http://www.europe-echecs.com/articl...

Kramnik decided to take the simplest and clearest draw. He and Anand shook hands almost immediately afterward.>

In the pre-match statements the views of Anand and Krmanik and such as Sierawan etc etc were all that they wanted to see was great chess or interesting games - Kramnik and Anand wanted to win, but the commentators and GMs observing were not particularly concerned about the result.

But they both also looked forward to great games, and expressed no enmity for their opponents.

I see Taimanov as great winner - he survived a big match defeat by Fischer but was able to keep things together despite attacks on him for that and could say how he felt he was getting an end game lesson in one game - and Larsen - Larsen continued to play despite being "crushed" - Fischer stopped - except for one match with Spassky - gradually he deteriorated while such as Benko - who stood aside - he 'sacrificed' himself so Fischer could go into the World Champs - also continued to play and live productively and compose great studies and so on - other great players lived good lives but Fischer's life and much of his world view (or out of context quotes and or misquotes of the dubious same) is not one to emulate - nor his sad philosophy of crushing people...

I seems to me that, in contrast to Fischer (of the "women have smaller brains", "Jews plot to take over the world", "Hitler was a great man." (!), "Good job!" (The Twin Towers); "weako patzers" etc...); Anand and Kramnik are dignified men (I haven't heard then raving about Jewish plots or whatever for example) - sure this is battle but it is battle between men not two socio-psychotics.

Anand for now has perhaps played the better chess - the third game was great - but Kramnik's defence has been courageous and ingenious.

* I have written about them a lot if you look back earlier to when Fischer died I gave an - albeit qualified - tribute to Fischer (especaily the great chess player Fischer - as I am not saying he wasn't a great player and a great personality - and very much a "fighter"... or that being a "fighter" is "bad"... it is how one fights.

PART 1

<INTRODUCTION>

Anand vs Kramnik, 2008 is the <fourth 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. Each move has been subject to a minimum (usually more, frequently much more) 16 ply evaluation on the reverse slide from the last move of the game, followed by the forward slide from the beginning of the game, again using a 16+ ply engine evaluation on each move.

Opening moves are included in this to generate the necessary hash tables that more comprehensively allow engine analysis. The forward 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 reverse slide. Moreover, the variations and levels in the engine’s evaluations marked of the opening moves are to some extent an artifact of the engine piggybacking earlier analysis of the game onto opening moves.

<General methods used are described in the bio.>

<Summary>

Both players seemed to be happy to play an essentially uneventful grandmaster draw game after the fury of the third game. Neither side gained more than the narrowest advantage; in fact the highest evaluated advantage mapped by the engine in the game was 0.35 in favor of White after Black’s <6…Nbd7> - a well known move in a frequently used opening.

<<Further notes by Visaya:

PART 2

<THE GAME>

GAME MOVES 1-11:

<1. d4> (=0.17) <1…Nf6> (=0.20)

<2. c4> (=0.13) <2…e6> (=0.13)

<3. Nf3> (=0.13) <3…d5> (=0.11)

<4. Nc3> (=0.13) <4…Be7> (=0.16)

<5. Bf4> (=0.08) <5…0-0> ( 0.31)

<6. e3> ( 0.31) <6…Nbd7> ( 0.35)

<7. a3> ( 0.27) <7…c5> (=0.24)

<8. cxd5> (=0.05) <8…Nxd5> (=0.05)

<9. Nxd5> (=0.05) <9…exd5> (=0.05)

<10. dxc5> (=0.05) <10…Nxc5> (=0.02)

<11. Be5> (=-0.01) <11…Bf5> (=0.12)

(The only move by Black in the CG.com database that has seen Black win a game in this drawish variation)

GAME MOVE 12:

<12. Be2> (=0.12) <12…Bf6> (=0.09)

Black played <12…Qb6> in K Hulak vs Lputian, 2005 and smashed White in 31 moves.

<12…Be4 13. 0-0 Bf6 14. Bxf6 Qxf6 15. Qd4> was played three times for 2 White wins and a draw. <15…Qd6> was played in P Tregubov vs A Goloshchapov, 2008 (won by White in 60 moves) while <15…Nb3 16. Qxf6 gxf6 17. Rad1 Rac8 18. Bd3> was played twice for one win for White and one draw.

PART 3

GAME MOVE 13:

<13. Bxf6> (=0.09)

<13. 0-0> transposes into the <12…Be4> variation noted previously.

GAME MOVE 13-14:

<13…Qxf6> (=0.11)

<14. Nd4> (=0.13) <14…Ne6> (=0.17)

The only other game in the database (to date) - A Flumbort vs A Goloshchapov, 2007 - that reached this point diverged with <14…Be4> and was also drawn, albeit after 21 moves.

GAME MOVES 15-18:

<15. Nxf5> (=0.00) <15…Qxc5> (=0.00)

<16. 0-0> (=0.00) <16…Rfd8> (=0.15)

<17. Bg4> (=0.00) <17…Qe5> (=0.00)

<18. Qb3> (=0.01) <18…Nc5> ( 0.28)

Comment: <18…d4> was also possible at this stage, and slightly preferred by the engine (=0.03).

For example: <19. Bxe6> quickly leads to a draw after <19…Qxe6 (if <19…fxe6 20. exd4 Qd5> (capture by either piece at d4 loses either the b7 pawn or the e6 pawn) <21. Qe3> and Black must defend the weak pawn.) 20. Qxe6 (if <20. Qxb7 dxe3 21. fxe3 Qxe3> concedes a slight advantage, although it is also drawish) 20…fxe6 21. exd4 Rxd4 22. Rfd1 Rad8 23. Rxd4 Rxd4> and a result is very unlikely.

PART 4

The game now flatlines.

GAME MOVES 19-29:

<19. Qb5> ( 0.20) <19…b6> (=0.20)

<20. Rfd1> (=0.15) <20…Rd6> (=0.15)

<21. Rd4> (=0.00) <21…a6> (=0.00)

<22. Qb4> (=0.00) <22…h5> (=0.14)

<23. Bh3> (=0.00) <23…Rad8> (=0.15)

<24. g3> (=0.15 <24…g5> (=0.15)

<25. Rad1> (=0.00) <25…g4> (=0.00)

<26. Bg2> ( 0.29) <26…Ne6> ( 0.29)

<27. R4d3> ( 0.29) <27…d4> ( 0.29)

<28. exd4> ( 0.29) <28…Rxd4> (=-0.11)

<29. Rxd4> (=-0.11) <29…Rxd4> (=0.00)

Draw agreed.

click for larger view

<CONCLUSION>

<Using method A, the game is weighted at 0, representing 0 bad move and 0 blunders by either Anand or Kramnik.