click for larger view

Analysis by Houdini 4 d 22 dpa done

1. = / + (-0.59): 27.b4 g4 28.Qd7 Re7 29.Qa4 Kg7 30.bxc5 bxc5 31.Qb3 f3 32.g3 Rd6 33.d4 cxd4 34.cxd4 Nf5 35.Qb4 Nxd4 36.Bc4 Qe8 37.Rb1 Qd8 38.a4 Nc6 39.Qc3+ Ne5 40.Bb5 Rd5 41.Qb4 Rd4 42.Qc3 h6 43.a5 Rd5 44.a6 Qb6 45.Qb4

click for larger view

Analysis by Houdini 4 d 23 dpa done

click for larger view

Analysis by Houdini 4 d 26 dpa done

1. = (-0.18): 22.Qg5 Rxd3 23.Rce1 h6 24.Qh4 Rd2 25.Rf2 Rd8 26.Qg4 Qd6 27.Rfe2 g6 28.Bc4 Kg7 29.Qf3 Qd7 30.b4 cxb4 31.axb4 Qf5 32.Re4 b5 33.Be6 Qg5 34.R4e2 Rd6 35.Ba2 Rf8 36.Re6 Rfd8 37.Bb1 Rxe6

Since a more-than-decent GM <did> play 26.Qxb7, maybe a little more thought is required.

--the position was not resignable

--the only alternatives were Qf3, Qxb7 or Qa4. If Qa4, the queen is clearly abandoning her consort, but the choice between the other alternatives is not so clear. The queen can defend g2 from either f3 or b7, but on f3 it's just begging for Carlsen's g-pawn to sweep down on it. Svidler could reasonably have concluded that Qf3 would just accelerate the attack.

--at 33 ply SF10 evaluates 26.Qxb7 at -0.75, 26.Qf3 at -1.27, and 26.Qa4 at -1.61. At 34 ply Qf3 noses out in front (-1.04 to -1.15), but that's not even a meaningful difference. At 35 ply, Qxb7 is back out in front again, though only slightly.

As Levy wrote of Fischer's clean score when commenting on the finish of his game with Reshevsky in the 1963-64 US Championship, sometimes Fischer's magical powers needed an assistant: his opponent.

As specific examples, I refer this poster to Fischer's fifth match game with Taimanov; the great man stood worse all game and defended with tenacity. Just when the draw was finally in sight, Taimanov hung a rook.

There were also two games in the match with Larsen where the Dane could have forced draws had he wished, but realised that would avail him naught.

<...(Carlsen) does not have this killer instinct.>

Svidler mentions there that his 26.Qxb7 was based on a very gross miscalculation - he wanted to follow 26...g5 with 27.Bd5, but this just loses on the spot to 27...Re7 28.Qa8 Nxd5 (27...Rb8 looks equally good, and very simple).

Btw, according to the evaluations of Sesse (stokfish on steroids - the program running on a Norwegian super-computer) it's much worse for White after both 26...Qxb7 & Qf3 than the ca. -1 evaluations posted here. It seems that the tipping point in favor of Black was already 22.Qf3?; as Leko mentions in the interview, White should apparently play Qg5/h5 - say, 22.Qh5 Rxd3 23.Rce1 g6 24.Qh4/e2. It might look very counter-intuitive to a human eye, but the point seems to be that it's of paramount importance not to allow the Ne5-g4-e3 maneuver (and White's heavy pieces are better coordianted this way). In the game, as Svidler notes, 23.Qe2 (which prevents Ng4) already doesn't work because then 23...Nxd3! is very strong - 24.Rcd1 c4! 25.Bxc4 Qc5+. 23.Qe4 (which covers c4) prevents that, but allows Ng4.

On 19 Rae1 - instead of 19 f4 - suppose that Black tries 19...Qf8 as in the game.

It is less misleading to say instead that Svidler did not consider 20...Qf8!!

This may be the star move of the game.

Really, this is laughable and otiose--one cannot even be a halfway strong player without the above trait, much less aspire to the supreme title.>

People are hypnotised by Fischer. In those matches there was the game where Petrosian was clearly better but his nerves got him.

Taimanov was way out of form. He wanted to have Tal as his second but Botvinnik knew that Tal liked the good life too much. Fischer probably would have won. He was expected to for years.

But unlike Fischer Carlsen keeps on playing chess. He was WC younger, but so far Carlsen hasn't gone mad. Which is a good sign.

The other one was Larsen. Larsen was someone who, more than Fischer, probably had a "killer instinct"...so much so that he kept trying to win in drawn positions.

Fischer had more than a "killer instinct". He had at the time opponents who obliged, but he also had a great opening knowledge, and his strategic play was excellent. But his weakness was in some areas of play where he was inflexible. And he was slowly deteriorating psychologically. Eventually he became a tragic wreak.

And <...(Carlsen) does not have this killer instinct.> is stupid as he doesn't need it! He has won three World Championships I think it is and he will probably win another. (And he keeps winning games and tournaments, as well as being I think the world champion of blitz and rapids,checkmating one of the world's top super GMs even!) He has a wider range than Fischer and is possibly comparable to Lasker in his depth and profundity. How he does it. Fischer, yes, he livened things up with the Najdorf, but I doubt the Najdorf would worry Carlsen. (And he knows how to side-step it). He seems to be able to play anything. He is one of the greats of chess. No question. I would like to see the odd win by such as Keymer etc but it has to be acknowledged he is currently (of the players known now) the best player by results and everyone knows, including Fischer, who knew, about taking draws when it was necessary.

It would be interesting to see a book of his games by openings. As such a book would show the thematic and other factors in his games. But even that attempt to 'pin down his style' might just lead one into infinity...

Caruana is also a great player. He needs to settle somehow. But he is clearly not far off. The game against Meier (I think it was) was great for example...

Hi Diademas,

I noticed every Black piece was hanging as well, including the Black King!

click for larger view

Prior to the mate. If it was White's move Rxf8+ mates in 4 moves.

"...this generation's Morphy!"

" ...looked like a machine attacking a human GM."

"...Carlsen is a magician."

I'm seeing a trend here:

Magnus the Magic Morphy-Mozart Machine.

(BTW machines do not attack humans, it is against Asimov's Robotic Laws.)

---

Yes a good game but the way some of you lot are going on about it you would think it was the second coming and the only game to ever finish in a checkmate.

You have all gone crazy.

---

"Unbelievable!!" Was also gushed.

Yes it is unbelievable that Carlsen's opponents have not yet figured out his Black Sicilian.

Svidler had the right idea going for this central formation.

click for larger view

Which can also come from Classical Italians and Lopez's. (so see below)

But why do they keep swapping that Knight on b6?

click for larger view

(Der...because a computer says so.)

Swapping a d5 Knight for a b6 Knight that has moved three times which opens up the a-file also giving Black two kicks with the b-pawns so a White 0-0-0 is ruled out is just a crap move. White's position is now inflexible, we know what is going to happen. 0-0 and f7-f5.

Tarrasch must be spinning in his grave.
(what he said about Knights on b6 should carry an x-certificate.)

Players should go for him, hunt him, insult him, rattle him, do not show him one ounce of OTB respect. MVL tried in the last round and failed but that BTW was a better game than this dogs dinner.

let's sort this Black Sicilian out.

Here Black has just played 6...Be7.

click for larger view

The guys are playing 6.Nd2 here with Nf1 to Ng3/Ne3 ideas. OK you can do that, the Black set up is for a Middle Game f5 push. So stop letting him have his own way, prevent the f5 push plan and forget about that Nxb6 crap.

Look at the last diagram again. You have 3 bits out, your e-pawn is protected, no d5 is happening soon so give him a good old fashioned 1.e4 e5. clobbering.

7.Ng5! Bxg5 8.Qh5 Be7 10. Qxf7+ Kd7

click for larger view

Forced and no f7-f5's in this game.

You have just played Bc4, Qh5 and Qxf7+ against the King Coconut. Look at the hero worship Nakamura still gets for playing 2.Qh5 v The Sicilian Nakamura vs A Volokitin, 2005 ... and losing.

(don't worry about losing, you can always smile when getting checkmated.)

Carlsen will look calm but inside he will be fuming. (job done).

You are getting two pawns (Qxg7), a roaming King, an a8 Rook that will not be making a move before the first time control etc...

And it's an OTB playable line. Cue Mickey Adams: Adams vs D Coleman, 1989 (and that is also a good game.)

---

And who brought Fischer into this game. Carlsen is standing on Fischer's shoulders. Carlsen is by far the better player, no doubt about it. Fischer was then (and it was a wonderful glorious then) but this is now and this lot want to switch off their computers, get out there and play proper chess.

click for larger view

<But why do they keep swapping that Knight on b6?

(Der...because a computer says so.) >

A. My SF10 at 33 ply/20 minutes picks 9.Nfe3 as best. Nxb6 is its second choice.

B. White plays Nxb6 there because he wants to keep his star KB (9.Bb3 Nd4).

C. Since Black has moved his knight three times, Dr. Tarrasch would have nothing to say about Nxb6.

Now, a petition. Since you know nothing about chess engines and will not learn, please just shut up about them, OK?

<Carlsen will look calm but inside he will be fuming. (job done).>