About here Karjakin finally sank into thought. The masses wondered what was going on – White was clearly hurling out preparation, but the engines to hand all seemed to prefer Black a bit now.} Nc3 27. Kxh6 a5 28. f4 a4 29. f5 { The a-pawn seems fastest – and is – but Black still needs to take some care. White’s e6 break will clear the way for his own pawn promotion, which will be dangerous even if slower.} Ke8 30. g5 a3 31. e6 a2 32. Kg7 fxe6 33. f6 a1=Q 34. f7+ Kd7 35. Be5 Qa5 36. Bf6 Qc5 37. f8=Q Qxf8+ 38. Kxf8 Ne4 {Eliminating the g-pawn, and all danger. See Karjakin’s tweet.} 39. Kf7 Nxg5+ 40. Bxg5 Kd6 41. Kf6 e5 42. Kf5 Kd5 43. Bd8 Kd4 44. Bxc7 Kc3 45. Kxe5 Kxc2 1/2-1/2 You must activate JavaScript to enhance chess game visualization.

I have checked my notes. I knew everything till 38…Ne4. But had to spend about 2 hours to remember :D! — Sergey Karjakin (@SergeyKaryakin) August 9, 2017



Karjakin on his opening prep vs MVL, after a memory refresher.

I’m not going to digress about how terrifying and depressing I find this. I may be grizzled, but I accept that this is where time and technology have taken us. What interests me instead is how different players approach this. Carlsen is clearly capable of taking part in this particular arms race, but prefers quiet alleys and hand-to-hand combat. His wins at Sinquefield were excellent examples of him achieving this again. MVL strikes me as a player with a scientific approach, who likes to explore his preferred openings profoundly with his mechanical assistant, collecting solutions. Caruana at his best – the brilliancy against Nakamura in the appendix below – seems to wield the engine, steering it into places it might not want to go at first, using it in conjunction with his intuition and hunting for well-hidden gold.

Watching Levon Aronian’s comeback, there have been several moments when his openings appear to me to be the result of a fully harmonic man-machine collaboration. Levon looks to have a large bag of tailor-made weapons. Running them through an engine doesn’t seem to produce an objective advantage. But the positions they reach are pure Aronian, sharp and baffling. He aims to get the advantages of comfort and surprise, while exposing his adversary to danger. I may be crazy, but this looks like real fusion, using enhanced intelligence not for sheer number-crunching, but to achieve very human aims and advantages. So – Levon is the best cyborg.

[Event "5th Sinquefield Cup 2017"] [Site "Saint Louis USA"] [Date "2017.08.02"] [Round "1.3"] [White "Aronian, L."] [Black "Nepomniachtchi, I."] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "A34"] [WhiteElo "2809"] [BlackElo "2742"] [Annotator "jt"] [PlyCount "57"] [EventDate "2017.08.02"] [EventType "tourn"] [EventRounds "9"] [EventCountry "USA"] [EventCategory "22"] 1. Nf3 Nf6 2. c4 c5 3. Nc3 d5 4. cxd5 Nxd5 5. e3 Nxc3 6. bxc3 g6 7. h4 Bg7 8. h5 Nc6 9. Ba3 {Later in the event Levon deviated first, which hints that surprise rather than objective strength was behind the opening success here. He might have been just playing it safe down the stretch though…} (9. Be2 Bf5 10. Qb3 b6 11. Ng5 e6 12. f4 h6 13. Qa4 Rc8 14. Ne4 g5 15. Bb5 Qd5 16. Nf2 Qd6 17. Ne4 Qd5 18. Nf2 Qd6 19. Ne4 {1/2-1/2 (19) Aronian,L (2809)-Svidler,P (2749) Saint Louis USA 2017}) 9... Qa5 {I assume that when preparing for this opening you calculate/examine moves like} 10. Rh4 $5 (10. Qb3 {first. Levon launches a fun rocket. It’s difficult to say when and if the engine fully agrees on this. But I see him and his engine with their arms slung over each other’s shoulder, just having a chat about how entertaining and confusing the game choice would be. They seem to understand each other. ‘Nepo’ is hardly a guy to be put off by bizarre complications, but he becomes quickly unglued. I am going to leave the details for you to study, hopefully without an engine first. I am just presenting this game as evidence for my odd theory of Aronian’s rather unique opening philosophy.}) 10... Bd7 11. Qb3 O-O 12. hxg6 hxg6 13. Qxb7 Rfd8 14. Qa6 Bxc3 15. Qxa5 Bxa5 16. Bxc5 Be6 17. Bb5 Ne5 18. Nd4 Rd5 19. Bxe7 Kg7 20. f4 Nd7 21. f5 Bxf5 22. Bc6 Re5 23. Nxf5+ gxf5 24. Bg5 Kg6 25. Bf4 Rd8 26. Bxd7 Rc5 27. Rh6+ Kg7 28. Rd6 Bc7 29. Rc6 1-0 You must activate JavaScript to enhance chess game visualization.

Another example comes to mind, where the opening idea could easily be forgotten due to the romantic violence of the game itself.

[Event "5th Norway Chess 2017"] [Site "Stavanger NOR"] [Date "2017.06.10"] [Round "4.2"] [White "Aronian, L."] [Black "Carlsen, M."] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "D45"] [WhiteElo "2793"] [BlackElo "2832"] [Annotator "jt"] [PlyCount "69"] [EventDate "2017.06.06"] [EventType "tourn"] [EventRounds "9"] [EventCountry "NOR"] [EventCategory "22"] 1. d4 d5 2. c4 c6 3. Nf3 Nf6 4. Nc3 e6 5. e3 a6 6. b3 Bb4 7. Bd2 Nbd7 8. Bd3 O-O 9. O-O Qe7 10. Bc2 Rd8 11. a3 $5 {A very bold idea that proves too tempting for the world champion to resist. Here again a lot of processing power does not necessarily lead to clear or easy conclusions. It strikes me as another example of a stylistic concept – an idea that very much suits the player, and where an engine does not provide more than encouragement.} Bxa3 12. Rxa3 Qxa3 13. c5 b6 14. b4 Ne4 15. Nxe4 dxe4 16. Bxe4 Rb8 17. Bxh7+ Kxh7 18. Ng5+ Kg8 19. Qh5 Nf6 20. Qxf7+ Kh8 21. Qc7 Bd7 22. Nf7+ Kh7 23. Nxd8 Rc8 24. Qxb6 Nd5 25. Qa7 Rxd8 26. e4 Qd3 27. exd5 Qxd2 28. Qc7 Qg5 29. dxc6 Bc8 30. h3 Qd5 31. Rd1 e5 32. Rd3 exd4 33. Qe7 Bf5 34. Rg3 Bg6 35. Qh4+ 1-0 You must activate JavaScript to enhance chess game visualization.

Kasparov’s ‘comeback’

No wrap-up of recent events can omit a few thoughts about the very temporary return of a great champion. How I wish we could see more of Kasparov; but the effort required for the modern game strains even the young. I was hoping for a bit more from Garry, if I had a real gripe it was that he seemed surprisingly respectful. Or perhaps sensibly respectful. His rust showed in a lack of speed but his class showed as he visibly improved day by day. The final day of the blitz gave grounds to argue that it would be fascinating to see him extend his comeback for a while.

I saw a complaint or two in the twitterverse that Kasparov’s lackluster result had tarnished his legacy. I don’t see this at all – this was hardly a serious comeback and there were clear signs that his strength even now could be restored to a very, very high level. The guy’s old and rusty after all, and the game has changed. But I think I understand the background to the complaint. It can come from a place of deep respect, and it reminds me of something I learned about chess lovers, and the heroes of yore.

I had a regular correspondence (paper and envelopes, kids) late in the life of the greatest Dane, Bent Larsen, after he had moved to Argentina. His health had prevented him from competing in tournaments for years. We had a written conversation where I mentioned that I’d seen Taimanov in a few events and was a bit saddened – meaning that it hurt a bit to see age reducing such a player’s level so much. Larsen just couldn’t understand what I meant, and asked me if Taimanov was ill, and it took a few letters back and forth before it dawned on me that for this breed – Smyslov, Taimanov, Larsen, etc. – there was simply no greater joy than playing. Larsen couldn’t even comprehend any regrets attached. The latter two didn’t even have their zeal dampened by being scarred for history by a merciless Fischer. Lesson learned; the love of the game is the only consideration for those who truly love it.

The World Cup – no predictions

After watching one of my picks for each recent major event combust and drift away as a cloud of ash, I will not be making any bold predictions for the World Cup. I know it’s irrational, but the stakes are too high to see how strong my jinx game is. But there are a few things I can’t help mulling over as the event draws near.

The champ

It is hard for me to avoid a disclaimer of pro-Carlsen bias when the guy has been on my club team as a kid, is a national hero where I live and is, in my view, the greatest positive force for the global popularization of the game ever. Having said that, nothing prevents me from having massive respect and admiration for many other players. And trying earnestly to reveal and discuss potential Carlsen weak spots can be both an interesting and useful pursuit. An honest attempt at constructive criticism or analysis doesn’t mean negativity or disrespect – about anybody.

With that out of the way, what is up with the champ and his plunge into the World Cup, with its crazy, haphazard knock-out dangers? Perhaps the most controversial thing Magnus has ever opined is a belief that this apparently random system is the best way to actually determine the world title. He likes the more wide-open field, rather than the very closed elite system that dominates top events, and feels this is more fair by nature. I assume he also likes the fact that all speeds – classic, rapid and blitz – are involved, and that it tests more facets of a player’s strength. In a few weeks time, we’ll see if he also enjoys the frightening randomness of two-game matches, and the incredibly high price that a single error can command.

I don’t see the point in making predictions about Carlsen. His record and his ratings make him the favorite, in everything, always. So what are the factors to weigh and watch?

Is taking part a good decision by Carlsen?

I’ve already hinted that I think it is an inspired choice. It is not as though he is actually putting anything on the line. Not only can he scramble the plans of potential challengers here seeking to secure a candidates spot in the classic title cycle, he can add another world title to his collection, and at this point in his career, all methods of inspiration are valuable. Barring some sort of horrible embarrassment, he has very much to gain. And being the favorite and ‘needing’ to win – well, that is the pressure he has been living with every time he plays.

That Karjakin fellow

Everyone is on about Carlsen’s shock decision to play and how he can affect his eventual title challenger, but I haven’t heard so much talk about there being another guy who can influence the championship cycle with the advantage of easier nerves – previous challenger Sergey Karjakin. He’s safely qualified for the candidates, and can try to damage the hopes of a dangerous rival or two along the way. When having fun poring over the possible routes and clashes that the tournament tree contains, special attention should be paid to the players directly in the way of these two.

There are few things chessplayers like more than scrutinizing rating lists and knockout tables. Here are a few more things to consider after working out how many potential candidates can have their ambitions ruined by Carlsen or Karjakin.

Thoughts for the World Cup

Nothing seems more popular these days than arguing, especially via the internet. There is never a shortage of topics, but if you run low, here are some suggestions. For civilized discussion. Is Aronian, who has been criticized for choking on the biggest occasions, finally becoming ‘best when it counts’? Is it now or never for the swashbuckling world number two?

I picked MVL to surge at Sinquefield on very simple grounds – the top players don’t stay down for long, and it was about his turn for a new success. So, is Nakamura highest on the ‘most due for success’ scale now? It has been a while. Or is he distracted these days with things like finance? Compatriot Caruana – how ‘due’ is he? Does his chance to qualify directly for the candidates by rating calm his nerves or dull his focus?

Never forget the champs, veterans and KO specialists: Anand, Kramnik, Svidler… Adams?

Darkish horses: The Chinese ‘quarter’ (the contingent is bunched up in the same part of the table); Giri; Shakh Mamedyarov?

I know I left out several major names here, they are only safer from potential jinxing. I can’t wait for this one to begin. Let’s talk about this, soon.

*****

Appendix:

[Event "8th London Classic 2016"] [Site "London ENG"] [Date "2016.12.15"] [Round "6.3"] [White "Caruana, F."] [Black "Nakamura, Hi"] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "B96"] [WhiteElo "2823"] [BlackElo "2779"] [Annotator "jt"] [PlyCount "63"] [EventDate "2016.12.09"] [EventType "tourn"] [EventRounds "9"] [EventCountry "ENG"] [EventCategory "22"] [SourceTitle "The Week in Chess 1154"] [Source "Mark Crowther"] [SourceDate "2016.12.19"] 1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 a6 6. Bg5 e6 7. f4 h6 8. Bh4 Qb6 9. a3 Be7 10. Bf2 Qc7 11. Qf3 Nbd7 12. O-O-O b5 13. g4 g5 14. h4 gxf4 15. Be2 b4 16. axb4 Ne5 17. Qxf4 Nexg4 18. Bxg4 e5 19. Qxf6 Bxf6 20. Nd5 Qd8 21. Nf5 {Overwhelming positional compensation for the queen. Both players would clearly have investigated this in cyborg fashion; here White nudged and guided his friend further.} Rb8 22. Nxf6+ Qxf6 23. Rxd6 Be6 24. Rhd1 O-O 25. h5 Qg5+ 26. Be3 Qf6 27. Nxh6+ Kh8 28. Bf5 Qe7 29. b5 Qe8 30. Nxf7+ Rxf7 31. Rxe6 Qxb5 32. Rh6+ 1-0 You must activate JavaScript to enhance chess game visualization.

[Event "5th Sinquefield Cup 2017"] [Site "Saint Louis USA"] [Date "2017.08.06"] [Round "5.3"] [White "So, W."] [Black "Carlsen, M."] [Result "0-1"] [ECO "C45"] [WhiteElo "2810"] [BlackElo "2822"] [PlyCount "58"] [EventDate "2017.08.02"] [EventType "tourn"] [EventRounds "9"] [EventCountry "USA"] [EventCategory "22"] [SourceTitle "The Week in Chess 1187"] [Source "Mark Crowther"] [SourceDate "2017.08.07"] 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. d4 exd4 4. Nxd4 Bb4+ 5. c3 Be7 6. Nxc6 bxc6 7. Bd3 d6 8. O-O Nf6 9. Re1 O-O 10. Nd2 Re8 11. Nf3 Nd7 12. Bf4 Nc5 13. Bc2 Bg4 14. h3 Bh5 15. Be3 Nd7 16. Ba4 c5 17. g4 Bg6 18. e5 Rb8 19. Bf4 Rxb2 20. exd6 Bxd6 21. Rxe8+ Qxe8 22. Bxd6 cxd6 23. Qxd6 Qe2 24. Qg3 Nf8 25. Re1 Rb1 26. Rxb1 Bxb1 27. Bc6 Bxa2 28. Qd6 Qc4 29. Ne5 Qxc3 0-1 You must activate JavaScript to enhance chess game visualization.

[Event "5th Sinquefield Cup 2017"] [Site "Saint Louis USA"] [Date "2017.08.03"] [Round "2.1"] [White "Carlsen, M."] [Black "Karjakin, Sergey"] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "A05"] [WhiteElo "2822"] [BlackElo "2773"] [PlyCount "83"] [EventDate "2017.08.02"] [EventType "tourn"] [EventRounds "9"] [EventCountry "USA"] [EventCategory "22"] [SourceTitle "The Week in Chess 1187"] [Source "Mark Crowther"] [SourceDate "2017.08.07"] 1. Nf3 Nf6 2. g3 c5 3. Bg2 Nc6 4. O-O e5 5. e4 d6 6. d3 g6 7. a3 Bg7 8. c3 O-O 9. b4 a6 10. Nbd2 b5 11. Rb1 Nd7 12. Nb3 cxb4 13. axb4 Nb6 14. Be3 Be6 15. Qd2 Rc8 16. Rfc1 Re8 17. h4 Na4 18. c4 h5 19. Kh2 Bg4 20. cxb5 axb5 21. Na5 Nd4 22. Rxc8 Qxc8 23. Rc1 Qd7 24. Nxd4 exd4 25. Bh6 Bh8 26. Rc6 Nc3 27. f3 Be6 28. Bf4 Be5 29. Bxe5 dxe5 30. f4 Qe7 31. Rc5 Rc8 32. Rxc8+ Bxc8 33. Nc6 Qd6 34. Nxe5 Qxb4 35. f5 Qd6 36. Nf3 gxf5 37. Qg5+ Kh7 38. e5 Qg6 39. Qd8 Be6 40. Ng5+ Kg7 41. Qxd4 Na4 42. Nh3 1-0 You must activate JavaScript to enhance chess game visualization.

[Event "Saint Louis Blitz 2017"] [Site "Saint Louis USA"] [Date "2017.08.18"] [Round "13.4"] [White "Kasparov, G."] [Black "Nakamura, Hi"] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "E32"] [WhiteElo "2812"] [BlackElo "2792"] [PlyCount "87"] [EventDate "2017.08.17"] [EventType "tourn (blitz)"] [EventRounds "18"] [EventCountry "USA"] [EventCategory "21"] [SourceTitle "The Week in Chess 1189"] [Source "Mark Crowther"] [SourceDate "2017.08.21"] 1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 Bb4 4. Qc2 O-O 5. a3 Bxc3+ 6. Qxc3 d5 7. Nf3 dxc4 8. Qxc4 b6 9. h4 c5 10. dxc5 bxc5 11. h5 h6 12. g4 Qd5 13. Qxd5 Nxd5 14. g5 hxg5 15. Bxg5 f6 16. Bd2 Nc6 17. Rc1 Nd4 18. Rxc5 Nxf3+ 19. exf3 Bd7 20. Rh4 Rfb8 21. b4 a6 22. Rd4 Bb5 23. Bg2 Re8 24. f4 f5 25. Bf3 Kh7 26. Bc3 Re7 27. Kd2 Rd8 28. Bxd5 exd5 29. Rdxd5 Rxd5+ 30. Rxd5 Rd7 31. Rxd7 Bxd7 32. Ke3 g6 33. h6 Kxh6 34. Kd4 Kh5 35. Kc5 Kg4 36. Bd2 Kf3 37. Kb6 Bb5 38. a4 Bf1 39. b5 axb5 40. axb5 Kxf2 41. Kc6 Ke2 42. Bc1 Kd1 43. Ba3 Kd2 44. Be7 1-0 You must activate JavaScript to enhance chess game visualization.

(Besøkt 4 946 ganger, 1 besøk i dag)