Members · Prefs · Laboratory · Collections · Openings · Endgames · Sacrifices · History · Search Kibitzing · Kibitzer's Café · Chessforums · Tournament Index · Players · Kibitzing
Fabiano Caruana vs Magnus Carlsen
Carlsen - Caruana World Championship Match (2018), London ENG, rd 12, Nov-26
Sicilian Defense: Lasker-Pelikan. Sveshnikov Variation (B33)  ·  1/2-1/2



Get this game explained with Decode Chess
explore this opening
find similar games 107 more Caruana/Carlsen games
PGN: download | view | print Help: general | java-troubleshooting

TIP: You can get computer analysis by clicking the "ENGINE" button below the game.

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


Kibitzer's Corner
< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 27 OF 28 ·  Later Kibitzing>
Premium Chessgames Member
  Joshka: YES WHOOPEE!!! 12 DRAWS!!!LOLO>>>WHAT A FARCE FIDE STILL IS and for all to see!!!

Format will have to be changed for any outside money coming in! Take that to the Bank!!! Total restructuring is called for!!!!

Nov-26-18  Cheapo by the Dozen: I'm coming around to the idea that a world championship being decided by a challenge match every few years isn't the way to go. Better to have an annual event with a favorable seeding for the reigning champion. MANY formats have been tried over the past 150 years, and none seems to work well. There are almost no other games or sports to point at for evidence of a working system. It's time to give up.
Nov-26-18  Cheapo by the Dozen: My current idea for a system is:

-- Decide that the world champion should excel at BOTH slow and rapid chess. (But not blitz.)

-- Have a match format alternating days with one slow game or two rapid ones, with two rapid games counting as much as one slow one.

-- Have a four-person knockout match tournament; i.e., two matches for the championship.

-- Seed them via two world championship tournaments, one each for classic and rapid chess.

-- The seeds for the overall championship = the reigning champion, the winners of the classic and rapid tournaments, and one or more others based on the two tournaments' results.

-- Blitz chess used only for last-resort tiebreakers.

Premium Chessgames Member
  Parachessus: <Joshka> is right---endless series of draws like we have seen here will drive the big bucks away.
Nov-27-18  DWTaylor Sr: <Richard Taylor> I totally agree with your statement about the match.These two players are literally equal in rating. Carlsen may be stronger in Blitz chess, Caruana seems stronger in preparations.That Caruana drew the Classical portion of the match is nothing to be ashamed of. The shame of the matter is the complaining of the draws. Really!! What do you expect from 2 players equally rated, that one would roll over and let the other one "run away " with the match? The games were quality, mistakes were made, but you can still get something out of every encounter. Stop crying and be happy. The decision is coming now in the tie -breaks.
Premium Chessgames Member
  Richard Taylor: <<DWTaylor Sr> Yes. There are many things wrong with World Champ Matches including the question, do we need them?

But I think the match as we have it was good. It could have been longer and so on.

As to prize money, we don't want to sell our souls for money. Chess needs to be for chess. If you lower the level to just pandering to the hoi polloi, or the unwashed, it is a problem.

On the other hand, we like our heros. We need a compromise.

But all else being = I think that whoever wins tomorrow (and however) has to be declared and accepted as the World Champion.

Also I think a largish tournament similar to the 1948 World Championship which was a double round robin (that I would like to see includes the World Champion him or her self [I know it seems silly to do that but I think it is a good idea] should be played every few years or say the top 20 players to "refresh" who is the world champion. Anand also won a similar tournament.

Anycase we shall see what happens tomorrow or it is nearly today depending where one is...

Premium Chessgames Member
  HeMateMe: why does kasparov say black was better, when the kingside is sealed off and all the pawns on the board lock in the two black Bishops?
Nov-27-18  RandomVisitor: <HeMateMe>Kasparov is a lot stronger player than I am, but clearly it is difficult to evaluate a position when 1. neither side can make progress, or 2. when one side has a "near fortress" position, that possibly can be maintained indefinitely.
Nov-27-18  That Roger: <HeMateMe>
Premium Chessgames Member
  Sally Simpson: ***

Hi BxChess:

"in your line after 35.Qb5, does not 35...Ra6 threaten to trap the queen with a pin?"

In the heat of the battle I thought that idea were on the board as well - hence my misguided rant post a few pages before my last one.

See my post hastily written post here. Caruana vs Carlsen, 2018 (kibitz #476)

"Ra8....Is Carlsen going a3 b3 from White Ba4."

Better recap my last post because I know you guys never look at previous posts.

Here after Carlsen has played 31...Ra8 and offered a draw.

click for larger view

32.Nh2 (what lese?) 32...a3 33.b3 Ba4

click for larger view

The Bishop has to be taken.

34.bxa4 Rxa4 and then the Ra5-Ra4 perpetual.

The Ra6 to b6 idea does not work but that is not want Carlsen was after.

click for larger view

35...Ra6 36.Bxc5 dxc5 37.Kc1 White holds. If it worked Carlsen would have gone for it.

My point was with the perpetual sitting there on the board, and if a dope like me saw the perpetual then so did Carlsen. Why offer a draw.

So have came to the conclusion a few of us owe Carlsen an apology because instead of playing the draw which he knew Caruana did not want. He used a wee bit psychology.

Basically. There is a perpetual on the table and if you try to avoid it then you are up the creek.

Carlsen makes the offer. Caruana spot the perpetual, (again if a cretin like me sees it so does he.) he spends time seeing if he can wriggle out of it or avoid it without drifting into a worse position.

No, so he agrees to the draw.

I've no idea if Carlsen said anything along these lines at the after game broadcast but there again why should he?

My other point is this a3 Ba4 idea is not the best way to go if you are a tin box super-duper computer so the box jockeys missed it.


Nov-27-18  lzromeu: Imagine a football game
Suddenly the teams agree to draw and go away.
Imagine the public in stadium
Nov-27-18  SpiritedReposte: End position still has a lot of play in it. The last slow game and they didn't play it out??
Premium Chessgames Member
  beenthere240: <Sally>
You suggest 32. Nh3 and ask "what else?" I think the computer was in fact suggesting 32. Qa3, which pretty much slams the lid on your exciting a3 line. Of course if Caruana plays this after declining a draw offer, he'll look a bit foolish.

Here's another way to avoid the draw "problem" (which I must confess I don't see). If a draw is agreed to, or forced by stalemate, repetition of moves, or insufficient force, the player with more time remaining on his clock will receive 0.55 points and his opponent 0.45 points. There would be no increments. Only in the extremely unlikely circumstance of both players having identical time remaining at the draw would we have the traditional 1/2 - 1/2 split. Going into a deep think could have bad consequences unless it pays off with a win.

Thus, in the present game 12, Carlsen would have received 0.55 points.

Nov-27-18  talhal20: It seems Carlsen was not interested to pursue for win unless everything was safe for him. So why should he take risk even with slightly better position than Caruana. But that is practical stuff not Champion's. Having said this the challenger does not want to win by taking risks. It seems both players are waiting for rapids/blitz to force result.
Nov-27-18  SugarDom: It says that Carlsen has 0.95 advantage when he offered a draw?

Premium Chessgames Member
  Joshka: <Izromeu> Exactly, but then again, you hit the nail right on it's head. They don't CARE ABOUT the public. They haven't for decades!!! FIDE is a joke!!
Nov-27-18  Petrosianic: I'm sorry, but your post uses far too few exclamation points to be convincing.
Nov-27-18  Vladimir Zukhar: a shame that now the WC Match must be decided in rapid/blitz games. what does prove to win this way. all the past great World Champions of old must be sick over it. if that was the case, then ever Kasparov could still be the World Champion as it shows here where he makes quick work of WC challenger Caruana only one year ago:
Nov-27-18  Petrosianic: <Sally Simpson>

<Let's say 32.Nh2 a3 33. b3 Ba4 >

I actually prefer 32. Qa3. Black has a clear advantage but no way to increase it other than an eventual P-QN4. If Black gets nothing from that (and I'm sure Carlsen knew if he did or not), then there's not much to play for.

I think the reason that Carlsen is getting heat is because people are accustomed to seeing him trying long and hard to grind tiny advantages out, and he didn't this time. But that presupposes that he actually has an advantage to grind. If the b5 break leads to nothing then he actually doesn't have a real advantage at all, only an illusory one.

Nov-27-18  unhandyandy: Radical solution: give black draw odds and have players make time bids on every game.
Nov-27-18  Petrosianic: I think the b5 break would be very hard to get in if White plays Qa3, doubles Rooks on the c file, then plays Ne1-c3. If he does get it in, I'm not at all sure Black has any advantage.
Nov-27-18  not not: would Alekhine agree a draw to play Capablanca at skittles to decide title?

or Botvinik who always refused to play blitz?

this is a joke of format unless u r Giri dreaming of drawing armagedon with black

give champion draw odds I say - and Im pretty strong 1600 player!

Premium Chessgames Member
  ajk68: 25...a5 was inaccurate. Doesn't make the top three at deeper evaluation.

1) -1.24 (36 ply) 25...exf4 26.Bxf4 b5 27.Qd2 Bf6 28.Bf1 bxc4 29.Bxc4 Rb8 30.Nd3 Ne4 31.Bb3 Qd8 32.Qe3 Bf7 33.Kb1 a5 34.Ba4 Nc3+ 35.Rxc3 Bxc3 36.Bc6 Bf6 37.Rc1 Kh7 38.Qe2 g6 39.Qe3 Bg7 40.Qa7 Bh6 41.Qf2 Bxf4 42.Nxf4 Rb4 43.Ne6 Bxe6 44.dxe6 Qe7 45.Qe3 f4 46.gxf4

2) -1.27 (35 ply) 25...b5 26.Bxc5 dxc5 27.Qd2 e4 28.Bf1 Qd7 29.d6 Bf6 30.Bh3 Bd4 31.Nxe4 Rfe8 32.Qg2 bxc4 33.Kb1 Kh8 34.Nd2 Qxd6 35.Nxc4 Qf6 36.Qf3 Bf7 37.Ne5 Bxe5 38.fxe5 Rxe5 39.Bf1 Rb8 40.Bd3 Rb4 41.b3 Kh7 42.Bf1 Rbe4 43.Bd3 Re3 44.Qf4 g6 45.Bc4 R5e4 46.Qd6 Qxd6 47.Rxd6 Bxc4 48.Rxc4 Rxc4 49.bxc4

3) -0.67 (35 ply) 25...e4 26.Be2 a5 27.Qd2 Be8 28.b3 Qb6 29.Nh3 g6 30.Rb2 Bf6 31.Bd4 Bxd4 32.Qxd4 Bd7 33.Ng5 Qb4 34.Rc2 a4 35.Qc3 Qxc3 36.Rxc3 axb3 37.axb3 Ra8 38.Kb2 Rfb8 39.Rcc1 b5 40.Ne6 bxc4 41.Nxc5 dxc5 42.Bxc4 Kf7 43.Kc3 Kf6 44.d6

Nov-27-18  cormier: Caruana–Carlsen, game 12 <analysis after 18… Nf8>

Syzygy <15. Be3 a6 16. Nc3 Qc7 17. g3 Be7 18. f3 Nf8> |

<+0.24 d27 19. Ne4> Nd7 20. Qd2 Nf6 21. Nxf6+ Bxf6 22. Be2 Qd7 23. O-O O-O 24. Rac1 Rfb8


Caruana–Carlsen, analysis after <19. Ne4>


<16. Nc3 Qc7 17. g3 Be7 18. f3 Nf8 19. Ne4> |

+0.36 d25 19. … Nh7 20. a4 O-O 21. a5 Nf6 22. Nxf6+ Bxf6 23. Rc1 Qd7 24. Qd2 e4

<+0.42 d25 19. … Nd7> 20. Qd2 Bg6 21. Kf2 O-O 22. Rc1 Bxe4 23. fxe4 Nf6 24. Bd3 Ng4+


Caruana–Carlsen, analysis after <20. Bd3>


<17. g3 Be7 18. f3 Nf8 19. Ne4 Nd7 20. Bd3> |

<+0.37 d27 20. … O-O> 21. Qd2 Bxe4 22. fxe4 Nc5 23. O-O Nxd3 24. Qxd3 Qd7 25. Kh2 b5


-0.28 d27 21. … Bg6 22. O-O-O f5 23. Ng5 Bxg5 24. hxg5 e4 25. fxe4 Ne5 26. Be2 Rac8

0.00 d27 21. … Qc8 22. O-O-O Nf6 23. Bg5 Nxd5 24. Qb3 Nf6 25. Nxf6+ Bxf6 26. Bxf5 Bxg5+

<<0.00 d27 21. … Rac8> 22. O-O-O Bg6 23. Rc2 f5 >24. Ng5 e4 25. Bf1 a5 26. Qc3 Bf6


<<-0.53 d26 22. O-O-O> Bg6> 23. Kb1 f5 24. Ng5 Bxg5 25. hxg5 e4 26. fxe4 Ne5 27. Be2 Ng4

-0.77 d26 22. Rg2 Bg6 23. Be2 Bxe4 24. fxe4 Nf6 25. Bb6 Qd7 26. Bf3 Bd8 27. Rc1 Bxb6

-0.80 d26 22. Rc2 Bg6 23. O-O-O f5 24. Nf2 Nc5 25. Bxc5 dxc5 26. Qd2 Bd6 27. Kb1 Qe7


<-0.76 d25 23. Rc2> f5 24. Ng5 Bxg5 25. hxg5 e4 26. Bf1 f4 27. Bxf4 Nc5 28. fxe4 a5


<-0.17 d26 23. … f5> 24. Ng5 Bxg5 25. hxg5 e4 26. Bf1 f4 27. Bxf4 Nc5 28. fxe4 a5


-1.66 d26 25. … exf4 26. gxf4 Bxh4 27. Bxc5 dxc5 28. Qd2 Bg3 29. Nh3 Rce8 30. Kb1 h4

-1.43 d26 25. … b5 26. Be2 a5 27. Qd2 b4 28. Bxc5 Qxc5 29. Nd3 Qd4 30. fxe5 dxe5

<-0.93 d26 25. … a5> 26. Qd2 e4 27. Be2 Be8 28. Kb1 Bf6 29. Rdc1 g6 30. Nh3 Bd7


-0.75 d24 26. Qa3 e4 27. Bf1 Bf6 28. Nh3 Be8 29. Ng5 Bd7 30. Kb1 g6 31. Bd4 Bxd4

<-1.10 d24 26. Qd2> e4 27. Be2 Be8 28. Kb1 Bf6 29. Rdc1 g6 30. Nh3 a4 31. Ng5 Bd7


-1.00 d25 26. … Bf6 27. Nh3 e4 28. Bf1 Be8 29. Kb1 g6 30. Ng5 Bd7 31. Be2 Ra8

<-1.00 d25 26. … e4> 27. Bf1 Be8 28. Kb1 Bf6 29. Nh3 g6 30. Ng5 Bd7 31. Be2 Ra8


<-1.17 d23 28. Kb1> Bf6 29. Rcc1 g6 30. Nh3 Ba4 31. Re1 Qg7 32. Ng5 Bd7 33. Red1 a4


<-1.12 d25 28. … Bf6> 29. Rh1 a4 30. Nh3 g6 31. Ng5 Bd7 32. Bd4 Qd8 33. Bxf6 Qxf6

-0.72 d25 28. … a4 29. Bd4 Bf6 30. Bxf6 Rxf6 31. Nh3 g6 32. Ng5 Bd7 33. Qc3 Rff8


-1.07 d27 29. b3 Qb6 30. Nh3 g6 31. Rb2 a4 32. Bd4 Bxd4 33. Qxd4 axb3 34. axb3 Qb4

-1.18 d27 29. Rdc1 a4 30. Rg1 Rb8 31. Nh3 g6 32. Rd1 Bd7 33. Ng5 Ra8 34. Rc3 Qd8

-1.19 d27 29. Nh3 Ba4 30. b3 Bxb3 31. axb3 Nxb3 32. Qe1 b5 33. c5 dxc5 34. d6 Qd7

-1.26 d27 29. Rcc1 g6 30. Re1 Ba4 31. Rg1 Bd7 32. Nd1 a4 33. Nc3 Ra8 34. Nb5 Bxb5

<-1.43 d27 29. Re1> Ba4 30. Rcc1 Rb8 31. Nd1 Bxd1 32. Rexd1 g6 33. Bd4 Bxd4 34. Qxd4 Kh7


whiteshark: Caruana–Carlsen, analysis after <29. Re1>:


<<<-1.36 d27 29. … Ba4!>>> 30. Rcc1 Rb8 31. Nd1 Bxd1 32. Rexd1 g6 33. Bd4 Bxd4 34. Qxd4 Kh7

-1.09 d27 29. … g6 30. Nh3 Ba4 31. Rcc1 Qg7 32. Ng5 Bd7 33. Red1 a4 34. Rc2 Rfe8

-1.01 d27 29. … Qd8 30. Bd4 Bxd4 31. Qxd4 a4 32. Nd1 g6 33. Qe3 Bd7 34. Rh1 Rb8

-1.00 d27 29. … Qe7 30. b3 g6 31. Nd1 Qd8 32. Bd4 Bxd4 33. Qxd4 Bd7 34. Qb2 Rb8

-1.00 d27 29. … Rb8 30. Rec1 g6 31. Nh3 Bd7 32. Ng5 a4 33. Rd1 b6 34. Bd4 Qd8

<choosen move -0.81 d27 29. … a4 30. Nh3 g6 31. Ng5 Bd7 32. Bd4 Qd8 33. Rd1 Qe7 34. Bxf6 Qxf6>


whiteshark: Final position after <31… Ra8>


= = = = = = = = =

-1.14 d29 32. Qa3 Rb8 33. Rdd2 b5 34. cxb5 Bxb5 35. Bxc5 dxc5 36. d6 Qb6 37. Bxb5 Qxb5

-1.24 d29 32. Nh3 Bd7 33. Ng5 b6 34. Bd4 Bxd4 35. Rxd4 Rab8 36. Kc1 Rfc8 37. Rd1 Qd8

-1.46 d29 32. Bd2 Bd7 33. Bc3 Bxc3 34. Rxc3 Rfb8 35. Nh3 Qd8 36. Ng5 b6 37. Rc2 Qf6

-1.70 d29 32. Bf1 a3 33. b3 Ra6 34. Kc1 Bd7 35. Qd2 Bb2+ 36. Kb1 Rfa8 37. Bd4 Nxb3

Nov-29-18  Ulhumbrus: 21 Rh2? was the move which cost Caruana a chance to win and as it happened, the match.

The computer evaluations as well as the GM comments suggest that after 21 0-0! Caruana would have had the upper hand and so a chance to win.

Jump to page #    (enter # from 1 to 28)
search thread:   
< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 27 OF 28 ·  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:

  1. No obscene, racist, sexist, or profane language.
  2. No spamming, advertising, duplicate, or gibberish posts.
  3. No vitriolic or systematic personal attacks against other members.
  4. Nothing in violation of United States law.
  5. No cyberstalking or malicious posting of negative or private information (doxing/doxxing) of members.
  6. No trolling.
  7. 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.

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

Blow the Whistle

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, 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.

Featured in the Following Game Collections[what is this?]
Sveshnikov Variation
from Siciliana Variante Sveshnikov by Gerareis
Sicilian Defense: Lasker-Pelikan. Sveshnikov Variation
from Siciliana by Gerareis
Sicilian Def. Lasker-Pelikan. Sveshnikov Var (B33) 1/2-1/2
from Lasker Approved, Fredthebear Applauds by fredthebear
Game 12, Match tied 6-6
from 2018 World Chess Championship by Penguincw
Game 12
from Carlsen in World Championships: the 2018 match by alexmagnus
Sicilian Defense: Lasker-Pelikan. Sveshnikov Variation
from Carlsen's Sveshnikov with black by Vicentin
Chess Network Videos: Part 3
by Penguincw
Nobody believed it was a draw.
from e4Newman's only favorite game by e4Newman

Home | About | Login | Logout | F.A.Q. | Profile | Preferences | Premium Membership | Kibitzer's Café | Biographer's Bistro | New Kibitzing | Chessforums | Tournament Index | Player Directory | Notable Games | World Chess Championships | Opening Explorer | Guess the Move | Game Collections | ChessBookie Game | Chessgames Challenge | Store | Privacy Notice | Contact Us

Copyright 2001-2020, Chessgames Services LLC