chessgames.com
Members · Prefs · Collections · Openings · Endgames · Sacrifices · History · Search Kibitzing · Kibitzer's Café · Chessforums · Tournament Index · Players · Kibitzing

  WCC Overview
 
  << previous HISTORY OF THE WORLD CHESS CHAMPIONSHIP next >>  
Anand vs Gelfand, 2012
Moscow, Russia

The World Chess Championship 2012 was a match between the defending world champion Viswanathan Anand of India and challenger Boris Gelfand of Israel, winner of the World Championship Candidates Knock-Out Tournament.1

 Vishy Gelfand 2012
  Ready to start game number four.

The match took place from May 10 to 30, 2012, in the Engineering Building of the State Tretyakov Gallery in Moscow. The prize fund was approximately 2.5 million US dollars.

The match format was 12 games, with the first game on May 11. The normal FIDE tiebreak protocol was in place: should the match be tied 6-6 tiebreaks would first employing rapid games, then blitz games, and finally an Armageddon game if needed. The time controls for the classical games was 120 minutes for the first 40 moves, add 60 minutes after move 40, add 15 minutes and the increment +30s/move after move 60.

The first half of the match saw the players tied after six fairly short draws. Gelfand drew first blood in game seven, in which Anand made some provocative or inaccurate moves and Gelfand held a commanding position. The very next day, revenge was had in game eight when Gelfand got his queen trapped on move 17--the shortest loss in WCC history! Then after four more draws, the match headed into overtime. Remarkably, only one of the first 12 games (#9) had lasted long enough to reach the time control at move 40.

Known for his prowess at rapid play, Anand was the clear favorite going into tiebreaks. After a see-saw victory in the second rapid game, and two more complicated draws, Viswanathan Anand defended his title once again.

click on a game number to replay game 12345678910111213141516
Gelfand½½½½½½10½½½½½0½½
Anand½½½½½½01½½½½½1½½

FINAL SCORE:  Anand 8½;  Gelfand 7½
Reference: game collection Anand-Gelfand WCC 2012

NOTABLE GAMES   [what is this?]
    · Game #8     Anand vs Gelfand, 2012     1-0
    · Game #9     Gelfand vs Anand, 2012     1/2-1/2
    · Game #7     Gelfand vs Anand, 2012     1-0

FOOTNOTES
1. World Chess Championship 2012, Wikipedia
2 The Times of India

 page 1 of 1; 16 games  PGN Download 
Game  ResultMoves Year Event/LocaleOpening
1. Anand vs Gelfand ½-½24 2012 Anand - Gelfand World Chess ChampionshipD85 Grunfeld
2. Gelfand vs Anand ½-½25 2012 Anand - Gelfand World Chess ChampionshipD45 Queen's Gambit Declined Semi-Slav
3. Anand vs Gelfand ½-½37 2012 Anand - Gelfand World Chess ChampionshipD70 Neo-Grunfeld Defense
4. Gelfand vs Anand ½-½34 2012 Anand - Gelfand World Chess ChampionshipD45 Queen's Gambit Declined Semi-Slav
5. Anand vs Gelfand ½-½27 2012 Anand - Gelfand World Chess ChampionshipB33 Sicilian
6. Gelfand vs Anand ½-½29 2012 Anand - Gelfand World Chess ChampionshipD45 Queen's Gambit Declined Semi-Slav
7. Gelfand vs Anand 1-038 2012 Anand - Gelfand World Chess ChampionshipD45 Queen's Gambit Declined Semi-Slav
8. Anand vs Gelfand 1-017 2012 Anand - Gelfand World Chess ChampionshipD70 Neo-Grunfeld Defense
9. Gelfand vs Anand ½-½49 2012 Anand - Gelfand World Chess ChampionshipE54 Nimzo-Indian, 4.e3, Gligoric System
10. Anand vs Gelfand ½-½25 2012 Anand - Gelfand World Chess ChampionshipB30 Sicilian
11. Gelfand vs Anand ½-½24 2012 Anand - Gelfand World Chess ChampionshipE54 Nimzo-Indian, 4.e3, Gligoric System
12. Anand vs Gelfand ½-½22 2012 Anand - Gelfand World Chess ChampionshipB30 Sicilian
13. Gelfand vs Anand ½-½32 2012 Anand - Gelfand World Chess ChampionshipD45 Queen's Gambit Declined Semi-Slav
14. Anand vs Gelfand 1-077 2012 Anand - Gelfand World Chess ChampionshipB30 Sicilian
15. Gelfand vs Anand ½-½63 2012 Anand - Gelfand World Chess ChampionshipD12 Queen's Gambit Declined Slav
16. Anand vs Gelfand ½-½56 2012 Anand - Gelfand World Chess ChampionshipB51 Sicilian, Canal-Sokolsky (Rossolimo) Attack
 page 1 of 1; 16 games  PGN Download 
  REFINE SEARCH:   White wins (1-0) | Black wins (0-1) | Draws (1/2-1/2)  
 

Kibitzer's Corner
< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 194 OF 194 ·  Later Kibitzing>
Jul-14-12  NGambit: <1. The qualifier was silly. >

Well after <nearly two decades> there was at least a proper qualifier for WCC with fair chance for everyone. Nobody would claim it was perfect. But, that it was definitely better than handpicking the challenger (a la kaparov-Shirov-Kramnik episode). In any case there is always something to complain about. The next qualifier is a candidates <tournament>. How do people like that for deciding challenger for the world championship <match>.

<2. There are a number of GMs who are stronger than the challenger.>

And the fact that they either failed or ran away from the qualifier?

Jul-14-12
Premium Chessgames Member
  keypusher: <Well after <nearly two decades> there was at least a proper qualifier for WCC >

And that is what we call assuming the quod that has to be demonstrandum'd. Or begging the question, if we prefer to English our Latin.

<But, that it was definitely better than handpicking the challenger (a la kaparov-Shirov-Kramnik episode). >

Not much of a standard of comparison. Even so, Kramnik was a better challenger than Gelfand.

<And the fact that they either failed or ran away from the qualifier?>

And the fact that the qualifier was little better than a coin flip? I'm not going to criticize anyone for losing or running away from a coin flip.

Look, there was a lousy qualifier, which produced a (relatively) lousy challenger and an extremely lousy match. At least they'll do it differently next time.

Jul-14-12  NGambit: <qualifier was little better than a coin flip?> so much for "standard of comparison"
Jul-14-12
Premium Chessgames Member
  HeMateMe: A lot of people have a mental block regarding the qualifying process for the most recent world championship. Carlsen decided not to play; Kramnik's results during the year weren't good enough. The rest were eliminated in matches, and Gelfand was the last man standing.

Why is this so difficult to understand?

Jul-14-12
Premium Chessgames Member
  keypusher: <He Mate Me>

<Why is this so difficult to understand?>

It's not. Everyone understands it. The "matches" were jokes. Do you understand <that>?

Jul-14-12
Premium Chessgames Member
  HeMateMe: only if you are a poor loser.
Jul-14-12
Premium Chessgames Member
  Shams: <HeMateMe> It's almost like you don't recognize that one format could ever have more or less integrity than another one.
Jul-14-12
Premium Chessgames Member
  HeMateMe: I too would have preferred the matches be longer, 6 games, 8 games, and a longer final match. Apparently the playing hall was so valuable, it could not be held for another two weeks or so, for a chess match.

I agree, in that sense. But I disagree with the constant bashing of Gelfand for dispatching his challangers, as though he wasn't worthy of playing a title match. No ond bashed 40+ Viktor korchnoia for winning the right to play 3 championship matches with Karpov--No one claims that it was a farce, that someone else should be playing Karpov.

Just sour grapes.

Jul-14-12  JoergWalter: look at soccer. how do the teams qualify? by playing 2 x 30 minutes games with 8 players per team? No.

the qualifying in chess should be through the same format that is used in the finals, imo.

Jul-14-12
Premium Chessgames Member
  Shams: <No ond bashed 40+ Viktor korchnoi for winning the right to play 3 championship matches with Karpov>

You don't really believe that anybody thinks quadragenarians are inherently unfit to challenge for the title, so why are you pretending people do? The point is, Korchnoi won the right to face Karpov through a candidates match format that has more integrity than this one did. That is all. It's not "bashing Gelfand" to point this out.

Jul-14-12  JoergWalter: The format has nothing to do with the players, their age etc.. The format is set up to what FIDE can afford financially - which is not much.
Jul-14-12  harish22: There does not seem to be anything wrong with the format. Gelfand just won it fair and square. It was not his fault that players like Carlsen, Aronian and Kramnik did not make it. It simply proved that while some players are very good at playing tournaments , they are not good match players.

Having said that i feel that Gefland is a top-10 player. However he has been in that position for more than 20 years. This is very unlike Carlsen, Aronian and Karajkin who have been there for last 5 years.

The match was tough because of psychological factors. Anand and Gefland have known each other for 30 years. In late 80's and earlier 90's, Gelfand was better than Anand. And even though Anand scaled great heights, Gelfand was never far behind.

It is not easy to play a ghost from the past. Gelfand may not have deserved the slot but he earned it. This is much better than treatment given to Kramnik. Kramnik was hand-picked by Kasparov. After he won the match he was allowed the benefit of a unification match and then a return match after he lost the title

Jul-14-12
Premium Chessgames Member
  HeMateMe: <JoergWalter: The format has nothing to do with the players, their age etc.. The format is set up to what FIDE can afford financially - which is not much.>

I think that hits the nail on the head. The world has changed, its a faster paced place than the chess world of the 60s and 70s. People and playing venues just cost a lot more than they did back in the day.

FIDE did manage to get control of the title process again, and it WAS fair for everyone. They just don't seem to have the funds to make the matches a bit longer, to more absolutely ensure that the best players move forward.

Aug-11-12  7he5haman: This may sound like a rather naive comment, but:

As far as I am aware, none of the players who played in the qualifier complained that the format was silly, etc., <even after they were knocked out of it>.

Why then should the rest of us complain? If it was good enough for the competitors both during and after their participation in it, then what we think really pales into insignificance.

Aug-11-12
Premium Chessgames Member
  Kinghunt: <7he5haman> Can you imagine how it would be if Aronian and Kramnik complained about the format after being knocked out? No, the only chance they had to complain was before the event. Also, GM Sutovsky spoke with them before the event, and the majority stated they would like to see the matches made longer. Gelfand, however, wanted to keep the short mini-matches, and as contracts had already been signed, no changes could be made so long as any single person objected. Most of the players did not like the format, but simply accepted it as the best they were going to be able to get, and once they agreed to it, there was no point in complaining, especially after they were knocked out.
Aug-11-12
Premium Chessgames Member
  PinnedPiece: What kind of champion, or one who wants to be thought of as champion material, would say "I need many many chances to prove I am the best. And if I am not proved the best, then I wasn't given enough chances."

It's up to the chess world to ensure the funding and fairness of the matches...it seems to me that a decent contender can't be expected to do so.

I would redo the entire nature of the championship cycle, myself, with the current "champion" but one of the participants from the outset.

.

Aug-11-12  csmath: The format is the way it is because there is no money for anything better.

The championship match was the way it was because there were no better players to play it.

Aug-11-12
Premium Chessgames Member
  Kinghunt: <csmath> There is money for more. Aren't FIDE/Agon about to stage a huge Grand Prix circuit? Turn two of those events into Candidates Quarterfinals and Semifinals, then change the 14 round Candidates we already have into a final match, and you're done. There is money for a better Championship system - it just has to be used where it matters instead of on an extravagant Grand Prix.
Aug-26-12  shivamshukl280: hye will anyone play a game
Sep-12-12  Ulhumbrus: Anand said that people had underrated Gelfand and that Anand had played as strongly as Kasparov had played at the London match in 2000. Gelfand still drew the match and came close to winning it which means that Gelfand also played as strongly as Kasparov had played at the London match in 2000.
Jan-01-13  tabul008: You can't choose challenger by just fide rating!
Jan-11-13
Premium Chessgames Member
  morfishine: Based on the assessments and opinions. its safe to say that clearly, Anand is no longer the player that he is...
Jan-11-13  voyager39: @morfishine Different situations require different character. Anand remains on the throne and we wait for a challenger to emerge.

Hopefully it will be one of the youngsters so that the next generation can gain legitimacy and find its place in history.

Jan-11-13
Premium Chessgames Member
  HeMateMe: Some would say that the younger generation has plenty of legitamacy. It's just that great players are hard to beat in matches, even when they are in their 40s.
Jan-11-13
Premium Chessgames Member
  morfishine: <voyager39> I appreciate the reply; I have the utmost respect for Anand. My comment was sarcastic, interjecting the words 'he is' instead of the normal 'once was'...

With that said, I think the 12-game format is too short and short-changes the chess viewing audience; the 24-game format allows for much more flexibility in openings. If nothing else, for that much money, the chess community deserves more games.

Jump to page #    (enter # from 1 to 194)
< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 194 OF 194 ·  Later Kibitzing>
NOTE: You need to pick a username and password to post a reply. Getting your account takes less than a minute, totally anonymous, and 100% free--plus, it entitles you to features otherwise unavailable. Pick your username now and join the chessgames community!
If you already have an account, you should login now.
Please observe our posting guidelines:
  1. No obscene, racist, sexist, or profane language.
  2. No spamming, advertising, or duplicating posts.
  3. No personal attacks against other users.
  4. Nothing in violation of United States law.
Blow the Whistle See something that violates our rules? Blow the whistle and inform an administrator.


NOTE: Keep all discussion on the topic of this page. This forum is for this specific tournament and nothing else. If you want to discuss chess in general, or this site, you might try the Kibitzer's Café.
Messages posted by Chessgames members do not necessarily represent the views of Chessgames.com, its employees, or sponsors.
Spot an error? Please suggest your correction and help us eliminate database mistakes!


home | about | login | logout | F.A.Q. | your profile | preferences | Premium Membership | Kibitzer's Café | Biographer's Bistro | new kibitzing | chessforums | Tournament Index | Player Directory | World Chess Championships | Opening Explorer | Guess the Move | Game Collections | ChessBookie Game | Chessgames Challenge | Store | privacy notice | contact us
Copyright 2001-2014, Chessgames Services LLC
Web design & database development by 20/20 Technologies