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

Viswanathan Anand vs Vladimir Kramnik
16th Amber Tournament (Rapid) (2007) (rapid), Monaco, rd 4, Mar-20
Spanish Game: Closed Variations (C84)  ·  1/2-1/2
ANALYSIS [x]

FEN COPIED

explore this opening
find similar games 198 more Anand/Kramnik games
PGN: download | view | print Help: general | java-troubleshooting

TIP: You can get computer analysis by clicking the "ENGINE" button below the game.

PGN Viewer:  What is this?
For help with this chess viewer, please see the Olga Chess Viewer Quickstart Guide.
PREMIUM MEMBERS CAN REQUEST COMPUTER ANALYSIS [more info]

Kibitzer's Corner
< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 1 OF 2 ·  Later Kibitzing>
Mar-20-07  ughaibu: Wouldn't 35.Bg6 win?
Mar-20-07  percyblakeney: Fantastic game, engines very much liked 31. g6 for Anand, almost 3.5 pawns up according to Shredder, but it doesn't exactly look easy to see through all the very complicated lines after it...
Mar-20-07  you vs yourself: Had Vishy found 32.g6, <notyetagm> would've run wild with his FENs;)

Great defense by Kramnik. Excellent attack by Anand. With so many piece sacs, it's amazing that he was still able to secure the draw after the attack ended.

Mar-20-07  Manequinho: I think Anand could have won this game...
Mar-20-07  Marmot PFL: White can win with 31.g6 Bxg2 32.Bxf7 Kh8 33.Kxg2 Nc2 (is there anything better?) 34.Bg5 threatening f6 and also Bxd8. However black had many choices before this. The game was much too complicated for rapid chess.
Mar-20-07  setebos: So what? It was rapid, you cannot see everything. Later, engine analysis and rabid postings will follow so stick around...
Mar-20-07  sheaf: if anand had found the win it would have been the most brilliant wins i have ever seen what an attack.
Mar-20-07  Marmot PFL: Grabbing that Ra1 was very risky and not in Kramnik's usual style of avoiding complications at all.
Mar-20-07  acirce: If 31.g6! Bxg2+ 32.Bxf7+ Kh8 33.Kxg2 Nc2 34.Bg5 Qe5!?, we get this:


click for larger view

35.Bxd8? is only a draw, but 35.Bxh6 wins, although White has to find a number of exact king moves that look dangerous at first sight.

For example 35..Qe2+ 36.Kg3! Qe1+ 37.Kf3! Qd1+ 38.Ke4! d5+ 39.Ke5!


click for larger view

and White both survives and wins because on every check like ..Qe2+ there is Be3+.

White also needs to be sure that he actually always wins after the discovered checks, and it's not just a perpetual or something. If 38..Qe1+, 39.Kd3 also wins, but the pretty continuation is 39.Be3+ Kg7 40.Qh7+ Kf6 41.Qh8+ Ke7 42.f6+ Kd7 43.Qh3+ Kc6 44.Bd5# - a pure mate with the direct help of the king:


click for larger view

Mar-20-07  sheaf: <acirce> i really doubt if anybody (except topalov for whatever reasons)can find such win even in classical time control so i guess draw was a fair result but i am surprised that rook sac was sound !?...
Mar-20-07  Marvol: <Marmot PFL: Grabbing that Ra1 was very risky and not in Kramnik's usual style of avoiding complications at all.>

Not sure I agree with you. If he thinks he can get away with it, Kramnik can be materialistic. For instance like he did in Topalov vs Kramnik, 2006
when his opponent also missed a win, but Kramnik seems to rely on his opponent not finding the win in the extremely complicated situation.

Although computers easily find the winning line, there's tons of psychology involved, and not necessarily in the attacker's favour. Having sac'ed several pieces the onus is very much on the attacker to find the forced win, or perish in the counterattack. This does not help, I presume.

If I have observed correctly, Kramnik did the latter part of his defence on incremental time, which I think is highly impressive.

Mar-20-07  sheaf: actually i would like to correc myself here, the win is not difficult after u see it in diagrams but to reach there one has to go thru a lot of counterintutive moves which makes it hard to think about it, it would have been great if anand had found the win.. great defense by kramnik who i thought chose very natural continuation...
Mar-20-07  Reisswolf: It's time already! Give these two guys a 16-game classical match. Let them go at each other in this manner.

It seems that there is something about Anand and Kramnik that causes them to play great chess against each other.

Mar-20-07  KamikazeAttack: Damn what a game. After 29. Rg2, Anand would have believed this was a sure win. I would have resigned as black.

Great play by both players. So imaginative. That attack was evil. How did Kramnik find a defence?

Mar-20-07  Softpaw: <slomarko: Kramnik was a full rook up but managed only to draw.>

LOL

Mar-20-07  Kangaroo: I suspect that <21 ... Ng5> instead of the centralizing move <21 ... Rad8> would be a much safer way for Black. The threat <Ng5-f3+> leaves only two visible choices for White. [A] <22. Qg2> which moves the white queen, the main attacking force, back to the camp. Or [B] <22. Bxg5 Qxg5> keeping the dynamic balance (unless I have overlooked something).

Had Kramnik selected such a strategic way, we would not have seen the exciting final part of the game.

Mar-21-07  setebos: Tendulkar vs Shakespeare was the best match in the ICC 7 years ago.Tendulkar was Svidler, Shakespeare was a mystery.(Rumored to be Kramnik) Anyway log on and see their games at 4-0. They are not inferior this one.(the best ones of course :) )
Mar-21-07  Plato: <setebos> I am no longer a member on ICC. Do you know who had the better score in their blitz games, overall? Thanks.
Mar-21-07  Atking: I'm blindfolded too but I think that the obvious 24. ...NxNf5 25.gxNf5 Bc8 with c6~d5 may draw without much difficulty (On 26.Qg3 d5! 27.Bxd5 Bxf5 (Eventually 27. ...RxBd5!?)). I could miss something therefore my impression is Kramnik enjoyed himself in the dangerous test line of 24. ...Nc2?!
Mar-21-07  gauer: Kramnik vs ratings list #1 Anand would sure make an interesting W. Ch. match, should FIDE allow a bout. These recent Spanishes & Bogo-Catalans would sure make for a more exciting repertoire test than those Slavs seen in the last cycle. It's surprising he's only now starting to play good chess in his late 30s, and one could wonder Kramnik's youth is advantageous or not.
Mar-21-07  KamikazeAttack: <Kramnik vs ratings list #1 Anand would sure make an interesting W. Ch. match, should FIDE allow a bout. These recent Spanishes & Bogo-Catalans would sure make for a more exciting repertoire test than those Slavs seen in the last cycle. It's surprising he's only now starting to play good chess in his late 30s, and one could wonder Kramnik's youth is advantageous or not.>

This post is unclear.

Who is "only now starting to play good chess in his late 30s"? Kramnik or Anand?

Kramnik is no where near late 30s. And Anand who is, has always played more than good chess, excellent chess in fact.

Mar-21-07  Marmot PFL: <marvol> good point, i was thinking more of games like this Anand vs Kramnik, 2002
or else this
Anand vs Kramnik, 2001

Here Anand is coming off a loss and wants more, and Kramnik more than meets him halfway. Nd4-c2xa1 looks way to risky against Anand when there is a safe alternative like Nxf5 and d5.

Mar-21-07  Marmot PFL: <acirce> Nice work. Someday I have to learn how to make those diagrams.
Mar-21-07  you vs yourself: <Marmot PFL> It's all explained here:FEN Help Page
Mar-22-07  gauer: As far as one-on-one match-play goes, and that Kramnik & FIDE have finally settled the W. Ch. title dispute, Kramnik's overall play seems strong, ever since his hiatus, during his arguably medically weaker years which Marmot quotes. Anand is also a sharp player (especially well-known for tournament scoring results in non-classical time-play), but isn't it a little late to only be currently peaking? Sonas could have a field day with this. Then again, it's too bad that W. Ch. play-offs weren't broken using a double-blind-fold formula, since the memory games have shown at least as much as strategic complexity as their quick-play, rapid counter-parts, IMO.
search thread:   
< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 1 OF 2 ·  Later Kibitzing>
NOTE: You need to pick a username and password to post a reply. Getting your account takes less than a minute, is 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, profane, raunchy, or disgusting language.
  2. No spamming, advertising, duplicate or nonsense posts.
  3. No malicious personal attacks, including cyber stalking, systematic antagonism, or gratuitous name-calling of any member Iincludinfgall Admin and Owners or any of their family, friends, associates, or business interests. If you think someone is an idiot, then provide evidence that their reasoning is invalid and/or idiotic, instead of just calling them an idiot. It's a subtle but important distinction, even in political discussions.
  4. Nothing in violation of United States law.
  5. No malicious posting of or linking to personal, private, and/or negative information (aka "doxing" or "doxxing") about any member, (including all Admin and Owners) or any of their family, friends, associates, or business interests. This includes all media: text, images, video, audio, or otherwise. Such actions will result in severe sanctions for any violators.
  6. NO TROLLING. Admin and Owners know it when they see it, and sanctions for any trolls will be significant.
  7. Any off-topic posts which distract from the primary topic of discussion are subject to removal.
  8. The use of "sock puppet" accounts to circumvent disciplinary action taken by Moderators is expressly prohibited.
  9. The use of "sock puppet" accounts in an attempt to undermine any side of a debate—or to create a false impression of consensus or support—is prohibited.
  10. All decisions with respect to deleting posts, and any subsequent discipline, are final, and occur at the sole discretion of the Moderators, Admin, and Owners.
  11. Please try to maintain a semblance of civility at all times.
Blow the Whistle See something that violates our rules? Blow the whistle and inform a Moderator.

NOTE: Keep all discussion on the topic of this page. This forum is for this specific game and nothing else. If you want to discuss chess in general, or this site, visit the Kibitzer's Café.

Messages posted by Chessgames members do not necessarily represent the views of Chessgames.com, its employees, or sponsors. All Moderator actions taken are at the sole discretion of the Admin and Owners—who will strive to act fairly and consistently at all times.

This game is type: RAPID. Please report incorrect or missing information by submitting a correction slip to help us improve the quality of our content.

Featured in the Following Game Collections[what is this?]
LaskerMan 3000's favorite games
by LaskerMan 3000
A spectacular attack by Anand, but he missed the final blow
from Exciting, Original, Unusual And Other Draws by TheAlchemist
Orlin Burov's favorite games
by Orlin Burov
AdrianP's Bookmarked Games (2007)
by AdrianP
Anti-Marshall
from Ruy Lopez by KingG
A spectacular attack by Anand, but he missed the final blow
from Exciting, Original, Unusual And Other Draws by T by Octavia
you vs yourself's favorite games
by you vs yourself


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 | Notable Games | World Chess Championships | Opening Explorer | Guess the Move | Game Collections | ChessBookie Game | Chessgames Challenge | Store | privacy notice | contact us
Copyright 2001-2019, Chessgames Services LLC