| Feb-11-05 | | siggemannen: good game from Gelfand, managed to restrain the c5-move which is 101 in catalan openings, 18. Nd5!! is a nice move, removing black's bishop |
|
| Feb-16-05 | | patzer2: B Gelfand (2696) - P Harikrishna (2632) [E06]
Bermuda International Bermuda BER (8), 07.02.2005
1.d4 Nf6 2.Nf3 e6 3.c4 d5 4.g3 Be7 5.Bg2 0–0 6.0–0 dxc4 7.Qc2 a6 8.Qxc4 b5 9.Qc2 Bb7 10.Bd2 Nbd7 11.Ba5 Ra7 12.Rc1 Be4 13.Qb3 Qb8 14.Qe3 b4 15.Nbd2 Ba8 16.Nb3 Rc8 17.Rc2 Be4 18.Ne5 Bxg2 <Taking the offered Rook exposes Black to a decisive discovered attack after 18...Bxc2?? 19.Nc6! Qb5 20.Nxe7+ Kf8 21.Nxc8 Rb7 22.Bxb7 Qxb7 23.Rc1 Qxc8 24.Rxc2  > 19.Nxd7 Nxd7 20.Kxg2 Qb5 21.Rac1 c6 22.Qf3 Nb8 23.Rc4 Rd7 24.e3 h6 25.Qe2 Re8 26.Qe1 Qa4? <26...c5! 27.dxc5 Nc6 28.Bxb4 Bf6 29.Ba3 a5 30.R4c2 a4 31.Nd2 Ne5 32.c6 Rc7 33.Qf1 Qb6 34.f4 Ng4 35.Nc4 Nxe3+ 36.Nxe3 Qxe3 37.Qf3 Qb6 38.Bd6 Rcc8 39.Rd1 Red8 40.b3 Bd4 41.Be5 Bxe5 42.Rxd8+ Rxd8 43.fxe5 Qc7 44.Qe3 Rd5 45.Rc4 Rxe5 46.Qxe5 Qxe5 47.c7 Qe2+ 48.Kg1 Qe1+ 49.Kg2 Qe2+ 50.Kg1 (50.Kh3?? Qf1+ 51.Kh4 g5+ 52.Kh5 Kh7 53.c8Q Qe2+ 54.Rg4 Qxh2+ 55.Rh4 gxh4 56.gxh4 Qe2#) 50...Qe1+ 51.Kg2 Qe2  Draw by threefold repetition. > 27.Bxb4! Qxa2 < 27...Bxb4?? 28.Rxb4 Qxa2 29.Ra1 > 28.Qc3 Bxb4 29.Rxb4 c5 30.dxc5 a5 31.Nxa5 Qd5+ 32.e4 Qa8 33.c6 Rc7 34.Rc4 Na6 35.b4 Qb8 36.Nb7 Rxc6 37.Rxc6 Qxb7 38.Rc8 1–0 |
|
| Feb-16-05 | | patzer2: Observations:
(1) 18. Ne5!? sets a pretty trap offering a poisoned Rook, which brings the position crashing down on Black should he dare accept it with 18...Bxc2?? 19. Nc6! (2) 26...Qa4? was the miscue that lost the game. Black had to try 26...c5! with chances of holding the draw. (3) After the deflection capture 27. Bxb4!, the Bishop is poison and leaves Black with a decisive advantage (pawn plus and soon to capture the isolated pawn on c6 for a winning endgame). (4) Taking the poison Knight offer 31. Nxa5 with 31...Qxa5?? leaves Black facing a decisive discovered attack after 32. Rxb8! |
|
| Feb-16-05 | | Saruman: <patzer2>>>Too much poison. |
|
| Feb-17-05 | | Flyboy216: My Crafty thinks 29 ... c5 is a ??, although it thinks black is already lost. |
|
| Feb-17-05 | | your brilliance: Where did black go wrong? It almost seems like this should be part of opening theory since white gets enormous sustained pressure on the c-file from move 10 or 11 onward, and that is what eventually cracks black. |
|
| Feb-17-05 | | siggemannen: yes, how is 29. c5 good, just loses some pawns. |
|
| Feb-17-05 | | patzer2: <Saruman: patzer2: Too much poison.> Indeed! After seeing this game, Gelfand's opponents will think twice before capturing any of his "en prise" pieces. |
|
| Feb-17-05 | | patzer2: <Flyboy216: My Crafty thinks 29 ... c5 is a ??> I also agree that it is bad, but the recommended improvement was 26...c5! What does Crafty think of it? |
|
| Feb-18-05 | | Flyboy216: <patzer2>: Crafty thinks 26...♖b7 is better. 26...c5 drops some points in eval after 27. dxc5 ♘c6 28. ♗xb4 ♘e5 29. ♘d4 ♕b8 30. c6 ♖d5 31. ♗xe7 ♘xc4 32. ♖xc4 ♖xe7 (My 29. ...c5 was in reference to the text move, of course. Correct was ...a5) |
|
| Feb-18-05 | | Flyboy216: To clarify, Crafty finds white slightly better after 26 ...♖b7 27. ♕d2 ♕a4 28. ♕c2 ♖b5 29. ♗c7 ♖c8 30. ♗xb8 ♖bxb8 31. ♖xc6 ♖xc6 32. ♕xc6 ♕xa2 33. ♕c7 ♖e8 34. ♕d7 ♔f8 |
|
| Feb-18-05 | | patzer2: <Flyboy> Thanks for the analysis of 26...c5!?, and the 26...Rb7!? alternative. Both are better than 26...Qa4? |
|
| Feb-18-05 | | Flyboy216: <patzer2> Actually, it finds 26...Qa4 better than 26...c5. Mind you, I'm a REAL patzer, so I can't do much more good than citing computer moves :-\ |
|
| Feb-20-05 | | patzer2: <Flyboy216> How deep did you have Crafty search the possibilities after 26...Qa4? My look with Fritz 8 indicates it's a bust. |
|
Mar-13-24
 | | plang: In Gelfand's analysis of the game both in New in Chess and in Informant 92 he gives the move order as 10..Ra7 11 Rc1..Be4 12 Qb3..Nbd7 13 Ba5. On the other hand Kavalek and Byrne show the move order used on this site. I tend to believe Gelfand's version as he shows detailed analysis of what his thinking was early in the game in NIC. Additionally, the same move order was used in his game with Anand at the 2004 Calvia Olympiad where he played 13 Bb4 and the game quickly ended in a draw. Here he improved with 13 Ba5. In the 2nd round Gelfand had played 14 Nbd7 against Vescovi and the game had also ended in a quick draw; here, in the 8th round, he diverged with the new move 14 Qe3. 14..b4!? prevented White's b4 push but weakened Black's b-pawn. 16..Rc8?! was a cause of Black's problems as not only does Black not achieve ..c5 but after White doubles rooks the pin on the c-file becomes an issue. Black offered a draw after playing 17..Be4 but Gelfand felt he had a solid advantage. 18..Bxc2? 19 Nc6 would have ended the game on the spot. In time pressure Black lost time with 23..Rd7?! and 24..h6?! when he could have been preparing ..e5 with ..Re8 and ..Bf8. Black apparently became tired of passive defense with 26..Qa4?! which took his queen out of play. Despite this loss Harikrishna finished in a tie for first with Gelfand in this 6 player double round robin. |
|
Kibitzing
