|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 8 OF 9 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Mar-13-14 | | DrGridlock: <cro777: <DrGridlock> GM Gilberto Milos in his analysis gives the following variation
22...Nc5 23. Bxc5 Rxc5 24. Rd7 Re2 with counterplay.
This variation I had in mind in the first place.> In the Gilberto 22 Nc5 line, Komodo finds some forcing tactics: 
click for larger viewAnalysis by Komodo32 3 32bit:
1. ² (0.68): 25.Rxf7 Bd5 26.Rf5 c6 27.Rb1 g6 28.Bxd5+ Rxd5 29.Rxd5 cxd5 30.g3 Kg7 31.Kg2 Rc2 32.Kf3 h5 33.Ke3 Kf6 34.a3 a5 35.h4 Ke5 36.f4+ Kd6 37.Kd4 Re2 where a .68 valuation doesn't find much "counterplay" for Black. Just looking positionally, White takes on f7 to win a pawn, ties up black's bishop on d5 with a pin, and then exchanges the pinned pieces in a grand flurish. Not clear to me what "counterplay" black is buying in this line. |
|
| Mar-13-14 | | DrAttitude: Whoa!! Whoa!!! Wow!!!! World Number 2 is beaten. This is a MAJOR UPSET! Usually The World Number 2 has Anand's "number" and Anand struggles against Aronian. I am shocked!!! |
|
| Mar-13-14 | | neilpatterson: 38. Rxc6 looks better to me. (after 38. ... Nxc3 39. R6xc3 a pawn is won and good pressure is exerted at c8). On the other hand, what do I know? You can't argue with success and it strangely looks like Anand had the whole rest of the game planned out from this point on. |
|
| Mar-14-14 | | haydn20: Instead of 11...Qd7, it looks like 11...f3 gives Black a completely comfortable game, tho' that's maybe not what Black wanted. Also, I didn't see 22...Nf6 as immediately losing. But 23...c6 was a stinker, relegating the LSB to the role of giant pawn. I tried 23...Be4 first and haven't found a clear path to a White win. That being said, Anand kept setting problems for Levon and the pressure did him in. A fine game for Anand. |
|
| Mar-14-14 | | whiteshark: GM Gilberto Milos annotates: http://en.chessbase.com/post/candid... |
|
| Mar-16-14 | | erniecohen: Should this be classified as a (bad) Marshall? The only difference at move 9 is White has advanced his QB pawn instead of the QP, which should make things worse for Black. (Of course Black subsequently wanders off into a bad variation.) |
|
| Mar-16-14 | | Everett: Anand likely has a lot of Ruy material left over from the WC, especially in the d3 lines. |
|
| Mar-17-14 | | Terminal B: Is Anand wearing a hairpiece? |
|
| Mar-17-14 | | RedShield: Is the Pope an Argentinian? |
|
| Mar-26-14 | | rahulthemoron: Interviewer:....the 2014 Candidates tournament. Are there any games or positions that have struck you as particularly interesting or beautiful? Carlsen: I was impressed by Anand's win against Aronian in the first round. It's not often that you beat the number two player in the world purely by technique. "impressed"? be afraid, be very afraid |
|
| Apr-03-14 | | Conrad93: This is like the early Marshall Gambit, except with 11. Nbd2, and a slightly different pawn structure. |
|
| Apr-03-14 | | Conrad93: Check this game out for comparison:
Anand vs Caruana, 2013 |
|
| Apr-03-14 | | Eyal: Strange that Aronian's novelty 11...Qd7 was actually a brilliant trap, only he missed how strong it was and didn't follow through with 13...Nf4! (instead of Nf6) 14.Nf3 (14.Ne4 Ng6) 14...Nxg2!! 15.Kxg2 a5!! (threatening to capture the bishop with a4 & preparing a rook lift to g6 via a6). As L'ami notes (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0OK...), it might have led to a completely different result to the game - and perhaps the whole tournament. Delchev also noted on chessbomb, during his live commentary, that Cheparinov showed him this idea several years ago
(http://chessbomb.com/o/2014-candida...). |
|
| Apr-03-14 | | anandrulez: Eyal : So is that that this is a home prep by Vishy or did he refute a novelty OTB ?
Curious because Corus 2013 win by Vishy was a home prep and he admitted that later on .
For a person of Vishy's calibre home prep is less of an achievement than OTB play and vs folks like Carlsen OTB is more important than novelties .
I think novelties are almost never going to work with Carlsen ? Currently he seems to avoid them very smartly . |
|
| Apr-03-14 | | Eyal: I wouldn't call it "refuted" - rather, as L'Ami puts it, being lucky that Aronian's prep for his own (potentially great) novelty was sloppy. Once the big danger was avoided with 13...Nf6, Vishy just won by playing a very good positional game - which is probably a good sign for him as far as the match with Carlsen is concerned... |
|
| Apr-03-14 | | diceman: <Terminal B:
Is Anand wearing a hairpiece?>
No.
It was thinning, but after the Carlsen match grew back. |
|
| Apr-03-14 | | RedShield: <Is Anand wearing a hairpiece?> It's wearing him. |
|
| Apr-03-14 | | Everett: <eyal> thank you for that. The kind of attack at the king, so quickly out of the opening, is reminiscent of Bronstein. Too bad Aronian missed the line. Was it mentioned by Anand or Aronian in the post-mortem? |
|
| Apr-03-14 | | cro777: In the position after 13...Nf4 14.Nf3
click for larger viewGM Alex Baburin (Chesstoday) considered 14...Nxh3+:
"My Houdini likes the idea of 13...Nf4 14.Nf3 Nxh3+ 15.gxh3 c5 but I suppose that Aronian had looked at it and found that it was inferior to the positional approach 13...Nf6" Houdini 3 at 35 ply gives:
(-0.21) 14...Nxg2 15.Kxg2 a5 |
|
| Apr-03-14 | | Ulhumbrus: <Strange that Aronian's novelty 11...Qd7 was actually a brilliant trap, only he missed how strong it was and didn't follow through with 13...Nf4! (instead of Nf6) 14.Nf3 (14.Ne4 Ng6) 14...Nxg2!! 15.Kxg2 a5!! (threatening to capture the bishop with a4 & preparing a rook lift to g6 via a6). As L'ami notes (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0OK...), it might have led to a completely different result to the game - and perhaps the whole tournament. Delchev also noted on chessbomb, during his live commentary, that Cheparinov showed him this idea several years ago (http://chessbomb.com/o/2014-candida...).> The Houdini analysis on the official site after 13...Nf4 goes 14 Nf3 14...Ng6 ( Houdini does not even consider 14...Nxg2)15 Rh5 Qd6 16 c3 Ra8-d8 17 d4 h6 18 a4 b4 19 Bd2 Nf4 20 Ra5 bxc3 21 bxc3 Qb6 22 Re5 Bxf3 23 Qxf3 Bd6 24 Bxf4 Bxe5 25 Bxe5 Qxb3 26 Qg3 g6 27 Bxc7 and Houdini assesses this as 0.41 compared with 0.26 after 13...Nf6 for which Houdini gives 14 Nf3 Bd6 15 Re1 Re8 16 Bd2 Rxe1 17 Nxe1 Re8 18 a4 h6 19 Nf3 b4 20 a5 Bd5 21 Bxd5 Nxd5 22 c4 bxc3 23 bxc3 Qf5 24 c4 Nf5 25 Bxf4 |
|
| Apr-03-14 | | Eyal: <Houdini 3 at 35 ply gives:
(-0.21) 14...Nxg2 15.Kxg2 a5>
There you go – not Baburin's 14...Nxh3. Looking at it a bit with my own engine, I got the impression that it has a problem in evaluating the full force of Black's attack (that's why it's easy to miss it in the first place, even if you look at the position after 13...Nf4 with an engine) and that the evaluations get better for Black if you slide forward in the variations (most of them are rather forcing). But it's not only the evaluations – the position is extremely sharp and dangerous for White, and a player with home-prep who manages to surprise his opponent into such a line would have a massive advantage over the board. Btw, I'm not surprised Delchev mentioned Cheparinov as a source in that chessbomb commentary I referred to – that's exactly the kind of ideas the latter was so good at finding for Topalov when he worked for him as a second. |
|
| Apr-03-14 | | DrGridlock: Some discussion on whether 13 ... Nf4 was an opening trap (and improvement on 13 ... Nf6). The L'Ami line is: 13...Nf4! 14.Nf3 14...Nxg2!! 15.Kxg2 a5!!
After which L'Ami finds:
16 a4 Ra6 17 d4 Rg6+ 18 Kh2 Bd6
with the observation that, "White can hardly move."
While that line leads to a good position for black, the improvement for White is 17 Qe2 instead of 17 d4. Komodo finds: Viswanathan Anand - Levon Aronian
click for larger view1. = (0.12): 17.Qe2 Rg6+ 18.Kh2 Bd6 19.Nh4 Rg1 20.Kxg1 Qxh3 21.f3 Qg3+ 22.Qg2 Qxe5 23.Bh6 bxa4 24.Bxg7 Bc5+ 25.Kf1 Qxg7 26.Rxa4 Bc8 27.Qxg7+ Kxg7 28.Rxa5 Bd4 29.Nf5+ Bxf5 30.Rxf5 Bxb2 31.Rc5 Rc8 32.Bd5 Bd4 2. µ (-0.83): 17.d4 Rg6+ 18.Kh2 Bd6 19.c3 Qc6 20.d5 Qd7 21.Bf4 Bc8 22.Rh5 Bxf4+ 23.Kh1 Rh6 24.Rxh6 Bxh6 25.Ng1 g6 26.Qg4 bxa4 27.Qxa4 Qxa4 28.Rxa4 Bf5 29.Bc4 Rb8 30.Ra2 Be4+ 31.f3 Bb1 32.Rxa5 Rxb2 In doing computer analyses of these lines, it's important to know to which depth analyses are done. "Official site" and "game time" analyses are usually to a small ply depth, and in this position often lead to incorrect evaluations. |
|
| Apr-03-14 | | Eyal: <1. = (0.12): 17.Qe2 Rg6+ 18.Kh2 Bd6 19.Nh4 Rg1 20.Kxg1 Qxh3 21.f3 Qg3+ 22.Qg2 Qxe5 23.Bh6 bxa4 24.Bxg7 Bc5+ 25.Kf1 Qxg7 26.Rxa4 Bc8 27.Qxg7+ Kxg7 28.Rxa5 Bd4 29.Nf5+ Bxf5 30.Rxf5 Bxb2 31.Rc5 Rc8 32.Bd5 Bd4> I actually looked at this line. Try instead 19...Bxe5+ 20.Qxe5 Re8 and you'll see the evaluation changing in favor of Black. |
|
| Apr-03-14 | | anandrulez: Interesting it reminds be of Kasparov Topalov famous game from 1999 - where Kxd4 and Topalov might have been winning . Its clear that luck favoured Vishy here . Levon got punished for being passive . Few questions I have :-
1) So is Nf4 winning ? It looks really promising . If so - Anand's Ne4 was the right idea or was it Bc2 that was better ? 2) Would Super GM's be able to calculate this type of Nxg2 OTB in modern day scenario where we just tend to respect another persons preperation ? Perhaps psychologically Aronian trusted Anand's Ne4 (assuming Aronian thought Anand prepared it ) |
|
| Apr-03-14 | | DrGridlock: <Eyal> In the 17 Qe2 line, 19 ... Bxe5+ does appear to be an improvement for Black over 19 ... Rg1. The 13 ... Nf4 line (instead of 13 ... Nf6) is very complicated. It's hard for computers to get the correct evaluations, and takes a very deep search. It also appears that 16 c3 may be an improvement for White over 16 a4. |
|
 |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 8 OF 9 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
