English Chess Forum

Nick Ivell wrote: ↑

Sun Nov 28, 2021 6:02 pm

Nigel was completely outclassed in those anti-Marshalls. Kasparov simply understood those positions better.

True but slightly misleading, as Kasparov went wrong near the end of Game 1, and Nigel could have adjourned with a significant advantage but unfortunately failed to make move 40 in time.

It's still perhaps a matter of style as to whether to provoke an anti-Marshall by playing .. 0-0 before .. d6 even if there's no intention of playing it. These days though, such is the popularity of lines with an early d3 that an a4 anti-Marshall or something very similar is always on the cards. Having lost a game yesterday in an anti-Marshall to the Nb1-d2-f1-g3-f5 plan, i was pleased to see a demonstration by Carlsen on how to rid yourself of the f5 Knight. Namely instead of wandering off to the Queen side with the normal .. Na5, you make space on e7 by playing .. Re8 and .. Bf8 so as to have .. Ne7 challenging a Knight on f5 or d5. Also you play .. h6. So did Short when Kasparov produced that memorable plan of Nf3-h4-g6xf8

Tim Harding wrote: ↑

Sun Nov 28, 2021 11:21 pm

Nick Ivell wrote: ↑

Sun Nov 28, 2021 6:02 pm

Nigel was completely outclassed in those anti-Marshalls. Kasparov simply understood those positions better.

True but slightly misleading, as Kasparov went wrong near the end of Game 1, and Nigel could have adjourned with a significant advantage but unfortunately failed to make move 40 in time.

Adjournments were at move 60 in that match. With the result there were none at all.

Chess is about the pursuit of perfection. It's not a circus. Latest Kingston blog.
https://kingstonchess.com/2021/11/29/th ... mpionship/

Although I think your blog is about a bit more than that, competitive (human) chess ceased to become about the pursuit of perfection a long time ago. There are good arguments against speeding up world championship matches in search of decisive results and “excitement” but the search for perfection is not one of them, in my opinion.

In fact at the highest level chess is often explicitly not about seeking out the best moves (at least in the early stages). It is far more about psychology, seeking out positions where one player is comfortable and the other isn’t, and preparation often involves seeking out notionally “inferior” opening lines which are less likely to have been analysed by the opponent in detail.

But speeding up time controls too much focuses on certain aspects of chess to the exclusion of others. Of course there’s a place for all of them in the right circumstances.

I didn't think they were under attack. I thought the consensus was that they went out of book early on each game and it was game on. The result of the second game in particular wasn't clear for most of the game. I heard a few questions in the post-match interviews about the results but not enough to say they were under attack -well that's what it sounded like to me anyway.

Y u avoid the Marshall? It loses a pawn

MJMcCready wrote: ↑

Mon Nov 29, 2021 7:02 pm

I thought the consensus was that they went out of book early on each game and it was game on.

At that level, they write their own books. In game 1, what looks like a beginner's pawn blunder by leaving the e pawn undefended was seemingly known by both players as well as others in the elite. Has it ever been published?

No I doubt it and therein lies a problem of the modern game, determining when they are and aren't in book when a spectator -very difficult to now these days.

No, I'd say the opposite - it's becoming less of a problem with the modern game, because of the ubiquity of chess databases.

Roger de Coverly wrote: ↑

Mon Nov 29, 2021 7:50 pm

At that level, they write their own books. In game 1, what looks like a beginner's pawn blunder by leaving
the e-pawn undefended was seemingly known by both players as well as others in the elite. Has it ever been published?

Hi Roger,

The first time 8.h3 Na5 was played, that I know of, was in Kalod- Bezgodov, Pardubice 1996.
White actually fell into a pitfall that was similar to one that appeared in Game one.

Nepomniachtchi - Carlsen Game one.

r4rk1/1bp2ppp/p2b1n2/1p1qN3/8/1P1P1Q1P/1PP2PP1/RNB1R1K1 w - - 2 14

If 14 Nc3 then 14...Qxe5. White played 14.Kf1 which holds the Rook.

Can you imagine the outcry if Nepomniachtchi had played 14.Nc3 in game one of a world title match.
Some people still go on about Fischer's game one 29...Bxh2 and that was 49 years ago!

Kalod- Bezgodov, Pardubice1996.

r4rk1/1bp2ppp/p4b2/1p1qN3/8/1P1P3P/1PP2PP1/R1BQR1K1 w - - 0 15

White played 15.Qf3. Black replied 15...Qxe5.

Kalod- Bezgodov, Pardubice1996.

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6 4. Ba4 Nf6 5. O-O Be7 6. Re1 b5 7. Bb3 O-O 8. h3 Na5 9. Nxe5 Nxb3 10. axb3 Bb7 11. d3 d5 12. exd5 Nxd5 13. Nc3 Bf6 14. Nxd5 Qxd5 15. Qf3 Qxe5 16. Rxe5 Bxf3 17. Rc5 Bb7 18. Rxc7 Bd5 19. c4 Rfe8 20. Be3 Bxb2 21. Ra2 Be5 22. Ra7 Rxa7 23. Bxa7 Bb7 24. d4 Bd6 25. Ra1 Bb4 26. d5 bxc4 27. bxc4 a5 28. Be3 f5 29. Rd1 Kf7 30. g3 Rc8 31. Rc1 a4 32. Rb1 Rxc4

And speaking of Fischer, there is a 2018 Red Hot pawn game where they followed game one for 12 moves.
The player of the black pieces had chosen for their nickname. 'Robert Fischer.'

Geoff Chandler wrote: ↑

Mon Nov 29, 2021 10:18 pm

White actually fell into a pitfall that was similar to one that appeared in Game one.

One of the ways of learning an unfamiliar opening is to check out the traps and cheapos. I did wonder why Kf1 was played. It looked a bit early to be centralising the king for the ending. Defusing a trick is an obvious justification.

IM Jack Rudd wrote: ↑

Mon Nov 29, 2021 8:54 pm

No, I'd say the opposite - it's becoming less of a problem with the modern game, because of the ubiquity of chess databases.

Yes that's true but then how many of those viewing have access to databases? If you don't have access to one, I still maintain it's much tougher these days to know when a player is in preparation and when they are not. I just assume that as soon as they start consuming more time, or a lot more time, they are out of home prep. That aside it's very difficult to be sure mainly because they play a lot more stuff these days and are a lot more versatile than, say, 30 years ago.

Roger de Coverly wrote: ↑

Mon Nov 29, 2021 11:45 pm

Geoff Chandler wrote: ↑

Mon Nov 29, 2021 10:18 pm

White actually fell into a pitfall that was similar to one that appeared in Game one.

One of the ways of learning an unfamiliar opening is to check out the traps and cheapos. I did wonder why Kf1 was played. It looked a bit early to be centralising the king for the ending. Defusing a trick is an obvious justification.

As soon as it was played David Howell said it was a computer move. Instant reaction there.

Today is Carlsen's birthday. He did not play a world title game on his birthday v Caruana or Anand
but he did win a rapid game v Karjakin on November 30th 2016. That was the game that ended with 50 Qh6+!!

2R5/4bppk/1p1p3Q/5R1P/4P3/5P2/r4q1P/7K b - - 6 50

Surfed about for more on chess and birthday, found this, a good read.

http://streathambrixtonchess.blogspot.c ... thday.html

(though a comment added 8 years after the original piece states that Steinitz did not play a world title game on his birthday. Still a good read.)