The Chess Mind

By Dennis Monokroussos.
This is a blog for chess fans by a chess fan, one who loves the beauty of the game and wants to share it with those who are like-minded.
Yet the chess mind is not only a chess mind, and other topics, such as philosophy, may appear from time to time. All material copyrighted.
Mexico City, Round 3: Titans draw, Morozevich wins
Even though the game lasted 65 moves, Anand-Kramnik was the first game to finish, ending well before the first time control was completed. Anand prepared an unusual continuation in the current main line of the Petroff, but Kramnik proved the better prepared player. The players reached a rook ending with three pawns apiece on the kingside, but with Black enjoying an extra pawn on the a-file. Kramnik gave it a good go, but after Anand's accurate 39.h4! the ending is demonstrably drawn.

The next game to finish was a draw between Grischuk and Aronian. Grischuk had a kingside initiative, but Aronian was fine until his 27th move. That was a blunder, but but Grischuk didn't see it. No matter: they repeated moves, and Grischuk missed it a second time. Fortunately for Aronian, he was able to declare a three-time repetition before Grischuk could have a third chance to find the win.

Morozevich-Svidler concluded a few moments later, and this was a win for White. Morozevich played an unusual line of the Scotch (I think whenever Morozevich is involved, we can use the template "Morozevich played an unusual line of..."), and Svidler enjoyed a pretty healthy advantage right away. Unfortunately for Svidler, he didn't seem to understand what was going on as well as Morozevich, and from a clear advantage on move 12 he was lost by move 21. The game went to move 37, but without any drama at all: Morozevich's play was forceful and accurate, and Svidler was crushed.

Finally, there was the perplexing (to me) game between Leko and Gelfand, another 5.Nc3 Petroff. (I wonder if Gelfand is offended by having this garbage line used twice against him, especially when Anand played the main line against Kramnik.) It seemed that Leko had a clear advantage, but he conducted the game as if the position was equal or even in Gelfand's favor. Eventually, that's just what happened: equality by the end of the first time control, and after 23 minutes' though from Leko, a clear extra pawn and serious winning chances in a queen ending. Gelfand tried (and tried, and tried, and tried) to win it, but after 100 moves the game was duly, and dully, agreed drawn.

Standings after Round 3:

1-2. Kramnik, Anand 2
3-6. Morozevich, Grischuk, Gelfand, Leko 1.5
7-8. Svidler, Aronian 1

Games here.
Posted by Dennis Monokroussos on Saturday September 15, 2007 at 10:14pm
Joshua Green (mail) (www):
In your analysis of Anand-Kramnik, you sort of reference another game that could have been saved by a similar stalemate resource.  The game you're thinking of is Chigorin - Tarrasch, Ostend 1905, which I found in Müller & Lamprecht's excellent Secrets of Pawn Endgames.
9.16.2007 3:05am
Jo C (mail):
Hello there,

Moro vs Svidler was a bit of a puzzle. You also picked out Black's move 18...Qh6 as a mystery. First I thought it might be an inbetween move of sorts, on the way to Qd6.

Then he started a clumsy manoeuver to try and swap Queens, which Moro duly (and not dully :-) rejected. Thank goodness.

I reckon that is where Black lost the plot.

BTW, have you any idea why in round 2 against Kramnik, Moro totally messed up his time handling? I would have loved to see that game continue from the point before Moro's time scramble started. Is he often that careless with the minutes?
9.16.2007 4:48am
Alex Herrera:
Why don't the top dogs do what so many amateurs do against the Petroff, 1.e4 e4 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Nc3
White can prepare deeply for the 4 knights or maybe some transpositions into the Scotch, and Black can't use his Petroff prep. This seems to make a lot of sense against Kramnik and/or Gelfand.
9.16.2007 9:37am
Dennis Monokroussos:
Re Tarrasch-Chigorin, I knew, but after three hours of that queen ending I didn't feel like looking it up. For the sake of other readers, thank you, Joshua, for providing them with the link. And you're right about the Müller &Lamprecht book, which is easily the best volume ever written on king and pawn endings. (Their Fundamental Chess Endings is also a great work, and Müller's endgame columns on the Chess Cafe website are terrific too.)

Jo C: I didn't claim 18...Qh6 was a mystery; I claimed it was dubious! The '?!' sign doesn't (necessarily) indicate a lack of understanding about the move, but that the move is in some way not fully up to snuff.

Alex: I suppose the answer to your question is that they don't only want to avoid the opponent's (deepest) preparation, they also want to have some winning chances! Every now and again there's a new, small twist in the Four Knights with 4.Bb5, and every now and again it shows up in elite games, but Black is always pretty quick to find equalizers there. It doesn't hurt to look, but I doubt there's too much there, and certainly not more than a one-off idea. As for the Scotch Four Knights, there's just nothing there: the structures are very easy for Black to handle.
9.16.2007 12:23pm