< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 55 OF 55 ·
|Jun-08-09|| ||yalie: <VaselineTopLove: <Everett> instead of 23.Rd2, how about 23.Qxf7+>|
agree Qxf7 i an easy draw. But how about 18.Ne5 fxe5 Bxd7 (Qxg4 Qxb5 ) Kxd7 Qxg4 Qc6 f3 Qxf3 Qxf3 Bxf3 looks great for black with those central passed pawns, no?
|Jun-08-09|| ||Everett: <VaselineTopLove> Didn't see 23.Qxf7+. Whoops.|
|Jun-08-09|| ||Everett: It should be added that white, after my line, has nothing better than a draw with best play, something he would not really wish for at this point in the game.|
<yalie> I think you are right with 18..fxe5. The mass of center pawns will be tough to stop, and this line proves better than the one with starting 18.Ne5 Bxe5. There is roughly material balance, but black has a mass of center pawns, the two bishops, and better development. White may have seen this and rightly not gone in for it.
|Aug-11-09|| ||LIFE Master AJ: I just added this to my game collection. (Anand's best games.) |
I suspected - from the very first - that Anand prepared much of this at home in his "opening's laboratory."
Perhaps taking away from this game's luster is that both sides missed the best moves toward the end of the game. (33.Bd3?) It still must be considered an outstanding effort by GM V. Anand. (How many people beat Kramnik with the Black pieces???)
|Aug-29-09|| ||visayanbraindoctor: Bridgeburner: PART 1
Kramnik vs Anand, 2008 the <third game of the 2008 title match>.
Quantitative mapping of this game between these players is below. Figures in brackets immediately after each move are the corrected engine evaluations generated on the return slide. The reverse slide smoothed out many, but not all fluctuation in the engine’s evaluations. The complexity of some variations was very likely too great to enable a fuller reconciliation from the forward slide, especially in the opening. <General methods used are described in the bio.>
The evaluation values in the opening come at the end of a full forward slide to the last move of the game and a full return slide back to the starting position. Engine preferences are included where they differ from players preferences, except for the first thirteen moves which are well trodden theoretical pathways.
After the cautious preliminaries in game 1, and the colossal struggle in game 2, this game was incredibly complex, exciting, replete with blunders – and a tragic game for Kramnik. Arguably this was the turning point of the match, as Kramnik – legendary for the accuracy of his play - failed to press an advantage gained from the lively opening and then blundered the game not once, but twice (not counting <33.Bd3>). Kramnik did not seem to recover from what must have been a morale-sapping loss, winning only the penultimate game before ultimately conceding the world crown.
Note: Anand’s annotations are added. Source: http://www.lekoanand.hu/eng/anand2....)
|Aug-29-09|| ||visayanbraindoctor: Bridgeburner: PART 2
<1. d4> (=0.15) <1…d4> (=0.15)
<2. c4> (=0.12) <2…c6> (=0.13)
<3. Nf3> (=0.13) <3…Nf6> (=0.17)
<4. Nc3> (=0.13) <4…e6> (=0.25)
<5. e3> (=0.25) <5…Nbd7> (=0.25)
<6. Bd3> (=0.18) <6…dxc4> (=0.25)
<7. Bxc4> (=0.18) <7…b5> (=0.24)
<8. Bd3> (=0.20) <8…a6> (=0.24)
<9. e4> (=0.24) <9…c5> (=0.24)
<10. e5> (=0.00) <10…cxd4> (=0.00)
<11. Nxb5> (=0.00) <11…axb5> (=0.20)
<12. exf6> (=0.20) <12…gxf6> ( 0.48)
<13. 0-0> (=0.03)
This marks the end of theory in respect of this opening as shown in the chessgames.com database. The only other game in the database to reach this point was Portisch vs G Kluger, 1962 which continued with <13…Qc7>, with White winning in 54 moves.
|Aug-29-09|| ||visayanbraindoctor: Bridgeburner: PART 3
<14. Qe2> ( 0.30)
<Engine preferences>: <14. Be4> (=0.03); <14. a4> (=-0.25); <14. Bf4> ( 0.30)
Anand commented that <After 14.Be4 Bb7 15.Bxb7 Qxb7 16.Nxd4 Rg8 Black has good counterplay, and this ended as a draw in Kamsky vs Kramnik, 1994; (link added)
<14…Bb7> ( 0.36)
<First three engine preferences>: <14...b4> ( 0.30); <14...Bc5> (=0.05); <14...Ba6> ( 0.26)
<15. Bb5> ( 0.36) <15…Bd6> ( 0.76)
<Engine preferences:>: <15…Ra5> ( 0.36); <15…Rg8> ( 0.54)
<16. Rd1> ( 0.76 )
Anand commented that: <16.Nxd4!? already has to be taken seriously here, and it has actually be played in [T Doeppner vs M Voigt, 1992, Germany]. Black, however, saves himself with a classic tactical stroke: 16…Qxd4 (16…Rg8 17.g3! is the computer improvement in the above-mentioned game) 17.Rd1 Bh2+! (17…Qc5? 18. Be3 Qc7 19. Rac1 Qb8 20. Bxd7+ Kxd7 21. Qb5+ Ke7 22. Rxd6! wins immediately) 18.Kxh2 Qh4+ 19. Kg1 Bxg2! 20. Bxd7+ Ke7 21. Kxg2 Rhg8+ usually black just mates in such scenarios here black has to find a perpetual: 22.Kf3 Qh5+ 23. Ke3 Qc5+ 24. Kd2 Rad8! 25. Rf1 (25. Qf1 Rd7+ 26. Ke1 Rd1+ 27. Kxd1 Qh5+ 28. Ke1 Qh2) 25…Rd7+ 26. Ke1 Rc8! 27. Qe3 Qa5+ 28. Bd2 Rxd2 29.Qxd2 Qe5+ 30.Qe2 Qa5+. This is the line given by computers leading to a perpetual.> (link added)
<16…Rg8> ( 0.76)
<17. g3> ( 0.76) <17…Rg4> ( 0.76)
Anand commented that <Technically speaking this is the novelty: D'Israel-Gerbelli, Americana 2000, mentioned in Informant 79, [continued] 17...Bc5 18.b4 and condemned the text-move.>
<18. Bf4> ( 0.69)
<Engine preferences>: <18. b4> ( 0.76); <18.a4> ( 0.70)
Anand commented here that < However, the Informant's recommendation of 18.Nd2 falls short due to 18...Ke7!! Suddenly Black's dream comes true, and [he] manages to amass all his potential energy for an assault on the white king: 19.Bxd7 (19.Qxg4 Qxb5 is just bad for white.) 19...Rag8! 20.Bb5 (20.Qb5 Qc7 just intensifies the pressure against g3.) 20...d3!? The most solid. (20...Rxg3+ 21.hxg3 (21.fxg3? d3+ 22.Qf2 Bc5 illustrates why Black has to take with the rook and not the bishop)) 21...Rxg3+ 22.Kf1 Bg2+ 23.Ke1 Re3!! this amazing move keeps Black afloat 24.fxe3 Bg3+ 25.Qf2 Bxf2+ 26.Kxf2 dxe3+ 27.Kxg2 Qxb5 and the computers again say: draw! There's a perpetual coming up.) 21.Qxd3 Rxg3+ 22.hxg3 Rxg3+ 23.Kf1 Rxd3 24.Bxd3 Qd4! 25.Nc4 Bb4 26.a3 Bg2+! 27.Kxg2 Qg4+ forcing perpetual.>
<18…Bxf4> ( 0.69)
|Aug-29-09|| ||visayanbraindoctor: Bridgeburner: PART 4
<19. Nxd4> (=-0.02)
<Engine preference>: <19. Rxd4> ( 0.69)
Displays an evaluation shift of 0.67, and notwithstanding the problems it presented Anand (who commented somewhat laconically that <19.Rxd4 is also very complicated.> - it is generally thought that Anand had prepared for <19. Rxd4>) over the board, it represents a <dubious move>.
<Weighting = <<0.5>> for a cumulative game weighting of <<0.5>>.>
Anand commented here that <19...Rg6!? 20.a4!? Maybe this cool computer-move is what Kramnik was planning on? (20.Bxd7+?! Kxd7 21.Nxe6+ Bd6! 22.Nf4 Rg5 is just much better for Black.; 20.Nxe6 fxe6 21.Rxd7 Kf8 22.Bd3 Be5 23.Bxg6 hxg6 24.Qc4 Ke8 25.Rh7 Bd4! this amazing move seems to hold the balance 26.Rxb7 Bxf2+ 27.Kf1 Qxb7 28.Qxe6+ Kf8 29.Qxf6+ Kg8 30.Qxg6+ Kh8 31.Qf6+ Kg8 32.Qg5+ Kh8, and despite the fact that White can check with his [queen] on whatever square he wants, no progress seems possible: 33.Qe5+ Kh7 34.Kxf2 Rf8+ 35.Kg1 Qb6+ 36.Kg2 Rf2+ 37.Kh3 Qh6+ 38.Kg4 Qg6+ with a perpetual.)>
<20. Nxe6> (=-0.02) <20…fxe6> (=-0.02)
<21. Rxd7> (=-0.02) <21…Kf8> (=-0.02)
<22. Qd3> (=-0.02)
Anand again: <Played instantly, and obviously this is what Kramnik intended when he sacrificed the piece on move 19. White covers g3 and threatens to invade on h7, so immediate action is required.>
Anand: < Here 22...Bc8? loses to 23.Rh7. And 22...f5? loses to 23.Qc3. After 22...Bxg3!? This seems to be just a forced draw 23.hxg3 h4! 24.Rd6 (24.Kf1? hxg3 25.fxg3 Rg5! wins for black.) 24...Qc5 25.b4 Qe5 26.Rd8+ Rxd8 27.Qxd8+ Kg7 28.Qe7+ Kh6 29.Qf8+ Rg7 30.Qh8+ Rh7 31.Qf8+ with a perpetual.>
<23. Rxg7> (=-0.02) <23…Kxg7> (=-0.02)
<24. gxf4> (=-0.02) <24…Rd8> (=-0.02)
<25. Qe2> ( 0.46)
<Engine preference>: <25. Qb3> (=-0.02)
Anand: <Also possible was 25.Qb3!? Kh6 26.a4 (26.Kf1? Bd5 27.Bc4 Bxc4+ 28.Qxc4 Rd2 and f2 collapses.) 26...Rg8+ 27.Kf1 Rg2 28.Qe3 Qxe3 29.fxe3 Rxh2 and the black h-pawn is just as dangerous as the white a- and b-pawns.>
<25…Kh6> ( 0.46)
Anand: <A very interesting and unbalanced position has arisen. White has two extra, and passed, pawns, but his kingside is permanently damaged and open to a direct mating attack.>
<26. Kf1> ( 0.46) <26…Rg8> ( 0.46)
<27. a4> ( 0.78)
<Engine preference>: <27. Rc1> ( 0.46)
Anand: <A good multi-purpose move, making sure the bishop and the pawn defend each other in the upcoming complications. Wrong was 27.f5? Bg2+! 28.Ke1 Bc6! 29.Qd2+ Kh7 30.Bxc6 Qxc6 31.Ke2 Qb5+ 32.Kf3 Rg4 33.Re1 Qc6+ 34.Ke2 Qc4+ 35.Kf3 (35.Kd1 Rd4 36.fxe6 Rxd2+ 37.Kxd2 Qb4+ 38.Kd1 Qd4+) 35...Rd4 and wins.>
<27…Bg2+> ( 0.78)
<28. Ke1> ( 0.78) <28…Bh3> ( 0.78)
Anand: <28...Bc6 is enough for a draw.>
|Aug-29-09|| ||visayanbraindoctor: Bridgeburner: PART 5
<29. Ra3> ( 1.79)
<Engine preferences>: <29. Rd1> ( 0.78); <29. Kd2> ( 1.43).
But for a later mistake by White on move 31, this would have been the losing move by White, as it shifts the game evaluation to over 1.40 in favor of Black. It therefore constitutes a blunder.
<The move <29. Ra3> is weighted at <<2.0>>, representing a blunder. Cumulative game weighting = <<2.5>>.>
Anand found this to be a fatal mistake: <Unfortunately for White, his [previous] move allows this possibility. He would have been [better] off ignoring it by playing 29.Rd1! Bf5!? An amazing move. White is ok, but would you be able to calmly play Qf1 or h3, as he is practically in a state of zugzwang, a [primary] point being 30.Qe3? Rg1+ 31.Bf1 Qa6!>
<29…Rg1+> ( 1.79)
<30. Kd2> ( 1.79) <30…Qd4+> ( 1.84)
<31. Kc2> ( 1.84) <31…Bg4> ( 0.95)
<Engine preference>: <31…Bf5+> ( 1.84). The move <31…Bg4> is a blunder as it (temporarily) concedes the win, although the nominal evaluation shift is only 0.89, reducing the game evaluation to below 1.40, from a winning advantage to a moderate advantage.
<Weighting for <31…Bg4> is therefore <<2.0>>, representing a blunder. Cumulative game weighting = <<4.5>>>
Anand gave this a <?> commenting that <Despite being 75 minutes ahead on the clock, by now I had caught up. I wanted to provoke f3. The correct way to continue was 31...Bf5+! 32.Rd3! a) 32.Kb3 Rc1! 33.a5 (33.Ra2 Bc2+! 34.Qxc2 Rxc2 35.Kxc2 Qxf2+ 36.Kb3 Qe3+ 37.Kc2 Qxf4 38.a5 Qxh2 ) 33...Qd5+! This move wins, but there are a lot of incredibly difficult moves in the winning line. 34.Bc4 a1) 34.Ka4 Bc2+ 35.Kb4 (35.b3 Bxb3+ 36.Rxb3 Qd4+ 37.Rb4 Qa1+) 35...Qd6+ 36.Kc4 Bd1+; a2) 34.Kb4 Qc5+ 35.Ka4 (35.Kb3 Bc2+ 36.Ka2 Qd5+ 37.Bc4 Qh1 38.Qxc2 Rxc2) 35...Bc2+ 36.b3 Bxb3+; 34...Qb7+ 35.Ka4 (35.Bb5 Bc2+ 36.Ka2 Qh1 mates.) 35...Rc2!! This [quiet] move is the point 36.Ba6 Qd7+ 37.Qb5 Rc4+ 38.Kb3 Qd3+ 39.Ka2 Qb1+ 40.Kb3 Rc2 41.Ra2 Be4!! 42.Bb7 Qd1 43.Ka3 Bxb7 44.Qxb7 Rc4 45.b3 Qd6+ 46.Kb2 Qd2+ 47.Ka3 Qxa5+ 48.Kb2 Qc3+ 49.Ka3 Rc5 and finally all white resistance is broken.; b) 32.Bd3 Rg2!? 33.Bxf5 Rxf2 34.Bd3 Rxe2+ 35.Bxe2 Qe4+ 36.Bd3 Qxf4 37.a5 Qxh2+ 38.Kb1 h4 39.a6 Qg1+ 40.Ka2 Qa7 and despite the mess, blacks pawns should prevail.; 32...Rg4!? This could be best 33.Kb3 Bxd3 34.Qxd3 Qxf2 keeps winning chances for black.>
<32. f3> ( 1.90) <the losing move>
<Engine preference>: <32.Rd3> ( 0.95). The move played (<32. f3>) conceded only 0.95 centipawns but constitutes a blunder as it was the losing move, shifting the position evaluation to over 1.40 in Black’s favor.
<Weighting is therefore <<2.0>>, representing a blunder. Cumulative game weighting = <<6.5>>>
Anand also gave this move a <?>, commenting that <Returning the favour. 32.Rd3! was a golden opportunity, as black has nothing more than: 32...Bf5 33.Kb3 Bxd3 34.Qxd3 Qxf2 35.Qd8! securing a perpetual.>
|Aug-29-09|| ||visayanbraindoctor: Bridgeburner: PART 6
<32…Bf5+> ( 1.90)
<33. Bd3> (#21)
<Engine preferences>: <33. Kb3> ( 1.90); <33. Rd3> ( 2.85)
The evaluation shift is unquantifiable as the forced mate replaces the numerical evaluation. Although the move actually played is a blunder in the traditional sense as it would have terminated the game almost immediately, it is not considered to be a blunder for the purposes of the method employed for this project as Black’s position was already lost, and remained so for the rest of the game. Accordingly, no weight is attached.
<33…Bh3> (-4.02 )
<Engine preference> <33…Bxd3+> (#21). The evaluation shift due to White’s move is also unquantifiable as it concedes a forced mate. However as it does not concede White’s forced win, it is not considered a mistake for the purposes of this project and as such there is no weighting attached to <33…Bh3>.
Anand gave this move a <?!>, commenting as follows: < Played instantly since this was my reason for provoking f3, but there was a stronger move: 33...Bxd3+! this wins the house instantly. 34.Rxd3 (34.Qxd3 Rg2+) 34...Qc4+. <34.a5> The alternatives were 34.Qe4 Rg2+ 35.Kd1 Qg1+ 36.Qe1 Qxh2! and Rg1 [can’t] be stopped, winning instantly. 34.Qd2 Rg2 35.Be2 Bf5+ 36.Kc1 Qg1+ 37.Qd1 Qxh2 38.Kd2 h4! 39.a5 Qxf4+ 40.Kc3 h3 41.a6 h2 42.a7 Rxe2 43.Qxe2 h1Q 44.a8Q Qc7+! This wins, but also the only move which doesn’t lose! 45.Kb4 Qb6+ 46.Ka4 Qh4+!>
|Aug-29-09|| ||visayanbraindoctor: Bridgeburner: PART 7
<34. a5> (-4.02 ) <34…Rg2> (-4.02 )
<35. a6> (-6.30 )
<Engine preference>: <35. Qxg2> (-4.02 )
<35…Rxe2+> (-6.30 )
<36. Bxe2> (-6.30 ) <35…Bf5+> (-6.10 )
<37. Kb3> (-11.36 )
<Engine preferences>: <37. Kc1> (-6.10 ); <37. Bd3> (-8.53 )
Anand: < Or 37.Bd3 Bxd3+ 38.Rxd3 Qc4+ and wins. Or 37.Kc1 Qxf4+ 38.Kd1 Qd4+ 39.Kc1 Qe5! and wins.>
<37…Qe3+> (-11.36 )
<38. Ka2> (-15.00 )
<First three engine preferences>: <38. Kb4> (-11.36 ); <38. Kc4> (-11.36 ); <38. Ka4> (-11.57 )
<38…Qxe2> (-15.00 )
<39. a7> (-18.82 )
<First three engine preferences>: <39. Rc3> (-15.00 ); <39. Ra4> (-15.68 ); <39. Kb3> (-15.97 )
<39…Qc4+> (-18.41 )
<40. Ka1> (-23.03 )
<Engine preference>: <40.Rb3> (-18.41 )
<40…Qf1+> (-21.83 )
<Engine preference>: <40…Qc2> (-23.03 )
<41. Ka2> (-21.83 ) <41…Bb1+> (-21.83 )
Anand’s final comment: <And now 42.Kb3 Qxf3+ is simple enough, so White resigned.>
|Aug-29-09|| ||visayanbraindoctor: Bridgeburner: PART 8
<Note> The fluctuations generated in the relatively low (16 minimum) ply forward slide were smoothed out as far as possible in the return slide. The corrected evaluations extracted from the return slide are used in this analysis, as they are considered more reliable than the raw evaluations generated on the initial forward slide. All moves have been evaluated on forward and return slide for completeness.
Between <-#21> (equal to infinity) applying to <33.Bd3> - representing a forced mate for Black - and < 0.76> in respect of the move group <<15…Bd6 16. Rd1 Rg8 17. g3 Rg4> representing a significant/moderate advantage for White.
<The largest evaluation shifts>:
- for White was #21 between <32…Bf5+> ( 1.90) and <33. Bd3>
- for Black was from -#21 between <33. Bd3> and <33…Bh3> ( 4.02)
• 93.9% of the ply in this game (77/82) coincided with engine preferences 1, 2 or 3
• 86.6% of the ply in the game (71/82) coincided with engine preferences 1 or 2
• 58.5% of the ply in the game (48/82) coincided with the engine’s first preference
• 92.7% of Kramnik’s moves (38/41) coincided with the engine preferences 1, 2 and 3
• 95.1% of Anand’s moves (39/41) coincided engine preferences 1, 2 and 3
• 80.5% of Kramnik’s moves (33/41) coincided with engine preferences 1 and 2
• 92.7% of Anand’s moves (38/41) coincided with engine preferences 1 and 2
• 53.7% of Kramnik’s moves (22/41) coincided with the engine’s first preference
• 63.4% (26/41) of Anand’s moves coincided with the engines first preference.
<The engine evaluation of the final position>:
is <-21.83 > consequent upon a 22 ply analysis. Note that an evaluation value of this magnitude is necessarily transitional as this is a mating attack. The true and ultimate value is of course infinity.
|Aug-29-09|| ||visayanbraindoctor: SUMMARY:
1 <blunder> by Anand:
<31…Bg4> ( 0.95)
2 <blunders> by Kramnik>:
First Kramnik blunder:
<29. Ra3> ( 1.79)
Second Kramnik blunder:
<32. f3> ( 1.90)
1 Kramnik dubious move:
<19. Nxd4> (=-0.02)
<Using method A, the game is weighted at <<6>>, representing <<1 blunder>> by Anand and <<2 blunders>> by Kramnik.>
<Under weighting method B, weighting is <<6.5>>, representing <<1 blunder>> by Anand and <<2 blunders>> and <<1 dubious move>> by Kramnik.>
See Bridgeburner chessforum for details.
|Sep-04-09|| ||Ulhumbrus: On 17 Ne1 one variation is 17...Bb4 18 Bd2 Ra5 19 Bxd7+ Kxd7 20 Qc4 Ra5-g5 21 Bxb4 Rxg2+ 22 Nxg2 Rxg2+ 23 Kf1 Ba6 24 Kxg2 Bxc4 25 Ba3 Qc6+ 26 Kg3 Qe4 27 Re1 Qg6+ 28 Kh3 e5 29 Rg1 Be6+ 30 Kh4 Qh6+ 31 Kg3 Qf4+ 32 Kg2 Qg4+ 33 Kf1 Bc4+ winning. This may be worth examining further.|
|Nov-30-09|| ||The Rocket: I simply cannot beliave how kramnik could play the move f3... which screams out blunder right at the board.|
|Jan-21-10|| ||fromoort: The comments you ascribe to Anand were actually notes made by his second, Nielsen, in an article he wrote for New in Chess magazine.|
|Mar-19-10|| ||funkymihir: Is there no way to queen?????????????????|
|Mar-19-10|| ||yalie: < funkymihir: Is there no way to queen?????????????????>|
nope. after a bunch of checks by the queen (also cleaning up the other white pawns simultaneously), bishop will come to e4 and cover the queening square.
|Apr-10-10|| ||funkymihir: yalie:nope. after a bunch of checks by the queen (also cleaning up the other white pawns simultaneously), bishop will come to e4 and cover the queening square>|
thnx yalie for answering my question
|Aug-29-10|| ||picard: Kasparov right after the game wondered if 33 Kb3 gave Kramnik a last chance. For example, 33 Kb3 Rc1 34. a5 Bc2+ 35. Qxc2 Rxc2 36. Kxc2 Qc5+ 37. Kb1 Qxb5 38. a6 Qd5 39. a7 and neither side can make progress. am i not seeing something?|
|Oct-08-10|| ||sevenseaman: Kibitzers who have followed this game real time are lucky indeed.|
This is a 'crack the whip' game. There is no stopping Vishy in this kind of flow. Not having had the privilege of real time I feel genuinely sad.
|Sep-26-11|| ||Rubberbandman: <visayanbraindoctor> some interesting stats from your engine about this game in your above posts.
Just goes to prove that GM's are mere mortals like the rest of us..but only just !|
|Jul-01-13|| ||phil6875: <picard> Your line is best up until 36. Kxc2 then 36...Qxf4 37. h3 Qf5+ 38. Bd3 Qxh3 gives Black better chances of making progress.|
|Oct-16-13|| ||DrGridlock: <visayanbraindoctor> gives a lengthy (9 part) computer analysis of this game. While daunting in its length, it misses some critical points. The methodology is to use 16-ply and 20-ply computer analyses for insights into this game. However, with a game this complex, accurate analysis needs much deeper analyses than this. One example is a critical turning point of this game, White's 18'th move. |
click for larger view
Analysis by Komodo32 3 32bit (depth=26):
1. ± (0.71): 18.b4 Ke7 19.a4 Re4 20.Qd3 Ne5 21.Nxe5 Rxe5 22.Bb2 Rxb5 23.axb5 e5 24.Rxa8 Bxa8 25.f3 Bd5 26.Ra1 Qb7 27.Kf2 h5 28.Kg2 Qc7 29.Rc1 Qb7 30.Ba3 Kf8 31.Rc5 Qa8 32.Bc1 Bxc5 33.bxc5 Qa1
2. = (0.25): 18.Nd2 Ke7 19.Bxd7 Rag8 20.Nc4 Qa6 21.Ba4 Qxa4 22.Nxd6 Kxd6 23.f3 Rh4 24.b3 Qc6 25.Ba3+ Kd7 26.Rdc1 Qxf3 27.Qxf3 Bxf3 28.Kf2 Rxh2+ 29.Kxf3 Rh3 30.Rg1 e5 31.Bb4 f5 32.Rac1 Rg4 33.Bc5 e4+
3. = (0.24): 18.a4 Qc5 19.Ne1 Re4 20.Qd3 Qh5 21.f3 Re5 22.Bd2 Rb8 23.b4 Rxb5 24.Qxb5 Qxb5 25.axb5 Bd5 26.Kg2 Ne5 27.Ra6 Nc4 28.Bh6 e5 29.Nd3 Rxb5 30.Re1 Bb7 31.Raa1 Bd5 32.Ra4 Bb8 33.Rea1 e4
4. = (0.17): 18.Bf4 Bxf4 19.Rxd4 Kf8 20.Bxd7 Rd8 21.Rad1 Rxd7 22.Rxd7 Bxg3 23.hxg3 Rxg3+ 24.Kh2 Bxf3 25.Qe3 Rg2+ 26.Kh3 Qxe3 27.fxe3 Rxb2 28.R1d2 Rb4 29.Kg3 Bc6 30.R7d4 Rb1 31.e4 Rg1+ 32.Kf2 Rg4 33.Ke3 f5
5. = (-0.05): 18.Qd3 0-0-0 19.Qe2 Kb8 20.a4 Qc5 21.Ba6 d3 22.Qxd3 Bxg3 23.Bxb7 Qxf2+ 24.Kh1 Bc7 25.Rd2 Qb6 26.h3 Rg3 27.Be4 f5 28.a5 Rxh3+ 29.Kg2 Rg8+ 30.Kxh3 Rg3+ 31.Kh4 Rg4+ 32.Kh3 Rg3+
At lower depth (20 or so plys), three options: Bf4, b4 and a4 appear to be approximately equal. <visyanbraindoctor> gives these three options evaluations of .69, .76 and .70. Going deeper (to a depth of 26), Komodo gives these three options evaluations of .17, .71 and .24. Kramnik's actual game move of 18 Bf4 is at least a "questionable move" if one analyses it in any depth.
The "project" of <visayanbraindoctor> et al, to produce a large number of shallow computer analyzed games seems to have been abandoned. At least in the case of this game, its abandonment was well deserved.
|Jun-09-14|| ||cplyakap: Stockfish says 33..Bh3 is blunder.|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 55 OF 55 ·