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


register now - it's free!
Viswanathan Anand vs Vladimir Kramnik
Anand - Kramnik World Championship Match (2008)  ·  Slav Defense: Czech Variation. Classical System (D19)  ·  1/2-1/2
To move:
Last move:

explore this opening
find similar games 166 more Anand/Kramnik games
PGN: download | view | print Help: general | java-troubleshooting

TIP: The tournament is found above the game. For the newest chess events, this information may be a link which takes you to the tournament page which includes other games, a crosstable, discussion, etc.

PGN Viewer:  What is this?
For help with the default chess viewer, please see the Pgn4web Quickstart Guide.

Kibitzer's Corner
< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 32 OF 32 ·  Later Kibitzing>
Oct-23-08  kbng11: Just some thought.
In move 34 instead of Kd3, Anand played e4 and then Ke3, Kd4 and trade off the rooks by Rxc3, Rxc3, Kxc3.

Can he able to squeeze a win out by penetrating on g file, or at least force a zugzwang position? (since he has a bishop to lost tempo)

Oct-24-08  whatthefat: <kbng11>

Look three posts above.

Oct-24-08  you vs yourself: <Has L'Ami's idea been tested?

<33. Kd1 Kf7 (33... Rc4 34. Kc2 Kf7 (34... Rxa4 35. Kxc3 and 36.Kd3 is bad) 35. Kd3 Rc8 36. Rxc3 Rxc3+ 37. Kxc3) 34. Kc2 Nc5 35. Rf1+! Kg6 (35... Kg8) 36. Rf8! Rxf8 37. Bxf8 Nxa4 38. Be7!>>

Not sure. Hopefully <Mateo>, <Eyal> or someone with rybka takes a good look at this line and see if black can save. I mean, if L'Ami gave this variation after the game, he probably spent a little time on it and maybe white missed a win.

Oct-24-08  tinpaper24: maybe kasparov can come back and redeem his student :)
Oct-24-08  yalie: <yalie: am too lazy to go through 30 odd pages - but is it true Anand missed a possible winning advatage by playing 33.Rc2 instead of 33.Kd1? any good analysis? when i play myself, white just win everytime with Kd1 - but I may have missed a key resource somewhere.>

I am increasingly convinced Anand missed a clear win here. Kd1 wins in almost everyline I play against comp.

Oct-24-08
Premium Chessgames Member
  notyetagm: <you vs yourself: <Has L'Ami's idea been tested? <33. Kd1 Kf7 (33... Rc4 34. Kc2 Kf7 (34... Rxa4 35. Kxc3 and 36.Kd3 is bad) 35. Kd3 Rc8 36. Rxc3 Rxc3+ 37. Kxc3) 34. Kc2 Nc5 35. Rf1+! Kg6 (35... Kg8) 36. Rf8! Rxf8 37. Bxf8 Nxa4 38. Be7!>>

Not sure. Hopefully <Mateo>, <Eyal> or someone with rybka takes a good look at this line and see if black can save. I mean, if L'Ami gave this variation after the game, he probably spent a little time on it and maybe white missed a win.>

<yalie: <yalie: am too lazy to go through 30 odd pages - but is it true Anand missed a possible winning advatage by playing 33.Rc2 instead of 33.Kd1? any good analysis? when i play myself, white just win everytime with Kd1 - but I may have missed a key resource somewhere.>

I am increasingly convinced Anand missed a clear win here. Kd1 wins in almost everyline I play against comp.>

Someone should ask endgame expert GM Speelman what he thinks about this 33 Kd1 idea.

Oct-24-08
Premium Chessgames Member
  notyetagm: <notyetagm: ... Someone should ask endgame expert GM Speelman what he thinks about this 33 d1 idea.>

I just did. I left a message for his <speelman> account on ICC.

Oct-25-08  Palma Vest: Anand did seem to miss the win here. Here's the line provided by Malcolm Pein in chessbase.

"There are interesting lines after 33.Kd3 c2? 34.Rxc2 Rxc2 35.Kxc2 Black's knight has no moves. White would like to set up a zugzwang with King on d4, pawn on e4 and bishop on e3. I thought this could not be organised without allowing Nc5 but I wonder if that matters. 35...Kh6 36.Kd3 Kg6 37.Kd4 Kh6 38.Ba3 Kg6 39.e4 Kh6 40.Bc1 Threat h4 40...Kg6 41.Be3Nc5 (41...Nf8 42.Kd3 Nd7 43.Kc3 ) 42.Kc4 Nxa4 43.Kb3 wins. However Black plays 33.Kd3 Nc5+ as in the game and draws."

Of course Anand is not Fischer, well known for Bishop endgame expert.

Oct-25-08  you vs yourself: <Palma Vest> Pein just does some superficial analysis-given that he has to submit it the same day, you can't blame him for not doing some deep analysis I guess. In his notes for 8th game for example, he didn't even mention the key moment when white could've played 25.Rf3 or Qc2 and get an edge.

In the line you posted for this game though, he just says c2 loses and gives a long line about how it does. However at the end, he says 33..Nc5+ instead of c2 draws.

Oct-25-08
Premium Chessgames Member
  Eyal: <L'Ami thinks he has found a win for White: 33. Kd1 Kf7 (33... Rc4 34. Kc2 Kf7 (34... Rxa4 35. Kxc3 and 36.Kd3 is bad) 35. Kd3 Rc8 36. Rxc3 Rxc3+ 37. Kxc3) 34. Kc2 Nc5 35. Rf1+! Kg6 (35... Kg8) 36. Rf8! Rxf8 37. Bxf8 Nxa4 38. Be7!>

<you vs yourself> Well, I'm not sure... L'Ami's idea is certainly interesting; the 33...Rc4 line leads to a position where the winning plan described by Har-Zvi can be utilized. However, in the 33...Kf7 line I'm not sure what's the plan in case of 35...Kg8 (which appears in brackets with no continuation following), since then White cannot play Rf8.

At any rate, it would have been at least a way for Anand to keep pressing for the win a little while longer.

Oct-25-08
Premium Chessgames Member
  KingG: After this game Kramnik said that it's not so easy to get winning chances against 1.d4. Well, it seems to me he could have at least tried 4...e6, which has worked out quite well for Anand. Of course, there were many other choices earlier as well, but obviously if you restrict your defences to 1.d4 to the Slav and the Nimzo/QID, then yes it will difficult to get winning chances. I'm sure someone like Morozevich or Ivanchuk would find ways of creating some complications as Black against 1.d4 in a must win situation.
Oct-25-08  Vishy but not Anand: <KingG: After this game Kramnik said that it's not so easy to get winning chances against 1.d4. Well, it seems to me he could have at least tried 4...e6, which has worked out quite well for Anand. Of course, there were many other choices earlier as well, but obviously if you restrict your defences to 1.d4 to the Slav and the Nimzo/QID, then yes it will difficult to get winning chances. I'm sure someone like Morozevich or Ivanchuk would find ways of creating some complications as Black against 1.d4 in a must win situation.>

You are right but Ivanchuk and Morozevich are very imaginative players and being very good tournament players makes them flexible to adjust their games strategy almost instantly.

Kramnik is only good in a match play, he can be of equal or beat anybody if they get tired of a draw and if they play as they were as Kramnik with his strong chess program studied thoroughly and prepared counter-moves. If Anand only plays almost the same openings like in Mexico, Kramnik has a better chance. His preparation with his very strong chess programs can find atleast how to counter up to draw the previous games of Anand which were all e4 openings. But unfortunately Anand plays d4 and even Kramnik is a d4 player, those opening variations he memorized for almost a year that his chess programs had found were almost all wasted in the current WCC match. It becomes like a tournament format for Kramnik that he is playing with another strong player and like in the tournament, his scores are not so impressive but always draw due to he needs almost a year for each of his opponents to study each of their styles and games. If he is playing with 10 opponents in the strong tournament, he needs 10 years to be the 1st place. So expect his worst results. But if the mathc will be stopped now and give him another year to study d4 again then he will have a little bit better chance.

He is not as genius as Ivanchuk or Morozevich who could play in different formats with different opponents. In my opinion, if Kasparov did not pick Kramnik as his personal challenger in 2000. Kramnik will never be a world champion due to he needs to topped each qualifying rounds for WCC before he can become a challenger and he would of course lose like what happened with him against Shirov in 1998 who was supposed to be the official challenger.

Oct-25-08
Premium Chessgames Member
  notyetagm: <KingG: After this game Kramnik said that it's not so easy to get winning chances against 1.d4. Well, it seems to me he could have at least tried 4...e6, which has worked out quite well for Anand. Of course, there were many other choices earlier as well, but obviously if you restrict your defences to 1.d4 to the Slav and the Nimzo/QID, then yes it will difficult to get winning chances. I'm sure someone like Morozevich or Ivanchuk would find ways of creating some complications as Black against 1.d4 in a must win situation.>

Kramnik's problem is that his playing style is designed not only just for matches, but <just for matches when he has the lead>.

Then he can draw to his heart's content with Black and play for minuscule advantages with White, knowing that his lead will be safe and a draw will bring him that much closer to match victory. This is the trap that Topalov fell into when he lost the first two games at Elista.

Oct-25-08  Vishy but not Anand: <Kramnik's problem is that his playing style is designed not only just for matches, but <just for matches when he has the lead>.

His playing style is keep drawing, until his opponent gets tired and make some risky moves and if he spotted it, he might get a chance to win.

He is also lack of "Novelty", he always stays at the bookline he memorized to ensure his drawing chances are higher.

Nov-02-08  whatthefat: <notyetagm: Then he can draw to his heart's content with Black and play for minuscule advantages with White, knowing that his lead will be safe and a draw will bring him that much closer to match victory. This is the trap that Topalov fell into when he lost the first two games at Elista.>

Well that's patently false. Topalov was later leading the match 3-2.

Nov-02-08  whatthefat: <He is also lack of "Novelty", he always stays at the bookline he memorized to ensure his drawing chances are higher.>

What does that even mean? The bookline has to end somewhere, at which point a novelty is produced. The nature of the current chess world is that you can't be at the top without a bag full of novelties, and Kramnik's produced as many as the next super GM. But I suppose you probably weren't following chess pre-Mexico anyway.

Nov-02-08  shortsight: <Vishy but not Anand: ... But unfortunately Anand plays d4 and even Kramnik is a d4 player, those opening variations he memorized for almost a year that his chess programs had found were almost all wasted in the current WCC match. It becomes like a tournament format for Kramnik that he is playing with another strong player and like in the tournament, his scores are not so impressive but always draw due to he needs almost a year for each of his opponents to study each of their styles and games. If he is playing with 10 opponents in the strong tournament, he needs 10 years to be the 1st place. So expect his worst results. ...>

The analysis of Kramnik is very amusing that it is worse than Fischer's comment when he's drunk!

Aug-17-09
Premium Chessgames Member
  LIFE Master AJ: Some computers give the final position as winning for White by 2-3 points. However, the game is absolutely drawn. This led the ChessBase commentator to remark: <"Health warning: please ignore your computers, they are counting beans, not blockades ... which some of them don't really get." - IM M. Pein.>
Aug-18-09
Premium Chessgames Member
  LIFE Master AJ: http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail...

This is the link for the CB article. (I apologize if its been given before, I looked through a few pages, and did not see it.)

Oct-07-10
Premium Chessgames Member
  visayanbraindoctor: This is the analysis by User: Bridgeburner

For details please go to his forum.

Oct-07-10
Premium Chessgames Member
  visayanbraindoctor: PART 1

<INTRODUCTION>

Anand vs Kramnik, 2008 is the <seventh 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 forward slide that followed the initial reverse slide originating from the last move of the game. This smoothed out many, but not all fluctuation in the engines evaluations. The complexity of some variations, especially in the opening, was very likely too great to enable a fuller reconciliation from the initial reverse slide.

<General methods used are described in the bio at the <Bridgeburner chessforum.>

The evaluation values in the opening come at the end of initial reverse slide back to the starting position from the last move of the game. Engine preferences are included throughout the game where they differ from players preferences except in the well trodden opening and in the ending where evaluation figures became artificially inflated.

Some analysis is included to provide some idea of the reason for the engine preferences where they didnt coincide with the moves played, except in situations where the evaluation differences was very minor or otherwise irrelevant.

<Summary>

After the subtle complexity and excitement of the sixth game, most of the excitement in this game focuses on the endgame from move 31 when many engines suddenly reported highly inflated evaluations that did not reflect the completely drawn nature of the game. For the main part, this is an uneventful game with neither player making significant errors, and ends in a quiet draw in a position which is not only impossible to win, but impossible to lose unless White chose to suicide by shifting the h-pawn at an inopportune moment.

<THE GAME>

<GAME MOVES 1 9>

<1. d4> (=0.17) <1d5> (=0.17)

<2. c4> (=0.12) <2c6> ( 0.27)

<3. Nf3> (=0.13) <3Nf6> (=0.17)

<4. Nc3> (=0.13) <4dxc4> (=0.20)

<5. a4> (=0.13) <5Bf5> (=0.13)

<6. e3> (=0.13) <6e6> (=0.13)

<7. Bxc4> (=0.13) <7Bb4> (=0.13)

<8. 0-0> (=0.13) <8Nbd7> (=0.25)

<9. Qe2> (=0.18) <9Bg6> (=0.18)

A common alternative is <90-0>, while a less common but equally viable alternative seems to be <9Bg4>: Opening Explorer

Oct-07-10
Premium Chessgames Member
  visayanbraindoctor: PART 2

GAME MOVE 10:

<10. e4> (=0.00): <100-0> ( 0.28)

In Vaganian vs D Marovic, 1990, Black played <10Bh5> on this moveand was crushed. Alternatively, Black can take on the challenge and the proffered pawn (and the <engines preferred move> with <10Bxc3 11. bxc3 Nxe4>, but Whites <12. Ba3> prevents Black from castling king side. This may not be an insoluble problem, eg: <12Qc7 13. Rfc1 0-0-0 14. a5 a6> with even chances (=0.00).

Its not surprising that Kramnik did not buy into this volatile line.

GAME MOVE 11

<11. Bd3> (=0.23)

Preferred by theory over the <engines preference: 11. e5> ( 0.28): <11Nd5 12.Bg5 Qc7 13.Rfc1 N7b6 14.Nxd5 Nxd5 15.Nh4 Be7 16.Nxg6 hxg6>. Opening Explorer shows the practical breakdown between <11. Bd3> and <11. e5>.

GAME MOVE 11 to 13

<11Bh5> (=0.23)

<12. e5> (=0.23) <12Nd5> (=0.23)

<13. Nxd5> (=0.00)

<Engine preference> <13. Bd2> (=0.23)

<GAME MOVES 13 & 14>:

<13cxd5> (=0.04)

<14. Qe3> (=0.00)

Still theory, with this move being invariably played, apart from one experiment with <14. h3> that went badly wrong for White (in V Gagarin vs Wojtkiewicz, 1995)

GAME MOVE 14:

<14Re8> ( 0.44)

Intriguingly, none of the <engines first three preferences>, namely: <14f6> (=0.00); or <14f5> (=0.08) or <14Qb6> (=0.13) appear in the database, with <14Be7> being the most common response: Opening Explorer .

<GAME MOVE 15>

<15. Ne1> ( 0.27) Appears four times in the database.

<Engine preference> <15.Bd2> ( 0.44). This appears once in the database; it was won by White: F Berkes vs Portisch, 2003

GAME MOVE 15

<15Bg6> ( 0.29)

The other alternative in the database is the <engines first preference>: <15Rc8> ( 0.27), played twice: in Topalov vs Kramnik, 2006, and in P Karthikeyan vs V Diepeveen, 2009 played in the Dutch Open in 2009, in which White played the startling <16. Bxh7+> and won.

The only other game in which the text move appears was subsequently played at Linares in Ivanchuk vs Anand, 2009 which followed this game until Anand diverged with <23a5>, an innovation Anand is unlikely to repeat. That game was also drawn, albeit after 65 moves in which Anand was perhaps lucky to survive.

Oct-07-10
Premium Chessgames Member
  visayanbraindoctor: PART 3

GAME MOVES 16-17:

<16. Bxg6> ( 0.29) <16hxg6> ( 0.29)

<17. Nd3> (=0.25)

<Engine preference> <17.Bd2> ( 0.29): <17Be7 18.Nd3>

GAME MOVES 17-20:

<17Qb6> (=0.25)

<18. Nxb4> (=0.25) <18Qxb4> (=0.25)

<19. b3> (=0.25) <19Rac8> (=0.25)

<20. Ba3> (=0.20)

<Engine preference>: <20. Bd2> ( 0.25): <20Qe7 21. Rfc1 Nb8 22. b4 Rxc1+ 23. Rxc1 Qd7 24. Qa3>

GAME MOVES 20-28:

<20Qc3> (=0.20)

<21. Rac1> (=0.20) <21Qxe3> (=0.20)

<22. fxe3> (=0.20) <22f6> (=0.20)

<23. Bd6> (=0.20) <23g5> (=0.20)

<24. h3> (=0.20) <24Kf7> (=0.23)

<25. Kf2> (+0.23) <25Kg6> (=0.23)

<26. Ke2> (=0.23) <26fxe5> ( 0.51)

<Engine preference> <26Rh8>

<27. dxe5> ( 0.51) <27b6> ( 0.51)

<28. b4> ( 0.51) <28Rc4> ( 0.79)

At this stage the game becomes extremely drawish, belying the subsequent strangely inflated evaluation figures that many engines, including the Shredder 11 used in this analysis, have produced. The evaluation figures are included out of academic interest only, and for completeness for anyone to make of what they will. Functionally, they should all be =0.00.

Neither Anand nor Kramnik made any errors in the concluding phases of the game.

Oct-07-10
Premium Chessgames Member
  visayanbraindoctor: PART 4

GAME MOVES 29-37:

<29. Rxc4> ( 0.79) <29dxc4> ( 0.79)

<30. Rc1> ( 0.79) <30Rc8> ( 0.79)

<31. g4> ( 0.79) <31a5> (=1.70)

<32. b5> (=1.70) <32c3> (=1.91)

<33. Rc2> (=0.96 and shifting) <33Kf7> (=1.71)

<34. Kd3> (=1.71) <34Nc5+> (=1.71)

<35. Bxc5> (=1.71) <35Rxc5> (=1.71)

<36. Rxc3> (=1.71) <36Rxc3+> (=1.87)

<37. Kxc3> (=1.87)

Drawn. Final position:


click for larger view

<CONCLUSION>

<The game is weighted at <<0>>representing a <<0 dubious moves, bad moves or blunders>> by either Anand or Kramnik as defined in weighting methods A and B.>

Dec-07-10
Premium Chessgames Member
  Kinghunt: Quite a beautiful finish. It is literally impossible for either side to lose this, however hard they try.
Jump to page #    (enter # from 1 to 32)
< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 32 OF 32 ·  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 game 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 submit a correction slip and help us eliminate database mistakes!
This game is type: CLASSICAL (Disagree? Please submit a correction slip.)

Featured in the Following Game Collections [what is this?]
Kramnik-Anand
by fref
Game 7, Anand leads 5-2
from 2008 World Chess Championship by Penguincw
Slav Defense: Czech Variation. Classical System
from adichess' Slave by adichess
Match Kramnik!
by amadeus
Match Anand!
by amadeus
Game 7
from Kramnik-Anand 2008 by ThePawnOTron2
good
from ramzee997's favorite games by ramzee997
8...O-O 9.Qe2 Nbd7 10.e4 Bg6 11.Bd3 Bh5 12.e5 Nd5 13.Nxd5
from Slav Defence, Dutch Variation by KingG


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 | advertising | contact us
Copyright 2001-2014, Chessgames Services LLC
Web design & database development by 20/20 Technologies