Magnus Carlsen vs Ivan Cheparinov (2007)

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

Kibitzing

Magnus Carlsen vs Ivan Cheparinov
World Cup (2007), Khanty-Mansiysk RUS, rd 5, Dec-06
Torre Attack: Fianchetto Defense (A48) · 1-0

ANALYSIS [x]

FEN COPIED

explore this opening	find similar games	10 more Carlsen/I Cheparinov games
sac: 28.Rxe5	PGN: download \| view \| print	Help: general \| java-troubleshooting

TIP: If you do not want to read posts by a certain member, put them on your ignore list.

For help with this chess viewer, please see the Olga Chess Viewer Quickstart Guide.

PREMIUM MEMBERS CAN REQUEST COMPUTER ANALYSIS [more info]

A COMPUTER ANNOTATED SCORE OF THIS GAME IS AVAILABLE. [CLICK HERE]

< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 22 OF 23 · Later Kibitzing>
Dec-06-07		frogbert: actually, this might be an interesting line for black: 54 Ke5 Kxg6 55. Ba2 g4!? 56.Kf4 Kf6 57.c4 Ke6 58.Kxg4 Kd7 59.Kf5 Kd6 60.Ke4 Kd7 61.Kd5 Kc7 click for larger view does white have time to capture a3 here? if not, how does white continue?

Dec-06-07		frogbert: it seems white just picks up the a-pawn and wins here. so forget it... :o)

Dec-06-07		tamar: Or 54 Bb3 or 54 Ba2 also win.

Dec-06-07		percyblakeney: I think Cheparinov was in some trouble already before 41. ... Kf6. Doing nothing leads to Carlsen playing Nb4-d5-c7, and it's probably not an easy position to defend.

Dec-06-07		Ulhumbrus: I have no objection to computer analysis, if the kibitzer says that it computer analysis. It adds to our knowledge of the resources contained in the position. As for the ending, it may be that it is lost for Black in the following way: if Black avoids letting White get a simple win, White manages then to get a tricky win. So Black is unable to avoid both a simple defeat and a tricky defeat as well.

Dec-06-07		frogbert: tamar, 54 bb3 and ba2 is the same variation i think, with the same motifs as above. :o)

Dec-06-07		tamar: Like <Ulhumbrus> I think the value of computer analysis outweighs its obnoxious factor, as it allows us to comprehend players 500+ points above us. But maybe chessgames could create an icon we could place at the start of any such post that would alert those who hate it to ignore those posts.

Dec-06-07		Ulhumbrus: I am sending this again, after having seen a mistake by omission. I have no objection to computer analysis, if the kibitzer says that it is computer analysis. It adds to our knowledge of the resources contained in the position. As for the ending, it may be that it is lost for Black in the following way: if Black avoids letting White get a simple win, White manages then to get a tricky win. So Black is unable to avoid both a simple defeat and a tricky defeat as well.

Dec-06-07		Peligroso Patzer: <tamar: *** I don't see much problem winning after 54 Ba2 or 54 Ke5 > Both moves are probably winning (in the case of 54. Ba2, assuming White follows up with 55. Ke5 - Black's King must be denied access to the f6-square), but the follow-up play remains difficult, not routine, so your phrase "don't see much problem winning" after either of those moves may be a bit cavalier.

Dec-06-07		Open Defence: i saw this at another site by using <hint> </hint> tags you could hide certain text of your post so that only the word hint was displayed.. it was very useful in puzzle solutions and can be applied to computer analysis so those who dont want to see it are not forced to

Dec-06-07		keres777: What's wrong with 32...Qxg4+ anyone? What am I missing?

Dec-06-07		tamar: <frogbert> right. The position is simplified, and objectively won for White. Carlsen relaxed and picked a move which only drew, due to a neat trick.

Dec-06-07		tamar: <Peligroso Patzer> It might be difficult, hard to say after the fact, but winning with an extra bishop usually means shouldering aside the opposing King with your King, so Ke5 looks pretty natural to me.

Dec-06-07		tamar: Open Defence> I see on sites like the Find the Move puzzles by our own User: WTHarvey you can create an invisible field between brackets only revealed when the user highlights it. Is that what you were thinking of? And is that possible easily?

Dec-06-07		TrueBlue: 19 .. Nd4 was a mistake

Dec-06-07		acirce: <I think Cheparinov was in some trouble already before 41. ... Kf6.> So did I around that time, and it still seems like it -- although it is almost certainly not lost.

Dec-06-07		Peligroso Patzer: <tamar: <Peligroso Patzer> It might be difficult, hard to say after the fact, but winning with an extra bishop usually means shouldering aside the opposing King with your King, so [54.] Ke5 looks pretty natural to me.> No question that 54. Ke5 was a natural move, but in difficult, technical endgames, the natural moves are not always the correct ones. In this case they happened to coincide (the natural and the accurate moves), but often they do not. It requires meticulous calculation to verify which move is really the correct one. Bearing in mind that if Cheparinov could have brought his e- and g-pawns to the same rank (e.g., the algebraic 5th), or get them to the e5- and g4-squares, whilst White's Bishop was tied to a2, the position almost certainly could not have been won by White, the necessary calculations here were very difficult. In hindsight, it may seem obvious that 54. Ke5 is the best way to prevent a later ... e5, but Carlsen just had too little time to complete the necessary calculations, including, for example, what I believe was White's biggest technical problem in this endgame: how to deal with a possible ... g4 at some point that would require the White King to move towards that pawn, thereby allowing ... e5.

Dec-06-07		tamar: I just disagree that this position is very difficult with White on move: click for larger view White must play accurately, but most of the heavy lifting is over. Black's King must give way.

Dec-06-07		Peligroso Patzer: You are probably right, <tamar> that even with limited time, it should have been possible to calculate (from the position in your most recent post) that White wins with something like: 55. Ba2 g4 56. Kf4 Kh5 57. c4 e5+ 58. Kg3 Kg5 59. c5 Kf6 60. Kxg4 Ke7 61. Kf5 Kd7 62. Kxe5 Kc6 63. Kd4 , but White had to be sure not to allow either (1) his c-pawn to be captured by White's King or (2) Black's e- and g-passed pawns to get into an unattackable configuration. There is no margin for error (not one tempo) in the winning lines against these potential drawing tricks at Black's disposal. So the calculations needed to be exact, and time was very short.

Dec-06-07		tamar: Whoever is right about subjective difficulty, I was happy to see a position where I could at least begin to understand the moves. The earlier part where Carlsen went from a mishmash formation on move 35- click for larger view to textbook bishop and knight co-ordination on move 48 click for larger view is a magic I can appreciate, but not really fathom.

Dec-06-07		dabearsrock1010: 50. g5 is a really neat move that I definitely would have missed

Dec-06-07		Jim Bartle: I would have, too, but about ten kibitzers were calling for it before it was played.

Dec-06-07		dabearsrock1010: <jim bartle> oh we definitely have some really strong players on this site im just saying for the intermediate player like me g5 is pretty cool

Dec-06-07		Xaurus: < I would have, too, but about ten kibitzers were calling for it before it was played.> I bet 90% of them were using Rybka.

Dec-06-07		Shams: is it obvious to everyone that black had to trade queens on move 32 instead of playing ...Qxg4+<?> it's not to me.

Jump to page # (enter # from 1 to 23)
search thread:
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 22 OF 23 · Later Kibitzing>

NOTE: Create an account today to post replies and access other powerful features which are available only to registered users. Becoming a member is free, anonymous, and takes less than 1 minute! If you already have a username, then simply login login under your username now to join the discussion.

Please observe our posting guidelines:

No obscene, racist, sexist, or profane language.
No spamming, advertising, duplicate, or gibberish posts.
No vitriolic or systematic personal attacks against other members.
Nothing in violation of United States law.
No cyberstalking or malicious posting of negative or private information (doxing/doxxing) of members.
No trolling.
The use of "sock puppet" accounts to circumvent disciplinary action taken by moderators, create a false impression of consensus or support, or stage conversations, is prohibited.
Do not degrade Chessgames or any of it's staff/volunteers.

Please try to maintain a semblance of civility at all times.

See something that violates our rules? Blow the whistle and inform a moderator.

NOTE: Please keep all discussion on-topic. This forum is for this specific game only. To discuss chess or this site in general, 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 ultimately at the sole discretion of the administration.

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