Adrian Mihalchishin - Fighting Chess With Magnus Carlsen

Mikhalchishin/Stetsko · Fighting Chess with Magnus Carlsen

ProgressinCiiess

Volume 31 of the ongoing series

Editorial board

GM Victor Korchnoi

GM Helmut Pfleger

GM Nigel Short

GM Rudolf Teschner

2012 EDITION OLMS

m

Adrian Mikhalchishin Oleg Stetsko

FIGHTING CHESS WITH MAGNUS CARLSEN

Translated and edited by Ken Neat

2012 EDITION OLMS

m

The Authors

Adrian Mikhalchishin (born 1954) has an excel lent international reputation, above al l as a fine chess trainer.

The Ukrainian-born grandmaster worked from 1980 to 1986 with the 12th world champion Anatoly Karpov,

and he has also assisted Zsuzsa Polgar, Maya Chiburdanidze, Vassily lvanchuk and Arkady Naid itsch. As

chairman of the FIDE Trainers' Commission, M i khalch ishin can also call on on h is wealth of experience as

an active player. He participated in several USSR national championships, 4th place in 1984 in the 51st

championship in his home city of Lvov being his greatest competitive success. He has also taken part in

four Chess Olympiads, three t imes for his new homeland of Slovenia (2000, 2002 and 2004).

Oleg Stetsko (born 1936) was a professional ai rforce pilot and a chess player of Soviet master standard,

who played several t imes in the strong USSR Armed Forces championships. After h is ret irement in 1984 he

was appointed to the train ing staff of the USSR national team, which in 1989 he helped to win the second

World Team Championship in Lucerne. Stetsko then worked as a journalist for the prestigious 64 magazine,

of which Anatoly Karpov was the editor-in-chief. In the 1990s together with the well-known grandmaster

Eduard Gufeld he wrote several books, including The Complete Dragon and Winning with the Torre Attack.

Bibliograph ical Information published by The Deutsche

Nationalbibliothek

The Deutsche Nationalbibliothek l ists this publ ication in

the Deutsche Nationalbibliografie; detai led bibliographic

data is available on the Internet at http://d nb.d-nb.de.

Copyright © 2012 Edition Olms AG

Wi l l ikonerstr. 10a · CH-8618 Oetwi l a.S./ZOrich, Switzerland

E-mail: [email protected]

Internet: www.edition-olms.com

All rights reserved. Th is work is protected by copyright. No part of this publ ication may be reproduced,

stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, electrostatic, magnetic

tape, photocopying, record ing or otherwise, without prior permission of the publ isher.

Printed in Germany

Printed on acid-free and ageing-resistant paper

Editor: Ken Neat

Photograph: © Ray Morris-Hi l l Photography

Translator: Ken Neat

Typesetting by: Art & Satz · Ulrich Dirr, D-80331 Munich

Printed by: Druckerei Friedr. Schmucker GmbH, D-49624 Loningen

Cover: Niklas WeiB, D-79104 Freiburg

ISBN13: 978-3-283-01020-1

Contents

Preface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Magnus Carlsen - Hero of the Computer Era . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 0 G. Kacheishvili-M. Carlsen 14 M. Maki Uuro-M. Carlsen 14 M. Carlsen-D. Kedik 15

F. Bindrich- M. Carlsen 15 D. Pavasovic- M. Carlsen 16 E. Rozentalis-M. Carlsen 16

M. Carlsen-L. Aronian 17 A. Onischuk-M. Carlsen 17 C. Pedersen- M. Carlsen 18

M. Carlsen-G. Kamsky 18 M. Carlsen-A. Adly 19 M. Carlsen-A. Naiditsch 19

L. Aronian-M. Carlsen 20

1 From Master to Grandmaster . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 Game 1 M. Carlsen - H. Harestad 23

Game 3 M. Carlsen-S. Ernst 31

Game 5 M. Carlsen-E. Shaposhnikov 35

Game 6 M. Carlsen-E. Vladimirov 41

Game 8 M. Carlsen- N. Short 46

Game 2 M. Carlsen-S. Zhigalko 26

Game 4 M. Carlsen -S. Dolmatov 34

M. Carlsen- G. Kasparov 39

Game 7 D. Palo-M. Carlsen 43

2 The Way to the Top . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 P. H. Nielsen-M. Carlsen 50

Game 10 I. Cheparinov-M. Carlsen 55

Game 12 M. Carlsen-K. Lie 62

Game 14 M. Carlsen-F. Amonatov 71

Game 16 M. Carlsen-A. Beliavsky 77

Game 17 M. Carlsen-J. Nunn 81

Game 19 M. Carlsen-A. Morozevich 90

M. Carlsen -A. Shirov 99

M. Carlsen-V. Topalov 107

Game 23 M. Carlsen-L. Aronian 112

Game 25 L. Aronian-M. Carlsen 118

M. Carlsen-Y. Pelletier 125

Game 27 M. Carlsen- T. Radjabov 129

Game 29 D. Jakovenko-M. Carlsen 135

Game 31 M. Carlsen-M. Adams 143

5

Game 9 M. Carlsen-A. Shirov 51

Game 11 M. Carlsen- P. Nikolic 57

Game 13 B. Jobava- M. Carlsen 66

Game 15 M. Carlsen- G. Kamsky 73

M. Carlsen -A. Beliavsky 80

Game 18 M. Carlsen-M. Adams 84

Game 20 A. Morozevich-M. Carlsen 95

Game 21 M. Carlsen- A. Morozevich 101

Game 22 M. Carlsen-V. lvanchuk 107

Game 24 M. Carlsen- L. Aronian 115

M. Carlsen-L. Aronian 123

Game 26 M. Carlsen-A. Onischuk 125

Game 28 V. Kramnik- M. Carlsen 133

Game 30 M. Carlsen-L. Dominguez 140

Game 32 M. Carlsen -I. Cheparinov 149

3 Life at the Top . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 155 Game 33 M. Carlsen- P. Eljanov 155

Game 35 V. Topalov-M. Carlsen 163

Game 37 M. Carlsen-V. Topalov 169

Game 39 M. Carlsen- V. lvanchuk 178

Game 41 L. Dominguez- M. Carlsen 187

Game 43 L. Aronian- M. Carlsen 195

Game 45 M. Carlsen -A. Beliavsky 201

Game 47 M. Carlsen- V. Anand 208

Game 49 M. Carlsen-A. Grischuk 215

Game 51 M. Carlsen-Wang Yue 221

Game 53 M. Carlsen- P. Leko 230

Game 55 M. Carlsen-T. Radjabov 237

Game 57 M. Carlsen -R. Ponomariov 244

Game 59 S. Karjakin- M. Carlsen 252

Game 60 L.-D. Nisipeanu- M. Carlsen 258

Game 62 M. Carlsen - E. Bacrot 265

Game 64 M. Carlsen-L.-D. Nisipeanu 271

Game 34 V. Kramnik-M. Carlsen 158


Game 38 T. Radjabov- M. Carlsen 174

Game 40 Y. Pelletier-M. Carlsen 184

Game 42 M. Carlsen- T. Radjabov 191


Game 46 M. Carlsen-L. Dominguez 205

Game 48 L. Dominguez-M. Carlsen 212


Game 52 M. Carlsen-D. Jakovenko 226


Game 56 M. Carlsen - V. Anand 240

Game 58 M. Carlsen- V. Kramnik 247

L. Aronian -M. Carlsen 256

Game 61 R. Ponomariov- M. Carlsen 261

Game 63 M. Carlsen -H. Nakamura 269

4 Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 274 Tournament and Match Record 274

Index of Carlsen's Opponents 279

Index of Openings 280

6

7

Preface The swift rise of the young Norwegian Mag

nus Carlsen to the top levels of chess has

literally overturned impressions about the

possibilities of teaching talented children.

Indeed, to progress at a young age from a

run-of-the-mill master to a real contender

for the chess crown in just five years is

something that only an outstanding tal

ent is capable of doing. In the history of

chess only Garry Kasparov has achieved

any similar. In this occurrence there is

much that is surprising: both the fact that

such an extraordinary talent appeared in

'non-chess' Norway, and the way itself in

which this chess mastery was acquired.

For graduates and successors of the So

viet Chess School, nurtured in a 'chess'

foundation established over decades, and

fostered from childhood in clubs at Pio

neers Palaces and then in chess schools

run by famous mentors, it is hard to imagine

a boy grasping the wisdom of chess virtu

ally on his own.

This is correct only in the sense that

Magnus likes to study chess on his own.

But there were also attendant circumstanc

es: Magnus's father, Henrik Carlsen, was

well known in Norway as a chess organiser,

and it was he who noticed his son's talent,

observing that already at the age of five

he had good analytical ability. And, not

surprisingly, knowing the precedent of the

famous Hungarian Judit Polgar, from an

early age the father began assisting his son

to become a chess professional, hoping

8

for great achievements. Another impor

tant factor was the boy's home situation.

Magnus has a secure basis-a wholesome

family, in which his sisters virtually idolise

him, and the attention and support of rela

tives and of society. Already at the age of

ten he had the help of a trainer, and as his

prowess developed he also acquired the

support of financial bodies, including the

Microsoft company.

By present-day junior standards, Mag

nus began a serious study of chess rather

late-at the age of eight. The initial motiva

tion was a promise by his father to include

him, if he played well, in the Norwegian

under-11 championship. This stimulated

the boy to study chess for 2-3 hours a

day over a period of six months. The rest

was accomplished by his all-consuming

interest in the game. Many point to the

prevalence of computer preparation, even

calling Magnus a computer boy. He does

not deny his enthusiasm for the computer;

indeed it would be strange not to make

use of it in the age of universal comput

erisation. For modern children, using a

computer does not present any particular

problems, and a grasp of the accompa

nying programs comes quite naturally to

them. As for purely chess preparation,

Carlsen uses the computer as an instru

ment, and he relates sceptically to con

tentions that it is emasculating live chess.

The main thing for Magnus is improving

his mastery and achieving results. Here

Preface

it is appropriate to recall the pithy saying

of Mikhail Botvinnik: 'Chess cannot be

taught, one can only learn it!' It is unlikely

that Magnus is familiar with the Patriarch's

claim, but he has patiently learned, pro

ceeding with the help of the computer,

picturesquely speaking, in seven-league

steps.

Another very important factor in his im

provement has been the reading of chess

literature. In the words of his father, he

literally swallowed all Kasparov's series

My Great Predecessors and from them he

remembers practically everything. These

books are a kind of academic course on

the classical heritage of chess. And the

fact that he prefers to work on chess on

his own ('Magnus is very independent

as regards preparation, I only help him',

testifies his trainer Simen Agdestein), is

merely an indication of his character. In

short, we see an example of the effective

study of chess by correspondence, based

on fertile ground. In the opinion of one

of the best trainers of the present time,

grandmaster Yuri Razuaev, the boy pos

sessed the gift of self-instruction.

It would be incorrect to talk about the

ineffectivness of this type of study, with

references to a lack of 'schooling'. There

9

have been countless examples of success

ful self-realisation. His way is familiar to

me not just by hearsay, since at a mature

age I managed to achieve chess master

standard and complete a correspondence

course at the Aviation Institute.

By his 19th year Carlsen had completed

his chess Academy, he had received high

marks from his examiners by victories in

very strong tournaments, and he was con

tinuing to improve. This is indicated by his

attainment of the high point 2800 in the

world rating list, which allows him to be

regarded as the strongest player in the

West. Carlsen has made his 'way to the

top' in chess high society. One of the many

ways available to a talented young person.

We would like to wish that his 'life at the

top' does not collapse, as in the novel of

the same name by the well-known English

writer John Braine.

In conclusion, we would like to thank

grandmaster Andrey Devyatkin for help in

describing the childhood stage of Magnus

Carlsen's chess career.

Oleg Stetsko USSR Master of Sport

Senior Trainer of the USSR

national team 1985-89

Magnus Carlsen - Hero of the Computer Era

When we beg in examin ing the chess phenomenon Magnus Carlsen and h is way to the top, the fi rst th ing that comes to mind is whether we can compare the talented Norweg ian with the bri l l iant chess gen iuses of the second half of the 20th century, Robert Fischer and Garry Kasparov. What is it that un i tes him with these great champions? Above a l l - a bri l l i ant memory. H i s fi rst tra iner, g randmaster S imen Agdestein , to ld me that he gave the young Magnus an open ing book to read , and the next day, as if noth ing had happened , he performed the new opening to a h igh standard . True, a striv ing for sharp posit ions immed iately on emerg ing from the open ing , as possessed by the young Fischer and Kasparov, was not very apparent, but a lready at the age of fifteen he was confidently p laying compl icated open ings such as the Sveshnikov Variation and the Botvinn ik Variat ion .

The greatest influence on the development of the young talent was u ndoubted ly made by the Norwegian grandmaster Simen Agdestein . Th is showed itself not only in chess, but also in the fact that Magnus is a good footbal ler. After al l , h is trainer played for h is country at both chess and footbal l , and he even scored a goal against Italy! They met when Magnus was 1 0 years old. In itial ly the boy studied with the Norweg ian master Torbj0rn Ringdal Hansen , who

10

was doing h is mi l itary service at a Col lege for Top Athletes, where Agdestein ran the chess sect ion. And with in a year he made incred ible progress. This is not surprising : Magnus was l itera l ly gr ipped by chess, p lay ing in a l l possib le tournaments and read ing numerous chess books in Engl ish.

His fi rst book was Find the Plan by Bent Larsen. At that t ime Agdestein correctly thought that, for lessons with a boy who was at the stage of mastering the basics of chess, a computer was not needed . And only later, when the open ing became an important element of the play in tournaments, M agnus began work ing with the analytical modu les Fritz and Rybka.

Agdestein worked with Magnus several times a month, spending two or three hours on the analysis of a game. I n Agdestein's opinion, chi ldren cannot be forced to study chess. Of course, it is not easy to teach a youngster to play, but if you can arouse h is ind ividual interest , mi racles occur. Th is is how it was with Magnus - motivation was the main key to success!

M agnus thought that on the way to h igher achievements he should become Norweg ian champion , but in 2004 and 2005 the road was blocked by h is experienced teacher, and it was only in 2006 that he managed to surpass h im . Surprising ly, Magnus was also unable to win i n the young age categories of the European


Championsh ips. But where now are those who fin ished ahead of h im? In the h istory of chess this has also occurred with other players. For example, up to the age of 1 6 the great Garry Kasparov was twice unable to demonstrate his superiority in class. I n the fi rst stage of h i s work with Magnus, Agdeste in set the objective of reach ing master level of play and he regarded individual tournaments only as stages towards the ach ievement of this a im. But al ready in 2004 he real ised that he was unable to raise the youngster to a h igher level , and the search for a new trainer began.

Contact with Garry Kasparov early in 2005 was not developed any further. But a mentor was found on Scandinavian soi l . After contacts at a number of jo int tournaments in Scandinavia, the strong Danish grandmaster Peter Heine N ielsen began work ing with the youngster. For a long time he had been keeping an eye on the young Norwegian and a year earl ier he had commented in the press: the West had not known such a great talent since the time of Fischer, and at such a young age Carlsen was not inferior to either Karpov or Kasparov. At that time N ielsen was actively col laborat ing with Vishwanathan Anand, and later, when he was having to work with both of them, he wou ld sometimes enl ist Magnus to prepare Vishy for i mportant events, such as, for example, the match for the world championship with Kramnik in 2008.

Working with N ielsen , Carlsen substant ia l ly expanded h is open ing repertoi re, which had to be greatly modern ised . For example, with Black he stopped playing the King's Indian Defence, which d id not suit his style. At that t ime Magnus was most successfu l in tense positions, in play 'move

11

by move', so to speak. Although he was sti l l a long way from the best players of this type, such as Fischer and Kasparov, he was nevertheless notable for his sensible and log ical p lay. True, at t imes his p lay looked somewhat s impl ified , sometimes automated , which was a consequence of fascination with computer preparation. Not without reason , Garry Kasparov warned about the pointlessness of such play. Th is is how he describes the essence of the play in so-cal led post-modern ism chess: ' Nowadays most young p layers s imply move the pieces in anticipation of a mistake, l i ke an ice-hockey team knocking the puck into the opponent's zone, hoping that someth ing wi l l come of this. The pure pragmatism of the young shows itself in many games. Carlsen st i l l needs to raise h is understand ing to match u p with h is energy and optimism'.

But even so, Magnus d id not develop l ike a computer player, although the work with N ielsen , who made active use of the computer, seriously developed the analytical aspect of h is talent, which is often cal led playing computer chess. Is this good or bad? Nowadays chess has changed , and the top players are not inc l ined to philosophise about the posit ion; they need quickly and effic iently to find not so much the best move, as the optimal decis ion. This enables them for a lengthy t ime to maintain the tension on the board and to set the opponent the maximum discomfort in the solving of constant problems. The plans for conducting the game in this type of chess are far less concrete than during the times of the great world champions, who adhered to the classical style of play, with the possib le exception of M ikhai l Tal . But these plans are based on the inten-

..;;;.. ______ _ Mag nus Carlsen - Hero of the Computer Era

sity level of the position and are solved

exclusively by concrete measures, not by

general reasoning.

The well-known trainer Arshak Petro

sian, observing Carlsen's play at the C

Tournament in Wijk aan Zee in 2004, was

surprised at how confidently the 13-year

old boy could 'serve with either hand', i.e.

play both 1. e4 and 1. d4 with equal suc

cess. At so young an age, such a thing was

typical only of Boris Spassky, the most uni

versal player of the Soviet Chess School,

who (stretching the point somewhat) can

be regarded as the forerunner of the mod

ern computer generation. Assessing Mag

nus's play, Arshak Petrosian quite seriously

warned his pupil, Peter Leko: 'Here is your

future rival, you should observe his play

very carefully. He is already quite a strong

positional player, and he places his pieces

correctly - a rare quality for such an age'.

A new stage in Carlsen's chess biogra

phy began quite recently - in the summer

of 2009, when he began working with Garry

Kasparov. Their first meeting occurred in

2004 at the festival in Reykjavik, when the

prodigy's play impressed Kasparov in their

rapid game, which the maestro saved only

with great difficulty. A year later Magnus

was invited by Kasparov to Moscow for

lessons with the famous trainers Yuri Ra

zuvaev and Alexander Nikitin. But this work

was not continued. Carlsen declined to

follow the program developed by the Rus

sian trainers, and decided to improve his

chess independently.

However, without highly-qualified help

it proved beyond Carlsen's powers to im

prove on the 'star' level achieved in 2008

(his official rating reached 2776), and the

assistance of Kasparov proved most op

portune. For Garry the field of activity was

very fruitful. Magnus possesses a natural

gift for correctly evaluating a position, a

very rare quality, one which at a young

age has been possessed by many world

champions. In Kasparov's opinion, in style

of play the Norwegian youngster is close

to Karpov, Smyslov and Capablanca. But

since Magnus's style of play is markedly

different from that of Kasparov, his contact

with the famous champion will undoubt

edly expand his chess views. Usually a

trainer works with his pupil, but it is unlikely

that this is what Kasparov does. His role

is rather that of a mentor; there are things

he can pass on to his protege. There is no

doubt that Carlsen's opening repertoire will

be strengthened -this is a strong compo

nent of Garry. Especially since as yet the

level of the youngster's opening repertoire

does not correspond to his strength of play.

At the same time it is important to learn a

more productive organisation of the work

ing process, in order to make maximum

use of his natural talent.

1 2

I n the opinion o f Arshak Petrosian,

working with Kasparov should not so much

change the young Norwegian's opening

repertoire, so much as shift his motiva

tion to the maximum level. This is the ap

proach of real champions to the play in

every game, and the accompanying feeling

of one's own superiority can be instilled

only by a great champion. This approach

to the fight was displayed in October 2009

at the super-tournament in Nanjing. It was

there that it became apparent what Mag

nus has in common with the champions

- he began to be feared!

I saw Magnus at many Olympiads and

European Championships during his de

velopment period. And the first thing that

strikes you (incidentally, this is also the

Magnus Carlsen - Hero of the Computer Era t2J ---------------- � ---------------- ---

opinion of the well-known manager Silvio Danailov) is the feigned lack of energy, both in external appearance, and in play. Al l the champions, apart from Karpov and Petrosian , looked very energetic , sometimes even frightening. As for Karpov, he had enormous i nternal energy, which he was able to transfer to the chess board . The drive of Kasparov and Fischer was felt as soon as their opponent arrived at the chess board . Carlsen conducts certain parts of a game as though i mperceptibly, i n the style of Karpov or Adams, but, in contrast to them, he not only does not avoid sharp variat ions, but happily goes in for them. An indication of the youngster's thorough self-confidence is that he ventures to play very sharp variations, without working out al l thei r detai ls, which Kasparov always aimed to do. Yes, there are instances when he plays superficial ly, but this is typical of young players, who do not always understand and sense the dangers associated with the opponent's counterplay. As for Carlsen, he possesses such a feel ing , and this is very important i n h igh- level p lay. It is another matter that h is power begins to d isplay itself only from a certain point in the game, but here he can already be i rresist ible. Again , this is a vivid characterist ic, typical of Karpov and to a certain extent of Fischer.

I n recent t imes M agnus has g reat ly added to h is depth of understanding of chess, he has begun to display an abi li ty to find min imal and latent chances in the position and he has clearly become more forcefu l i n his play. That is , he has mastered the transit ion to total chess, the readiness to fight to the end. We are seeing the development of a fighter. It should be said that, i n their youth, neither Fischer nor

Kasparov was an uncompromising fighter. They became th is with the growth in the confidence and power of their play and, let's make no secret of the fact , an awareness of their mission in the chess world. We are also observing th is phenomenon with the increase in the mastery of the young Norwegian, which is reflected in an abi l ity to find the best decisions in any posit ion.

But Carlsen is inseparab le from h is era. He is simu ltaneously also a computer p layer - it is all the same to h im what he p lays, as he looks for the best or opt imal solution on the basis of h is own ind iv idual algorithm . Carlsen is not a strateg ist and not a thinker - he is a performer, l i ke an eng ineer find ing the sol ut ions to specific problems. And his p lay resembles the output graph of an atomic power station - constant and h igh . Although h is p lay lacks fantastic moves and d iscoveries, it is staggering in its logic and composure. It is as though he has no nerves - the typical character of a northerner. But perhaps it is not just a question of th is? Not without reason , at the conclus ion of the Nanj ing tournament of 2009, the 2nd-p laced Topalov declared : 'I was the winner among people, but Carlsen is s imply from another planet ! ' There you have an explanation , which does not make the Carlsen enigma any more understandable.

13

Al l these best q ualities of the young Norwegian are what we have tried to present in h is games. Through the chronology of the games we wanted to show the development of the most talented player from the West , and to compare Magnus at the formation stage with the modern Magnus. Of course, there are many aspects to his play and in the framework of one book it is impossible to encompass


the unbounded . Therefore we wi l l restrict ourselves to just one component of h is p lay, a very important ind icator of p laying strength - the abi l ity to play the endgame, which has invariably d istinguished the great champions of the past .

It is wel l known that, espec ia l ly with the modern str ict t ime control, the endgame can be d ifficu lt for young players, and here they commit far more mistakes than in the midd legame. There are var ious reasons for th is : a lack of knowledge of standard posit ions, a poor mastery of typical manoeuvres and, it goes without saying, ignorance of classic examples. These gaps are not easy to el im inate, and here the serious assistance of a trainer is needed . Therefore it w i l l be interesting for students of chess to see not only Magnus's mistakes when he was a youngster, but also how he was able to correct them, and on what he is st i l l continu ing to work. At the present t ime his techn ique of convert ing an advantage in the endgame resembles that of Fischer, and it rarely misfi res - an indication of the serious work he has done. The defence of i nferior pos it ions is another matter - accord ing to the defin it ion of Botvinn ik, it is this qual ity of a player that ind icates his strength of p lay in the endgame. And here, as was once the case with Fischer, Magnus has had many problems. But, as the examples wi l l show, he is wel l aware of th is deficiency and is working actively to e l im inate it . It can now be said that, whereas in the in it ial stage of Carlsen's career the endgame was the weak aspect of h is play, now we can talk about h is superiority over other grandmasters who have crossed the 2700 rat ing mark. H is latest tournaments have demonstrated th is .

G. Kacheishvi li - M. Carlsen Bad Wiessee 2001

a b c d e f g h

8

7 7

6

5 5

4

3 3

2 2

1 J. a b c d e f g h

57 . .. §a5+?

If possible, one should normally beg in by advancing a passed pawn - 57 . . .f2!, and only then decide what to do next. 58. l:!g8+ <;!>h5 59. l:!f8 l:!a5+ 60. <;!>d4 l:!xa6 61 . b7 l:!b6 would have led to a draw.

1 4

58. �d4 §xa6?

It was not yet too late for 58 . . . f2 .

59. b7 §b6 60. b8'W §xb8 61 . §xb8 �f4 62. §f8+ �g3 63. �e3

Black resigned .

M. Maki Uuro - M. Carlsen Helsinki 2002

a b c d e t g h

8 8

7 • 7

6 I. 6

� 5

4 � 4

3 � � 3

2 2

a b c d e f g h


56. �f4 Ja a1 57. Ja b4 Jaf1 + 58. �g4 Ja e1 59. e4 �f6 60. Ja b6+ �g7 61 . �f4 §f1 +?

Anyth ing, except release the attack on the passed pawn! 61 . . . �h6 or 61 . . . �f7 would have enabled Black to f ight for a draw.

62. �g5 §f3 63. g4 §e3 64. §xg6+ �f7 65. §f6+ �e7 66. §f4 �e6 67. �g6 � e5 68. §f8 §a3 69. g5 �xe4 70. �g7 � e5 71 . g6 Jag3 72. �h7 Ja h3+ 73. �g8 � e6 74. g7 Jag3 75. Jaf1 �e7 76. Ja e1 + �d7 77. Ja e4

And by construct ing a 'bridge', Wh ite won .

M. Carlsen - D. Kedik Norwegian Under-1 8 Championship 2002

a b c d e f 9 h

8 8

7 • 7

6

5 5

4 [j, 4

3 �[j, 3

2 2

a b c d e f 9 h

48. g4?

First the way for the king should have been secured - 48. fla4.

48 . . . Ja b3+ 49. �f4 Ja b4+ 50. �f5 Ja bS+ 51 . �e6 Ja b4!

It is important not to al low the pawns to advance! Subsequently Black demonstrates the same mechan ism.

52. Ja a7+ �h6 53. �f5 labS+ 54. �f6 l'l b6+ 55. �f7 §f6+!

It is usefu l to make use of the 'desperado' rook to drive the king away from the pawns. With the king cut off, it is easier to blockade the pawns.

56. �e8 Jaf4! 57. g5+ �h5 58. Ja h7+ �g6 59. Ja h 6+ �g7 60. h5 Ja e4+ 61 . �d7 Ja e5 62. Jag6+ �h7 63. �d6 Ja a5 64. �c7 Ja e5 65. �d7 Ja a5 66. �e6 Ja a6+ 67. �f5 Ja xg6

Draw.

After the lesson in th is game, al l Magnus could do was to remember for ever the method of 'h itch ing ' the rook to the king and the passed pawns. A year later he h imself saved a s imi lar end ing .

1 5

F. Bindrich - M. Carlsen European Under-1 4 Championsh ip

Budva 2003

a b c d e f 9 h

76. Jaf3 Ja h1 77. �g4 Jag1 + 78. Jag3 Ja a1 79. Ja c3 Jag1 + 80. Jag3 Ja a1 81 . §d3 Jag1 + 82. �f4 §f1 + 83. �g4 §g1 + 84. �f3 Jaf1 + 85. �g2 Jaf5 86. Jag3 §a5 87. �h3 Ja a1 88. §b3 Ja h1 + 89. �g4 §g1 + 90. �f4 §f1 + 91 . §f3 §h1 92. �f5 §xh5 93. §a3 §h1 94. §a7+ �f8 95. �g6 Jag1 96. §a8+ �e7 97. �h6?!

M agnus Carlsen - Hero of the Computer Era

There was a win by 97. �g8!, intending �h7 and g5-g6, a manoeuvre which is useful to remember.

Bindr ich d id not in fact find this manoeuvre (although the possibi l ity presented itself several t imes), and the game ended in a draw on the 1 1 5th move.

D. Pavasovic - M. Carlsen

Wijk aan Zee C 2004

a b c d e f g h

8 8

7 7

6 6

5 • 5

4 � 4 3� � .I 3 2 2

a b c d e f g h

44 ... §g2?

Surely it was obvious that Black should aim for the exchange of the kingside pawns. The simple 44 . . . �c6! 45. �b4 g5 would have enabled h im to draw.

----------------

58. �d6 �b6 59. §f5

Black resigned.

E. Rozentalis - M. Carlsen Malmo/Copenhagen 2004

8

6

5

4

a b c d

3 � 2

8

7

6

5

� � 4 � 3

� 2

a b c d e f g h

29 ••• �h6?

The offer to exchange rooks - 29 . . . �f7 ! 30 . �xf7+ �xf7 31 . fxg4 - wou ld have enabled Black to hold the position. Magnus did not work out the elementary pawn end ing : 31 . . . �e6!? 32. �g3 fS 33. hS fxg4 34. hxg6 �f6, since in the event of 34. h6? �f7 35. �xg4 �g8 it is Black who wins.

30. fxg4 c4 31 . �f3 cxd3 32. cxd3 §c8 33. �f4 g5+ 34. hxg5+ fxg5+ 35. �e4 §c1 36. �xd4 §g1 37. §e4 §a1 38. �c5 §xa3 39. d4 �g6

The exchange of rooks leads to a lost pawn end ing . Th ings would not have been changed by

39 . . . as 40. dS �c3+ 41 . �b6 �d3 42. �c6 �C3+ 43. �d7. 46 ... §h2 47. §xg6+ �b5 48. §g5+ �b6

49. §h5 §g2 50. �a4 §f2 51 . §h6+ �b7 52. b4

The winning technique is s imple and instructive.

52 . • • §f5 53. h5 §e5 54. b5 §e1 55. §f6 §a1 + 56. �b4 §b1 + 57. �c5 §c1 +

1 6

40. d 5 §c3+ 41 . �b5 �f6 42. d 6 §d3 43. �c6 aS 44. d7 §c3+ 45. �b7 §b3+ 46. �c7 §c3+ 47. �d8 �f7 48. §e7+ �f8 49. §e5

Black resigned. He has no defence against the check on f5 and then �e7.


M. Carlsen - L. Aronian FIDE World Championship

Tripol i 2004

a b c d e f 9 h

8 8

a b c d e f 9 h

This position occurred in the fi rst game of the tie-break. It is wel l known that rook endings with f- and h-pawns offer the weaker side real saving chances. And the fact that this was a rapid-play game is no excuse for Carlsen being unable to save the game. A top-class grandmaster is obl iged to know key endgame posit ions.

In end ings of this type the best squares for the king are considered to be f2 and g2. Here 66. �g2 suggests itself, a iming to block the h-pawn , and leaving the rook the option of checking along the rank and along the fi le (the best square for it is a8). But there fol lowed :

66. mg4?! ha

and it transp i red that, s ince the w in of the h3-pawn leads to a lost pawn ending, it has become more d ifficu lt to hold the posit ion .

67. �g5+?

gb3+ 71 . �h2 or immediately 69. �g3 gh8 70. �h2.

67 . . . mf7 68. �h5 me6 69. �h8 �c3 10. mt4 mt7 (70 . . J�c2!) 11 . m94 mg6 72. mf4 �c2!

The conversion techn ique is instructive. Since 73. gxh3 gf4+ leads to the exchange of rooks, the pawn continues its advance, and the k ing makes an outflank ing manoeuvre.

1a. mga h2 74. mta mt5 75. �h5+ me6 7 6. �h8 me5 77. �e8 + md4 78. �d 8+ mc3 79. � h 8 �d 2 80. mg3 md3 81 . mf3 mc2 82 . mg3 md1

White resigned .

8

7

6

5

4 3 2

A. Onischuk - M. Carlsen Olympiad , Calvia 2004

a b c d e

8

7

j.s 5

fj, 4 !j, cJ;; 3

fj, 2

a b c d e f 9 h

Black should be able to hold such an ending a pawn down, but Magnus has no clear impression of how to defend.

f ? 44 ... mt8 45. h4 g6 46. mt4 t6?

This trick, based on stalemate - 67 . . . xgS . - leads to defeat. 67. ga2 fS+ 68. �f4 would Such a move is s imply inconceivable for a have held the posit ion , i ntend ing after grandmaster. An obvious gap in Magnus's 68 . . ,gb8 to play 69. ga6+ �hS 70. �g3 'school ing'. 46 . . . �e7 47. gS hxg5+ 48. hxgS


f6! , reducing the number of pawns, was correct.

47. h 5!

Now holes appear in Black's posit ion.

47 ••• mf7 48. E[b7+ mg8 49. me4 gxh5 50. gxh5 mf8 51 . E[h7 E[e1 + 52. mf5 m9a 53. E[d7 E[f1 54. t4 mta 55. d 6 mea 56. E[h7 E[d1 57. mea

Black resigned.

8

7

6

5 4 3

2

C. Ped ersen - M. Carlsen Gausdal 2005

a b c d e f g h

a b c d e f g h

8

7

6

5 3

2

This is a theoretically drawn endgame, but you have to know the defensive procedure.

91 . Irc2 J.b4 92. E[c4 J.e7 93. mf4 mh5

I t is correct to head for the corner of the opposite colour to the bishop - 93 . . . �h3.

94. �f5 AdS??

If chess notat ion a l lowed it , th is move would deserve a greater number of quest ion marks. The s imple 94 . . . �h6 would have enabled Black to draw.

95.E[c8

Black resigned.

M. Carlsen - G. Kamsky World Cup, Khanty-Mansiysk 2005

a b c d e f g h

8 8

7

6 6

5 � 5 4 B .\ .!. 4 3 B �· 3

2 B � B 2

a b c d e f g h

White is a pawn up with a winning posit ion. All that is requ i red is a certain accuracy.

41 . E[a6+ me5 42. E[h6 E[d4 43.1tlc4+ mt5 44. h4 ltlt7 45. E[b6?!

45. �xh7? was not possible because of the loss of the rook after 45 . . . �g6! , but by playing 45. �e3+ �e4 (45 . . . �e5 46. �xh7) 46. �e6+ �e5 47. �c4 White would have won easily.

45 ... E[xh4 46. E[xb4

And here 46. �g3! �h1 47. �xf3 would have led to the win of the f3-pawn.

1 8

4 6 ... E[h3 47. a5/tlg5 48. a6??

This e lementary oversight changes the p icture. N ow White is losing , although a s imple kn ight manoeuvre - 48. �e3+ and 49. �g4 - would have enabled h im to queen h is a-pawn i n comfort.

48 ••. ltle4+ 49. me3 f2+ 50. me2 E[c3?

50 . . . �f3! would have won immediately.

51 . �d2?

The comedy of errors continues . After 51 . �f1 ! Wh ite wou ld again have won :


51 . . JU3 52. �d6+ �xd6 53. a?.

51 . . . J;lxc2 52. J;ld4 �xd2 53. J;ld5+ �e6

White resigned.

M. Carlsen - A. Adly Reykjavik 2006

a b c d e f 9 h

8 .i. I. 8

7 7 6 M�� • 6

5 .t. 5 4 .t. tiJ 4

3 3

2 � 2

a b c d e f 9 h

White's pair of passed pawns is obv i ously more promis ing than Black's. But with which pawn should he beg in? It is not hard to calculate that in the event of 55. c7 Axe? 56. bxc7+ �d7 57. f!a7 �c6 58. �d3 cJ?b6 White loses h is pawns, and it wi l l be a draw. Therefore Magnus begins with the other pawn, but he reaches an impasse. The truth is revealed within three moves.

55. b7?!

This advance should have been prepared by bringing up the king - 55. �d3! . Now, however, Black succeeds in neutral is ing the pawn pair.

55 . . . .tc7 56. J;la8 J;lb8 57. �d3

By attacking the pawn, Black releases his rook. White is short of one move, which could have been provided by the far-sighted 55. �d3.

58. J;la6?

White should have exchanged rooks, after which his knight blockades the pawn pair, guaranteeing a draw. Now the black pawns become dangerous .

58 . . • J;if8 59. �d2 e4+! 60. �xe4 J;lf3+ 61 . �c2 �xe4 62. J;la8 J;lc3+ 63. �d1 J;lb3 64. �c2

After 64. f!c8 Black casts a mating net around the enemy k ing: 64 . . . Af4 65. c7 f!xb7 66. f!e8+ �d3.

64 . . . J;lb6 65. lieS d3+ 66. �d1 J.f4 67. J;le8+ �f3 68. b8W J;lxb8

White resigned.

M. Carlsen - A. Naiditsch Sarajevo 2006

a b c d e

8

7 M 6 .f. 5� 4

3 I. � � 2 ��

M a b c d e f 9 h

8

6

5 4

3

2

After 57. �c5+ �d5 58. �a6 White loses W h ite's pos i t ion is c lose to w i n n i n g , his passed pawns: 58 . . . �xc6! 59. �xb8+ but he st i l l has to make a few accurate cJ?xb7 and the result is a draw. moves .

57 . . . �d5 29. J;Icc7?!

1 9


Material would have been won by 29. gxa6 �g5 30. Ac4 �e4+ 31 . �f3 �d2+ 32. �e2 gb2 (after the exchange of the minor pieces White has a won rook end ing) 33. Axe6+ �h8 34. gb6.

29 . . . �b2 30. h4?!

A pointless move. The king should have been brought i nto p lay : 30 . �e1 g b1 + 31 . �d2 gb2+ 32. gc2, retain ing winn ing chances. Now Black succeeds in beg inn ing counterplay.

30 ... �g7!

Before the second rook is activated , the k ing must be moved out of the danger zone. In the event of 30 . . . gda 31 . gxf7 gdd2 32.gfd7 a l i near mate is threatened , and Black cannot play 32 . . . gxe2+ 33. �f1 gf2+ 34. �e1 gfe2+ 35. �d1 .

31 . �xa6 �d8 32.�aa7 �dd2 33. �xf7+ �g 6 34. h5+

The conseq uences of 34. �f3 g xe2 35. �f4 g b4+ 36. �e5 gxe3+ 37. �d6 gd4+ 38 . �e7 gxh4 are unclear.

34 . . . �g5 35. �g7+ �h4! 36. �g1?!

I n rook endings, k ing activity is of great importance, but it wou ld appear that the black rooks are al ready fu l ly operational . If 36. �f3 there can fol low 36 . . . gxe2 (not 36 . . . e5? 37. g4! with advantage to White) 37. �f4 gb5! and Black holds the posit ion. The exchange of rooks 37 . . ,gxg2 38. gxg2 gxg2 39. �e5 would merely compl icate h is defence.

36 . .. �xe2 37.�ab7?

37 . . . �xg2+ 38. �xg2 �xb7 39. �a2

39. h6 ga7 40. gg7 gxa5 41 . gxh7 �h5 also leads to a draw.

39 . . . �xh5 40. a6 �a7 41 . �f2 �g4 42. �a4+ �g5 43. �f3 e5 44. �a5 �f6 45. �g3 �e6 46. �h4 �f6

Draw.

L. Aronian - M. Carlsen

Tal Memorial Tournament

Moscow 2006

a b c d e f 9 h

8 8

7 7

6 6

5 5

4 4

3 3

2 2

a b c d e f 9 h

A theoret ical ly d rawn posit ion . Magnus knew - and had employed earlier in similar positions - the method of keeping the pawn under fire: 69 . . . ge2 ! . Instead of this he prefers another plan of defence: attacking with the rook from the long side, which proves to be more compl icated .

69 ... �a1 70. �e7 �a5 71 . e6 �a7+ 12. �d7 �as 73. �d 6 �a7+?

In the flank attack one must not give up the 8th rank. 73 . . . �g6 was the only defence.

As a result , after being a pawn up, White 74• �eS

loses two. But also after 37J!ad7 ga2! he cannot hope for anyth ing . Black resigned .

20


It has to be said that Carlsen drew the conclusions from the deficiencies of his play in endings, and the consequences of the work he put it soon became apparent. Already at the Olympiad in Turin (2006) he demonstrated endgame play on a grand scale against Adams (No. 1 8), where he converted the advantage of the two bishops.

The year 2007 proved exceptionally productive. There was the impressive conversion of an extra pawn in an endgame with rooks and opposite-colour bishops in a game with Morozevich (No. 21 ) . There was an admirable depth of ideas in the endings from the 3rd and 5th games of h is Candidates match with Aronian (Nos. 23 and 24), in which with subtle manoeuvres Magnus was able to confine the enemy king in a 'box'. The finish to his game with Onischuk (No. 26), where his knights restricted the mobi l ity of a rook, also invites inclusion in the books. At the World Cup in KhantyMansiysk, in his game with Adams (No. 31) Magnus again showed bri l l iant technique in

21

convert ing the advantage of the two bishops in a compl icated multi-piece endgame. Also instructive is the fin ish to the game with Cheparinov (No. 32), where l iteral ly by nuances Carlsen was able to outplay an active rook with h is bishop and knight.

Also impressive were some masterpieces by Carlsen early in 2008. In Wijk aan Zee there was a n ice fin ish to h is game with Eljanov (No. 33), where he subtly coordinated his rooks and knight. A special place goes to his win over the world champion Kramnik (No. 34) - Magnus was able to construct another 'box' for the k ing. At the end of the year in B i lbao he added to the textbook col lection of heavy-piece endings: he was able to convert an outside passed pawn in a heavy piece endgame with Aronian (No. 43). Of the games from 2009 mention should be made of his subtle hand l ing of the endgame against Jakovenko (No. 52), in which Magnus was able to exploit some imperceptible errors by the opponent in an equal posit ion.

Chapter 1

From Master to Grandmaster Gifted young players have always drawn the attention of both admirers of the ancient game and of recognised experts. During the active development of chess over the last century and a half, young talents who have gone on to achieve an outstanding level of play can be counted l iteral ly in s ingle f igures. As for recent times, the record belongs to the Ukraine-born Sergey Karjakin , who became a grandmaster at the age of 1 2 . Such is the trend of the times, the age of techn ical progress. Universal computerisation has become a kind of accelerator in the development of the new chess generat ion. Chess databases and modern analytical modu les enable young talents to acqu i re the necessary knowledge far more qu ickly, and lack of experience in the development of tactical and strateg ic understanding is compensated by a computer- l ike calculat ion of variat ions. Whereas 30 years ago, accord ing to the picturesque expression of Tigran Petrosian , young players emerg ing into the chess arena were cal led 'ch i ldren of l nformator', now they are cal led 'ch i ldren of the computer'. Therefore rumours about the young Norwegian boy Magnus Carlsen , who displayed outstanding chess talent at an equal ly early age as Sergey Karjakin , qu ickly spread around the chess world .

But in 2002 i t was the Ukrain ian youngster who reigned supreme. The height of h is fame came at a tournament of the Grand Prix series, held in Moscow, where one of the authors of this book participated in the capacity of arb iter. The spectators who arrived at the Mezhdunarodnaya Hotel were able to observe a curious picture. On an empty stage the last pair were continu ing to batt le: l iteral ly impending over a frai l lad with his touching l ittle qu iff was a bearded hunk of a man . The experienced l lya Smir in needed 1 40 (!) moves to overcome the resistance of the 1 2-year-old Seryozha Karjakin . Th is was their second game with the classical t ime control; in the fi rst the grandmaster had managed to save a hopeless position a rook down by means of perpetual check.

At that t ime Seryozha's contemporary - Magnus - was st i l l at the start of h is career, although at the age of eleven he was able to share 1 st-2nd places in the Norwegian Under-1 8 Championship . However, he did not d istingu ish h imself at the European Under-1 2 Championsh ip in Spain , where he fin ished only sixth . But in the world championship among h is contemporaries in Greece, Carlsen displayed h is character and shared 1 st-2nd places with lan Nepomniachtch i , who on the tie-break was proclaimed world champion. Junior events at such a tender age do not usual ly cause much of a st i r. This makes the almost improbable episode with Nepomniachtchi a l l the more curious. The emergence of the 1 2-year-old world champion made such an impression on one of the major Russian Newspapers lzvestiya, that it decided to sponsor h im , overlooking that he was merely the best player among h is contemporaries. True,

22

M . Carlsen - H. Harestad --------------------

soon the sponsorsh ip came to noth ing , s ince lan Nepomniachtch i d isappeared into the general mass of Russian players.

It is possib le, therefore, that i n post-Soviet chess they learned about the Norwegian prodigy only i n 2003, when the magazine 64- Shakhmatnoe obozrenie reported that in Scandinavia there was a sh in ing new 1 2-year-old master by the name of Carlsen. Fi rst he shared 3rd-7th places in the Norwegian Championship, and then he d ist inguished himself in the Pol it iken Cup tournament in Copenhagen . This was the fi rst prestigious tournament in the world chess calendar in which Carlsen took part. The influential Dan ish Politiken newspaper has al ready staged it 25 t imes, trad it ional ly provid ing a sol id prize fund. Th is attracts strong players, and it is suffic ient to recal l that among the winners have been such famous names as Smyslov, Korchnoi and Vaganian. The young Norwegian also d ist ingu ished h imself i n Copenhagen , scoring 8 points out of 1 1 games and fin ish ing only a point behind the winner Krishnan Sasik iran. Start ing with a rating of 2385, Carlsen demonstrated a strength of play corresponding to a performance of 2500 (it should be mentioned that Karjakin already had this official rating). In that period the foundation was laid of the mastery that Magnus demonstrated both in attack on the king, and in positional play.

Carlsen's 'v is it ing card ' in Copenhagen was a spectacular mat ing attack in h is game with Harestad .

Game 1 M. Carlsen - H. Harestad

Copenhagen 2003 Ruy Lopez [ C98]

1 . e4 e5 2. �f3 �c6 3 • .tb5 a6 4 • .ta4 �f6 5. 0-0 b5 6 • .tb3 .te7 7. Ete1 d6 8 . c3 0-0 9. h3 �a5 1 0 • .tc2 c5 1 1 . d4 Y!/c7

The classical Chigorin Variat ion of the Ruy Lopez.

12. �bd2 �c6 13. d5 �d8 14. a4 Ela7

Black does not want to concede the a-fi le. However, the presence of the rook on a7 allows White to play b2-b4 in a more favourable situat ion. The main cont inuat ion here is 14 . . . f!b8.

15. �f1 g6

b2-b4 is possible.

a b c d e f 9 h

8 ..t� K. 7 K 'if ..t• 6 . • �· 5 ·· � · _,-

4 � � 3 � ttJ 2 � � �� 1 .:1. ��.:l.tt:J�

•

�

a b c d e f 9 h

1 6 • .th6

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1

1 6 . b4!? cxb4 1 7. cxb4 Ad7 1 8. Ae3 .§b7 1 9. axb5 Axb5 20. Y!/d2 is more in the spirit of the posit ion, with the better game for White.

If 1 5 . . . h6, then 1 6 . Ae3 with the idea of 1 6 ... Ete8 1 7. �g3

23

Chapter 1 · From Master to Grandmaster

The preparatory 1 7. g4 should have been included.

17 . .. thd7 1 8. thh2

And here 1 8 . b4 Af8 1 9 . Ae3 was more logical , maintain ing the pawn tension.

1 8 ... f6 1 9. Ae3 thb6 20. axb5 axb5 21 . Ad3 Ad7 22. Yi'd2

a b c d e

8

7 .I 6

5

4

3

2

a b c d e f 9 h

8

6

5

4

At the young age of 1 2 it is not easy to stay patient and engage in strateg ic manoeuvring , trying to find a vulnerable point in Black's solid defensive l i nes. But Magnus patiently bides h is t ime.

22 . .. thf7 23. §xa7 Wxa7 24. We2 Wa6 25. thg4 c!>g7

Black i s not tem pted by the provocat ive 25 . . . h 5? ! , after w h i c h there can fo l low 26. tDxh5 ! gxh5 27. tDh6+ tDxh6 28. Axh6 Af8 29. �xh5 Axh6 30. �xh6

hopes involving tDh6 and transferring h is own knight to c5.

29. §f1 thc5

a b c

8 .1 7

6 'iif

d e f 9 h

-*--*-�*" .l .l.l

5 .l� � .l 4

3

2

1

.l �

� jl jl

a b c

� iV

d e

ttJ tt.J �

� � g�

f 9 h

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1

Somehow i m percept ib ly Car lsen has aimed his pieces at the kingside, but Black does not sense the danger. He continues to ignore the move 29 . . . h5, although after it the black king wou ld have been more safely placed than in the game. In the event of 30. tDh6 tDg5 31 . f4 exf4 32. �xf4 �xh6 (not 32 . . . Axh3? because of 33. tDxh5+! gxh5 34. e5! �f8 35. tDf5+ Axf5 36. �xf5 and Wh ite wins) 33. h4 �f8 Black safely withdraws his k ing.

30. thh 6! thg5

Black shou ld have restricted h imself to the cool-headed exchange 30 . . . tDxh6 31 . �xh6+ �g8 , w i th the i ntent ion of switching his bishop to g7.

�e7 31 . �e3 �g7 32. �xf6, when Wh ite 31 . 141 exf4 32. Wxf4 Axh3?

has three pawns for the piece and a cont inuing attack.

26. Ac1 tha4 27. Ac2 §a8 28. We3 c4

Black could have cont inued his wait ing strategy - 28 . . . tDb6 29 . Ad3 �a4, but 28 . . . Axg4!? 29. hxg4 c4 also came into considerat ion, n ipp ing in the bud White's

24

Black is tempted by the win of a pawn, underest imat ing White's latent attack ing resources . I t was better to s imp l ify the posit ion : 32 . . . �xh6 33. h4 �f8 34. hxg5+ fxg5 35. �h4+ �g7 36. A xg5 �xf 1 + 37. tDxf1 Axg5 38. �xg5, although here too White's chances are preferable. Now,

M. Carlsen - H. Harestad tt:J ------------------��

however, Magnus succeeds i n demon

strat ing the latent energy of h is p ieces in all its g lory.

33. �h4 Ad7

(see next diagram)

34. e5! dxe5 35. t'Llh5+! gxh5

Now White announces mate in 3 moves.

But B lack wou l d a lso have lost after 35 . . . r;!lh8 36. Axg5 fxg5 37. 'Mig3! .

a b c d e f 9 h

a J.

a b c d e f 9 h

36. �xg5+! fxg5 37. l3f7+ �xh6 38. l3xh7 mate

8

Carlsen's successful performance in the Pol it iken Cup tournament greatly raised h is self-esteem, and he was also noticed by the organ isers of other tournaments. True, h is performances in the 'compulsary program' among his contemporaries were not so successfu l . Competit ive fatigue made itself felt. Especial ly vexing was the set-back at the European Under-1 4 Championsh ip in Budva (Montenegro) . When Magnus won against his main rival Sergey Zhigalko and took the lead with 6Y2 points after the 7th round , it appeared that the question of the champion was decided . But he contrived to lose both h is last two games, in which he was winn ing , and fin ished only th ird .

Magnus also started confidently at the world championsh ip in Halk id ik i (Greece), scoring 3% points in the fi rst 4 rounds. But unforeseen c ircumstances prevented h im from becoming champion. As Agdestein , who was accompanying h im, described i t , the air was l iteral ly buzzing with bacteria and Magnus became i l l (h is temperature reached 40 degrees) . He nevertheless kept in the lead ing group unti l the 9th round, but on this occasion he lost to Zhigalko and had to be satisfied with a share of 9th-1 3th places (?Y2 out of 1 1 ) . These set-backs were not accidental : a ch i ld 's organ ism is sti l l del icate, and s ince the 'compulsary program' for the year was over-generously combined with the 'free' one, by the end of the twelve months Magnus was very t ired . This is not surpris ing - he had played about 1 50 games!

It is wel l known that in Norway since long ago they have long shown a great respect for their heroes, and they try to create the best condit ions for the d isclosure of thei r talent. Carlsen was no except ion. At the age of ten he drew the attention of the Norwegian grandmaster Simen Agdestein , who in 2002 began working with the prodigy. Despite the comparative shortness of thei r lessons - twice a month spending 2-3 hours on the analysis of games played - their col laboration produced resu lts. I n 2003 Carlsen three times achieved the international master norm (the last t ime at the Pol it iken Cup tournament) and by the end of the year he had raised h i s rat ing to 2450.

25

Chapter 1 · From Master to G randmaster ----------------------

Game 2 M. Carlsen - S. Zhiga lko

European Under-14 Championship Budva 2003

Sicilian Defence [ 833]

1 . e4 c5 2. �f3 �c6 3. d4 cxd4 4. �xd4 �f6 5. �c3 e5

Despite its apparently anti-posit ional nature, the Chelyabinsk Variat ion is sti l l a l ive and has not been refuted . Among the el ite players it is constantly employed , for example, by Radjabov and Shirov.

6. �db5 d6 7. Ag5 a6 8. �a3 b5 9. Axf6

At the present t ime White more often turns to the qu ieter l i ne 9 . tbd5 Ae7 1 0. Axf6 Axf6, and here 1 1 . c3 or 1 1 . c4.

9 . . . gxf6 1 0. �d5 f5 1 1 . Ad3

The alternative is 1 1 . c3, to which Black should reply 11 . . . Ag7, since the capture on e4 is bad in view of 1 1 . . .fxe4 1 2 . Axb5! axb5 13. tbxb5, and against the threat of 14 . tbbc7+ 'i!?d7 1 5 . �g4+ there is no satisfactory defence, whi le 1 1 . . . Ae6? is pointless in view of 1 2 . exf5 Axf5 1 3 . �f3 .

1 1 . . . Ae6 1 2. 0-0 Axd5 13. exd5 �e7 1 4. c3

The capture 14. tbxb5 Ag7 1 5. tbc3 e4 gives Black good compensation for the pawn.

14 • . . Ag7

(see next diagram)

1 5. 'Wh5

Theory has gradual ly come to the conclusion that from the standpoint of f ighting for an advantage 1 5 . f!e1 0-0 1 6 . �h5 e4 1 7. Af1 is more promis ing.

26

a b c d e f g h

8 I. 'ii' . I. 8

7 1.1\ • ..t. . 7

6 £ • 6

5 � . . 5

a b c d e f g h

1 5 . . . e4 1 6. Ac2 'Wc8 17. :§ae1 0-0 18. Ab3

a b c d

8 I. 'iV 7

5 4

6

VJ!/ 5 4

3

a b c d e f g h

I n h is commentary for ChessBase, Dorian Rogozenko r ightly remarked that it is hard to th ink of a more natural move - the d5-pawn is defended and the manoeuvre tba3-c2 prepared . The d i rect 1 8 . f3 gives Black the opportun ity for rather easy equal ity: 1 8 . . . b4 1 9 . tDb1 bxc3 20. tbxc3 A xc3 2 1 . bxc3 �xc3 2 2 . Ab1 tbg 6 2 3 . �xf5 exf3 24 . �xf3 �xf3 2 5 . .§xf3 f!ae8 with a drawn endgame, as i n Karen Asrian's game with Wang Yue (KhantyMansiysk 2005). However, for qu ite a long t ime the main continuat ion was considered to be 1 8 . c.!ih1 - u nt i l at the tou rnament in Dortmund (2002), i n h is game with Topalov, Leko employed the strong

M . Carlsen - S. Zhigalko

novelty 1 8 . . . .§b8! , aimed at creating qu ick 20. f4 (plann ing �e3 and g2-g4) or even counterplay on the queenside. It remains 1 9. f3 !? was more logical . to add that after the immed iate 1 8 . . . b4 White has the unpleasant reply 1 9 . cxb4 1 9 ... 1tig6 20. ltic2 ltif4 21 . Y«h4

Axb2 20 . .§e3 ! . In general , the character of the position

is such that if both sides make the critical moves (which normally can be achieved only with the help of deep home preparation), the game most often concludes with the mutual el im ination of the forces and a draw.

18 . .. �h8?!

Black has confused something - here this move is pointless. Let us briefly examine the other poss ib i l i t ies. Tou rnament practice has shown that after the qu iet 18 . . . �g6 1 9 . �c2 Wh ite's chances are preferable ( if 1 9 . . . �f4 there is a dangerous exchange sacrif ice: 20 . 'Wg 5 �d 3 21 . �e3!) . After 1 8 . . . .§ b 8 White has t ime to consol idate h is queenside - 1 9. �c2 a5 20. a3 ! after which he can calmly mount an offensive on the opposite side of the board .

The only way to equalise is by the energetic 1 8 . . . a5! , which occurred a few days later in the game Carlsen - McShane, which continued 19. �xb5 a4 20. Ad1 'll!/c5 21 . �d4 Wxd5 22 . .§e3 'We5 23 . .§h3 h6 24. f4 'Wf6 with dynamic equi l ibrium. If 19. 'll!/g5 the best is apparently 1 9 . . . 'Wd7! 20. f3 �g6! 21 . fxe4 f4 with excel lent play for Black (Fernandez Romero- Eijanov, Andorra 2003).

1 9. �h1?!

On the emergence from the open ing , both players have made decisions that are hard to understand , which, however, is easi ly explained i n v iew of their youth and the complexity of the posit ion. 1 9. �c2 �g6

a b c d e

a b c d e f g h

21 ... Ae5?!

It is strange that Black d id not in fact carry out that for which he was obviously aiming: 21 . . . �d3, after which White wou ld probably have had to give up a rook for the powerfu l knight . However, h is compensation would have been suffic ient: 22 . .§e3 'Wd8! 23. 'Wh3 Wg5 24 . .§xd3 exd3 25. 'll!/xd3 f4! , and the posit ion is unclear.

27

22. 1tie3

Now, as if by schedu le, the wh ite pieces arrive at the necessary posts.

22 ... 9:g8 23. Ac2! b4 24. g3 1tid3

The opponent's in it iat ive after 24 . . . �g6!? 25 . 'll!/h5 bxc3 26. bxc3 (or 26 . b3 !? f4 27. �f5) 26 . . . Axc3 27 . .§d1 seemed too dangerous to Zhigalko, and so he decided to g ive up a pawn.

25. Axd3 exd3 26. Wxb4

(see next diagram)

Chapter 1 · From Master to G randmaster

a b c d e

5

4 'f!i

6

5

4

3 8 .t ttJ 8 3

2 8 8 8 8 2 .: .: � 1 a b c d e f 9 h

White is sti l l a long way from a troublefree convers ion of h is advantage - it is no easy matter to suppress the typical 'Chelyabinsk' activity of the enemy pieces. However, from this moment Magnus begins demonstrat ing mature technique beyond his years.

retained the advantage. Now, however, Carlsen retains the d5-pawn with the help of a ' l ittle combination' .

34. c4! �g7

If 34 . . . Axb2 there fol lows 35. !!e8+.

35. b3

a b c d e f 9 h

8 .! 7 J .J .t • .t

.t_[ l .t .i. -6

5 .1 8 4 8 1:, 8 3 8 .t 2 8 8

8

7

6

5

4

3

2 J, 1 ttJ .: � 1 a b c d e f 9 h

26 • . . 13:b8 27. Wc4! White has set up a seemingly indestructible

27. Wa3? would have lost to 27 . . .f4 28. ti:Jg2 monolith, but, strangely enough, Black sti l l fxg3 29 . fxg3 Axg3 ! . has some drawing chances.

27 • • • f4!

It is not possib le to regain the material : 27 . . . !!xb2 28. Wxd3, or 27 . . . d2 28. !!b1 .

35 • • . 13:a5

35 . . . a5 36.!!4e3 d2 37.!!1 e2 was hopeless for Black.

28. Wxc8 J3:gxc8 29. /l)d1 ! J3:c5 30. gxf4 36. J3:g1 + �f8 37. J3:g2 f!:a3!

30. !!e4! was more accurate: 30 . . . !!xd5 (or 30 . . .fxg3 31 . fxg3 with the same idea of soon surrounding the d3-pawn) 31 . gxf4.

30 • • • J.xf4 31 . J3:e4 J.e5 32. f4 J.g7!

Better than 32 . . . Af6.

33. J3:fe1

Or 33. !!f3 !!xd5 34. !!ee3 Ah6! .

33 . • • At6

The two players are as though competing in inventiveness. Zhigalko persistently tries to break through the obstructive barriers, ski lful ly erected by Carlsen in the path of the black pieces.

38. J3:e3 J3:e8

If 38 . . . aS, then 39. !!xd3 a4 40. !!dg3 cl1e7 41 . bxa4 !!xa4 42. !!b3 ! , and White should gradually convert h is two extra pawns.

39. J3:d2! 33 . . . h5 was poss ib le , a l though after 34. cl1g2 !!xd5 35. cl1f3 White would have An accurate move, enabl ing the knight to be

28

M . Carlsen - S. Zhigalko

activated with gain of tempo. 39. !lxe8+?! Jixh6 50. �xh 6+ mta 51 . �f5 aS �xe8 40. !ld2 aS 41 . lilf2 a4 was weaker.

39 . .. Jixe3 40. �xe3 .id4 41 . �f5

After 41 . !lxd3 Axe3 42. !lxe3 !lxa2 the win for White is in question , since his king is badly placed.

41 . .. Ac5 42. Jixd3

42. �g2! Ab4 43. !lxd3 !lxa2+ 44. �g3 was more method ical , bring ing the king into play.

42 . . . Jixa2 43. Jih3

a b c d e f g h

8 8

7 • 7

6 . 6

5 .i. B 5

4 B 4

3 B M 3

2 .I B 2

� 1 a b c d e f g h

43 . . . mga?

Black shou ld have p layed 43 . . . !lf2 ! 44. !lxh7 (44. !lh6? !lxf4 45. tilxd6? �g7) 44 . . . �g8 45 . !lh3 !lxf4 46 . tile?+ �g7 (46 . . . �f8 47. Cilc6) 47. �g2 (or 47. Cilc6), and although with best play White should win, he would have to overcome techn ical difficulties.

44. Jih6!

With the fal l of the d6-pawn, Black's entire position collapses. However, accurate calculation is sti l l requ i red of White.

44 . .. Jia1 + 45. mg2 Jia2+ 46. mf3 Jia3 47. �xd6 Jixb3+ 48. me4 Jib6 49. �f5

a b c d e f g h

8 8

7

6 6

5 . .i. B tD 5

4 B � B 4

3 3

2 B 2

a b c d e f g h

52. d 6!

The t imid 52 . �d3? a4 53. �c3 �e8 would have delayed the win , although probably would not have thrown it away.

52 ... a4 53. mds Ab4

If 53 . . . a3 , then 54. �xeS �e8 (54 . . . a2 55. d7) 55. tild4 a2 56. tilb3.

54. c5 mea 55. c6 Aas 56. mc4

Of course, there was no point in playing 56. c7? Axe? 57. dxc7 �d7, since a knight is bad at combatting a passed rook's pawn. Now Black is in zugzwang.

2 9

ss ... mda 57. �e7 hs sa. ts h4 59. h3 ts 60. �d5 a3 61 . mb3

Black resigned.

Th is far from fau lt less but entertain i ng game is a good i l l ustrat ion of Magnus's abi l ity from his youngest years to create posit ions in which m istakes are practically inevitable. In so do ing , he normal ly makes fewer m istakes i n them than his opponents.

Chapter 1 · From Master t_o_G_ra_n

_d

_m_a

_.st

_er ________ _

The lessons of 2003 were not wasted . During this t ime Carlsen changed l ittle in the way he worked to improve his standard of play. He sti l l preferred to do this independently, devoting to it five hours a day. Apart from working at the board , he also read chess books with great pleasure. True, the range of them was very specific, but here it is better to hand over to h is father, Henrik Carlsen.

' Magnus has looked at many games compris ing the classical heritage of chess, inc luding all the games from Kasparov's books My Great Predecessors, which he l iteral ly devoured and of which he remembers practical ly everyth ing. He reads a lot: Fire on

Board by Shirov, Kramn ik's best games, fundamental works on the endgame and, of course, many books on the open ings. I should also add the New in Chess magazines and Yearbooks and other i nterest ing chess magazines. Without any d ifficu lty Magnus combines read ing of chess material and i ts s imu ltaneous analysis. I n the fi rst years of h is chess career he spent a lot of t ime moving the pieces on the board , repeating games and remembering ideas he had seen . But in the last two years he has mainly been analysing in h is head . '

There are those who l ike to talk about Carlsen's lack of 'school ing' , but I should l i ke to remind them of the possib i l ity of studying by correspondence. As regards its effectiveness, everything is decided by motivat ion. There are numerous examples of this. Besides, can one talk about a lack of 'school ing' , when you have such a prestigious trainer as Simen Agdestein?

Graduates of the Soviet chess school and thei r fol lowers improve their mastery by studying the classical heritage of the great world champions - Lasker, Capablanca, Alekh ine and Botv inn ik , and researchers such as Tarrasch , N imzowitsch and Ret i . To them it may seem amazing how, without read ing a s ingle book by these classics, Carlsen independently achieved such a high level of chess understanding . At the t ime such a th ing seemed impossible. For example, Tigran Petrosian l i ked to remember h is youth, when he kept a copy of N imzowitsch's book My System under h is p i l low. But, as we learned earl ier, Magnus absorbed the best of the classical heritage from Kasparov's five-volume My Great Predecessors. As for the speed of assim i lat ing material , present-day geniuses have their resources. I n the computer age it is hard to imag ine a 1 3-year-old boy who does not spend hours on a computer. Carlsen was no different, using the computer as h is main helper in preparing for tournaments. As he matured the effic iency increased , h is open ing repertoi re expanded , and he perfected h is abi l ity to make a deep study of his opponents' play and find their weak points.

Magnus began the year 2004 wel l prepared . One of the p i l lars of the world chess calendar is the trad it ional festival in the small Dutch town of Wijk aan Zee. It is famous not only for its main A Tournament, which year after year assembles almost the ent ire chess elite, but also its less prestigious B and C al l-play-all tournaments, enabl ing young talents stage by stage to make thei r way into chess h igh society. And to beg in with the C tournament, even a FIDE category 9 - modest by today's standards - is qu ite natural for a young matador. Carlsen's debut created a genu ine furore! He not only won with a score of 1 01/2 from 13 games, but also exceeded the international grandmaster norm

30

M . Carlsen - S. Ernst

by 1% points. The sharp and energetic attacking style of the 1 3-year-old Norwegian testified to the appearance of a new star on the chess horizon . Professionals began talking about h im . The h igh ly experienced grandmaster Ljubomir Kavalek, who in h is t ime had seen many talents, saw Carlsen as a 'Chess Mozart ' . He was echoed by Evgeny Bebchuk, who in the 1 990s was head of the Russian Chess Federat ion: 'As a person closely acquainted with the play of al l the great grandmasters, I can confidently say that in the h istory of chess no one has played l i ke this at the age of 1 3 . '

The game with i nternational master Sipke Ernst, p layed at a key moment of the fight for the fi rst prize, not only captivated those who value bri l l iancy, but gave a s l ight insight into the secrets of Magnus's home laboratory in work with a computer. To a question , whether the attack on the king was the result of preparation or the fru it of inspiration , he replied: ' I knew that 1 7. 'We2 was the theoretical move, but I d idn 't remember the variations, so I thought about it for some 25 minutes, trying to understand the posit ion . I saw the kn ight move 1 8 . t:Dg6 in the game Bologan -Anand (Dortmund 2003). You can decide for yourself whether it was imag ination or home preparation ! '.

It wou ld not be out of place to mention: ideas in themselves do not hover in the air. The patent on the knight move to g6 in this variation belongs to Alexander Bel iavsky, who twice used it to defeat the famous ' Danish prince' Bent Larsen in 1 981 and 1 984, at the tournament in Ti lburg and in the USSR v. Rest of the World match . (The inqu isitive reader is referred to Bel iavsky's book Uncompromising Chess) .

Game 3 M. Carlsen - S. Ernst Wijk aan Zee C 2004

Caro-Kann Defence [ 819]

1. e4 c6 2. d4 d5 3. <tlc3 dxe4 4. <tlxe4 .ats 5. <tlg3 A9s s. h4 h6 7. <tlf3 <tld7 a. h5 Ah7 9. Ad3 Axd3 1 0. Wxd3 e6

a b c

a !,

6

5

4 � 4

3 VJg tt:Jtt:J 3

2 � � � � � 2 1 : j, � : 1

a b c d e f g h

31

1 1 . Af4

At one time 1 1 . Ad2 was also played, since Black's main reaction was considered to be the set-up with queenside castl ing . But in recent years he has often preferred kingside cast l ing , and in th is case the bishop is more actively placed at f4.

1 1 . . . <tlgf6

If he wants to carry out the plan with queenside cast l ing , Black can play 1 1 . . .'Wa5+, provoking 1 2 . Ad2 (1 2 . c3 makes it easier for him to develop counterplay with . . . c6-c5), and then retreat 1 2 . . . 'Wc7.

12. 0-0-0 Ae7 13. <tle4

A popular move, which has the aim in the event of 13 . . . 0-0 of attacking the k ing's position with the g-pawn - 14 . t:Dxf6+ t:Dxf6


1 S . g4, as in the game Shirov - Dreev (Dos Hermanas 2003) .

Before this 13 . tDeS used to be played . The problems that Black encountered are wel l demonstrated by the game Bel iavsky-Tal (Moscow 1 981) , which continued 13 . . . 0-0 14. �e2 �aS 1 S. �b1 �ad8 1 6. c4 tDxeS 1 7. dxeS tDd7 1 8 . �d2 AgS (with the aim of weakening the eS-pawn, but 1 8 . . . bS!? 1 9. �hd1 tDb6 came into consideration) 1 9. AxgS hxgS 20. h6 (20. �hd1 tDxe5!) 20 . . . tDxe5.

.tJl- .! .�. . ' '

... ... !::, 'iV 1.1 ...

!::, 4J

!::, !::, : � � !::, � :

Analysis diagram

21 . �d5! ! . This is now the last romantics played! The rook places itself under a fourfo ld attack , d isrupt ing the coord inat ion of Black's queen and kn ight . I n the event of 2 1 . . . cxd5? 22 . �xeS gxh6 23. �xh6 f6 24. �xe6+ �f7 25 . tDh5 Black cannot hold out. Tal preferred a prosaic solut ion: 21 . . . �xdS! 22. cxdS �xdS 23. hxg7 �xg7 Y2-Y2. Most of the spectators (and in the concert hal l of the International Hotel there were more than a thousand) were puzzled by the peace agreement. This is not surprising , s ince a pretty variation remained off-stage: 24. tDhS+! �g6! 25. tDf4+! gxf4 26. �h5+ �f6 27. �h4+ �fS 28. �hS+ and Black has to reconci le h imself to perpetual check, s ince 28 . . . �e4? ! 29. �e2+ �d4 30. �d1 + �cS 31 . �xd5+! �xdS 32. �d2+ is risky.

32

The posit ion reached in th is game after Black's 1 5th m ove occu rred nearly a quarter of a century later i n the game Bologan - Anand (Dortmund 2003), but White played 1 6 . tDg6! and after 16 . . . �fe8 1 7. tDxe7+ �xe7 1 8 . �d3 �ee8 1 9 . �hd1 �dS 20. �g1 ! b5 2 1 . �d2 aS?! (21 . . . c5!) 22. tDe2 b4 23. g4 his attack was more rea l .

But the pioneer of the ' impending' tDeSg6 (which is the idea of placing the knight on eS) was again Bel iavsky, who carried it out in a game with Bent Larsen (Ti lburg 1 981) . Black refrained from cast l ing in favour of 1 3 . . . a5 14 . �he1 a4?, after which he ran into 1 5 . tDg6! . Nowadays this is one of the techn ical devices in the solving of such posit ions, which Carlsen used in the present game. There fol lowed 15 . . . tDdS?! (1 S . . . a3! 1 6 . b3 tDdS was correct, although here too 1 7. tDf5! secures White an advantage) 1 6 . tDf5! Af8? (1 6 . . . exf5 real ly was better) 1 7. Ad6 �g8 1 8 . c4 tDb4 1 9. �h3! fxg6 20. �xe6+ �f7 2 1 . hxg6+ �xe6 22. �e1 + tDeS 23. AxeS 1 -0.

13 . . . 'Wa5

I n the game Bo logan - D reev ( Dagomys 2006) Black s impl ified the posit ion: 13 . . . tDxe4 14. �xe4 tDf6 1 S . �e2 �dS 1 6 . �b1 'We4 and obtained a roughly equal endgame.

14. mb1 0-0 1 5. lt\xf6+

15 . g4 tDxg4 1 6. tDe5 tDdxe5 17. dxeS �ad8 1 8 . Wh3 with sharp play has also occurred .

1 5 . . . lt\xf6 1 6. lt\e5 §adS 1 7. 'We2

The th reat of . . . c6-c5 cou ld also have been parried by 17. 'Wb3, but after 17 . . . Wb6 1 8 . Wxb6 axb6 a practical ly equal endgame is reached .

M. Carlsen - S. Ernst

17 . . . c5?!

Ernst proves to be unfami l iar with the variat ion, otherwise he wou ld have p layed 17 . . . VNb6! (Anand - Bareev, team match Russia v. Rest of the World, Moscow 2002), where the threat 1 8 . tilg6? is parried by 18 . . . Aa3.

8 a b c

7 •1i d e

.! f 9 h

.� . .�. • • 6

r--.J · � • 5 'if tb � 4

.,L--.J � � 3

2 � � � Vjj � �

8 7 6 5 4

3

2

1 � g g 1 a b c d e f 9 h

18. �g6! fxg6?

And this shows a lack of elementary knowledge (Bologan -Anand, Dortmund 2003) . 18 . . . �fe8 1 9. tilxe7+ �xe7 20. dxc5 �ed7! was essential , when it is not easy for White to demonstrate h is superiority, s ince the c5-pawn is regained .

19. Wxe6+ �h8 20. hxg6!

Creat ing a mat ing net, s ince Black has no defence against the sacrif ice on h6 ,

destroying h is k ing's protection .

20 . • . �g8

If 20 . . . �de8 or 20 . . . �d7 there is the decisive 21 . �xh6+! gxh6 22. Axh6 fol lowed by g6-g7. But the reinforcement of the h6-pawn does not change th ings.

a b c d e f 9 h

8 .! .� � . 8 .1. • 7

6 VIii � · 6

4

3

a b c d e

5 4

3

� � 2

g 1 f 9 h

21 . J.xh6! gxh6 22. �xh6+! �xh6 23. Wxe7 �f7 24. gxf7 �g7 25. �d3 �d6

Mate could have been avoided by playing 25 . . . 'Wb6 26. �g3+ 'Wg6 27. �xg6+ 'i!i>xg6, but al l the same the endgame after 28. d5 is hopeless.

26. �g3+ �g6 27. We5+ �xf7 28. Wf5+ �f6 29. Wd7 mate

A spectacular epau lette mate!

Inspired by his bri l l iant performance in Wijk aan Zee, Carlsen decided to test his powers in Moscow at a far h igher level in the Aeroflot Open , which was then becoming increasingly strong. By that t ime in Russia the affectionate n ickname Malysh had become fi rmly attached to his name, by analogy with the popular hero of the ch i ldren's stories Karlson on the Roof by the wel l -known Swedish author Astrid Lindgen . The attention of the experts in the press to the Norwegian prod igy was assured .

And so, the Rossiya Hotel , the A Tournament, where the consistently strong field did not afford any opportun ities for a respite. I n it ial ly there was a set-back - in the fi rst

33

Chapter 1 · From M aster to Grandmaster

round Magnus lost to Shu lskis, after overlooking a s imple tactic in t ime-trouble. But the youngster d id not lose heart and he produced a series of three wins, gained in such dynamic style, that it became clear: he d id not i ntend to yield to successors of the celebrated Soviet chess school .

' I w i l l never forget the veneration' , remembers the wel l -known chess journal ist Evgeny Atarov, 'with which Kasparov's famous trainer Alexander N ikit in produced a copy of the Carlsen - Dolmatov score sheet: "Th is is the play of a gen ius !" ' Indeed , we don't recal l anyone defeating the experienced Sergey Dolmatov in 19 moves. The secret lay in Magnus's thorough preparation for a specific opponent. H is open ing repertoi re i ncorporated play with Wh ite, so to speak, from either hand - 1 . e4 and 1 . d4, but for Dolmatov he made an exception - 1 . &Df3! . And this is why. I n h is computer database he d iscovered 1 0 games with the reply 1 . . . f5 . It was here that the mine was laid - Magnus prepared a new plan in what was a seemingly harmless variat ion for Black.

There was a past history to the events which occurred in this game. The position aris ing after White's 8th move occurred in the game Lerner- Bareev from the 1 986 USSR Championship Premier League in Kiev, where Dolmatov was also playing. Evgeny Bareev recal led (in a conversation with Maxim Notkin , the notable chess commentator) that when this position was reached he became i l l at ease, and, recognis ing the dangers facing Black, he managed to find a move order with which he did not lose (8 . . . c6! 9. Ad3 Axd3 1 0 . '!Wxd3 &Df6 1 1 . 0-0 Ae7 12 . &De2 d5). The confident defence found by Bareev, who did not al low the bishop to come out to c4, lu l led the vig i lance of Dutch players, who perm itted themselves a seemingly insign ificant transposition of moves, and this was noticed by Carlsen .

Game 4 M. Carlsen - S. Dolmatov

Moscow 2004 Reti Opening [ A04]

1 . tilf3 f5 2. d3!?

A kind of anti-Dutch variation, which mainly has a psycholog ical effect .

2 . . . d6 3. e4 e5 4. tilc3

The position has acquired contours typical of the open games.

4 . . . tilc6

Evgeny Bareev evaluates this position as favourable for White, and th inks that in this set-up Black should play 4 . . . &Df6.

34

a b c d e f g h

8 .I .i. 'iW • .i. l.&\ .I 8

7 .t .t .t .t .t 7 6 1.1\ .t 6

5 .t 5

4 � 4

3 t:jj � t:jj 3

2 � � � � � � 2 1 1:i ii, VJg � ii, 1:i 1

a b c d e f g h

5. exf5! �xf5 6. d4 tilxd4

Now if 6 . . . e4 there is the unpleasant 7. d5! .

7. tilxd4 exd4 8. 'Wxd4 tilf6?

M. Carlsen - E. Shaposhnikov ---------------------

The capture on c2 is dangerous for Black, who is clearly beh ind in development, but 8 . . . c6 is stronger, h indering the development of the bishop at c4.

9. i.c4!

Far more energetic than 9. Ad3 Axd3 10 . Wxd3 c6 1 1 .00 Ae7 1 2 . ttie4 ttixe4 13. Wxe4 0-0 with equal ity, Romanish in Malaniuk (Tal l inn 1 987).

9 . . . c6 1 0. Ag5!

The posit ion is an open one, and, as is customary i n such a s ituat ion, Carlsen develops his pieces i n their most active positions.

a b c d e f 9 h

'ii' e ..t .! 8 � � 7

6 J!a\ 6

5 ..tJt 5

a b c d e f 9 h

1 0 . . . b5

This move does not change the assessment of the posit ion as dangerous for Black. If 1 0 . . . d5 there fol lows 1 1 . 0-0-0!, and it only remains to include the second rook in the play, after which the king wi l l be doomed. Especial ly s ince the bishop on c4 is i nd i rectly defended: 1 1 . . . dxc4 12. We5+ or 1 1 . . . Ae7 12 . �he1 0-0 (1 2 . . . dxc4 13 . Axf6) 1 3 . We5. The king can be moved off the dangerous f i le - 1 1 . . .c!?f7, although here too after 1 2 . �he1 Black is lost . The variat ions 12 . . . h6 13. tLlxdS!

cxd5 14 . Axf6 gxf6 1 5 . Wf4 or 12 . . . Wd6 13. �e5 Ae6 14 . Axf6 gxf6 1 5. �xe6! Wxe6 1 6. tLlxdS are convincing enough.

1 1 . J.b3 J.e7?

The decisive mistake. Black's position was sti l l hang ing by a thread: 1 1 . . . We7+! 1 2 . �f1 (or 1 2 . �d2 0-0-0) 1 2 . . . 0-0-0 1 3 . a4 b4! 14 . Wxb4 d5, and at the cost of a pawn he would have avoided an immediate loss.

12 . 0-0-0 Wd7 13. !ahe1 �d8

6

5

a b c d e

• iV ..t

f 9 h

.! � �

� .t Jt

a b c d e f 9 h

8 7 6

5

This position recal ls the t imes of the romantic 1 9th century. S imi lar positions can be found in the games of Pau l Morphy and Adolf Anderssen . 'There fo l lows a combination, as natural as the smi le of a 1 3-year-old youth' (M . Notkin).

35

1 4. !axe7! Wxe7 1 5. Wf4 i.d7 16. tbe4 d5 1 7. tbxf6 h6 18 . .lh4 g5 1 9. Wd4

Black resigned . An impressive rout!

Game S M. Carlsen - E. Shaposhnikov

Moscow 2004 Nimzo-/ndian Defence [ E38}

1 . d4 tbf6 2. c4 e6 3. tbc3 i.b4 4. Wc2


This q ueen move, which has the a im of keeping the queenside pawn structure intact , is one of the most common reactions to the N imzo- lnd ian Defence.

4 . . . c5

Other popular replies are 4 . . . 0-0 and 4 . . . dS.

5. dxc5 AxeS

S . . .tba6 6. a3 Axc3+ 7. 'l!Vxc3 tL!xcS is also played , but most often Black repl ies S . . . 0-0 and captures on cS with his bishop only after 6. a3.

6. tDf3

It is curious that in the event of 6. Af4 the p lay m ay unexpected ly transpose i nto a l i ne of the c lassical Queen's Gambit : 6 . . . 0-0 7. tLlf3 tLlc6 8. e3 dS 9. !!d1 'WaS 1 0. a3 etc.

6 • • . 'Wb6

Black provokes e2-e3, to prevent the development of the bishop at gS or f4. However, as the further course of the game wi l l show, it is just as wel l placed on the long d iagonal .

7. e3 a6

a b c d e f g h

Of course, B lack's queen is obviously mis-

placed , and so he prepares to retreat it to the more appropriate square c7, by taking control of bS.

8. b3 'Wc7 9. Ab2 b6 1 0. Ae2 Ab7 1 1 . g4!?

As usual, Carlsen resolutely tries to exploit the opponent's s l ightly retarded development, especial ly as in the previous round he had gained a powerful charge of positive emotions. The alternative was the qu iet 1 1 . 0-0, but in this case Black can beg in rather unpleasant (by human standards) ' Paulsen- l ike' counterplay with 1 1 . . . tLlg4! (there is also another, more sol id reply -1 1 . . . Ae7!? with the intention of setting up a ' hedgehog' by . . . d7-d6 and . . . tLlbd7). 1 1 . !!d1 !?, recommended by Vital i Golod, deserves considerat ion.

11 • . . tDxg4

The sacrifice has to be accepted , as otherwise White's play is too s imple: g4-gS , tLle4, 0-0-0, !!dg1 and so on .

3 6

12. lag1 tDxh2 1 3. tDgS!

For what has White given up two pawns? Al l h is pieces are in play, apart from the rook on a1 , which needs only one move to be included . B lack, on the other hand, has to solve the problems of both h is uncastled k ing, and, no less important, the knight on h2 which is cut off from its main forces. The fearless Rybka assesses the position as equal , but in practice it is far more pleasant playing White.

13 . . . tDc6! 14. 0-0-0

Th ings are unclear after the tem pti ng 14 . tLlxf7!? �xf7 1S . !!xg7+ �xg7 1 6. tLldS+ WeS! - Black obtains too much material for the queen . For example, 1 7. AxeS+ tLixeS

M. Carlsen E. Shaposhnikov

18 . �b2 Ad6 1 9 . tDxb6 Ab4+ 20. �d1 tDhf3 21 . tDxa8 l;!.xa8 with chances for both sides.

a b c d e f g h

8 J. • J. 8

7 .i.'it' .t. 1. 1. 7 6 .t. .t. � .t. 6

5 .i. tjj 5

4 [j, 4

3 [j, tjj [j, 3

2 [j, � VJii � [j, � 2 � a a

a b c d e f g h

14 . . . �e5?

This natural move, defend ing the f7-pawn and preparing q ueenside castl i ng , is a mistake. I n our computer age, concrete variations in chess increasingly take precedence over general considerations. Very many players (especially of the older generation) find it hard to accept this, especial ly since the variations are often such that they can hardly been found at the board when there is restricted time for thought.

Only 14 . . . d5 ! ! - a solut ion which at fi rst sight looks l i ke an attempt to extinguish a fi re with petro l , and therefore without analysis wi l l be rejected by 80% of players - enables Black to maintain a dynamic balance. Here are these variat ions, which conclude with the assessment 'unclear' : a) 1 5 . Ah5 g6 1 6 . tDxd5 exd5 1 7. Axh8

gxh5 18 . �xh7 0-0-0; b) 15. tDxd5 exd5 1 6 . Axg7 l;!.g8 1 7. �xh7

0-0-0; c) 1 5 . cxd5 tDb4 1 6 . �e4 0-0-0; d) 1 5 . tDa4 tDb4! 1 6 . �d2 0-0-0 1 7. tDxc5

bxc5 1 8 . Axg7 dxc4 1 9 . Axh8 l;!.xd2 20. l;!.xd2 �as.

1 5. �ce4 0-0-0 1 6. �xc5 bxc5

1 6 . . . �xc5 is bad in view of 1 7. tDe4! Axe4 (otherwise 1 8 . tDd6+) 1 8 . �xe4, and the knight on h2 is lost.

17. f4

1 7. tDe4! �b8 1 8 . l;!.xg7 was even better, with a very strong in it iative. After the move in the game, strangely enough, White does not have a forced win .

37

1 7 . . . �ef3

a b c d e f g h

8 1• !.1 I!. 8

:t. l.t. .t. 7 .i.'it' .t. 7 6 .t. .t. 6

5 l .t. tjj 5

4 [j, [j, 4

3 [j, [j, � 3

2 [j, � VJil � � 2 1 � a a 1

a b c d e f g h

1 8. �xf7?!

What could be more natural than this capture? However, the most obvious continuation again proves to be not the strongest. It was preferable to p lay 1 8 . tDxf3!? tDxf3 1 9 . l;!.xg7 J;!.df8 20. J;!.f1 ! (the most accurate; there is no c lear win after 20. l;!.xh7 J;!.hg8 ! , wh i le if 20 . J;!.g3 Black i s saved by 20 . . . tDd4! 21 . exd4? �xf4+) 20 . . . tDh4 2 1 . J;!.g4 tDf5 22 . Axh8 f! x h 8 23. �c3. White succeeds i n transforming h is in i t iat ive i nto someth ing more tang ib le, and he should gradual ly convert h is exchange advantage.

18 . . . �xg1 1 9. !;lxg1 �f3 20. !;lxg7?!


The midd legame is of a purely calculat ing nature, and is not easy to annotate. The impetuous rook capture could have lost White the greater part of h is advantage, which wou ld have been retained by 20. gf1 tDh4 21 . tDxh8 gxh8 22. Axg7 gea 23. Ah5 (or 23. �xh7). After 20. gg3 Black is again saved by 20 . . . tDd4! .

20 . . J ihg8 21 . �xd8

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

a b c d e f 9 h

. QJ .i.'it' .t � .t .t .t [3J

!. J:( .t

[3J [3J [3J �

[3J �V/if � � !.---

a b c d e f 9 h

21 . . . 'Wxd8?

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

B lack m i sses h i s chance : 2 1 . . , gxg7! 22. Axg7 �xd8, and if 23. �xh7 there is the unp leasant 23 . . . �aS! . Now Wh ite's posit ion is again almost won .

22 . .tf6! 'Wf8 23. Wxh7 !ih8!

23 . . . gxg7 is hopeless: 24. Axg7 �f7 (if 24 . . . �e8 25. Ac3, and the detached knight is soon won) 25. �h8+ �c7 26. Af6 Ac6 27. �dB+ �b7 28. Axf3 Axf3 29. Ae7! or 29. Ae5.

24. 'Wg6

White should have considered 24. gf7!? g x h7 25 . g xf8+ �c7 26. g h a g x h 8 27. Axh8 Ae4, when he has qu ite good chances of convert ing his extra pawn in the endgame.

24 . . . 1ih1+ 25. �b2 !ig1 26 . .tg5

a b c d e f 9 h

8 'if 8

7 1:( 7

VJH 6

5 � 5

4 [3J 4

3 [3J � 3

� 2

!. a b c d e f 9 h

26 . . . !ixg5?

Shaposh n i kov apparent ly despai rs of compet ing with h is young opponent i n the calculation of variations and he does not notice 26 . . . tDh4! 27. �f6 (if 27. �h7, then 27 . . . Ae4! 28 . gf7 Axh7 29 . gxf8+ �c7) 27 . . . �xf6+ 28. Axf6 ge1 ! 29. Ag4 tDg2 - thanks to h is active rook Black sti l l has saving chances.

27. fxg5 �e5 28. 'Wf6 'Wd6 29. !ig8+ �c7 30. �c3!

Black resigned.

Carlsen played the second half of the tournament with alternat ing success, but nevertheless, by scori ng 5% points in 9 rounds, for the second t ime in succession (after Wijk aan Zee) he achieved the grandmaster norm. He was developing l iteral ly before one's eyes, and a d i rect acquaintance with the Norweg ian prod igy a l lowed certain observations to be made. In part icular, pleasantly surprising was h is modest behaviour and

38

M. Carlsen - G. Kasparov

the amazing composure with which Magnus conducted h is games with experienced grandmasters. I n h is style of play one senses a classical approach to the game. He competently deploys h is pieces, d isplaying h is read iness to engage in a large-scale strategic battle. At the same time, his age often tel ls . Magnus is not averse to taking tactical decisions, and risky sacrifices of material occur for the sake of maintain ing the in itiative. Also, he constantly keeps the enemy king in view, and he displays exceptional imag ination when attacking it . And al l th is is supported by wonderfu l calculating abi l ity, not only with speed of th ink ing, but also depth of penetration into the posit ion.

A surpris ing th ing was Carlsen's striv ing for complete independence in h is work on chess: ' I l i ke to prepare on my own , and I don't understand how some outsider can impose on me h is choice of open ing or h is vision of the fight. ' A unique view for such a young age. At the same t ime he spoke with great respect about h is fi rst trainer Simen Agdeste in , who responded in s imi lar terms (Agdestein wrote about Magnus the book Wonderboy, publ ished in 2004 by New in Chess).

After h is successfu l performance in Moscow, Carlsen played less wel l at the trad itional tournament in Reykjavik , where he scored only 50%. But the main result of the visit to Reykjavik was Carlsen's meeting with Garry Kasparov, who had been invited to take part in a bl itz and rapid tournament. Garry easi ly beat Magnus at bl itz, but in the rapid tournament, held on the knock-out system, an embarrassment almost occurred . In the fi rst game, after playing the open ing superficial ly, the strongest p layer i n the world was thoroughly outplayed by the youngster, and it was only a lack of experience that prevented the latter from winn ing the game. In the second game Kasparov was extremely composed and he won the min i -match , but the impression remained and it had important consequences for Carlsen. When a year later Kasparov gave up toplevel chess, he decided to share h is experience with the one he considered the most worthy. H is choice fel l on the strongest young player from the West .

M. Carlsen - G. Kasparov

1 . d4 d5 2. c4 c6 3. �f3 �f6 4. �c3 e6 5. Ag5 �bd7 6. e3 'WaS 7. �d2 Ab4 8. 'Wc2 0-0 9. Ae2 e5 1 0. 0-0 exd4 1 1 . �b3 'Wb6

11 . . .'�c7 was much better. Now somehow imperceptibly Garry sl ides into a positional mire.

1 2 . exd4 dxc4 13. Axc4 a5 14. a4 Wc7 1 5. �ae1 h6 1 6. Ah4 Ad6 1 7. h3 �b6 1 8. Axf6 � xc4 1 9. �e4 Ah2+ 20. �h1 �d6 (20 . . . b5 21 . tLlbc5 was

39

risky for Black) 21 . �xh2 �xe4+ 22. Ae5 �d6

a b c d e

a !. ..t 7 .\ 'if 6 .\ � 5 .t � 4 B B 3 ttJ B 2 B VJJ! B B �

: : a b c d e f 9 h

8

7

5 4

3

2


23. 'Wc5

White acts as though in the Russian saying : 'You can't have too much of a good thing' , but here it does not apply. Although Black's position is sti l l unenviable - it is not easy for h im to complete his development under fi re by the opponent - Kasparov is g iven a respite.

The immediate 23. d5! would have set Garry serious problems.

23 . . . §d8 24. d5

I t was also possib le to transpose into a favou rable endgame: 24. Axd6 �xd6+ 25. �xd6 �xd6 26. �e8+ �h7 27. �fe1 b5 28.�1 e7 bxa4 29. &Dc5 �xd4 30. �xf7.

24 . . . 'Wd7 25. ttld4 ttlf5 26. dxc6 bxc6 27. tilxc6 §e8 28. §d1 'We6 29. §fe1 .tb7 30. ttld4 etlxd4 31 . 'Wxd4 'Wg6

a b

a J. 7 .i. 6

5 . 4 [j, 3

2 [j, 1

a b

c d

�

e

I.

Jt

.: .: c d e

f g h

• 8

• • 7

'ti' . 6

5 4

[j, 3

[j, [j, cJ;; 2

1

f g h

32. 'Wg4

As it is fashionable to say nowadays, up to here Magnus has played l ike Fritz or Rybka. But the problem with computer programs is that they often evaluate endings with an extra pawn as though their 'brains' are switched off. They fol low the pr inciple: I have a pawn , so there is no need to th ink! And although, compared with other drawn posit ions, here there are opposite-colour b ishops, not a s ing le computer g ives a drawn assessment.

Winning chances would have been retained by 32. f3 , removing the threat from the bishop on b7, whereas White's darksquare bishop can attack both along the long d iagonal , and - especial ly important - the a5-pawn .

32 . . . 'Wxg4 33. hxg4 .tc6 34. b3 f6 35 • .tc3 §xe1 36. §xe1 .td5 37. § b1 'i!lf7 38. 'i!lg3 §b8 39. b4 axb4 40 . .txb4 .tc4 41 . a5 .ta6 42. f3 'i!lg6 43. 'i!lf4 h5 44. gxh5+ 'i!lxh5 45. §h1+ 'i!lg6 46 . .tc5 §b2 47. 'i!lg3 §a2 48. Ab6 'i!lt7 49. §c1 g5 50. §c7+ 'i!lg6 51 . §c6 .tf1 52. Af2

Draw.

A month later, at the Open in Dubai , Magus achieved the grandmaster norm for the th i rd t ime (61/z points from 9 rounds), and then he confirmed his growing c lass in Scand inavia at the Sigeman Tournament (FI DE category 1 3) . The tournament was held in Malmo and Copenhagen, but whereas in the Swedish part Magnus's p lay was rather restrained (21/z points from 5 rounds) , in Denmark he defeated three g randmasters and fi n ished i n 3rd p lace with 51/z points out of 9 , once again ach ieving the grandmaster norm .

40

M . Carlsen - E. Vlad imirov

The 1 3-year-old Norweg ian's achievements were recognised by h is inc lusion i n the World Championsh ip in Libya, held on the knock-out system in May 2004. However, Carlsen's appearance went practical ly unnoticed, since in the very fi rst round he lost to the rapidly progressing Levon Aronian. But it should be mentioned that the latter was able to overcome his young opponent only in the second rapid t ie-break game, in which Magnus lost a theoretical ly drawn rook end ing with f- and h-pawns.

After the set-back in Libya, Carlsen played without interruption, one tournament after another, and his rating also improved . By the time of the Olympiad in Calvia (Mallorca) the youngster had raised it by another hundred points and reached 2581 , final ly catching his more successfu l contemporary Sergey Karjakin . I n the Norwegian team Magnus immediately made his debut on board 1 , which was conceded to h im by the permanent team leader, grandmaster Agdeste in . Despite his higher rat ing, Magnus's trainer did not hesitate - the future belonged to h im. And Carlsen did not let h im down. He scored 3% points from 5 games, and the Norwegian team fin ished in a respectable 31 st place.

These successes marked an important watershed . The t ime of Swiss ' lotteries' was at an end . At the age of 14 , with such a h igh rat ing , Magnus could hope for more favourable invitations from tournament organisers, and the opportun ity presented itself to plan a schedule of performances. After the protracted series of official competit ions, which had taken much strength , now was the t ime from him to rest and assess his capabi l it ies. But signed contracts have to be fulfi l led . And after the Olympiad came a considerable s lump: an ind ifferent performance at the four-player Hoogeveen Essent Crown tournament in Hol land and a complete fai lu re in the Spanish Team Championship (four losses and five draws). Such a d ismal f inish cou ld hardly have improved his mood before the New Year. But how could he reject taking part in a F IDE category 1 4 tournament in h is homeland?

Game 6 M. Carlsen - E. Vladimirov

Dubai 2004 Sicilian Defence [ 867]

1 . e4 c5 2. tllf3 tllc6 3. d4 cxd4 4. tllxd4 tllf6 5. tllc3 d6 6. £g5 e6 7. Wd2 a6 8. 0-0-0 .td7 9. f3

(see next diagram)

9 • • . .§c8

Apart from the move in the game, B lack has a wide choice of alternatives: 9 . . . Ae7, 9 . . . b5 or 9 . . . tbxd4. For example, i n the last case the fol lowing development of events

41

a b c d e f 9 h

8 .i 'it' • .i.. .i 8

.t. ..t .t. .t. .t. 7 7 6 .t. "' .t. .t. "' 6

5 � 5

4 4

3 3

a b c d e f 9 h

i s poss ib le : 9 . . . tD xd4 1 0 . �xd4 Ae7 1 1 . g4 Ac6 1 2 . Ae3 0-0 1 3 . g5 tbd7 14 . h4 b5 1 5 . �b1 b4 1 6 . tbe2 d5 1 7. exd5 Axd5 1 8 . �f4 .§c8 with good counter-


p lay for Black (Ta l - Balashov, Tal l inn 1 973).

1 0. J.e3

1 0 . g4 is also possible: 1 0 . . . Ae7 1 1 . Ae3 tDe5 (1 1 . . . h6 1 2 . h4 transposes into the game) 1 2 . g5 tDh5 with double-edged play.

1 0 . . • �e5

Another development of events involves the exchange of knights: 10 . . . tDxd4 1 1 . Axd4 b5 1 2 . g4 Ac6 13 . g5 tDd7 with pawn attacks on opposite wings.

1 1 . g4 h6 12 . h4 b5 1 3. Ad3 b4 14. �ce2 d5 1 5. exd5 �xd5 1 6. �f4

a b c d e f 9 h

8 .!. 'if • i. .!. 8

7 i. .t. .t. 7

.t. .t. 6

5 1.& 1.& 5

4 ttJ tij � � 4

3 il, il, � 3

2 � � � WJ 2

g g 1

a b c d e f 9 h

1 6 • • • 'Wa5

Apparent ly, to the experienced Evgeny Vlad im irov, Black's ach ievements in Gazik - Popovic (Stary Smokovec 1 991 ) seemed inadequate. That game continued 1 6 . . . tDxd3+ 1 7. 'Wxd3 tDxe3 1 8. 'Wxe3 Ac5 1 9. tDh5 0-0 20. g5 We? 21 . �d2 (21 . tDf6+ gxf6 22. gxf6 �h7 23. 'We4+ �h8 24. 'We3 leads to a curious draw) 21 . . . Aa4 22. gxh6 Axc2? (22 . . . g6!? 23. �b1 �fd8 was correct) 23. hxg7 Ag6 24. gxf8'W+ (24. �d1 ! Axd4 25. gxf8'W+ �xf8 26. 'Wxd4 would have won material) 24 . . . Axf8+ 25. tDc2

42

Axc2 26. tDf6+ �h8 27. tDe8 'Wc6 28. 'We5+ �g8 29. �d6?? (29. tDf6+ �h8 30. tDe8+ wou ld have forced a draw) 29 . . . Ah6+ 0-1 .

1 7. �b1 �xf3?!

H ow shou ld th is m ove be assessed? It looks very attractive, s ince the knight capture 1 8 . tDxf3? m ay lead to m ate: 1 8 . . . tDc3+! 1 9 . bxc3 bxc3 20. 'Wc1 Aa3, but Black's i l l usions are soon dispelled . It would have been more logical to settle on 1 7 . . . tDxd3 1 8 . 'Wxd3 tDxe3 1 9. Wxe3 Ae7, with an inferior but defensible posit ion.

1 8. 'Wf2 �xe3 1 9. 'Wxe3 �xd4

If 19 . . . Ac5 there fol lows 20. 'Wxf3 Axd4 21 . tDg6!, and the attempt to play for mate - 21 . . . e5!? 22. tDxh8 Ae6 - is parried by 23. b3 'Wa3 24. Ab5+ axb5 25. �xd4 exd4 26. �e1 'Wa7 27. tDg6 .

20. 'Wxd4 Wc5

8

7

21 . 'We4

a b c d e f 9 h

Black is beh ind in development and White bui lds up the threats (if 21 . . . Ae7 there follows 22. tDh5), completely rul ing out the possibi l ity of the black king cast l ing. At fi rst s ight the queen move seems impossib le due to 21 . . . Ac6 22. 'We2 Axh1, but it is

D. Palo - M. Carlsen

here that a 'mine' has been la id: 23. CL!xe6! W/e7 (23 . . .fxe6 24. �xe6+ leads to mate: 24 . . .<;t>dB 25. Ae4+) 24. Af5! ! and there is no defence against the mate by 25. !!dB+ !::!xdB 26. tile?#. A pretty mate also awaits B lack after 21 . . . Ae7 22. Cbh5 Ac6 23. CL!xg7+ �fB 24. /i}xe6+ fxe6 25. !::!hf1 + �eB 26. �xc6+ Wfxc6 27. Ag6#!

21 . . . 'Wc6 22. 'We2 aS

a b c d e f 9 h

8 .I 8

7 7

6 � 6 5

4 {jj [j [j 4 3 � 3 2 /j /j /j VJ!i 2

� :g :g 1 a b c d e f 9 h

Black has an extra pawn and the two bishops: what else, it wou ld seem, can he want? But the main thing is the insecure position of h is k ing. If 22 . . . Ad6 there follows 23 . Cbh5 0-0 24. g5 with a dangerous attack.

23. �h5 a4 24. §hf1 ! §c7

Black is ob l iged to forget about counterplay: 24 . . . b3 25. cxb3 axb3 26. �f2 bxa2+ 27. �a1 and he has to run with h is king - 27 . . . �d8 (27 . . . f6? 2B. CL!xf6+!) , a llowing 2B. �xf7. Therefore he defends the f7-pawn with h is rook, but White stri kes a blow at its neighbour. I n the event of the defence by the queen 24 . . . �c5 25. �f3 Wie7 there fo l lows a b low from the left -26. �b7.

25. 'Wf2 .tea

a b c d e f 9 h

8 .i. • .i. .I 8

7 .I � � 7

6 'iiV � � 6 5 {jj 5

/j /j 4 3 � 3 2 [j [j [j fH 2

� :g :g a b c d e f 9 h

26. 'Wd4!

The double attack (27. Ab5 with mate at dB is threatened , as wel l as the capture on g7) is i rresist ib le.

26 . . . §d7 27. �xg7+ .1xg7 28. 'Wxg7 §f8 29. 'Wxh6

White is now a pawn up with a continu ing attack on the k ing. The game is decided .

43

29 . . . b3

If 29 . . . a3 , then 30. �g5 with the threat of 31 . Ab5 is decisive, since after 30 . . . Aa6 31 . Axa6 �xa6 there fo l lows 32. �f4, as occurred in the game.

30. axb3 axb3 31 . cxb3 .ta6 32 . .txa6 'Wxa6 33. 'Wf4! §a7

If 33 . . . �b5, then 34. �c4 is an adequate reply.

34. 'Wb8+ �e7 35. 'Wb4+

Black resigned .

Game ? D. Palo - M. Carlsen

Gausdal 2004 Nimzo-lndian Defence [E32]


1 . d4 �f6 2. c4 e6 3. �c3 Ab4 4. Vc2 0-0 5. a3 .Q.xc3+ 6. 'Wxc3 b6 7 . .Q.g5

Another plan i nvolves the development of the bishop at b2: 7. !Df3 Ab7 8 . e3 d6 9. Ae2 !Dbd7 1 0. O-O !De4 1 1 . �c2 f5 1 2. b4 etc.

7 • • • J.b7

a b c d e f g h

8 i. "' 'if I. • 8

7 .f. ..t .t. .t. 1. 1. 1. 7 6 ... "' 6

5 � 5

8. �f3

a b c d e f g h

4

3

At the present time fashion gives preference to 8. e3 d6 9. !De2 !Dbd7 1 0 . �c2. For example: 10 . . . h6 1 1 . Ah4 c5 1 2 . �d1 �c7 13 . !Dc3 a6 14 . �d2 �adS 1 5 . f3 d5 1 6 . cxd5 exd5 1 7. Ad3 �fe8 1 8 . 0-0 �c6 1 9. Ac2, and one can speak of some advantage for White (Dreev - Korotylev, Moscow 2009).

8 • . . d6 9. �d2

The s imple 9 . e3 !Dbd7 1 0. Ad3! is also possible, since the exchange on f3 can only favour White, who gains the advantage of the two bishops against two knights and the half-open g-fi le for an attack. 1 0. Ae2 �c8 1 1 . 0-0?! is less good because of 1 1 . . .!De4! .

9 • . • �bd7 1 0. f 3 c5 1 1 . e 4 Ile8 12. J.d3

1 2 . Ae2 deserves considerat ion.

12 • • • cxd4 13. Vxd4 �c5 14. Ac2 e5 1 5. 'Wf2

a b c d e f g h

8 8 .I 'ii' .l. • 7 7 .t. .t ... ... ... 6

5

4

... ... "' £::,

"' ... £::,

� 6

5

4

£::, £::, 3 3

fj, � {jj WJ [j, [j, 2 2

l:t � l:t a b c d e f g h

1 5 . . . �g4!

This tactical trick enables Black to solve his opening problems. 1 5 . . . !Dfxe4? did not work because of 1 6. !Dxe4 !Dxe4 1 7. Axe4.

44

1 6. Axd8?!

1 6 . �h4! f6! 1 7. �xg4 fxg5 1 8. 0-0-0 was stronger, with an unclear game. The Danish player probably underestimated the dangers awaiting him in the endgame, which is by no means so harmless for White as it may seem.

1 6 . . • �xf2 1 7. �xf2 Ilexd8

A close examination of the position reveals that the weak d6-pawn is easi ly defended , and the possession of the d5-point does not play any great role. At the same time, White's l ight-square bishop is bad , and the dark squares in his position are weakened.

1 8. b4

In the event of 1 8 . �hd1 !De6 the black kn ight wou ld have reached d4, wh ich , however, wou ld hardly be fatal for White.

D. Palo - M. Carlsen

The move in the game is more active, but also more committing - the c4-pawn is weakened .

18 . . . li:le6 1 9. Ethc1 �f8 20. li:lb3 �e7 21 . Ad3 Ac6

a b c d e f 9 h

a J. I. a

7 . • • • 7 6 • -*- • � 6 5 • 5 4 £:::, £:::, £:::, 4 3 £::, /!iJ � £:::, 3

2 rJ;; !:::, £:::, 2 1 .a. .a.

a b c d e f 9 h

22. a4?

This merely aggravates White's d ifficu lties. The accurate 22. tDd2 was better.

22 . . . a5! 23. bxa5 tileS!

Apparently Palo was only reckon ing on 23 . . . bxa5 24. c5! , when the posit ion becomes equal . Now another wh ite pawn is fixed on a l ight square.

24. Ac2

After 24. tDxc5 both captures wou ld have led to a big advantage for Black.

24 . . . bxa5 25. Eicb1 �d7 26. tilxc5+ dxc5

The position can be assessed as 'between a win for Black and a draw'. It is important only for Black to retain at least one pair of rooks, to avoid the creation of a fortress. I n practice the stronger side is often successful in such cases, s ince it is very d ifficult to defend passively.

27. Eid1 + �c7 28. Eixd8 Eixd8 29. �e3 Eid4 30. Ad3 Ad7 31 . Etb1

If 31 . �a2!? Carlsen would probably have played 31 . . . g6 32. �b2 f5 . The difference compared with the game continuation was that the 6th rank wou ld remain c losed , and B lack wou ld be denied the possib i l ity of . . . �d6-g6-h6, which could have g iven White add it ional chances.

8

7

6

a b

5 . 4 £:::, 3

2

c d e

• -*-

• • £:::, 1. £:::,

f

� � £:::,

9 h

£:::, £:::, a b c d e f 9 h

31 . . .f5! 32. Eic1

8

6 5 4 3

2

It was not possib le to capture on f5 because of 32. exf5 �xd3+! 33. 'i!;>xd3 Axf5+, but 32. g3 g5 (32 . . . �d6 33. Ac2) 33. �g1 was interest ing.

45

32 . . . f4+ 33. �e2 Eid6 34. Eib1 Eih6!

It is usefu l to provoke h2-h3, after which White's pawns are on squares of the colour of h is bishop.

35. h3 Etg6!

Carlsen demonstrates excel lent technique - it is a lso not out of place to draw the k ing away from the centre.

36. �f2 Etd6 37. �e2 g5 38. Ac2 h5 39. Eid1 Eid4

I t wou ld have been a b l under to p lay

Chapter 1 · From Master to Grandmaster __________________ .____ ------------------------

39 . . J !xd1 ? 40. �xd1 g4 41 . h4, when there is nowhere for B lack to break through.

40 . .td3

40. l:!xd4 cxd4 fol lowed by the king march to c5 was also hopeless.

40 .. J;td6 41 . .tc2 9:d4 42 . .td3 .tc6

The open ing of a second front comes into Black's plans, but for the moment 42 . . . g4 is premature because of 43. hxg4 hxg4 44 . l:!h1 with the activat ion of the rook (44 . . . Axa4 45. l:!a1 ) .

43. 9:g1 9:d8 44. g3!?

I f 44 . l:!b1 , then 44 . . . Axa4! (44 . . . l:!h8 is less good : 45. Ac2 g4 46. h4! and Wh ite has exce l lent chances of sett i ng up a fortress) 45 . l:!a1 Ac6 46. l:!xa5 �b6! (but not 46 . . . l:!a8 47. l:! x a8 (47. l:!xc5 �d6) 47 . . . Axa8 48 . �d2 �b6 49. �c3 �a5 50. �b3=) 47. l:!a1 l:!a8. The point of B lack's plan is to break through with his k ing v ia the queenside: 48. l:!xa8 (after 48 . l:!b1 + �c7 Wh ite is probably lost) 48 . . . A x a8 49 . �d2 �a5 50 . �c3 �a4 51 . Ac2+ �a3 52. Ab1 Ac6 53. Ac2 Aa4 54. Ad3 �a2! and wins.

44 . . . 9:g8 45. gxf4 exf4 46. e5!

White deprives h imself of his only trump the protected passed pawn , but this decision is forced , since Black was threatening . . . �d6-e5 with a total b ind.

46 . . . .td7

(see next diagram)

47 . .th7?!

47. Ae4! was more res i l ient : 47 . . . Axh3

8

7

6

a b

5 .l 4 � 3

2

c d

• ..t

.l �

�

e f g h

.!.

� .l .l .l � �

� a b c d e f g h

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

and, despite h is two extra pawns, B lack st i l l has to overcome some techn ical d ifficult ies.

47 . . . 9:g7 48 . .te4 .txh3

As usually happens when convert ing an advantage, at the critical moment one has to switch from the systematic strengthening of the position to the calcu lat ion of specific variat ions.

49. a:h1 g4 so. a:b1 a:9s s1 . a:b7+ ct>da 52. e6 a:es

The e-pawn has been stopped , and White is u nab le to cope with the connected passed pawns.

53. 9:f7 g3 54. 9:xf4 9:g5 55 . .td5 .txe6! 56. mt1 .txd5 57. cxd5 9:xd5 58. ct>g2 9:d4 59. 9:f5 h4 60. mh3 c4

White resigned .

Game 8 M. Carlsen - N . Short

Hoogeveen 2004 Queen 's Gambit {037]

48. Ad5 l:!g7 49. l:!b1 l:!e7! 50. l:!b7+ �d8 1. d4 �f6 2. c4 e6 3. �f3 d5 4. �c3 51 . l:!b8+ Ac8 52. l:!a8 l:!xe5+ 53. �f2 Ae7 5. Af4 0-0 6. e3 c5 7. dxc5 AxeS

46

M . Carlsen - N. Short

a b c d e f g h

8 1. 1.&1. 'if I. . 8

7 .t. .t. .t. .t. .t. 7 : J j_l.t. l.& : 4 � i, 4

3 � � � 3 2 � � � � � 2 1 II � � i, II 1

a b c d e f g h

8. cxd5

A few years later, when he had grown up

10 . . . �c6 11 . .td3 .tb6 12. 0-0

a b c d e

4

3 � 2 � 1 �

1 2 . . . d4

a b

i, i, � � 'if

c d e

� � � II �

f g h

4

3 2

a l itt le, at the 2008 B i l bao tournament Magnus has also had occasion to play th is Carlsen chose a more aggressive varia- position with B lack. At the Amber Tournation against lvanchuk: 8 . "Wc2 tbc6 9. a3 ment (N ice 2009) in his b l indfold game with �a5 10 . 0-0-0 .te7 1 1 . h4 l::!.d8 1 2 . tDd2 lvanchuk he set Wh ite more compl icated a6!? 13 . Ae2 b5! 14 . cxd5 exd5 1 5 . g4? ! . problems: 1 2 . . . Ag4 1 3 . h3 Ah5 14 . b4 §.e8

Th is attack is too l ate , and W h ite 1 5 . §.c1 a6 1 6 . Axa6 §.xa6 1 7. b5 §.xa3 should have restricted h i mself to central 1 8 . bxc6 bxc6 1 9 . §.xc6 §.a? and Wh ite strategy: 1 5 . tDb3 "Wb6 1 6 . tDd4 tDxd4 cou ld f ind nothing better than to go into 1 7. §xd4, restra in ing B lack's i n it iat ive. If a position with opposite-colour bishops -1 7 . . . Ac5 there can fo l low 1 8 . Ae5 Axd4 20. '1Wb3 Axf3 21 . §.xb6 Ae2 22. §.b1 Ac4. 1 9 . Axd4 when the centra l ised b ishop, which has no opponent , i s no weaker than a rook .

The game cont inued 15 . . . Ae6 1 6. tDb3 �b6 17. g5 tDe4 1 8 . tDxe4 dxe4 1 9. §.xd8+ �xd8!? (1 9 . . . "Wxd8 20. �b1 Wd5 21 . tDc1 §c8 22. Wd1 "Wc5 23. tDb3 'Wf5 is also possible, retain ing a dangerous in it iative) 20. 'i!?b1 l::!.c8 21 . "Wd1 tDc6 22. h5 a5! and Black's attack proved more real .

8 . . . CLixd5 9. �xd5 exd5 1 0. a3

The game is level .

1 3. e4 .tg4 14. h3 .th5 1 5. g4 .tg6 1 6. �d2 f6

If 1 6 . . . §.e8, then 1 7. Ag3 fol lowed by f2-f4 is possible.

1 7. lac1

(see next diagram) I n th is variat ion 1 7. tDc4 Ac7 1 8 . Axe? '1Wxc7 1 9 . f4 is more often p layed . The game Pel let ier- Ubi lava (Spain 2000) con

Sharper play resu lts from 1 0. Ad3 Ab4+ t inued: 19 . . . Af7! 20. §.c1 �h8 21 . b4 Axc4 1 1 . 'i!?e2 tbc6 1 2 . "Wc2 h6 1 3 . l::!.hd1 with 22. l::!.xc4, and here instead of 22 . . . Wd6 strong pressure i n the centre, although B lack cou ld have p layed 22 . . . "Wb6! with Wh ite's unshe ltered k ing neverthe less strong counterplay in connection with . . . gives h im some problems. a7-a5 (Dautov) .

47


a b c d e f g h

5 5

a b c d e f g h

1 7 . . . �h8 1 8. �c4 /ic7 1 9. /ixc7 YJ/xc7 20. f4 §ae8

20 . . . Af7! was stronger.

21 . YJ/f3 YJ/e7 22. §ce1 lif7 23. �d2!

A subtle move, making way for the bishop.

8

a b c d e f

.! .! g h

• 7 .t. .t. 'ii'.S.. .t. .t. 6 I.& 5

4 l

3 � 2

1

23 . . . g5!

� a b c

.t.

�. � � � i., VIIi � CiJ

: : � d e f g h

8

7

6

5

4

3 2

1

Sens ib le prophylax is . B lack sets u p a barrier on the d istant approaches to h is k ing. With passive play the pawn offensive could have become very dangerous: 23 . . . a6 24. h4! h6 25. g5! fxg5? 26. hxg5 hxg5 27. 'I!Nh3+ <;!>g8 28. e5 g6 29. e6! and White wins the bishop (29 . . . Axe6 30. f!xe6).

24. /ibS a6?

In view of the weakening of the k ingside, it was essential to cover the f6-square -24 . . . Ag6! , preventing White's manoeuvre which he carried out i n the game. Then 25. Axc6 bxc6 is pointless, since the pawn breakthrough 26. f5 Af7 27. e5? AdS is to Black's advantage. He also has a sound position after 25. 'I!Ng3 'I!Nc5 or 25. '1Wd3 f!d8.

25. /ixc6 bxc6 26. fxg5 fxg5 27. YJ/f6+!

At that t ime Carlsen was a l ready noted for h is practical approach . If he sees real chances in an endgame, he is prepared to be satisfied with a smal l advantage.

8

7

5

4

a b c

3 � 2 �

d e f g h

a b c d e f g h

27 . . . �g8?

6

5

4

Short was clearly rattled . Otherwise how can it be explained that he gave up the d4-pawn, and then 'asked' to go into an endgame. After 27 . . . 'I!Nxf6 28. f!xf6 c5 29. e5! (29. f!ef1 <;!>g7 30. f!xa6 f!b8 31 . f!a7 <;!>g8 32. e5! f!xb2 33. tbe4 Ag6 is not so clear) 29 . . . f!e7 (with the idea of 30. f!xa6 f!fe8, s ince otherwise Wh ite w i l l p ick up the a6-pawn for free) 30. tbf3 §.feB 31 . §.d6! a5 32. f!c1 White fixes al l the opponent's weaknesses.

28. YJ/xd4 c5 29. YJ/f6 YJ/xf6 30. §xf6

White is a pawn up with the better posi-

48

M . Carlsen - N. Short

tion. Magnus conducts the technical phase 36. Eic1 Eib3 37. �f2 c3 impeccably.

30 . . J!b8 31 . �f3 flxb2 32. �xg5 Aa2 The pawn capture 37 . . . flxa3 38. fla1 c3 33. §xf8+ �xf8 34. �xh7+ <tle7 35. �g5 c4 39. <tle3 leads to a mortal p in .

a b c d e f 9 h 38. e5 Etxa3 39. �e4 c2 40. Eixc2 Eixh3 8 8

7 • 7

6 ' 6

5 iLl 5

4 fj, fj, 4

3 /j, fj, 3 2 .i. l. 2

a b c d e f 9 h

Black's last hope is h is passed pawn . But Magnus is v ig i lant.

41 . Eic7+ �d8 42. Eia7 Ac4 43. g5 Eih4 44. �d6 Ae6 45. g6

Here the curtain could have been lowered.

45 . . . Etg4 46. g7 a5 47. �f3 Eig1 48. �b7+ �e8 49. �c5 Af7 50. �e4 Eixg7 51 . �d6+ �f8 52. Eia8+ �e7 53. �f5+ �d7 54. Eta7+

Black resigned.

49

Chapter 2

The Way to the Top The chess festival in the town of Drammen, not far from Oslo, was a notable event in Norway. Just th ink, 500 players, d ivided into 1 0 tournaments, the main of which was the Dram men Smartfish Masters (FIDE category 1 4), were invited to greet the New Year 2005 in a friendly atmosphere. How could their idol refuse such an invitation? Of course, Magnus played , but somehow superficial ly. In the very fi rst round, against the Danish grandmaster Peter Heine N ielsen , wel l -known for his h igh-qual ity open ing knowledge (he had worked with none other than Anand), he played , so to speak, 'at sight' .

P. H. Nielsen - M. Carlsen Drammen 2004/2005

1 . �f3 �f6 2. c4 c6 3. d4 d5 4. �c3 dxc4 5. a4 .tf5 6. �e5 �bd7 7. �xc4 'Wc7 8. g3 e5 9. dxe5 �xe5 1 0 . .tf4

6

5

a b c

4 !::, t2J 3 t2J 2 !::, 1:

d e f

•.t 9 h

.I 8

......... 7

� 6

�.t 5

� 4

!::, 3

!::,!::, !::, 2

�� :1

1 0 .•• �fg4?! 1 1 . f3 g5!?

But this is already his own home preparation , s i nce Morozevich 's cont inuation 11 . . .''We7 12. fxg4 ttid3+ 13. 'Wxd3 Axd3 14. ttid6+ �d7 1 5 . 0-0-0 led to serious problems. However, the attempt to rehabi l i tate the idea of the piece sacrifice proves unsound .

12 . fxg4 gxf4 1 3. �xe5 'Wxe5 14. gxf5 .tc5 1 5. 'Wc2

By playing 1 5 . 'Wd3! N ielsen could have placed B lack in a critical posit ion . Now, however, he gains defin ite counterplay.

1 5 .•• 0-0-0 16. 'We4 fxg3 17 . .tg2 'Wd6 In th is tabiya of the Slav Defence, where 1 8. 'Wd3 'Wf4?

a b c d e f 9 h

since the 1 930s 1 0 . . J:td8 1 1 . 'Wb3 tDfd7 has been played , Magnus surprised the 18 . . . 'Wf6 was correct . open ing encyclopaed ist with an eccentric idea, which shortly before he had seen in 1 9. 'Wxg3 'Wd2+ 20. �f1 'Wxb2 21 . J::i:b1 an Internet game of Alexander Morozevich. 'Wxb1 + 22. �xb1 J::i:d1+ 23. 'We1 J::i:hd8 Black is ready to sacrifice a knight with the 24 • .te4, and White converted h is extra aim of keeping the wh ite king in the centre. piece.

50

M . Carlsen - A. Shirov

However, every cloud has a si lver l in ing ! N ielsen began taking a closer look at Magnus (they had al ready played six months earl ier in the Sigeman tournament) and he soon become his mentor. Talking about N ielsen, it should be mentioned that the Dane had absorbed many of the methods of the Soviet chess school . It was no accident that Garry Kasparov named h im as one of the trainers who wou ld help in the development of Carlsen's open ing repertoire.

As regards Magnus's further play in the Drammen tournament, the casual start did not bring any benefit. In the 3rd round he was 'pun ished ' for h is superficial play in the opening by the 73-year-old veteran Victor Korchnoi . Then came opening d isasters against Johannessen and Macieja, which demonstrated the inadequacy of h is 'black' repertoire. The result was a share of last place with the lady world champion Antoaneta Stefanova. Some consolation was provided by his only win, over Alexey Shirov. True, this was not without the help of the el ite grandmaster, who fai led to withstand Magnus's 'caval ier' attack. This win al lowed Peter Heine N ielsen to catch Shirov and share 1st-2nd places with h im. The two Scand inavians then travel led together to the tournament in Wijk aan Zee.

Game 9

M. Carlsen - A . Shirov

Drammen 2004/2005

Ruy Lopez [ C95}

1. e4 e5 2. �f3 �c6 3. Ab5 a6 4. Aa4 lUf6 5. 0-0 Ae7 6. ile1 b5 7. Ab3 0-0 8. c3 d6 9. h3 �b8

a b c d e f 9 h

sK�.i.'iV K. a 7 � 1.�� 7

J!l\ 6 5 � 5

4 � 4

3 JL� ttJ � 3 2 � � � � � 2

1 .:t:ttJJL�.: @ a b c d e f 9 h

The ultra-sol id Breyer Variation .

10. d4 �bd7 1 1 . �bd2 Ab7 12. Ac2 §e8 13. �f1 Af8 14. �g3 g6 1 5. b3 c6

51

Black prevents the d4-d5 advance, which is possible after the automatic fianchetto of the bishop - 1 5 . . . Ag7 1 6 . d5 'We? 1 7. c4, when White gains a spatial advantage.

16. Ag5 Ag7

The preparatory 1 6 . . . h6 came into considerat ion, to drive the bishop from its active posit ion .

17. 'Wd2 'Wc7

The trad it ional ' S pan ish ' post for the queen , but in recent years Black has also played 17 . . . 'We?, a keen advocate of which is Krishnan Sasik iran. For example, one of h is recent games, against Bauer in the 2008 French Team Championship, cont inued 1 8 . a4 'Wf8 1 9 . Ad3 d5!? 20. dxe5 tbxe5 21 . tDxe5 �xe5 22. Af4 �ee8 23. e5 tbd7 with double-edged play.

18. a4

(see next diagram)

Chapter 2 · The Way to the Top

a b c d e f 9 h

a .!. .!. • a 7 j_'Yjfl,& •-*-• 7

6 • • • '-'• 6 5 •J • jL 5 4 8 8 8 4 3 8 8 tiJtiJ8 3

2 jLfjf 8 8 2

1 .: .: � a b c d e f 9 h

a b c a .!. 7 j_ 6 . • 5 • 4 8 3 8 8

d e f 9 h

.!. • 1.& •-*-•

'iV .jL . 8

tiJ 8 2 jL� 8 8 1 .: .: �

a b c d e f 9 h

a 7

6 5 4

3

2

1 8 • . • dS and by exploit ing the p in , Wh ite wins a

This leads to the open ing of the position , piece: 27. f4 tbc4 28. f!xe6 tbxd2 29. f!xe8 which al lows White, thanks to the active f!xe8 30. f!xb7. p lacing of h is p ieces, to develop an at-

24• f4 Y!/e7 2s. E!ea tack on the kingside. 1 8 . . . f!ad8 fol lowed by . . . tbf8 or the immediate 1 8 . . . tbf8 was With the threat of 26. ttlf5 gxf5 27. f!g3+. more sol id , after which Carlsen was in-

� 2S . . . �f8 tending 1 9 . b4 and then �b3, train ing h is b ishop on f7. a b c d e f 9 h

��---=��

1 9. dxeS �xeS

After the complete open ing of the centre -1 9 . . . tbxe4 20. Axe4 dxe4 21 . tbxe4 tbxe5 22. tbxe5 Axe5 - Black has to reckon with 23. ttlf6+ Axf6 24. Axf6, when it is not easy for h im to defend on the kingside.

20. �xeS Y!/xeS 21 . Af4

I n the event of 21 . f4 V!lc7 22. e5 tbd7 the bishop at g5 proves to be out of play.

21 . . . Y!/e6 22. eS �d7 23. Ah6

(see next diagram)

23 . . . Ah8

The attem pt to win a pawn - 23 . . . bxa4 (23 . . . tbxe5? 24. Axg7 rilxg7 25. f4 1oses the knight) 24. bxa4 tbxe5 25. Axg7 r:ilxg7 is parried by the interposition 26. f!ab1 ! f!ab8,

52

.!. l,&.j_ a 'iiV. • 7

.jL 6

26. E!f1?!

A natural move, and an indication of the deficiencies in the young grandmaster's 'schoo l ing '. The attack should be combined with prophylaxis against possib le counterplay by the opponent. It was correct fi rst to restrict B lack's play on the queenside by 26. b4!? with the possible cont inuation 26 . . . c5 27. f!ae1 bxa4?! 28. Axa4

M. Carlsen - A. Shi rov ttJ --------------------� ------------------�

flec8 29. Ag5!? (th is is stronger than 29. f5 cxb4 30. cxb4 f!.c4) 29 . . . �e6 30. bxc5. But for the moment doubts are something unfami l iar to Magnus, and he launches an attack on the king, ind icating his read iness to sacrifice a whole rook.

26 . . . cs 27. f5?!

This direct attack is parried by counterplay in the centre, a fact admitted by Carlsen himself, who considers the correct move to be the prophylactic 27. f!.fe1 !?.

27 . . . d4

Without the sl ightest doubts! The e5-pawn is 'poisoned' because of the pin on the bishop- 27 . . . Axe5?! 28. Axf8 �c7 (28 . . . f!.xf8? loses to the interposit ion 29. f6, cast ing a mating net around the k ing: 29 . . . �d6 30. gxe5 �xe5 31 . �h6). But now White forces the transition into a clearly favourable endgame: 29. f!.xe5 �xe5 30. �h6 �e3+ 31 . �h2 �xh6 32. Axh6 (variation by Carlsen) .

28. cxd4 cxd4 29. fxg6?!

A continuation of the previously calculated l ine. It was not yet too late to 'cal l a halt ' -29. �xd4 Axe5.

29 . . . hxg6?!

The energetic actions of his young opponent so impressed the experienced fighter Shirov, who h imself had gained numerous wins with a d i rect attack on the k ing, that he fl inched and could not bring h imself to go in for the critical continuation 29 . . . dxe3! 30. gxh7+ tDxh7 31 . �e2.

.I .I •.a 1. 'if. ""

• A • 8

[::, [::, • l!jjl::,

A V!;V [::, 1:1�

Analysis diagram

However, the th reat of 32. �g4+ can be parried, and White does not have compensation for the sacrificed rook, since he has to reckon with the advance of the e3-pawn. Carlsen gives the fol lowing variat ions:

a) 31 . . . �xe5 32. �g4+ Ag7 (the pin allows White to regain one of the pieces)

53

33. Axh7+ �h8 (if 33 . . . � x h7? there is 34. f!.xf7, when 34 . . . �xh6? fai ls to 35. tDf5+), and White's attack suffices only to save the game: 34. tDf5 Axh6 35. tDxh6 f!.e7 (or 35 . . . Ad5 36. �h4 �g7 37. tDxf7+ Axf7 38. Ag6+ �g8 39. Axf7+ �xf7 40. f!.xf7 �xf7 41 . �f4+, forcing a draw by perpetual check) 36. �h4 e2 37. tDxf7+ f!.xf7 38. Ag6+ �g8 39. Axf7+ �f8 40 . �h6+ �e7 41 . �h4+ �f8 42 . �h6+ with perpetual check;

b) 31 . . . Axe5!? (vacating a square for the king) 32. Axh7+ (32 . �g4+ �h8 33. tDf5 f!.g8) 32 . . . �xh7 33. �h5 e2 34. tDxe2 �g8 and Wh ite's attack comes to a standst i l l .

30. �f5? Carlsen cannot stop h imself, but this reckless knight sacrifice should have led to defeat. Therefore he should have retreated his rook - 30. f!.e2 (weaker is 30. �xd4 Axe5), intending after 30 . . . Axe5 the exchanging operation 31 . Axf8 �xf8 32. f!.xe5 f!.xe5 33. Axg6 Ad5 34. tt:'ih5.

30 . . . gxf5 31 . �g3+ �g6 32. Axf5


a b c d e f 9 h

.I . ..�.. 8

7 'ti'.l 7

J!l\ � 6 5 �� 5

4 3 g� 3 2 � � 2

g� a b c d e f 9 h

32 . . . Wxe5?!

After 32 . . . AxeS! 33. gg4 �d6 34. �d3 Ac8! 35. gxg6+ fxg6 36. Axg6 Ad? White's hopes would have been dashed . But even after the text move it is not easy for h im to save the game.

33. Ei:g4 Ag7 34. Axg6 fxg6 35. §xg6 Ei:e7 36. Ei:f4

a b c d e f 9 h 8 J. • 8

7 ..t.. .I ..t.. 7

6 .l g� 6 5 .l 'iV 5 4 � .l g 4 3 � � 3 2 � � 2

� a b c d e f 9 h

36 ••• Ae4??

In the time scramble Shirov overlooks an interposition , lead ing to h is defeat . The bishop manoeuvre was good only after the inc lus ion of 36 . . . gf8 , wh ich wou ld have forced the exchange on g7, since if 37. gxd4 Ae4! 38. ggs Black has 38 . . . gfs.

37. Ei:g5! We6 38. Axg7

Black resigned .

In 2005 the composition of the B Tournament at the famous festival in Wijk aan Zee was selected especial ly carefu l ly by the organisers, who were able to ensure a sol id F IDE category 13 . More than half of the participants comprised the most promising young players of that t ime. There were the recent prodigies Sergey Karjakin and Magnus Carlsen, who were meeting for the fi rst t ime, and some sl ightly older players: Shakhriyar Mamedyarov, Ivan Cheparinov, Daniel Stel lwagen, Jan Smeets, Alejandro Ramirez and Alexandra Kosteniuk - al l grandmasters. I n short, in such a youth parade a good performance was a matter of prestige! Magnus arrived at the tournament not only fu l ly prepared in the openings, but also with a more pragmatic approach. Even his entourage had changed. Alexandra Kosteniuk made this curious observation: 'The numerous snacks and drinks had disappeared from his table, and in Wijk aan Zee I never saw h im wearing his favourite trainers.' What told was the favourable influence of Peter Heine N ielsen, who was playing alongside. Everyone saw how much he chatted with Carlsen during walks together. Outwardly, because of the d ifference in their weight categories, this pair looked very eccentric and provoked smi les on the faces of passers-by.

But let's return to the chess itself. Magnus's play was rather restrained: after winning in the 2nd round against Kosteniuk, he proceeded cautiously, as though awaiting h is

54

I. Cheparinov - M. Carlsen

opportunity. And after a series of seven draws the Norwegian as though gained his second wind and powerfu l ly attacked the kings of Cheparinov and N ikol ic . Moreover, the attack against the experienced Bosnian grandmaster was awarded the spectators' daily prize. Unfortunately, after jo in ing the leading group, Magnus ran out of steam and lost his two remain ing games. The result was only a modest 7th place. First prize and an invitation to the A Tournament the fol lowing year was won by Sergey Karjakin , who achieved an excel lent result - 9% out of 1 3 .

There was reason for h im to b e distressed - progress t o higher society had to be deferred for another year.

Game 1 0

I. Cheparinov - M. Carlsen

Wijk aan Zee B 2005


1. e4 c5 2. �f3 �c6 3. d4 cxd4 4. tnxd4 �f6 5. �c3 e5

The Chelyabinsk Variat ion assu med an honourable p lace in M agnus's open ing arsenal , and he soon became famed as one of its main experts .

6. tndb5 d6 7. Ag5 a6 8. �a3 b5 9. Axf6 gxf6 10. �d5 Ag7 11 . Ad3 �e7 12. �xe7 'f!xe7 13. c4 f5 14. 0-0 0-0

a b c d e f

8 .! 8

7 6

5 5 4 4 3 ti:J 3 2 [3:, [3:, [3:,[3:,[3:, 2 1 � � �

a b c d e f 9 h

15. cxb5?!

A poor move, al lowing Black a pawn centre, which in such a dynamic position is more

important than the sacrificed pawn. The main continuations are 1 5. Y#f3 and

1 5. 'Wh5, forcing Black to rel ieve the pawn tension, which is important in the fight for the d5-square.

1 5 . . . d5 1 6. exd5 e4 1 7. 'We2 Eib8

17 . . . 'tlfb4 1 8 . Ac4 'Wxb2 1 9. tbc2 axb5 20. f!.ab1 'tlff6 21 . f!.xb5 f4 (Rogozenko) also came into consideration. The active pawn pair g ives Black compensation for the sacrificed material (for example, if 22. 'tlfxe4?! there is 22 . . . Af5 23. 'tlfe2 f3) .

55

18. Eiab1

a b c d e f 9 h 8 .!.i. .�. 8

7 if ... .i. ... 7 6 ... 6 5 [3:, 5 4 4 3 ti:J 3 2 /J:,/J:,

� a b c d e f 9 h

1 8 . . . Eib6!

A typical trait of the young Carlsen was that he always had h is eye on the opponent's


king. With the vigorous rook manoeuvre to of his pieces is i l lustrated by the fol lowing the kingside he, as they say, takes the bu l l variation: 21 . bxa6? Axa6 22. �fd1 Ah6 by the horns - the king wi l l have no peace. 23. We1 �xg2+! (now this sacrifice is ap

19. 'We3 Jag6 20. J.c2

White pins his hopes on the b-pawn, since after 20. bxa6 it is not possible to exploit the passed a-pawn. In view of the fact that the g2-pawn is inadequately defended , in many variations B lack is practical ly guaranteed perpetual check by a rook sacrifice: 20 . . . Wh4 21 . a? Ad4 (with the idea of 22. Wxd4 �xg2+) 22. a8W (22 . Wg3 Wxg3 23. hxg3 Axa7 24. Ac2 e3 is risky for White) 22 . . . Axe3 23. fxe3 exd3 24. �f2 (if 24. Wa7 there is 24 . . . �xg2+ 25. 'it>xg2 Wg4+) 24 . . . We? - Black retains the in itiative and is threatening not only the e3-pawn, but also the move . . . Ab7.

The passive 20. �fd1 We5 21 . Af1 al lows Black to bui ld up a dangerous attack: 21 . . . f4 22. Wc3 Wh5.

20 ..• 'Wh4

8

7

a b c

6 � 5 8 4 3 CLJ 2 8 8 iL

21 . b6

1:1 a b c

d e

8 � '@'

d e

f g h

.�. 8

�.i.� 7 .! 6

� 5 'iW 4

3 8 8 8 2 1:1 �

f g h

This lone pawn hard ly has any future, but it is not easy for Wh ite to choose a sound plan, whereas Black is ready to add fuel to his attack. For example, the latent activity

propriate) 24. 'it>xg2 Wg4+ 25. 'it>h1 Wf3+ 26. 'it>g1 Ae2! and Black has set up a mating construction. If 21 . �fd1 White has to reckon with the advance of the f-pawn - 21 . . . �e8 22. d6 f4. He is also unable to set u p a blockade by 21 . f4 on account of 21 . . . exf3 22. Wxf3 Ae5 23. h3 �g3 24. We2 Wxh3 etc.

21 . . . �h8!?

By including his second rook in the attack along the g-fi le, Magnus demonstrates that he is not th inking about a draw, which he could have forced by 21 . . . Ad4 22. Wxd4 �xg2+ 23. 'it>xg2 Wg4+.

22. �c4 JagS

The murderous . . . Ad4 is threatened .

56

23. g3 'Wh3 24. Jafd1

A usefu l move, at the same t ime vacating a square for the k ing. If 24. Wd2 there fol lows 24 . . . f4! with the threat of 25 . . . �h6 (the immediate 24 . . . �h6 is parried by 25. f4) . 24. f4?! immediately is not good because of 24 . . . Af8! with the threats of . . . Ac5 and . . . �xg3.

24 ••• Jah6 25. 'Wf4

a b c d e f g h

8 .i. .�. 8

7 �.i.� 7 6 � 8 .! 6 5 8 � 5 4 LD �'@' 4 3 8 1V 3 2 8 8 iL 8 8 2

1:1 1:1 � a b c d e f g h

M . Carlsen - P. N ikol ic

25 •. . At6? 33. �g1 . Now, however, White is doomed .

26 ••. Axe5 27. 'Wxe5+ f6 28. 'Wf4 Elg4 A careless move, which could have cost B lack the fruits of h is efforts . He should There was a quicker win by 28 . . . aS! 29. b4 have included the other bishop in the at- axb4 30. �xb4 Aa6 with the threat of playtack by playing 25 . . . aS! , when it is doubtfu l ing the bishop to f3 . whether White can prevent the develop-

29• Wc7 ElgS 30• Ele1 ment of the bishop at a6. For example: 26. b4 Ac3 27. bxaS (27. bS? �h4) 27 . . . Aa6 There is no way of saving the game. 30. b7 28. Ab3 �h4 ( in the event of 28 . . . 'Wxh2+ does not work because of 30 . . . Axb7 29. �f1 �c8 30. �e2 �xc4 31 . Axc4 Axc4+ 31 . 'Wxb7 e3! with unavoidable mate. If 32. �e3 'WhS 33. �e1 �d6 34. �bc1 ! Black's 30. 'Wf4, then 30 . . . aS! is decisive. attack comes to a standsti l l) 29. 'Wxh4 (29. �e3? �xh2+ leads to mate) 29 . . . �xh4, winning the queen.

Wh ite is ob l iged to th row caution to the winds: 26. d6 Aa6 27. b3 e3! 28. �d3 (evidently the only move, since 28. Ad3? is bad: 28 . . . e2 29. d7 'Wxh2+ 30. �f1 e2+! 31. �xe2 �e6+ 32. <!>d3 'Wg2 33. 'WxfS flf6 , and Black wins the queen) 28 . . . 'Wxh2+ 29. �f1 with sharp play, where White is apparently able to defend . Here are some sample variations: a) 29 . . . �e8 30. �xe3 'Wh1 + 31 . �e2 'Wc6

32. �d2 Axd3 33. Axd3 �xd6 34. 'WxfS �g8 3S. �e2, and the wh ite pieces are excel lently coordinated ;

b) 29 . . . exf2 30 . 'Wxf2 (30 . d7? ! 'Wg1 + 31 . �e2 �e6+ i s dangerous for White, whi le if 32. �e3 or 32. �e3 there fol lows 32 . . . Ah6) 30 . . . 'Wxf2+ 31 . � xf2 �h2+ 32. �g1 �xc2 33. d7 Af6 34. �e1 , and White's passed pawns compensate for the lost piece.

26. �e5?

After 26. b7! Axb7 27. �d6 'Wxh2+ 28. �f1 Black's attack would have come to a standsti l l , for example: 28 . . . �g7 29. �xf5 (or 29. �xfS Ae7! 30. �xb7?! �f6) 29 . . . 'Wh1 + 30. �e2 'Wh5+ 31 . g4 �xg4 32. 'Wxh6 WxfS

57

30 . . . 'Wxh2+ 31 . <!>t1 'Wh1 + 32. <!>e2 'Wf3+ 33. <!>d2 'Wxf2+ 34. <!>d1 f4 35. 'Wc3 fxg3 36. Axe4 Ag4+ 37. <!>c1 lieS

White resigned .

Game 1 1 M. Carlsen - P. Nikolic

Wijk aan Zee B 2005 French Defence [COB]

1 . e4 e6 2. d4 d5 3. �d2 c5 4. exd5 exd5 5. �gf3

a b c d e t 9 h

8 .I �.S..'ii'tfi.S..� .I 8

7 .. • • 7 6 5 4

6 5 4

3 tt:J 3 2 /j, /j, [j, tt:J fj, /j, /j, 2 1 It �� It 1

a b c d e f 9 h

5 ••• c4!?

The experienced N ikol ic aims to neutral ise the fruits of h is young opponent's home


preparation and he avoids positions with an isolated d5-pawn . Another version of this idea - 5 . . . tt:lc6 6. Ab5 c4 - has its special features, since White has determined the position of h is l ight-square bishop.

6. b3 cxb3 7. axb3

A prag matic approach to the choice of m ove, typ ica l of p l ayers of the compute r g e n e rat i o n . Magnus p refers a sound m ove, and dec l i nes to enter a d iscuss ion i nvo lv i ng t h e i ntermed iate exchange of the l i g ht-square b ishops after 7. Ab5+ Ad7 8. We2+ We7 9. Axd7+ ti:lxd7 1 0 . axb3 , wh ich had occu rred in several of N i ko l ic 's games. For examp le , the game Adams - N i ko l i c (Neum 2002) conti nued 10 . . . f6 1 1 . tLlf1 Wxe2+ 1 2 . � xe2 Ad6 1 3 . Cbe3 Cb e7 1 4 . Aa3 Axa3 1 5 . Z!xa3 �f7 1 6 . tt:le1 tLlf8 1 7. tLld3 tt:le6 1 8 . c3 Z!hd8 1 9 . �d2 tt:lc6 20 . Z!d 1 Z!ac8 %-%. Apart from the exchange of the l i g htsquare b ishops, also of i nterest is the p ract ica l l y u n ex p l o red 7 . . . tt:lc6!? , not fear ing the swift attack suggested half a centu ry ago by I g o r Bondarevsky : 8 . We2+ Ae7 9 . tt:le5 ! (noth ing is g iven by 9 . axb3 tt:lf6 1 0 . Aa3 0-0 1 1 . Axc6 A x a3 1 2 . Z!xa3 Wd6 1 3 . Z!a5 Wxc6=) . The best here i s 9 . . . We? ! ( i t i s i m portant to defend the kn ight , not forgett ing about the defence of the b ishop on e7) 1 0 . axb3 (th is is stronger than 1 0 . c4 tLlf6 1 1 . Axc6+ bxc6 1 2 . axb3 0-0 1 3 . 0-0 c5= or 1 0 . ti:ldf3 f6 ! ? 1 1 . Axc6+ bxc6 12 . Cbd3 bxc2=) 10 . . . ti:lf6 1 1 . Axc6+!? (or 1 1 . Aa3 0-0 1 2 . Axc6 Axa3 1 3 . Z!xa3 bxc6 1 4 . 0-0 c5=) 1 1 . . . bxc6 1 2 . 0-0 0-0 1 3 . Z!e1 Z!e8 , and B lack, alternat ing the ideas . . . Ae7-b4 and . . . c6-c5, obta ins good p lay.

a b c d e f 9 h

8 I. 1.11 ..t 'Vi • ..t 1.11 I. 8 7 .t.t .t .l ? 6 6

5 5

4 4

3 [j, tb 3

2 [j, tiJ [j, [j, [j, 2

1 1:, �� .: 1

a b c d e f 9 h

7 . . . .tb4

This bishop manoeuvre was actively employed by David Bronstein. 7 . . . Ad6 8 . Ad3 tt:le7 9 . 0-0 0-0 1 0 . Z!e1 tt:lbc6 1ooks more natural . For example, the game Lebedev Bronstein (Moscow Championship 1 953) cont inued 1 1 . c4 Ab4! (here th is bishop manoeuvre effectively counters the rook move to e1 ) 1 2 . \Wc2 ti:lg6 1 3 . Ab2 Ae6 14 . Z!ad1 Wf6 1 5 . Z!e3 Ad6! 1 6 . Wc3 ti:lf4 with the in it iative for Black.

58

After the modest move 1 1 . c3 B lack com p letes h i s deve lopment : 1 1 . . . Af5 1 2 . tLlf1 Z!e8, retain ing a sound posit ion, for example: 13. Aa3 Axa3 14. Z!xa3 Wd6 1 5. Z!a1 Wf6 1 6 . tt:le3 Axd3 1 7. Wxd3 a6 1 8 . b4 eLla? 1 9. tt:le5 tLlb5 with the idea of . . . Z!ac8.

8. �e5

It is hard to catch Carlsen unawares, even in such a rare variat ion. He is fol lowing the game Svidler- Korchnoi (Groningen 1 996). Black is not caused any particular problems by 8. Ad3 tt:le7 9 . 0-0 ti:lbc6 1 0. Aa3 0-0 or 8. Ab5+ Ad7 9. We2+ tt:le7 1 0. 0-0 0-0 1 1 . Aa3 Axa3 1 2 . Z!xa3 ti:lbc6.

8 . . . �e7

M. Carlsen - P. N ikolic

Korchnoi played 8 . . . ttlf6 and after 9. Ad3 a) 1 3 . . . ttlg6 1 4 . f!h5 0-0 1 5 . ttlb1 Ab4 0-0 1 0 . 0-0 Ac3 1 1 . f!a4 Ad? 1 2. ttlxd7 1 6 . c3 Ae7 1 7. f4 Wc8 1 8. f5 ! with an tDbxd7 13 . ttlb1 Aa5 he maintained the balance. But 1 0. Ab2!? was possibly stronger.

9. Ad3 �bc6 1 0. 0-0

One gains the impression that Magnus had analysed this position at home, s ince he ignores the th reat of . . . Ab4-c3 with the win of a pawn (otherwise he would have played 1 0. Ab2) .

10 . . . Ac3

Black accepts the chal lenge, although h is retarded development undoubted ly puts his king in a dangerous position . It was not yet too late to castle - 1 0 . . . 0-0 1 1 . Ab2 with somewhat the better game for White.

11. !::[a4!

a b c d e f

a J. .t.'ii'• 7 .f..f. �· 6 � 6

5 .ltD 5

4 2:, 8 4 3 8-*.iL 3

2 8tD 888 2

iLvtli 2:. � a b c d e f g h

11 . . . Axd4

I t looks provocative to p lay 1 1 . . . CL!xe5 12 . dxe5 Ad? (or 12 . . . Axe5 13 . f!e1 Af6 14 . Wh5 �f8 1 5 . ttlf3 g6 1 6. Wh6+ �g8 17. Wf4 with the better chances for White) 13 . l:!h4 (after the passive 13 . f!a2 ttlc6 Black has an easy game in view of the threat of . . . tDc6-b4), since the black king has not yet castled. Here are a few variations:

i rresist ib le attack in view of 1 8 . . . CL!xe5 1 9. f6 . The trick 1 8 . . . Wc6, with the idea after 1 9 . fxg6 fxg6 of trapping the rook, also does not save Black in view of the simple 1 9 . e6;

b) 13 . . . ttlc6 14. ttlf3 h6 15 . Ad2 Axd2 (weaker is 1 5 . . . Axe5 1 6 . l:!h5 Af6 1 7. f!xd5 Wc8 1 8 . We2+ Ae6 1 9. We4 g6 20. Ac4 with advantage to White) 1 6 . Wxd2 0-0 1 7. f!e1 f!e8 1 8 . Wf4 (1 8 . f!xh6 tbxe5) 1 8 . . . Wa5 1 9. b4 Wb6 20. f!xh6! gxh6 21 . Wxh6 ttld8 22. Wh7+ ( i t was not for the sake of perpetual check - 22. Ah7+ �h8 23. Ag6+ - that White sacrificed a rook) 22 . . . �f8 23. Wh8+ �e7 24. Wh4+ �f8 25. ttlg5 with a strong attack for White.

12 . �xc6 �xc6 1 3. Aa3 Ae6 14. �f3 Ab6?!

It was essential to neutralise the threats on the a3-f8 d iagonal , which would have been achieved by 1 4 . . . Af6 1 5 . l:!e1 Ae7 .

59

1 5. 'Wa1 !

A subtle manoeuvre, d ispel l ing Black's i l lus ions of h id ing his king on i ts own wing: if 1 5 . . .f6 there can fol low 1 6 . f!e1 �f7 1 7. l:!f4 with the threat of ttlf3-g5+.

15 . . . Wc7 16. b4!

The attack on the king was the 1 4-year-old Carlsen's natural element. He did not play 1 5. Wa1 in order to l imit himself to 1 6. Wxg7, although th is also g ives a considerable advantage. With the pawn thrust Magnus warns h is opponent about the danger of cast l ing queenside .

(see next diagram)

�------------------C-h-ap• t-er_2 __ · _The�W�a�y� to� t�he� T�o- p __________________ __

a b c d e f 9 h

6

5

4 M 8 3 � 2

1 � a b

1 6 . . . f6

� 8

c d e f 9 h

6

5

4

Black opts for artificial castl ing , real is ing that after 16 . . . 0-0 1 7. b5 l!iJe7 1 8 . f!e1 ! he wi l l be unable to withstand White's dangerous in it iative. For example, 1 8 . . . Ac5 1 9 . Ab2 'Wb6 20. f!e2 f6 2 1 . Ad4 or 18 . . . f!fe8 1 9. Ab2 l!iJf5 20. g4 'Wc5 21 . f!e2 l!iJh6 22. Axg7 l!iJxg4 23. Ad4 'Wd6 24. l:!xe6 with an obvious advantage to White in both variations.

Let us examine the dangers await ing Black after 16 . . . 0-0-0 1 7. b5:

a) 17 . . . l!iJa5 1 8 . Ab2 f6 1 9 . Ac3 l!iJc4 20. Ad4 �b8 ( if 20 . . . 1!iJa5 there fol lows 21 . 'Wa2 and then 22. f!a1 ) 21 . f!e1 l:!he8 22. f!xa7! with a strong attack;

b) 17 . . . 1!iJe7 1 8 . Ac1 (or 1 8 . f!c1 �b8 1 9. c4 d xc4 20 . A xc4 'Wd7 2 1 . l!iJe5 'WeB 22. Axe6 fxe6 23. l!iJc4 Ad4 24. Ad6+ and White wins the exchange) 18 . . . l!iJf5 (1 8 . . . 1!iJg6 1 9 . Ae3 Axe3 20 . fxe3 'Wc5 2 1 . f!xa7 'Wxe3+ 22 . �h1 'Wb6 23. l!iJg5 with the threats of 24. l!iJxe6 and 24. l!iJxf7) 1 9 . Axf5 Axf5 20. Af4 Wc5 21 . Ae3 with an obvious advantage to White.

17. §e1 'i!lf7

It would be wrong to criticise N ikol ic for

this natural move. B lack's position is so compromised that it is already hard to offer any good advice. Lev Psakh is considers it best to return the pawn - 17 . . . l!iJe5, but even here White's attack is very strong: 1 8 . l!iJxe5 fxe5 1 9 . b5! . An important interposition, preventing cast l ing , which is possible, for example, in the event of 1 9 . f!xe5? 0-0 ! , and i f 20. l:!xe6 there is 20 . . . Axf2+ 21 . �h1 'Wd7, forking the rooks.

I • I AA'Y!¥ AA

j_ j_ 8 A A

J:r Jt Jt

8 8 8 8 � J:r �

Analysis diagram

1 9 . . . Wf7 20. l:!xe5 (if 20. f!e2 there can fol low 20 . . . e4!? 21 . Axe4 dxe4 22. f!axe4 0-0-0 23. f!xe6 Axf2+ 24. �h1 Ad4, and B lack somehow ho lds on) 20 . . . Axf2+ 21 . �h1 0-0-0 22. Ab2 with a dangerous in it iative for White. We wi l l trust the twot imes USSR champion Lev Psakh is , an expert on this opening, but also enquire what Rybka th inks about i t . Its verd ict is pessimistic: 20 . . . Axf2+ 2 1 . �h1 0-0-0 22. Ac1 ! l:!hf8 23. f!f4 'Wd7 24. Wc3+ �b8 25. Wb4! f!f7 26. f!xf7 Wxf7 27. Wf4!? (27. l:!xe6 Wxe6 28 . Wf4+ �a8 29 . Wxf2 is also good) 27 . . . Wxf4 28. Axf4 and Black cannot avoid loss of materia l .

60

19 . . . 0-0-0 20. l:!xe5 'Wf7 21 . We1 f!he8 22. Ac1 ! is also dangerous for Black - on the queenside too his king cannot fi nd peace: 22 . . . �b8 23. Af4 �a8 24. 'Wa1 with the threat of 25. l:!xa7+.

Fleeing with the king to the queenside

M . Carlsen - P. N ikolic ltJ --------------------------- ---------------------------

is real ist ic after the s imp l if icat ion recommended by Andrey Devyatk in : 1 9 . . . e4!? 20 . A xe4 d xe4 2 1 . !!axe4 0-0-0 22. �xe6 !!d2 23. !!e8+ !!xe8 24. !!xe8+ �d8 25. !!xd8+ 'Wxd8, but after 26. 'Wc3+ �b8 27. 'Wf3 he has to play a d ifficult endgame a pawn down.

18. b5 �as

Putting the knight out of play leads to a rapid defeat . But also after the logical 18 . . . ttld8!? White retains a dangerous attack. Here is a sample variat ion: 1 9 . 'Wd1 �d7 20. !!h4 �g8 21 . ttld4 Axd4 22. !!xd4.

19. 'Wd1 !

The queen has done excel lent work on the a1 -h8 diagonal and it returns home in order to attack the king on the l ight squares. I n the fi rst instance ttlg5+ is threatened .

1 9 . . • !3:ae8

There is no way of saving the game: 19 . . . g 6 (1 9 . . . ttlc4 20 . Af5 !) 20 . ttlg5+! fxg5 21 . 'Wf3+ �g7 22. Ab2+ d4 23. !!xd4 Axd4 24. Axd4+ �h6 25. h4 and White wins.

a b c d e f g h

20. �g5+! fxg5 21 . Wf3+ �g8 22. l3:xe6

Black resigned .

The modest performance in Wijk aan Zee showed that the youngster needed t ime to improve h is play. Carlsen took a t ime-out, probably the fi rst in h is career. However, the more than two months rest from tournaments was a wearisome period for Magnus. Strangely enough, the break d id not benefit h im, and a warm-up, planned on home territory at the Gausdal Classic Tournament (FIDE category 1 0), was frankly a fai lure. Magnus started extremely bad ly - half a point in the fi rst four rounds, and he fin ished in a share of 6th-8th places. In a class of h is own was Sergey Tiviakov, who scored 8% points out of 9. Magnus's mood was improved by h is part icipation in a series of rapidplay tournaments with a 25-minute t ime contro l . The most prest ig ious of these was the four-player Cuidad de Leon tournament in Spain with the participation of Anand, Kasimdzhanov and Shirov. True, he did not play the latter two, s ince in the semi-final Carlsen lost 1 -3 to Anand, but the fi rst meeting with one of the strongest players in the world was undoubted ly benefic ia l .

At the European Championship in Warsaw, Magnus justified the expectations of his supporters, scoring 8 points from 1 3 games (+5 -2 =6) . In such a un iformly strong 'Swiss', th is cou ld be considered a successfu l result for a 1 4-year-old grandmaster. His performance in the double-round tournament in Bie l with s ix grandmasters (FI DE category 1 6) was more modest. Magnus propped up the tournament table with 4 points from 10 games, in which he d id not score a s ingle win and suffered two defeats. Before the next category 1 6 tournament, the Samba Cup in Denmark, Carlsen warmed up at

61


home in the Gausdal Bygger'n Masters (1 st place - 8 points out of 9) - and 'burned h imself out'. There was no time to regain his strength, since the Samba Cup started the very next day. The tournament in Skanderborg fol lowed the same pattern as in Drammen: 8th place out of 10 contestants was undoubted ly a fai lure for Carlsen . The only faint consolation was a win over the fi rst prize-winner, Baadur Jobava.

These set-backs can hardly have been conducive to a good mood before the main tournament of the year - the World Cup in Khanty-Mansiysk. If one sums up the series of fai lu res, beg inn ing with the Spanish team championship on the eve of 2005, where Magnus suffered four defeats, the picture was depressing, and the fai lures in h is native Scandinavia were especial ly unpleasant: the Drammen, Gausdal Classic and Samba Cup tournaments. Less than a month remained to prepare for the World Cup. I n youth , which is typified by optimism, it is easier to heal one's wounds.

Game 1 2 M. Carlsen - K. Lie

Gausdal 2005 King's Indian Defence [E62]

This game is interesting for Carlsen's approach to the solving of open ing problems in a non-standard situat ion, and also the conversion of a min imal advantage in an endgame with opposite-co lour bishops with rooks.

1 . d4 �f6 2. �f3 g6 3. g3 .tg7 4 . .tg2 0-0 5. 0-0 d6 6. c4 c6

A rare branch of the King's Indian Defence, where Black attacks not the d4-pawn, but the c4-pawn.

7. �c3 'Wb6 8. h3 Wa6 9. b3 b5

(see next diagram)

1 0 . .tg5!?

On encountering a comparatively rare variation, Carlsen decides to fight for the in itiative from the very fi rst moves. He sacrifices a pawn, hoping to exploit the retarded development of the black pieces. Especial ly since experience of playing this position in

62

a b c d e f g h

8 .i 1.1\.i. .�. 7 £ � ££-*.£ 6 'if JA,I£ 5 £ �.&£I 4 B B 3 B [jj [jjB B 2 B B B � 1 -: �� : �

a b c d e f g h

8 7 6

5

4

3

2

1

a routine manner ind icates that Black has qu ite good counterplay. For example, the attempt to attack the b5-pawn - 1 0. cxb5 cxb5 1 1 . Wd3 - achieves its aim only after the awkward 1 1 . . .Ad7 1 2. Ag5 ! , when the bishop on d7 merely hinders Black in completing the development of his queenside, while at the same time the exchange on f6 fol lowed by tDd5 is threatened. But 1 1 . . . b4 is far stronger, and the attempt to get at the rook on a8 - 1 2. tDe1 - is parried by 1 2 . . . Axh3! 1 3 . Axh3 (the mass e l im inat ion 1 3 . Axa8 Axf1 leads to the loss of a pawn) 13 . . . bxc3 14. Ag2 d5 with good play for Black.

M . Carlsen - K. Lie

The main conti nuat ion is considered to be 1 0 . ttld2 bxc4 1 1 . ttlxc4 Ae6, where Black has quite good counterplay. I n h is time Magnus's trainer Agdestein became aware of this in a game with Klaus Bischoff (Dortmund 1 987), which continued 12 . ttle3 tDbd7 1 3 . Ab2 .§fc8 1 4 . .§c1 .§ab8 1 5. �d2 CL!b6 1 6. f4 c5 1 7. d5 Ad7 1 8 . .§a1 �as with active play for Black.

10 . . . bxc4 1 1 . bxc4 Wxc4 12 . !ac1 .ta6

White's plans include e2-e4 fol lowed by tDc3-d5. Therefore it is usefu l to clarify the intentions of the active bishop on g5 - 1 2 . . . h6!?, which is usual ly practised i n King's Ind ian set-ups. Now it is i l logical to play 13 . Axf6 Axf6 14 . ttle4 �xa2 1 5 . ttlxf6+ exf6, since the position is simpl ified , and it is not easy for White to breach the black pawn barricade. Igor Stoh l considers 1 3 . Ad2 'We6 1 4 . .§e1 ttlbd7 (1 4 . . . Aa6 1 5. e4 .§c8 is also possible, but not 15 . . . Ac4?! because of 16 . e5! ttlh7 1 7. exd6 �xd6 1 8. tbe4 �d5 1 9. tbe5) 1 5 . e4 ttlb6 1 6 . e5 tbfd5 1 7. ttlxd5 cxd5, and here 18 . .§c7 retains the in itiative for White.

13. !ae1

The on ly known game at that t ime , Berkes - Stokke (Stockholm 2003), continued 13. e4 h6 14 . Ad2 e5 1 5 . dxe5 dxe5 16. tbd5 cxd5?! (an insufficiently justified queen sacrifice; Black should have decided on 1 6 . . . �xa2, when all Wh ite can do is force a draw - 1 7 . .§a1 �b2 1 8 . .§b1 �a2) 17 . .§xc4 Axc4 1 8 . ttlxe5! Axf1 1 9. �xf1 CL!xe4? (1 9 . . . dxe4) 20. Ab4 .§d8 21 . ttlxf7! CL!c6 22. ttlxd8 .§xd8 23. Aa5 1 -0.

13 . . . Wb4 14. e4

(see next diagram)

a b c d e f g h

14 . . . e5?

Understandably, Black is t i red of being under pressure, but if he d id not l i ke 14 . . . .!::!d8 1 5 . �d2 with the threat of 1 6 . ttld5, then 14 . . . h6 1 5. Ad2 �b6 would have enabled him to defend. I n return ing h is extra pawn, Black ends up i n a strategical ly i nferior posit ion in view of h is weak pawn on c6.

15. dxe5 dxe5 16. �xe5 Wa5

If 16 . . . .§e8? White has the decisive 17. tbxf7! �xf7 1 8 . e5 tbh5 1 9. ttld5! �b2 20. ttlc7.

63

17. �xf7

Here this sacrifice is not so effective. Playing for bri l l iancy might merely have brought Carlsen unnecessary problems. The simple 17. Axf6 Axf6 1 8. tbxc6 tbxc6 1 9. tbd5 Ae5 20 . .§xc6 would have enabled White to win a pawn without any bri l l iancy.

17 . . . !axf7 18 . e5

(see next diagram)

1 8 ••• �bd7?

Black is rattled, and he does not even make an attempt to play on with an extra kn ight . Apparently, after 18 . . . ttle8 he was afraid of the attack 1 9. ttle4! (1 9. AdS �b4 20. e6


a b

8 .1. J!&\ 7 . 6 j_ s'if 4

c d e

• 8

f 9 h

• ... .�.. J!&\.

ii

a b c d e f 9 h

8

7 6

5

4

i s parr ied by 20 . . . .!::!fS 2 1 . tDe4 Ac4 22. a3 '!Wb3) 19 . . . h6 (the pawn is taboo: 19 . . . AxeS? 20. tDcS .§fS 21 . '!Wb3+) 20. e6! .§fS 21 . tDd6 hxgS 22. e7! and Black has no defence. However, the threat of the epawn's advance could have been averted by the bishop retreat 1 9 . . . Ac8, although here too White's in it iative is very dangerous: 20. tDcS .!::!fS 21 . '!Wb3+ ®h8 22. g4! .§xgS 23. '!Wf7 /!i)c7 24 . .§ed1 /!i)d7 2S. /!i)xd7 Axd7 26 . .§xd7 '!WxeS 27 . .§xc7.

1 9. exf6

2S . .§e6 ! . If 2 1 . . . '!Wxa2? there a lso fo l lows 2 2 . /!i)xf6+ .§xf6 2 3 . '!Wd4! and B lack has no defence: 23 . . . .!::!f7 24 . .§xc6 '!WaS 2S . .§ce6.

22. :§xc6 Ab7

The black pieces coord inate more harmoniously after 22 . . . l:!d8 23. '!Wa1 AbS 24. l:!e6 Ac4 2S . .§eS '!Wb6.

23. :§e6 :§d8

If 23 . . . Wxa2? White wins by 24 . .§xe7! .§xe7 2S. /!i)f6+ ®f7 26 . .§xe7+ ®xe7 27. /!i)dS+! ®f8 28. '!Wf3+ .

24. 1l\'e2 Axe4

B l ac k stra i g htfo rward l y (24 . . . WfS? ! 2S . .§xe7! .§xe7 26. /!i)f6+) goes in for opposite-colour bishops. But in the presence of other pieces, especial ly the queens, hopes based on this factor are i l l usory: a bishop which has no opponent is dangerous in an attack on the king.

But here playing for bri l l iancy by 1 9 . Axc6! 25. 'Wxe4 Ac5 26. :§e2 :§df8 27. Wd5! l:!c8 20. /!i)dS /!i)xdS 21 . e6 was qu ite ap-propriate. However, the move in the game A dangerous pin with an X-ray along the also ensures White an advantage. a2-g8 d iagonal .

1 9 . • • �xf6 20. Axf6 Axf6

I f 20 . . . l:!xf6 there wou ld have fo l l owed 21 . /!i)dS! .§f7 22. /!i)e7+ ®h8 23. tDxc6.

21 . �e4 Ae7

It is im portant to retai n th is b ishop - otherwise there is noth ing w i th wh ich to defend the dark squares. If 2 1 . . . AbS, then 22 . /!i)xf6+ .§xf6 23 . l:!eS! with the th reats

27 • . . 1l\'b4

Black does not sense the danger. It was essential to 'unpin' the king - 27 . . . ®g7 and if 28. ®h2 to offer the exchange of queens by 28 . . . Ab6. It should be mentioned that 28 . . . l:!xf2? is not poss ib le because of 29 . .§xf2 .§xf2 30. l:!e7+! , when the mating attack costs B lack h is q ueen: 30 . . . ®h6 31 . g4 Wd2 32 . gS+ ! '!WxgS 33 . .§xh7+.

Axc6 and Wb3+ is good enough to w in , 28• �h2 �g7 but there is also a spectacu lar com puter so l ut ion : 23. AdS+!? ®f8 24. Wd4! Wd8 Not 28 . . . Axf2? 29 . .§xf2 .§xf2 30 . .§xg6+.

64

M. Carlsen K. Lie

a b c d e f 9 h

8 .! 8

7 .l .� • • 7

6 g 6

5 .i.� 5

4 'iV 4

3 � � 3 2 � g�� 2

a b c d e f 9 h

29. Y!Ve5+?!

There was a qu ick win by 29.f!.2e4! �a3 30. �eS+ �g8 31 . f!.h4 �d3 (if 31 . . . f!.g7 there is 32. f!.xg6! hxg6 33. AdS+ with a mating attack) 32. �xeS, with an extra bishop for White.

29 . .. �g8 30. a3

This move al lows B lack to exchange the queens, which eases the problem of defend ing his k ing . The threat of 30 . . . �d4 could have been parried by 30. f4! , having in mind the variat ion 30 . . . �d4? 31 . �xd4 Axd4 32. AdS! �g7 33.f!.6e4, but by playing 30 . . . f!.fS Black would have forced the queen to retreat to a less imposing pos i tion: 31 . �a1 Ad4 32 . �d1 f!.d8 etc. Also possible is 30. f!.e4 f!.fS 31 . f!.xg6+ hxg6 32. 'We6+, winning the queen , but how to convert the advantage is not clear.

Playing to surround the b ishop also does not ach ieve its a im: 30 . f!.c6 Ad4 31. 'WdS Ab2! (from the long d iagonal the bishop guarantees its king a shelter at g7) 32. f!.cS Af6 33. f!.c7 �g7.

30 ... Y!Vd4! 31 . 'Wxd4 Axd4 32. f4 �g7

The game has gone into an ending which is not easy to win .

33. Ads Af6 34. h4 E:d7 35. Ae4 E:fd8 36. q;,h3 E:d6 37. E:xd6 E:xd6 38. E:c2

a b c d e f 9 h

8 8

• • 7

6 .! .i..l 6

5 5

4 �� 4

3 � � � 3 2 g 2

a b c d e f 9 h

Endings with opposite-colour bishops are Carlsen's forte. On many subsequent occasions he was able to demonstrate the superiority of his bishop. In the g iven specific position it is worth noth ing that White's extra pawn is on the kingside, where Black's resources are concentrated . Therefore Carlsen keeps both wings in view.

38 . . . E:d7?!

Pass ive defence makes th i ngs eas ier for White. 38 . . . f!.a6!? was more cr it ical : 39. f!.c7+ (after 39. f!.a2 f!.e6! 40. AdS f!.e3 B lack attacks the g3-pawn , p ract ica l ly forcing the exchange of rooks: 41 . a4 Ac3 42. f!.a3 Ad4) 39 . . . �h6 40. h5 f!.xa3 41 . f!.c6 f!.e3 , pursuing the bishop. After the trans it ion into a rook ending by 42. Axg6 hxg6 43. f!.xf6 �xhS 44. f!.f7 �h6 4S. f!.xa7 Black has real chances of a draw.

39. q;,g4 Ae7 40. a4 E:d4 41 . Ac6 h5+?!

65

Th is i m pu ls ive move merely c reates a weakness on g6. 41 . . . �f6 was more logical .

42. q;,h3 Ad6 43. q;,g2 Ab4 44. q;,h3

Chapter 2 The Way to the Top �-------------------

Ad6 45. Aea l:id3 46. q;,g2 l:ie3 47. l:ic6!

a b c d e f 9 h

8 � 8

7 . • 7 6 ::t.i. • 6

5 • 5

� � 4

3 K � 3

2 � 2

a b c d e f 9 h

47 . . . l:ie6?

The rook ending after 47 . . J!xe8 48. gxd6 ge7 49. c!>f3 or 47 . . . Axf4 48. gxg6+ c!>f8 49. gxf4 gxe8 50. ga6 is clearly better for White, who has an active rook. But moving into a p in leads to the loss of the a7-pawn. More was promised by a symmetric attack on the g3-pawn - 47 . . . Ab4! 48. Axg6 Ae1 49. Axh5 gxg3+ 50. c!>f1 (weaker is 50. c!>h2?! ga3 51 . ga6 Axh4) 50 . . . ge3 51 . gg6+ c!>f8 52. gg4 Ad2 53. c!>f2 ge4 54. f5 gxg4 55. Axg4 with real drawing chances.

48. !:ia6 q;,f8 49. Ab5 iif6 50. Ad3!

It i s usefu l to gain a tempo. The rest does not requ i re any commentary.

50 . . . q;,g7 51 . l:ixa7+ q;,f8 52. a5 Ab4 53. a6 l:id6 54. l:ic7 l:ixd3 55. l:ic8+ q;,g7 56. a7 l:id2+ 57. q;,f3 l:id3+ 58. q;,e4 l:ia3 59. a8'W

Black resigned.

Game 1 3

B. Jobava - M. Carlsen

Skanderborg 2005

Queen's Indian Defence [E12]

1 . c4 �f6 2. d4 e6 3. �f3 b6 4. Ag5

It was not hard for Magnus to prepare for th is game - at that t ime th is variation was Jobava's main weapon against the Queen's Indian Defence.

4 . . . h6 5. Ah4 Ae7 6. �c3 c5

Carlsen fo l lows the path of lvanchuk in h is recent game with Jobava at the Capablanca Memorial (Havana 2005), in which White suffered a crushing defeat. The classical 6 . . . Ab7 7. e3 tDe4 seemed rather ted ious to h im .

7. e4

The fol lowing continuat ion is practical ly unexplored: 7. d5 tDxd5 8 . tDxd5 (the exchanging operation 8. cxd5 Axh4 9. dxe6 fxe6 1 0 . Vt/c2 with the threat of Vt/e4+ is parried by the s imple 10 . . . Af6 1 1 . Vt/g6+ c!>f8 with an acceptable game for Black, who is able to stabi l ise the posit ion of his king thanks to the threat of the exchange 1 2 . . . Axc3+ 1 3 . bxc3 Vt/f6) 8 . . . A x h 4 9. tDxh4 Ab7 (weaker is 9 . . . exd5 1 0. Vt/xd5 tDc6 1 1 . tDf5) 1 0 . g3 (after 1 0 . tDf3 exd5 1 1 . cxd5 0-0 12 . e3 'Wf6 1 3. 'Wb3 tDa6 Black successfu l ly completes h is development, retaining some in it iative) 10 . . . exd5 1 1 . Ag2 0-0 1 2 . 0-0 'Wf6 1 3 . Axd5 (or 1 3 . b3 gea 14 . e3 Vt/e5 with the idea of 1 5 . cxd5 g5!) 1 3 . . . Axd5 1 4 . Vt/xd5 tDc6 1 5 . b3 gad8 1 6 . gad1 gfe8 1 7. e3 ge5 1 8 . 'Wd6 ge6, and Black maintains the balance.

7 . . . cxd4 8. �xd4 d6

B. Jobava - M . Carlsen

a b c d e f g h

8 I�.i.'ii'fl I 8

7 � .i.�� 7 6 �! r� �� 6

5 5

4 r- �[fj�

� 4

3 --[fj 3

2�� 2 1 Jl �� Jl 1

a b

9. lDdb5!

c d e f g h

With the idea of breaking up Black's kingside pawns by exchanging on f6. However, as was shown by the Jobava- lvanchuk game, it proves to be i l l usory.

9 ... a6 1 0. e5!?

This move, giv ing the play an almost forcing character, was undoubted ly prepared at home. Thereby Jobava ind i rectly admits the effectiveness of the pawn sacrifice made by lvanchuk: 1 0 . Axf6 Axf6 1 1 . ttJxd6+ �e7 1 2 . ttJxc8+ ygxc8.

!.�'if !. .££ I!J£ £.i. £ r -

!:!:, !:!:, .-

� !:!:,!:!:, £!:,£!:,£!:, M �� M

Analysis diagram

13 . ttJa4?! (1 3 . ygf3 fol lowed by Ae2 and 0-0 was stronger) 13 . . . �d8 14. ygb3 ttJd7 15. yga3+, and after 1 5 . . . ttJc5 1 6 . Ae2 (not 1 6 . ttJxb6? ygc6 1 7. ttJxa8 because of 17 . . . Axb2! 1 8 . 'Wxb2 ygxe4+ 19. yge2 ttJd3+ 20. �d2 ttJf4+ and Black wins the queen) 16 . . _ygc6 1 7. ttJxc5 ygxc5 ! . lvanchuk offers

to go into an endgame: 1 8 . ygxc5+ bxc5 1 9 . �b1 �ab8 20. b3 Ac3+ 21 . �f1 �d2, which, despite the pawn deficit , i s advantageous to B lack . The game continued 1 8 . b4 yggs 19. �d1 ygxg2 20. b5+ �e8 21 . �xd8+ �xd8 22. Af3 ygg5 23. bxa6 ygd2+ 24. �f1 Ad4! 25. Ae2 Ac5 26. ygg3 ygxa2 27. ygxg7? �d1 +, and B lack soon won.

67

1 0 . . . dxe5

Real i s i ng that 1 0 . . . axb5 1 1 . exf6 gxf6 (1 1 . . . Axf6? ! 1 2 . Axf6 ygxf6 1 3 . ygxd6 i s dangerous for B lack) 1 2 . ttJxb5 Cbc6 1 3 . Ag3 leaves Wh ite with an enduring in it iat ive without any r isk , Carlsen goes in for an exchange sacrif ice. His central pawn mass promises him sufficient compensat ion.

1 1 . Axf6

Weaker is 1 1 . ygf3? e4! 1 2 . Cb xe4 axb5 1 3 . tDxf6+ gxf6 14 . Wxa8 Ab4+ 1 5 . �e2 ygd2+ 1 6 . �f3 e5 with a very dangerous attack for B lack. For example : 1 7. ygds (Wh ite loses qu ickly after 1 7. ygxb8 ygf4+ 1 8 . �e2 0-0) 1 7. . . ygf4+ (as a reserve variat ion there is a draw: 1 7 . . . Ab7 1 8 . ygxb7 ygf4+) 1 8 . �e2 0-0! 1 9 . Ag3 ygf5 20. ygd3 (if 20. �d1 there is the decisive 20 . . . Ab7! 21 . ygxb7 �d8+) 20 . . . ygg5 (with the threat of . . . ttJc6 and . . . �d8) 21 . yge3 ygg6 22. �c1 bxc4 etc.

1 1 ... Axf6

If B l ac k i nterposes t h e exc h a n g e 1 1 . . .ygxd1 + 1 2 . �xd1 axb5 1 3 . Axg7 (after 1 3 . AxeS lDd7! 14 . A.xg7 �g8 1 5 . lbxb5 �xa2 1 6 . Axh6 �xb2 Black has qu ite good counterplay) 13 . . . �g8 14 . Axh6 White wins a pawn without suffic ient compensation for the opponent.


12 . Wf3!

White wins the exchange, but M agnus manages to find defensive resources.

12 • • . axb5 1 3. Wxa8 b4!

a b c d e f 9 h

8 � � .i. 'IV. .I 8 7 ££ 7

6 £.i. £ 6 5 £ 5

4 £ B 3

2 B B 1 11

a b

ttJ

c d

4

3

B B B 2 � � l:, 1

e f 9 h

strong in it iative; 1 6. tLlxb4 Y#d4! 1 7. tLlxc6 Y#e4+ 1 8. 'i!?d1 Axc6 is also advantageous to Black) 15 . . . Ad7 1 6. 'Wd6 bxc3 1 7. bxc3 e4 1 8. 0-0-0 Ae7 (1 8 . . . Axc3 1 9. Ae2 Y#c8 with the idea of .. . Aa4 is also possible) 1 9. Wd4 Aa4 (1 9 . . . Af6 20 . Wxe4 We? 21 . Y#a8+ Ac8 is also good) 20. Wxd8+ Axd8 21 . gd4 Ac6 22. Ae2 Ac7 fol lowed by . . . 'i!?e7. Carlsen assesses this position as favourable for Black.

14 • . . J.d7 15. �xf6+

White hurries to deform Black's kingside pawns, whereas he also had other poss ib i l it ies. True, 1 5 . tLld6+ is unconvincing : 1 5 ... 'i!?e7 1 6 . tLlb5 (or 1 6 . gd1 tLlc6 1 7. 'Wxd8+ gxd8 1 8 . tLle4 tLld4) 16 .. . tLlc6 1 7. Wxd8+ gxd8 1 8. 0-0-0 tLld4 with suf-

The moment of truth for the assessment f icient compensation for the exchange. of the open ing idea devised by Jobava, But 1 5 . gd1 , keeping the exchange on f6 who apparently underest imated this pos- in reserve, deserved serious consideration: s ib i l ity, expect ing only 1 3 . .. tLld7 1 4. tLlxb5 1 5 . . . tLlc6 (1 5 . . . Ae7 1 6. c5 0-0 1 7. Wa7 fa-0-0 1 5 . 0-0-0 with advantage to White. vours White) 1 6 . Y#xd8+ 'i!?xd8 1 7. c5 bxc5 However, Carlsen has p lanned a more 1 8 . tLlxc5 tLld4 1 9. tLlxd7 'i!?xd7 20. Ad3 , active ro le for the knight , by preparing a and White's position is preferable (Carlsen). route for it to d4, from where it controls 1 7. tLlxf6 gxf6 1 8 . g3 'i!?c7 1 9. Ag2 tLld4 both wings. 20. f4 Ac6 21 . 0-0 also looks qu ite good,

14. �e4

After 1 4. Y#xb8 bxc3 1 5. gd1 Ad? 1 6 . Y#xd8+ 'i!?xd8 1 7. bxc3 e4 the pair of strong bishops fu l ly compensates for the sacrificed exchange.

d ivert ing the knight to f5 for the defence of the f-pawns.

1 5 •. . gxf6 1 6. c5

White is aiming for a clear pawn structure on the queenside, but 1 6 . 0-0-0 was more logical , after which Carlsen was intending to play 16 . . . tLlc6 1 7. Y#a4 (of course, the queen exchange 17. \Wxd8+ 'i!?xd8 fol lowed by . . . tLld4 would satisfy B lack) 1 7 . . . 'i!?e7, and with a subsequent . . . Wa8 Black activates his forces.

1 4 . \Wa4+ looks stronger : 1 4 .. . tLlc6 (i n the event of 1 4 . . . Ad? 1 5 . Y#xb4 tLlc6 1 6 . Y#d6 Ae7 1 7. Wd1 tLld4 B lack has some compensation for the exchange, but White's chances are nevertheless preferable) 1 5 . Y#xc6+ (activity with 1 5 . tLld5 is dubious: 1 5 . . . Ab7 1 6. Wb5 0-0 1 7. Y#xb6 exd5 1 8 . Wxb7 tLld4, and the powerfu l

16 .•. bxc5 17. Wa7 �c6 1 8. Wxc5 �d4!

knight on d4 enables Black to develop a After carrying out this key defensive ma-

68

B. Jobava - M . Carlsen ctJ ------ �

noeuvre, Black can consider that he has 1 9 . . . 'We7! solved h is opening problems.

a b c d e f 9 h

8 .I 8

7 7

6 • 6

5 5

4 4

3

a b c d e f 9 h

19. 0-0-0?

Jobava chooses a bad post for h is k ing, where it may came under attack by the active black pieces. But it was not an easy choice. For example , if 1 9 . Ad3 Black can fight for the in it iative: 19 . . . 'Wa8! (after 19 . . . 'We? 20. 'Wb6 0-0 21 . 0-0 Ac6 22. l:!fc1 Black would have problems with the defence of his b4-pawn) 20. 'Wxb4 l:!g8! 21 . a3 (if 21 . 0-0-0, then 21 . . . 'Wxa2 is possible, not fearing 22. 'Wb8+ <!;}e? 23. 'Wxg8, since Black is guaranteed a draw by perpetual check: 23 . . . tDb3+ 24. r!;}c2 tDd4+ 25. r!;}c1 tDb3+, as after 25. r!;}c3? 'Wb3+ 26. r!;}d2 'i'xb2+ 27. r!;}e1 e4! Wh ite is in danger of losing) 21 . . . l:!g4 ! . An important intermediate move, the virtues of which are revealed in an assessment of the d i rect capture 21 . . . l:!xg2 22. 0-0-0 l:!xf2 23. l:!hg1 , with an unclear game. Now, after the queen moves, the rook invasion fol lows in a more favourable situat ion: 22. 'Wd6 l:!xg2 23. 0-0-0 §xf2 24. l:!hg1 'Wc6+! , or 22. 'Wc3 l:!xg2 23 0-0-0 l:!xf2 24. l:!hg1 'Wc6! . Evidently White shou ld have restricted h imself to the modest 1 9. f3 , when Black could again offer the exchange of queens by 19 . . . 'We7.

Magnus demonstrates a deep understanding of the posit ion. The endgame with the powerfu l kn ight on d4 is advantageous to Black .

20. 'Wxe7+

After 20. 'Wb6 0-0 21 . Ad3 Ac6 the situation favours Black, s ince he can develop an attack on the white king by playing his rook to a8 and his queen to d5.

20 . . . mxe7 21 . mb1 J.c6 22. f3

If 22. l:!g1 again 22 . . . l:!g8 is possible, with the idea of . . . tDf3.

22 . . J �g8 23. Eic1 f5 24. Eic4 Eib8!

Subtle conduct of the endgame - now it is not easy for White to complete his development. I n a superior position it is important to maintain the tension, by forcing the defending side to solve the most d ifficult problems. The tempting continuation 24 . . . AdS 25. l:!xb4 tbxf3! 26. a4 would have g iven White some chances, associated with his pair of connected passed pawns.

69

25. b3

25 . Ad3 is not poss ib le because of 25 . . . Ab5. The attempt to develop the h1 -rook does not work, s ince if 25. h4 there is 25 . . . f4 (25 . . . h5 26. l:!h3 f4 27. g3 l:!g8 is also good) 26. h5 r!;}d6 27. l:!h4 tDfS, and the rook has to return home.

2s . . . t4 2s. mb2 ts

The pawn mass d isplays its character! The pair of central pawns is i rresistible.

(see next diagram)

Chapter 2 · The Way to the Top -- �---- �------------------

a b c d e f g h

8 .I 8

7 7

6 j_ 5 5

4 4

3 3

a b c d e f g h

27. h4

I f 27. Ad3 there wou ld have fol lowed

31 . . J:tf8 32. gg4 gfs was also good, tying the rook to the h5-pawn, fol lowed by . . . e6-e5 and . . . ggs.

32. Elg4 e3 33. Elg6

The posit ion also cannot be held after 33. ge1 tDf5 34. Ae2 gd8 35. gg6 Ae4, whi le if 33. Ad3 there is the decisive 33 . . . e2! 34. ge1 (34. gg6 gc8!) 34 . . . gc8 35. gg6 gc3.

33 . . . Ae4 34. Elxh6 Elg8

Magnus appears to be enjoying the posi-t ion, avoiding the win of a piece by 34 . . . e2.

27 . . . AdS 28. gc7+ �d6 29. gg7 e4 with 35. Elc5+ �d6 36. Elc4 �dS 37. �c1

advantage to Black. e2 38. Elxd4+ �xd4 39 . .lxe2 Elxg2

27 . . . �d6 28. h5 AdS 29. Elc1 e4 40. Ad1

30. fxe4 After 40. �d1 Black casts a mat ing net with 40 . . . �e3 ! .

If 30 . Ac4, then 30 . . ,gg8 31 . gh2 e3 was possible. 40 . . . Elxa2

30 . . . fxe4 31 . Elh4 �eS White resigned .

The World Cup in Khanty-Mansiysk - analogous to the world championsh ip on the knock-out system - was another reform of the world championship, with a sl ight lowering of its status. The top ten in the tournament gained the right to take part in the Candidates tournament of the next ind ividual world championship cycle in 2007. The knock-out event of 1 28 grandmasters, held in a remote part of Russia, proved to be a turn ing point in Carlsen's career on the eve of h is 1 5th birthday. For Magnus this was a second test in matches with the strongest players in the world . True, the fi rst one -in 2004 - had ended in the very fi rst round, but the maturing Carlsen , who had joined the group of ' twenty-six hundreds' on the world rating l ist , now had the right to hope for a more successfu l performance.

This was how his performance was assessed by the experienced grandmaster Viorel Bologan: 'The revelation of the tournament was Carlsen . He is d istinguished by his classical method of playing - he plays competently and calculates wel l . For the moment he sti l l d isplays a tendency to play for l ittle traps, but in pr inciple th is is m in imal . Over the last two years he has been merci lessly beaten in various tournaments, and unexpected ly th is path to success has proved the shortest. Now he h imself wi l l do the

70

M. Carlsen - F. Amonatov

beating. ' I n h is preparations for the tournament Magnus had greatly improved h is opening groundwork. ' It i s apparent that he is doing such work on his open ing repertoi re', M ikhai l Gurevich said in admirat ion, 'that experienced grandmasters don't know what to play against h im ! ' The youngster had also greatly improved h is endgame technique.

I n contrast to Libya, in Russia Carlsen played seven stages: fou r in the main tournament and three in the add it ional fight for qual ification to the Candidates tou rnament. H is resu lt could have been even better, since he missed a real chance to go through to the quarter-final of the main tournament, when in h is match with Evgeny Bareev he lost a rapid game which was practical ly decided. But even without th i s h is l i st o f wins was impressive: among those defeated were Zurab Azmaiparashvi l i , Farrykh Amonatov, Ivan Cheparinov, Joel Lautier, Vlad imir Malakhov and Gata Kamsky.

Game 1 4 M. Carlsen - F. Amonatov

World Cup, Khanty-Mansiysk 2005 Sicilian Defence [ 890]

1. e4 c5 2. t'Llf3 d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. t'Llxd4 �f6 5. t'Llc3 a6 6 • .te3 e5 7. t'Llf3

The main cont inuation is 7. tDb3 Ae6 8. f3 with the development of an attack on the kingside. The move i n the game i s also very popular and ind icates that Carlsen is a iming for posit ional play.

7 . . :Wc7 8. a4 b6

Black radical ly prevents a4-a5, but th is move has d rawbacks, wh ich Carlsen i s able to d isclose. 8 . . . Ae7 9. a5 0-0 is more often played . For example, the game Jang Jong -Sakaev, (China- Russia match 2004) conti n ued 1 0 . Ae2 tbc6 1 1 . Ab6 �d7 1 2. tDd2 tDb4 1 3. tDc4 d5! 14. exd5 tDfxd5 15 . tDxd5 tDxd5 1 6 . Af3 Ab4+ 1 7. <!>f1 ! tDxb6 1 8 . tDxb6 �xd 1 + 1 9 . !:!xd1 !:!b8 20. !:!d5! !:!e8? (20 . . . Ae6!? 21 . !:!xe5 !:!fd8 came into considerat ion, with s uffic ient compensation for the pawn) 2 1 . c3 Af8 22. tDxc8! !:!bxc8 23. Ae4! with advantage to Wh ite in view of the weakness of the a6/ b7 pawn pair.

71

9. t'Lld5

9. Ag5 is regarded as the main continuation .

9 . . . t'Llxd5 1 0. 'Wxd5 t'Llc6

After 10 . . . Ab7 it i s not easy for Black to complete his development: 1 1 . �b3 Axe4 1 2 . Ac4 �b7 1 3 . 0-0-0 Axf3 (if 13 . . . Ag6 there fo l lows 1 4 . tDh4 Ah5 1 5 . f3! tDc6 1 6 . Axb6 or 1 6 . �xb6 with advantage to White) 14 . gxf3 tDc6 1 5 . <!>b1 ! (1 5 . Ad5 b5 1 6 . f4 is also good) 15 . . . !:!b8 (1 5 . . . tDa5 1 6. Ad5) 1 6. Ad5 with an obvious positional advantage for White.

6

5 5

4 fj, 4

3 3

2

a b c d e f g h

1 1 . t'Llg5


The less ambit ious 1 1 . \Wd2 Ae7 1 2 . Ac4 14 . . . Eia8 0-0 al lows Black to complete his development. The game Kir. Georg iev - lstratescu (Ohrid 2001) continued 1 3 . Ad5 Ae6 1 4. 0-0 E!ac8 1 5 . E!ac1 tbb8! 1 6 . E!fd1 tbd7 with equal chances.

11 . . . Eib8

It is not poss ib le for B lack to complete h is queenside deve lopment normal ly -1 1 . . .Ab7? 1 2 . Axb6! \Wxb6 1 3 . \Wxf7+ �d8 1 4. a5! and if 14 . . . tbxa5 1 5 . tbe6+ White g ives mate in three moves.

12 . Ac4

Carlsen's favou rite procedu re from h is youth: i f i t is possible to put the k ing under f ire, he does this.

12 . . . �d8 13. Wd3 h6

Black is impatient to drive away the annoying knight. To be fai r, it should be ment ioned that the theory of th is variation was largely unexplored . 1 3 . . . Ae7 is stronger, when the fol lowing l ine is not dangerous: 14. Axa6 Axa6 1 5 . "Wxa6 "Wxc2 1 6. Wb5+ Wc6 17. 0-0 "Wxb5 18 . axb5 Axg5 1 9. Axg5 tbe6 20. Ae3 tbc7 21 . E!fc1 tbxb5 22. Axb6 �d7 with a reasonable endgame for Black (Ku laots - Leyva, Olympiad, Turin 2006) .

14. �f3

5 5

4 [j, if, [j, 4

3 � �tt:J 3

2 [j, [j, [j, fj, fj, 2 1 � � � 1

a b c d e f 9 h

1 4 . . . Ae7 is no longer possible, s ince after 1 5 . Axa6 Axa6 1 6. "Wxa6 Black's strategic deficiencies are obvious. Let us continue: 16 . . . Wxc2 1 7. "Wb5+ "Wc6 (1 7 . . . �f8? 1 8 . a5) 18 . �e2! 0-0 19 . "Wxc6 tbxc6 20. E!hc1 E!fc8 21 . E!c3 tbb4 22. Axb6, and White wins a pawn. Therefore the a6-pawn has to be defended , but the return of the rook to a8 is an admission that B lack has problems with h is queenside development and it is not easy for him to coordinate his pieces. If 14 . . . "Wb7 there can fol low 1 5. 0-0 Ae7 1 6. Ad5!? with enduring pressure on the

72

queenside: 1 6 . . . "Wc7 1 7. tbd2 0-0 1 8 . Wc4 "Wd7 (not 1 8 . . . Wxc4? 1 9 . tbxc4 b5? be-cause of 20. Aa7) 1 9 . "Wb3 tbe6 20. tbc4.

1 5. �d2 �e6

After 15 . . . Ae7 1 6 . Ad5 Ab7 1 7. 0-0 0-0 1 8 . tbc4 Axd5 1 9 . Wxd5 E!b8 20. E!fd1 White has an obvious spatial advantage.

1 6. AdS labS

1 6 . . . Ab7 1 7. 0-0 Axd5 1 8 . exd5 tbc5 1 9. "Wc4 also favours White - he is threatening 20. b4.

17. Wc4!

a b c d e f 9 h

8 K -*. • -*- K 8 7 'if .t .t 7

s .t .l .l l.&\ .t s 5 i;, .t 5

4 [j, VJII [j, 4

3 if, 3

2 [j, [j, t;jj [j, [j, fj, 2 1 � � � 1

a b c d e f 9 h

M. Carlsen - G. Kamsky

The move of a mature master! Since the majority of the black pieces are undevel oped , Carlsen exchanges the on ly active one - the queen, with the hope of converting h is spatial advantage in the endgame.

17 . . . �e5?!

This attem pt to avoid the exchange of queens leads by force to the loss of the exchange. But in the endgame too Black cannot hold out: 17 . . .'�xc4 1 8. CL!xc4 CL!f4 (not 18 . . . b5? 1 9. axb5 axb5 20. Aa7) 19. 0-0-0! Ad? (1 9 . . . CL!xd5 20. �xd5 1eads to the loss of a pawn) 20. Axf4 (20. CL!xb6 Ag4 21 . �d2 tiJxg2 22. a5 CL!xe3 23. fxe3 is also good) 20 . . . exf4 21 . e5! b5 (if 21 . . . dxe5 there fol lows 22. CL!xe5 or 22. Axf7+) 22. CL!xd6+ Axd6 23. exd6, and Black cannot avoid loss of materia l .

1S. b4! b5 1 9. axb5 axb5 20. We3 ti:}e6 21 . Wxe7 �xe7 22. Aa7 �xd5 23. AxbS �xb4 24. 0-0!

Inc luding the second rook in the attack on the queenside.

24 . . . �e6 25. iifb1 Ae7

At last Black has managed to develop th is bishop. In the event of 25 . . . CL!xb8 26. �aS tiJc6 27. �xc8+ 'i!?d7 28. �aS its release might lead to further losses.

26. J:ixb5 0-0

8

a b c

� .a. d e f 9 h

K e 7

6 5

4

3

.l .l 1.1\ .l

11

2 8 {jj 1 11

.l 8

a b c d e

8

7

5

4

3

27. �e4!

Deep calculat ion! All Black's trickery leads merely to a reduction in the materia l .

27 . . . Ae6 2S. Axd6 Axe4 29. lieS! lieS

After 29 . . . Axd6 30. �xc6 the elegant fork proves decisive.

30. l:ixe4 Axd6 31 . iia6 JabS

The alternative 31 . . . CL!e7 32. �xc8+ CL!xc8 33. �a8 is equal ly hopeless.

32. g3 �d4 33. l:ixd6 iib1 + 34. 'i!?g2 iib2 35. e3 �e2 36. 'i!?t1

73

Black res igned .

Game 1 5 M . Carlsen - G . Kamsky

World Cup, Khanty-Mansiysk 2005 Sicilian Defence [ 843]

1 . e4 e5 2. �f3 e6 3. d4 exd4 4. �xd4 a6 5. �e3 We7 6. Ad3 b5 7. 0-0 Ab7 S. We2 �e7 9. iie1

a b c d e f 9 h

8 Kl.l\ e .t.. 7 .t..'if.l l.l\ .l 6 .l .l 6 5 5

4 {jj /j, 4

3 {jj � 3

2 /j, /j, /j, 'i! 8 8 8 2 1 : � 11 �

a b c d e f 9 h

This novelty, apparently saved up for such an i mportant game, best characterises Car lsen's understand ing of the game, based on a knowledge of the c lass ics .


Taking account of B lack's retarded de- The World Cup formula with a min i -match velopment, he prepares the knight thrust of two c lassical games raised the value of to d5. For th is he needs to reinforce the each of them. Therefore it i s hard to con-pin on the e-fi le.

9 . . . �bc6

The natural way of deve lop ing . If 9 . . . tLlg6 a l l the same there fo l lows 1 0 . tLld5 ! 'Wd6 (1 0 . . . exd5? 1 1 . exd5+ tLle7 1 2 . tLlf5) 1 1 . c4 (the aggress ive 1 1 . 'Wh5 is j ustif ied after 1 1 . . .exd5 1 2 . exd5+ �d8 1 3 . Ag5+ �c7 1 4 . c4 with an attack on the k ing , but B lack can cont inue h i s development with 1 1 . . . tLlc6!?) 1 1 . . . bxc4 1 2 . A xc4 f6 (here too 1 2 . . . exd5? 1 3 . exd5+ �d8 1 4 . 'We8+ �c7 1 5 . 'Wxf7 'Wf6 16 . tLle6+ �b6 1 7. Ae3+ is dangerous for B lack; if 12 . . . tLlc6 there i s the unp leasant 1 3 . tLlf5) 1 3 . Ad2 tLlc6 with the idea of 1 4 . tLlxc6 Axc6 1 5 . J;!ad1 Ab5.

If 9 . . . g 6 B lack has to reckon with 1 0 .tLldxb5!? axb5 1 1 . tLlxb5 'We5 1 2 . Ae3 tLlbc6 1 3 . f4 .

1 0. �xc6 �xc6

10 . . . dxc6 was more circumspect. To judge by the game, Kamsky either underestimated White's in it iative after the knight thrust to d5, or he altogether did not consider it.

a b c d e f 9 h

8 I. • .1. I. 8 7 .1. 'iV .l .l .l .l 7 6 .\ � .l 6 5 .l 5

4 8 4

3 tb � 3

2 8 8 8 VJ/i 8 8 8 2 1 Ir � It: �

a b c d e f 9 h

1 1 . �d5! exd5

74

demn Kamsky for taking a r isk. Otherwise he would have retreated with 1 1 . . .'Wd8.

12 . exd5+ �e7 13. c4!

An important move for the understanding of th is posit ion. Since it is unreal for the black king to move to its own wing, White must prepare to meet it on the queenside.

13 . . . b4

Opening the position by 1 3 . . . bxc4 14. Axc4 a l lows the wh ite rook to jo in the attack along the c-fi le, and if 14 . . . 'Wd6 Black has to reckon with 1 5 . g3 fol lowed by Af4.

14 . .tg5 f6

The alternat ive 1 4 . . . 'Wc5 i s parr ied by the seemingly modest offer to exchange the queens - 1 5 . 'We3 'Wxe3 1 6 . l;!xe3 f6 (1 6 . . . d6 1 7. Axe? Axe? 1 8 . J;!ae1 ) 1 7. d6 �f7 (1 7 . . .fxg5 1 8 . dxe7 �f7 1 9 . J;!ae1 J;!e8 20. exf8'W+ l;!hxf8 21 . l;!xe8 l;!xe8 22. l;!xe8 �xe8 23. Axh7 1eads to the loss of a pawn) 1 8 . dxe7 Axe? 1 9. Af4 with the better endgame for White.

1 5. 'Wh5+ g6 16. Wf3 fxg5 1 7. 'Wf6 0-0-0

a b c d e f 9 h

8 • 1. .1_ J. 8 7 .l. 'iV .l � .\ 7 6 .l VJ!i .l 6 5 8 4 .l 8 3

2 8 8 1 Ir

a b

�

c d

5

4

3

8 8 8 2 It: �

e f 9 h

M. Carlsen - G. Kamsky

18. 'Wxh8

After the tempting 1 8 . d6 there is 18 . . . �g8! 1 9. Wxh8 Axd6 and the in it iative passes to Black. From the material point of view, the outcome of the open ing operation is not wonderfu l for White. But as regards the assessment of the posit ion, it has been an undoubted success: h is pieces are dominant , whereas for the moment the black bishops are shut in .

18 . . . 'Wd6

If 1 8 . . . h6 there fol lows 1 9 . Wf6.

19. Ae4

With the threat of c4-c5.

19 .. /�b8 20. Iiac1 'Wf4 21 . g3 'Wf7 22. 'Wd4

22. We5+ fo l lowed by Wxg5 is also good enough, but Carlsen is hoping for more.

22 . . . d6 23. 'Wb6 Iid7 24. 'Wxb4 t'Llf5

a b c d e f 9 h

8 • 7 ..t 6 . 5

4 VJ!I B

a b c

25. Axf5

..t .1. 'iV • • • B � ·

�

d e f 9 h

8

7

6

5

4

An amazingly pragmatic approach to the solution of the position . Wh ite exchanges the active knight in order to invade with his rook at e6, not paying any great importance to the undoubl ing of the black pawns.

25 . . . gxf5

25 . . . Wxf5 loses to 26. l::!e8+ �a7 27. Wa3! l::!c7 28. We3+.

26. Iie6 f4 27. Iice1 Iid8 28. 'Wb6 Iic8 29. b4!

White's main threat involves the invasion of h is rook at e8.

29 • . . fxg3

If 29 . . . l::!xc4 there fo l lows 30. b5 axb5 31 . l::!e8+ l::!c8 32. Wxb5 Wxd5 33. l::!xc8+ � xc8 34. l::!e8+ �c7 35 . Wxd5 Axd5 36 . l::! xf8 , obtain i ng a techn ica l ly won end ing .

30. hxg3 h5 31 . b5 'Wc7

Since Black cannot be sat isfied with 31 . . . axb5 32. Wxb5 when there is no defence against 33. l::!e8, he is forced to agree to an endgame, where his bishops are sti l l out of play.

75

32. 'Wxc7+ �xc7 33. a4 axb5 34. axb5 �b6 35. Iie8

35. l::!f6! is more forcefu l , when B lack i s practical ly in zugzwang.

35 . . . £g7 36.Ii8e6

a b c d e f 9 h

8 .1. 8

7 ..t ..t 7

6 • • : 6

5 B B 4 B 4

3 3

2 2

a b c d e f 9 h

Chapter 2 · The Way to the To..;.P _________ _

36 . • J ad8?

Black should have decided on 36 . . J�xc4 37. �xd6+ �c5 38. �g6 Ac3 39. �d1 Axd5 40. �xg5 Ad4 41 . �xh5. It is not easy for h im to escape from the p in , but the advance of the f- and g-pawn pair requ i res t ime, which gives h im some practical saving chances.

37. c5+!

40. �xc3 Axd5 41 . �d1 Aa8 42. �a3 d5 (after 42 . . . �xb5 White wins by 43. �da1 Ac6 44. �a5+, whi le if 42 . . . Ab7 there fol lows 43. �e3 and 44. �e6) 43. �da1 Ab7 44. �e3 �d7 45. �e5 �g7 46. �b1 , although here too White should be able to convert h is exchange advantage.

39. §xb7 §f8 40. Jac7+ ckxd5 41 . §d1 !

The final subtlety. 42. b6 is threatened.

An unexpected thrust, leading to the win 41 •• . Jab8 42. �ag7 94 43. JagS+ ckc4

of one of the bishops. 44. Jaxh5 Ac5 45. JagS Jaxb5 46. Jaxg4+

37 • . .'itxc5 38. §e7 Ad4 ckc3 47. ckg2 Aa3 48. Jagd4

38 . . . Ac3 was more resi l ient: 39. �c7+ �b6 Black resigned .

Qual ifying for the Candidates series impl ies contacts with the world el ite and the reaching of a new level of mastery. The chess world was expecting a great deal of Carlsen , but if you raise your potential in slow steps, you should remember that t ime does not work long for the young, and you can easi ly d issolve into the overal l mass, as occurred with a number of h is talented contemporaries. But to gain in class, it is important to make the next step. The step into chess h igh society. For the 1 5-year-old grandmaster a rating of 2570 on the results of 2005 gave every justification for th is .

At that t ime the chess calendar offered two opportun ities to progress. The fi rst was to qual ify for the main Wijk aan Zee tournament. Here there was no problem, as Magnus was a desired guest at the most famous festival of the year. Another way of breaking into el ite society was offered by the wel l -known Dutch chess patron Joop van Oosterom, who sponsored not only his trademark 'Melody Amber' tournament, but also the ' Rising Stars' competit ion, where veterans tested talented young players, the best of whom would qual ify for the main tournament. Carlsen made use of both opportun ities.

I n January 2006 he again , for the th ird year in a row, played in Wijk aan lee. On this occasion the organisers had invited a stronger field for the B tournament compared with the previous year, raising it to F IDE category 1 5 , where the brightest young talents were guaranteed places. But such rivalry was to the advantage of Magnus, who had rested and was eager for a fight. The battle for qual ification to the A tournament was uncommonly dramatic. It appeared that on this occasion Magnus would more than hold his own: after 7 rounds he was confidently leading with 6 points, after gaining a number of wins in splendid attacking style. But he then slowed down with a series of draws, and in the 1 1 th round he was caught by Alexander Motylev, who won their

76

M. Carlsen - A. Beliavsky

individual encounter. It was these two who were victorious in the tournament, after overcoming the hurdle of the last round, where they had to defeat the lady players Kateryna Lahno and Humpy Koneru . True, even with a share of 1 st-2nd places (9 points out of 1 3) there were sti l l grounds for d isappointment, since on the t ie-break fi rst prize went to Motylev. But the festival organisers reassured Carlsen , saying that they had decided to al low both players into the A tournament in 2007.

Game 1 6 M . Carlsen - A. Beliavsky

Wijk aan Zee B 2006 Ruy Lopez {C91]

1 . e4 e5 2. �f3 �c6 3 . .tb5 a6 4. Aa4 �f6 s. o-o b5 6. Ab3 .tb7 7. d3

a b c d e f g h

8 i. 'ir' • .t i. 8

7 .t .l .l .l .l .\ 7 6 .\ � � 6 5 .l .l 5

4 � 4

3 Jb � ttJ 3 2 � � � � � � 2 1 1:l ttJ Jb iV : �

a b c d e f g h

This modest pawn move is a kind of ant iArkhangelsk variation, d i rected against the active development of the bishop at c5, which is Black's main response to one of the basic continuat ions 7. §e1 . Another such continuation is 7. c3, which was especially popular at the end of the 20th century. The greatest sti r at that t ime was created by the game N u n n - Bel iavsky (Amsterdam 1 990), which continued 7 . . . tt::lxe4 8. d4 tt::la5 9. Ac2 exd4 1 0 . b4 tt::lc4 1 1 . Axe4 Axe4 1 2 . §e1 d5 1 3 . tt::lxd4 c5! 14 . bxc5 Axc5 1 5. f3 0-0 1 6. fxe4 dxe4 1 7. *h1 §e8 18. Ae3 tt::lxe3 1 9. §xe3 b4, and Bel iavsky won after a very sharp fight.

7 . . . Ac5?!

Here th is activity is inappropriate, since it al lows White to develop his knight at c3, creating the threat of p inn ing the f6-knight (with the idea of tt::lc3-d5), after which the absence of the bishop from e7 is very perceptible. The main continuation is 7 . . . Ae7, as Bel iavsky had played in al l h is preceding games. To the question, why did he play 7 . . . Ac5, Alexander merely shrugged h is shoulders.

8. �c3

For the moment the immediate pin 8. Ag5 is premature, since after 8 . . . h6 9 . Ah4 0-0 1 0. tt::lc3 Ae7! Black retreats his bishop, obtain ing an easy game. Now, however, it is not easy for h im to choose a moment to castle.

8 . . . d6

77

A natural and frequently-employed move. But 8 . . . 0-0!? also comes into considerat ion, with the idea after 9. Ag5 h6 1 0. Ah4 Ae7 of reaching a position from the variation g iven in the previous note.

9. a4

A standard flank attack , wh ich at the same t ime solves the problem of retaining the l ight-square bishop. After the modest 9. Ae3 0-0 1 0. a3 tt::ld4 Black has no problems.


9 . . . �a5

A dubious move - the knight moves to the edge of the board . The main continuation is considered to be 9 . . . b4. S ince the t ime of the Kasparov-Anand world championsh ip match in 1 995 it has been considered that 1 0 . !Dd5 1eads to the exchange of th is knight (1 0 . . . !Da5 1 1 . !Dxf6+ 'Wxf6), which eases Black's defence: 1 2 . Aa2 h6 13. c3 bxc3 14. bxc3 0-0 1 5. Ae3 �ad8 1 6. �b1 Ac8 (with the idea of . . . Ag4 or . . . Ae6) with rough ly equal chances. More compl i cated play resu lts from 1 0. !De2 0-0, and if 1 1 . a5!? (preventing . . . !Da5), then 1 1 . . . d5!? i s possible.

10 . Aa2

No true 'Spanish' player would part with h is trademark bishop for the sake of an extra, doubled pawn - 1 0 . axb5 !Dxb3 1 1 . cxb3 axb5 1 2 . �xa8 Axa8 1 3 . !Dxb5 h6, for which B lack has sufficient compensation in the form of the two bishops.

a b c d e f 9 h

8 .!. 'if • .!. 8

7 .i_ j. j. j. j. 7 6 j. j. � 6 5 � j. .i_ j. J_ 5 4 [j, [j, 4

3 f:D B ED 3

2 � /j, /j, /j, /j, /j, 2 1 1:r � VJH 1:r �

a b c d e f 9 h

1 0 ••. b4 1 1 . �e2 Ac8?!

On the whole th is is a thematic bishop manoeuvre, by which Black takes control of f5 (for where the knight is a iming) and gains the opportun ity to neutral ise the bishop on

a2 or effect a pin on g4. But in the g iven specific situation, for the moment th is manoeuvre is premature. Black should have decided on 1 1 . . . 0-0!? 1 2 . Ag5 h6 13 . Ah4, when 13 . . . Ac8! is now good .

12 . c3

If 1 2 . Ae3 Black equal ises by 1 2 . . . Axe3 13 . fxe3 Ae6! .

1 2 . . . bxc3 13. bxc3 Ab6

A prophylactic b ishop retreat , s i nce in the event of 13 . . . Ae6 the 1 4. d4 advance is made with ga in of tem po, and after 1 4 . . . Axa2 1 5 . �xa2 Ab6 1 6. Ag5 White has an enduring advantage.

78

14. �g3

Now if 14. Ag5 there can fo l low 14 . . . h6 1 5 . Ah4 g5!? (1 5 . . . 0-0?! 1 6 . !Dg3!) 1 6 . Ag3 0-0.

a b c d e f 9 h

8 .!. .i. '�'• .!. 8

7 j. j. j. j. 7 6 j. .i. j. � 5 � j. 4 [j, [j, 3 fj, [j, t:D t:D

6 5 4

3

[j, [j, /j, 2 � � .:r �

a b c d e f 9 h

14 . . . Ae6?!

Black decides against 14 . . . 0-0, fearing the pin 1 5 . Ag5 . But perhaps the devi l is not as terrible as he's painted? For example, the game De Firmian - Lugo (San Diego 2004) continued 15 . . . h6 16 . Ah4 Ag4 1 7. h3 Axf3 1 8 . 'Wxf3 g5 1 9. tDf5 gxh4 20. !Dxh6+, and here, by playing 20 . . . �g7! 21 . !Df5+

M . Carlsen - A. Beliavsky

<.!?h8, Black wou ld have held the posit ion. Instead of 1 9 . �f5 Viktor M ikhalevsky rec-ommends 1 9. �h5! �xh5 20. '1Wxh5, which is correct after 20 . . . gxh4? 21 . '1Wg6+ �h8 22. '1Wxh6+ �g8 23. �h1 ! with dangerous threats such as f2-f4. But 20 . . . '1Wf6! 21 . Ag3 <.!?g7 22. l:!ab1 '1Wg6 is stronger, when Black successfu l ly defends (Bel iavsky) .

15. d4! J.xa2?!

If was not yet too late to castle - 1 5 . . . 0-0 16. dxe5 dxe5 1 7. �xe5 '1Wxd1 1 8 . l:!xd1

a b c d e f 9 h

a .I 'YJV .�. . 8

7 I. 1. 1. 1. 7

6 I. ..t I. � 6

5 � I. 5

4 D. D. D. 4

3 D. tb tb 3

2 .: D. D. D. 2

� � .: � a b c d e f 9 h

1 1. Ag5! §ad8 1 9 . l:!e1 l:!fe8 , and B lack's active pieces g ive h im q u ite good compensa-

White has been able to implement the main

tion for the pawn. conceptual idea in the 7 . . . Ac5 variat ion.

16. !axa2 0-0?!

Now White's attack becomes i rresist ib le, but it is already hard to offer Black good advice. For example, he is unable to return the a5-knight to the defence - 1 6 . . . �c6 17. a5! �xa5 (1 7 . . . Axa5? 1 8 . 'Wa4 '1Wd7 19. d5) 1 8 . dxe5 dxe5 1 9. l:!d2 with numerous threats. The defence is also not eased by the inclusion of 1 6 . . . exd4!? 1 7. cxd4 0-0 1 8 . Ag5 h6 1 9 . Ah4, when in view of the threat of �h5 White's attack is very dangerous. For example: 19 . . . c5 20. �h5 g5 21 . /:Dxg5 �xh5 22. '1Wxh5 hxg5 23. Axg5 f6 24. '1Wg6+ �h8 25. l:!a3! or 1 9 . . . l:!e8 20. '1Wc1 (with the threat of �h5) 20 . . . �b3 21 . '1We3 �xd4 22. �xd4 Axd4 23. '1Wxd4 g5 24. f3! gxh4 25. �f5, and Black's position is destroyed (Mikhalevsky) .

The p in on the knight decides the game.

1 7 . . . exd4

Things are not changed by 17 . . . h6 1 8 . Ah4. Now 1 8 . . . exd4 1 9. cxd4 leads to a posit ion considered i n the note to 16 . . . 0-0, whi le if 18 . . . �c6 there fol lows 1 9 . �h5! g5 20. �xg5! �xh5 21 . '1Wxh5 hxg5 22. Axg5 f6 23. Ah6, and after the capture of the rook White's attack remains dangerous.

18. �h5! dxc3 1 9. �h4!

White's attack is so strong, that he can demonstrate the strength of his caval ry. But also after the prosaic 1 9 . Axf6 gxf6 20. '1Wc1 �h8 21 . '1Wxc3 l:!g8 22. �xf6 B lack would not have held out for long.

19 . . . �h8 20. �f5

Black resigned.

Some commentators gave an enthusiast ic assessment of th is game. This wou ld seem to be a de lus ion . Be l iavsky's p lay was a long way from h is real potential , as ind icated by the series of mediocre moves , beg inn ing with h is choice of opening variat ion . Knowing the main idea of Wh ite's p lay against 7 . . . Ac5, it was not hard

79


for Magnus to find obvious moves . But he must be g iven h is due - he carried out a sustained attack .

Carlsen encountered Be l iavsky's real potential a few months later i n Amsterdam, where he was also hop ing to make use of the other opportun ity to move i nto 'h igh society' .

I n the summer of that year the Max Euwe Associat ion, f inanced by Joop van Oosterom, organised in Amsterdam a team tournament ' Ris ing Stars' v. ' Experience', held on the Scheveningen system. Famous veterans tested promising young players. The best of the young would receive an invitation to the Melody Amber tournament, held in Monaco with the participation of the world el ite. The composition of the jun ior team was imposing: the young grandmasters who had d ist ingu ished themselves in Wijk aan Zee - Sergey Karjakin , who had shared 5th-6th places in the A Tournament, and Magnus Carlsen, who had shared 1 st-2nd places in the B Tournament, the home players Daniel Stel lwagen and Jan Smeets, and the Chinese player Wang Hao. As for the five veterans, only the 53-year-old Alexander Bel iavsky was sti l l active in competitions. He became a strict examiner of the main favourites in the two concluding rounds: he defeated the leader Carlsen and did not al low Karjakin to catch h im . As a result Carlsen and Bel iavsky fin ished fi rst in their respective teams with identical resu lts - 6% points from 1 0 games. For the second t ime Carlsen fulfi l led his main objective - to break through to encounters with the el ite in a min imum of two tournaments in 2007. As for the examination by the veteran , it was very instructive.

8

7

M. Carlsen - A. Bel iavsky Amsterdam 2006

a b c d e f g h

.1 .1 ... 'iV

6 ... ..t ... � 5 ... 4 D, 3 j, D, � 2 D, D, D, D,

6

5

4

3

2

1 .S, � .s � 1 a b c d e f g h

31 •.• Wg4! 32. J.e3

White cannot take the knight by 32. �xd6 on account of an attractive mate: 32 . . . .!:!f2 33 . .!:!g1 �xg2+! 34 . .!:!xg2 .!:!f1+ 35 . .!:!g1 .!:!xg1#.

80

32 •. . J.xe3 33. Wxe3 9:f4

In a position which is d ifficult for the opponent it is logical to increase the pressure . Therefore Bel iavsky is not in a rush to win a pawn - 33 . . . tDxe4 34 . .!:!f1 !? (34 . .!:!e2 tDd6) 34 . . . tDf6 35 . .!:!ae1 , which al lows White to activate h is forces .

34. J.d1

Magnus fol lows the path of least resistance. 34. Ac2 was stronger: 34 . . . .!:!ef8 35. �c5 .!:!f2 36. �xeS+ .!:!8f6 37. �g3 �xg3 38. hxg3 .!:!xc2 39. e5 .!:!e6 40. exd6 .!:!xd6, and now not 41 . .!:!e8+?! ct1g7 42 . .!:!e7+ ct1h6 43 . .!:!xb7 .!:!dd2, but immed iately 41 . .!:!e7! .!:!xb2 42 . .!:!f1 , and the activity of the rooks secures equal ity. Therefore B lack wou ld apparently have had to regroup h is forces

M . Carlsen - J. Nunn

by 35 . . . 'We6 36. fiad1 Wf6 37. '.'!?g1 fif2, but after 38. Ad3 White holds the position .

34 . . . Wg5 35. 'Wd3?

This al lows a rook invasion, lead ing to the loss of a pawn without any compensation. 35. Af3!? tilxe4 36. fiad1 was more resi l ient, although even here after 36 . . . tDf6 followed by . . . e5-e4 the extra pawn should have the final word .

a b c d e f g h

8

7 6 .t 6

5 5

4 4

3 3

a b c d e f g h

35 . . . fif2 36. Af3 �d2 37. Wf1

Also after the queen exchange 37. We3 Wxe3 38. fixe3 fixb2 the endgame is hopeless for White.

37 .. J axb2 38. �ad1 �d8 39. c4?!

The cunning 39. Ag4 (with the idea of fixd6) is parried by the cool-headed 39 . . . '.'!?g7.

39 . . . �g7

In time-trouble one wants to play as solid ly as possible, but 39 . . . fixa2 was also possible, i ntend ing to meet 40. c5 with 40 . . . tDbS 41 . Wc4 fiad2.

40. 'Wd3 �f7 41 . 'Wa3 �dd2 42. �xd2 'i'xd2 43. �d1 �xa2 44. 'We7 Wc3 45. h4

If 45. Wxb7 or 45. fif1 , then 45 . . . fia1 is also

81

decisive. Two pawns down, White played on for another ten moves before curtai l ing h is hopeless resistance.

Game 1 7 M. Carlsen - J . Nunn

Amsterdam 2006 Sicilian Defence [ 890]

1 . e4 c5 2. �f3 d6 3. d4 �f6 4. �c3 cxd4 5. �xd4 a6 6. Ae3 e5 7. �f3 Ae7 8. Ac4 0-0 9. 0-0 Ae6 1 0. Ab3 �c6 1 1 . We2 �aS 12. �fd1 �xb3 13. cxb3!?

The main continuation 1 3. axb3 We? is considered to be sound enough for B lack, and so Carlsen turns onto a less wel l-explored path, opening the c-fi le for his rook and preventing the development of the queen at c7.

a b c d e f g h

'i¥ • • 8

7 .i. .t .t .t 7 .t .i. � 6

5 .t 5

4 � 4

3 � CD j, Ci:J 3

2 � � Wif� � � 2 1 : : �

a b c d e f g h

1 3 . . . 'We8

Two years later the game Carlsen - lvanchuk (Morel ia/Linares 2008) continued 13 . . . tDd7 1 4. tDd2 Wc7 1 5 . fiac1 fifeS 1 6. tDdS Wd8 1 7. fixeS fixeS 1 S . tDxe7+ Wxe7 1 9. tDc4 Axc4 20. bxc4 tileS 21 . b3 fic6 and Black maintained the balance. With the exchange of the dark-square bishop the d6-pawn is weakened , of course, but it proves impossible to approach it.

Chapter 2 · The Way to the Top �----------------

14. �e1

This move ind icates that Carlsen is fami l iar with the theory even of th is fai rly rare variat ion. 14 . Ag5, attempting to exploit the weakness of the d5-point, is parried by 14 . . . tDh5! (th is possib i l ity is based on tactics: 1 5 . tDxe5 is not possible because of 1 5 . . . f6), played in the game Movsesian Babula (Czech Team Championsh ip 2005-6) . After the exchange of B lack's ' bad ' bishop the chances are equal .

14 . . . hS

Later, at the rap id tournament in Cap d 'Agde 2006, Karjakin played more energetically against Carlsen: 14 . . . tDg4 1 5. tDc2 f5 1 6 . f3 tDxe3 1 7. tDxe3 fxe4 1 S. tDxe4 lldS 1 9. tDd5, and a position with equal chances was reached .

1 5. �c2

The knight is transferred to the key point of the position - d5.

1 5 . . . 'Wd7 1 S. �b4 gfc8 1 7. f3 .idS 1 8, gd3

By threatening the doubl ing of rooks on the d-fi le, Wh ite does not al low time for . . . b7-b5.

h 8

7 'if ... ... 7

.t. i. � ... 6

5 ... 5

4 ttJ � 4

3 � ttJ I!l � � 3

2 � � vw � � 2 a b c d e f 9 h

1 8 . . . a5

This weakening of the queenside squares by Black is associated with an incorrect idea. Possibly the experienced grandmaster was not attracted by the exchanging operation 1 S . . . Aa5 1 9. tDbd5 tDxd5 (or 1 9 . . . Axd5 20. tDxd5 AdS 21 . llad1 tDe8 22. llc3 tDf6) 20. tDxd5 AdS (not 20 . . . b5 21 . Ab6) 21 . llad1 , lead ing to a passive posit ion, which, however, is not easy to breach.

8 2

1 9. �bd5 �xd5 20. �xd5 a4?!

I l logical - why undouble the white pawns? 20 . . . lla6 21 . llad1 llac6 was in the spirit of the position, with the idea of 22. llc3 Axd5. 20 . . . b5 and 20 . . .f5 were also possible.

21 . bxa4 gxa4 22. b3 gas 23. gad1 gas?

A strange move, to put it mi ld ly, leading to the loss of a pawn. If Black was intending to exchange on d5, 23 . . . Wb5 24. a4 WeS 25. tDb4 llaaS was more logical , at least provoking a weakening of the b3-pawn . 23 . . . f5 came i nto considerat ion, with the threat of 24 . . . fxe4 25. fxe4 Ag4, whi le if 24. Wf2? White has to reckon with 24 . . . Axd5 25. llxd5 f4.

24. �bS .txbS 25 . .txbS gas 2S. gxdS We7

a b c d e f 9 h 8 .I • 8

7 ... 'ir' .t. 7

6 .1. � I!l i. ... 6

5 ... 5

4 � 4

3 � � 3

2 � vw � � 2 I!l �

a b c d e f 9 h

M. Carlsen - J. Nunn

27. Wb2!

Apparent ly when he p layed 23 . . J �a5 Black missed th is possib i l ity, hoping for 27 . .§d8+ .§xd8 28. Axd8 �C5+ 29. <!>h1 'Wa3, when he regains the pawn (30. f!d2? Axb3 31 . axb3 �c1 + 32 . .§d1 f!a1 ). Now, however, the queen is switched to its own wing , where it supports the advance of the pawns.

27 . . . Wg5?!

Of course, 27 . . . f!xb6? 28. f!xb6 �c5+ 29. �f2 does not work, but B lack should have reconciled h imself to 27 . . . f!aa8 28. a4 f6, since the attempt to develop counterplay on the kingside is unreal istic.

28. a4 h5 29. a5 h4 30. b4 !3:aa8

White has made progress with h is attack on the queenside, whereas Black's play has come to a standsti l l , since after 30 . . . h3 31 . f!d8+ .§xd8 32 . .§xd8+ <!>h7 33. �d2 'Wxd2 (otherwise b4-b5) 34 . .§xd2 f!a8 35. g4 he loses h is h3-pawn.

31. Wd2

a b c d e f 9 h

a .I. .i • 8

7 • • • 7

6 � I:( .t 6

5 � • 'ii' 5 4 � � • 4

3 � 3

2 � � � 2 1:( �

a b c d e f 9 h

31 . . . Wxd2

Black is forced to agree to the exchange of queens, since otherwise after 31 . . . �h5 32. h3 the queen remains out of play, passively observing the breakthrough by the a-pawn: 32 . . . �g6 33. f!c1 .§xc1 + 34. �xc1 .§c8 35. �d2 (also good is 35. �xc8+ AxeS 36 . .§xg6 fxg6 37. b5 <!>f7 38. Ac7 <!>e6 39. <!>f2 , when the march of the k ing to the queenside leads to the winning of the e5- and h4-pawns) 35 . . . f!c4 36. Ae3 <!>h7 37 . .§b6, winning the b6-pawn .

32.!3:1 xd2 !3:c4 33. Ac5 !3:c8 34. !3:b6 !3:c7 35. �f2 �h7 36. Ad6 !3:d7

36 . . . f!c2 37. <!>e1 f!c1 + 38. f!d1 leads to the exchange of a pair of rooks and the loss of the e5-pawn.

37. �e3 f6

Parting with the e5-pawn, but also hope-less is 37 . . . f!c3+ 38. f!d3 f!xd3+ 39. <!>xd3 f6 40. <!>c3, when White creates a passed pawn.

38. Axe5 fxe5 39. !3:xe6 !3:xd2 40. �xd2 !3:xb4 41 . !3:xe5 !3:b2+ 42. �c3 !3:xg2 43. !3:h5+ �g6 44. !3:xh4 !3:a2 45. �b4

Black resigned.

After h is notable performance in the World Cup, Carlsen was also guaranteed invitations to the major a l l -p lay-al l tournaments. Nevertheless, he couldn't refrain from a trip to Reykjav ik to take part in the trad it ional Open . Magnus was leading up to the last round, but he contrived to lose a better endgame to the Egyptian Ad ly, whose rating was 1 50 points lower than h is . The result was a share of 6th-9th places with a score of

83


6% points out of 9. A more serious test awaited h im at a F IDE category 1 7 tournament in Sarajevo with a wel l -balanced young field of six part icipants. In the absence of any obvious outsiders, the tournament concluded with a un ique result : '+ 1 ' was sufficient for a share of fi rst place. Carlsen gained h is only win with B lack against the Bosnian Borki Predojevic, and for clear victory in the tournament he needed to do the same in the last round with White, but he played on to a d ifficult endgame, which he saved only by a miracle. The result was a share of 1 st-3rd places with N is ipeanu and Malakhov (5% points from 1 0 games).

Part of the 'compulsory' program for 2006 was the Olympiad in Turin. Although Norway does not number among the 'chess' countries and the team faced matches in the second echelon, Magnus showed h imself to be a genuine leader. On board 1 he scored 6 points in 8 games, which enabled the Norwegian team to finish in an honourable 31 st place.

Carlsen's star status d id not affect h is patriotic sense, and he thought that he should also play in the Norweg ian Championsh ip . This stro l l in an easy tournament (FI DE category 9) proved in fact to be qu ite d ifficult - a share of 1 st-2nd places with his fi rst mentor, Agdestein (7 points out of 9) . The match for the title of champion was won 3-1 by the pupi l .

The tournament in B ie l , held with the same format as in the previous year, attracted an even stronger field (FI DE category 1 7), with the participation of the winners of the preced ing tournaments, Alexander Morozevich (2003 and 2004) and Andrey Volokit in (2005). It was the games with them that determ ined Carlsen's result . He ach ieved the impossible - he won twice against Morozevich , but he also lost twice to Volokit in . As for Morozevich, on this occasion too he was i rrepressible and he again won ' B iel ' by a marg in of 1 % points from Carlsen and Radjabov, who shared 2nd-3rd places with 6 points out of 1 0 .

Standing apart in the series of strong tournaments was the rapid-play event in the French town of Cap D'Agde (FI DE category 1 4), where in his semi-final match Carlsen lost %-1 % to Karjakin .

Game 1 8 M. Carlsen - M. Adams

Olympiad , Turin 2006 Nimzo-lndian Defence [ E20]

1 . �f3 �f6 2. c4 e6 3. �c3 Ab4 4. g3 o-o 5. Ag2 d5 6. d4

Since the 1 4th world champion Vlad imi r Kramn ik i ntroduced the Catalan Open ing into h is repertoi re, i nterest i n positions of this type has greatly increased. Th is theme was taken up by Carlsen, who is also not

84

averse to playing with a fianchettoed bishop. This same position can also arise in the Romanish in Variat ion of the N imzo- l ndian Defence. Its virtues include piece pressure on the centre, and its d rawbacks - the vulnerabi l ity of the c4-pawn , which is not the case in the Catalan Open ing .

6 . . . dxc4 7. 0-0

Fi rst c larify ing the b ishop's posit ion by 7. a3!? also comes into considerat ion.

M. Carlsen - M. Adams

Analysis diagram

a) 7 . . . Axc3+ 8. bxc3 and after the attempt to defend the c4-pawn - 8 . . . c6 (if 8 . . . b5, then 9. a4! is good, taking play along simi lar l i nes) there can fo l low 9. Cbe5! tbd5 1 0. V!fc2 b5 1 1 . e4 Cbf6 1 2. a4 Ab7 13 . Aa3 �e8 14 . �b1 ! with the threat of 15 . Cbxc4. 8 . . . Cbbd7 is more cautious, after which White carries out a plan typical of such posit ions: 9. 0-0 c6 1 0 . a4 b5 1 1 . Aa3 �e8 1 2 . Cbd2 Cbd5 13 . V!fc2 Ab7 14 . Cbe4;

b) 7 . . . Ae7 8. V!fa4 a6 9. V!fxc4 b5 1 0 . V!id3 Ab7 1 1 . Ag5 Cbbd7 1 2 . b4 a5!? 1 3 . 0-0 axb4 1 4 . axb4 A x b4 1 5 . Cbxb5 c5 16. dxc5 �xa1 1 7. �xa1 Axc5 with an

6

5

a b c d e f 9 h

8 K . • • • 7 · � 6

5

4 ..t. • t:::. 4

3 !:::. liJ liJ !:::. 3 2 !:::. !:::, !:::, ii, £:::. 2 1 M ii, WH M �

a b c d e f 9 h

If 8 . . . Ae7 White concentrates his forces in the centre: 9. e4 Cba5 1 0. Ae3 a6 1 1 . V!fe2 b5 1 2 . �ad1 , threatening to launch an offensive. Noteworthy, for example, is the game Matlakov - Emel in (St . Petersburg 2009): 1 2 . . . Ab7 1 3 . Cbg5 Cbd7 14 . h4 V!fe8 1 5. f4 Cbb3 1 6. e5 Axg2 1 7. �xg2 h6 1 8. d5! Cbdc5 (Wh ite also has a dangerous attack after 1 8 . . . hxg5 1 9 . hxg5 g6 20. V!fg4 �g7 21 . Cbe4 �h8 22. Cbf6) 1 9 . V!fg4 �d8 20. f5 exf5 21 . �xf5 g6 22. Cbge4 �h7 23. V!ff4 1 -0.

equal game (Radjabov-Topalov, Sofia 9. bxc3 Elb8 1 0. Ag5 b5 2008) .

7 . . . tDc6

Black is preparing an attack on the centre by . . . e6-e5. The alternative is the undermining move 7 . . . c5. Therefore it is more accurate to c larify the bishop's posit ion on the 7th move.

8. a3

(see next diagram)

8 . . . Axc3

Playing this position with Black, Carlsen tried retreating his bishop - 8 . . . Aa5 9 . e3 e5 10. tbxe5 Cbxe5 1 1 . dxe5 V!fxd1 12 . �xd1 �d7 1 3 . f4 Cbc5 and he equal ised in Pedersen -Carlsen (Aalborg 2006).

After the inclusion of 1 0 . . . h6 1 1 . Ah4 the cont inuation 1 1 . . . b5 1 2 . e4 e5 leads to a transposit ion of moves. The dangers of w inn ing the b ishop - 1 1 . . . g5 1 2 . Cbxg5 hxg5 1 3 . Axg5 are wel l demonstrated by the game lvan isevic- Mas (Biel 2008): 1 3 . . . �g7 14 . e4 Cbe7 1 5 . f4 Cbh7 1 6 . V!fh5 Cbxg5 1 7. fxg5 e5 1 8. �f6 Cbg8 1 9. �af1 V!/e7 20. V!ih4 V!id8 21 . V!fh5 V!fe7 22. dxe5 Ae6 23. g6 Cbh6 24. gxf7 �h8 25. f8Vff+ 1 -0.

1 1 . e4

85

Carlsen considers a more effective way of exploit ing the p in on the knight to be 1 1 . Cbd2!? Ab7 (after 1 1 . . . Cbe7 12 . Axf6 gxf6 1 3 . Cbe4 the weakness of the c5-square is


disclosed) 1 2 . tDe4 tDa5 1 3 . tDxf6+ gxf6 1 6 •• . iie8?! 14 . Ah6.

11 ••• h6 12. J.h4 e5

12 . . . g5?! is r isky: 1 3 . tDxg5 hxg5 14 . Axg5 e5 1 5 . d5 with a dangerous attack for White.

a b c d e 8

7 � 6 5

4 3 � 2

1 1:[

.l .i. 'i¥ � ,..

� � � � � �

�

� a b c d e

13. �xeS!

f 9 h

.� . 8

� � 7

,.. � 6 5

i, 4 [fj � 3 � i, � 2

1:[ � 1 f 9 h

For Magnus, who is noted for h is concrete th ink ing , there is no reason to avoid an endgame where he has a spatial advantage and the two bishops. Nothing sign ificant is promised by 1 3. d5 tDa5 - after 14 . a4 there can fol low 1 4 . . . g5 1 5. tDxg5 hxg5 1 6. Axg5 'Wd6, and the pin does not succeed .

1 3 • • • �xe5 14. dxe5 Wxd1 1 5. §fxd1 �d7

If 1 5 . . . tDg4 Carlsen was intending 1 6. AdS �b7 1 7. f4 tDe3 1 8. �d2 tDxg2 1 9. «it>xg2, when White gains an enduring advantage thanks to his control of the d-fi le.

1 6. f4

Black's posit ion is unenviable: the rook on d 1 severs h is defensive resources in two, and the bishop pair is ready to beg in operating at fu l l power.

P layed on general g rounds: B lack prevents the transference of the bishop to the q ueenside. Annotat ing the game in lnformator, Adams suggests a more promising way to resist: 16 . . . tDxe5! 1 7. Ae7! §e8 1 8 . fxe5 �xe7 1 9. �d8+ «i!?h7 20. Ah3 Axh3 21 . §xb8 §xe5 22. §b7! �xe4. Despite the exchange advantage, the weakening of White's periphery al lows Black to in itiate counterplay, for example: 23. �xb5 �e2 24. §c5 §g2+ 25. «it>h1 §c2 26. �xc4 Ag2+ 27. «it>g1 c6 28. �a4 Ad5 29. �xa7 �g2+ 30. «it>f1 �xh2 31 . §e1 «it>g6 or 23. «it>f2 §e5 24. �xc7 §f5+ 25. «it>e3 a6, and White has nothing real .

1 7. e6!

A bri l l i ant posit ional pawn sacrifice for the sake of including the g2-bishop in the game.

86

a b c d e f 9 h 8 .l .i. .I • 8

7 � � ,.. � � 7

6 � � 6 5 5

4 � � Jt 4 3 � � 3 2 i, � 2

1 1:[ 1:[ � a b c d e f 9 h

1 7 ••• fxe6

As though bewitched, Adams calculated the consequences of capturing the pawn and decided on the move i n the game. The capture with the rook 17 . . . §xe6 did not appeal to him because of 1 8 . e5 g5 1 9 . fxg5 tDxe5 20. �d8+ «i!?g7 21 . gxh6+

M. Carlsen - M . Adams

gxh6 22. ge1 ! ge6 23. ge3, and now if 23 . . . �d3? there fol lows 24. gxe6 fxe6 when Black cannot d isentangle h imself. Rybka, which does not suffer from i l l u sions, defends by 23 . . .f6!? 24. Ad5 geb6 25. gg8+ �h6, and although the k ing 's position looks suspicious, it cannot be captured . However, 1 8 . Ad8! is more cunning (to judge by the game, Carlsen had th is move in mind): 1 8 . . . c6 1 9. e5 with the threat of 20. Ah3.

But it is not essential to take the pawn! I t is surpris ing, but in their commentaries on the game neither Adams nor Carlsen even considered 17 . . . �c5! 1 8 . exf7+ �xf7 1 9 . e5 Ab7, when Black safely completes his development.

18. e5 �xeS

The only possible way of offering at least some resistance. 1 8 . . . g 5 is d u b ious : 1 9. fxg5 �xe5 20 . gxh6 Ab7 21 . Af6 �d3 22. g4, and the passed pawns are bound to decide the game.

19 . .td8!

An excel lent intermed iate move! Black, under the cross-fi re of the bishops, is forced to give up the exchange.

19 . . . �d3 20. J.xc7 S:b7 21 . J.xb7 J.xb7

a b c d e f 9 h

8 .!. • 8

7

6 I. 6

5 5

4 £::, 4

3 £::, £::, 3

2 £::, 2

1 : : � a b c d e f 9 h

22. a4!

Carlsen's play in th is endgame is admirable. Depth is combined wi th concrete decision-taking. It is wel l known that the side who is the exchange ahead should a im for the exchange of the opponent's rook, to deprive him of counterplay. The young Norweg ian is prepared to sacrifice a pawn to ach ieve this objective.

22 . . . bxa4 23. S:db1 .tc6 24. S:b8 �f7

Black cou ld have prevented the invasion of the rook by playing 24 . . . gxb8 25. Axb8 a6 26. Ad6 �f7 27. lab1 Ab5, but not for long. After 28. �g2 �f6 29. �f3 h5 30. �e4 White advances h is kingside pawns, and after the open ing of one of the files the rook penetrates into the rear.

25. S:xe8 �xeS

8

a b c

7 I. � 6 .i. 5

4 I. I.

d e

3 £::, � 2

1 :

f 9 h

I.

£::, £::,

£::, �

a b c d e f 9 h

26 . .td6

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

The game enters the technical phase. Fi rst the path of the a4-pawn must be blocked.

87

26 . . . a6 27. E:b1 h5?!

I l logical. If possible, the invasion of the rook should be prevented - 27 . . . Ab5. However, after 28. �g2 h5 29. �f3 �f7 30. �e4 White would have obtained the position considered in the note to Black's 24th move. Now Black loses a pawn.

28. S:b6 �d7

Chapter 2 · The Way to the Top ��--------------

I f 28 . . . Ab5 there fol l ows 29 . .§b7 Ad? 30 . .§a?.

29. Af8 g6 30. §xa6

Black has a pawn for the exchange, and in add it ion it is passed. But th is does not change the evaluation of the ending: White should win , although it wi l l be a lengthy process.

30 . . . e5 31 . fxe5 tilxe5 32. h4 tilg4

The c3-pawn is immune: 32 . . . tDf3+ 33. �f2 tbd2 34. �e3 tbe4? 35 . .§xc6.

33. Ag7 �c7 34. Ad4

The bishop has handed over control of the a4-pawn to the rook, but it is perform ing an important ro le by preventing the manoeuvre of the kn ight to e4. The knight must find another way of ty ing the king to the defence of the g3-pawn, since against passive defence it wi l l head towards the a4-pawn.

34 . . . tilh6 35. �f2 tilf5 36. Ac5 �d7 37. Ab4

'The Moor has done his duty, let him go! ' The rook is freed to go in pursuit of the pawns.

37 . . . �c7

a b c d e f 9 h

8 8

7 • 7

G g .l_ 6

5

4 ... Jt ... 3 8 3

2 2

a b c d e f 9 h

38. §a7+

38 . .§aS! was stronger: 38 . . . �b6 39 . .§c5 tbd6 40. �e3 ebbS (in the event of 40 . . . <t;c? 41 . �f4 �b6 42 . .§g5 the g6-pawn is lost) 41 . .§xc4 a3 42 . Ac5+ �c7 43 . .§a4 tbxc3 44 . .§xa3 and White wins the pawn.

38 . . . �b6 39. §f7 tilh6 40. §e7 Ad5

Adams defends resourcefu l ly, doing everything possible to prevent the white king from crossing the 3rd rank. But Carlsen fi nds a subt le rook manoeuvre, which destabi l ises the defence.

41 . §d7! tilg4+ 42. �e2 Ae4 43. §d4! Ad3+ 44. �f3 tilh2+ 45. �f4 tilf1 46. §d6+ �b5 47. §d5+ �b6 48. §a5 Ac2 49. §e5 Ad3 50. �f3

50. g4!? hxg4 51 . �xg4 was stronger, not al lowing Black the chance which occurred in the game.

50 . . . tild2+ 51 . �f4 tilf1 ?

Adams misses the opportun ity to advance his pawn to a3 - 51 . . . tDb1 ! , with chances of holding the new defensive l ine.

Analysis diagram

Here are the variations g iven by Adams:

88

a) 52 . .§aS a3 53. �g5 Ac2 54. g4 (54. f!a8 �b7 55. f!a5 �b6, pursuing the rook) 54 . . . hxg4 55. �xg4 Ab3 56. �g5 Ac2, and by reduc ing the pawn m ater ia l , Black holds on;

b) 52 . �e3! a3 53 . .§aS Ac2 54. �d4 Ab3 fol lowed by 55 . . . a2.


But White's play can be improved . In variation b) instead of 53. �aS he can win the c4-pawn - 53. <!>d4! Ac2 (53 . . . <!>b7 54. �as �b6 55. �a4! Ac2 56. Ac5+ <!>c6 57. �a6+! �b7 58. �aS) 54. Ac5+! (of course, not 54. <!>xc4?? CL!d2+ and the pawn cannot be stopped) 54 . . . <!>c6 55. <!>xc4. To convert the passed c3-pawn White must l ift the blockade of the c4-square, which Black can set up by 55 . . . CL!d2+ 56. <!>b4 a2 57. �e6+ �d5 58. �a6 Ab1 . This is achieved by the manoeuvre of the bishop to b2 - 59. �a3! CL!c4 60. �aa tLld2 61 . Ae3 lilc4 62. Ag5 CL!eS 63. <!>b3 CL!c4 64. Ac1 �cs (64 . . . CL!d6 65. �aS+) 65 . �a4 <!>bs 66 . l::!.b4+ <!>aS 67. Ab2, and the c-pawn beg ins advancing.

Of course, under the strict t ime control i t was impossib le to calculate al l these subtleties, but this was Adams' only chance of saving the game.

52. g4

There is no other way of breaching Black's defences.

52 . . . hxg4 53. �xg4 �d2 54. �f4 �b3?

And here the on ly sav ing chance was 54 . . . CL!b1 ! , with the hope of exchang ing the a-pawn for the h4-pawn. However, as Adams shows in h is analysis, after White's best continuation 55. <!>e3! he would have retained winn ing chances.

Analysis diagram

a) 55 . . . a3 56. <!>d4 Ac2 (the attempt to attack the h4-pawn after 56 . . . CL!d2 leads to the temporary removal of the knight to the edge of the board , which al lows White to pick up the a3-pawn and launch an attack on the k ing : 57. l::!.e6+ <!>bS 58. Axa3 CL!f3+ 59. <!>d5 CL!xh4 60. Ac5 CL!f3 61 . l::!.b6+ <!>as 62. �b4 or 57 . . . <!>b7 58. Axa3 CL!f3+ 59. <!>cS CL!xh4 60. l::!.e7+) 57. Ac5+! <!>c6 58. <!>xc4 tLld2+ 59. <!>b4 a2 60. l::!.e6+ <!>d5 61 . l::!.a6 Ab1 62. Ae3 CL!c4. Although B lack has set up a blockade on c4, it is not d ifficu lt to l ift it: 63. Ad4 tLld6 64. �a5+ <!>e4 65. Af6 <!>d3 66. �a3 CL!c4 67. �aa CL!e3 68. c4, and the pawn beg ins advancing;

b) 55 . . . � b7 56 . �as a3 57. <!>d4 CL!d2 58. <!>d5 (58 . �xa3 leads to the loss of the h4-pawn: 58 . . . CL!f3+ 59. <!>dS CL!xh4 60. Ac5 CL!f5 61 . l::!.a7+ <!>c8) 58 . . . CL!b1 59. l::!.b5+ <!>c8 60. <!>d4 CL!d2 61 . <!>e3 tLlf1 + 62. <!>f2 CL!d2 63. �a5 tLlb1 64. <!>e3 <!>b7 65. <!>d4 tLld2 66. <!>dS tLlb1 . In this posit ion, although White has retained an advantage, B lack has more chances of hold ing the posit ion, having in mind an attack on the h4-pawn.

55. lie6+

The knight on b3 is essential ly out of play and it is easier to attack the pawn on a4 than on a2, as was examined in the note to Black's 51 st move.

55 . . . �b5

89

The a4-pawn is also not saved by 55 . . . <!>b7 56. <!>es CL!d2 57. <!>d5 CL!f3 (or 57 . . . CL!b1 58. �e7+ <!>b6 59. Ac5+ <!>bS 60. �b7+ <!>a6 61 . �a7+ <!>bS 62. Ab4) 58. l::!.e7+ <!>b6 59. Ac5+ <!>bS 60. �b7+ <!>a6 61 . l::!.a7+ <!>bS 62. Ae7 tLld2 63. Ad8 and the inevitable �aS+ (Adams).

...., ________ .....;C:;h.:;:a:;:,:pt::er'.:.2:........:._· The Way to the Top

56. §e8 �c1

The position cannot be held by 56 . . . �b6 57. !!a8 �b5 58. �e5 Ac2 59. �d5 Ad3 60. !!b8+ �a6 61 . �c6 Ae4+ 62. �c7, when Black is in zugzwang (Adams).

57. §b8+ �c6 58. §a8 �e2+ 59. �f3 �g1 + 60. �e3 �e2 61 . §xa4

The t itan ic work has nevertheless concluded with the win of the pawn. Now White can permit h imself to switch to an attack on the g6-pawn .

61 .•• �d5 62. §a5+ �e6 63. §a2 �g3 64. �f4 �f5 65. §a6+ �f7 66. �g5 �g3 67. §a7+ �g8 68. �f6 �h5+ 69. �e5 �g3 70. Ac5 �f5 71 . Af2!

After the knight's manoeuvrabi l ity has been restricted , the game qu ickly concludes.

71 . . . �h6 72. Ad4 �f5 73. �f6

Black resigned .

Game 1 9 M . Carlsen - A. Morozevich

Biel 2006 King's Indian Defence [ £97]

1 . d4 �f6 2. c4 g6 3. �c3 Ag7 4. e4 d6 5. �f3 0-0 6. Ae2 e5 7. 0-0 �c6 8. d5 �e7 9. a4

A rare continuation in the classical variation of the King's Ind ian Defence, which used to be practised in the late 1 980s. Nowadays it is considered that White's main plan involves the preparation of c4-c5, which can be begun with an immediate 9. b4 or after the preparatory moves 9. tLle1 , 9. tLld2 or 9. Ad2.

9 . . . a5

It was because of th is reply, f ixing the b4-square, that the move 9. a4 went out of use. This makes it a l l the more interesting - what has Carlsen prepared?

90

7

6

s j. 4 8 3

2

a b c d e f g h

1 0. b3!

8

6

5

4 3

Here it is! To support the move b4 White brings out his bishop to a3 . This is a fresh idea in the g iven posit ion - the kn ight remains at f3 , in order in the event of . . . f7-f5 to proceed via g 5 to e6. It should be mentioned that the fi rst serious test of th is variation occurred in the World Cup in the game Korchno i - Kasparov (Barcelona 1 989), which conti nued 1 0 . tLle1 tLld7 1 1 . Ae3 f5 1 2 . f3 tLlc5! 1 3 . tLld3 b6 14 . b4! tLlxd3! 1 5 . 'Wxd3 axb4 1 6. tLlb5 �h8 1 7. 'Wb3 tLlg8 1 8. 'Wxb4, and here, as Kasparov shows, Black would have gained an advantage by 1 8 . . . fxe4! 1 9 . fxe4 !!xf1 + 20. !!xf1 Ah6! 21 . Af2 tLlf6 ! .

1 0 . . . �d7 11 . Aa3 Ah6

Of course, 1 1 . . .f5?! 1 2 . tLlg5! tLlf6 1 3 . c5! h6 14 . cxd6 cxd6 1 5 . tLle6 Axe6 1 6. dxe6 would have been too big a concession to White. Apart from the spike-pawn on e6, which cramps Black, his own pawn on d6 needs defending .

M . Carlsen - A. Morozevich

12. b4 axb4 13. Axb4 f5

a b c d e f g h

s .l ..t 'iV .1 • a

7 · · � � £ 7 6 .l .l ..t 6 5 B .l .l 5

4 B � B B 4

3 CD CD 3

2 � B B B 2 1 :. VJ!I :. �

a b c d e f g h

Here we can take stock of White's opening idea. Compared with the 9. b4 variation, he is as though a tempo down , since his pawn has gone to b4 in two moves, which, however, is not of great importance. The main ideas of this position are wel l known: White prepares c4-c5, and Black, whi le trying to prevent this, ties down the white pieces by the reinforcement of the f5-e4 pawn tension, not hurrying with the exchange. As for the plan of advancing the kingside pawns in connection with . . .f5-f4, in the g iven situation (with the bishop on h6) it is unfounded, since White gets in first with his attack on the queenside. In this respect it is useful to be fami l iar with van Wely's games with lvanchuk (Wijk aan Zee 1 999) and Piket (Monaco 1997).

14. ttld2

A typical manoeuvre. S ince the kn ight's route to g5 is b locked , it defends the e4-pawn and is ready from b3 to support the c4-c5 advance.

Also a typical manoeuvre in th is type of position . The king moves off the a2-g8 d iagonal in good t ime (which is usefu l in the

91

event of c4-c5) and vacates the g8-square for the knight, which at e7 is too passively placed. From here the knight can be played to f6, supporting the attack on the e4-pawn.

15. a5 Iaf7

For the moment there is noth ing new. White continues seizing space, while Black strengthens his queenside defences and is not in a hurry to remove the support of the f5-pawn.

1 6. ttlb5

Carlsen is true to h is aggressive style. He presses on the queenside, d isplaying h is read iness to sacrifice the e4-pawn and hoping to use h is pieces on the adjacent a2-g8 and a1 -h8 d iagonals.

1 6 . . . ttlf6

Black accepts the chal lenge. The posit ion demands concrete decis ions, and Morozevich th inks that the manoeuvre of h is other kn ight to f6 via g8 is too slow, since he has to reckon with 1 7. exf5 gxf5 1 8 . �c2 when he again faces a d i lemma - how to operate with h is knights.

17. c5 dxc5

After 17 . . . Axd2 1 8. �xd2 tt::lxe4 White had prepared 1 9. �a2! dxc5 20. d6, attacking rook and knight .

a b c d e f g h

7 6

5

4 4

3 3

2 CD � B B B 2 1 1:, 'i¥ :. �

a b c d e f g h


1 8 . .tc3

Outwardly a thematic move: by captur ing the eS-pawn, the bishop puts the b lack king u nder an 'X- ray' attack . But i n the g iven situation this is going too far. Carlsen commits a mistake, typical of youth: he fai ls to reckon with the opponent's counterplay. There was no point i n rejecti ng 1 8 . AxeS, s ince after 18 . . . Axd2 1 9. 'Mixd2 l£lxe4 20. 'Mib2! B lack has no way of opposing White's attack on the long d iagonal : 20 . . . l£lxcS 21 . 'MixeS+ �g8 22. l£lxc7. Now in the event of 22 . . . l£ld7 23. Wc3 !!a7 24. !!fd1 l£lf6 2S. d6 l£lc6 26. Ac4 White real ises the attacking conception begun with 1 6 . !£lbS - h is pieces dominate on the a2-g8 and a1 -h8 d iagonals . There only remains 22 . . . !!b8, but after 23. l£le6! (th is is stronger than 23. d6 l£le4) White forcib ly

An ant i-positional move - the doubled cpawns are no adornment to Black's position . The natural 1 9 . . . tDxc6! suggested itself: 20. l£lc4 !!d7! 21 . Wc2 tDxe4 22. tLlb6 !!b8 23. l£lxd7 Axd7, and after . . . tDd4 Black has more than sufficient compensation for the sacrificed exchange.

20. �a3

a b

8 !. 7

6

5 8 4

3 � 2 1 :.

c d e f g h

.i. 'ii' • � .�. • • � · .s.. • • • 8

� � � 8 8 8 � :. �

8

7

6

5 4

3 2

transposes i nto a favou rable endgame: a b c d e f g h

23 . . . WxdS 24. WxdS !£lxdS 2S. eLl xeS !!c7 26. !!fc1 l£lf4 27. Af1 . 20 . . . fxe4

1 8 . . . c6!

This way, without a moment's respite! In the event of 1 8 . . . Axd2 1 9 . Wxd2 tDxe4 20. AxeS+ �g8 21 . Wb2 White wou ld have achieved h is a im.

1 9. dxc6?!

Carlsen beats a retreat , rely ing on ly on the posit iona l p l uses assoc iated with the kn ight 's post on the c4 b lockad ing square . And wrong ly so ! By the p iece sacrifice 1 9 . AxeS cxbS 20. AxbS !!xaS 21 . !!xaS WxaS 22. tDc4 White could have continued the attack: 22 . . . Wd8 23. l£ld6 !!f8 24. Axf6+ !!xf6 2S. Wa1 Wf8 26. eS, regain ing the sacrificed material and retaining the in it iative (Sergey Shipov) .

19 . . . bxc6?!

The attempt to win this pawn with the knight after 20 . . . Axd2 would have been parried by the intermediate move 21 . tDc4! (after 21 . Axd2?! tDxe4 22. Ac3 Wc7 23. Ab2 tLldS 24. l£lc4 !!e7 2S. f4 Aa6 26. eLl xeS �g8 the black knights dominate in the centre of the board) 21 . . . tDxe4 22. AxeS+ �g8 23. f3 , and White regains the piece, retaining a l l the pluses of h is posit ion. As Viktor M ikhalevsky has shown , B lack would have had to go in for a forcing variation: 23 . . . WdS! 24. fxe4 Ae3+ 2S. tDxe3 WxeS 26. tDg4! fxg4 27. Wd8+ �g7 28. !!xf7+ �xf7 29. !!f1 + tDfS 30. Ac4+ �g7 31 . Wg8+ �h6 32. exfS gxfS 33. �h1 !?, where the doubled extra pawns are of no importance, but White's in it iative remains. After the inclusion of 33. Wf8+ �gS 34. �h1 Black can sacrif ice the exchange - 34 . . . Aa6!

92

M. Carlsen - A. Morozevich

3S. 'Wxa8 Axc4 36. !::!g1 AdS with the threat of forcing a draw by perpetual check after . . . Axg2+.

21. �ac4! �ed5 22 • .&.xeS .&.g7 23. �d6

An i l log ical , reckless move, depriving the position of its strateg ic c larity for which Carlsen was aiming. He should have considered 23 . 'Wa4 e3 (23 . . . 'Wd7 24. 'Wa3 'fie? 2S. Ad6 favours White) 24. fxe3 tDxe3 2S. !::!f2 , and after the inevitable exchange of a pair of knights White controls the most important points on the board .

23 . . J ae7 24.�2c4 .te6?

This routine central play al lows White to advance h is passed pawn . 24 . . . Aa6 ! , keeping the white pieces under pressure, was more logical .

25. a6! �b4 26. 'Wc1

26. 'Wb1 !? (with the threat of tDb7) came into consideration: 26 . . . 'Wg8 (both 26 . . . tDxa6 27. tDb6 and 26 . . . !::!xa6 27. !::!xa6 tDxa6 28. 'Wa1 are u nfavou rab le for B lack) 27. tDb6 !::!aa7 and now 28. 'Wc1 gains in strength . For example, if 28 . . . tDd3 there is 29. Axd3 exd3 30. 'WxcS.

26 . . . �d3?!

Understandably, Morozevich did not l ike 26 . . . !::!xa6 27. !::!xa6 tDxa6 28. Wa1 ! !::!a? 29. f3! e3 30. tDxe3, when B lack is unable to d isentangle h imself without losing materia l . But he could have taken the pawn with the knight: 26 . . . tDxa6 27. !::!d1 (after 27. Wf4 tDd5 the kn ights become coordinated) 27 . . . AdS 28. 'Wf4 'Wf8 , and the knight on a6 moves out of 'custody'.

27 • .&.xd3 exd3

a b c d e f 9 h

a .I 'iV • 8

7 .1. ..t. � 7

6 � � ti:J..t. '.& � 6

5 � dt r-+ 5

4 t2J 4

3 � 3

2 � � � 2

1 S � s � 1

a b c d e f 9 h

28. 'Wc3?!

A poor move, al lowing Black to provoke favourable s impl ificat ion whi le reta in ing his extra material . White could have fought for an advantage with the natural 28. !::!d1 .

93

28 . . . Axc4! 29. 'Wxc4?!

After this move the d2-pawn remains al ive and White has to fight for equal ity. More accurate was 29. tDxc4 tDe4 30. 'Wb2 �g8!? 31 . Axg7 !::!xg7 32. tDb6 !::!aa7 33. !::!fd1 with the idea after 33 . . . Wd4 34. Wxd4 cxd4 35. !::!xd3 c5 of forcing a draw: 36. tDc8 !::!a8 37. tDb6.

29 . . . 'Wg8! 30. 'Wxc5 d2

An impu lsive decision, provoked by a desire in t ime-trouble to fix White's attention on the far-advanced passed d-pawn. From the standpoint of fighting for an advantage, 30 . . . 'WdS! 31 . Wc3 (31 . Wxd5 tDxd5 32. f4 tDb4) 31 . . . tDh5 32. Axg7 + !::!xg7 33. 'Wb4 c5 34. We4 Wxe4 35. tDxe4 c4 was stronger.

31 . Jaad1 Jaxa6?!

One can understand Black's desire finally to capture the annoying passed pawn. Especially since in severe time-trouble it was hard to evaluate the consequences of the ex-


changing variation 31 . . . \Wd5! 32. \Wc3 1:!xe5! 33. \Wxe5 \Wxe5 34. tDf7+ �g8 35. tDxe5 tDe4, where for the moment the d2-pawn remains al ive, but as Shipov showed, Black is in no danger: 36. tDc4 Ac3 37. f3 Ad4+ 38. �h1 tDf2+ 39. !:!xf2 Axf2 40. !:!xd2 1:!xa6, and the draw is not far off.

32. §xd2

a b c d e

8

7

6 .!, 5

4

3

2

.!. j. tt:J WI j,

� d e

f g h

'i¥ . 8

j_ j. 7

J!& j. 6

5

4

3

� � � 2

� � f g h

With the win of the d2-pawn White has also gained a sol id positional advantage.

32 . . • �d5 33 • .txg7+ §xg7?!

The e-fi le should not have been conceded. 33 . . . �xg7 34. \Wd4+ tDf6 was stronger, since now 34. !:!e2! would have put Black in a critical posit ion: 34 . . . !:!e7 (Black would not hold out much longer after 34 . . . tDc7 35. !:!fe1 f!a8 36. \Wxc6) 35. f!xe7 tDxe7 36. tDe8! \Wxe8 37. \Wd4+ �g8 38. \Wc4+. But White missed this chance, and everything turned fu l l c ircle.

34. h3?! 'We6!

to create a counter-threat - 36 . . . f!ga7! . Now the piece sacrifice 37. f!db2?! \Wxd6 38. 1:!b8+ �g7 39.1:!1 b7+ proves ineffective in view of 39 . . . tDc7 (39 . . . tDe7?? 40. f!g8+! leads to mate in three moves), and after 40. !:!xa7 f!xa7 41 . f!g8+ �f6 White can count on ly on a d raw. M ost probably White would have had to restrict h imself to 37. '1Wd4+ �h7 with an unclear posit ion.

37. §xb6 'We1 + 38. �h2

a b c d e f g h

8 • 8

7 .!. 7

6 � · tt:J j. j. 6

5 I.& 5

4 � 4

3 � 3

2 � � � rJ;; 2

'iii a b c d e f g h

38 • • • �xb6?

Black overlooks a queen manoeuvre, winning a pawn, just when salvation was at hand: 38 . . . \Wxd2 39. !:!xc6 \!f/f4+ 40. \!f/xf4 tDxf4 and, in view of a l l the pawns being on one wing, he can hope for a draw.

39. 'Wf4! �d5?

Al lowing a mating attack. But also after 39 . . . \We7 40. Wxh6+ �g8 41 . Wf4 tDd5 42. Wg3 there was no chance of saving the game.

It is important not to concede the e-fi le to 40• §xdS! cxdS 41 • 'WfS+ �h? 42. �ea

the white rooks.

35. §b1 h6 36. 'Wc4 §b6? Black resigned .

By impu lsively a iming to s impl ify the posi- This defeat merely aroused Morozevich, t ion, Morozevich misses an opportun ity who won four games in a row. But then

94

A. Morozevich - M . Carlsen

again 'await ing' h im was Carlsen . On this occasion Magnus had to demonstrate h is defensive ski l l in a d ifficult posit ion.

Game 20 A. Morozevich - M. Carlsen

Biel 2006 Sicilian Defence [ 830]

1. e4 cS 2. �f3 �c6 3 . .tbS �f6

Carlsen is seeking fresh ideas in an old variation . 3 . . . g6 occurs far more often .

4 . .txc6 dxc6 S. d3 �d7 6 . .tf4!?

With the knight retreat Black prepared the fixing of the centre with . . . e7-e5, and White, while continuing his development, prevents this. The play is more committing after 6. e5 eab6. The source game Bologan - Lautier (Poikovsky 2003) continued 7. tLlbd2 Af5 8. 0-0 e6 9. b3 Ae7 1 0. Ab2 0-0 1 1 . l:!e1 a5 12 . a4 tLld5 1 3 . tZ:Ie4 VUe? with compl icated play. But in this variation too Carlsen had some experience: 7. 0-0 c4! 8. d4 Ag4 9. c3 e6 1 0. Ae3 Ae7 1 1 . tLlbd2 0-0 1 2. vt/e2 'Wd5 1 3 . b3 vt/a5 14 . bxc4 tZ:Ia4 1 5. tZ:Ib3 (1 5. tZ:Ie4!?) 15 . . . vt/a6 1 6. h3 Ah5 1 7. Ad2 eab6 1 8. g4 Ag6 1 9 . Ag5 Axg5 20. tZ:Ixg5 'Wxc4 21 . vt/xc4 tL:Ixc4, and Black achieved the better endgame (Gu l laksen - Carlsen , Tromso 2006) .

6 . . . g6 7. 'Wc1 .tg7?!

In his comments on the game Carlsen considers that it was more logical to prevent the exchange of h is bishop by 7 . . . h6, a iming to obtain a position s imi lar to the main variation 3 . . . g6 4. Axc6 dxc6.

8 . .th6 WaS+!

A move with deep impl ications. Magnus

has found a way to avoid the exchange of bishops. If 8 . . . 0-0 there cou ld have fol lowed 9. h4.

9. c3

If 9 . Ad2, then 9 . . . vt/b6 is possible.

9 . .• �eS! 1 0. �xeS .txeS 1 1 . �d2

a b c d e f 9 h

J. s

5

4 4

3 3

::t: 1 a b c d e f 9 h

1 1 . . . 'Wa6?!

A poor move, and the i n it ia l cause of B lack's problems. The d3-pawn is easily defended , whereas for a long t ime the queen proves to be out of p lay. The more naturai 1 1 . . . Ae6 1 2 . tZ:Ib3 suggests itself, and now 1 2 . . . vt/b5, provoking a weakening of the d4-square (1 2 . . . vt/b6 1 3 . Ae3 Axb3 14. axb3) 1 3 . c4 vt/b6 14. Ae3 Ad4 with rough ly equal chances (variation by Carlsen).

95

12. 'Wc2

Those fol lowing this game on the internet wondered what Morozevich was thinking about for so long, since 12. tZ:Ic4 is such a natural move. However, after 12 . . . Ac7 1 3 . vt/e3 (manoeuvres such as 1 3 . Ag7 l:!g8 14 . vt/h6 Ae6 1 5 . vt/xh7 0-0-0 can hardly be seriously considered) 13 . . . Ae6 14 . vt/xc5 0-0-0 White is forced to switch


to defence - 1 S. Ag7 ghe8 1 6 . Ad4 <!>b8, when h is pieces are too cramped . 1 7. 0-0 can be answered by 17 . . .fS!?, setting White a choice - 1 8. AeS gxd3 1 9. Axe?+ <!>xc7 20. 'WeS+ <!>d? or 1 8 . exfS AxfS , in both cases with an acceptable game for Black.

1 2 . . . .te6 1 3. f4

White drives back the bishop to c7, in order to obtain the poss ib i l ity of playing c3-c4, rel ieving h is concerns over the d3-pawn and sti l l further restricting the queen on a6. I n the event of 13 . �f3 Ac7 1 4. �gS Black need not fear the doubl ing of his apawns - 14 . . . 0-0-0 (weaker is 14 . . . Ad? 1 S . 'Wb3) 1 S . �xe6 fxe6, s ince it is not easy to defend the backward d3-pawn: after 1 6 . c4 AaS+ 1 7. <!>e2 B lack doubles rooks on the d-fi le .

13 . . . .tc7 14. 0-0 f6

Preparing the retreat of the bishop to f7 in the event of f4-fS .

1 � cM 0-0-0 1 6. a4!

The vice tightens. Black's posit ion is desperate, since White's on ly weakness - the d3-pawn - is easi ly defended , whereas it is easy for h im to plan his attack on the q ueenside: a4-aS , �d2-b3, f4-fS and Ah6-e3.

a b c d e f

8 <9 .1 .t. .t. .i. .t.J-7

6 'ifV ... .i. .t. 5 ... 4 B B B B 3 B 2 B � tiJ

g h

.I ...

.t. .!.

B B 1 1:, : �

a b c d e f g h

1 6 . • . E:d7

8

7 6

5 4

3

2

1

Carlsen recognises the danger of his posit ion, and, real is ing that 1 6 . . . AaS 1 7. �b3 Ab4 1 8 . aS is hopeless (the queen is sti l l out of play) , he decides on rad ical measures. He decides to carry out a combined attack on the aS- and d3-pawns, displaying his read iness to part with his trapped queen . Half-measures aimed at cutt ing off the bishop on h6 apparently d id not appeal to him - 1 6 . . . ghg8 1 7. aS gS 1 8. �b3 b6 1 9 . axb6 'Wxb6 20. fxgS fxgS 21 . 'Wc3, when after Ag7 Wh ite controls the posit ion's important h ighway and retains a stable advantage.

96

17. a5 E:hd8 1 8. E:a3

The attack on the d3-pawn has come to a standst i l l , whereas 1 9 . fS Af7 20. Ae3 is threatened , forcing B lack to weaken his k ing 's defences - . . . b7-b6. But Carlsen had al ready taken a decis ion.

18 . . . .txa5!

It is better to die standing , than to l ive on your knees!

a b c d e f g h

8 . .�. 8

7 j. j. !. .I. ... 7 6 'jV ... .i. .t. .t. .!. 6

5 .i_ ... 5 4 B B B 4

3 1:, B 3

2 [j, VJJ{ttJ B B 2

1 : � 1

a b c d e f g h

19. f5!

White is not in a hurry. The move �b3 wi l l not run away, and for the moment it is useful to include the bishop in the attack on the cS-pawn .

A. Morozevich - M. Carlsen

19 . . . Af7 20. fxg6

If 20. ti)b3 there wou ld have fol lowed 20 . . . �xd3 21 . ti)xc5 (in the event of 21 . �xa5 V!Vxc4 22. 'Wxc4 Axc4 23. ti)xc5 �d1 24. �xd1 l::lxd1 + 25. �f2 b6 the piece is regained) 21 . . . Ab6! . It was on this queen sacrifice that Carlen's defensive idea was based. After 22. �xa6 Axc5+ 23. �h1 bxa6 a position arises, s imi lar to that which occurred in the game.

20 . . . hxg6 21 . eS Ae6 22. exf6

It was poss ib le to w in the exchange -22. ti)e4 Af5 23. e6 �d4 24. Ae3, but Morozevich is hoping for more.

22 . . . exf6 23. �b3 �xd3 24. �xeS .tb6

A piece is lost after both 24 . . . 'Wb6 25. �xa5 V!Vxa5 26. ti)xe6, and 24 . . . 'Wxc4 25. 'Wxc4 Axc4 26. ti)xd3 Ab6+ 27. ti)f2 Axf1 28 . �xf1 .

2S. �xa6

For White to restrict h imself to the win of the exchange by 25. �xd3 Axc5+ 26. �h1 27. 'Wxd3 Axc4 28. 'Wh3+ f5 29. �e1 would be too great a concession to Black.

2S . . . AxeS+ 26. �h1 bxa6

a b c d e f g h

8 . ... 8

7 I. 6 I. 5

4

3

2

"r--->---7

5

4

3

£::, £::, 2

a � 1 a b c d e f g h

This is the position for which Carlsen was aiming i n h is attempt to save the game. Black has sufficient material compensation for the queen, and his control of the d-fi le al lows h im to hope for counterplay in view of White's inadequately defended back rank. Surprising ly, he ignores this factor.

27. Ag7?

Fate is obviously unkind to Morozevich . Now he loses the game. Of course, it is unjust to end up with a zero after such highqual ity play. But objectively, it has to be admitted : the situation has changed , and the coord ination of the black pieces can be d isrupted only by concrete play: 27. b4! Ab6 (27 . . . Axb4 28. 'Wa4) 28 . 'We2! Af7 (28 . . . Af5 29. g4!). Now Carlsen suggests the fol lowing variation 29. 'We4 �b7 30. b5 axb5 31 . cxb5 Ad5 32. 'We7+ (or 32. bxc6+ Axc6 33. 'Wxg6 �d1 ) 32 . . . �a8 33. bxc6 Axc6 34. 'Wxf6 �3d6 with counterplay for Black. But White can also consider 29. Ag7 �d2 (29 . . .f5? ! 30. c5 Ac7 is not good because of 31 . Ae5!) 30. 'Wf3 �8d6 31 . Af8 �e6 32. 'Wc3 �de2 33. Ac5 �b7 34. 'Wd3 Ac7 35. b5, when he nevertheless succeeds i n d isrupt ing the coord inat ion of the black pieces.

97

27 .•. Ag4!

Now Wh ite cannot ho ld h i s back rank, which gives Black a serious attack.

28. b4

Here this move is now too late.

28 . . . Ae3! 29. h3 �d1 30. �xd1 �xd1 + 31 . �h2 Af4+ 32. g3 �d2+ 33. Wxd2 J.xd2 34. hxg4

(see next diagram)


a b c d e f g h

8 8

7 ... 7

6 ... 6

5 5

4 £::, £::, £::, 4

3 £::, 3

2 j_ � 2

a b c d e f g h

34 ••• Axb4?!

For the moment Carlsen's endgame technique is sti l l shaky. The exchange of pawns a l lows White to pro long the resistance.

There was a quicker win by the thematic diverting-cum-interference move 34 . . . c5! 35. bxc5 Ag5 36. Af8 aS 37. c6 Ac1 , when the a-pawn cannot be stopped.

35. Axf6 aS 36. �g2 �d7 37. �f3 Ad6

These tricks are unnecessary. There was an e lementary w in by 37 . . . a4 38 . �e2 a3 39. �d3 �e6 40. Aa1 Ae7 41 . �c2 Af6.

38. �e4 Axg3 39. �d3 �e6 40. Ad4 a6 41 . �c2 a4 42. �b1 Ae5 43. Af2 �d6 44. �a2 Ac3 45. �a3 �e5 46. �xa4 �f4 47. Ab6 �xg4 48. Aa5 Axa5 49. �xa5 �f4 50. �b6 aS

White resigned .

The sternest test of Carlsen's potential came at the M ikhai l Tal Memorial Tournament, which took p lace in November 2006 in Moscow. This was the fi rst time he had played in a F IDE category 20 tournament with such a un iformly strong field . I ndeed , half of them were in the top ten in the world rat ing l ist , and although Carlsen h imself was just 2 points short of the 2700 mark, a lready in the 1 st round the difference was felt . Magnus was g iven a genu ine strategy lesson by Gelfand : 'Just l i ke Ch igorin' , Yury Razuvaev commented on the manoeuvres of h is knights, which outplayed the opponent's bishops. After being g iven a master class by one of the pupi ls of the Soviet Chess Schoo l , subsequently the youngster held on l i ke a seasoned competitor. For the moment it was hard to hope for anyth ing more, and had it not been for an embarrassment in h is game with Aronian (on th is occasion he lost a dead-drawn rook endgame), Magnus wou ld have saved face right to the end of the tournament. But as it was - a share of 8th-9th places with 3% points out of 9 . A serious lesson on the eve of his 1 6th b i rthday.

Contrary to expectat ions, Carlsen made a poor start to the year 2007. In h is fi rst A Tournament in Wijk aan Zee (FI DE category 1 9) he suffered a complete fai l u re. Magnus lost four games, without a s ing le win , and shared last p lace with Sh i rov. The game between them from the last round was the only one where Carlsen was genu inely c lose to a w in . It was something else that was important. Magnus managed to summon up his courage and demonstrate the potential of a fighter, ready for forthcoming batt les.

98

M. Carlsen - A. Sh i rov

8

7

M. Carlsen - A. Shirov

Wijk aan Zee 2007

a b c d e f 9 h

.i .i • .i. .i. .t

6 .\ I.& .\ 'iV .t 5 .\ 4 8 1.&\ tD 8 tD 3 8 M 8 2 1t 8

8

7

6

5

4

3 2

1t � M � 1 a b c d e f 9 h

26. �f5!

Carlsen apparently thought that winn ing the q ueen by 26. �fe6 .§.xe6 27 . .§.xf6 .§.xf6 was an insufficient reward for the parrying of the attack.

It is dangerous to take the knight - 26 . . . gxf5 27 . .§.g3! �h8 28. �h5 '1Wd4 29. �xg7! (th is is more effective than the capture with the rook) 29 . . . Wxd1 30 . .§.xd1 .§.xe4 (30 . . . f!.g8 31 . �xf5) 31 . Axe4 fxe4 32. �h5, winning the exchange with a conti nu ing attack: 33 . .§.xd6 is th reatened (variation by Carlsen).

27. �xg7 Wxg7 28. lag3

28. f!.bf3!? was stronger.

28 . . . laf8 29. e5!?

A pawn sacrifice on the altar of the attack! Bri l l iancy lovers will undoubtedly give Carlsen's enterprise its due. And yet , objectively speaking, this is not the most justified solution to the position, s ince against accurate defence White's plan does not

lead to the goal . Here too 29. f!.gf3 was more logical .

29 . . . �xe5 30 . .tb2 �bc4 31 . �xg6+

White has no other way of continu ing the attack. 31 . Ad4 al lows Black a respite to bring up h is reserves and parry the attack: 31 . . .f!.f6 32. �d5 .§.xf1 + 33. Wxf1 .§.f8, retain ing the extra pawn.

31 •. . hxg6 32. laxf8+ laxf8 33. Axg6

After 33 . .§.xg6 � x b2 34. Wh5+ �g8 35. f!.xg7+ � xg7 B lack's material compensation for the q ueen is too great.

I 99

a b c d e f 9 h

a b c d e f 9 h

33 . . . .tg4?

Carlsen comments that both he and Shirov considered th is to be the on ly possible defence, s ince a continuation of the forcing play by 33 . . . f!.f1 + 34. Wxf1 �xb2 35. Ae4! Wh6 36. AdS would have led to a loss for B lack, in view of the threat of f!.g8. But th is proved to be delus ion. After 33 . . . Ae8! White would have had nothing better than to force a draw by perpetual check: 34. Wh5+ �g8 35. Ah7+ �h8 36. Ag6+.

34. laxg4 Wt6 35. Ad4 Wf1 + 36. Wxf1 laxf1 + 37. �h2 �xa3 38. £d3 lad1 39. lag3 �ac4 40. h4


There is no point i n commenting on the practical ly forced play in the t ime scramble, except to suggest moving one of the bishops out of the pin - 40. Ac3!?.

40 ... �d2

Only a computer would be capable of finding a defence such as 40 . . . &Db6! .

The smoke of battle has cleared . With material equal , Wh ite has the two bishops, an important factor, g iven the open character of the posit ion. But subsequently he missed chances to convert h is advantage, and the game ended in a draw 20 moves later.

It is un l ikely that anyone was expecting Carlsen to succeed in the most prestigious tournament - Morel ia/Linares (FI DE category 20), so poor had been his fi rst contacts with the el ite grandmasters in Moscow and Wijk aan Zee. It was al l the more surprising to see h im lead ing together with Anand after the Mexican half of the tournament. This d id not surprise Magnus h imself, as he was the most 'motivated ' fighter in the initial part of the tournament. 3% points in the fi rst five games - perhaps on ly Kasparov had managed this! After an exchange of blows with Morozevich and Anand (Carlsen's 'evil gen ius') , he gained successive wins over lvanchuk and Topalov, who clearly underest imated the youngster. In the Span ish half of the tournament they played against h im with more respect, and only i n the last round was he unable to anything to counter the solid strategy of Leko, who was eager to win at least one game. Carlsen was caught by Morozevich, who played bri l l iantly in the second half of the event. Nevertheless, by scoring 'p lus one', he clung on to 2nd place, a point beh ind the winner, Anand . The main outcome of the tournament was that Magnus had learned how to win against el ite grandmasters!

He confi rmed this at the 'Melody Amber' Tournament, staged by Joop van Oosterom in Monte Carlo. This was a un ique contest with twelve of the strongest players in the world , personal ly selected by the patron , who played two games a day - one b l indfold and one rapid. Carlsen performed worth i ly in the rapid event, and with a score of 6% points he shared 2nd-5th places, beh ind only the world champion Vlad im i r Kramnik. He was less successfu l at b l indfold play, where he scored 4 points.

One would have thought that , having passed through the crucible of several prest ig ious tou rnaments , Car lsen had earned h imself a rest . But ahead lay the Cand idates tournament, crown ing his fi rst cycle i n the batt le for the world championsh ip . Before trave l l i ng to E l ista it was im portant to raise h is fight ing spi r it in h is homeland , and M agnus decided to p lay i n Gausda l , wh ich was c lose to his heart. In order to ensure the motivat ion of thei r ido l , the organisers of the 'Gausdal C lassic ' g randmaster tournament did everyth ing possible to ra ise its level to F IDE category 1 2. T he tournament was i n the nature of a warm-up : Magnus easily took the fi rst prize. Over the short d istance of 9 rounds he scored 7 po ints, fi n ishing 1 % ahead of h i s nearest r ival.

100


Game 2 ..... 1 _� M. Carlsen -A. Morozevich

Morel ia/Linares 2007 King's Indian Defence [ E66}

1. d4 tDf6 2. c4 g6 3. g3 .tg7 4 . .tg2 0-0 5. tbc3 d6 6. tDf3 c5

This move characterises the Yugoslav Variat ion, which was so named thanks to the analyses of Yugoslav p layers i n the 1950s. By attacking the centre from the wing, Black tries to expand the range of his bishop on g7, not fearing the exchange 7. dxc5 dxc5, since in the absence of any weaknesses White can hardly hope for an advantage in this symmetric posit ion. I n the event of 7. d5 with 7 . . . b5!? B lack can switch to a sharp variation of the Benko Gambit. Therefore after 6 . . . c5 White usually does not hurry to close the centre, but waits for B lack to br ing out h is kn ight with 7 . . . thc6, after which he plays 8. d5. In modern tournaments the development 6 . . . thc6 7. 0-0 a6 is preferred , when after 8. d 5 tDa5 9 . thd2 c 5 a s imi lar pawn structure arises. The attack on the wh ite centre with the central pawn 6 . . . thbd7 7. 0-0 e5 takes us back to the outstand ing 'fathers' of the King's Ind ian Defence, David Bronstein and Isaak Boleslavsky.

7. 0-0 tbc6 8. d5

White's ma in continuat ion , lead ing to a closed posit ion. But in the Yugoslav Variation B lack also has to reckon with the transition into the symmetric variation after the exchange 8. dxc5 dxc5, where White can try to exploit the advantage of the fi rst move. But here too B lack has counterarguments. For example, after 9 . Ae3 Ae6 10. �a4 he can avoid the symmetry -1 0 . . . thd4! , whi le if 9 . Af4 (with the idea of

I

thf3-e5) there can fol low 9 . . . thh5 10 . Ae3 thd4! .

8 . . . tba5 9. tbd2 e5

a b c d e f g h

a!. .i.� I. e 8

7 j.j. j..i_j. 7 6 j.

1.&1 ., 6

si.&J · � · 5

4 � 4

3 tiJ � 3

2 � � tiJ � �i, � 2 1 �1 i,� �� 1

a b c d e f g h

By closing the centre, B lack sign ifies that h is priorities l ie in the centre and on the kingside. The drawback to h is position is the knight on a5, which is not easy to bring into play.

The other plan with a counterattack in the centre and on the queenside is associated with the undermin ing of the pawn chain by . . . e7-e6 and . . . b7-b5 and play on the b-fi le. It is usual ly carried out via this move order: 9 . . . a6 10 . �c2 �b8 1 1 . b3 b5.

1 0. b3

More usual is 10 . a3 b6 (1 0 . . . �c7? fai ls to 1 1 . b4! cxb4 1 2. axb4 thxc4 13 . thb5 �b6 14. thxc4 �xb5 1 5 . thxd6 �xb4 1 6. Aa3 with an obvious advantage for White) 1 1 . b4 thb7 1 2. Ab2 thg4 (if 12 . . . thea White erects the same barricade) 13 . h3 thh6 1 4. e3! f5 1 5 . f4 with compl icated play.

As for the obvious move 1 0. e4, it has contrad ictory assessments. The outstand ing King's Ind ian expert Yefim Geller regu larly employed it, hoping to exploit the undermin ing move . . .f7-f5 to White's advantage, since on the decisive part of

101


the battlefield he has one piece more. For example, after 1 0 . . . CL!g4 in h is game with Vel im i rovic (Havana 1 971 ) he responded 1 1 . b3 f5 1 2. exf5 and after 12 . . . e4? 1 3. f6! CL!xf6 1 4.CL!dxe4! CL!xe4 1 5 . CL! xe4 Axa1 1 6 . Ag5 Af6 17. CL!xf6+ �xf6 1 8. 'Wa1 Black was unable to escape from the vice. But also after 1 2 . . . gxf5 1 3. h3 CL!h6 14 . Ab2 with the preparation of f2-f4 it is not easy for Black to create counterplay on the kingside. Nevertheless, the modern view on the problems of th is variation recommends that White should avoid al lowing Black h is main counterplay resource.

With 1 0 . b3 Wh ite fol lows a d ifferent conception: he pays no attention to the out-of-play kn ight at a5 and tries to exploit its absence for the creation of a numerical superiority on other parts of the board , avoid ing giving Black something to latch onto for the creation of counterplay.

1 0 . . . tbg4

The retreat 1 0 . . . CL!e8, preparing . . .f7-f5 , does not satisfy the non-routinely th inking Morozevich . However, now Black has to reckon with h is second kn ight also being driven to the edge of the board . Th is creates the constant problem of fi nding a suitable refuge at the rear for the kn ights, whose paths i ntersect at d8. In this respect it i s useful to see how th is position was handled by Kasparov, who in his game with Bel iavsky (Linares 1 994) preceded the kn ight move with 1 0 . . . Ad7. There fol lowed 1 1 . Ab2 CL!g4 1 2. h3 CL!h6 13. e3 (Bel iavsky chooses the plan with the blockade of the e5/f5 pawn pai r; 1 3. e4 f5 1 4. exf5 gxf5 1 5 . 'Wc2 fol lowed by f2-f4 is more often played) 13 . . .f5 14 . f4 a6 1 5. 'Wc2 b5 1 6 . CL!d1 (White takes h is kn ight via f2 to d3, a iming to provoke a crisis at e5; i n

the event of 1 6 . �ae1 Black advances his queenside pawns with gain of tempo: 1 6 . . . b 4 1 7. CL!d1 CL!b7 and then . . . a6-a5-a4) 1 6 . . . �b8 17. Ac3! (it is important to remove the bishop from the 'X-ray' of the rook) 17 . . . �e8 1 8. �b1 CL!f7 1 9. CL!f2 exf4 (Black has to keep the knight at a5 in view; for example, after the inclusion of the exchange on c4, 1 9 . . . bxc4 20. bxc4 �xb1 21 . �xb1 exf4 22. exf4, he cannot play 22 . . . �e3 because of 23. Axg7 r:!lxg7 24. tLlf1 followed by Wc3+) 20. exf4 �e3 21 . Axg7 r:!lxg7 22. �fe1 ! �xe1 + (if 22 . . . We7 there fol lows 23. CL!f3 with the threat of 24. �xe3 Wxe3 25 . �e1 ) 23. �xe1 Wf6! (it is important to occupy the long diagonal) 24. cxb5 axb5 25 . b4 cxb4 26. 'We? 'Wd8 27. 'Wxd8 �xd8 28. CL!d3 �c8 with an equal game.

1 1 . h3 tbh6 12 . tbde4!?

A com pletely new idea in th is posit ion. It is obvious that if 12 . . .f5 there fol lows 1 3. CL!g5 with the threat of an invasion at e6. I ncidental ly, about the effect of a novelty. It often operates l i ke a psychological bomb, and the reaction to it is burdened by this psychological factor: the opponent knows something that I don't know. And to go along with the opponent involves a r isk: at the board wi l l it be possible to find everyth ing which he prepared at home? Morozevich d id not take the r isk, but he went, as they say, from the frying pan into the fire.

1 2 ... f6?!

Black refrains from active measures, preparing the kn ight retreat to f7 and reserving the move . . . f7-f5 for better times. Even so, there were no grounds for rejecting the main l i ne of play. \

102

M. Carlsen - A. Morozevich ----------------------------

a b c d e f 9 h 8 .!. .i. 'iiV .!. • 8 7 . . -*-• 7 6 ' • ••�.&6 5 1.& · � · 4 � ttJ 3 � tt:J 2 � 1.:

a b c d e f 9 h

13. �xd6!?

5

4

2

This positional sacrifice of a piece for two pawns (the one on c5 cannot be held) sharply changes the character of the play. And although it is to a certain extent i ntui tive, with his poorly coord inated pieces it is not easy for Black to restrain the d5-pawn. Taking account of the surprise effect, he is forced to solve completely new problems.

13 . . . Wxd6 14. �e4 Wd8

After 1 4 . . . \Wb6 1 5 . Ae3 the pawn cannot be saved .

15. �xc5 f5

The psychological effect of the piece sacrifice has worked . It is not in Morozevich's style to try and 'd ig in'. By return ing the material, he coord inates his pieces. However, with his extra pawn Magnus also feels comfortable. But d id Black have anyth ing better? He would have been unable to solve his problems after 1 5 . . . Wc7 1 6 . Aa3 !;!d8 17. tbd3 f5 1 8. Wc2. For example, it is r isky to play 18 . . . e4 1 9 . tbf4 Axa1 ?! 20. l;!xa1 , when he m ay be unable to surv ive the 'draught' along the long diagonal. He would have lost material after 1 5 . . . tbf7? 1 6 . tbe6 Axe6 17. dxe6 tbd6 1 8. e7 Wxe7 1 9. Wd5+.

But a conund rum was posed by 1 5 . . . tbf5!?, which would have set White d ifficult problems. For example: 1 6 . Aa3 !;!e8!? (after 1 6 . .. Wc7 17. tbe4 b6 18. d6 Wf7 1 9. tbxf6+ Wxf6 20 . Axa8 Black achieves less) 1 7. tbe4!? (1 7. g4 tbh4 1 8. d6 tbxg2 1 9. �xg2 Af8 with the threat of . . . Wxd6 and . . . b7-b6) 17 . . . b6 1 8. g4 tbh4 1 9. tbd6 tbxg2 20. tbxe8 tbf4 21 . tbxg7 �xg7 with unclear play.

16. d6 e4 1 7. d7

After the i nc lus ion of the exchange 1 7. Axh6 Axh6 the advance 1 8. d7 !;!f7 19. dxc8W Wxc8 would have al lowed Black counterplay, based on the advantageous opposite-colour bishops.

17 . . . �f7 18. �b1 We7 1 9. dxc8W �axeS 20. �a4 �fd8 21 . We1 �c6

8 7 •• 6 1.& 5

4 ttJ � 3 � 2 �

II � a b c d e f 9 h

This was the position for which Morozevich was aiming, when he went in for the forcing play beginn ing with 1 5 . . . f5 . For the sacri ficed pawn Black has compensation , in the form of his more active pieces.

22. �c3 �d4 23. Ab2

If 23. tbd5 Black could have sacrificed the exchange: 23 . . . l;!xd5!? 24. cxd5 !;!c2, obtain i ng defi n ite compensation . But after

103


25. �h1 tbxe2 26. Ad2 tild4 27. �c1 �xa2 27. WaS 28. �c8+ Af8 29. Ab4 tild6 30. 'Mr'd1 tD4d5 31 . �c2 �xc2 32. 'Mfxc2 White's chances

It should not be forgotten that this game

are sti l l better.

23 . . . bS 24. tildS

was played in the fi rst round of the most prestigious tournament of the year, and after his fai lure in Wijk aan Zee Carlsen

24. e3 suggests itself, after wh ich the rna- was sub-consciously a im ing for clarity.

noeuvre 24 . . . tbc2 25. 'Mfe2 Axc3 26. Axc3 Possibly, therefore, he prefers to transpose

tDa3 27. �bd1 looks dubious i n view of into a technical endgame, rather than play a

the weakness of the long d ark-square d iagonal , whi le 24 . . . tilf3+ 25 . Axf3 exf3 26. tilxb5 would have led to the win of a

midd legame with a couple of extra pawns: 27. cxb5 'Mr'c5 28. b4 'Mr'd6 29. a4, wh ich involves some risk.

second pawn , although also with an ele- 27 . . . bxc4 28. tile3! Wc7 29. Wxc7 Axc7 ment of r isk - the wh ite king's defences 30. tilxc4 tileS are weakened .

24 . . . 'Wd6

24 . . . 'Mr'c5!? was more vigorous, when i n the event of 25. tDf4 'Mr'd6 26. cxb5 �c2 27. Axd4 Axd4 28. �d1 e3 29. fxe3 Axe3+ 30. �h2 'Mr'e5 Black's active pieces would have given him defin ite compensation for the sacrificed materia l .

2S. Axd4 Axd4 26. !ad1 AeS?

Black m isses a chance opportunity to exchange a pai r of pawns: 26 . . . bxc4!? 27. �xd4 cxb3 28. axb3 �c5 29. f3 �xd5 30. �xd5 'Mr'xd5 31 . fxe4 fxe4 32. 'Wc3, when White's achievements are less than in the game.

8

6

5

4

a b c d e

a b c d e f 9 h

8

6

5

4

As a result of the exchanging operation White has obtained an endgame with an extra pawn and a stable pawn structure, where Black's practical saving chances are associated with the opposite-colour bishops. With every exchange these chances are improved .

31 . E:i:xd8+ !axd8

a b c d e f 8 .!. 7 ... .t.. 6

5

4 tlJ 3 £::, 2 £::,

a b c d e f 9 h

32. E:i:c1!

8

6

5

4

The active kn ight has to be exchanged , after which White wi l l ' revive' h is bishop, regroup his forces, and at a conven ient moment undermine Black's pawn chain with g3-g4.

1 04


32 .•• !Llxc4 33. §xc4 §d1 + 34. Af1 Ad6 43 ••. mf6 35. e3 a5! 43 . . . f!xd3? fai ls to 44. f!xe4+ and 45. f!xf4.

It is useful to halt the pawns at the d istant 44. Axe4 §d2! 45. §xd2 Axd2 46. mg3

approaches to the queening squares. If White were able to advance f2-f4 with his

36. mg2

The prophylactic 36. f!c2 was more accurate, preventing the possib le 36 . . . f!d2.

36 .•. mf7 37. §c2 me7 38. Ae2 §d5

After 38 . . . f!a1 White would probably have carried out the same plan as in the game.

39. Ac4 §d1 40. g4

a b c d e f 9 h 8 8

40 . .• f4?

A committing decision . Any neutral move, such as 40 . . . �f6, would have retained practical d rawing chances. Now, however, White wins the e4-pawn . True, it is with the help of a tactical trick, which was easy to overlook when making the last move before the time control .

41. exf4 Axf4 42. §e2 §d4 43. Ad3!

Now Black has to play on two pawns down. The only consolation is the possib i l ity of exchanging rooks, transposing into a pure ending with opposite-colour bishops. Retain ing the rooks - 43 . . . f!xd3 44. f!xe4+ leads to a hopeless rook end ing.

pawn on h3, the position would be won for h im . But he is not able to do this.

46 . . . Ae1 47. mt3 Ab4 48. h4 h6 49. me2 Ad6

The kingside should have been blocked -49 . . . g5 50. h5, when it would not be easy for White to find a winn ing plan.

so. md3

a b c d e f 9 h 8 8

7 7

6 ..t ....... 6

5

4 � [j,[j, 4

3 [j, � 3

2 [j, [j, 2

a b c d e f 9 h

50 • .. Ac5

Black misses the last opportunity to play 50 . . . g5, when after 51 . h5 �e5 52. f3 Ab4 it would not be easy for White to convert h is material advantage. H is chances are associated with the creation of an outside passed pawn: 53. �c4 Aa3 54. �b5 Ab4 55. �a4 Ad2 56. a3 �d6 57. �b5 Ae1 58. b4 axb4 59. axb4 Ad2 60. �c4.

Analysis diagram

1 05

Chapter 2 · The Way to the Top �---------------------

The critical position . White would l i ke to d ivert the b lack pieces by the advance of the b-pawn and then create a second passed pawn on the h-fi le with the help of the f2-f4 breakthrough , which works, for example, after 60 . . . Ae1 ? - 61 . f4! gxf4 62. g5 . I n the event of 60 . . . Ac1 White wins using the typical idea of restrict ing the opponent's king- 61 . AdS! , enabl ing h is own king to go to e4 and then on to the h6-pawn - 61 . . . Af4 (if 61 . . . Ab2 the pawn advances - 62. b5, wh ile if 61 . . . Ae3 62. �d3 the k ing breaks through to e4) 62. �d4 Ad2 63. b5 Aa5 64. �e4 Ab6 65. Ac4 and �e4-f5 (M. Marin).

The on ly move lead ing to a d raw is 60 . . . Ae3! . I t i s i m portant to keep the b6-square under contro l , without l ift ing the contro l of f4 , and the 'kn ight opposit ion ' of the k i ngs with the support of the b ishop enab les the posit ion to be held . I f 61 . AdS or 61 . Aa8 there fo l lows 61 . . .�e5 , and noth ing i s given by 61 . b5 or 61 . �d3 because of 61 . . . Ab6. The march of the k ing to a6 - 61 . �b5 is restrained by 61 . . . Ad2. I nc idental ly, here too the opposit ion can be ma in tai ned - 61 . . .�c7 62 . �a6 �b8, s i nce after the advance of the pawn to b6 the f3-f4 breakth rough does not ach ieve its aim: the passed h -pawn is held by the b ishop, and if the wh ite k i ng goes to its aid , Black wins the b6-pawn , by d ivert ing the wh ite bishop with his passed pawns.

51 . f4 h5 52. g5+ 'it>g7 53. 'it>c4

(see next diagram)

53 . . . Ad6?

I t is i l logical to give the opponent connected passed pawns. 53 . . . Af2 54 . �b5 Ae1 55. a3 �f7 56. Ad3 �g7 57. Ae2 �f8

a b c d e f 9 h 8 8

7

6

5 £ ..t. 4 � 3 [j, 2 [j,

a b c d e f 9 h

3

2

58. f5 gxf5 59. Axh5 �e7 was stronger, retain ing chances of saving the game.

54. 'it>b5 Axf4 55. 'it>xa5 Ag3 56. 'it>bS Axh4 57. a4 Axg5

Black has restored material equal ity, but the pawn race is obviously won for White.

a b c d e f 9 h 8 8 7 • 7

6 £ 6

5 � ..t. £ 5 4 /j, 4

3 [j, 3

2 2

a b c d e f 9 h

58. aS 'it>f6 59. a6 Ae3 60. 'it>c6 g5 61 . b4 'it>es 62. b5 'it>xe4 63. b6 g4 64. a7 g3 65. a8'W 'it>f3 66. b7 Af4 67. Wf8 'it>e4 68. 'We8+

Black resigned .

no6

M. Carlsen - V. lvanchuk tt:J --------------------�

M. Carlsen - V. Topalov Morel ia/Linares 2007

a b c d e f 9 h 8 • 8

7 'if "' 7 6 I. I. VJfi 6

51.1.8 I. QJ 5 4 4

3 8 8 3

2 8 � 2

a b c d e f 9 h

Here someth ing i nexp l icable occurred with Topalov. He resigned the game, not finding any way to save h is kn ight, and he merely shrugged h is shoulders in perplexity when Magnus showed h im how to do this: 64 . . . Vf!d5+ 65. f3 e5. White has noth ing more than perpetual check by 66. Vf!h7+ �f8 67. Vf!h8+ Vf!g8 68 . .'Dh7+ <;!;>f7 69 . .'Dg5+.

Game 22

M. Carlsen - V. lvanchuk Morel ia/Linares 2007

GrOnfeld Defence [ 087]

1. d4 CLlf6 2. c4 g6 3. CL!c3 d5 4. cxd5

.'Da5. Nowadays plans are also practised where Black does not hurry to relieve the pawn tension. lvanchuk fol lows the tradi tional path, retain ing the option after the bishop retreat of revert ing to fami liar l i nes by exchanging pawns, but the course of events in the game, where the kn ight at a5 played the role of a spectator, may subsequently have led h im to another, possibly more promis ing conti nuation: 10 . . . Vf!c7 1 1 . l::!c1 l::!d8. The game Cheparinov- lvanchuk (Cap d'Agde rapid 2008), continued 1 2. Af4 Ae5!? 1 3. Axe5 .'Dxe5 14 . Ab3 .'Dg4 1 5 . .'Dg3 Vf!f4 1 6. Vf!f3 Vf!xf3 1 7. gxf3 LDf6 1 8. l::!fd1 �f8 1 9 . .'De2 b6 20 . e5 .'Dh5 21 . dxc5 Aa6 22 . .'Dg3 "Df4 23. cxb6 axb6 with excel lent compensation for the pawn , typical of Gri.infeld-type positions.

1 1 . !J.d3

a b c d e 8 .!. .i. � 7 1.,_,..:1.:--:.,--_ 6

5"' 4

3

2 8 1:

f 9 h

a b c d e f 9 h

5 4

3

tDxd5 5. e4 CL!xc3 6. bxc3 IJ.g7 7. /J.c4 11 . • . b6

c5 8. CL!e2 CL!c6 9. !J.e3 0-0 1 0. 0-0 This variation has become popular in recent

This is the so-cal led main variation of the years. Of course, Black could also have re

Gri.infeld Defence. It was here that the fi rst turned to the main l ine by playing 1 1 . . . cxd4.

attempts were made to refute what has 12 . lac1 turned out to be the 'evergreen' idea of If White captures the pawn - 1 2. dxc5?! the Austrian grandmaster Ernst Gri.infeld bxc5 13. Axc5, then after 13 . . . Vf!c7 14. Ad4 (3 . . . d5!), fi rst carried out in 1 922. e5 1 5 . Ae3 Ae6 1 6 . Vf!c2 .'Dc4 Black has

10 • .• CL!a5 ful l compensation .

Over previous decades Black's main con- 12 • . • cxd4 tinuation was 10 . . . cxd4 1 1 . cxd4 Ag4 12. f3 With the rook on c1 , Carlsen considers

107


the open ing of the c-fi le to favour White. I ndeed , to neutral ise the control of the cfi le Black has to go in for the exchange of rooks, which reduces the possib i l ity of creat ing piece play typical of the G ri.infeld Defence. 1 2 . . .'\Wc? looks to be in the spi r it of the posit ion , although it is not easy to shake the pawn centre. Black's problems are i l lustrated by the game Jakovenko-Areshchenko (World Cup, Khanty-Mansiysk 2009): 1 3. 'Wd2 Ab7 14 . Ah6 fiad8 1S . Axg7 �xg7 1 6 . f4 fS?! 1 7. exfS gxfS 1 8. 'We3 'Wd6 1 9. ficd1 c4 20. Ac2 AdS 21 . 'WeS+ WxeS 22. fxeS e6 23. �f4 �f7 24. fide1 �e7 2S. fie3 bS 26. fib1 a6 27. fih3 fit? 28. fih6 �c6 29. Ad1 ! 1 -0.

After 1 3. 'Wd2 Black can consider 1 3 . . . eS, when i n the event of 14 . dxeS AxeS 1S . f4 Ag7 1 6 . eS fid8 or the immed iate 1 4 .. . fid8 (intend ing 1S . AgS Aa6!) he obtains excellent play. However, 1 4 . f4!? is more critical .

13. cxd4 e6

If 1 3 . . . Ab7 there would have fol lowed 1 4. dS! , restricting the bishop, and Black is obl iged to prevent this move. However, this leads to a weakening of the dark squares on the kingside, which creates the grounds for an attack.

14. 'Wd2 .tb7

a b c d e 8 .!. 'if 7 .l .i. 6 .l 5 � 4

3

2 12 a b c d e f g h

8

6

5 4

3

15. h4

A strong move, introduced by the German grandmaster Rainer Knaak in a game with Malich (Hal le 1 976). Wh ite begins a flank attack without r isking the loss of a pawn, since in the event of 1 S . . . Wxh4? 1 6 . Ag5 'WhS (th ings are not changed by 1 6 . . .'\Wg4 17. f3 'WhS 1 8. �g3 Axd4+ 1 9. fif2) 17. �g3 'Wg4 1 8. Ae2 the queen is lost .

15 . . . 'We7?!

Surprisingly, lvanchuk fol lows Mal ich, who already then had become convinced about the drawbacks to this move and had recommended 1S . . . 'Wd7, which Black adopted in later games with his variation . True, without particular success. For example, the game Knaak- Kir. Georgiev (East Germany 1 987) continued 1 6. Ah6 fiac8 17. hS! fixc1 1 8 . .§xc1 fic8 1 9. Axg7 .§xc1 + 20. Wxc1 �xg7 21 . h6+! with advantage to White.

The move in the game is obviously not in the spi rit of the position, s ince it assists White's plan of exploiting the weakness of the dark squares. Carlsen considers the best defence to be 1S . . . �c6, after which he was intending to play 1 6 . eS. But a rad ical solution in the spi rit of the Sici l ian Dragon also comes into consideration: 1 S . . . hS!?, n ipping in the bud the threat of the h-pawn's advance. For example, the game Tim manBaramidze (Bundesl iga 2007) continued 1 6. AgS 'Wd7 1 7. Ah6 fifc8 1 8. Axg7 �xg7 1 9. WgS 'Wd8 20. 'Wg3 fixc1 21 . fixc1 fic8 22. fie1 �c6 23. dS �b4 24. Ab1 exd5 2S. a3 �c2 26. fid1 , and here 26 . . . We8! would have led to equal play.

16. h5!

This is stronger than 1 6 . AgS f6 1 7. Af4, as played in the Knaak- Mal ich game, where

1 08

M. Carlsen - V. lvanchuk

White did not ach ieve anything sign ificant.

16 . . . l:UcS 1 7. e5!

a b c a .I .I 7 .t j_ 6 .t 5 1.1\ 4

_..___ 3

2 � 1 .:

d e f 9 h •

'W.t.i. .t .t .t � �

� 1-----------� � WltiJ � �

.:� a b c d e f 9 h

8

7

6

5 4

3

2

1

The concrete solving of problems by earlsen , who immediately 'takes the bul l by the horns', is impressive. Wh ite prepares the ground for the exchange of the bishop on g7, regard less of the weakening of the long light-square d iagonal , which Black is not able to explo it . Previously 1 7. Ag5 �a3 18. e5 was preferred, and, to judge by stories about Magnus's outstand ing memory, this idea was wel l known to h im .

1 7 . . . 1axc1 ?

This was clearly not lvanchuk's day. The exchange of al l the rooks deprives Black of his last hopes of creating counterplay. As Carlsen comments, fi rst and foremost the kn ight should have been brought back into play - 1 7 . . . tDc6. The prophylactic 17 . . . �d7, preparing to besiege the d4-pawn after 18 . . . tDc6, was also in the spi rit of the position.

1S. laxc1 lacS

If 18 . . . �d7 Wh ite attacks: 1 9 . Ag5 l:::!.c8 20. l:::!.xc8+ �xc8 21 . Af6 tDc6 22 . �g5! (22 . Axg7 <;!;>xg7 23. Ae4 tDe7 al lows Black to ho ld the posit ion) with the th reat of

tDe2-f4. For example: 22 . . . �f8 (22 . . . �e8 23. hxg6 hxg6 24. tDf4 tDxd4 25. tDh5! or 22 . . . Aa6 23. Axa6 �xa6 24. tDf4) 23. hxg6 h xg6 (23 . . . fxg6 24 . tDf4) 24. tDf4 Ah6 25 . �h4 tDxd4 26 . tDxg6 fxg6 27. �xd4 etc.

1 9. !axeS+ AxeS 20. Ag5 Y!/c7

Black misses the last chance for a successful defence: 20 . . . �d7, as suggested by lvanchuk in h is commentary on the game. 'This is more resi l ient', agrees Carlsen, 'But even so after 21 . Af6 in any case it is very hard to bel ieve that B lack is able to survive.' After the best reply 21 . . . tDc6 Black's position is sti l l dangerous.

Analysis diagram

Wh ite can cont i nue the attack as i n the game: 22 . �g5 tDxd4 23 . Axg7 <;!;>xg7! (weaker is 23 . . . tDxe2+ 24. Axe2 <;!;>xg7 25 . h6+! <;!;>fa 26 . �f6 with the th reat after Ae2-d3xg6 of queen ing the h -pawn , wh i l e i n the event of 26 . . . �d2 27. Af1 Ab7 28. �h8+ <;!;>e7 29. �xh7 Wh ite p icks up an i m portant pawn and succeeds in return i n g w i th h i s queen - 29 . . . A xg2 30. �g7 �d1 31 . �f6+ <;!;>fa 32. <;!;>xg2 with an extra p iece) 24. �f6+ <;!;>f8 25. tDf4! (25 . h 6 is just i f ied o n l y i n t he event of 25 . . . tDxe2+ 26. Axe2 , but by p lay-ing 25 . . . tDf5! B lack ho lds the posit ion: 26 . �h8+ <;!;>e7 27. tDf4 tDxh6 28. �xh7 g5) 25 . . . gxh5 26 . Axh7 �c7 27. tDxh5 , and the attack cont i nues .

�09


Another way of attacking is 22 . 'Wf4 with the idea of 23. Axg7 �xg7 24. 'Wf6+ �f8 25. Axg6! hxg6 26. h6 and the pawn is i rresist ib le. B lack loses after 22 . . . Axf6 23 . gxf6 'Wd8 (23 . . . We8 24. Ab5 Ad7 25. Axc6 Axc6 26. We? leads to the loss of a pawn) 24. hxg6 fxg6 (24 . . . hxg6 25. Wg5 �f8 26. Axg6) 25. f7+! �g7 26. Ab5 Ad7 27. Axc6 Axc6 28. f8W+, winning the bishop. After the bishop retreat 22 . . . Af8 again 23. Wg5 is possible. Let us consider the main variations:

White has carried out h is p lan, and now it only remains to get to the king.

21 . . . �c6

A belated return of the kn ight. But Black has no defence against the threat of Wd2-g5 with a 'break- in ' at g6. For example: 2 1 . . . Af8 22 . Wg5 tDc6 23. h xg6 hxg6 24. Axg6 fxg6 25. Wxg6+ Ag7 26. Axg7 Wxg7 27. We8+, or 21 . . . Axf6 22. exf6 Wd8 23. Wg5 tDc6 24. hxg6 fxg6 25. Axg6! .

22. Wg5

a) 23. · .tDxd4? 24. tDxd4 Wxd4 25. hxg6 White is inexorable in the conduct of his fxg6 26. Axg6 and White wins; p lan. He is threaten ing to capture on g7

b) 23 . . . Ab7?! 24. hxg6 fxg6 25. d5! exd5 followed by h6+ and Wf6 , and if 22 . . . Af8

(otherwise 26 . d 6) 26 . A xg6 h xg6 the bishop sacrifice is decisive.

27. Wxg6+ Ag7 28. e6 and wins;

c) 23 . . . tDe7 24. hxg6 fxg6 25. tDf4 Ab7 26. Wg4 AdS 27. Axe? 'Wxe7 (27 . . . Axe? 28. tDxg6!) 28. tDxd5 exd5 29. Wc8 with advantage to White - he is threatening 30. Wc6;

d) 23 . . . tDb4 (the most resi l ient) 24. hxg6 fxg6 25. Axg6! hxg6 26. Wxg6+ Ag7 27. tDf4 Wf7 28. Wg5 �h7 29. Wh4+ �g8 30. Axg7, and by coord inating his queen and kn ight (as Rybka ind icates), Wh ite combines an attack on the k ing with the threat of winn ing one of the p ieces:

d1 ) 30 . . . �xg7 31 . tDh5+ �f8 32. Wd8+ We8 33 . Wf6+ Wf7 34. Wh8+ �e7 35. tDf6 Wf8 36. Wh4;

d2) 30 . . . Wxg7 31 . tDh5 Wh6 32. tDf6+ �g7 33 . Wg4+ Wg6 34 . tDe8+ � h7 35 . Wh3+ W h 6 36 . tDf6+ �g6 37. Wg4+! Wg5 38. We4+ Wf5 39. Wh4 �g7 40. tDe8+ �g6 41 . Wh8.

21 . Af6!

22 . . . h6

A forced weaken ing, s ince Wh ite was threatening 23. Axg7 �xg7 24. Wf6+ �f8 25. h6 when the pawn cannot be stopped .

23. Wc1!

The p in on the kn ight emphasises the hopelessness of Black's posit ion.

a b c d e f g h 8 .t • 8

7 .l 'iV .t.t 7

6 ·� .lj, .l .l 6

5 B B 5

4 • B 4

3 j, 3

2 B CiJBB 2 VJg �

a b c d e f g h

23 • . . g5

If 23 . . . Wd7 White wins by 24. hxg6 fxg6 25. tDf4 tDxd4 26. tDxg6. But now to the

1 1 0

M. Carlsen - V. lvanchuk tD

vertical p in is added a diagonal one, which a b c d e f 9 h leads to the loss of a piece. 8 8

24. Ab5 Ad7 25. d5! exd5 26. �d4 7

Axf6 27. exf6 'Wd6 28. Axc6 'Wxf6 6 29. Axd7 'Wxd4 30. g3 'Wc5 31 . 'Wxc5 5 bxc5 32. Ac6 d4 33. Ab5 �f8 34. f4 4 4 gxf4 35. gxf4 3 3 Black resigned . 2

a b c d e f 9 h

The Candidates tournament in the new cyc le of the individual wor ld cham pionship was a notable event in Carlsen's chess career. The very appearance of a 1 6-year-o ld candidate for the world crown was an extraord inary phenomenon. The on ly p layer to have previously achieved this was Bobby Fischer, among whose opponents were the stars of the post-war wave of Soviet grandmasters. P laying in the Candidates Tournament in 1 959 were such titans of the Soviet Chess School as Paul Keres, Vasily Smyslov, Mikhail Tal and Tigran Petrosian , who are now legends of world chess. The present-day Candidates have their stars , and although the l ist of real contenders for the chess crown is shorter, th is does not reduce the i ntensity of the fight at the top level .

At the Candidates Tournament i n El ista, he ld on the knock-out system , Carlsen was pai red with Levon Aronian , the brightest young representative in the chess el ite. Forecasts regard ing the outcome of the match were one-sided. The c lear favourite was the Armenian grandmaster, with whose strength and experience one could hard ly compare the potential of the uncommonly talented but not yet batt le-hardened youngster. Here it was forgotten that , with prod igies, t ime moves on a different scale, and that which takes others years, they resolve within months. And the Carlsen who went into batt le in Elista was a ' renovated' vers ion , one who had marked ly gained in strength during his contact with the elite. True, in h is opening preparation there were sti l l gaps , and the first game of the match appeared to confirm the unfavourable forecasts. Carlsen , who was not yet ready for opening d isputes, went in for an unpretentious anti - Marshal l variat ion in the Ruy Lopez and contrived to lose an absolutely equal position . In the 2nd game the self-confident Aronian was not eager to build on his success, and in the th i rd game, like a sphinx, Magnus rose from the ashes and level led the scores.

1 11


Game 23 M. Carlsen - L. Aronian

Candidates Match, 3rd Game El ista 2007

English Opening [ A30]

1 . �f3 �f6 2. c4 b6 3. g3 c5 4 • .ag2 .ab7 5. 0-0 e6 6. �c3 .ae1 7. lae1 d5

The most popular move, lead i ng to the creation of a mobile pawn centre for White. Lovers of the 'hedgehog' structure prefer 7 . . . d6 8. e4 a6 9. d4 cxd4 10 . �xd4 V!fc7.

8. cxd5 �xd5 9. d4

This move is usually made after the preparatory exchange 9 . �xd5 V!!xd5. The following also occurs: 9. e4 �b4 (9 . . . �xc3 1 0 . bxc3 0-0 1 1 . d4 transposes) 1 0 . d4 cxd4 1 1 . �xd4 �8c6 1 2 . �xc6 V!!xd1

�c6 1 3 . Ab2 gives preference to White, B lack's defensive resources should also not be underest imated . The attem pt to prevent the creation of the pawn centre fai ls in this objective.

1 1 . �e5! .axg2 12. mxg2 0-0 13. e4

a b c d e f 9 h 8 !.'.& 'if .�. . 8 7 .l .S..l .l 7 6 .l .l 6 5 .l ttJ 5 4 8 8 4 3 8 8 3 2 8 8r!? 8 2 1 l,! � �:!

a b c d e f 9 h

1 3 . l::!xd1 Axc6. I n both cases this leads 1 3 . . . 'Wc8

to an early exchange of queens.

a b c d e f 9 h 8 J. I,& 'if. J. 8 7 .l .a .a .l .l .l 7 6 .l .l 6 5 .l '.& 5 4 8 4 3 ttJ tt:J8 3 2 /j,/j, 8 8 �8 2 1 :! � � :! rJ;;

a b c d e f 9 h

9 . . . �xc3

The p reparatory exchange 9 . . . cxd4 1 0. V!!xd4 0-0 comes into considerat ion, whi le if 10. �xd5 there is the good reply 10 . . . V!!xd5.

1 0. bxc3 .Q.e4

Although the experience of the main continuation 10 . . . 0-0 1 1 . e4 cxd4 12. cxd4

A new idea for solv ing B lack's opening problems, compared with 13 . . . Af6 14. �g4 cxd4, as was played in the game Yermol insky-Atal ik (Berkeley 2005). There fol lowed 1 5. Aa3 Ae7 1 6. Axe? V!!xe7 1 7. cxd4 l::!d8! 1 8. d5 exd5 1 9. exd5 V!!d6, and here White could have retained the better chances by 20. l::!c1 ! �a6 21 . V!!f3 �c5 22. l::!cd1 . Black can also consider 14 . . . �c6!? 1 5 . Ae3 cxd4 1 6 . cxd4 V!fd7 with an equal game.

14. 'Wg4

The alternative is 1 4. d5!? Af6 1 5. Af4 with the better chances for White.

14 . . . .at6 15. �f3

With the threat of e4-e5 and Ah6.

15 . . . mha 16. h4!

M agnus a lways has such an attacking move i n mind, especia l ly s ince 16 . . . h6 does noth ing to prevent 1 7. Ag5! .

16 . . . �c6 1 7 . .ag5!

112

M. Carlsen - L. Aronian ctJ --------------------- -----------------�

a b c a,E 'iV 7 .l 6 ·� 5 .l 4 3 8 2 8 1 1:,

d e f 9 h .. • .l.l.l

.l.i. !k,

8 8 V/!i 8 l::iJ 8 8 41

: a b c d e f 9 h

17 . . . cxd4

8 7 6 5 4 3 2

For Black, who is under fire, it is not easy to hold the posit ion. 1 7 . . . Axg5 1 8. hxg5 will not do, since it allows the rook to be included in the attack along the h-fi le. H is difficulties are on ly aggravated by 1 7 . . . �d8 18. l:Xad1 cxd4 1 9. cxd4, when he has to reckon with the d4-d5 b reakth rough . Therefore B lack agrees to the deformation of h is kingside pawn structure, which may tel l not only i n the middlegame, but also in the endgame.

18. Axf6 gxf6 1 9. cxd4

The queen exchange could have been avoided - 1 9. �f4 �d8 20. cxd4 with the better game, but Carlsen has perceived certain advantages for White in the endgame and he provokes the opponent's reply.

19 ... e5

There appears to be noth ing better. If 19 . . . �d8 there is the good reply 20. �f4, when 20 . . .tbxd4? fai ls to 2 1 . ged1 e5 22. �xeS.

20. Wxc8l3:axc8 21 . d5 �a5

Black transfers his kn ight to the d6 blockading point. 21 . . . �b4 is i l logical on account

of the s imple 22. l:Xed1 fol lowed by an attack on the queenside by a2-a4 .

6 6 8 .l 5

4 8 8 4 3 l::iJ 8 3 2 8 8 � 2 1 1:, :

a b c d e f 9 h

22. h5!

Not only clearing the knight's path to the key f5-point, but also with the aim of 'sealing in ' the king, which wi l l be unable to render any assistance to its forces.

22 . . . �c4 23. �h4 �d6 24. h6 Jac3?!

24 . . _gc4 suggested itself.

25. l3:ac1! l3:fc8

For a rook, an open file is a gulp of fresh air. Aron ian makes use of the last practical chance. I n rejecting the capture of the pawn - 25 . . . tllxe4, he appreciated White's i ntention of attaching 'epaulettes' to the king at h6 and d6 - 26. �f5! gd8 (after 26 . . . l:Xfc8? 27. l:Xxc3 �xc3 the p in 28. l:Xc1 is decisive) 27. gxc3 �xc3 28. d6.

1-- ·.�. • .t. .t. .t.

� [j .t. [j 1----, .t.tt:J

I�

1.1\ £::., [j t::,cJ;;

:S: Analysis diagram

113


Tableau! - th is was how the French would have assessed the result ing posit ion. The i nvasion of the rook on the c-fi le is threatened, but supporting the kn ight leads to the loss of a pawn, without essential ly changing the posit ion: 28 . . . b5 29. gc1 b4 30. a3 a5 31 . axb4 axb4 32. gc2. White i ntends to play gb2, for example, 32 . . . gd7 33. gb2 gb7 33. gxb4! , since after 33 . . _gxb4 34. d7 gba 35. tDd6! B lack has no defence against the threats of 36. tDxf7+ and 36. tDc8.

26. §xc3 §xc3

a b c d e f g h 8 . 8

... ... 7 6 � ... � 6 5 � ... 5 4 � ttJ 4 3 .I � 3 2 � � � 2

� a b c d e f g h

27. <tlf5!

This is where the depth of the h4-h5-h6 manoeuvre is felt. White forcibly transposes into a rook ending where the black king is tightly 'sealed in ' by the f5- and h6-pawns.

27 ••• <tlxf5 28. exf5 �g8

Black cannot prevent the rook's i nvasion on the k ings ide by 28 . . . gc4 in v iew of 29. d6 c2fg8 30. gd1 gca 31 . g4! when he is i n zugzwang. It is not possib le to avert the breakthrough by the g-pawn: 31 . . . c2ff8 32. d7 gd8 33. g5 c2fe7 (33 . . .fxg5 34. f6) 34. g6 and the h-pawn queens (variations by Carlsen).

29. §e4! �f8 30. §g4 lic7

I n the event of 30 . . _gd3 31 . gg7 gxd5 32. gxh7 c2fg8 33. gg7+ c2fh8 34. gxf7 gas 35. gxf6 Black cannot cope with the armada of white pawns.

31 . §g7 b5 32. §xh7 �g8 33. §g7+ �h8

White is as though playing with an 'extra' k i ng. If 33 . . . c2ff8 there fo l lows a breakth rough by the h -pawn - 34. d 6! gd7 35. gg4 and 36. h7.

34. d6

a b c d e f g h 8 . 8 7 ... .I ... � 7 6 � ... � 6 5 ... � 5 4 4 3 � 3 2 � � � 2

a b c d e f g h

34 . . . §d7

34 . . . gb7 is more resi l ient, with the idea of creating a passed pawn, but then a raid by the king proves decisive: 35. c2ff3 b4 36. c2fe4 a5 37. c2fd5 a4 38. c2fc6 b3 39. axb3 axb3 40. c2fxb7 b2 41 . d7 b1 'W+ 42. rl::lc7 Wc1 + 43. c2fd8 Wc5 44. gxf7, and after ge7 the king h ides from the checks at g6.

35. �f3 b4 36. �e4 §xd6

After 36 . . . a5 37. c2fd5 a4 White wins by the same method as in the preced ing note.

37. §xf7 §a6 38. g4 �g8 39. h7+ �h8 40. g5 fxg5 41 . f6

Black resigned .

114

M. Carlsen - L. Aronian

After the 4th game everyth ing appeared to have come ful l c i rcle. Now on his guard , Aronian played with great composure and did not let Carlsen 'off the ropes'. For the Norwegian, behind 1 1/2 -21/2 in the match, only one chance remained - to make use of his last White in the 5th game. And he d id this bri l l iantly.

Game 24 M. Carlsen - L. Aronian

Candidates Match , 5th Game El ista 2007


1. d4 �f6 2. c4 e6 3. �f3 b6 4. a3 Ab7 5. �c3 d5 6. cxd5 �xd5 7. �c2 Ae7 8. e4 �xc3 9. bxc3 0-0 1 0. Ad3 c5 1 1 . 0-0 �c7

1 1 . . . Wc8 came into consideration, with the idea of exchanging the bishop after . . . Aa6.

12. �e2 �d7 13. Ab2

a b c d e f g h a .! .1 • a

7 • .i.. 'if,... .i.. • • 7 6 • 6 5 • 5 4 � � 4 3 � � � ttJ 3 2 � V/JJ� � � 2 1.: .:�

a b c d e f g h

Carlsen had experience of playing the Petrosian Variat ion, although with the black pieces. At the tournament in B ie l (2005) Gelfand attacked h i m with 1 3 . e5 , and th is is what happened: 13 . . J:!.fd8 14 . h4 �f8 1 5. Ae3 Wc6 1 6. lafd1 laac8 1 7. h5 h6 18. �e1 tDh7 1 9. Wg4 �g5 20. �h2 �h8 21 . a4 tDe4 22. ladc1 Ag5 23. f4 f5 24. We2 Ah4 25. tDf3 Ae7 26. Ab5 We? 27. Ac4 �d7 28. Ab5 We? 29. Ac4 Wd7 1/2-1/2 .

1 3 . . . c4

An unexpected decision in the context of the match .

I n making th is strategically risky move, Aronian surely should have had a 'bomb' up h is sleeve. After a l l , by relieving the pawn tension (of course, 1 4 . Axc4 Axe4 is unfavourable for White), he granted White a mobi le pawn centre with prospects of an attack on the king side, which meant that he had to aim to strike fi rst on the queenside. But it would appear that he was merely counting on Carlsen's psychological depression after the defeated suffered the day before.

Usually in this variation Black maintains the pawn tension by developing his rooks at c8 and d8. Here are two typical examples on this theme:

Kasparov - Kra m n ik (L inares 2004): 13 . . . laac8 14. tDd2lafd8 15 . lafd1 tDf6 1 6. a4 cxd4 1 7. cxd4 Ab4 18. tDf3 We? with equal chances;

Ponomariov - Leko (Tal Memorial , Moscow 2006): 1 3 . . . lafd8 1 4. d5 exd5 1 5 . exd5 Af6 1 6. c4 b5! with good counterplay for B lack.

14. Ac2 b5 1 5. Ac1

After B lack has 'locked ' the long d iagonal, the bishop is doing noth ing at b2 , and so it jo ins the attack on the kingside, aiming for g5 .

1 5 . . . a5 16. Etb1

115


a b c d e f g h s_! .. . 8 7 .i. 'iV 1.& ll. I. I. 7 6 I. 6

5 4 4 3 [:::, 3 2

a b c d e f g h

16 . . . Aa6?!

This obvious move decides the outcome of the game, s ince the attack against the undefended k ings ide l ooks extremely dangerous. But a lso i nterest ing is the p ragm at ic view of the young p rofess iona l , who cons iders the best m ove to be 1 9. �xb4! with the win of a pawn . The rook cannot be taken because of a standard attack: 1 9 . . . A x b4 20. A xh7+ 'i!>xh7 (or 20 . . . 'i!>h8 21 . �g5 g6 22. 'Wf3! 'i!>g? 23. 'Wf4 with the threats of �xe6+ and 'Wh4) 21 . �g5+ 'i!>g8 (2 1 . . . 'i!>g6 leads to mate after 22. 'We4+ f5 23 . exf6+ 'i!>h5 24. 'Wh7+ 'i!>g4 25. h3#) 22. 'W h 5 �tea

When there are attacks on opposite wings, 23 . 'Wxf?+ 'i!>h8 24. �e1 ! , and B lack has every tempo is important. Therefore 1 6 . . . n o defence against the switch ing of the b4! 1 7. axb4 axb4 1 8. cxb4 �a2 was more rook to h3. logical , with suffic ient compensation for the sacrificed pawn (Carlsen).

1 7. e5 b4?

But now this move is too late. It was t ime for Black to concern h imself with h is king: 1 7 . . . �fe8 1 8. �g5 �f8 1 9 . 'Wh5 A xg5 20. Axg5 with a somewhat i nfer ior, but sound posit ion.

If 1 7 . . . �fb8 Black has to reckon with the breakthrough 1 8. d5!? exd5 1 9. e6.

1 8. axb4 axb4

a b c a_!

d e f g h

.. . 7 'iVI.&.i.l.l.l. 6 .i_ I. 5 [:::, 4 1.1.£:::, 3 2

1 9. Ag5

[:::, �

I;! � a b c

4J 'fl[:::,[:::,[:::,

d e I;!� f g h

8 7 6 5 4 3 2

1 9 . . . ctlb6

Naturally, 19 . . . Axg5? 20. �xg5 h6 21 . 'We4 f5 22. �xe6 'Wc8 23. Wt4 would have been suicidal.

20. 'We4 g6 21 . 'Wh4 a:a7

Not 21 . . . Axg5 22. �xg5 h5 23. �xb4 �d5 24. �e4! , when 24 . . . �xb4 fai ls to 25. �f6+ 'i!>g? 26. �xh5+ with inevitable mate.

22. At6!?

Of course, the extra pawn after 22. Axe? Wxe7 23. 'Wxe7 �xe7 24. �xb4 �d5 is too smal l a gain i n such a powerful pos it ion . Carlsen was a im ing on ly for an attack, but, hav i ng coo led down after the batt le , h i s p ragm at ic v iew i nc l i ned in favour of 22. �xb4, s ince here too the win of the exchange - 22 . . . Axb4 23. Af6 �b8 24. cxb4 - leads to a very strong attack on the k ing (25 . �g5 is th reatened). After 22 . . . �d5 23. �a4 Wh ite rema ins a pawn up (23 . . . �xc3? 24 . Axe? 'Wxe7 25. 'Wxe7 �xe7 26. �xa6 leads to the loss

1 1 6


of a piece) , retaining threats to the king. For exam ple, in the event of 23 . .. .Ab5 24 . .§xa7 'Wxa7 25 . .Ae4 Black's position is unenviable.

22 . . . Axf6 23. exf6 �d5

8 a b c

7 I. 'iV 6 .*_ 5

d e f g h

.�. . .t. .t.

· � · '.&

4 ... ... � VJJJ 3 � ttJ 2 ii, � � �

� �� a b c d e f g h

24. Ae4

8 7 6 5 4 3 2

Amazing pragmatism! By threatening the exchange on d5 Carlsen provokes the exchange of queens, preferring to go into an endgame with an extra pawn, rather than an attack with 24. tt::le5, which looks very attractive. For example: 24 . . . b3 25. Ae4 'Wd6 26. f4 .§e8 27 . .Axd5 exd5 28. f5, building up the threats. This is correct, but what can be suggested after 24 . . . bxc3 25. Ae4 'Wd6?

24 . . .'fif4 25. Axd5 Wxh4 26. �xh4 exd5 27. �xb4

White's main trump in this ending is the 'nail ' on f6. By sealing the kingside, it effectively guarantees White an extra piece - his king, the role of which in the endgame is hard to overestimate.

27 . . . Ac8 28. �b6

Prophylaxis against the threat of . . . .!:!a6.

28 . . . �a3 29. �c1 Ae6 30. �f3 �fa8

a b c d e f g h 8 8 I. • 7 7 r .t. .t. 6 5 4 3 2

31 . h4!

� ...� ... .t.

· � I. � ttJ

� � � � �

a b c d e f g h

6 5 4 3 2

Signal ling the start of an attack on the kingside. Although Black's defences appear solid , Magnus sees a way to launch a decisive storm .

31 . . . h6 32. �e5 �a1 33. �xa1!

The only way of fighting for a win . I f 33 . .§bb1 Black can reply 33 . . . .§1 a3! , restricting White's offensive actions.

33 . . . �xa1 + 34. �h2 �a3 35. �b8+ �h7 36. f4!

An essential link in White's plan is the diversion of the bishop ( f4-f5 is threatened). To convert his advantage it is important for him to win the f7-pawn without exchanging the minor pieces, since in the event of 36 . .§f8 .§xc3 37. ti:lxf7 Axf7 38 . .§xf7+ <i!?g8 39 . .§g7+ <i!?f8 40 . .§xg6 .§d3 the rook ending is not worse for Black (variations by Carlsen).

36 . . . �xc3

(see next diagram)

37. h5!

A bril liant solution! The pawn offensive with a smal l army creates a fine aesthetic impression. Black cou ld not have prevented this move by . . . h6-h5, since after ti:lf3-g5 he would have been mated.

117


a b c d e f g h

a l :s I a 7 [ .l •1 7 sl j_ � .l.lls 51 .lti:J 1 5 41 · � � �14 3[ .! 13 2 1 � �1 2 1 I 11 a b c d e f g h

37 . . • gxh5

Forced, since if 37 . . . gS? there follows 38. fS AxfS 39. �xf7 with unavoidable mate.

38. laf8 laa3 39. f5! J.xf5 40. laxf7+ mg8 41 . lag7+ mts 42. lab7! laa8 43. mg3!

The king decides the outcome. If 43 . . . c3 there fol lows 44. mf4 c2 (44 . . . Ae6 4S. l:!e7) 4S. �xfS! with mate in four moves.

43 • • • ladS 44. mt4 J.e4 45. g3! c3 46. llt7+ mgs 47. llg7+ mts 48. tbd7+ laxd7 49. laxd7

Black resigned .

I n the 6th game Carlsen again deserved the highest praise - this time for the defence of a difficult position.

Game 2S L. Aronian - M. Carlsen

Candidates Match, 6th Game Elista 2007

Slav Defence [017}

1 . d4 tbf6 2. tbf3 d5 3. c4 c6 4. tbc3 dxc4 5. a4 J.t5 6. tbe5 tbbd7 7. tbxc4 tbb6

6 5

ti:J� 4 3 t2J 3 2 � � � � � 2 1 :s �� :s 1

a b c d e f g h

Capablanca-Vidmar (Carlsbad 1 929), the main continuation was considered to be 7 . . . V!fc7 8. g3 eS 9 . d xeS �xeS 1 0 . Af4 �fd7 1 1 . Ag2 f6 , where in recent times Black has begun to experience difficu lties after 1 2 . �xeS . For example, the game van Wely-1. Sokolov (Dutch Championship 1 998) continued 12 . . . �xeS 1 3. aS a6 1 4. 0-0 Ad6 1 S. �e4 Ae7 1 6. V!ib3 with a small but enduring positional advantage for White. Therefore, not without reason , Ivan Sokolov made a detailed study of 7 . . . �b6 8. �eS aS and took it up. It was this that Carlsen employed in this important game.

8. tbe5 a5 9. g3 tbfd7

For many years, beginning with the game

This continuation is employed far more rarely than 9 ... e6 10. Ag2 Ab4 1 1 . 0-0 0-0, and since the advance of the e-pawn is not threatened, for the moment it is not essential for Black to perform such pirouettes. But also Carlsen's decision to exchange

1 1 8


the active knight rather earlier is probably no accident.

10. ftlxd7

Nothing significant is promised by the knight retreat 10 . tDf3. For example, the game Svid ler- Wang Yue (China 2008) continued 1 0 . . . e6 1 1 . e4 Ag4 12 . Ag2 e5 13. 0-0 exd4 14 . �xd4 f6 15 . Ae3 1/2-1/2. If 1 0 . tiJd3 there can fol low 1 0 . . . e5!? 1 1 . dxe5 tDc5 with active counterplay for the pawn.

10 . . . 'Wxd7

In the event of 1 0 . . . tDxd7 1 1 . Ag2 e6 12 . 0-0 Ab4 1 3. e4 the centre has to be conceded without sufficient reason.

11 . e4 .th3

In the game P. H. Nielsen-Timman (Malmo 2002) Black d ecided first to weaken White's kingside: 1 1 . . . Ag4? ! 1 2 . f3 Ah3 13. Axh3 Wxh3 1 4 . Wb3 .§a6 1 5 . Ae3 Wg2? 1 6 . 0-0-0 Wxf3 17 . .§he1 , and his delay in castling led to defeat . It should be mentioned that after the better 15 . . . e6 1 6 . �f2 White also has the advantage.

12. J.xh3 'Wxh3 1 3. 'Wb3 !aa6

a b c d e f g h

reason to be dissatisfied with his position. He has managed to remove White's 'sting' - the g2-bishop, one of the main performers in such a position , supporting the d4-d5 breakthrough, and at the same time it is not easy for White to exploit the awkward position of the rook on a6. However, White's reply changes the picture.

14 . .tf4!

From here the bishop can attack the knight on b6. In the game Gyimesi- Bu Xiangzhi (Germany 2007) White developed his bishop more passively - 14 . Ae3 and after 14 . . . e6 15 . d 5 Ab4 1 6. dxe6 Wxe6! 17. Wxe6+ fxe6 1 8. Axb6 l:!xb6 1 9. 0-0-0 Ac5 20. f4 �e7 he had an inferior endgame.

14 . . . e6 1 5. J.e5!

A wel l-known technique: before placing the bishop on its designated square - c7, in passing White tries to extract some benefit by provoking a weakening of the kingside.

1 5 . . . .tb4

The first impression is that Black has no

The d rawbacks to 1 5 . . .f6 are revealed by 1 6 . Ac7 Ab4 1 7. 0-0-0 0-0 1 8. tDe2! (after 1 8. tDa2 c5 1 9 . tDxb4 c4!? Black has serious counterplay: 20. Wa3 axb4 21 . Wxb4 tDxa4 22. Wxb7 l:!fa8) . Now, in view of the th reat of tDf4 or even tDg1 , it is not easy for Black to defend his e6-pawn . He can hard ly contemplate either 1 8 . . . g5 1 9 . tDg1 Wg2 20. Wxe6+ �h8 2 1 . tDh3 with a compromised kingside, or 18 . . . Wg2 1 9 . Wxe6+ �h8 20. tDf4! �xf2 21 . l:!hf1 We3+ 22. �b1 with a trapped queen. The main d rawback of Black's position is obvious - his pieces are bad ly p laced . On encountering difficulties , Car lsen sacrifices a paw n , hoping to gain time to coordinate his forces.

1 1 9

Chapter 2 The Way to the Top

16 . .txg7 lagS 1 7. Ae5 'Wg2

Black regains the pawn , a central one moreover, which gives him the d5-square - an excel lent base for his pieces. True, for this he has to exchange his bishop, weakening his dark-square periphery. But in White's position too the light squares are weak. The question is whose strategy is the more discerning.

1 8. 0-0-0 Axc3 1 9. 'Wxc3

White is hoping to extract more from the position than the endgame after 1 9. bxc3 �xe4 20. c4 �e2 2 1 . c5 (not 2 1 . �d3? tbxa4! with the threat of . . . �b6) 21 . . . �c4+ 22. �xc4 tbxc4.

19 . . . 'Wxe4 20. lahe1 'Wd5

Normally it is important to blockade the weak point in front of an isolated pawn. I n the given situation , where the king has not castled , this is doubly important: the opening of the position after a pawn breakthrough cannot be al lowed . This cou ld occur after 20 . . . �f5 21 . d5! tbxd5 (after 21 . . . cxd5 22. �c7 the b7-pawn is lost) 22. �xd5 exd5 23. �c5!, when Biack has no defence.

21 . b3 'Wd7 22. 'Wc2

8 7

a b c

.l 6 !.'.&\ .l 5 .l 4 [3::, 3 [3::, 2 �

d e •

'iV .l �

[3::,

� Ir ir

f 9 h

I. .l .l

[3::, [3::, [3::,

a b c d e f 9 h

8 7 6 5 4 3 2

Despite al l his trickery, as yet Black has not managed to consolidate his forces,

whereas White has his sights set on the h7-pawn.

22 . . . 'We7

Carlsen dislikes passive play and he decides to sacrifice a pawn to activate his pieces as much as possib le . There is logic in this - there are plenty of weaknesses in White's position, and Black can greatly hinder the advance of the pawns. In such a situation it is customary to rely on intuition, but the consequences of passive defence also have to be weighed up: 22 . . . �g6!? 23. <!>b2 tDd5 24. h4 h5 25. �e2 �g4 26. f3 �g6 27. g4 �e7, and Black is sti l l holding the position . Nothing is given by either 28. gxh5 �h6, or 28. g5 �b4, while if 29. f4 , then 29 . . .f6 looks a satisfactory reply.

23. 'Wxh7 lag6

After the preparatory 23 . .. �a3+ 24. <!>d2 �g6 Black has to reckon with 25. �e3! tbd5 26. �h8+ <!>d7 27. �f3, reminding Black that he also has a king. Therefore Carlsen wou ld have to seek the exchange of q ueens by 24 . . . �a2+ 25 . �c2 , but , knowing Aronian's technique in the conversion of a minimal advantage in simple positions, he does not want to al low White a comfortable l ife and he prefers to go fishing in troubled waters.

24. 1ae3

One gains the impression that both players are thinking in the same direction and are not in a hu rry to exchange q ueens. Carlsen is afraid to go into an endgame, while Aronian is also not in a rush , hoping to finding chances in the middlegame, in which he is hardly taking any risk: it is difficult for Black to create any counterplay,

1 20


since he has to worry about his own king. After 24. �h8+ Black wou ld have been unable to avoid the queen exchange, since with his king in the centre he would have to reckon with the opening of the position. For example, if 24 . . . @d7, then 25. d5! followed by 26. �b8 (the immediate 25. �b8 does not work because of 25 . . . �a3+) and the queen , coordinating with the bishop, creates dangerous threats.

24 . . . ttld5 25. §f3 'Wf8 26. h4 §h6

Carlsen again decides against going into the endgame after 26 . . . �h6+ 27. �xh6 §xh6. For the same reason after the retreat of the rook he does not play 27 . . . �a3+.

27. 'Wc2 §a8 28. 'Wd2 §h5 29. �b2 'Wg8 30. §e1 'Wg6 31 . Ad6 §d8

The young Norwegian manoeuvres with his pieces like a high ly-experienced grandmaster, observing the basic ru les of actions by the defending side. He avoids pawn advances and any activity, keeping a careful eye on the opponent's manoeuvres. 31 . . . @d7, not removing the defence of the aS-pawn , can also be recommended . But Magnus prefers to defend this pawn with counterplay.

32. Aa3 'Wg4 33. §d3 §f5 34. §e5 �d7

a b c d e f g h 8 8 7 7 6 6 5 £ 5 4 [j, 3 � /j, 3 2 � 2

a b c d e f g h

35. 'We2

Carlsen has nevertheless won the psychological battle. White's manoeuvres have not led to anything, and Aronian himself offers the exchange of queens. I n the event of 35. §xf5 �xf5 36. �e2 @c8 Black finally resolves the problem of his king.

35 . . . §g8!?

And this is al ready the chal lenge of a selfconfident fighter. Black avoids the natural exchange 35 . . . �xe2+ 36. §xe2, not fearing the doubling of his pawns by 36. �xg4 §xg4 37. l:!xf5 exf5 , since White cannot prevent . . . f5-f4.

36. 'We1

Aronian appreciates his opponent's audacity and returns to the previous manoeuvring strategy.

36 . . . §g6 37. §e2

Here the exchange 37. §xf5 exf5 is unfavourable on account of the possible manoeuvre . . . l:!g6- e6-e4.

37 . . . §f3?!

121

a b c d e f g h 8 8 7 £ • £ 7 6 £ £ .I 6 5 £ "' 5 4 [j, [j, 'iV [j, 4 3 � /j, a .l [j, 3 2 � a [j, 2

� a b c d e f g h

Up till now Carlsen has acted irreproachably, but in time-trouble his composure


deserts him . He forces events, changing the character of the position, although it was possible to continue the strategy of indirectly defending the aS-pawn, by attacking the f2- and d4-pawns: 37 . . . .§g8 38 . .§c2 'l;\'g6 39 . .§d1 (39. '1;\'xaS? ebf4) 39 . . . 'Mlf6 etc.

38. :§xf3 'Wxf3 39. :§c2 Wf6 40. Wxa5 Wxd4+ 41 . �a2 :§f6 42. f4?!

After Black's lapse on the 37th move White has managed to break through to the queenside, at the same time ridding himself of his isolated d4-pawn . However, by removing his f-pawn from attack, he creates a backward pawn on g3, which significantly eases Black's defence. The correct continuation was pointed out by Rogozenko: 42. Ac5! We4 43 . .§d2 .§f3 44. Wa7 rile? 45. Ae3! with the idea of 46. 'Mld4, exploiting the fact that 45 . . . ebxe3?? is not possible on account of the mating attack 46. WaS+ b6 47. 'Mla7+.

42 . . . :§g6 43. Was

This leads to simplification , which cou ld have been avoided by 43 . .§d2 with the probable continuation 43 . . . 'l;\'e3! 44. Wb4 rile? 45 . Wd6+ rilb6 46 . Wd8+ rila6 47. Wa8+ rilb6 (47 . . . 'I;\' a? 48. Wxa7+ rilxa7 49 . .§d3 leads to a better endgame for White) 48. aS+ rile? 49. Ad6!? rild7 (after

49 . . . rilxd6? 50. 'Mld8+ rileS 51 . .§xd5+! and 52. 'Mlb6 the queen is lost), and Black is still holding the position .

43 . . . �b4+ 44. Axb4 Wxb4 45. :§g2

The last attempt to retain an advantage -45 . .§c4 'Mld2+ 46. rila3 rile?! 47. Wf8 .§xg3 48. 'Mlxf7+ Wd7 49. Wxd7+ rilxd7 would have resu lted in a drawn rook endgame.

7 6 5

a b c d e f 9 h 8 7 6 5

8 8 4 8 3 :t 2

a b c d e f 9 h

45 . . . :§xg3!

A worthy conclusion to this titanic struggle.

46. :§xg3 Wd2+ 47. �a3 Wc1 +

Draw.

Such a draw is worth any win . To hold out in a very difficult battle at a critical moment of the match signified a moral victory for Carlsen.

And so, ' normal time' ended in a 3-3 draw, and the match continued with a tie-break of four rapid games. And everything repeated itself again. Aronian won his first 'White' game and for the third (!) time took the lead in the match . After two draws Carlsen had one last chance to make use of the white pieces in what was already the 1 0th game of the match . And he performed a miracle, fighting 'to the last bu l let ' , and winning a theoretical ly d rawn endgame.

1 22


M. Carlsen - L. Aronian Candidates Match , 1 0th Game

Elista 2007

a b c d e f g h 8 8

a b c d e f g h

In pre-reform times, when games were played with the c lassical time control and there were adjournments, one cannot imagine such an ending being resumed . The pawn cannot be converted. This is obvious, but not for the present-day 'condensed ' times, when the competitive element prevails over logical play. Nowadays, fol lowing the F IDE reforms, games are played to a finish, and players are ensured against losing on time by the addition of extra seconds after each move. And so Carlsen plays on . What is striking is the professionalism with which he plays this ending, even under the rapid time regime: here there is the rule 'do not hurry' (it is more difficult to defend than to attack), restraint in advancing the pawn

(making it taboo for Black to exchange the queens), and the maximum activation of the king.

69. �h3 'Wb1 70. Wf6+ �h7 71 . Wf3 �g7 72. �h4

The technique of coordinating the king and q ueen whi le keeping the pawn on its initial square is impressive. In a rapidplay finish it is not easy to defend - it is important not to run into an exchange of queens. Black exaggeratedly p lays without checks , on ly moving his king, placing it on safe squares .

72 . . . �h7 73. Wf7+ �h8 74. Wh5+ �g7 75. Wg4+ �h7 76. Wh5+ �g7 77. We5+ �h7 78. Wd5 �g7 79. Wd4+ �h7 80. Wd7+ �h8 81 . g4

The pawn comes into play at the most appropriate moment, provoking Aronian into giving checks with his queen .

81 . . . Wh1 + 82. �g5 Wc1 +?

This next impu lsive check leads to defeat. The position cou ld have been held by 82 . . . 'We4 or even 82 . . . 'Wa8!?, with a tactical point: 83. 'Wf5 'Wg8+ 84. �h6 'Wg7+ 85 . �h5 'Wf7+ 86. Wxf7 - stalemate!

83. �g6 Wb1 + 84. Wf5

Black resigned .

And so, the tie-break also ended in a draw, 2-2 . The winner was due to be decided in a blitz match of two games, and if necessary an 'Armageddon' game would be played . But things did not come to this. The ability to play five-minute chess has its specific features, and here the clear favourite was Aronian , who won both games, and with them the match .

Carlsen gave a critical appraisal of his defeat: 'Aronian is very strong', he replied to a correspondent of the magazine 64 Shakhmatnoe obozrenie. 'The match with him was a good lesson; I realised that there is sti l l much to learn about chess, much to study.

1 23


Leven caused me a mass of unpleasant surprises in the middlegame. I n addition , I basical ly cou ldn 't get out of the opening with the black pieces.' But, despite the defeat, it was this match that brought Carlsen up to a new level . The 1 6-year-old grandmaster presented himself to the chess community as a real contender for the world crown in the near future. He presented himself in particu lar as an inflexible fighter! Three times in a week he equalised , twice in decisive games - only those possessing a champion's character are capable of this.

Three weeks for ' repairs' before the start of the third 'pi l lar' of the wor ld chess calendar - the Sparkassen G M Tou rnament in Dortmund (FI DE category 20) was not a long time. It is wel l known that this was a kind of personal fiefdom of Kram nik, who by that time had won there on eight occasions. The other participants were a lso no pushover. Carlsen was in a cautious mood : 'When there are so many solid opponents: Kramnik , Anand , Gelfand , Leko - playing is not easy. They exert pressure with their every move, not losing concentration for a second . In this sense Dortmund was in general the most difficu l t su per-tournament of the year for me: Morelia/Linares or Wijk aan Zee was fu l l of fighters such as lvanchuk or Topalov, who themselves play and a lso al low their opponents to p lay. Here there were no such p layers.' Therefore he was not too disappointed with the resu lt : a loss to Kramnik (where he was thoroughly outplayed by the champion in his favou rite Catalan Opening) and fighting d raws with the rest was no reason to be u pset . Especial ly since three weeks later there was the tou rnament in Bie l , where the opposition was not q uite so strong.

On this occasion the organisers of the festival in Biel had changed the format of their main tournament. They increased the number of participants to ten , and, despite the absence of Morozevich , the main victor of the last few years, they were able to raise the level to F IDE category 1 8. Carlsen was happy: the opponents were of those who themselves play and al low others to play. It seemed the right time to play fighting chess, but he was continuing to work on his own game, and in Biel we saw a self-confident ' technician' . Magnus happily exchanged the queens, relying on his great ly improved endgame technique, as he demonstrated in the very first round in this game with Bu Xiangzhi. He was not concerned by the protracted nature of the battle (the conversion of a positional advantage with opposite-colour bishops and rooks took 50 moves) . The tournament went well, and three rounds before the end Carlsen was leading by a margin of one point. It seemed that victory was assured . But at that moment he committed a childish error, inadmissible for a 1 7-year-old grand master.

1 24

M. Carlsen - A. Onischuk

M. Carlsen - Y. Pelletier Biel 2007

a b c d e 8 .! 1.1\ .! 7 ..t

9 h 8

6 6 5

4 8 4 3 8 [jj li, 8 3 2 8 8 8 8 2

� .: 1:'( 1 a b c d e f 9 h

After the natural 1 6 . f3 White is slightly better, but that is al l . But Magnus played 1 6. Axh7?? (one can't help remembering the first game of the 1 972 Spassky- Fischer match), and after the natural reply 16 . •. f5 17. e4 �g7 1 8. exf5 �xh7 1 9. fxe6 fxe6 he was a piece down for obviously inadequate compensation.

What was the cause of such inexcusably cavalier p lay? Perhaps he was seeking revenge for the miniature in his first tournament in Biel 2005, which he lost to Pel letier in the opening (1 . d4 �f6 2. c4 e6 3. �c3 Ab4 4. �c2 d5 5. cxd5 c5 6. dxc5 �xd5 7. Ad2 AxeS 8. �xd5 �xd5 9. e4 �d4 10. 0-0-0 �d7 1 1 . Ab5 0-0?? 1 2 . Ac3, and Black lost a piece). On the principle - it depends who you are playing!

This chi ldish ness cost him dearly. As it is said , misfortunes do not come sin gly. Through inertia Carlsen lost his next game to van Wely and a l lowed himself to be passed by Radj abov, whom he had to p lay in the l ast rou n d . Al l that remained was to disp lay his character and win ' to order', and although he did this , Magnus was caught by Onischuk . They h ad to p lay a b l itz tie - b reak for

the first prize. They fought to the last: with a score of 2-2 things came down to an 'Armageddon' (d raw in favour of Black, but he has 4 minutes on the clock) . And Carlsen again disp layed his character. He won the game with Black, and moreover he won 'on c lass' . Passions died down - Magn us had won his first su per-tournament.

Game 26 M. Carlsen - A. Onischuk

Biel 2007 Queen's Gambit [043]

1 . d4 �f6 2. c4 e6 3. �f3 d5 4 • .tg5

By a non-traditional way the game has entered the currently popu lar Moscow Variation , the classical route to which lies via the Queen's Gambit (1 . d4 d5 2. c4 e6 3. �f3 �f6 4. Ag5). The variation received this name after the famous Moscow International Tournament of 1 925, where it was employed by Emanuel Lasker and Efim Bogoljubow.

4 . . . h6 5 . .txf6

A popular continuation . Those who like sharp p lay prefer to test their strength (and home preparation !) in the so-cal led Anti- Moscow Variation 5 . Ah4 c6 6 . �c3 dxc4. As for Carlsen , he prefers c learer play.

5 . . . 'Wxf6 6. �c3 c6 7. 'Wb3

Along with 7. �c2, one of the main continuations in the Moscow Variation .

7 . . . dxc4

Another branch 7 . . . �d7 8. e4 dxe4 9. �xe4 �f4 1 0. Ad3 e5 1 1 . 0-0 has been known

1 25


since the time of the 1 938 AVRO Tournament.

Analysis diagram

The Euwe- Fine game continued 1 1 . . . Ae7 1 2 . gfe1 exd4 1 3. &Dxd4 0-0 1 4. Ac2 tDf6 (nowadays the more forceful 1 4 . . . tDc5 1 5 . '1Wc3 gd8 is p referred , with equal play) 1 5 . gad1 g6 1 6 . tDxf6+? ! (1 6 . '1Wc3!?) 1 6 . . . Axf6 1 7. ge4 We? 1 8. '1We3 *g7 1 9 . h4 h5 20. gf4 ge8! 2 1 . '1Wxe8 'Wxf4 22 . tDf3 gba 23. '1We4 '1Wxe4 24. Axe4 Ag4, and Black won the endgame in excel lent style.

The modern sharp continuation 1 1 . . . exd4 underwent a severe test ing in the game Mamedyarov-Topalov (Sofia 2007), where Shakhriyar made use of a recommendation by Jan Timman, that had not come to the attention of the ex-world champion - 1 2 . &Dxd4! , after which cas-tling is not possible - 12 . . . Ae7 1 3. tDf5 ! . The game continued 12 . . . tDc5 1 3. &Dxc5 Axc5 14 . gae1+ *f8 1 5. ge4 '1Wf6 1 6. '1Wc3 a5?! (1 6 . . . Ad7!? 17. b4 Axd4 1 8. gxd4 gea - Stohl) 1 7. gfe1 Ad7 1 8.g1 e3 Ab4 1 9. Wc2 '1Wd6 20. gf3 h5 21 . c5! Axc5 22. Ac4 f6 23. tDe6+ Axe6 24. gxe6, and White soon won .

8. Wxc4 �d7 9. e3 g6 1 0. Ae2 Ag7 1 1 . 0-0 0-0

(see next diagram)

a b c d e f g h

.�. . 8 1.& � .�. 7

6 � 'if � � 6 5 5 4 'o/i/ 8 4 3 t2J 8 t2J 3 2 /j, /j, � 8 8 2 1 M M �

a b c d e f g h

12 . Jafd1 e5

Carlsen thinks that the p reparatory 12 . . . '\We?!? is more accurate.

1 3. �e4

Black is seriously behind in the development of his queenside, and White's play involves exploiting the weakness of the d6-square for the invasion of his knight.

1 3 . . . 'We7?!

Here this move does not oppose White's plan , since it al lows a favourable breakthrough in the centre. As Carlsen shows in his comments on the game, the problem would have been solved by the paradoxical move 1 3 . . . Wf5 ! . This seems strange - the queen invites the knight to go to d6 with gain of tempo, but the subtle point is that Black forces the exchange on e5 and neutralises the danger: 14 . tDd6 Wf6 1 5 . dxe5 tDxe5 1 6 . tDxe5 Wxe5 1 7. 'Wb4 Ae6, and 18 . Wxb7?! is risky because of 18 . . . Ad5.

14. d5 cxd5 1 5. 'Wxd5 �b6

The alternative 1 5 . . . tDf6 1 6 . Wd6 Wxd6 1 7. &Dxd6 would also have left White with a favourable endgame.

"1 26

M. Carlsen - A. Onischuk

a b c 8 .i ..t. 7 .f. .t. 6 '.& 5 4 3 2 8 8 1 1:,

a b c

16. Wc5!

d e f g h

.ie 'ii .t. ..t.

... ... � ...

tiJ 8 tb JL 8 8 8

1::. d e f

� g h

8 7 6 5 4 3 2

One cannot help but be amazed at the pragmatism of the young grandmaster. If the position demands it , Carlsen is prepared to try and squeeze out a minimal advantage, even in an obviously protracted endgame.

16 . . . Wxc5 1 7. �xeS Ag4

White's control of the d-file combined with the pressure of his knight on the b7-pawn creates problems for Black over the development of his light-square bishop. Onischuk's decision to sacrifice the pawn for the sake of disclosing the potential of his bishop pair seems a fu l ly objective one. If he defends the pawn by 17 . . . �b8, after 18. �ac1 the problems of developing the bishop are not relieved: if 18 . . . AfS there is 19. tbh4, while if 18 . . . Ag4 - 1 9. h3.

18. h3

1 9. �xb7

White must accept the pawn sacrifice, since after 1 9 . �ac1 e4 20. hxg4 exf3 21 . Axf3 Axb2 22. �b1 �xeS 23. �xb2 �c7 he cannot hope for anything.

1 9 . . . Ae6

The pair of long-range bishops supported by the rook put the queenside under concerted fire, forcing White onto the defensive.

20. b3

White cannot get by without this move, 20. �d2 is too passive: 20 . . . �c7 21 . &baS (21 . tbd6 �d8) 21 . . . �tea 22 . �ad1 �c2, while after a move by the knight - 20. tDd6 the potential of the black pieces is fu l ly revealed : 20 . . . �c2 21 . �d2 �xd2 22. tbxd2 �d8 23.tD2c4 e4 24. �b1 fS , and again 2S. b3 cannot be avoided .

20 . . . 9:c2 21 . Af1

8 a b

7 ... tiJ 6 '.& 5 4

c d e

'-1-

..t. ...

f g h

.� . .t. ..t.

... ... •

a b c d e f g h

8 7 6 5 4

For the moment 1 8. tbxb7 does not work 21 . . . �d5 because of 18 . . . e4.

18 . . . 9:ac8

Black has gained an important tempo to secure an excel lent post for his bishop at e6.

Black is at the c ross-roads: should he continue his active course, which Onischuk sett les for, by playing his knight to c3, or limit himself to waiting tactics? For example, 21 . . . AdS 22. tDd6 �c6 23. ebbS

1 27i


a6 is possible, d riving the knight to the edge of the board (24. tDa3) . But what to do next? 24 . . . e4 is only a half-measure: 25. tDd4 1k5 26. f!ac1 and White nevertheless transfers his knight to c4 - 26 . . . f!fc8 (or 26 . . . f!a5 27. tDc4 Axc4 28. bxc4 f!xa2 29. c5 tDc8 30. f!a1 , winning the a6-pawn) 27. f!xc5 f!xc5 28. tDc4! , and Black is unable to regain the pawn. If 24 . . . a5 White rep lies 25 . tDd2 e4 (25 . . . a4 26 . Ab5) 26 . f!ab1 f!a8 27. tDac4, stabilising the a3-knight.

22. Ac4 tilc3 23. l:id2 l:ixd2 24. tilxd2 e4 25. �f1

a b c d e f 9 h 8 8

'--'r .I.e 7 6

.t. CD .i.

.t. .i. .t. .t.

7 6

] • 5 5 � .t. 1 4 4

� I.& � � 3 3 � CD � � 2 2 :: � a b c d e f 9 h

25 . . . 1:ib8

Alexey Korotylev considers the best plan to be the switching of the light-square bishop to the long diagonal , from where it defends the e4-pawn and keeps an eye on the queen side pawns: 25 . . . Ad7!? 26. a4 Ac6 27. tDd6 Ae5 28. f!c1 Axd6 29. f!xc3 Ab4 30. f!c2 f!d8, and the a4/b3 pawn pair is securely blockaded . It shou ld be added that the attempt to advance the bpawn - 26. tDc5 Ac6 27. b4 - is parried by 27 . . . f!d8 28. �e1 a5! 29. bxa5 tDa4. Now, however, Carlsen confidently finds the key

26. tileS Axc4+?

It wou ld appear that Black no longer had any choice, other than to win the exchange: 26 . . . tDa4 27. tbxe6 Axa1 28. bxa4 fxe6 29. Axe6+ �g7 30. tDxe4, where White wou ld be faced with converting his compact pawn mass in a protracted endgame. But , at the least, this was a practical chance, whereas with the exchange of the light-square bishops the potential of the extra pawn increases sharply.

27. t'ilxc4 l:ib5

Apparent ly O nischuk was pin ning his hopes on this move, thinking that after the knight moves to a6 it wil l be out of play. After 27 . . . tDa4 White can interpose 28. tDa6 .

28. t'ila6!

This knight is destined to discredit the ru le of Siegbert Tarrasch , that a knight on the edge of the board always stands bad ly. In the given specific position the white knights are excel lently coordinated , restricting the rook, which looks longingly at the c6-square.

28 . . . Af8

a b c d e 8 8 7 .t. 7 6 CD 5 .I 5 4 CD .t. 4 3 � I.& � � 3 2 � � � 2 1 :: �

a b c d e f 9 h

to Black's defences. 29. b4!

1 28

M. Carlsen - T. Radjabov

And here is the key to the position. By sacrificing a pawn, White completely ties down the black pieces.

29 . . . .txb4 30. a4 lib7 31 . lic1 ltid5 32. lib1 f5

Against the attempt to unravel with a ' reverse' pin , White has a choice between two winning endgames: 32 . . J!e7 33. �xb4 .§b7 34. �xd5 .§xb1+ 35 . �e2 and 34. �d6 .§xb4 35 . .§xb4 �xb4 36 . �xe4.

33. a5!

a b c d e f g h 8 • 8 7 � .1 s t[j 5 � 1.& 4 .i. tZJ 3 2

a b c d e f g h

7

5 4

2

The domination of the white knights over the b lack rook is impressive! By taking away the b6-square, White puts Black in zugzwang. Carlsen confirms this with the fol lowing variations: 33 . . . .§e7 34. �xb4 .§b7 35 . �b6 ! , or 33 . . . .§b5 34. g3! with the threat of 35. �d6 (after the immediate 34. �d6 .§xa5 35. �xb4 �xb4 36 . .§xb4 .§a1+ White has to give up his f2-pawn). The performance is finished . The curtain can be lowered .

33 . . . �g7 34. ltie5 f4 35. exf4 e3 36. fxe3 ltixe3+ 37. �g1 ltid5 38. �h1 lib5 39. ltic6

Black lost on time.

Game 27 M. Carlsen - T. Radjabov

Biel 2007 Irregular Opening [ 807]

1 . e4 d6

Despite the fact that in the last round Carlsen was more high ly motivated (to overtake Radjabov, he had to win the game), his opponent was by no means in a peaceable mood . This is also indicated by the choice of opening. It should be mentioned that Radjabov (as also Carlsen) is no respecter of reputations, and he is one of the few who plays for a win with both colours. It is worth remembering Teimour's win , at the age of 1 6 , over the great Garry Kasparov in Linares 2003. With the black pieces, moreover! It is sufficient to say that Teimour's main weapon against 1 . d4 is the King's Indian Defence, in which he has gained numerous wins.

2. d4 ltif6 3. ltic3 e5

A curious psychological moment. It turns out that Radjabov was only 'scaring' Carlsen with the Pirc-Ufimtsev Defence; he does not intend to fianchetto his bishop, and he invites a transposition into the Philidor Defence. He is not afraid of the exchange of queens, realising that in view of the tournament situation Carlsen will not go in for it .

4. ltige2

Magnus prefers something different, which has no name in opening classification . The transposition into the Phil idor Defence could have occurred after 4 . �f3 �bd7.

4 . . . ltibd7

Carlsen thinks that the development of the bishops was more in the spirit of the

129


position - 4 . . . Ae7 S. g3 Ag4 6. Ag2 exd4 7. �xd4 tilc6.

5. g3 c6 6. Ag2

It was possible to forestal l the pawn initiative on the queenside by 6. a4.

6 . . . b5 7. a3 Ae7 8. 0-0 0-0 9. h3 aS

In the rapid game G risc h u k - Fridman (Mainz 2006) Black included his pawn in the attack only after developing his bishop: 9 . . . Ab7 10 . g4 aS, but after 1 1 . tilg3 exd4 12 . �xd4 cS 13. �d1 b4 14 . tilbS!? Aa6 1 S. a4 it transpired that the d6-pawn required defending. The game continued 1S . . . g6?! (1 S . . . tileS) 1 6 . Ah6 f!eS 1 7. gS tilhS 1 S. tilxhS gxhS 1 9. �xhS 'i'b6 20. f4 c4+ 21 . �h1 f!acS 22. fS tileS 23. f6 AdS 24. AfS 1 -0.

1 0. g4

It is natural to try and take the lead in the flank attacks , although in his comments on the game Carlsen considered this to be not the optimal decision, without, however, suggesting anything instead .

1 0 . . . Aa6

a b c 8 .1

d e 'iV

f g h

.�. . 7 l.& .l. .l .l .l 6 .1, .l .l 1.& 5 £ £ .l 4 � � � 3 � t2J � 2 � � tD � .il. 1 J::l .il. 'lW g �

a b c d e f g h

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

Haifa 1 989) Beliavsky preferred to restrict Black on the queenside in 'Spanish' style

- 1 1 . b4. The game continued 1 1 . . . Ab7 12 . f!b1 axb4 1 3. axb4 tileS 14 . tilg3 g6 1 S. Ah6 tilg7 1 6. tilce2 tilb6 1 7. f4 exf4 1 S. tilxf4 AgS?! (1 S . . . tilc4! was more logical) 1 9. AxgS WxgS 20. eS dxeS 21 . tile4 �e7 22. dxeS �xeS 23. �d6! and White developed a dangerous initiative.

1 1 . . . b4?! One can only try and guess why Radjabov did not go in for the favourable opening of the position : 1 1 . . . exd4 1 2 . �xd4 b4 13. tilce2 bxa3 1 4 . .§xa3 (1 4. bxa3? tilxg4!) 14 . . . dS, where the black pieces would have become very active. But subsequently too his play raises questions. Apparently it was one of those days for Radjabov.

12 . �ce2 bxa3 By beginning with 12 . . . dS 1 3. exdS tilxdS, Black would not have al lowed the activation of the queen's rook and after 14 . f!e1 he would have achieved an equal game: 14 . . . bxa3 1 S. bxa3 Af6.

13. r:lxa3 d5

a b c d e f g h 8 .1 7

8 'i¥ .1 9 l.& .l. .l .l .l 7

6 .1. - .l 1.& 5 £ .l .l 4 ··� � �

a b c d e f g h

14. r:le3!

6 5 4

2

1 1 . �g3 This shows a deep understanding of the A provocative move, since it a l lows the position! The rook manoeuvre to the centre, opening of the position. In his game with involving the doubling of rooks on the e-file, Mokry (European Team Championship, forces Black to release the pawn tension.

130


This leads to the opening of the position , making it easier for White to attack on the kingside. 1 4 . . . dxe4 Black is forced to concede the centre. He vacates the d5-square for his knight , hoping to d rive away the rook, but disi l lusionment awaits him . The alternative 1 4 . . . exd4 1 5 . CL'Ixd4 Ac5 (1 5 . . . Axf1 ? 16. CDxc6 \WeB 1 7. exd51eads to the loss of a piece) 1 6 . .§.fe1 '!Wb6 (weaker is 1 6 . . . Axd4 17. \Wxd4 c5 1 8. \Wa4 d4 19 . .§.a3 with an attack on the weak pawns) 1 7. c3 had its drawbacks, but at least Black would have activated his bishops. 1 5. �e1! The rook moves out of the pin and the illusions associated with 1 5 . . . CL'Id5 prove unfounded in view of 1 6 . .§.xe4. Unexpectedly it transpires that the black pieces are mobilised far worse for the forthcoming play.

a b c a !. 7

6 j_ Jl. 5 I. J 4 • 3 2 � �

d e 'if

f g h

.�. . 1.1\ ..tl.l.l.

1.1\ I.

� · � : l:b � l:b � �

1 � iV : � a b c d e f g h

1 5 . . . Wc7

a

7

6 5 4 3 2 1

Not an easy choice. The inclusion of the exchange 15 . . . exd4 1 6. CDxd4 V#c7 sharply activates the opponent's pieces: 1 7. g5 CDd5 18 . .§.xe4 Ac5 1 9. CL'Igf5 '!Wb6 (if 1 9 . . . a4 there follows 20. \Wh5 .§.fd8 21 . c4! Axc4 22. CL'Ixg7!) 20. \Wh5 .§.fd8 (or 20 . . . Axd4 21 . CDxd4 g6 22. \Wh6 .§.fd8 23. b3! with the decisive threats of Ab2 and .§.h4) 21 . b3

CDf8 22. Ab2 CDg6 23. CDxg7! CL'Idf4 24. CL'Idf5 CL'Ixh5 25. CDxh5 with a decisive attack.

1 5 . . . h5, a move considered by Carlsen , also looks irrational , since it contradicts a classical rule: don't move pawns on the wing where you are weaker. After 1 6 . gxh5! (1 6. g5 CL'Id5 17 . .§.xe4 Axg5 1 8. dxe5 CL'Ic5 would suit Black) 1 6 . . . CL'Id5 17 . .§.xe4 f5 18 . .§.xe5 CDxe5 1 9. dxe5 White has more than sufficient compensation for the exchange (Axd5 and CL'If4 is threatened).

Possibly the best solution to the situation could have been 1 5 . . J �e8. 16. �f5 .td8? The bishop retreat conclusively disrupts the already poor coordination of the black pieces , dividing them into two camps. 16 . . . .§.fe8 answers better the demands of the defence. 1 7. g5 �d5 18. �xe4 f6 1 9. �eg3

a b c d e f g h a !. ..t .�. . a 7 'il l.&\ 1. 1. 7

6 j_ I. I. 6 5 I. 1.1\ 1. /:b � 5 4 � : 4

a b c d e f g h

1 9 . . . g6 It is al ready hard to offer Black any good advice, since the white pieces are arriving on the kingside as though by schedule. To illustrate this we give two possible variations: 1 9 . . . .§.f7 20. \Wg4 CDe7 21 . b3 CDg6 22. Aa3 or 19 . . . CDe7 20. gxf6 CDxf5 21 . CDxf5 Axf6 22. dxe5 tDxe5 23. Af4. In both cases White's advantage is obvious.

20. �h6+ �g7

131


If 20 . . .'�>h8 there could have fol lowed 22. e6! 21 . gxf6 (21 . dxe5 fxe5 22. tbg4 is also good) 21 . . . Axf6 22. tbg4 Ag? 23. tbxe5

The decisive breakthrough . White clears

tbxe5 24. dxe5 with an extra pawn. the approaches to the black king.

21 . dxe5 fxg5

a b c d e a .I ..t 7 'iV,..

.t ,.. �

4 l:r 3 2 � �

� � l:r a b c d e

f g h

.1. • .t .t � .t

� � � �

� f g h

8

7

6 5 4 3 2

22 . . . �xh6

I f 22 . . . tD7f6 there a lso fol lows 23. e7! Axe? 24. l::!xe7+ tbxe7 25. l::!xe7+ VJ/xe7 26. tbhf5+.

23. e7! 'Wb6

The capture of the pawn leads to a mating attack: 23 . . . tbxe7 24. l::!xe7 Axe? 25. l::!xe7 !!adS 26. 'Wd4 l::!f6 27. 'Wh4#.

24. exf8'W+ tilxf8 25. c4 tilf4 26. 'Wd6 �g7 27. �xf4 gxf4 28. S:e7+

Black resigned .

An im portant landmark in Car lsen's self-assertion was his participation in the second Mikhail Tal Memorial Tou rnament (F I DE category 20) . On this occasion Carlsen arrived in Moscow not as a timid pupi l , l ike a year earlier, but as a fighter, tested in batt le with el ite grandmasters. However, he did not manage to take part in the batt le for the first p rize. Kram nik was untouchable . After the 1 4th world cham pion had passed on his ' ru l ing authority ' to Anan d , he p layed freely and over the short distance of 9 rounds he scored +4, finishing 1% points ahead of the second-p laced Shirov. But Carlsen's share of 3rd-5th p laces with Peter Leko and D mitry Jakovenko a lso showed that he had effectively established himself in the upper echelon .

P laying in Moscow against a farge group of successors of the famous Soviet Chess Schoof is always a serious test . Especial ly when you begin the tournament with a game against Kramnik, and the fact that in Moscow the 1 4th world champion always plays with particular commitment and is always aiming to win . The intrigue was increased by the fact that , in their previous meeting in the summer of that year in Dortmund , Carlsen had suffered a disaster in the Catalan Opening. The opening was predictable.

1 3

V. Kramnik - M. Carlsen ---------------------

Game 28 V. Kramnik - M. Carlsen

Moscow 2007 Catalan Opening [ EOS}

1. �f3 �f6 2. c4

Kramnik's favourite way of reaching the Catalan .

2 . . . e6 3. g3 d5 4. d4 £e7 5. £g2 0-0 6. 0-0 dxc4 7. 'Wc2 a6 8. 'Wxc4 b5 9. 'Wc2 J.b7 1 0. £d2

ready in a positional trap: 17 . . . c6 18. tDd3 or 17 . . . axb4 1 8. tDc6 V!/d7 1 9. axb4 is equally unpleasant) 1 7. tDb3! . The cu lmination of White's strategy - he achieves a complete blockade of the queenside. After 17 . . . axb4 1 8. tDa5 Aa8 1 9. tDac6 Axc6 20. tbxc6 V!/d7 21 . Axd5! exd5 22. axb4 Black was completely paralysed and the b5-pawn was doomed .

1 1 . £g5 �bd7 12. �bd2 Jac8 1 3. �b3 c5

White is intending to place his bishop on Thus Black has carried out his plan, but a5, to prevent the freeing advance . . . c7-c5. has associated it with a new idea.

a b c d e f g h s ,i � 'iV .i fl a

7 .i. £ .i. £ £ £ 7 s £ £ � 6

5 £ 5

4 4

3 [jj � 3

2 � � V/H� � � � � 2 1 l: £D l: �

a b c d e f g h

10 •.• Ad6

Carlsen's home preparation . Black vacates the e7-square for his queen , when the Aa5 thrust becomes irrelevant. Up til l here the two players had move for move repeated their game in Dortmund, which continued 1 0 . . . tDc6 1 1 . e3 tDb4 1 2. Axb4 Axb4 1 3. a3 Ae7 14 . tDbd2 lk8 1 5. b4 a5 1 6 . tDe5! (apparently this move came as a surprise to Carlsen, who was being guided by the game Bruzon - Capo Vidal , Morelia 2007, which went 1 6 . V!/b2 axb4 1 7. axb4 'Wd6 18. flfb1 flaB with good play for Black) 1 6 . . . tDd5? (Black should have exchanged bishops - 1 6 . . . Axg2 17. �xg2, but he is al-

14. J.xf6 �xf6!?

This is Carlsen's genuine novelty. He sacrifices a pawn. In the only previous game on this theme, Hofman - Browne (Bad Wiessee 1 998), Black played 14 . . . V!/xf6 1 5. tDe5 cxd4 1 6. tDxd7, after which White did not tempt fate and he offered a draw.

Analysis diagram

What was it that Carlsen did not like here? Sergey Shipov suggests the fol lowing variation: 1 6 . . . V!/d8 1 7. tDbc5 Axg2 1 8. tDxf8 Axf1 1 9 . 'Wxh7+ �xf8 20. tD b7 V!/d7 21 . tDxd6 flc6 22. tbxf7 �xf7 23. flxf1 , and White wins a pawn. But 21 . . . V!/xd6 22. 'Wh8+ �e7 23. 'Wxc8 Axe2 must also be considered. White is the exchange up, but the d4-pawn, supported by the bishop, is a real force. In addition the white king is a concern . Let us consider a possible

1 33


continuation: 24. l:;!c1 �f6! (out of harm's way!) 25. l:;!c7 (25 . Wfc7 Wle5!?) 25 . . . Wib4 26. �g2 Wle1 27. l:;!c1 Wid2 28. l:;!c5 Ad3 29. Wlb7 �g6 and Black is alright. But these and other variations remained off-screen , since the two players continued playing at high speed , demonstrating confidence in their home preparation.

1 5. �xc5

If 1 5 . dxc5, then 1 5 . .. �e4! is good .

1 5 •. . J.e4 1 6. Wc3 e5!

For the sacrificed pawn Black has developed great activity. For example, bad for White is 17. �xeS Axg2 18. �xg2 Axe5 1 9. dxe5 �e4 when he has to give up his queen.

17. e3 J.xc5 1 8. dxc5 Wd5

It was only now that Kramnik stopped to think. And he had plenty to ponder. Black has successful ly solved his opening problems.

8

7

a b

6 .\

c d e I

I f g h

• • .\ .\ .\ �

5 .\ 8 'if .\ --4 .t 3 � 8 CiJ 8 2 8 8 1 1:,

a b

1 9. laad1 WaS

c d e

8 � 8 .: w f g h

8

7

6 5 4 3 2 1

1 9 . . . '1Wb7 was more active, but Carlsen only took into account the nuances known to him with the defence of the back rank.

20. �h4 J.xg2 21 . �xg2 �e4

As Pushkin said: 'One dawn to replace another hastens'. Now White has to watch out for the possible manoeuvre . .. �e4- g5-f3.

22. Wxe5 laxc5 23. 'Wd4

If 23. Wif4 possible is 23 . . . �g5 24. �h1 h6 fol lowed by the invasion of the rook on the 2nd rank.

a b c d e

a b c d e f g h

23 . . • 1ac4!

A multi-purpose move. The rook d rives the queen off its central position and frees the knight for the manoeuvre to f3. I n the event of 23 ... l:;!c2 24. �f4 (after 24. �e1 f!e2 25 . �f3 h6 26 . a3 f!c8 the b lack pieces occupy their optimally active positions) 24 . . . �g5 25. 'l!l'ld5 �f3+ (weaker is 25 ... Wixd5 26. f!xd5 �f3+ 27. �g2 �d2 28. l:;!e1 with the threat of the f!e2 pin , while after 28 . . . f!xb2 29. �d3! f!b1 30 . f!xb1 �xb1 31 . �b4 White again obtains an extra pawn) 26. �g2 Black has either to withdraw his knight or work out the consequences of the mutual pin after 26 . . . �d2 27. Wxa8 f!xa8 28. f!fe1 l:;!d8.

24. 'Wd3

After 24. Wle5 , apart from the t rivial 24 . . . f!c5, there are also other possibilities. Black undoubted ly has ful l compensation

1 34

D. Jakovenko - M. Carlsen

for the pawn, although it is sufficient only to maintain the balance, not more.

24 .. .ti�g5 25. b3 �c5 26. h4

To avoid standing for ever under the threat of the check on f3.

26 . . . �f3+ 27. �h1

a b c d e 8 'ii' 7

6 .l 5 .l l. 4 3 fj, 2 fj,

a b c d e f g h

27 . . . 'Wc8

8

6 5

How can one refrain from threatening mate on h3? But Black's position is so good , that he does not need to hurry. For example, he cou ld first have developed his rook -27 . . . gea , opened an escape square for his king with . . . h7-h6, and then taken a decision.

28. �f4 'Wg4!

Otherwise with <;!;>g2 White wil l d rive away the knight.

29. 'Wd7 �f5!

Magnus's motto is 'on ly forward ' ! The exchange sacrifice on f4 is now on the agenda. Kramnik has to find a way to save himself.

way to save the game is by a countersacrifice of a rook.

a b c d e 8 8

7 'iV 6

5 :t: .l 5 4 fj, 'iJJ fj, 4 3 fj, 1.1\ B 3 2 fj, fj, 2

:t: W 1 a b c d e f g h

32. 'We6+ �h8 33. 'Wxf5!

Exploiting the absence of an escape square for the king, White exchanges the queens.

33 . . . 'Wxf5 34. �xf5 �xf5 35. �d1 g5

Black cannot get away with half-measures - 35 . . . g6 36. <;!;>g2.

36. hxg5 �xg5 37. fxg5 �xf2 38. a4 bxa4 39. bxa4 �a2 40. �d4

Draw. The tempo play in the final stage of the game is impressive. The two p layers proved worthy of each other. Even so, there was a smal l 'p lus' for Carlsen, even if only a moral one - in his opening preparation he surpassed none other than Kramnik.

Game 29 D. Jakovenko - M. Carlsen

Moscow 2007 Nimzo-lndian Defence [ E20]

1 . d4 �f6 2. c4 e6 3. �c3 Ab4 4. �f3 30. �d5 �xf4 31 . exf4 f5

White goes in for the Romanishin Variation Again mate on h3 is threatened . The only with the fianchetto of the bishop. The main

1 35

Chapter 2 The Way to the Top

continuations are 4. e3 and 4. 'Wc2. 18. Af4

4 .•• c5 5. g3 cxd4 6. �xd4 0-0 7. J.g2 d5 8. cxd5 �xd5 9. 'Wb3

a b c d e f g h

6

5 .l

1.& .i.. tiJ � ti}

2 � �

4

3

1 � i,

8 �. . .l .l .l ?

6

5 4

3

a b c d e f g h

A universal move in this type of position. White counters the pin on the knight and attacks the d5-point.

9 . . . Wa5

9 . . . 'Wb6 is weaker in view of 10 . Axd5 exd5 1 1 . Ae3. 9 . . . tDc6 1 0. tDxc6 bxc6 1 1 . 0-0 Was 1 2. Ad2 leads to a transposition of moves.

1 0. Ad2 �c6 1 1 . �xc6 bxc6 12 . 0-0 Axc3 1 3. bxc3

After the exchange of the bishop 1 3. Axc3 tDxc3 14. bxc3 Aa6 Black easily equalises. For example, the game Moiseenko-Zugic (Toronto 2003) continued 1 5. 'Wb4 Wxb4 1 6. cxb4 §ab8 17. a3 Axe2 1 8. §fc1 §fc8 19. Axc6 �f8 20. f4 �e7 21 . �f2 Aa6 %-%.

1 3 ••• Aa6 14. Elfd1 'Wc5

a b c d e 8 .1 7 .l 6 l.& .l 5 4 � .i.. 3 � 2 � 1 � �

8

6

'if 5

a b c d e f g h

This battle took place at the peak of the variation's development, where much was decided by nuances, since this position was studied at the highest level . And although it is considered favourable for White, who has the two bishops, Black's resources are also quite considerable: his light-square bishop can be included in the fight for the d-file and in the play on the kingside. True, there are also drawbacks: Black's queenside pawns are in need of defence.

White began developing his bishop at f4 after a detailed investigation had been made of 1 8 . Ae3, putting the queenside under attack. After Black carried out his main idea of exploiting the weakness of the light squares: 1 8 . . . Ae2 19 . §e1 (1 9. §d2 §ab8, Kasparov - Anand, Wijk aan Zee 2000) 1 9 . . . tDc4 20. Wc5 §fd8 2 1 . e5?! (21 . h3!?) 21 . . . tDb2! 22. Wxc6 tDd3, where he achieved the better game (Bacrot Grischuk, Cap d 'Agde 2003), interest in the move 1 8. Ae3 fel l away.

Preventing c3-c4, which is possible after �

1 8 ••• c5 14 . . . Axe2.

15. e4 Ac4 1 6. 'Wa4 �b6 1 7. Wb4 Wh5

Nothing is given by 17 . . . 'Wxb4 1 8 . cxb4 §fd8.

B lack is at the parting of the ways: should he drive back the queen or the bishop? Carlsen begins by driving back the queen, but in so doing he takes into account the

1 36


experience of the game Grischuk - Gelfand (World Championsh ip, Mexico 2007), where B lack included 1 8 . . . Ae2 1 9 . l::!e1 and wanted both the one and the other - 1 9 . . . cS 20. Wb3 eS, expecting 21 . Ae3 tDc4. But there fol lowed 21 . Ac1 ! , when Black faced an unpleasant white initiative on the queenside: 21 . . . l::!ac8 22. a4 Ac4 23. Wb2 Wg6 24. aS tDd7 2S. l::!d1 Wc6 26. Ah3 Ae6 27. Axe6 Wxe6 28. Ae3 §c7 29. Wa2! (the exchange of queens guarantees White control of both the open fi les, d and b) 29 . . . Wxa2 30. §xa2 tDf6 31 . f3 , and White obtained clearly the better endgame.

The alternat ive 1 8 . . . eS a l lows Wh ite to attack the c6-pawn. For example, the game Najer- Jakovenko (Moscow 2006) cont i nued 1 9 . Ae3 Ae2 20. l::!e1 tDc4 21 . Wcs l::!fd8 22. l::!ab1 h6 23. h3! tDxe3 24 . Wxe3 Ac4 2S. a4 aS 26. WcS Ae6 27. h4 l::!d2 ! , where for the pawn B lack gained good counterplay. But it is qu ite poss ib le that White's p lay can be improved .

1 9. Wb2

t inued 20. Ae3 l::!fc8 21 . f3 Wg6 22. a4 aS 23. Ah3 Ae6? (after 23 . . . !:!cbS 24. Wa3 Ae2! Black wou ld have had counterplay) 24. Wxb6 Axh3 2S. Wxg6 fxg6 (after 2S . . . hxg6 26. g4 fS 27. §dS fxg4 28. fxg4 Axg4 29. AxeS al l the black pawns are weak) 26. �f2 , and White achieved c learly the better endgame.

20. �e1

A dubious decision to concede the d-fi le, not supported subsequently by any idea. 20. f3 came into consideration , but blocking the diagonal of his bishop apparently did not come into White's plans.

20 . . . �d7

Carlsen's abi l ity to p lace his pieces on their best squares characterises h im as an adherent of the c lassical style of play. Black prepares the doubling of his rooks, at the same time defending the a7-pawn, and leaves open the possibility of including the second rook in the defence of the cS-pawn in the event of Wa3.

21 . h3

A month later at the 2007 World Cup in White has to reckon with the threat of a Khanty-Mansiysk, Cheparinov in his game with Carlsen made an attempt to improve White's play with 1 9. Was. The game continued 19 . . . eS 20. Ae3 Ae2 21 . l::!e1 tDc4 22. Wa6 tDxe3 23. §xe2 tDxg2 24. �xg2 and, despite the symmetry of the pawn weaknesses on the queenside, the black pawns proved more vulnerable.

19 . . . �ad8

A more natural continuation than 19 . . . eS? ! , which makes the defence of the cS-pawn more d ifficu lt . For example , the game Bacrot -Grischuk (Poikovsky 200S) con-

rook invasion of the second rank, and in the event of this he prepares g3-g4.

21 . . . h6

Carlsen also makes a usefu l wait ing move, leaving open the possibi l ity of . . . l::!c8 in the event of Wa3.

22. a4

(see next diagram)

A pointless advance in the given situation , since an attack on the queenside is not a real ity.

1 37


a b c d e 8

7 ... 6 � 5 ... 4 � .i. 3 � 2 Wi 1 :

a b c d e f g h

22 . . . .ta6!

8

7

A subtle move. The bishop vacates an important square for the knight , without blocking the d-file, which cou ld have occurred after 22 . . . Ad3.

23. Wa2

was intending to answer with 25 . . . g5! . Now if 26. Ac1 ? there fol lows a rook invasion - 26 . . J!d1 27. Aa3 �xe1 + 28. �xe1 �d1 29. �xd1 'Wxd 1 + 30. �h2 'Wa4 and the queenside comes under attack by Black, and after 31 . Af1 Ab7! 32. Axc4 'Wd1 the kingside also col lapses. White has to throw caution to the winds: 26. g4 'Wg6 27. Ae4 'Wg7 28. Ag3 tbd2, but the in itiative remains with Black.

25 . . . e5 26. g4

White loses after 26. Ac1 ? �d1 27. g4 �xe1 ! 28. gxh 5 �dd1 , a lso pick ing u p the bishop.

26 . . . Wg6 27. Axc4 exf4!

Transposing into a heavy piece ending by 27 . . . Axc4 28. Wxc4 exf4 29. Wxc5 �d3

This prophylactic queen move in the event would have left White with counterplay -

of . . . tbc4 ind icates that Jakovenko has 30· 'Wf5 'Wd6 31 · e5 'Wd5 32. e6.

reconciled himself to waiting tactics. It was 28. AdS f3! more logical to return the rook to the d-file by playing 23. g4 'Wh4 24. �ed1 .

Fixing the kingside in anticipation of . . . h6-h5.

23 . . . §fd8 24. a5 �c4

a b c d e 8

7 ... 6 .i_ 5 � 4

3 2 Wff 1 :

a b c d e f g h

8

7

8 a b c

7 ... 6 .i_

d e K K

5 � .l i, 4 � 3 � 2 'iY 1 : .=.

f g h

• ... ...

� �.

� ... � �

� a b c d e f g h

29. c4?

8

7

6

5

4

3 2

25. At1 It is na"lve to hope to shelter behind the

White could have parried the threat of 25. . . bishop, since Carlsen has already found e5 with the rad ical 25. e5 , which Carlsen the key to the enemy king. White should

138


have given up the exchange: 29. l::!.e3 Ae2! (29 . . . Wf6 30. c4 h5 31 . e5 Wh4 32. l::!.xf3 leaves White with some hopes) 30. l::!.xe2 fxe2 31 . Wxe2, when his active bishop gives compensation.

29 . • • h5 30. �h2 Wf6!

Black moves his queen closer to the king, keeping 'up his sleeve' a delayed-action mine. The g4-pawn wil l not run away, especia l ly as after 30 . . . hxg4 White wou ld have defended with 31 . l::!.g1 Wf6 32 . l::!.ad1 ! gxh3 33. Wb3.

31 . Iig1?!

The rook on a1 should have been moved out of range of the queen - 31 . l::!.ad1 , and after 31 . . . \Wf4+ 32. �h1 hxg4 White can defend by 33. l::!.g1 Wh6 34. l::!.g3 (variation by Shipov).

31 . •. hxg4

a b c d e f g h B .i • B

7 .l .i .t .t 7

6 .i_ 'iV 6

s f::, .t i.. 5

4 £::, £::, .t 4

3 .t £::, 3

2 '{i £::, � 2

1 .: .: a b c d e f g h

h2, White has to accept the loss of the exchange - 33. Wxc4 Wxa1 .

32. Iiab1?

Jakovenko sensed the danger and moved his rook away, but to the wrong square. 32. �ad1 , defending the bishop, was essential.

32 . . . Axc4!

That's it! The fortress on d5 col lapses, and the exposed king cannot withstand the attack by the heavy pieces.

33. Wxc4

If 33. Axc4 Black decides matters with 33 . . . l::!.d2, when 34. Axf7+ fails to 34 . . . �f8.

33 . . . Wf4+ 34. Iig3 Iixd5!

The e4-pawn is pinned , and al l that remains for White is to sacrifice his queen for two rooks, since after 35. hxg4 l::!.d1 there is no defence against . . . Wh6+ with a decisive invasion of the queen . White does not have sufficient compensation - this is not one of those cases where the rooks have operational scope .

35. Wxd5 Iixd5 36. exd5 c4

While the rook is pinned , the pawn swiftly advances towards the queening square .

37. Iid1 c3 38. d6 c2 39. Iid3 Wc4!

The axe is raised ! If 32 . �xg4 Carlsen had One senses that Carlsen is savouring the

prepared 32 . . . Axc4! , and since 33. Axc4 position .

i s not possible on account of 33 . . . �d2 40. gr93 Wc6 41 . Iid3 Wc5! 34. Wa4 l::!.xf2+ 35. �g1 �fd2! with the ir-resistible threats of . . . Wd4+ and . . . We5- White resigned .

139

..;;;. ___________ c_hapter 2 · The Way to the To,p_ ------------

After the Tal Memorial , how cou ld he not play in the world blitz championship with the participation of the world champion Anand, which was held two days later there in Moscow, in the prestigious GUM building on Red Square? Carlsen battled selflessly in the double-round tournament with 20 participants, and finished in an honourable 9th place, with a score of 20% points. Of course, 38 games with the strongest blitz players in the world was a severe strain , especial ly as two days later the World Cup was starting in Khanty-Mansiysk.

Carlsen cou ld rightly consider himself a veteran of the knock-out system, he liked the fierce struggle in mini-matches, and he was improving tournament by tournament. We should remind you : in Tripoli 2004 Magnus went out in the first round, in Khanty-Mansiysk 2005 he reached the fourth , but in Khanty-Mansiysk 2007 he played six stages. 'The knock-out suits the young more than experienced players,' Carlsen was to say after the end of the tournament. ' I n particular because it is easier for us to recover, and because nothing special is expected of us. Before the World Cup I didn't have many expectations. I wasn't afraid of anyone, but also I did not consider myself the favourite. I simply came along and played. It turned out wel l . I hope this wil l also continue in the future.'

The start was difficult , as fatigue told after the continuous marathon. The respite in the 'entry' match with the Australian Zhao Zong Yuan (2-0) was purely symbolic for Magnus, since his subsequent opponents did not al low him to relax. Much strength was used on a protracted endgame in the first game with Naiditsch , whom he managed to overcome only in the tie-break (3-1 ). Things took a difficult course in the match with Dominguez, who in the first game so zealously tried to spoil Magnus's birthday, that on this occasion too he was thinking about the tie-break. But the second game went wel l (1 %-%), and subsequently his play improved . By the same score 1 %-% he won his mini-matches against Adams and Cheparinov.

Game 30

M. Carlsen - L. Dominguez

World Cup, Khanty-Mansiysk 2007


1 . e4 c5 2. �f3 d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. �xd4 �f6 5. �c3 a6 6. J.e2 e5 7. �b3 J.e7 8 . .tgs

The pin on the knight is a natural reaction to 6 . . . e5. By the threat of the exchange on f6 White discloses the weakness of the d5-point and the d6-pawn .

8 . . . J.e6 9 . .lxf6 .lxf6

The modern experience of the Sicilian Defence (and earlier - of the King's Indian Defence in the variation with . . . tDb8-d7 and . . . e5xd4) has shown that the weakness of the backward d6-pawn is fu l ly compensated by Black's active piece play in the centre.

Black is not concerned about his d6-pawn being inadequately defended - he can support it by retreating his bishop to e7 or cover it with his knight from d4 after the exchange of the knight on b3.

1 0. 'Wd3

(see next diagram)

140

M. Carlsen - L. Dominguez

a b c d e f g h

'if .!. a 7 al al al 7

al .i. .i. 6

5 al 5

4 8 4

3 QJ QJ � 3 2 8 8 8 � 8 8 8 2 1 : � : 1

a b c d e f g h

10 . . . Ag5

An original idea - Black prevents White's queenside castl ing. The classical continuation is considered to be 10 . . . �c6 1 1 . 0-0-0 Ae7 12 . �b1 0-0 1 3. �dS AgS. A characteristic game, for example, is KramnikAnand (Wijk aan Zee 2004), which continued 14 . h4 Axh4 1 S. g3 Af6 1 6. 'Wf3 AgS 17. 'WhS h6 1 8. f4 Af6 1 9. �d2 �d4 20. Ac4 §c8! 2 1 . c3 �bS 22. fS AxdS 23. AxdS §xc3! 24. 'Wg6! (or 24. bxc3 �xc3+ 2S. �c2 CL!xdS! 26. exdS 'WaS 27. 'Wf3 §c8+ 28. �b1 §c3 with equal play) 24 . . . 'Wb6 2S. §xh6! and the players agreed a draw in view of perpetual check - 2S . . . �a3+ 26. �a1 �c2+ 27. �b1 �a3+.

The plan with control of the dS-point is also possible - 1 0 . . . 0-0 1 1 . 0-0-0 Ae7 12 . �dS AxdS 1 3. 'WxdS 'Wb6 14 . §hf1 �d7 1 S. �b1 �f6 .

1 1 . Eld1 �c6 12 . a3

The variat ion with the win of a pawn -12 . 'Wxd6 'Wxd6 13 . f!xd6 �e7 14 . f!d1 �b4 1 S . Ad3 §ac8 1 6 . 0-0 f!hd8, where the activity of the black pieces guarantees ful l compensation - would undoubted ly be a bonus for the opponent.

12 . . . Axb3 13. cxb3 �d4 14. b4 §c8

Black makes a seemingly useful wait ing move; after 14 . . . 0-0 he was wrongly afraid of 1 S . h4, for the reason that White has insufficient resources to conduct an attack on the kingside. The variation 1 S . 0-0 g6 1 6. Ag4 looks more real , with the idea of advancing the pawn to fS, since the 1 6 . . . fS counter has its d rawbacks: 1 7. exfS gxfS 1 8. Ah3!? (1 8. Af3 'Wd7 1 9. AdS+ �h8 20. CL!e2 is also good) 18 . . . 'Wd7 1 9. f4 , and Black may have problems with the defence of his fS-pawn.

1 5. o-o o-o 1 6. Ag4!

It is useful to retain this bishop, 'urging' the rook to go to c6 where, strangely enough, it proves to be out of play.

1 6 . . . Eic6 1 7. g3 g6 1 8. f4 Ah6 1 9. Elf2 Ag7

a b c d e f g h 8 'i¥ .�. . 8 7 ·� J---.._ al .i. al 7 6 al .!. all I al 1 6

5 al 5 4 8 � 8 8 � 4

3 8 Qj� 8 3 2 8 : 8 2 1 : � 1

a b c d e f g h

Somehow imperceptibly it has transpired that in this unpretentious manner Carlsen has outplayed his opponent. Despite the apparently active placing of the knight on d4 and the rook on the c-fi le, they are effectively out of play. At the same time the wh ite pieces are ready for an offensive on the kingside, and it is not easy for Black to create counterplay.

141

------------------ Chapter 2 · The Way to the Top

20. f5! 'Wg5 21 . Ah3 Ah6

I ntending to exploit the weakening of the dark squares by 22 . . . 'We3.

22. §e1 b5 23. mg2

a b c d e f 9 h

The temptation to drive in the pawn wedge 23. f6 , constructing a kind of trap around the enemy queen , was very great. But then the position becomes closed and there is a protracted battle in prospect . At the same time, as Carlsen comments, he sensed that the opponent was experiencing some discomfort and that it was possible to await a more favourable outcome. Taking account of this, a usefu l waiting move was made.

23 . . . §a8?

Magnus's intu ition did not let him down. Black is unable to find a sensible plan of defence, and he commits a mistake, leading to disaster. The idea of switching the rook via a8-a7-c7, in order to double rooks, looks rather abstract , since it requi res too much time. In anticipation of tDd5 he should have considered prophylaxis - 23 . . . c;!>h8, but after 24. tDd5 Wd8 again looming up is the idea of the wedge f6 fol lowed by the advance of the h-pawn . 23 . . .lk7 24. tDd5 !!a? 25. !!ef1 is also too passive for Black.

It would appear that it is already hard to offer h im any good advice.

24. fxg6 hxg6

I n the event of 24 . . .fxg6 the unfortunate position of the rook at a8 is d isclosed -25. Ae6+! tDxe6 26. 'Wd5 !!ac8 27. Wxe6+ c;!>h8 28. tDd5 and the concerted actions of the queen and kn ight shou ld bring a win (variation by Carlsen). For example, if 28 . . . !!f8, then 29. tDf6 is strong, with the threat of winning the queen by h2-h4.

25. Ad7!

The poor rook! Black has reason to regret his superficial move 14 . . . !!c8. Incidentally, the proud knight at d4 is also sti l l playing the role of observer.

25 . . . §c4 26. b3 §c7 27. �d5!

Coord inat ing the actions of kn ight and bishop. Black cannot avoid loss of materia l : under threat is not on ly his rook, but also his queen in view of the threat of tDd5-f6+ and h2-h4.

a b c d e f 9 h a .I • 8

7 .� � £ 7

6 £ £ £ j_ 6

5 £ tt:J £ 'iV 5

4 � � � 4

3 � � � � 3 2 l!t � � 2

l!t a b c d e f 9 h

27 . . . §c1?

Now Black loses h is queen . He should have accepted the loss of the exchange by retreating 27 . . . 'Wd8, although it is clear

142


that the win for White wou ld be merely a question of time.

28. h4! §xe1

If 28 . . . \Wd8, then 29. Z!xc1 Axc1 30. '1Wf1 is decisive.

29. hxg5 .txg5 30 • .tg4 §a1 31 . a4

Rook for queen is clearly insufficient compensation. Dominguez decided to play on to the time control .

31 . . . g;,g7 32. �c3 §a3 33. axb5 axb5 34. �xb5 �xb5 35. 'Wxb5 .te3 36. §f1 §a2+ 37 . .te2

Not only a retreat, but also the start of an attack on the f7-pawn .

37 . . . §a7 38. g;,h3 §a8 39 • .tc4 §h8+ 40. g;,g4 §h5 41 . §xf7+ g;,h6 42. 'Wd7

Black resigned .

Game 31 M. Carlsen - M. Adams

World Cup, Khanty-Mansiysk 2007 Nimzo-/ndian Defence [ E36]

1 . d4 �f6 2. c4 e6 3. �c3 .tb4 4. Wc2 d5 5. a3 .txc3+ 6. 'Wxc3 dxc4

English solidarity. Fol lowing the prescription of Nigel Short , Michael Adams concedes the centre, in order to develop his light-square bishop with gain of tem po. The main continuations are considered to be 6 . . . c5 and 6 . . . tile4.

7. Wxc4 b6 8. Af4

Cup, Mikhail Gurevich played 8. tilf3 0-0 9. Af4 against Adams, and after 9 . . . Aa6 he retreated 10. 'Wc2 (1 0. '1Wxc7 Wxc7 1 1 . Axe? Z!c8 12 . Af4 tilbd7 wou ld have transposed into the present game) 1 0 . . . tilbd7 1 1 . Z!d1 WeB 12 . g3 c5 1 3. Ag2 Ab7 1 4. dxc5 and offered a draw, which , natural ly, was accepted . How can one reject upholding the black pieces without a fight in a mini-match of two games? In the second game Adams made successfu l use of the white pieces.

8 . • . Aa6

The same idea can be carried out , without sacrificing a pawn - 8 . . . tild5 9. Ag3 Aa6, as Onischuk p layed against Carlsen in a blitz match for the first prize at the tournament in Biel . There fol lowed 10. Wa4+ \Wd? 1 1 . Wc2 '1Wb5 12 . tilf3 tilc6? and here 13. b4! with the threat of 14 . e4 wou ld have won .

Therefore 9 . . . 0-0 10 . tilf3 Aa6 is more accurate, as in the game Beliavsky- Rozentalis (Baden 2007). There fol lowed 1 1 . \Wa4 Wd7 1 2 . 'Wc2 c5 13. tilg5 tilf6 1 4. Ae5 cxd4 1 5 . Axf6 d3 1 6 . exd3 gxf6 1 7. tile4 Wd4 1 8. Wc3 %-%.

a b

5 4 3 B 2 B 1 .:

a b

c d e 'iV .

f 9 h

.1. 1. 1. 1.

· �

VIHB �

B B B B

8

7

6 5 4 3 2

� � ttJ .: 1 c d e f 9 h

Carlsen is ready to engage in a theoretical 9. 'Wxc7 Wxc7 1 0. Axc7 0-0 discussion, by choosing the most critical variation with the acceptance of the pawn Strangely enough, this natural move proved sacrifice. I n the 2nd round of the World to be a novelty. Black does not hurry to

143


determine the position of his knight, keeping open the option of both . . . CL!d7 and . . . CL!c6. Before this the main cont inuation was considered to be 10 . . . CL!c6 1 1 . tDf3. For example, the game Wang Hao-Jakovenko (Poikovsky 2008) continued 1 1 . . . );tc8 12 . Af4!? 0-0 1 3. );tb1 );tfd8 14 . e3 Axf1 1 5 . );txf1 CL!e4 1 6. c;t>e2 tL!aS 1 7. );tfd1 CL!b3 1 8. CL!e1 g5 1 9. Ag3, and here after 1 9 . . . hS 20. f3 CL!xg3+ 21 . hxg3 aS Black could have held the position. The game went 19 . . . f5 20. Ae5 c;t>f7 21 . f3 and White retained an advantage.

1 1 . <tlf3 Jac8 1 2 . .tf4 <tlbd7

For the sacrificed pawn Black has a lead in development and control of the c-fi le. The question is whether White can neutral ise these temporary factors, whi le retain ing his extra pawn.

1 3. <tld2!?

The start of an impressive manoeuvre.

13 ••. Jac2

The best reply was 13 . . . tDh5! , according to Adams, leaving the evidence in parentheses.

14. Jab1 Jaac8

8 a b c

.I 7 . 6 -*. . 5 4

d e

�

f 9 h •

• • • · �

� �

8 7 6 5 4

3 � 3 2 � .I CD � � � � 2

:J:l � ii, :J:l 1 a b c d e f 9 h

�----------------

1 5. <tlb3!

Now the depth of Carlsen's idea becomes apparent. He takes his knight to a1 , from where it d rives away the rook.

15 ••• .tc4

An original decision , to say the least. Black goes in for a forc ing l i ne, s ince his play has come to a standsti l l . I n the event of 1 5 . . . tL!dS 1 6. Ad2 tD7f6 1 7. f3 the move e2-e4 cannot be avoided , whi le if he attempts to prevent it with 1 6 . . .f5, then after 1 7. CL!a1 );t2c7 1 8 . e3 Axf1 1 9 . c;t>xf1 eS 20. dxe5 tL!xeS 21 . c;t>e2 White consolidates his forces, retaining a sound extra pawn.

1 6. <tla1 ! .ta2 17. <tlxc2 .lxb1 18. <tla1 <tld5

The attempt to cut off the bishop from the c1 -square - 1 8 . . . );tc4 1 9. e3 );tc8 20. �d1 CL!e4 21 . Ag3 does not prevent White from completing his development after Af1 -a6.

1 9 • .td2 e5

a b c d e

a b c

8

6 5 4 3

ii, � � � � 2 � ii, :J:l 1

d e f 9 h

A unique situation: White's passive pieces block the enemy rook's access to his rear, h is kingside is undeveloped , but Black has no way of strengthening his position. Therefore he makes a last attempt to sup-

1 44

M . Carlsen - M. Adams

port his fading initiative, as otherwise after f2-f3 and e3-e4 his opening idea wil l have been a failure.

20. e3!?

Also possible is 20. dxe5 tbxe5 21 . e3 (intending Aa6 and �e2) 21 . . . Ad3 (weaker is 2 1 . . . tbd3+ 22 . Axd3 Axd3 23. f3 f5 24. �f2 �f7 25. �d1 ) 22. Ae2, when the black pieces occupy highly active positions (variation by Adams). But not for long . Let us continue: 22 . . .f5 23. f4 Axe2 24. �xe2 t'i:lc4 25. �c1 �c7 26. �c2 b5 27. b3! t'i:lxa3 28. �xc7 tbxc7, and with his knight cut off at a3 it is un likely that Black can hold the position . There can fol low 29. �d3 (with the threat of Ab4) or 29. Ab4 t'i:lb1 30. �d3.

20 . . . exd4 21 . exd4 �b8

The manoeuvre 21 . . . tbf8 22. Aa6 �e8+ 23. �d1 tbe6 looks more logical , threatening after . . . tbdc7 to regain the pawn. But here too White retains the advantage: 24. �e1 �d8 25. tbb3.

22. f3 �c6 23. £c4

Black succeeds in exchanging the l ightsquare bishop: 27. Ae3 t'i:lf4+ 28. �f2 tbd3+ 29. Axd3 Axd3, obtaining opposite-colour bishops and setting up new defensive lines. For example: 30. �d1 Aa6! 31 . d5 Ab7 32. d6 tbd5 33. tbc2 f6 and . . . �d8.

24. �f2 .tf5 25. �b3

White has managed to retain his extra pawn, but Black's control of the d5 blockading point leaves him with defensive resources.

a b c d e f 9 h 8 .!. 8

7 ... ... ... ... 7

6 1. 1.& 6

5 1.& .i. 5

4 i, � 4

3 � [jj � 3

2 � i, � � � 2

: 1 a b c d e f 9 h

25 . . . .te6 26. flc1 f6 27. a4 aS?!

A careless move, al lowing Black to rein- This natural reaction to the threat of a4-force the blockade at d5. 23. �f2 with the aS a l lows Wh ite to regrou p his pieces. threat of Aa6 was more accurate. Then 27 . . . �f7 (with the idea of exchanging the 23 . . . Aa2 is dubious in view of 24. b3 t'i:lxd4 l ight-square bishops after . . . tbde7) 28. �e1 25. Ac4, when Black has problems in re- tbce7 fol lowed by . . . tbc7 was stronger. leasing his stray bishop.

28_ .tc3 Therefore it is sounder to support the

knight on d5 - 23 . . . Af5 24. Ac4 Ae6, at the same time setting a small trap: 25. �d1 tt::le3! 26. �xe3 Axc4.

White frees his knight from the defence of the pawn, in order to transfer it to a more active post .

23 . . . fld8 28 . . . At7

23 . . . tt::lcb4 came into consideration: 24. b3 Here also it was not yet too late for 28 . . . �f7 t'i:ld3+ 25. �f1 tbc7 (25 . . . �d8? 26. Axd5 29. �e1 &bee? 30. tbd2 tt::lc7. �xd5 27. �e2) 26 . �e2 �e8+, and , by giving up the blockade of the d4-pawn, 29. �d2 �de7

1 45


8

7

6

a b c

· � 5 . 4 £::, Jl. £::, 3 Jl. 2 £::, ttJ

£::, � £::, £::,

a b c d e f 9 h

30 . .lt1 !

8

6

5 4

3

2

' I could have exchanged the bishops, but with almost no time left I suddenly found a very good plan' , Carlsen comments. He sacrifices the d4-pawn, advantageously transforming the position. Indeed, on this occasion too Magnus's intuition d id not let h im down . After 30. &td1 �xd4 31 . Axf7+ �xf7 32. �c4 the exchange of the d4-pawn for the b6-pawn is indeed favourable for White, but Black could also play 30 . . . Axc4 31 . �xc4 �d5, continu ing his blockading strategy.

30 . . . �xd4 31 . �e1 �dc6 32. �c4 �d5 33. �b1 !

'The point. Black cannot take o n c3 due to the b6-weakness, and as a result White wi l l have time for a desirable regrouping.' (Carlsen)

33 . . . �f8?!

It is not surpris ing that in t ime-trouble Adams does not have the time to see through the opponent's idea, and he makes what is in general a usefu l move, central is ing the king. But why not attack the a4-pawn? 33 . . . Ag6 34. &td1 (34. &tc1 &tea with the idea of . . . �cb4) 34 . . . Ac2 35. &txd5 &txd5

36. �e3 Ab3 37. �xd5 Axd5 suggests itself, retaining practical chances of a draw (variation by Carlsen). 33 . . . Aea is also possible, and if White tries to carry out his intended plan - 34. Ae1 , then 34 . . . �ce7 35. b3 Ag6, switch ing to an attack on the b3-pawn. If 36. &tc1 there can fol low 36 . . . &tea 37. �g1 �e3 3a. Af2 �7d5.

34. Ae1 �e7?!

Continu ing on the same course. It was not yet too late to 'jo in u p on' the a4-pawn - 34 . . . �cb4 35. &td1 (or 35. �g1 &tea 36. Af2 &te6 37. &td1 .tea 3a. b3 Ag6, forcing 39. �a3) 35 . . . �c2 36. Ad2 .tea 37. b3 Ag6 etc. 34 . . . Ag6 35. &td1 Ac2 36. &td2 Axa4 37. �xb6 Ab3 3a. �xd5 &txd5, s impl ifying the posit ion, was also possible.

a b c

a b c d e f 9 h

35. �g1 !

8

This was Carlsen's idea: the king moves away from the centre, but vacates the f2-square for the bishop, from where it attacks the b6-pawn , after which, relying on the strength of h is bishop pair, White gains good winning chances.

One never tires of admiring the depth and precision of Carlsen's ideas! On the 1 3th move he embarked on a manoeuvre

1 46

M . Carlsen - M. Adams

with his knight into the corner of the board , which enabled h im to keep h is extra pawn, and on the 30th he devised a retreat by his pieces, to obtain a strategical ly more favourable position with equal material . The abi l ity to arrange the pieces on the necessary squares, the depth of ideas and the purity of their implementation in some way remind one of Jose Rau l Capablanca.

35 . . . �b8

Black takes his kn ight to d7, to support the b6-pawn. More active play came into consideration - 35 . . . tDeS!? 36. tDxe5 fxe5 37. Ah4+ tDf6 38. �e1 �d6 39. Ag3 tDd7 (39 . . . �e8?! 40. Ab5 �e7 41 . f4!) 40. Ab5 AdS 41 . �d1 (41 . Axd7 �xd7 42. AxeS+ �c5 leads to the creat ion of oppositecolour bishops) 41 . . .�e6, and White has to look for new ways.

36 • .lf2

Carlsen comments that he used h is remaining time studying the king walk after 36. tDxb6! tDxb6 37. Axa5 tD8d7 (37 . . . �d6? 38. Ab4) 38. Ab4+ �e6 39. �e1 + �f5 (39 . . . �d5? 40. Ab5! is bad for Black) and he was unable to find a win. But had there been a l ittle more time, he would surely have found 40. Ad3+ �g5 41 . �e7 tDf8 42. �xf7 .!::lxd3 43. Axf8 tDxa4 44 . .!::lxg7+ with new material gains. It should be added that 39 . . . tDe5 would also not have saved Black after 40. Aa5 .!::lb8 41 . f4 tDxa4 42. fxe5 �d7 (42 . . . tDxb2? 43. exf6+ �xf6 44. Ac3+ �g6 45. �b1 ; 42 . . . tDxb2? 43. Ac4+; 42 . . .fxe5?! 43. Ac7) 43. exf6 gxf6 44. b4 with a technically won endgame. In short, th is could have been a worthy conclusion to the game.

36 . . . �d7 37. S:e1 + �f8 38. S:d1 We7 39. E:e1 + Wf8 40. �d6

8

7

6

3

2

a b c d e

K � ttJ �

a b c d e f g h

40 . . . �e5?!

8

6

5

A mistake on the last move before the t ime contro l . The exchange of the bishop creates a situation where the superiority of the two bishops over the two knights, which have no strong points, is very perceptible. 40 . . . tDc5 was also unsuitable: 41 . tDxf7 �xf7 42. AxeS bxc5 43. Ac4 .!::ld7 44. �d1 �e6 45. f4 g5 46. g3 and Black cannot disentangle h imself (Adams). But 40 . . . Ag8 was more resi l ient.

41 . �xf7 Wxf7 42. E:d1

The centra l i sed black kn ights are hobb led by the wh ite b ishops stand ing at the rear.

42 . . . We7 43. f4 �g4

B lack wou l d have lost m ater ia l after 43 . . . tDxf4 44. �xd8 �xd8 45. Axb6+.

44. E:e1 + Wf8

Consideration should have been g iven to 44 . . . �d6!? 45. Ad4 tDxf4 46. �e4!? g5 47. Axb6 �b8 48. �d4+ �c6 49. Axa5 �xb2 50. Ad2 (if 50. �b4 there fo l lows 50 . . . �a2 with the th reat of 51 . . . �a1 ) 50 . . . tbe6, and the black pieces are more active than i n the game.

1 47

Chapter 2 · The Way to the Top �------------------

45. J.d4 !ad6

45 . . . tDxf4 was dubious in view of 46. Axb6 �d5 47. �e4 g5 48. g3 f5 49. �d4.

46. h3

a b c d e 8 8

7

6 .I 6

,. 5

i, � ,. 4

3 � 3

2 � � 2

J: Ji, � a b c d e f g h

Adams thinks that it was possible to capture the pawn - 46 . . . tDxf4 47. �e4 tbe6 48. �xe6 �xe6 49. hxg4 �e4 50. Axb6 �xa4, but Black would hard ly be able to save such an endgame. For example, 51 . Ab5 �a1 + ( in the event of 51 . . . �xg4 52. Axa5 r!:le7 53. Ac3 the outside passed pawn, supported by the bishops, is bound to win) 52. r!lf2 �b1 53. Ac5+ r!lf7 54. Ac4+ r!:le8 55. b3. The king approaches the centre, after which the b6-pawn is won. Possibly this was the only practical chance, since in the subsequent play Carlsen d id not offer another one, unhurriedly bringing the game to a victorious conclusion.

47. !ad1 !

Dispel l ing Black's last i l l usions (47 . . . tDxf4? 48. Ac5).

47 . . . �f5 48. J.f2 me7

After the rook exchange 48 . . . tDxf4 49. �xd6

tDxd6 50. Axb6 the knights lose their last strong point and are unable to resist the long-range bishops, as occurred in the game, Even so, B lack cannot avoid the exchange of rooks.

49. g4 �h6

After 49 . . . tDfe3? the pin 50. �e1 is decisive.

50. f5 �f7 51 . J.g2 �f4 52. !axd6 �xd6 53. J.xb6 �c4 54. J.c5+ md7

a b c d e f g h 8 8

7 • ... ... 7

6 ... 6

5 ... i, � 5 4 � ,. ,. � 4

3 � 3

2 � i, 2

� a b c d e f g h

55 . .tf1

The position is a purely technical one, and through i nertia Carlsen retains the bishop pair. But, as it transpires, the knights are able to stand up for themselves, and avoiding the exchange merely prolongs the game. 55. b3! tDxg2 (55 . . . tDd2 56. Ae3) 56. *xg2 tDd2 57. b4, creat ing an outside passed pawn, was stronger. 57 . . . tDe4 58. Af8 r!le8 59. bxa5! is an amusing variation.

55 . . . �xb2 56. J.b5+ mda

56 . . . r!lc7 was more resi l ient: 57. Af8 g6 (or 57 . . . tDxh3+ 58. r!lh2 tDf2 59. g5 fol lowed by Axg7) 58. fxg6 hxg6 59. h4, although here too Black is unable to save the game.

1 48

M . Carlsen - I. Cheparinov

57. Ab6+ �e7 58. �h2

Capturing the pawn would have won more quickly - 58. Axa5 tbxh3+ 59. �g2 tbf4+ 60. �f3 tbd5 61 . �e4.

58 . . . �d5 59 . .txa5 �d6 60. Ad2 �c5

Now, when the king has come to the aid of the knights, Wh ite cannot get by without the exchange of one of his bishops.

61. �g3 �c7 62. Ae3+ �b4 63. Ad2+ mcs 64. Ac1 �c4 65. Axc4 �xc4 66. Ad2 �a6 67. aS

Of course, in th is endgame White also has an easy win .

67 . . . �b5 68. �f3 �c5 69. Ac3 h6 70. �e3 �c4 71 . Ad4 �a6 72. �e4 �b4 73. h4 �b5 74. Ac3 �a6 75. �d5 �c5 76. Ad4 �d3 77. �e6

Black resigned.

Game 32 M. Carlsen - I . Cheparinov

World Cup, Khanty-Mansiysk 2007 Torre Attack [ A48]

1. d4 �f6 2. �f3 g6 3 . .tg5

Carlsen chooses the Torre Attack, avoiding the main l ines of the Grunfeld and King's Indian Defences, which are possible in reply to 3. c4. A quite logical decision in a min i-match in the World Cup, where with the 'classical ' time l im it the white pieces were of primary importance and there was a risk of running into a prepared l ine by the productive Bulgarian Topalov-Cheparinov pair ing.

3 . . . .tg7 4. �bd2 d6

The crit ical reply to the development of the kn ight at d2 is 4 . . . d5, restr ict ing its influence in the centre, but the move 4 . . . d 6 also has its vi rtues. However, from a romantic such as Cheparinov one would not expect anyth ing else.

5. e4 0-0 6. c3 c5

a b c d e f g h 8 .i � .i. 'if .! 8

7 .\ .\ .l .l .i. .\ 7 6 � .\ 6

5 i!. 5 4 � � 4

3 � {jj 3

2 � � {jj � � � 2 � � i!. M 1

a b c d e f g h

7. dxc5

The game has transposed i nto a qu iet variat ion of the P i rc- Ufimtsev Defence where, as is wel l known, the attempt to maintain the pawn tension by 7. Ad3 leads to the exchange of White's important darksquare bishop: 7 . . . cxd4 8. cxd4 h6 9. Ah4 tbh5! with good prospects for B lack . I n th is respect the game T i m man -Topalov (Belgrade 1 995) is instructive: 1 0 . 0-0 g5 1 1 . Ag3 g4 12 . tbh4 tbxg3 13. hxg3 Axd4 1 4. CL!f5 Axf5 1 5 . exf5 h5 1 6 . f6 CL!d7 (1 6 . . . e6 1 7. CL!e4 Axf6 1 8. �d2 �g7 or the immediate 1 6 . . . Axf6 is stronger) 1 7. fxe7 �xe7 1 8. Af5 CL!c5 19 . CL!c4 with sharp play, where White has sufficient compensation for the pawn.

7 . . . dxc5 8. Ac4

After 8 . Ae2 CL!c6 9. 0-0 �c7 1 0. �c2 Ae6 Black has an easier game.

1 49


8 . . . �c6 9. 0-0 Yl/c7

9 . . . tila5!? is more active: 10 . Ae2 Ae6 1 1 . �e1 a6 1 2 . Wc2 (or 1 2 . Af4 h6 13 . Wc2 b5 14 . h3 'Wb6 with equal chances) 1 2 . . . b5 13 . �b3 �xb3 14. axb3 We? with good play for Black, Malaniuk- Marin (Romania 1 992).

1 0. Yl/e2

The main continuation is considered to be 1 0. �e1 , after which Black can carry out the same l ine with the exchange of the dark-square bishop: 10 . . . h6 1 1 . Ah4 �h5 12 . 'Wc2 Ag4 13 . Ag3 �xg3 14 . hxg3 h5 1 5 . �f1 Ah6, obtain ing comfortable play, Burmakin - Kurnosov (Ulan Ude 2009).

10 . . . h6 1 1 . Ah4 �h5!

The crucial manoeuvre in this variat ion, leading to the exchange of the dark-square bishop.

12 . 1Ue1

1 4. Ag3 �xg3 1 5. hxg3 b6 1 6. �h2 .thS

A provocative move: Cheparinov invites the enemy fire. 1 6 . . . Ad7 was more circumspect.

17. g4 .tg6 1 8. g3 Dad8 1 9. f4

a b c d e f 9 h 8 .1 .i.e 8 7 .l 'iV .l .l .i. 7 6 .ll.&\ ..t .l 6

5 .l .l 5 4 � BBB 4 3 B VJ!J B 3 2 DB t2J 4:J2 1 l:[ II �

a b c d e f 9 h

1 9 . . . �d4!?

If 12. we3 there can fol low 12 . . . �a5 13 . Ad3 Nevertheless Ivan imposes h is play! The advanced knight is immune on account of

c4 14 . Ac2 g5 1 5. Ag3 �xg3 1 6. hxg3 �d8 the loss of the queen.

with good play for Black.

12 . . . Ag4 1 3. We3! 20. flac1 bS! 21 . Af1

A useful move, moving the queen out of After the active 21 . AdS with the threat of

the p in . Now the natural 1 3 . . . b6 is met by twice capturing on d4, White has to reckon

14 . e5! , shutt ing the g7-bishop out of the with 21 . . . 'Wb6!?, when the attempt to shut in the bishop - 22. f5 Ah7 23. �df3 �xf3+ 24. tilxf3 e6 25. Ab3 c4 leads to the exchange of queens, which does not come into Carlsen's plans.

game.

1 3 . . . g5

After the inc lus ion of 1 3 . . . tila5 1 4 . Af1 and now 14 . . . g5 Black has to reckon with 1 5. �xg5!? hxg5 1 6. 'Wxg5 Wf4! 1 7. h3 Ae6 1 8 . Wxf4 tilxf4 1 9. Axe? �fc8 20. Ag5, when White has three pawns for a knight, which may be advantageous in the endgame.

15

21 . . . gxf4 22. gxf4 �e6 23. eS

The fork 23. fS is parried by 23 . . . Ae5 24. �hf3 Af4 25. We2 �g5, and if 26. fxg6 Black wins by 26 . . . Axd2 27. �xd2 �xd2 28. 'Wxd2 �f3+.

M. Carlsen -I. Cheparinov --------------------

a b c d e f g h 8 K Ke 8

'iV ££..t 7 6 � ..t£ 6 5 � 5

4 � � 4

3 � Wi 3

2 �� 2 l:r l:rlt�

a b c d e f g h

23 . . . f5!

Cheparinov is eager to sacrifice a piece. He cannot remain for ever under the impending threat of the pawn phalanx!

24. exf6 J::lxf6 25. f5 �g5 26. fxg6 J::le6 27. 'Wf2 .le5!

a b c d e f g h 8 K • 8 7 £ 'if £ 7 6 K �£ 6 5 .i. � 5

4 � 4

a b c d e f g h

For the sacrificed piece Black has a strong attack . For example, White loses after 28. tDhf3? Ag3 29. 'Wg2 Axe1 30. tDxe1 'Wf4! or 30. gxe1 gxd2 ! . Somewhat better is 28. tDdf3 Ag3 29. 'Wg2, when after exchanges on e1 - 29 . . . Axe1 30. gxe1 gxe1 31 . tDxe1 - Black retains the in itiative: 31 . . . c4! 32. tDef3 'Wb6+ 33. �h1 'Wxg6, since White's minor pieces are sti l l passive (variation by Shipov).

28.J::lxe5

A pragmatic approach . Without delv ing into detai ls, Magnus e l iminates the powerfu l bishop.

28 . . . 'Wxe5 29. �df3

Here Carlsen wrongly avoids going into an endgame, since the pressure of the heavy pieces on the central fi les is so great that there are no prospects of activat ing the minor pieces. After 29. Ag2 'We2 30. tDdf3 gd1 + 31 . gxd1 'Wxd 1 + 32 . 'Wf1 'Wxf1 + 33. tDxf1 tDxf3+ 34. Axf3 gxg6 35. �f2 he would have obtained a more favourable version of the endgame than that which occurred in the game. As for Sergey Shipov's recommendation 33. Axf1 tDxf3+ 34. tDxf3 a6, this endgame is safer for Black, since it is not possible to retain the g6-pawn -35. tDh4 ge4 36. Ag2 gxg4 37. tDf5 gg5 38. tDxe7+ �f8 39. tDd5 gxg6, and with his outside passed h-pawn Black is not in danger of losing. Also insufficient is 35. �f2 gxg6 36. �g3 gd6 37. Ae2 e5! 38. tDxe5 gd2, when the rook reaches the second rank.

29 . . . �xf3+ 30. �xf3 'Wf4 31 . J::le1 !

Carlsen final ly real ised that he needed to exchange the queens.

31 . . . J::lxe1

It is not clear - who in fact is playing for a win? Black could have captured the g4-pawn - 31 . . . 'Wxg4+ 32. Ag2 gxe1 +, forcing a draw in the variations 33. tDxe1 'Wxg6 34. 'Wxc5 gd1 35. 'Wxe7 'Wg3 36. �f1 'Wf4+ 37. �g1 'Wg3+ or 33. 'Wxe1 'Wxg6 34. 'Wxe7 gd1 + 35. �f2 'Wc2+ 36. �g3 'Wg6+.

32. �xe1 'Wxf2+ 33. �xf2

151

Chapter 2 · The Way to the Top --------------------

a b c d e f g h 8 • 8

7

6 � £ 6

5 5

4 � 4

3 � 3

2 � � � 2

L:iJJt a b c d e f g h

If th is position is compared with the one examined i n the notes to Wh ite's 29th move, it is obvious that the situation is worse for h im.

33 . . J;td2+ 34. �e3 §d1

Black makes things d ifficult for h imself. He should have reduced the number of pawns: 34 . . J:!xb2! 3S. tbd3 .§c2 36. tDxcS .§xc3+ 37. <;!.>d4 .§g3 38. Ae2 <;!,>g7, and after the win of the g- or the a-pawn he is close to a draw. This is confirmed by the variations 39. Ad3 .§xg4+ 40. <;!.>es .§g2 41 . tDe6+ <;!.>g8 42. tbc7 hS or 39. gS hxgS 40. Ad3 a6 41 . tDxa6 eS+ 42. <;!,>e4 <;!,>xg6 43. tDcS g4 44. <;!,>xeS+ <;!.>hS 4S. AxbS .§a3, where the outside passed pawns g ive Black sufficient counterplay.

35. �e2 §a1 36. Ag2 c4

a b c d e I g h 8 • 8

7

6 � £ 6

5 5

4 � 4

3 3

� Jt 2

L:2J a b c d e f g h

The subsequent play in this ending resembles a three-act d rama. Act One - lost i l l usions. Carlsen ignores the sharp move 37. b4, a iming by the t ime control on move 40 to obtain a position with a clearer pawn structure.

37. a3

Good winn ing chances would have been g iven by the energetic 37. b4! , blocking the queenside pawns, which would have enabled the minor pieces to be activated . Let us consider the main variations: a) 37 . . . .§xa2+ 38. <;!.>e3 <;!,>g7 39. Ae4 e5

(otherwise <;!.>d4) 40. tDc2 .§b2 41 . AfS! a6 42. <;!.>t3! .§b3 (or 42 . . . .§a2 43. tDe3 .§a3 44. tDdS) 43. <;!,>e4 .§xc3 44. <;!,>xeS, and White develops an attack on the king;

b) 37 . . . cxb3 38. axb3 a5 ( in the event of 38 . . . �g7 Wh ite attacks with 39. Ae4 .§a3 40. tDg2! .§xb3 41 . tDf4) 39. Ac6! a4 (39 . . . b4 40. c4) 40. b4! , and the a-pawn wi l l be stopped by tDc2.

37 ..• §b1 38. Ae4! §xb2+ 39. tilc2 �g7 40. �e3

a b c d e f g h 8 8

• 7

6 � £ 6

5 5

4 Jt � 4

� 3 2 2

a b c d e f g h

This was the position Carlsen had aimed for. The black pawns have been stopped , and the wh ite pieces are excel lently coord inated . It would appear that the win is

152

M. Carlsen -I. Cheparinov

a matter of technique. I ndeed , after the attem pt to i m pede the king by 40 . . . e5 White creates an attack against i ts opposite number: 41 . &Db4! �b3 42. tDd5 �xa3 43. Af5! b4 44. &De?! (with the threat of &De8+) 44 . . . �f8 (44 . . . � xc3+ 45 . �e4) 45. �e4 bxc3 46. �xeS �e7 (otherwise �f6) 47. &Dd5+ �f8 48. &Df4! �a6 49. �d4, winning the pawns (variations by Shipov). But al l is not so clear.

40 .•. §b3!

Act Two - disappointment. This accurate rook move, tying the king to the c3-pawn , is a kind of cold shower for White. It transpi res that after the i ntended 41 . tDd4 there fo l lows 41 . . . aS 42. �c5 (42 . Af5 �f6 and . . . e7-e6) 42 . . . �xc3 43. �xb5 §g3 44. Af5 �f6 45. &Dd4 �xa3 46. �xc4 §e3 and White is stymied. If 47. &De6 there fol lows 47 . . . �xe6, with the theme of the dark-square corner in mind: 48. g7 �c6+ (or 48 . . . �xg7 49. Axe6 h5! 50. g5 �g6) 49. �b5 �xg7 50. �xc6 h5! 51 . g5 a4. He is forced to retreat h is k ing.

41 . �d2 �f6?

a b c d e f 9 h 8 8

7

6 · � · 6

5 5

4 � 4

3

2 2

a b c d e f 9 h

An unexpected conclusion to the Second Act . After the pin 41 . . . �b2 there is noth ing more sensible for White than 42. �e3, when

Black has to repeat moves 42 . . . �b3 with a probable draw. Now, however, White gains an opportunity to support the g6-pawn and he should be able to win .

42. �d4!

In view of the threatened knight manoeuvre &Dd4-e2-g3-h5, the idea of breaking through with the a-pawn after 42 . . . �b2+ 43. �e3 is too late, and so Black is forced to exchange his b5-pawn for the a3-pawn, which radically changes his pawn structure for the worse.

42 . . . §xa3 43. �xb5 §a5 44. �c7 Wg7

Black also loses after 44 . . . �g5 45. Af5 h5 46. &De8+ �e5 47. gxh5! �xf5 48. g7, when he has to give up his rook.

45. �e6+ �h8 46. �e3 §a1 47. �d4 aS 48. J.c6!

The bishop is hurrying to f7.

48 . . . a4 49 • .tea §g1 50. g5!

The g5-pawn joins the group supporting the g6-pawn - it has to be covered .

50 . . . a3! 51 . .tf7 §xg5!

Here is a surprise! Just try in t ime-trouble coping with the advancing pawns.

52. �xg5 hxg5 53. J.xc4 Wg7

a b c d e f 9 h 8 8

7 7

6 6

5 5

4 4

3

2 2

a b c d e f 9 h

153

Chapter 2 · The Way to the Top �-----------------

Act Three - swings. It has noth ing in common with the preceding acts. It was performed in severe time-trouble by two actors worn out by the very difficult struggle in the midd legame. The strength of the fighters was exhausted, and in such a condit ion, with t ime running out, calcu lat ing work is practical ly impossible. As fortunes swung backwards and forwards, Caissa smi led on her favourite.

54. �d3?

This move throws away the w in , which could have been achieved by the studyl ike 54. �e5! �xg6 55. Aa2. Now the race to queen a pawn - 55 . . . g4 56. �f4 �h5 57. c4 �h4 58. c5 g3 59. �f3! �h3 60. c6 ends with a winning check. It is also possible to win more prosaically: 57. �g3 �g5 58. c4, and Black cannot hold his g4-pawn.

54 . . . �xg6 55. �c2 g4 56. �b3 �f5

In the pawn race, t ime is important . After 56 . . . e5 57. AdS �f5 58. c4 e4 59. c5 e3 Black would also queen one of h is pawns.

57. �xa3 g3?

57 . . . e5 or 57 . . . �e4 wou ld have led to a draw. There is no point i n commenting in depth on instant play in a t ime scramble, but we wil l merely touch on the errors.

58 . .tf1?

Why not the immediate 58. AdS, occupying the long d iagonal?

58 . . . e5?

58 . . . �e4 would have saved the game.

59. �b3?

The blockading 59. Ag2 would have won.

59 . . . �f4?

Here also it was not too late for 59 . . . �e4.

60. J.g2

It is no longer possible to go wrong, as . . . �f3 was threatened .

60 . . . �e3 61 . �c4 �f2 62 . .t.e4

Black resigned.

This and the preceding games used up much of Carlsen's strength . Everyone has their l im it , and in the semi-fi nal he lost without a part icu lar fight to Gata Kamsky (%-1%), who in fact won the World Cup. Questioned whether he was disappointed to have gone out of the World Cup at the semi-final stage, Magnus repl ied: ' I hadn't expected to go so far. And I was very t ired, so basically I was ready to go out any point. ' This was not surprising, since for practically the entire year he had not had any respite, playing tournament after tournament. At a press conference Carlsen looked extremely t ired . Indeed to reach the semi-final of the World Cup after such a lengthy marathon of d ifficult battles was an ind ication of h is fighting spirit. An important stage in his career had come to an end - at the age of 1 7 Carlsen had made h is way to the top and was establ ished among the world el ite.

154

Chapter 3

Life at the Top In 2008 the organisers of the chess fest ival i n Wijk aan Zee were able to assemble the strongest f ield for the main tournament in its ent ire h istory (FI D E category 20). They could hardly have imagined that in such prest ig ious company Carlsen wou ld ach ieve the greatest success i n h is short career. He shared 1 st-2nd p laces with Aronian, ahead of a l l the main nominees in the battle for the world crown . The last year had not been wasted . From a complete fiasco in h is fi rst A tournament in 2007, without a s ing le w in , to a tr iumph with five won games - th is was the resu lt of an enormous amount of work. But as before, Magnus was modest: ' Before the tournament I thought that if I could score 50%, it wou ld not be a bad result , ' he said i n an interview for the magazine 64 Shakhmatnoe obozrenie. ' I wasn't expect ing to win , of course, and the share of fi rst p lace was a p leasant surprise for me.' But , as they say, appetite improves during the meal . Magnus h imself real ised how he was improving from one tournament to the next . Along with the perfecting of h is posit ional understand ing , the techn ique of p laying simple posit ions and in particu lar the endgame, he was also accumu lat ing experience in h is meet ings with the strongest players in the world . His self-esteem was also growing: ' I can no longer consider 50% a good result . Of course, th is is a b ig success, but i n the world there are st i l l many p layers who are stronger than me. To become world champion , I w i l l have to develop and improve in many respects. '

Game33

M. Carlsen - P. Eljanov Wijk aan Zee 2008

GrCmfeld Defence [ 091}

It is rare to win a simple posit ion against a strong g randmaster without any apparent effort , based on factors that are deeply h idden. This game, although without outward effects, is impressive for its completeness.

1. d4 �f6 2. c4 g6 3. �c3 d5 4. �f3 .tg7 5 . .lg5

5

White's system of development associated with h is last two moves has the aim of forcing Black to concede the centre. The roots of White's idea l ie i n the game Alekh ine- Bogoljubow (Vienna 1922), where White fi rst developed h is bishop - 4. Ag5, after which there fol lowed 4 . . . etJe4. Later things were refined: after the inclusion of 4. tDf3 Ag7 the move . . . etJe4 causes White less trouble.

(see next diagram)

Chapter 3 · Life at the Top

a b c d e f 9 h 8 i. �..i.'i¥. i. 8

7 .\ .l .l .l..i. .\ 7 6

5

4

3

� .l ii,

a b c d e f 9 h

6

5

4

3

5 ••• tbe4 6 • .lh4 tbxc3 7. bxc3 dxc4 8. 'Wa4+ 'Wd7 9. 'Wxc4 b6 1 0. e3 .la6 1 1 . 'Wb3 .lxf1 12 . mxf1 0-0

Carlsen's reputation in questions of home preparation had grown so much, that Eljanov avoided 12 . . . tDc6 13 . �e2 0-0, which he had successfu l ly employed in a game with Kiri l Georg iev (Wijk aan Zee 2006) , where after 14. lahd1 tDaS 1S . 'Wb4 lafe8 1 6 . flac1 laac8 1 7. c4 'Wg4 1 8 . h3 'We4 1 9 . 'Wa4 eS he gained qu ite good counterplay.

1 3. me2

a b c d e f 9 h 8 i. � i.e 8

7 .\ � .l 'iV .l .l..i. .l 7 6 .\ L J .\ 6

5 .-I 5 -

[::, ii, 4 4

3 V/i{[::, [::,CiJ 3

2 [::, �[::,[::,[::, 2

1 1:( 1:( 1 a b c d e f 9 h

hoping to exploit the opening of fi les for h is rooks, supported by the long-range bishop on g7.

14. dxc5

14 . lahd1 tbc6 1 S. dxcS is also played , but here Black has already completed his development and he can begin counterplay on the queenside, exploit ing the position of the white king in the centre. For example, the game Neverov - Pavlovic (Hastings 200S/6) continued 1 S . . . 'Wc8 1 6. laab1 bxcS 1 7. 'Wc4 tbaS 1 8. 'WbS tDc6 1 9. 'Wc4 (1 9 . 'WxcS 'Wa6+) 1 9 . . . lab8 20. laxb8 'Wxb8 2 1 . 'WxcS lac8 22 . Axe? (22 . �f1 was more cautious) 22 . . . 'Wb7 23. Ad6 'Wa6+ 24. lad3 tDaS (24 . . . tDeS!? 2S. 'Wxc8+ 'Wxc8 26. AxeS AxeS 27. tbxeS 'We6 also came into considerat ion, obtain ing an outside passed pawn after . . . 'Wxa2) 2S. 'WdS tbc4 26. tbgS tDb2 27. 'Wxf7+ �h8 with sharp play, favourable for Black.

14 •.• tba6!?

Black intends to play his knight to the excel lent square cS with gain of tempo in the event of 1S. cxb6 tDcS 1 6. 'Wc4 axb6 17. lahd1 'Wb7, obtaining excellent compensation for the pawn ( . . . f!a4 is threatened).

1 5. Elhd1 'Wb7

The alternative is 1 S . . . 'Wc7. I n the game Lautier- lvanchuk (Terrasa 1 991) White decided to accept the pawn sacrifice, and this is what happened: 1 6 . cxb6 axb6 1 7. a4 tDcS 1 8 . 'Wb4 laaS 1 9. Ag3 eS 20. tDd2 (or 20. �f1 lafa8 21 . 'Wc4 bS) 20 . . . lafa8 21 . CL!c4 tbxa4! 22. �f1 Af8! 23. tDd6 tbxc3 24. laac1 lacS 2S. lad3 tbe4! 0-1 .

13 ••. c5 But Wh ite is by no means obl iged to

I n provoking the capture on cS, which is accept the pawn sacrifice, and he can play

positionally advantageous for White, Black 1 6 . c6!?, as in the game.

associates this move with a pawn sacrifice, 1 6. c6

156

M. Carlsen - P. Eljanov

Of course, 1 6 . cxb6?! axb6 1 7. !;iab1 tDcS mobi le, in the given specific position they 18 . 'ti'b4 tbe4 did not come into Carlsen's are immobi l ised . Therefore Black should plans. In his preparat ions for the game have thought about preparing to advance he was aiming for a favourable endgame. them - 23 . . . a6 24. Aa3 !;iac8 etc.

16 ... Wxc6 17. Axe7 Eife8 1 8. Aa3 Wxc3 24. �f3 Eiae8 25. h3 f6

Black regains the pawn, since in the event of 18 . . . !;iad8, as played in the game Grivas - Leko (Dortmund 1 992), the compensation for it is insufficient: 1 9 . !;iac1 tbc7 20. c4 tbe6 21 . �f1 'We4 22. !;idS.

19. Wxc3 Axc3 20. Eiac1 Ab4 21 . JJ.b2!

White deploys h is pieces in their most active posit ions.

21 .. . Af8 22. tbd4 tbc5

a b c d e a .I 7 £ 6

5

4

3

a b c d e f 9 h

23. g4!

8

6

5 4

3

A deep move, aimed not only at seizing space, but also at f ighting for the weakened f6-point.

23 •.. Eie4

Here there is noth ing for the rook to do - the knight at d4 stands l ike a rock. According to the theory of positional play, formulated by the fi rst world champion Wi lhelm Stein itz, 'small advantages' should be accumulated . Among these is a queenside pawn majority, which Black has here, as in many Grunfeld-type positions. But, in contrast to other variations with a strong pawn centre for White, where the black pawns are very

Log ical . B lack has gone total ly onto the defensive and he brings his king to the centre.

26. Aa3 �f7 27. Eic2

8 8

7 £ 6 £ 6 5 1.& 5 4 tt:J.I £::, 4

3 � £::, � £::, 3 2 £::, n £::, 2

n a b c d e f 9 h

Carlsen 's technique in this endgame resembles the ' i ntr icate' sty le of Anatoly Karpov in h is best years, when he would lu l l h is opponents with unhurried manoeuvres, maintain ing the pressure and forcing them sooner or later to weaken themselves. White prepares to double h is rooks on one of the files, intending the knight sortie to bS.

27 ..• tba6? This is wrong. The knight at cS was actively placed, and the decision to exchange bishops is a strategic mistake. Now Black's rear, especially the d6-square, is extremely weak, and the wh ite rooks are able to invade. He should have stuck to waiting tactics, for example 27 . . . !;i4e7, offering White a choice: to play an endgame with an isolated cS-pawn after 28. AxeS bxcS 29. ttlb3 (29 . !;ixcS !;ixe3+) 29 . . . !;ic7 30. !;ic4, or continue manoeuvring - 28. tDbS !;ib7, although finding the key to Black's position

157


is not easy. Thus, here the exchange of the erwise the f6-pawn cannot be defended), f8-bishop is not so dangerous: 29. tbd6+ after which the endgame becomes of a Axd6 30. �xd6 �c7, and Black sets up technical nature. Sooner or later the e- and new defensive l ines, since going into the rook end ing by 31. Axc5 bxc5 has its drawbacks, if only because of their drawing tendencies. Apparently, the spirit of the preceding strategy could have been maintained by a pawn offensive on the kingside - 29. h4 with the idea of breaking through, depending on circumstances, with g4-g5 or h4-h5. Here are some possible variations:

a) 29 . . . h6 30. �c4 �e6 31 . tDd4 (or 31 . �d8 Ae7 32. �h8 �g7 33. �a8) 31 . . . �e8 32. tbe2 �c8 33. h5;

b) 29 . . . �e5 30 . Ab2 �e6 31. �cd2 Ae7 32. �d5 a6 33. tbd6+ Axd6 34. �xd6 �c7 35. �d8.

28. £.xf8 mxf8 29. grc6

The start of the decisive invasion.

29 . . . mg7 30. �b5 gr4e7 31 . grdd6 �c5 32. �c7

The capture 32. �xf6? tbd7 leads to the loss of the exchange.

32 . . . grf8 33. h4 grff7 34. �d5

8

6

5 4

3

a b c d e f 9 h 8

6

5

� � 4

� � 3

2 � � 2

a b c d e f 9 h

Complete domination by White. Black is forced to exchange a pair of rooks (oth-

f-pawns wi l l advance, creating a passed pawn.

34 . . . grd7 35. grxd7 �xd7

35 . . . �xd7 36 . tDxf6 �f7 37. g5 tbd7 38. �e4 tDxf6+ 39. gxf6+ �xf6 40. �xf6 <.!?xf6 41 . �d5 leads to a won pawn endgame for White.

36. mg3 �c5 37. f3 h6

Activity with 37 . . . f5 is inappropr iate -38. gxf5 gxf5 39. h5 . 38. h5 tbd3 39. g5 gxh5 40. �h6 is also good for White.

38. �f4 g5

38 . . . �h7 39. h5 g5 40. tbd5 �g7 41. e4 was l ittle better for Black.

39. �h5+ mg6 40. f4 gxf4+ 41 . exf4 mh7 42. t5 m98 43. mt3

The decisive word belongs to the king!

43 . . . �d7 44. me4 mf8 45. grC8+ me7 46. md5 b5 47. grh8 �b6+ 48. mc6 �c4 49. gra8 �e5+ 50. mc5 �d7+ 51 . mxb5 md6 52. grxa7 grf8 53. mb4 �c5 54. mc4

Black resigned .

Game34

V. Kramnik - M. Carlsen Wijk aan lee 2008


I n th is game Magnus demonstrated the sign ificance of a correct opening choice. With the aid of the cunning ' hedgehog' he was able to outplay the world champion.

158

V. Kramnik- M. Carlsen

1. �f3 �f6 2. c4 e6 3. �c3 c5 4. g3 b6 5 . .tg2 .lb7 6. 0-0 Ae7 7. d4 cxd4 8. Wxd4 d6 9. §d1 a6

a b c d e I g h 8 I. '.&\ 'if • I. 8

7 ..t _j .... ..t .t. ...... 7 6 ... I ... I l.l l.t. '.&\ 6 5 I 5

4 £::, fli 4

3 ttJ ttJ £::, 3

2 /j,� [j,� !Jl,� 2 1 � !il,� �

a b c d e I g h

Black has arranged h is pawns in a socal led ' hedgehog' set-up, the spines of wh ich are aimed at the central squares and b5.

10. �g5

This cont inuat ion was introduced more than 30 years earl ier. White plays his knight to e4 in order to attack the d6-pawn.

10 . . . Axg2 1 1 . �xg2 �c6

The developing 1 1 . . . &Dbd7 does not work because of 1 2 . tbge4, w inn ing the d6-pawn.

12. 'Wf4

By playing h is queen to this active position , White maintains the pressure on the d6-pawn, intending to include h is bishop in the attack on it from a3 (after b2-b3).

12 . . . 0-0

The alternative is 1 2 . . . �a7, immediately switch ing the rook to d7. If White does not react to this manoeuvre, the ' hedgehog ' may demonstrate its spines, as in the game Webb - Hart (Hastings 1 977/78):

13 . b3 0-0 1 4. tbge4 �d7 1 5 . Ab2 �e8 1 6. �ac1 d5 with excel lent p lay for Black. But also i n the event of 1 3 . &Dce4 �d7 14 . &Dxf6+ Axf6 White cannot make use of tactics: 1 5 . &Dxh7 �xh7 1 6 . 'We4 �h5 1 7. 'Wxc6 �c5 1 8 . 'We4 'Wc8, regain ing the pawn with an equal game (Adorjan - Bischoff, New York 1 986).

1 3. �ce4 �e8!

It is important to defend the pawn without s impl ifying the posit ion, s ince the wh ite kn ights are ' hang ing ' somewhat. In the event of 13 . . . &Dxe4?! 14 . &Dxe4 �a7 1 5. b3 �d7 1 6. Ab2 the ' hedgehog's' spines are not so effective: 1 6 . . . d5 1 7. cxd5 �xd5 1 8 . &Dc3 �xd1 1 9 . �xd1 'Wc8 20. tbe4, and White created threats to the k ing (Csom - Kindermann , Biel 1 986).

1 4. b3 lia7 1 5 . .tb2

8 a b c

7 J. d e I g h

'ii''.&\1.. ..t .t..t..t.

6 .f..t.'.&\.t..t. 5

4 £::, 3 £::, 2 £::, !il, 1 �

a b c

1 5 . . . §d7

ttJ tbfli

� £::, £::, � £::,

� d e I g h

8

7 6 5 4

3

2 1

I n h is commentary Carlsen remarks that he had not expected such an old-fashioned variat ion as 1 0. tbg5 and he had to beg in th ink ing for h imself. I ntu itively he fol lowed the correct course, and s ince the young 'classic' is accustomed to placing his p ieces on the best squares, th is

159


move came natural ly to h im. I n the game Wojtk iewicz - Ftac n i k (Budapest 1 993) Black carried out the themat ic ' hedgehog' advance 15 . . . b5!? (with the idea after 1 6 . cxb5 axb5 of playing . . . d6-d5). The game continued 1 6 . �f3 Was 17 . .§ac1 h6 1 8 . �ed2 (if 1 8 . �c3 there can fol low 18 . . . �e5 wi th the th reat of . . . Ag5) 1 8 . . . .§d7 1 9 . <!>g1 V«b7 20 . Y«e4 bxc4 21 . Y«xc4 .§c7 22. 'i«d3 d5 with rough ly equal chances.

1 6. E[ac1

White completes h is development, ind irectly preventing . . . d6-d5.

1 6 . . . �c7

A new idea in the ' hedgehog' structure, found at the board . B lack prepares a pawn offensive with . . .f7-f5 and . . . g7-g5, dr iv ing back the wh ite p ieces with gain of tempo, and beforehand he defends h is e6-pawn . The standard p lan involves the preparat ion of . . . b6-b5 - 1 6 . . . Y«a8 1 7. �f3 b5.

the queenside: after b3-b4 and c4-c5 the d-fi le is opened, creating conditions for the exchange sacrifice on d4.

20 . . . J.g5!

a b c d e I 9 h

a b c d e I 9 h

The hand of a great master! Black provokes a weakening of the f3-square, a desirable one for a knight . Compared with the position after Black's 1 6th move, the picture has changed radical ly. He is in complete possession of the in itiative.

21 . e3 E[ff7

A ski lfu l combination of offensive with 17. �f3 f5 1 8. �c3

prophylaxis: Black prepares in good time After the retreat 1 8 . �ed2 the kn ight for White's counterplay with b3-b4 and blocks the d-fi le for the rook, and Black c4-c5, by defending h is rook on d7. can switch to play i n the centre - 1 8 . . . e5!? (here 1 8 . . . g 5 1 9 . Y«e3 g4 20. �e1 is less effective, s ince the b6-pawn needs defending) 1 9 . �e3 �e6 with the idea of . . . �as and . . . �cd4.

18 . . . g5 1 9. Wd2 g4 20. �e1

Everybody back! The active 20. �d4?! is worse because of 20 . . . Ag5 21 . e3 �e5, when the long a8-h1 d iagonal passes into Black's und ivided possession . There is an especial ly yawning weakness at f3 , which makes it hard for White to create play on

22. <!>g1 �e8

This passive knight is switched to a more active post.

23. �e2 �f6 24. �f4 We8

' I would have l iked to play . . . �e4 immediately, but I rejected it because of the queen sac 24 . . . �e4 25. �xe6? WeB 26. �xg5 �xd2 27. �xf7. I don't real ly understand why though, since 27 . . . �e4 28. �h6+ <!>f8, with the point of 29. �xf5 <!>f7, wins for Black.' (Carlsen).

160

V. Kramnik - M. Carlsen

25. Wc3 !lg7 26. b4 �e4 27. Wb3 !lge7

The queen must be freed for more important matters than the defence of the e6-pawn.

8

7

a b c

IL__Jr

d e

'iV II

6 £ .l '.& .l .l 5

f g h

• .l

.l .S.. 4 � � '.&QJ .l 3 � � � 2 � � � � 1 l:l:QJ <;t>

a b c d e f g h

28. Wa4?!

8

7 6

5 4

3

2

1

This attempt to d ivert the q ueen to the defence of the queenside weaknesses does not achieve its aim. Kramn ik must have taken the reply into account, but underestimated the dynamic potential of the central ised knights. At a press conference after the game Carlsen admitted that he judged the position to be equal or s l ightly better for White. His intuit ion d id not let him down. As N igel Short pointed out, the best solution for White was 28. h4! , and since 28 . . . gxh3 29. Ctixh3 is unfavourable for Black, it has to be admitted that the knights on e4 and f4 are of equal value.

28 .. . �e5 29. Wxa6?

The strength of inertia is staggering . White should have stopped in good t ime and returned h is queen to b3. Other moves are unsound. If 29. c5?! Black has 29 . . . Ctic4! , whi le after the exchange 29. Axe5? dxe5 White loses a piece (30. gxd7 exf4 31 . gcd1 et:lc3!) .

29 . . . !1a7

8 a b c

7 I 6 �£ 5

4 � � 3

2 � �

d e f g h

'iV • I .l

.l .l '.& .l .S.. '.&QJ.l � �

� � l: l: . <;t>

a b c d e f g h

30. Wb5

8

7 6

5

4

3

2

White is forced to retreat . When he made his queen sortie on the 28th move Kramn ik overlooked that after 30. Wxb6? geb7 31 . Wd4 Af6! h is queen would be trapped (32 . . . Ctif3+ is threatened). Now, however, Black transposes into a clearly better endgame.

30 . . . Wxb5 31 . cxb5 §xa2 32. §c8+ �f7 33. �fd3 J.f6

Black a lso has a b ig advantage after 33 . . . Ctixd3 34. Ctixd3 Af6, but Carlsen was absorbed in constructing a 'box' for the wh ite k ing.

34. �xe5+

I n the event of 34. Axe5 dxe5 35. gc6 ttig5 White has no defence against the threat of . . . Ctih3+ and . . . e5-e4.

34 . . . dxe5

' 34 . . . Axe5 was probably better, but i n t ime-troub le I was reluctant to a l low 35. Axe5 dxe5 36. Ctid3, which however is wel l met by 36 . . . �f6 37. gfB+ �g7 38. gda (38. gb8 gd7) 38 . . . Ctic3 39. gf1 gd2! and wins. ' (Carlsen)

35. !lc2 !lea7 36. �g2

36. �f1 is stronger, since White cannot get by without this move.

36 . . . �g5 37. §d6?

161


Belated activity. White shou ld have re- Loss of material cannot be avoided . stricted h imself to 37. �dd2, but al l the 40. c.t?e2 same the 'box' is slamming shut and the game cannot be saved.

37 ..• e4! 38. Axf6 Wxf6 39. Wf1

If 39. �xb6, then 39 . . . �a1 40. �e2 �f3 is decisive.

39 •.. �a1

8 a b c

7 .! J 6 • 5 � 4 � 3

2 .s: 1 ,!

a b c

d e f 9 h

.s: •• t•

l · �

• �

� ��

d e f

• �

�

9 h

8

7 6

5 4

3

2

1

Now al l the wh ite pieces are tied by the threat of doubl ing rooks on the 1 st rank. On the other hand , . . . �f3 is threatened .

If 40. �cd2 Black wins by 40 . . . �b1 41 . �d1 �xb4, when 42. �xb6 is not possible on account of 42 . . . �b2 with the i rresistible threat of . . . �h3.

40 . • J:ib1 41 . :i:id1 :i:ixb4 42. �g2 :§xb5 43. �f4 :i:ic5 44. :i:ib2 b5 45. Wf1 :i:ic7 46. :§bb1

If 46. �g2 Black exchanges a pair of rooks by 46 . . . �c1 47. �xc1 �xc1 48. �xb5 �f3

49. �e2 �e1 50. �b2 �g5 and puts White in zugzwang , after which he wins with the pawn offensive . . . e6-e5 and . . . h7-h5-h4.

46 ••• :i:ib7 47. :i:ib4 :l:ic4 48. :i:ib2 b4 49. :i:idb1 �t3 50. c.t?g2 :i:id7!

Now White cannot avoid the exchange of rooks fol lowed by zugzwang.

51 . h3 e5 52. �e2 :§d2 53. hxg4 fxg4 54. :§xd2 �xd2 55. :§b2 �f3 56. Wf1 b3 57. �g2 :i:ic2

White resigned .

Carlsen arrived at the main super-tournament of the year, Morel ia/Linares (FIDE category 21 ) as the victor from Wijk aan Zee. But he real ised that to achieve such a success here would be more d ifficult : the evenly strong field did not permit any relaxation - there were no outsiders. In Wijk aan Zee there were, after a l l , a few players against whom you could hope to win or at least have a respite. But here Magnus did not relax and throughout the tournament he sat on the 'wheel ' of the leader Anand.

Curious in this respect is the pen-portrait of one of the grandees of Russian chess journal ism, Yuri Vasi l iev: ' Magnus, this l ittle mongoose, r ising sharply and swiftly over the board , when he needs to grasp the nape of another cobra, is a new super-hero! To win alone, without a trainer, the tournament in Wijk aan Zee, and then to take second place in "double-headed" Linares?! And all this at the boyish age of 1 7! ' In Linares Carlsen's play was dynamic and uncompromising, and, as in Wijk aan Zee, he scored five wins. Moreover, h is contribution to the eight decisive games considerably influenced the statistics of the tournament, in which the proportion of draws sl ightly exceeded 50%. The one to suffer most at the hands of the 'mongoose' was Topalov, who lost both games to h im.

162

V. Topalov - M. Carlsen

Game35

V. Topalov - M. Carlsen Morel ia/Linares 2008

Alekhine Defence [ 804]

1. e4 �f6

Carlsen was so confident in his powers, that he decided to surprise his opponent with the Alekhine Defence, an opening from his chi ldhood. Nowadays he employs it only in bl itz games, and he was successfu l with it at the 2007 World Championship in Moscow. Nevertheless, in supertournaments it is not customary to play such open ings. How great is the degree of risk? I remember a conversation with Lev Polugayevsky, one of the strongest Soviet grandmasters. Commenting on the fascination for this opening of Vladimir Bagirov, who wrote a book about it, he was categorical : 'An incorrect opening! I don't have the t ime, otherwise I would refute it ' . Knowing Polugayevsky's character and his analytical powers, one can have no doubts about this.

2. e5 �d5 3. d4 d6 4. �f3

For a long t ime White tried to refute the Alekhine Defence with 4. c4, but nowadays he does not hurry with this move, preferring to complete his development.

4 ... dxe5 5. �xeS c6

Preparing the exchange of the active knight, since if 5 . . . tbd7 Black has to reckon with 6. tbxf7 c;!;>xf7 7. Wh5+ c;!;>e6, when White can choose between 8. c4 and 8. g3 with an attack on the king.

At a tender age Magnus preferred 5 . . . g6, as, for example, against lan Nepomniachtchi in the World Youth Championship (Heraklion 2002). The game continued

6. Ac4 c6 7. tbc3 Ae6 8. 0-0 tbd7 9. Wf3 Ag7 1 0. l:!e1 0-0 1 1 . Wg3 tbxe5 1 2 . dxe5 tbxc3 1 3. Wxc3 Axc4 14 . Wxc4 Wd5 1 5. We2 !!adS, and Black maintained the balance.

6 . .ld3

At the World B l itz Championsh ip (Moscow 2007) other continuations were tried against Carlsen:

Sh i rov - Carlsen: 6. Ac4 tbd7 7. tbf3 tb7f6 8. h3 Af5 9. 0-0 e6 1 0 . Ag5 Ae7 1 1 . tbbd2 h6 1 2 . Axf6 tbxf6 1 3 . c3 0-0 14. Ab3 c5 1 5 . Ac2 Axc2 1 6. Wxc2 l:!c8 1 7. Wb3 We? with an equal game;

Grischuk- Carlsen: 6. Ae2 Af5 7. 0-0 tbd7 8 . tbg4 e6 9 . c4 tb5f6 1 0 . tbe3 Ag6 1 1 . tbc3 Ad6 12. b3 Wc7 13. h3 0-0 14. Ab2 !!adS with compl icated play.

6 . . . �d7

a b c d e f 9 h 8 i. .i. 'tW • .i. i. 8 7 • • �···· 7 6 • 6

5 �tt:J 5

4 8 4

3 � 3

2 888 888 2 1 :s: tt:J� �� :s: 1

a b c d e f 9 h

7. �xd7

Five years earl ier, p lay ing aga inst the 1 2-year-old Carlsen (Rethymnon 2003), Emi l Sutovsky did not bother to argue and he agreed to an endgame with 7. 0-0 tbxe5 8. dxe5 tbb4 9. Ae4 Wxd1 1 0. l:!xd1 f5 1 1 . a3 tba6 12 . Af3 g6 13 . tbd2 Ae6 14 . Ae2 tbc7 1 5 . tbf3 Ad5 1 6. tbd4 Ag7 1 7. c4 Af7 18 . f4, in which White had the better chances.

Chapter 3 · Life at the Top --------------------- --- ��------------------

At the Moscow Bl itz tournament M i chael Adams retreated h i s knight - 7. !Df3, but also without success: 7 . . . !D7f6 8. h3 !Db4! 9 . Ac4 AfS 1 0. !Da3 (1 0 . Ab3 aS!=) 1 0 . . . e6 1 1 . c3 !DbdS 1 2. !Dc2 Ae7 1 3 . !De3 Ag6 14 . !DeS 0-0 1 S. 0-0 !Dxe3 1 6. Axe3 !DdS 1 7. Ad2 cS. The game is equal .

7 ••• .lxd7 8. 0-0 g6 9. �d2

9. lae1 Ag7 1 0. c3 0-0 1 1 . AgSiooks preferable.

9 . . . .tg7 1 0. �f3 0-0 1 1 . Iie1

A sound move, made on general grounds, but for gain i ng an advantage general grounds alone are insufficient, as Carlsen emphasises with h is subsequent p lay. Meanwhi le , the presence of the bishop on g7 demands that attent ion be paid to the d4-pawn, which could have been rei nforced by 1 1 . c3 or at least the p in on the knight prevented - 1 1 . h3. I n the game Kulaots-Heim (Gausdal 2003) White solved his development problems in orig inal fashion: 1 1 . Wd2!? aS 1 2. a3 a4 13 . WgS lac8 1 4. lad1 bS 1 S . Wh4 e6 1 6. AgS. It is probable that B lack's p lay here can be improved, but the main thing is the innovative th inking.

11 . . . .lg4 12. c3 c5!

a b c d e f 9 h

'if .�. . 8 .t..t..i..t.7

6 .t. 6

5 5

4 4

3 3

a b c d e f 9 h

I n contrast to Topalov, Carlsen's play is specific and purposefu l . With this b low at the centre he casts doubts on the opponent 's opening conception.

1 3 . .le4?!

After the capture of the pawn 1 3. dxcS there is the unpleasant 13 . . . !Dxc3! 14 . bxc3 Axc3 1 S . Ah6 Axe1 1 6 . Wxe1 Wxd3 1 7. !DeS Wd4!? 1 8 . c6 (the primitive 1 8 . Axf8 �xf8 1 9. !Dxg4 Wxg4 1eaves White a pawn down) 1 8 . . . bxc6 1 9. !Dxc6, and here there is a choice: 1 9 . . . Wd6 20. !Dxe7+ �h8 21 . Axf8 laxf8 22. Wc3+ f6 23. lae1 Ae6 24. We3 Af7 when the pawn capture 2S. Wxa7 is risky because of the p in 2S . . . lae8, or 1 9 . . . Wf6 20. !Dxe7+ �h8 2 1 . !DdS Wd4 22. Axf8 laxf8. In both cases Black has a good game. But the decision to go in for a position with an isolated d4-pawn is also i l logical: with the black pieces being very active, this pawn comes under attack.

13 . Ae2 came into consideration, provoking 13 . . . Axf3 (1 3 . . . cxd4 14. !Dxd4 Axe2 1 S . !Dxe2 1eads to simpl ification favourable to White) 14 . Axf3 cxd4 and at the least White can try to 'muddy the water' - 1 S. c4 !Db6 1 6. Axb7 lab8 1 7. Aa6 Wc7 (1 7 . . . e5 1 8 . b4) 1 8 . AgS eS 1 9 . lac1 .

13 . . . cxd4 14. cxd4

More cunning was 14. h3 Axf3 1 S. Wxf3 e6 (Black is better after 1 6 . c4?! WaS 1 7. Ag5 !De3 or 17.1ad1 fS) 1 6 . cxd4 Axd4 1 7. Axd5 WxdS 1 8. WxdS exdS when, compared with the position in the game, White has opened an escape square for his k ing.

14 . . . e6 1 5. Wb3?!

1 S . h3 Axf3 1 6. Wxf3 was better, transposing into the variation considered earlier. But it was also possible to play 1 6 . Axf3

164

V. Topalov - M. Carlsen

'i'b6 (1 6 . . . Wd6!?) 1 7. Axd5 exd5 1 8. Ae3!? 20 . . J�fd8 'i'xb2 19. Wd3 Wb6 20. gab1 Was 21 . Wb5 'i'xb5 22. gxb5, regain ing the pawn.

15 . . . Axf3! 1 6. �xf3 �xd4 1 7. �xd5

White takes play into an endgame, since if he keeps the queens on with 1 7. Wxb7 the game clearly goes in Black's favour: 17 . . . Wa5 1 8 . gd1 gabS 1 9 . Wc6 gfc8 20. Wd6 gda 21. Wg3 Axb2 . 17 . . . gba 18. Wa6 Wf6 1 9. gb1 gfc8 is also good .

17 .. . 'i'xd5 1 8. 'i'xd5 exd5 1 9. :iad1 J.g7

6

5

4

3

a b c d e

2 £::, £::, 1 .: ib .S:

a b c d e f 9 h

8

6

5

4

3

White is a pawn down, and he must regret that he did not go in for the variation g iven i n the note to his 9th move. His d ark-square b i shop i s n ot d evel oped, a n d i n v iew o f t h e weakness of his back ran k he is u nable to rega in the pawn: 20 . gxd5 gfd8 2 1 . gxd8+ gxd8 22 . Ae3 (22 . <!>f1 gd1 + 23. <!>e2 gh1 ) 22 . . . b6 23. gb1 Axb2.

20. <!>f1

20. Af4 gfd8 21. gac1 gd7 22 . b3 d4 23. gd3 gea 24. *f1 h6 25. ge1 gxe1+ 26. <!>xe1 f5 27. f3 <!>f7 28. h4 <!>e6 29. <!>e2

6

5

4

3

a b c d e

2 /j,/j, 1 .: jb]d

a b c d e

21 . J.g5?!

f 9 h

• 8

£ .i. £ 7 £ 6

5

4

Since Black's plans include the . . . d5-d4 advance, White must base his play on the blockade of the d-pawn . The move in the game not only does not solve this problem, but also al lows Black to carry out the advance with gain of tempo. I n this respect straightforward development is insufficient: 21 . Af4 gd7 22. gd2 gca 23. gad1 d4, and Black advances his d-pawn: 24. <!>e2 Af6 25. <!>d3 g5! 26. Ag3 gc3+! 27. <!>e2 ( in the event of 27. bxc3 dxc3+ 28. <!>c2 gxd2+ 29. gxd2 cxd2 30. <!>xd2 <!>f8 31 . <!>d3 <!>e7 32. <!>e4 <!>e6 Black has winning chances in the bishop ending) 27 . . ,ge7+ 28. <!>f1 gc6, switching the rook to the queenside (variations by Shipov).

By al l the rules of endgame play, it is usefu l to centralise the king - 21 . <!>e2, aiming not only for the blockade of the pawn, but also the exchange of bishops, since in a rook endgame White's chances of a draw are improved. For example: 21 . . ,gac8 22. <!>d3 gd6 23. Ae3 Axb2 24. gab1 d4 25. Ad2 gb6 26. Aa5 gbs 27. gd2 gxa5

�d5 30. gd1 , blocking the pawn, was more 28.gbxb2, transposing into a rook ending. resi l ient, although it is hard to bel ieve that Stronger is 21 . . ,gd7!? 22. <!>d3 gea 23. gb1 this position can be saved . gde7 24. Ae3 b6 25. gd2 ge4 26. gc1 d4!

165


27. Ag5 h6 2S. f3 �4e6 29. Af4 g5 30. Ac7 �e3+, when Black should win .

21 ... l::ld7 22. §d2 h6 23. J.e3 d4 24. §d3

The attempt to exploit the c-fi le by 24. �c1 proves ineffective: 24 . . . �adS 25. Af4 g5 26. Ag3 f5 27. f3 d3 ! . The subsequent winn ing plan is as fol lows: . . .f5-f4, . . . Ae5, . . . �c7, and after the exchange of a pair of rooks the king comes into play.

24 ... §c8 25. Ad2?!

25. �c1 was more res i l ient : 25 . . . �ddS! ( in the event of 25 . . . �xc1 + 26. Axc1 f5 27. *e2 the king blockades the pawn on the d3-square) 26. �cd1 �c2 27.�3d2 �deS! (the exchange of rooks 27 . . . �xd2 is just if ied after 2S. �xd2 f5 29. f3 *f7 30. Af2 d3! 31 . *e1 b6, when after . . . �d5 Black transfers his king to the q ueenside, but 2S. Axd2! with the idea of �c1 is stronger, and it is not apparent how to breach White's defences) 2S. Axd4 Axd4 29. �xd4 �xb2 30.�4d2 �xd2 31 . �xd2 b5 32. *e2 �c3

The black pieces occupy ideal positions, contro l l ing al l the most important l ines on the battlefie ld . The technique for converting the advantage is h igh ly instructive.

27. a4 f5 28. b3 §ec7 29. J.e1 �f7 30. §d2 §c1 31 . §xc1 §xc1 32. �e2 l::lb1 33. l::ld3 �e6 34. h4 �d5 35. Ad2 �e4 36. l::lg3 f4! 37. l::ld3

37. �xg6 d3 mate would have been a pretty fin ish !

37 ... J.e5 38. f3+ �d5 39. Ae1 .ld6 40. Ad2 g5 41 . hxg5 hxg5 42. Ae1 g4 43. fxg4 �e4 44. g5?

And White resigned, without wait ing for 44 . . . �xe1 +.

Game36

M. Carlsen - L. Aronian Morel ia/Linares 200S

Ruy Lopez [ CSB]

1 . e4 e5 2. �f3 �c6 3. Ab5 a6 4. Aa4 �f6 5. 0-0 Ae7 6. l::le1 b5 7. Ab3 0-0

33. �d3 �c2+ 34. �d2 �c4! , after which 8. a3

Black takes his king to the centre with real winn ing chances.

25 ... l::lc2 26. l::lb1 l::le7 !

6

5

4

a b c d e

a b c d e f g h

5

4

3 a b c d e f g h

Carslen's favourite way of avo id ing the Marshal l Attack.

8 ... Ac5

166


For a long t ime the main continuat ion was the classical 8 . . . d6 (as Shirov played against Carlsen in Wij k aan Zee 2007). But the move in the game is also logical: Black fi rst brings out h is bishop to an active position .

9. c3 d6

In the event of 9 . . . d5?! 1 0 . exd5 tbxd5 1 1 . d4 exd4 1 2 . cxd4 Ab6 13. tbc3 Black has a poor pawn structure on the queenside.

10. d4 .tb6 1 1 . h3

To maintain the pawn tension in the centre it is important to prevent the p in on the knight at f3 .

11 . . . lire8!?

Aronian's refinement compared with the game Carlsen -Svidler (Wijk aan Zee 2007). Black does not consider it necessary to spend t ime on . . . h7-h6. That game developed as fol lows: 1 1 . Ae3 h6 1 2 . h3 l::!e8 13 . tbbd2 Ab7 14 . dxe5 d xe5 1 5 . Axb6 cxb6 1 6 . tbh2 Y!/e7 1 7. tbg4 l::!ad8 with roughly equal chances.

12 . .tg5

With the bishop cut off from its wing by the d6-pawn, this pin may cause Black problems. He is forced to concede the centre.

12 . . . h6 13 . .th4 exd4

13 . . . g5 is risky in view of 1 4. Axg5 hxg5 1 5 . tbxg5 l::!f8 (1 5 . . . d5?! 1 6 . Y!/f3 exd4 1 7. Axd5 tbe5 1 8 . Y!/g3) 1 6 . l::!e3 Y!/e7 1 7. l::!g3.

14. cxd4 g5

After q u iet development with 1 4 . . . Ab7 15 . tbc3 White has a small but enduring spatial advantage.

15 . .tg3

Now in the event of 1 5. Axg5 hxg5 1 6. tbxg5 the move 1 6 . . . d5! gains in strength .

1 5 . . . g4

The e4-pawn is taboo: 1 5 . . . l::!xe4? 16 . l::!xe4 tbxe4 17. AdS Y!/e8 1 8. Y!/c2 tbxg3 1 9. Y!/g6+ (1 9 . Axc6? Af5) 1 9 . . . C�f8 20. Y!/xh6+ �g8 (20 . . .'i!>e7 21 . tbc3) 21. Y!/xg5+ �f8 22. Y!/xg3 tbxd4 23. tbc3! and, despite the material equal ity, B lack's position looks broken.

1 6. hxg4 £.xg4

a b c d e f g h a J. 'if.! 8 7 � � 7 6 �.t�� 6 5 � 5 4 � � j_ 4 3 � � tb� 3 2 � � � 2 1 .: tLJ �.: <it>

a b c d e f g h

17 . .th4!

White has lost the opening battle, and with his knight undeveloped he is unable to hold the d4-pawn. Therefore Carlsen renews the p in , not hesitating to sacrifice the pawn.

1 7 . . .t£�xd4 1 8. �c3 Axf3

It is hard to condemn this move, made after a long think. Aronian opens the g-fi le for an attack on the king, but carries out the idea incorrectly. He should have taken control of the d5-square - 1 8 . . . c6! , and if White nevertheless insists on p inn ing the knight - 1 9. e5?! dxe5 20. tbe4, then his king is assailed by the powerfu l group of black piec-

167:

Chapter 3 · Life at the Top ----------------�

es concentrated in the centre: 20 ... �xe4! 21 . Axd8 l;!axd8 22. l;!xe4 (the queen has to be returned , s i nce neither 22. Axf7+ �xf7 23. �g5+ �xg5 24. Wxg4 �gf3+! nor 22. Vi'b1 Axf3 wi l l do) 22 . . . �xf3+ 23. gxf3 l;!xd1+ 24. Axd1 Af5 25. J;!e2 Ad4, reaching an endgame with real winn ing chances for Black. However, White is not obl iged to throw caution to the winds and he can switch to defence - 19. Aa2 �g7 20. Vi'd3.

1 9. gxf3

a b c d e f 9 h

a,! 'i¥.1 • 8 7 I. I. 7 6 I. .i. I. � I. 6 5 I. 5 4 �� it 4 3 � itti:J � 3 2 � � 2 1 1::, 'iVl:. �

a b c d e f 9 h

1 9 . . . �h8?

20. �d5 §g8+ 21 . �f1

Of course, 21. �h1? wou ld have been crazy - the lone king simply cannot hold out against the black army: 21 . . . �g4! 22. Vi'xd4+ Axd4 23. Axd8 �xf2+ 24. �h2 l;!axd8 with the terrible threat of . . . l;!g5.

21 . . . �g4 22. Wxd4+!

Here is the d ifference compared with 19 . . . �h7!? - the exchange of queens takes place with check, and the assessment of the position changes rad ical ly.

22 . . . .lxd4 23. Axd8 �h2+ 24. �e2 §axd8

8 7

5 4

a b c d e

a b c d e f

7 I. 6

5 4 3

� 2

9 h Here the variat ion 19 . . . c6 20. e5 d xe5 21 . �e4 can no longer satisfy Black, whi le the attempt to invade with the queen by 20 . . . Yi'c8 21. Axf6 Vi'h3 22. J;!e3 �xb3 25. J;!ad1 !

23. J;!e4 does not promise anything real , The knight on h2 is doomed , but the bishapart from perpetual check after 23. · . Vi'g3+ op's posit ion must be c larified , s ince if 24. �h1 Yi'h3+. 25. J;!h1 there fol lows 25 . . . l;!g2.

However, the idea carr ied out i n the game would also have been practicable, but with appropriate refinement: 19 . . . �h7!? 20. �d5 l;!g8+ 21. �f1 �g4! 22. Vi'xd4 (22 . Axd8?? �h2 mate) 2 2 . . . Vi'xh4 23 . �xb6 cxb6 24. fxg4 (or 24. �e2 �e5 25. J;!h1 Vi'f6 26. J;!h3) 24 . . . Vi'h3+ 25. �e2 Vi'xb3 26. f3 J;!ac8 27. J;!ac1 J;!c2+ 28. l;!xc2 Wxc2+ 29. �e3 and the storm d ies down.

25 . . . Axb2

Now White wins a piece, practically without compensation, but also after 25 . . . c5 26. l;!h1 l;!g2 27. l;!xd4! cxd4 28. �f4 J;!g7 29. l;!xh2 Black is doomed.

26. §h1 c6

168

M. Carlsen - V. Topalov tiJ ----------------------

26 . . . Ae5 27. f4 or 26 . . . f!g2 27. !De3 was no better.

27. �f4 Ae5 28. �d3 �xf3 29. �xf3 Ag7 30. !ah5!

Playing to restrict the opponent's mobi l ity. Black has three pawns for a knight, but the white pieces are so active that he has no hopes of saving the game.

30 . . . d5

If 30 . . . f!d7 there fol lows 31. !DeS, whi le after 30 . . . c5 White captures the pawn -31. Axf7 f!gf8 32. f!f5 f!d7 33. Ae6.

31 . exd5 Jad6 32. Jaf5 cxd5

a b c d e f 9 h

8 .�. 8 7 • .i. 7

4

• 6 5 4 3 2

a b c d e f 9 h

33. Jac1 !

Excel lent technique for converting the advantage - the pawns will not run away, but it is always usefu l to activate a piece.

33 ..• Jaf6 34. Jaxf6 .txf6 35. Jac6 �g7 36. �f4 Ag5 37. �h5+ �h8 38. Jaxa6 d4 39. �e4 Jag6 40. Jaa7

Black resigned .

1 . c4

�---------------

Game37

M. Carlsen - V. Topalov Morel ia/Linares 2008


A rare move for Carlsen, with the psychological idea of forcing the opponent to play without home preparat ion. But Topalov is a tough customer!

1 . . . e5 2. �c3 �f6 3. �f3 �c6 4. d3!?

Provoking the opponent into a Sici l ian Defence with colours reversed. More usual ly White fianchettoes his bishop - 4. g3, keeping the advance of the d-pawn in reserve.

4 • . • d5

Topalov accepts the chal lenge.

5. cxd5 �xd5 6. e4 �b6

The alternative is 6 . . . !Df6 7. Ae2. The game Morozevich -Grischuk (World Championsh ip , M exico 2007) cont inued 7 . . . Ag4 8. 0-0 Axf3 9 . Axf3 !Dd4 10 . g3 Ac5 1 1 . Ag2 0-0 12. !Da4 Ab6 1 3 . Ae3 Wd6 14 . f4 !Dd7 1 5. c;t.h1 f!ad8 16. f!c1 with compl icated play.

7. Ae2 Ae7

69

a b c d e f 9 h

8 I. .i. 'ii'e 7 • • • .i. . 6 1.11.1 5

6 5

4 8 4 3 ti:J 8 ti:J 3 2 88 �888 2

i, VJH� M 1 a b c d e f 9 h


A posit ion, typical of the Boleslavsky Variation with colours reversed , has arisen. It should be remembered that in Sici l ian-type positions the value of a tempo is qu ite h igh.

8. 0-0 0-0 9. a4

I n fu l l accordance with the ideas of the afore-mentioned variat ion - to drive the knight from b6.

9 ••• Ae6!?

9 . . . a5 suggests itself, but Topalov apparently d id not want to concede the bSpoint to the knight, which would assist the d3-d4 advance. For example, the game Agdestein - lvanchuk (Ti l burg 1 993) cont inued 1 0. Ae3 fS 1 1 . �c1 f4 12 . Ad2 Ab4 13 . et:lbS Axd2 14. et:lxd2 <;!i>h8 1S. h3 Ae6 1 6. tt:lf3 Ag8, and here 1 7. d4! is good .

1 0. Ae3

The threat is stronger than its execution! For the moment a4-aS is kept in reserve, espec ia l ly s ince the d i rect 1 0 . aS et:ld7 1 1 . d4 exd4 1 2 . et:lxd4 et:lxd4 1 3 . Wxd4 et:lcS, emphasis ing the weakness of the b3-square, leads to a position favourable for Black.

The knight is withdrawn not only for the sake of prophylaxis against a4-aS, but also with the aim of transferring it to b3.

1 1 . d4

This is the sign ificance of an extra tempo in a Sici l ian structure. At one t ime, when the Sici l ian was just beginn ing to become establ ished , the battle for equal ity was associated with the preparation of the freeing advance . . . d6-dS. There was no real point in insisting on 1 1 . aS in view of 1 1 . . . et:lcS.

For example, M ihai l Marin considers the fol lowing variation: 12 . b4!? et:lxb4 (1 2 . . . et:lb3 1 3 . �b1 ttlbd4 14 . bS tt:lxf3+ 1S . Axf3 ttld4 1 6. Ag4 b6 1 7. Axe6 fxe6 is also possible) 1 3 . et:lxeS f6 14 . �b1 fxeS 1S. �xb4 b6, in both cases with a sound position for Black.

11 ••• exd4 12. tlbxd4 tlbxd4 1 3. 'Wxd4 c6

a b c a .!.

6 5

8

6 5

4 £::.. fli £::.. 4 3 t2J � 3 2 £::.. � £::.. £::.. £::.. 2 1 : : �

a b c d e f g h

Black has safely got through the open ing. White's sl ight superiority in the centre is of a temporary nature, whereas Black's pawn majority on the queenside is a real positional factor. If he should succeed in playing . . . Wa5 and . . . �d8, Black wi l l be able to seize the in it iative.

14. a5 tlbc5

This offer to go into an endgame is based on positional factors: apart from his pawn majority on the queenside, Black can invade at the weak b3-point.

1 5. 'We5

Magnus is happy to play an endgame, but in the g iven specific situation he prefers to retain h is queen for an attack on the king.

1 5 ••• tlbb3 1 6. Jaa4

A not altogether su itable post for the rook, but otherwise the aS-pawn cannot be de-

170

M. Carlsen - V. Topalov ---------------------

fended . After the interposit ion 1 6 . gfd1 Black forces the exchange of queens by 1 6 . . . 'llrb8, transposing into a favourable endgame.

16 . . . .ld6 1 7. YlrhS

a b c d e f g h

a .! "if .l e 8

7 .l .l .l .l .l 7 6 .l .i. .i. 6

17 . . . g6

a b c d e f g h

A cool-headed defence. The threat of e4-eS with the switching of the rook to h4 is in the air, but Black has t ime to transfer h is bishop to g7, cementing together h is castled posit ion. The other way of defending involves 17 . . . 'llrc7. However, it is not easy to work out the consequences of the attack after 1 8 . eS!? AxeS 1 9. f4 (the frontal attack 1 9. gh4 h6 20. Axh6 gxh6 21 . 'lltxh6 is parried by 21 . . . gfe8 22. ghs Ag7 23. ggs WeS!). For example: 1 9 . . . Af6 20. tDe4 We? 21 . fS AdS 22. tDxf6+ 'lltxf6 23. gh4 h6 24. gg4 etc. 1 9 . . . Axc3 20. bxc3 gfe8 21 . fS! WeS 22. fxe6 Yltxe3+ 23. �h1 fS 24. gh4 h6 2S. Ac4 is also unclear.

18. 'llrh6 .les

White's threats are vividly i l lustrated by the variation 18 . . . tDxaS? 1 9. eS! Ae7 20. ttJe4. Now 20 . . . tDb3 is met by a combinat ion on the theme of d ivert ing the q ueen -21 . Ab6! axb6 22. gxa8 Yltxa8 23. ttJf6+

Axf6 24. exf6 and mate next move, and Black also fai ls to save the game with 20 . . . f6 21 . exf6 Axf6 22. tDxf6+ gxf6 23. AgS.

19 • .lgS?!

This inconsistency is not typical of Carlsen. True, after 1 9. h4 Ag7 20. Wf4 the offensive would have come to a standst i l l , since he would have had to reconci le h imself to the exchange of queens: 20 . . . 'llrb8 21 . Yltxb8 gfxb8 22. gd1 gda with good p lay for Black. But, apparently, there was no longer anything better - the aS-pawn is too weak. For example, if 1 9. gd1 there can fol low 1 9 . . . 'llrc7 20. f4 Ag7 21 . 'llrgS h6 22. 'lltg3 tDxaS, winn ing the pawn.

1 9 ••• Wc7 20 • .le3

The abi l ity to admit your m istakes is an important qual ity for a professional. Carlsen returns his bishop to the same square and , although he loses a pawn, as if nothing has happened he cont inues looking for chances on the kingside. Meanwhi le, 20. Wh4!? tDxaS 2 1 . f4 Ag7 22. fS also came into consideration .

20 ••• �xaS 21 . f4 .lg7 22. Wh4 .lb3

22 . . . bS! was more vigorous, s ince now 23. gd4 would not have been such a productive idea: 23 . . . ttJc4 24. Axc4 Axc4 2S. gfd1 Axd4 26. Axd4 fS.

a b c d e t g h

.� . 8

.l .i. .l 7 6 .l 6

a b c d e f g h

171

Chapter 3 · Life at the Top ------------------

23. Jad4!

An excel lent move in the psycholog ical sense. One can understand Topalov's feelings. It is not easy for an attack-minded player to decide on the win of the exchange by 23 . . . Axd4 24. Axd4, opening the floodgates in the d i rection of h is k ing.

23 . . . Jaad8?!

A human is afraid of things that a computer works through without hesitation : 23 . . . Axd4 24. A xd4 fS 2S . exfS �d8! 26 . Ylff2 flxfS 27. Ag4 flf7 and Rybka does

h6 32. flg3 �h7 33. �hS with the threat of 34. Axh6 Axh6 3S. flg6), and now after 29. AxeS fS 30. �f2 flf7 31 . Axa7 White regains the pawn, since 31 . . . Axb2?! is dangerous because of 32. Ab6 �d2 33. fld1 �b4 34. fld8+ �g7 3S. Acs �a4 36. flaB.

28 . . . fxe5

The capture 28 . . . gxfS 29. flxfS would signify a lack of ambition .

29. AgS �b6 30. f6 C4+ 31 . �h1

An automat ic move i n t ime-t ro u ble . 31 . J;if2!? Axf6 32. Axf6 'tlfxbS 33. AhS! was

not see any d i rect continuation of the at- stronger, when the bishops gain scope: tack. It parries the obvious 28. tile4 with 33 . . . 'tlfe8 34. Af3 'tlfe6 3S. Ae4. 28 . . . flxf4! 29. ttlf6+ �xf6 ! .

24. e5!

Here it is, the triumph of spirit over matter! White's attack acqu i res a fresh impetus. The way is opened for the knight to f6.

24 . . . §xd4 25. Axd4 cS

There was also a strategic solution to the posit ion : 2S . . . fld8 26. �f2 b6 27. tile4 cS with the switching of the knight to d4: 28. Ac3 tilc6.

26. Ae3 f6

The desire to activate the g7-bishop is understandable, but 26 . . . b6 !? 27. tile4 Ac4 28. Ylff2 fld8 was also not bad , with the idea of playing the knight to d4.

27. �bS 'Wd8 28. fS!?

The pawn makes a breakthrough, although no l ight is apparent at the end of the tunnel . Since if 28. AxeS Black had prepared 28 . . . fxeS ! , White could have prepared it by fi rst playing 28. e6!? Axe6 (if 28 . . . �e7 White attacks by 29. fS gxfS 30. J;if3 Axe6 31 . flh3

31 . . . 'Wxb5 32. fxg7 Jaxf1 + 33. J.xf1

a b c d e f g h 8 • 8

£:::. 1. 7 6 I. 6

it 5 4 � 4 3 3

2 !:::. !:::. 2

it <i!t 1 a b c d e f g h

33 . . . �xg7?!

In t ime-trouble Topalov decides against leaving h is king in front of the 'm ine' on g7. Even so, the pawn could have waited . Black should have consol idated his forces, since the aS-knight is c learly out of play. True, he has to return one of the pawns and the position is not completely clear. Here are some variations: a) 33 . . . �dS 34. Ah6 tilc6 3S. Ae2 �f7

36. �g4 �fS (36 . . . tild8 37. 'tlfc8 'tlfe7

172

M. Carlsen - V. Topalov ----------------------

38. Af3) 37. Axc4+ Axc4 38. 'Wxc4+ 'Wf7 39. 'Wd3 ! (39 . 'Wc1 tbd8) 39 . . . e4 40. 'Wd1 and then h2-h3;

b) 33 . . . 'Wd7 34. Ah6 tbc6 35 . Ae2 ! ? (35. Axc4+ Axc4 36. 'Wxc4+ Wf7 37. Wc1 tbd8) 35 . . . 'Wf5 36. h3 e4 37. Ag4 'Wf1 + 38. �h2 'Wf7 39. Ad?! 'Wxd7 40. 'Wf6,

34. AdS! �c6??

A blunder in time-trouble. Now Black gets mated. He could have held the position by 34 . . . 'Wd5 35. 'We?+ �g8 or 34 . . . �g8 35. 'We? Wd5 , when Wh ite has noth ing more than perpetual check.

and the threat of mate on f8 ties Black down (4o . . . 'Wc?+ 41 . �h1 'Wf? 42. 'Wd6

35. Wf6+ mga 36. We6+ mta 37 . .lg5

We? 43. 'Wf4 'Wf7) . Black resigned .

After h is successes in Wijk aan Zee and Morel ia/Linares, the appearance of Carlsen's name among the prize-winners of the strongest tournaments was no longer regarded as a sensation. He also enhanced his reputation at the el ite 'Melody Amber' Tournament, which had changed its constant venue from Monte Carlo to N ice. Magnus shared 2nd-5th places, performing equally sol idly in both discip l ines (bl indfold and rapid).

At the fi rst tournament of the Grand Prix series in Baku (FIDE category 1 9) Carlsen started as the rating favourite. Therefore it was somewhat unusual to see him keeping in the background and playing second fidd le. But Magnus came to the fore in the last two rounds - he won against Adams and Bacrot and shared 1 st-3rd places. True, few real ised that the turning point in his play had occurred back in the 7th round, when in his game with Radjabov Carlsen took the risk with Black of going into the Dragon Variation of the Sici l ian Defence. This was not a one-off action, but a change of conception. The hitherto typically White-biased player began also playing for a win with Black. Magnus, as usual , was modest: ' I simply looked at the main l i nes in the Dragon Variation and I couldn't understand where Black had problems. The posit ions appealed to me, and I decided to include this opening in my repertoire. '

The success of the Aeroflot Open festival in Moscow drew the attention of Ukrainian patrons. Start ing in 2006 they began organising prestigious al l-play-al l tournaments in Foros in the Crimea. The resort area, which in not so distant t imes used to greet the leaders of the USSR, and then by inheritance those of the Ukraine, was selected by the Aerosvit Company, presenting an opportun ity for Ukrainian professional chess players to earn some money. In 2008 the organisers were also able to interest Carlsen, by assembl ing a F IDE category 19 field. The outcome of the tournament was effectively decided in the very fi rst round, when Magnus confidently outplayed lvanchuk and took the lead , not al lowing his rivals the sl ightest chance. Clear fi rst place with a score of +5 in 1 1 rounds cannot be called anything but a triumph. On the current rat ing l ist Magnus moved up to second place and closed r ight up on Anand.


Game38�--------�

T. Radjabov - M. Carlsen Grand Prix, Baku 2008


1 . e4 c5 2. �f3 d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. �xd4 �f6 5. �c3 g6 6 • .le3 .lg7

So, the Dragon Variat ion, a never-end ing dispute in which players of all times and nations have engaged ! However many t imes it has been buried , it has always c l imbed back onto its feet. Not so long ago (after the mi l lennium), one of the authors of this book, in collaboration with the unforgettable Eduard Gufeld, whose tremendous love for the g7-bishop was legendary, had to raise the entire Dragon in the process of writ ing a book about this open ing. This was by no means a labour of Sisyphus, and rumours about the tam ing of the Dragon proved exaggerated . And the fact that the brightest representatives of the chess young are prepared to demonstrate this (Radjabov also happily plays this variation with Black) is the best confirmation.

7. f3 �c6 8. 'Wd2 0-0 9. J.c4

The main cont inuation in the Rauzer Attack, where the most recent research has been made. White develops his bishop in an active posit ion , preventing . . . d6-dS, which is possible after 9. 0-0-0.

9 . . . .ld7

A flexible move, leaving Black a wide range of options. In part icular, he can carry out one of the main counterplay resources -the . . . tilc6-eS-c4 manoeuvre - without fi rst developing his queen , thereby saving a tempo.

10 • .lb3

This prophylactic bishop retreat is part of the 'compulsory program' of th is variation . After 1 0. 0-0-0 with 1 0 . . . ftb8!? Black can transpose into the so-called 'Chinese Dragon', which Radjabov employed in his game with Carlsen from the Grand Slam tournament in B i lbao 2008. 1 0 . . . flc8 or 10 . . . tileS leads to the main l ine of the variation.

10 .•• Etc8

a b c d e t g h

8 .l. 'i¥ .�. . 8 7 .\ .t .i. .t .t .i. .\ 7 6 1.&\ .t 1.&\ .t 6 5 5

1 1 . h4

An important branch. White does not hurry to castle, but fi rst tests Black's reaction . In recent t imes the more restrained development 1 1 . 0-0-0 tileS 1 2 . �b1 has been in fash ion, where Wh ite is not in a rush to disclose his attacking plans on the kingside, retain ing the option of playing both h2-h4 and g2-g4. For example: 1 2 . . . tilc4 13 . Axc4 flxc4 14. g4 b5 1 5. b3! . 1t is important to disrupt the coordination of the rooks - now 1 5 . . . flcS? 1 6 . tile6! leads to the loss of the exchange, and 1 5 . . . flc8 1 6 .tildxb5 'WaS 1 7. a4 is also in White's favour. But it turns out that the rook does not have to move. The game Socko-Stocek (Bundesl iga 2006) continued 15 . . . b4! 1 6 . bxc4 bxc3 1 7. V!Vxc3 'Wc7 1 8 . gS tilhS 1 9. �c1 flc8 20. 'Wd3 AeS with sufficient counterplay for the sacrificed exchange.

1 74

T. Radjabov - M. Carlsen

Apart from the standard plan , also interesting is 1 2 . . . .!:!e8!? (with the idea at an appropriate moment of playing . . . e7-e5), which Carlsen tried two rounds later in his game with Karjakin: 13. h4 h5 14 . Ah6 &Dc4 15 . Axc4 .!:!xc4 1 6. Axg7 �xg7 1 7. &Dd5 e5!? 1 8 . tDxf6 Wxf6 1 9. tDe2 flc6 20. tDc3 Ae6 21 . &Dd5 Axd5 22. Wxd5 Wf4! 23. �d2 Wxd2 24 . .§xd2 f5, and Black maintained the balance.

11 . . . h5!

For Dragon devotees this is the standard reaction to h2-h4, since if 1 1 . . . &De5 Black has to reckon with the pawn sacrifice 12. h5 tDxh5 13 . g4 tDf6 14 . Ah6 Axh6 15 . �xh6 with a dangerous in itiative for White.

12. 0-0-0 tUe5 1 3. Ag5

The most usual cont inuat ion . Wh ite attacks the knight which is preventing g2-g4, and he restricts Black's possib i l it ies. The direct attack 13 . Ah6 &Dc4 14 . Axc4 .!:!xc4 15. Axg7 �xg7 1 6. g4 hxg4 1 7. h5 does not achieve its aim. For example, the game Sax- Kir. Georgiev (Burgas 1 992) continued 1 7 . . . flh8 1 8. hxg6 fxg6 1 9. f4 e5 20. fxe5 (or 20. &Dde2 .§xh1 21 . .§xh1 &Dxe4 22. &Dxe4

and now 1 5. h5 or 1 5 . f4 1eads to very sharp play.

14 . . . :iae8!

A prophylactic move, after which the sacrificial attack, possible after 14 . . . b5 1 5. g4 hxg4 1 6 . h5 tDxh5 1 7. &Dd5 when Black is forced to p lay 1 7 . . . .!:!e8, is now considered insufficient, since in the variation with 14 . . . .!:!e8 the rook is already in the r ight place and Black saves an important tempo. However, even in the fi rst case he has adequate defensive resources: 1 8. flxh5 gxh5 19 . Wh2 flxd5 20. Axd5 �b6 21 . tDf5! Axf5 22. exf5 gxf3 23. Wxh5 and now instead of 23 . . . flc8 , which has occurred in practice, consideration should be given to 23 . . . Wf2!? 24. flh1 Wg3 with sharp play.

a b c d e f g h 8 'i¥ .1. 8

7 • • -*- • •..t 7 6 • �· 6 s .!. � i, . s 4 CD !:::. £:::. 4 3 i, {jj !:::. 3

2 l:::, l:::, l:::, V§I !:::. 2 � 1;l l;l 1

.§xe4 23. fxe5 .§xe2! 24. Wxe2 Wg5+ with a b c d e f g h roughly equal chances - Stohl) 20 . . . dxe5 21 . &Dde2 flh3! with double-edged play. 1 5. g4?!

13 . . .:iac5

This move has the aim of preparing the pawn attack . . . b7-b5. I n addition , the rook takes control of a number of i mportant points along the 5th rank. If 13 . . . &Dc4, then 14. We2 &Da5 1 5 . �b1 is good , fol lowed by an attack on the kingside.

14. �b1

A usefu l prophylactic move. 14. g4 hxg4

After the game Radjabov adm itted that he had mixed u p two l i nes. Now Wh ite is forced to throw caution to the winds. 15 . .!:!he1 is regarded as the main continuation. But what White had prepared in reply to 15 . . . Wa5 remained a mystery, since extensive practice has not demonstrated anything sign ificant. For example, the game Bel iavsky - Ki r. Georg iev (Wijk aan Zee 1 985) went 1 6. f4 &Dc4 (after 16 . . . &Deg4? 17. e5! dxe5 1 8. Axf7+ �xf7 1 9. &Db3 Black


loses material) 1 7. Axc4 �xc4 1 8. Axf6 (the 1 8 . eS breakthrough does not achieve its aim: 1 8 . . . tDdS! 1 9. tDxdS 'WxdS or 1 8 . tDb3 'Wa6 1 9. eS tDg4 20. exd6 Axc3 21 . bxc3 e6!) 18 . . . Axf6 1 9 . tDdS 'Wxd2 20. tDxf6+ exf6 21 . �xd2 fS! with an equal endgame.

1 S. Ah6!? tDc4 1 6. Axc4 �xc4 1 7. Axg7 �xg7 1 8. tDdS leads to a position which occurred in the afore-mentioned Karjakin - Carlsen game.

15 . . . hxg4 1 6. h5

The alternative is to create a breakthrough in the centre: 1 6. f4 tDc4 1 7. Axc4 �xc4 1 8. Axf6 Axf6 1 9. eS Ag7 (weaker is 19 . . . dxeS?! 20. fxeS AxeS 21 . tDde2 and then h4-hS) 20. hS dxeS 21 . fxeS Ac6 with unclear play.

1 6 . . . ti)xh5 1 7. §xh5

If 1 7. f4 Black has several possible cont inuations: 17 . . . tDc4 1 8. 'Wd3 bS, 17 . . . tDc6 1 8 . eS 'Wc8 or 17 . . . tDf3 1 8 . tDxf3 Axc3 1 9. bxc3 gxf3.

After 17. tDdS Mikhail Golubev considers the best to be 1 7 . . . �xdS! 1 8 . AxdS 'Wb6 with dynamic play.

1 7 . . . gxh5 1 8. Wh2

a b c d e f g h 8 'iV X •

... � � .t. .t. .i. 7

6

5 .I � � � 4 ED � 3 � ED 2 � � � 1 � :a:

a b c d

�

e f

�

WI g h

8

7

6

5 4

3

2

1

note to 1 4 . . . �e8, the white knight is at c3, and Black has a wide choice of defensive measures.

1 8 . . . ti)g6!?

Now if 1 9 . tDdS there is 1 9 . . . h4. In Radjabov's opin ion 1 8 . . . Wb6!? 1 9 . WxhS e6 is also good .

1 9. Wxh5 Was

Black is obl iged to reckon with the threatened capture on g6 (for the moment this is unfavourable - 20. 'Wxg6? e6), and Carlsen decides to return the exchange, but with a more active position for h is queen . Before this 1 9 . . . �xgS 20. WxgS e6 21 . Wxg4 Wf6 had been played .

The immediate 1 9 . . . e6!? is also interesting: 20. tDfS! 'WaS! 21 . �h1 (21 . �xd6 Ac6) 21 . . . �xfS 22. exfS WxfS 23. fxg4 'WeS with a sound position for Black (Stoh l) .

20. f4!

If 20. tDdS there can fol low 20 . . . e6 21 . �h1 exdS 22 . Wh7+ �f8 23 . Ah6 Axh6 24. 'Wxh6+ �e7 2S. 'WgS+ f6 26. 'Wxg6 dxe4, and White does not have sufficient compensation for the exchange.

20 . . . §xg5

After 20 . . . �xc3 21 . bxc3 'Wxc3 there is the counter-sacrifice 22. Axf7+ �xf7 23. fS .

21 . fxg5 e6

8

6

a b

5 'if 4

3

c d e f g h 8

7

6

4

3

2

I n contrast to the position examined in the a b c d e t g h

176

T. Radjabov - M. Carlsen ------------------------

22. t'Uf5?

Youth strives only to go forward , but this leads merely to a reduction in White's attacking potential . He should have restricted himself to 22. 'Wxg4, although, objectively speaking, the spearhead of his attack has been considerably blunted .

22 . . . exf5 23. �xg6 Ae6 24. �h5

a b c d 8

6

5

4

3 � l:iJ 2 � � �

e f 9 h

• 8

.a 7

� 6

5

4

3

2

The rook endgame aris ing after the ex- a b c d e t 9 h changes 24. Axe6 �xe6 25. �xf5 Axc3! 26. bxc3 �xf5 27. exf5 �e4 is in Black's 31 . . . e2? favour (2B . �xd6? is not possible because of 2B . . . g3).

24 . . . fxe4 25. §f1

After 25 . et:ld5 Carlsen g ives th is variation: 25 . . . e3! 26. g6 �fB 27. gxf7 Axf7 (or 27 . . . �e7 2B. �g5 Axd5 29. �f1 ! �dB 30. �xd5 e2 31 . �e1 ) 2B . �f1 'We1 + ! 29. �xe1 Axh5 30 . �f1 + Af7 31 . <tlxe3 �xe3 32. �xf7+ �eB with an obvious advantage to Black, who has an extra pawn which is also passed .

25 . . . We5!

With this impu lsive move Carlsen could have ru ined the resu lts of h is work. He should fi rst have secured the position of his king: 31 . . . �e7 32. �f3 e2! 33. �xb7+ (33. �xe2 �xe2 34. et:lxe2 g2 35. c3 Ah6) 33 . . . �f6 34. et:lxe2 �xe2 35. �f7+ �g5 36. �xg7 �a6+ 37. �b1 g2 and the pawn cannot be stopped . H ow, however, by playing 32. �d7! , Wh ite would have successfu l ly ' terrorised ' the k ing : 32 . . . �gB (32 . . . �e7 33. �cB+ WeB 34. �f5+ etc.) 33 . WeB+ AfB 34. �xb7 Ae7 35 . 'Wh1 �fB 36. �h7 �eB 37. et:lxe2 �xe2

Black p ins h is hopes on the passed g- 3B . g7. pawn - 25 . . . Axb3 26. axb3 �e7 27. �xg4

32. �f3+? promises less.

26. §xf7 Axb3 White misses his chance, and the king escapes from the checks.

26 . . . �fB!?, s impl ifying the position, is even .l... 32 . . . -=-e8 33. �f7+ stronger.

White loses after 33. �xe2 �xe2 34. <tlxe2 27. axb3 g3 28. �a2

g2 fol lowed by the manoeuvre of the bishop With a rather transparent trap: 2B . . . g2? to d4 or e3. 29. �f2! g 1� 30. �f7+ �h7 31 . �h5+ with

33 . . . �d8 34. Wg8+ �d7 35. Wf7+ We7 a draw.

36. Wf5+ �d8 37. Wa5+ b6 38. Wd5

28 . . . Etf8 29. §xf8+ �xf8 30. Wg4 e3 31 . g6

e1W 39. Wa8+ �d7 40. Wb7+ �e8

White resigned .

177


Game39

M. Carlsen - V. lvanchuk Foros 2008

King's Indian Defence [E97}

This game, which was annotated by earlsen, enables us to understand to a certain extent the log ic of the decisions he takes, based not so much on calculat ing abi l i ty (which some experts consider to be the main reason for h is achievements), as on h is depth of understanding of chess. This, in our view, is Carlsen's main strength , placing h im on a par with the great chess players in the world .

1 . d4 �f6 2. c4 g6 3. �c3 J.g7 4. e4 d6 5. �f3 0-0 6 . .le2 e5 7. 0-0 �c6 8. d5 �e7 9. b4

a b c d e f 9 h 8 I .i.'i¥ .� . 8

7 j. j. � J. .i. J. 7 6 j. � · 6

5 � · 5

4 � � � 4

3 I{) I{) 3 2 � Ji � � � 2

1 l:l Ji � l:l � a b c d e f 9 h

In the Classical Variation this move is the most popular. This is not surpris ing. The characteristics of the pawn structure imply the c4-c5 attack by White and . . .f7-f5 by Black. The move 9. b4 enables White to get going without beating about the bush.

9 . . . �h5 1 0. !!e1

The modern continuation . At one time they preferred to 'take the bul l by the horns' with 1 0 . c5, but it was real ised that there were

sound arguments for 1 0 . . . ttif4. Therefore, before launching the attack with c4-c5, White neutral ises this possib i l ity: the rook vacates the f1 -square for the bishop. Mark Taimanov, the founder of the Classical Variation, used to parry the threat of . . . ttih5-f4 with the radical 1 0. g3, but ever since the effectiveness of the counterplay with . . . f5-f4 was demonstrated, White has preferred to defer this move unt i l better times.

10 . . . f5 1 1 . �g5

The knight is aiming for e6, with White displaying h is read iness to sacrifice a pawn for the sake of increasing the activity of his pieces.

11 . . . �f6

a b c d e f 9 h 8 1. .i. 'it' �. . 8

7 j. j. � .i. J. 7 6 j. � · 6

5 � j. j. t{) 5 4 � � � 4

3 I{) 3 2 � Ji � � � 2 1 l:l ��l:l �

a b c d e f 9 h

12 . f3

'Th is has become the main l ine after a lot of van Wely- Radjabov games' (Carlsen). In th is sentence Magnus expressed the sum total of knowledge, accumulated in ChessBase - for him the opinion of modern experts is important . But this is also the fru it of the decades of labour by such mighty King's Ind ian players as Yefim Geller, Eduard Gufeld, Garry Kasparov and Boris Gelfand - the l ist could be extended.

178


When conducting plans with an attack on pawn chains, your own chain should be reinforced . If 1 2 . Af3 Black can reply by undermin ing the spearhead of the pawn chain - 1 2 . . . c6!?.

12 . . . �h8

A usefu l prophylactic k ing move, i ntroduced into modern practice by Radjabov. Black prepares for the possible open ing of the a2-g8 diagonal in the event of 1 3 . �e6 Axe6 14 . dxe6, assuming that it is dangerous for h is king to remain on it.

13. b5?!

'For some reason I decided against playing the main l ine - with 1 3 . �e6 - and came up with this move instead , which clamps down on the black queenside. It looked interesting to me during the game, but now I don't l ike it any more: it's probably just too slow' (Carlsen). A typical admission. Magnus is not incl ined to th ink dogmatical ly, although he undoubtedly knew the prospects for White in the event of 13. �e6 Axe6 14 . dxe6.

Analysis diagram

The dispute in this position between van Wely and Radjabov began in 2005 at the World Cup in Khanty- M ansiysk, when Teimour tried to p ick up the pawn with h is e7-knight , which is passively placed, by transferring it to c6 - 14 . . . fxe4 1 5. fxe4 �c6.

It only remained to play . . . Cbd4, but Leek prevented this with 1 6 . Cbd5! (1 6 . . . �d4? 1 7. e7) and after the forc ing cont inuation 16 . . . �xe4 1 7. Af3 �f6 18. b5 Cbxd5 1 9. bxc6! White retained the in itiative. There fol lowed 1 9 . . . �b6? 20. cxb7 �b8 21 . c5! e4 22. �xe4! dxc5 23. Wxd8 �fxd8 24. Ag5 �e8 25. �d1 Ad4+ 26.�exd4! cxd4 27. e7 and the e-pawn decided the game. But also after the better 19 . . . �c3! 20. cxb7 �b8 21 . Wc2 We8 22. Ad2 �a4 (with the idea of . . . �c5) 23. Ae3 White, with h is pair of passed pawns, has an obvious advantage.

The duel cont i n ued in Wij k aan Zee 2007, when Radjabov went for the e6-pawn with h is other k n i g ht : 14 . . . Cbh5 1 5 . g3 Af6 (with the idea of . . . �g7) 1 6 . c5 f4 1 7. g4 �g7 1 8 . Ac4 �c6 1 9. cxd6 cxd6 20. �e2 �c8 21 . AdS �xb4 22. �b1 �c2, after which Black held the i n it iative and won the game. At Monaco 2007 i n their b l i ndfo ld game van Wely began wi th 1 5 . c5 and after 15 . . . �f4 1 6 . Ac4 fxe4 1 7. �xe4 �f5 1 8 . Axf4?! exf4 1 9 . Cbd5 �e8 Black safely got through the opening. And fi nal ly, i n B ie l 2007, van Wely corrected Wh ite's p lay : 1 8 . g3 !? Cbh3+ 1 9 . <!>g2 �g5 20. �g4 �xf3 21 . <!>xf3 e4+ 22. �xe4 Axa1 23. Ag5 tbe7+ 24. <!>g2 Ae5 25. �f4 Axf4 , when after the fau lty 26. gxf4? with 26 . . . d5 B lack seized the i n it iat ive and went on to win the game. Meanwhi le , 26. Axf4! wou ld have guaranteed a d raw: 26 . . . d5 27. Wa1 + <!>g8 28. Ah6 Cbf5 29. e7 Wxe7 30. Axd5+ �f7 31 . �f6+ <!>h8 32. �h5+.

1 3 . . . �e8

With the same idea of attacking the e6-pawn in the future from g7 (after . . . Af6). Of course, it is also possible to achieve the same aim after 1 3 . . . �h5.

179

Chapter 3 · Life at the Top --� ��--------------

14. A.e3 with opposite-colour bishops is clearly to

I n the event of 14 . c5 dxc5 1 5 . Ae3 Black White's advantage.

is not obl iged to defend the pawn - 1 5 . . . 1 9 . . .1t�xc5

b6, s ince here 1 6. tbe6 Axe6 1 7. dxe6 'After this the kn ight wil l be somewhat

takes place in a situation favourable for Wh ite. Stronger is 1 5 . . . Ah6 ! 1 6 . tDf7+ �xf7 1 7. Axh6, exchanging the 'bad' darksquare bishop (variations by Carlsen).

14 . . . .tf6 1 5. �e6 .txe6 1 6. dxe6 �g7 1 7. Ah6

The possession of the two bishops in the closed type of position after 1 7. tDd5 tbxe6 18 . tbxf6 �xf6 is not an advantage.

1 7 . . . �xe6

Otherwise the knight manoeuvre to g7 does not make sense. In the event of 1 7 . . . tbg8 1 8 . Axg7+ Axg7 1 9 . c5! White succeeds in defending his e6-pawn .

1 8. Axf8 Wxf8

a b c d e f g h 8 .1 'iV •

·· � � _.t. 7

6

5 4

3

.t.�.i. .\ fj, .t..t..L-fj, fj, ttJ fj,

2 fj, � fj, fj, 1 :

19. c5!

a b c � :

d e �

f g h

8

7

6

5 4

3

2 1

' I th ink this is basically the only move, as the highest priority is to activate the bishop' (Carlsen). This comment shows the essence of Magnus's concrete th ink ing. The main thing for h im is the ideal placing of his pieces, for the sake of which he does not begrudge giving up a pawn. With the activation of the bishop, the situation

s ide l ined. 1 9 . . . dxc5 was probably better. I intended to continue 20. Wd7 Wc8 21 . Wxc8+ �xc8 22. Ac4 with an about equal ending' (Carlsen). A confirmation of the previous comment. Magnus is objective not only with respect to h is pieces. Let us continue the variation with 22 . . . tbd4, i n

order to see the difference in the placing of the knight: at d4 it is 'eternal' , whereas at c5 it is merely trad itional and has no future. But let us be honest regard ing the natural reaction to 1 9. c5 - to whom would it occur to voluntari ly spoi l his pawn structure in a s imi lar situation, if it d id not even occur to the non-trivial ly th inking lvanchuk?

20 • .tc4 .tg5 The only way of activating the 'bad' bishop.

21 . We2 'Wh6 22. liad1 White has managed to restrain the darksquare bishop, by not al lowing it to go to e3 or d2. But otherwise White's achievements are sl ight: an attack on the queenside for h im is just as unreal ist ic as one on the kingside for Black. The position is one of dynamic balance.

22 . . . 1if8

a b c d e f g h 8 8 .i • 7 .t. .t. f.t.l � .t. 7

.t. .t.'ii' 6 6 fj, � .t..t..t 5 5

� fj, 4 4

ttJ fj, 3 3 fj, � fj, fj, 2 2

ld ld � a b c d e f g h

180

M. Carlsen - V. l vanchuk

23. a4

'I was not quite sure if including a4 and . . . b6 was a good idea, as the a4-pawn wi l l require constant attention now, but it has to be said that . . . b6 is also qu ite a concession here, as it g ives up any dream of ever advancing the pawn centre' (Carlsen). One cannot help agreeing with the evaluation of 23 . . . b6, but as regards 23. a4 Magus is understating someth ing , and he most probably p layed th is intu it ively. This is something we wi l l be able to ascertain .

23 . . . b6?!

It was safer to stick to a waiting course, as in the game - 23 . . . Wh4 24. g3 'Wh3 etc.

24. g3 'Wh3

An unpleasant move, preventing the consol idating �g2.

25. Wg2 Wh6 26. We2 Wh3 27. �h1

The avoidance of the repetit ion has the aim of dul l ing the veteran's vigi lance. How otherwise can his reply be explained?

27 . . . �d7?!

Why not sound out the opponent's intentions with 27 . . . Wh6 ?

28. !l:a1 !

' I bel ieve that the rook is a l ittle better off on a2 than on d1 , as it can now support a5, and also go to c2 in some l ines' (Carlsen). Here it is, that amazing intuit ion! Magnus could not have known Eduard Gufeld, and had probably not read his book on the King's I nd ian publ ished i n 2002, but he exactly reproduced an idea of Tigran Petrosian in a simi lar situation with a bishop on the h6-c1 diagonal, which he carried out in their game from the USSR Championship Final in 1 960. Here is the admiring commentary by the loser: 'Whi le I was marking t ime, Petrosian gave me an object- lesson on the theme that time in chess, as in l ife, is i rreversible. His gen ius was revealed in the fact that he avoided the 'm ined' square c1 ( a2-a4, b2-b3, ga1 -a2-c2, gf1 -b1 -b2) and succeeded in setting up a decisive bind on the queenside. Such a plan was hard to find and highly instructive. " I ron Tigran" s imply reduced the board to seven ranks, after which it transpired that my bishop was indeed f ir ing into empty space.' Here you have the young Norwegian's lack of 'school ing ' ! Not without reason do they say that he absorbs ideas l ike a sponge.

28 . . . Wh6 29. !l:a2 �f6?!

181


8 7 6 5 4 3

a b c d e I 9 h

.I • .t.l l.t. � ... ... ... .t.'i¥ � .t..t..i.. �

� � � f£J � �

8 7 6 5 4 3

� � � � 2 2 �

a b c d e I 9 h

31 . �d5! �xd5 32. �xd5 �f4 33. Wf2

Was the knight 's run worth such effort, if it can be parried in one move?

33 . . . fxe4 34 . .lxe4 Wg5 35. Jac2 d5?

Black's play has come to a standst i l l , but why voluntari ly give up material? 35 . . . �f7 was more resi l ient, although after 36. Ab7! with the idea of Ac8-g4 White nevertheless wi l l force h im to declare his intentions.

36. �xd5 �xg3 37. hxg3 �f4+ 38. 'it?f1

�xd5

8

6 5

3 2

a b c d e I 9

a b c d e I 9 h

39. Jace2!

6 5 4 3 2

Simple and business- l ike! The e5-pawn cannot be held: if 39 . . . �f5 there is 40. g4, while if 39 . . . �e8 there fol lows 40. f4 .

39 . . . Wf6 40. Jaxe5 Wxf3 41 . Wxf3 Jaxf3+ 42. 'it?e2 Jaf5 43. Jaxf5 gxf5 44. 'it?d3 c5 45. Jae5 �b4+ 46. 'it?d2

Black resigned .

The uninterrupted series of successes created another wave of interest in the rapidly progressing 1 7-year-old Norwegian. Carlsen's name was regularly among the first prize-winners at such prestigious tournaments as Wijk aan Zee, Linares, N ice, Baku and Foros - only successes, not a single fai lure. It appeared that to conquer the summit - a rating of 2800 - only one last effort was needed . Magnus's confidence in his own potential was impressive: he bel ieved that he was capable of anyth ing, and that the l imit of his possibi l ities lay far ahead . However, among the chorus of eulog ies, doubts were also expressed about the qual ity of h is play, and it was said that his talent was only of a calculating nature. Numerous cock-and-bul l stories were whipped up, such as his lack of 'school ing' with a substitute knowledge of computer dogmatism, and the surprise at how Carlsen had contrived , without reading a single classical chess book, to learn everything.

What can we say? One can merely feel sympathy for the i l l -wishers. As for his love of chess, this question is indeed one that appeals only to basic instincts. Questions about the qual ity of his play also sound rhetorical , since the appreciation of Magnus's masterpieces depends on your own level of chess, and stories about his lack of school-

182


ing had long ago been refuted by his father. His school ing was at the level of a h ighqual ity expert, and prizes at super-tournaments testify to the marks of the examiners. And besides, can one talk about a lack of school ing, when you have such a mentor as Simen Agdestein? The famous Russian trainer Yuri Razuvaev l iked to remember the introductory sentence by Mikhai l Botvinn ik at a session of h is school : ' I must immediately warn you that you cannot be taught to play chess, you can on ly learn ! ' Magnus had learned. I ndependently. There were countless examples of this.

It is clear that the t imes of the old chess stars are long s ince gone. Time has moved forward , and technical possib i l it ies have also changed . And whereas in the last century new ideas and conceptions were tracked down l iteral ly piecemeal in chess period icals, in the computer age it would be s i l ly not to use databases with m i l l ions of games, processed accord ing to certain criteria . ' It is suffic ient s imply to cl ick on a few keys,' complains Alexander Khal ifman , whose main successes coincided with the start of mass computer usage. 'Based on this, it is completely d ifferent qual it ies that are cal led for: calculat ion, memory and energy. Moreover, the key word here is memory! What becomes important is not the abi l ity to look at many posit ions from various openings, but that al l th is should be in your head . ' One can argue with th is . From the exist ing work with jun iors it transpires that many talented players possess such qual it ies as a good memory and excel lent calculat ion, but only a few make it to the top. I t is important not only to be able to calculate, but also to know what to calcu late. The main th ing here is grasping the depth of chess, understanding the essence of a posit ion, enabl ing a number of variat ions to be immediately d iscarded and not considered . It is not possib le to calculate everyth ing . A player's c lass is determined by his abi l ity to chop off branches of the calculat ion ' tree' and find the correct cont inuation . This comes easi ly to only a few, among them Carlsen. 'I probably have qu ite a good understanding of chess, ' he let sl ip i n one of h is i nterviews. Th is the where the root of the question l ies.

As regards memory, it is worth dwel l ing on this factor in more detai l . Here Carlsen is undoubted ly superior to many of his contemporaries. Dur ing his apprenticesh ip, Agdestein wrote an introductory letter to Garry Kasparov, extracts from which were publ ished in the magazine 64 Shakhmatnoe obozrenie. This was how he assessed the potential of his pupi l : 'F i rst of a l l , Magnus has an incred ible, photographic type of memory, when a page is not read , but immediately imprinted on the brain and instantly assimi lated . He remembers not only the game itself, but also where, when and who played it . He is capable of read ing a book on a sharp open ing during the course of one evening (usual ly without using a board and pieces) and of playing it the fol lowing day even against a strong grandmaster. This explains why he has such a broad open ing repertoi re . It often seems to me that he can play everyth ing and that in the open ing he knows everyth ing . It is wel l known that in the Sic i l ian Defence there are several incred ibly sharp l ines, where White unexpected ly sacrifices a couple of pieces, and it a l l ends with a better endgame - but suddenly Magnus tel ls me that al l these compl ications are theory, and he knows about them! This is not

183


surpris ing - he l iteral ly swal lows al l chess materia l . ' We should remind the reader that Alexander Alekh ine and M ikhai l Tal also had such a memory. And if to Carlsen's phenomenal memory you add this staggering intuit ion, p lus his absolute lack of fear of the strongest in the world - two important qual it ies remarked on by the famous trainer Mark Dvoretsky - this says a great deal . Magnus's potential a l lows h im to hope for a worthy place at the chess summit .

Carlsen was self-sufficient; he acknowledged the strength of the leaders of the chess world , but he real ised that he could beat any of them. The only one that Magnus had not yet got his 'teeth' into was the world champion Anand - he was the only one whom he had not managed to beat (not counting bl itz games) . Therefore their clash in Mainz, even in a rapid event, was of particular interest . There was no real battle. After suffering a fiasco in h is favourite 'Dragon' in the fi rst game, Magnus also conducted the second game weakly. The 1 -3 defeat was undoubted ly a blow to h is self-esteem. However, there was nothing surprising about this, as rapid-play comes naturally to the quick-acting Anand; here he is the acknowledged leader. As for Carlsen's fai lure, there is a l im it to everything, and a player can only do so much. The continuous battles at the top level , and with the bar raised h igh, demanded far more expenditure of energy than earl ier.

Magnus arrived in Germany from Switzerland, where he had just played an intense tournament, and he looked very t ired . It appeared that the battle in Biel did not herald any sensation. What for Carlsen , a regular participant in super-tournaments, was a F IDE category 1 8 tournament with a far from stellar field of six grandmasters! He set the pace: he won the fi rst half, and consol idated his success by also winning his second game against the undoubted outsider Pelletier. But when it appeared that the fate of the fi rst prize was decided, Magnus was let down by h is maximal ism: he decided to win with White against Alekseev. He fai led to finish off a sl ightly better posit ion, and the protracted battle ended with the blunder of a pawn on the 75th (!) move and a loss. This game was the deciding point of Carlsen's performance in Biel , since a desperate attempt to halt the leader Dominguez with the help of the risky 'Dragon' almost led to a second defeat . The outcome was 3rd place with 6 points out of 9. For the t ime being the storming of the 2800 summit had to be deferred .

Game 40

V. Pelletier - M. Carlsen Biel 2008


1. d4 tbf6 2. tbf3 e6 3. c4 b6 4. g3 J.a6 5. b3 J.b4+ 6. J.d2 Ae7 7 • .tg2 d5

7 . . . c6 is considered the main continuation, but the move of the central pawn also oc-

curs quite often. By turning onto a sideline, Carlsen was hoping to outplay the Swiss grandmaster, who was performing badly in the tournament.

8. cxd5 exd5 9. tbc3 0-0 1 0. 0-0 Ab7 1 1 . §c1

(see next diagram)

184

Y. Pelletier - M. Carlsen

a b c d e f g h

a K,.. 'iV K tfr 7 .t .i. .l J[ .i. .t .t .t 6 .t ,.. 5 .t 4 � 3 � [jj [jj � 2 � ib � � ib � 1 1;1 � 1;1 �

a b c d e f g h

1 1 . . . �bd7

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

In this position the more trad itional way of developing is considered to be 1 1 . . . tba6 fol lowed by playing the knight to c7 after the c-pawn has moved . Of course, White can counter this. Here the game Aronian - lvanchuk (Morelia/Linares 2006) is of interest: 1 1 . . . tDa6 12 . Af4 l::!e8 13 . &DeS h6 14 . tDbS!? cS 1 S . tDc4 (1 S . dxcS bxcS 1 6. tDc4 Ac6 17. tDbd6 is possible) 1S . . . Ac6 1 6 . tDcd6 l::!f8 1 7. dxcS bxcS, and after 1 8 . �d2!? (the game went 1 8 . tDd4 cxd4 1 9. l::!xc6 tDb4 20. tDb7 �e8 21 . l::!c7 tDa6=) the hanging pawns are in need of defence.

But after the classical knight manoeuvre . . . tDb8-d7-f8-e6 ( in the style of the Carlsbad Variation of the Queen's Gambit) the knight also assists the undermin ing of the centre.

12 . J.f4 c6

a b c d e f g h

a x 'i¥'.1 • 8 7 .t .i. ,.. .i. .t .t .t 7 6 .tj .t ,.. 6 5 .t 5 4 � ib 4 3 � [jj [jj � 3 2 � � � � ib, � 2

1;1 1;1 � a b c d e f g h

14. l3cd1?!

Pelletier fol lows in the footsteps of Aronian, taking into account the experience of the game van Wely- Leko (Dortmund 2008), where the attem pt to stop the c-pawn did not work: 14. �b2 tDf8 1 S . b4 tDe6 1 6. Ae3 Ad6 17. a4 �e7 1 8. l::!b1 a6 1 9. Ad2 l::!ab8 20. e3 cS 21 . bxcS bxcS 22. �a2 g6 23. dxcS AxeS 24. tbe2 tbe4 2S. l::!fd1 Aa8 26. l::!xb8 l::!xb8 with equal play. However, what he was hoping for is not clear. After Black's reply it transpires that White has simply wasted a tempo - an obvious hole in h is home preparations. Carlsen does not forg ive such things.

14 . . . Ab4!

With the unequ ivocal threat of 1 S . . . Axc3 1 6 . �xc3 l::!xe2. The problems are not rel ieved by 1 S . &DeS?! tDxeS 1 6. AxeS tDd7! .

After the development of the knight at d7 1 5. J.d2 §c8 1 6. 'Wb2 'We7 1 7. §fe1 'Wf8 Black is forced to support h is dS-pawn .

13. 'Wc2 l3e8 (see next diagram)

(see next diagram) As Carlsen h imself th inks, in principle this queen retreat is not essential , since the

The same position was reached by trans- threat of e4 with the idea . . . Axc3 exdS is posit ion in the game Aronian - H uzman not real istic. But he sensed that the op(Warsaw 200S). ponent was agon ising over his choice of

185

Chapter 3

a b c d e f g h 8 I .l. 'ii' fr 8 7 .l j_ 1.1\ .l .l .l 7 6 .l .l 1.1\ 6 5 l r .l 5 4 .t � 4 3 � Ci:J Ci:J � 3 2 � � � � � � � 2

l:l l:l � a b c d e f g h

Life at the Top

a b c d e f g h

a b c d e f g h

I d f h 22 . . . £.xc3!?

p an , an so or t e moment he improves the placing of h is pieces.

18 . .lh3 J:Icd8 1 9. 'Wc2 h6!?

Cont inu ing the same wait ing tact ics. Act iv i ty with 1 9 . . . 'De4 leads to m ass exchanges: 20. tDxe4 dxe4 21 . Axd7 �xd7 22. Axb4 'Wxb4 23. 'DeS �xd4 24 . tDxc6 Axc6 2S. Wxc6 �ed8 26. � xd4! with the s impl if icat ion of the posit ion and a probable draw, which d id not su i t Carlsen , who was a im ing for v ictory i n the tournament.

20. �h4

Magnus's tactics have worked . How can White refuse the invitation to go to fS? But with this creeping out of the ' lair ' the play becomes much more l ively, which in view of the d ifference in motivation is to Carlsen's advantage.

20 . . . cs 21 . �f5 a6

The bS-square has to be covered against the possible invasion of the knight.

22. 'Wb2

(see next diagram)

When pawn tension exists it is never easy to make a choice as regards the further transformat ion of the pawn structure. Should Black go in for an ' isolan i ' - 22 . . . cxd4 23. tDxd4 'DeS, which stabi l ises the position with the prospect of protracted play, or decide on hanging pawns? Carlsen prefers to compl icate matters.

23. J.xc3 �e4 24. dxc5 �xc3 25. 'Wxc3 bxc5 26. 'WaS �f6

8 a b

7 .t 6 .l 5 � 4 3 � 2 �

c d e f g h .l i. 'ir'e 8

.l .l 7 1.1\ .l 6 Ci:J 5

4

a b c d e f g h A typical posit ion with hang ing pawns. Black's pieces are ready to support their activity with . . . dS-d4 and . . . 'Df6-e4, which demands energetic counter-action from White such as 27. �c1 !? or 27. Ag2.

27. 'Wb6?

186

L. Dominguez - M. Carlsen

A strange move for a grandmaster. White provokes a p in , which is advantageous for his opponent.

21 . . . .tc8! 28. �g2

Only now did Pelletier see that the intended 28. tDxh6+ gxh6 29. AxeS does not work in view of the interposition 29 . . . �d6! , when White loses a piece. If 28. f3 there fol lows 28 . . . Ae6 with the threat of 29 . . . g6.

28 ..• �e4!

With the threat of . . . tDg5. N ow Wh ite's game goes downhi l l .

29. f3 �g5

36 .•• Sle3?!

There was a quick win by 36 . . . �c8! 37. Wa3 � xe2+! 38 . tDxe2 Wh3+ 39. �f2 Wf3+ 40. �g1 We3+ 41 . �g2 Ah3+ with mate in three moves (variation by Carlsen).

37. Wd4?

A t ime-trouble mistake, leading to a rapid defeat . 37. �g1 was more resi l ient , although even here after 37 . . . �c8 38. Wa3 �ce8 White would also have been unable to resist the pressure.

37 •.. Wh3+ 38. �g1 Slxg3+ 39. hxg3 Wxg3+ 40. �h1 £f5

29 . . . tDc3 30. �d3 (no better is 30. �d2 d4 with the threat of . . . tDd5) 30 . . . tDxe2 31 . �e3 White resigned .

Axf5 32.�3xe2 �xe2+ 33. �xe2 Ad3 leads to the loss of a pawn.

30. g4 h5! 31 . Elc1 g6

31 . . . tDxh3 32. �xh3 hxg4+ 33. fxg4 g6 34. tDg3 Wh6+ 35. �g2 Axg4 was more accurate, in the end leading to a position which occurred in the game.

32. �g3 �xh3 33. �xh3 hxg4+ 34. fxg4?!

34. �g2 was more resi l ient.

34 . . . Wh6+ 35. �g2 £xg4 36. Vxc5?

8 7

a b c

6 . 5 4

a b c d e

8 7

5 ..t 4 ttJ 3 r:J;; !::, 2

f 9 h

18

Game 41

L. Dominguez - M. Carlsen Biel 2008


1. e4 c5 2. �f3 g6 3. d4 Ag7 4. �c3 cxd4 5. �xd4 �c6 6 . .te3 �f6 7. Ac4 0-0 8 . .tb3 d6 9. f3 Ad7 1 0. Vd2 Erc8 1 1 . 0-0-0 �e5 12. �b1

A useful prophylactic move, without which White cannot get by in most branches of the Dragon Variat ion. White takes h is king into safety, invit ing Black to declare h is i ntentions. For example, i n the event of 1 2 . . . tDc4 1 3 . Axc4 �xc4 White can begin an attack with 14 . g4!?.

1 2 .•• a6

This move in combinat ion with 9 . . . Ad7 was Carlsen's main weapon in 2008, one which he employed in five games. If 1 3 . g4 Black can play 1 3 . . . b5.


1 3. h4 h5

a b c d e f g h 8 .!. 'if .�. . 8 7 .i. .l .l .i. 7

.l 1.1\ .l 6 5 1.1\ £ 5 4 [jj � � 4 3 it [jj it � 3 2 � � � Wi � 2

� � � 1 a b c d e f g h

14. g4

This flank pawn breakthrough is nowadays a standard plan of attack. Black's defence is eased by the early exchange of the darksquare bishops: 14 . Ah6 tbc4 1 5 . Axc4 �xc4 1 6 . Axg7 c!ixg7, and here 1 7. g4 is not so dangerous - 1 7 . . . hxg4 1 8 . h5 �h8. I n the rapid game Anand - Carlsen (Mainz 2008) White preferred 1 7. �he1 , and after 1 7 . . . �e8!? 1 8 . tbde2 (1 8 . tbd5 e5! 1 9 . tbb3 tDxd5 20. 'Wxd5 Ab5=) 1 8 . . . 'WaS 1 9. tDf4 �ec8 20 . tbcd5 'Wxd2 2 1 . � xd2 tDxd5 22. tbxd5 �e8 he satisfied h imself with an equal endgame. 14. Ag5 is examined in the game Radjabov- Carlsen (Baku 2008).

14 . . . hxg4 1 5. h5 t"Llxh5

a b c d e f g h 8 .l. 'i¥ .I. e 8 7 .i. .l .l .i. 7

.l .l 6 5 1.1\ 1.1\ 5 4 [jj � .l 4 3 it [jj it � 3 2 � � � WI 2

� � � 1 a b c d e f g h

1 6. Ah6

In this variat ion Dom inguez was a p ioneer, and it tu rned out that the exchange of the dark-square b ishops was premature . Subsequently the more dangerous cont i nuat ion 1 6 . �dg1 was e m p l oyed against Carlsen , and his fi rst attempt was a fai lu re. I n h is rapid game against Anand (Mainz 2008) M agnus p layed 1 6 . . . 'Wa5 and after 1 7. Ah6 � xc3? 1 8 . Axg7 c!lxg7 1 9 . �xh5 ! it was t ime for h im to res ign . Tru e , after 1 9 . . . � x b3 Anand sat i s f ied h imself with the w in o f the queen - 20 . 'Wxa5 , but he cou ld a lso h ave p layed more forcefu l ly : 20. 'Wh6+! c!if6 2 1 . 'Wg5+ c!lg7 22 . tDxb3 'We? 23. 'Wh6+ c!if6 24. �xe5. The experiment with 16 . . . �c5, as p layed against Topalov in the Grand Slam tournament (B i lbao 2008), also ended in fai l ure . The game cont inued 1 7. Ah6 c!ih7 1 8 . A xg7 c!i xg7 1 9 . f4 tbc4 20 . A xc4 �xc4 21 . f5 e5 22. tbde2 �h8 23. b3 �c6? 24 . �xg4 tDf6 25. �gg1 �xh1 26 . �xh1 tbg4 27. tDg3 with an obvious advantage to Wh ite. And although an improvement was found - 23 . . . �c8! 24. �xg4 (24. 'Wxd6 Axf5!) 24 . . . tbf6 25. �xh8 (25 . �gg1 'We?!) 25 . . . 'W x h 8 2 6 . � g 1 �c6 , when B l ack holds the posit ion (A . Kuzmin), Magnus d id not tem pt fate any further. But the Dragon had once aga in demonstrated its v iab i l ity !

The main events occurred in the variation 1 6 . . . 'Wa5 1 7. Ah6 (where Carlsen suffered a disaster after 17 . . . �xc3?). At the Grand Prix tournament in Sochi 2008 Radjabov shocked Karjakin (and al l connoisseurs of the Dragon) with a fantastic double exchange sacrifice.

(see next analysis diagram)

188


Analysis diagram

17 . . . Af6! ! 1 8 . fxg4 Axg4 1 9. Axf8 �xf8 20. �e3 gxc3! 21 . 'Wxc3 �xc3 22. bxc3 e6 and Black gained excellent compensation . Perhaps not sufficient for a win, but the psychological effect was so powerfu l that Karjakin was unable to save the game.

16 . . . e6?!

This al lows White to develop a dangerous initiative. Black should have clarified the situation by exchanging the dark-square bishops: 1 6 . . . �h7! 1 7. Axg7 �xg7 18 . f4 et:lc4 19. Axc4 gxc4 20. f5 e5, when he would have achieved a good game (A. Kuzmin) .

17. i:idg1 'Wf6

a b c d e f 9 h

impun ity, which would not be the case with his king on c1 on account of the exchange of queens after 1 8 . . . Axh6 1 9. 'Wxh6 �f4+.

1 8 . . . .lxh6

Not 18 . . . et:lc4?! 1 9 . Axc4 �xd4 20. Ad3 Axh6 21 . �xh6 'Wg7 22. �e3 ttlf6 23. g5 etlh5 (after 23 . . . tileS 24. gg4 with the threat of ggh4 Black is forced to make a further weakening of his k ing's defences) 24. Ae2 fol lowed by Axh5.

1 9. 'Wxh6 �g7 20. 'We3 �f6 21 . g5 �h5 22. �de2

8 7

5 4 3

a b c d e

.i. .l .l

� �

Ji tt:J WI 2 � � � t2J

<;!;> a b c d e

f 9 h .i ft 8 .l 'it' 7

.l 6 � � 5

4 3 2

: : 1 f 9 h

White's plan of attack is 23. gxh5 gxh5 24. etlf4 with the th reat of etlf4xh5-f6+. Black's counterplay is associated with the advance of his queenside pawns and the exchange sacrifice on c3.

22 . . . a5

Th is m ove is m o re log ica l in rep ly to 22. et:lce2 , whereas here 22 . . . b5 is more appropr iate. But i n that case too Wh ite carries out the same p lan of attack as i n the game : 2 3 . g x h 5 g x h 5 24. ttlf4 � h 8 25 . gh1 w i th the th reat of ttlf4x

18. fxg4! h5-f6+, whereas B lack's counterp lay is

This is where the value of 1 2. �b1 shows too late: 25 . . . h4 26 . 'Wf2 gxc3 27. bxc3 itself - White can capture the pawn with et:lc4 28. e5! , b lock ing the commun ica-

189


t ions to the k ing . Now a l l captures on eS are bad : 28 . . . til xeS 29 . gxh4 , 28 . . . dxeS 29. gxh4, o r 28 . . .'�xeS 29 . 'Wxh4. However, there is st i l l the possib i l ity of 28 . . . gca, attempting to evacuate the king to the queenside.

23. §xh5!? gxh5 24. �f4 �g4

The alternative 24 . . . 'Wh8 2S. gh1 h4 26. 'Wf2 gfd8 27. gxh4 'Wg7 28. gh3 gcs (with the idea of 29. &DhS &Dg4 30. 'Wf4 'WxgS) looks more attractive.

a b c d e 8 7 6 5 £ 4

a b c

25. 'Wh3 'Wd4?

8 7 6

� £ 5 � tD ,.. 4 � 3

2

d e f 9 h

a b c d e 8 8 7 7 6 6 5 � 5 4 tD ,.. 4 3 � 3 2 � � tL1 2

� � 1 a b c d e f 9 h

30 . . . Ac6!

Carlsen does not miss such opportun ities. Now he is able to cover his k ing.

31 . 'Wh4 .te4! 32. �c3

Of course, not 32. 'Wxg4?? Axc2+ 33. �c1 (33 . �a1 gas mate) 33 . . . AfS+.

32 . . . .tf5 33. �h5 f6!

In amazing fashion Black has activated his posit ion. With the inclusion of the rooks in the defence after 34. &Dxf6+ &Dxf6 3S. gxf6 �f7 White's attack peters out.

34. �g3 §c7 35. �xf5 exf5 36. gxf6 �xf6 37. 'Wg5+ c;t?t7!

A rare instance of Carlsen playing impul- The fol lowing was a false trai l : 37 . . . gg7?!

sively. 2S . . ,gxc3 26. bxc3 &DeS 27. &DxhS 38. 'WxfS gg1 + 39. �a2 ga8+ 40. &Da4 �f7

'Wg6, intending . . . gda, was essential . 41 . 'WbS.

26. �ce2! 'Wxe4 27. Wxh5?! 38. 'Wxf5

It is not clear why Dominguez rejected the thematic 27. tL!xhS! . After al l , even 'by eye' it is obvious that the variation 27 . . . fS 28. gxf6 �f7 29. tL!hg3 'Wg6 30. tL!f4 is unable to save Black. He preferred to win the queen, thinking that the king would not run away, but he underestimated Black's defensive resources.

27 . . . a4 28. §h1 'Wxh1 + 29. Wxh1 axb3 30. axb3

190

a 8 7 6 5 4 3 2

a

b c

� tD � � �

b c

d e f 9 h .! 8 • 7 ,.. 6 lWJ 5

4 3 2

d e f 9 h


38 . . . i:le7

Black begins erecting a 'fortress'.

39. b4

rtle7 45. Vd3 rtlt7 46. �b5 rtle7 47. �d4 rtlf7 48. 'Wf3 §h5 49. �f5 rtle6 50. �d4+

Not 39. �d5?? because of mate in two Having fai led to find the key to the fortress,

moves.

39 . . . i:le5 40. 'Wf2 i:ld8 41 . b3 i:ld7 42. rtlb2 i:lde7 43. 'Wb6 i:ld7 44. 'Wd4

Dominguez forces a draw by repetition.

50 . . . rtlf7 51 . �f5 rtle6 52. �d4+

Draw.

A new tournament - the Grand Slam in Bi lbao (FI DE category 21 ) occupied a special place in the chess calendar. It was organ ised with a record prize fund for tournaments without the status of a world championsh ip - 400,000 Euros. The idea of the organisers was that those playing in it should be the winners of the main super-tournaments of the year. Those taking part in the fi rst tournament were the winners in Wijk aan Zee, Linares and Sofia - Aronian, Anand and lvanchuk, together with the personal ly invited Carlsen, Topalov and Radjabov. A special feature of the tournament was the ' footbal l ' system of scoring (3 points for a w in , 1 point for a draw).

The battle of the 'big six' proved highly uncompromising. This was a benefit performance by Topalov, who was striving to demonstrate the rightfu lness of his participation in the current world championsh ip cycle (he was facing a match with Kamsky). Vesel in won four games, two of them against Carlsen , gaining revenge for the 'double' in Linares. The blow to Magnus's self-esteem was softened by second prize in the tournament: on the tie-break he f inished ahead of Aronian. In last place, to general surprise, was the world champion Anand.

Game42

M. Carlsen - T. Radjabov Grand Slam, Bi lbao 2008


1. e4 c5 2. �f3 d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. �xd4 �f6 5. �c3 g6 6. J.e3 £g7 7. f3 0-0 8. 'Wd2 �c6 9 . .lc4 J.d7 1 0. 0-0-0 i:lb8

(see next diagram)

This is the co-cal led 'Ch inese Dragon' . The author of this brand name is the Bel-

a b c d e f g h 8 K 'iV K . 8

7 . . .i. • • .i. . 7 6

5 4

3

1.&£ 1.&£

ik ti:J � £i:J ik �

6

5 4

3

2 � � � WJ � � 2 w .: .: 1

a b c d e f g h

gian master Luc Henris, who under this point of this move is to exploit the b-fi le t it le publ ished an analysis of 10 . . . .§b8 in after the exchange of the knight on c4. 2002 in the New in Chess Yearbook. The At the same time, the main trump of the

191


'Ch inese' is to immediately react to the wing attack 1 1 . h4 or 1 1 . g4 with the pawn sacrifice 1 1 . . . b5! . It is dangerous to accept it. For example, the game Stanford -Anka (McMinnvi l le 2004) cont inued 1 1 . h4 b5! 12 .tDdxb5 tbe5 1 3 . Ae2 \Wa5 14 . tbd4 1:!fc8 1 5 . tbb3 1:!xb3! 1 6 . cxb3 (1 6 . axb3? loses to 1 6 . . . tbxe4 1 7. fxe4 \Wa1 + 1 8. tDb1 tbc4!) 1 6 . . . \Wxa2 1 7. \Wc2 \WaS with an attack for Black. However, 1 2 .tbcxb5!? tba5 13 . tba3 is not so clear.

11 . .tb3 tba5 12. c.t>b1

Th is prophylact ic move is best made immediately. After the d i rect attack 12 . h4 b5 1 3 . h5? ! (1 3 . �b1 tbc4 1eads to a pos i t ion from the game) 13 . . . tbc4 14 . Axc4 bxc4 1 5 . Ah6 'lti!fb6 Wh ite is forced to weaken his k i n g 's d efences . A game Echevaria - da Costa (correspondence 2003) cont inued 1 6 . b3 Axh6! 1 7. \Wxh6 '!WaS 1 8 . �b2 1:!fc8 1 9 . tbde2 Ae6 with the i n it iat ive for Black.

12 . . . b5 1 3. h4

The effect of the move . . . tba5-c4 can be weakened by 1 3 . Ah6 Axh6 1 4. \Wxh6, but , as often happens in the Dragon, the early exchange of bishops does not give anything. For example, the game Berg- Evdomikov (Moscow 2007) continued 14 . . . e5!? 1 5 . tbde2 tbxb3 1 6. cxb3 b4 1 7. tba4 (or 1 7. tbd5 tbxd5 1 8 . 1:!xd5 Ae6 1 9. 1:!d2 1:!b6=) 17 . . . '!We7 1 8. tbg3 Ae6 1 9. h4 1:!fc8 20. hS 1:!c7 21 . '!Wg5 tbe8 22. '!Wd2 1:!c6 with equal play.

1 3 . . . tbc4 14 . .txc4 bxc4 1 5. ma1 h5!

Essential prophylaxis against the h4-h5 attack.

1 6. !ib1

a b 8 .i 7 ... 6

5

4

3

c d e f g h

a b c d e f g h

8

7

6

3

2

The posit ion reached is typical of the 'Chinese Dragon' structure. The last two moves are necessary for the defence of the king. Despite the enti re power of Black's heavy art i l lery, its defences are not easi ly breached.

1 6 . . . Wa5

Black must act energetically to counterbalance White's possible attack. Instructive, for example, is the game Efimenko-Charbonneau (Montreal 200S), which continued 1 6 . . . !:!e8 1 7. Ah6 Ah8 1 8 . g4 hxg4 1 9 . h5 '!Wa5 20. hxg6 fxg6 21 . 1:!h4 gxf3 22. tbxf3 tbxe4? 23. tbxe4, and all Black's subsequent efforts proved in vain : 23 . . . c3 24. tbxc3 !:!xb2 25. �xb2 Axc3+ 26. '!Wxc3 !:!b8+ 27. '!Wb3+ !:!xb3+ 28. axb3 e5 29. 1:!d1 Ac6 30. tbg5 d5 31 . !:!f1 1 -0.

But there are quest ions. Apart from 1 9 . . . '!Wa5, the capture 1 9 . . . tbxh5 should also be examined . Now 20. !:!xh5 is parried by 20 . . . Axd4! (20 . . . gxh5? 21 . '!Wg5+ �h7 22. '!Wxh5 with a mating attack) 21 . Wxd4 e5. Also 20. fxg4 tDf6 21 . Ag5 tbxg4 22. tDd5 is unclear. And final ly, in the game White would hardly have felt so carefree if instead of 22 . . . tbxe4? Black had played 22 . . . tbg4! 23. tbd4 Af6.

17 . .th6

192

----------------------�M�. C�a�rl�se�n - T. R_ad�ja_b_ov _____________________ �_

The specific nature of the position is such that the typical pawn attack 1 7. g4 hxg4 1 8 . h5 ti:)xh5 does not have the strength to break through, both after 1 9 . fxg4 Axg4, and in the event of 1 9 . Ah6 gxf3 ! . I n the game Kulaots-Papp (Hungary 2008) White stuck to central strategy: 1 7. ti:)de2 l::!.fc8 1 8. l::!.hd1 l::!.b4 1 9. a3 l::!.cbB 20. Ad4 1::1.4b7 and d id not achieve anything sign ificant. We should add that also noth ing is given by the typical tactic 1 7. ti:)d5 \Wxd2 1 8. ti:)xe7+ �h7 1 9 . Axd2 ti:)xe4, when Black regains his pawn with the better position .

17 . . . Axh6! 18. 'Wxh6

a b c d e f g h

a b c d e f g h

18 . . . lab6

Note this manoeuvre. Black intends to double rooks and at the same time he restricts the mobi l ity of the knight on c3 - if White removes the defence from the a2-pawn he gets mated ( . . . \Wxa2+! and . . . l::!.a6) .

19. g4

Usually this thrust is fo l lowed up with h4-h5, but with the queen on h6 this does not work. But what else can be suggested for White? After al l , 1 9. Wg5 l::!.a6 is too passive.

19 . . . hxg4 20. We3

After the game Magnus admitted that he had forgotten about the typical idea 20. h5 g5 ! , cutt ing off the queen. Its release by 2 1 . ti:)f5 Axf5 22. \Wxg5+ <!>h7 23 . fxg4 ti:)xe4! 24. \Wxf5+ (24 . ti:)xe4?? Wxa2+!) 24 . . . Wxf5 25. gxf5 ti:)g3 leads to an endgame favourable for Black.

20 . . . lafb8 21 . h5 g5

21 . . . ti:)xh5 22. fxg4 (22 . ti:)f5 gxf5 23. laxh5 f4! is not good for White) 22 . . . Axg4 is stronger, when the knight on c3 sti l l cannot move, since after 23. ti:)d5 l::!.a6 24. a3 c3! 25. \Wxc3 (25 . ti:)xc3? \Wxa3+!) 25 . . . Wxc3 26. ti:)xc3 White finds himself a pawn down.

8 a b

.! c d e f

7 . -*- • • 6 .! • � s if 4 · tLl � 3 tLl 2 � � � 1 � 1:1

a b c

Viii �

d e f

g h

• 8

7

6

· � 5

• 4

3 2

1:1 1 g h

22. fxg4 �xg4 23. Wd2 16 24. �f3 laa6

Radjabov is looking for a way to approach the king, but he fai ls to find one. He should have central ised h is q ueen - 24 . . . Wc5 ! , when he is i n control o f the s ituat ion . For example, in the event of 25 . ti:)d5 c3 26. �xc3 \We3 B lack transposes i nto a favourable endgame (Notkin).

25. lahg1 lab4 26. a3

Parrying the threatened double sacrifice on a2 .

26 . . . Ae6

193


After the game Radjabov suggested the prom is i ng q ueen sacr if ice 26 . . . !!a4 !? 27. tbxa4 �xd2 28 . tbxd2 !!xa4.

a b c d e f 9 h 8 • 8

7 .l 7 6 J. 6 s 'ii 4 .l .l 4 3 /j, t2J 3 2 [j, [j, W!J 2

1 � g g a b c d e f 9 h

27. e5!

Sensing the somewhat ponderous nature of Black's manoeuvres, Carlsen resolutely opens up the posit ion, forcing the opponent to solve concrete problems.

27 . . . dxe5

The combinat ion 27 . . . �xa3+ 28 . bxa3 !!xa3+ 29. tba2 c3 is refuted by 30. �xg5+! fxg5 31 . !!xb4.

28. �xg5! .tf5

If 28 . . . fxg5 there wou ld have fo l lowed 29. �xg5+ �f8 30. h6 and a piece has to be g iven up for this pawn.

29. �ge4 mh7

fai ls to achieve his aim with 30. �e2 tLlh6 31 . �g2, after which, apart from 31 . . . Ag4 32. �d2 f5, Black has an interesting comb inat ion : 31 . . . Axe4! 32. �xe4 �xa3+! 33. bxa3 !!xa3+ 34. tba2 !!xa2+! 35. �xa2 !!a4+ 36. �b2 c3+ 37. �xc3 !!xe4, transposing into an unclear endgame.

30. 'We2 �h6

The trappy 30 . . . !!ab6?! (with the idea of 31 . !!xg4? !!xb2!) is dubious in view of 31 . �f3 Ae6 (31 . . . tbh6 32. tLld5) 32. tbg5+! fxg5 33. tbe4, when White breaks through to the k i n g . The exp iatory sacrif ice 33 . . . !!b3 also does not help: 34. cxb3 !!xb3

35. tbxg5+ �h6 36. �f8+ �g5 37. �xe7+.

31 . §g3

a b c d e f 9 h 8 8

7 .l • 7 6 J. � 6 s 'ii £::, 5 4 .l .l 4 3 £::, t2J g 3 2 £::, £::, Wi 2

1 W g a b c d e f 9 h

31 . . . .te6?

It was essential to help the king - 31 . . . �b8! 32. �g2 �h8 (33 . !!g1 �b6), since now after 32. �g2 tLlf5 33. �g7+! Black would have had no defence. But is there any need to comment on time-trouble play? Perhaps only for the sake of establ ishing the truth .

On general g rounds it wou ld be usefu l to remove the king from the danger zone - 29 . . . �f7!?. The attempt to drive back the knight with 30. �g3 wou ld be refuted by supporti ng it with the rook: 30 . . . !!b8! 31 . �e2 tbh6 32. �e3 tbg4 33. �g1 tbh6, and White has to curb his ambitions - since

32· lagS? �fS?

34. �g6? Axe4 moves the 'pointer' towards At this speed of play it is no wonder that his own king: 35. tbxe4 �xa3+. He also a combination examined in the notes to

194


Black's 29th move was missed: 32 . . . Af5! 33. �g2 Axe4! 34. �xe4 �xa3+! etc. , although here the d ifference in the placing of the kings t ips the evaluation in favour of White.

33. 'Wg4!

Now Carlsen is in charge!

33 . . . �h4 34. �g5+! fxg5

After 34 . . . r;t>h8 White gives a l i near mate -35. tDf7+ Axf7 36. l:!h6.

35. 'Wxg5 �xg6 36. 'Wxg6+ Wh8 37. §g1

Black resigned .

Game43

L. Aronian - M. Carlsen Grand Slam, B i lbao 2008 English Opening [ A32]

1. c4 c5 2. �f3 �f6 3. d4 cxd4 4. �xd4 e6 5. g3 �b4+ 6. �d2

Before this Aron ian had played 6 . Ad2, including against Carlsen in their famous 2007 Candidates match in El ista. True, this occurred in the 1 1 th , bl itz game: 6 . . . Ac5 7. tDb3 Ae7 8 . Ag2 tDc6 9. tDc3 b6 1 0. Af4 Ab7 1 1 . 0-0 0-0 12 . Ad6, where Magnus played the superficial 1 2 . . . tDa5?! (1 2 . . . tDe8 is sounder) 1 3 . tDxa5 Axg2 14 . r;t>xg2 bxa5 15 . e4 l:!c8 1 6 . b3 and ended up in an inferior position . But s ince that t ime more than a year had passed - a gigantic d istance for the swiftly- improving Carlsen . By defending against the check with h is knight, Leven invites Magnus to go in for a 'hedgehog' structure.

6 . . . �c6 7. �c2 �e7 8. �g2 0-0 9. 0-0

a b c d e f g h 8 8 I. .*-'ii' I. •

7 .l .l .l .i. .l .l .l 7 6

5

4

3

� · � r : � �[ �

4

3

2 � � [jj [jj � � � � 2

1 J: �� :s w a b c d e f g h

After complet ing h is k ings ide development B lack has to dec ide o n h i s subsequent p lan , tak i n g i nto account the features of the posit ion . I t is c lear that , w i th h is b ishop on g2, Wh ite wi l l a im to coord inate it with h is kn ights, for which the natural posts are c3 and d4, but for the transference of the kn ight from d2 t ime is requ i red. I n the spi rit of the posit ion is 9 . . . d5 1 0 . cxd5 exd5 1 1 . tDb3 Af5 1 2 . tDcd4 Ae4, when with h is isolated dpawn B lack's p ieces are act ively p laced for the forthcom ing batt le . Another p lan i nvolves the sett ing up of a ' hedgehog ' : 9 . . . b6 1 0 . b3 Ab7 1 1 . Ab2 �c7 12 . e4 d6 1 3 . tDe3 , where Wh ite has a spatial advantage .

9 . . . §b8!?

A new idea. Black is intending to undermine the c4-pawn.

1 0. �e4

White is intending to seize control of the weak d6-point. Another route for the knight comes into consideration - 1 0. tDb3 with the idea of 1 0 . . . b5 1 1 . c5. It is true that this al lows Black to develop pawn activity on the queenside, but, without the support of the pieces, this does not come to anyth ing:

195


1 1 . . . a5 1 2. tDcd4 Yfic7 (1 2 . . . tDxd4 13 . Yfixd4) 13 . Ad2!? (1 3 . a4 bxa4 expands the scope of the rook on b8) 13 . . . a4 14 . tDxc6 dxc6 1 5 . tDa5 (nothing is g iven by 1 5 . Aa5 Yfie5 1 6. Ac3 Yfic7) 15 . . . Ad? 1 6. Yfic2, and after 1 7. b4 White blocks the queenside, freeing his hands for play in the centre.

10 . . . b5 1 1 . cxb5 §xb5 12 . ttld6 Axd6

After the roo k retreat 1 2 . . J �b8 Wh ite consol idates his hold on d6 - 1 3 . b3 Aa6 1 4. Aa3 Yfia5 1 5 . l:!e1 l:!fd8 1 6 . e4 with the idea of 1 6 . . . tDe8 1 7. e5, and 17 . . . tDxe5? is not possible in view of 1 8 . tDc4! tDxc4 1 9 . Axe?, winn ing the exchange.

1 3. Wxd6 Ab7 14. ttla3

14. b3 tDe7 1 5 . Axb7 l:!xb7 1 6. Ab2 came into consideration , reta in ing pressure on the dark squares.

14 . . . §b6

8 a b c

7 I. ..t

d e

'if I.

f g h

.�. . 1. 1. 1.

6 .�. � � �. � 5

a b c d e f g h

15. Ae3?!

8

7

6

5

The ambitions of the two players have converged on the d6-point . For the sake of this Aronian is ready to sacrifice a pawn, although fu l l compensation is not apparent. 1 5 . tDc4 l:!a6 1 6. Ad2 (preventing . . . tDa5) 1 6 . . . tDe7 1 7. Y!id3 Axg2 1 8 . c.!>xg2 is more

natural , with the prospect of converting the queenside pawn majority.

15 . . . §xb2 1 6. Ac5 §e8 17. §ab1

White cou ld have won the exchange: 1 7. tDc4 l:!xe2 (not 17 . . . l:!b5?! 1 8 . a4 l:!b3

1 9 . Yfid1 l:!c3 20. tDd6, winn ing material) 1 8 . Y!id3 Aa6 1 9. Yfixe2, but after 1 9 . . . d5 fo l lowed by . . . Axc4 B lack wou ld have gained adequate material compensation.

17 . . . §xb1 18. §xb1 Aa6

1 8 . . . Aa8 was weaker: 1 9 . tDb5 Y!ib8 20. l:!b3 !? with the idea of 20 . . . tDa5 21 . Axa7, regain ing the pawn.

1 9. ttlb5 Axb5 20. §xb5 Wc8 21 . a4 h6

It is usefu l to open an escape square for the king, preparing . . . Yfia6, which for the moment does not work because of 21 . . . Yfia6 22. Axc6 dxc6? 23. l:!b8.

a b c d e f g h 8 'iV I. • 8 7 I. I. 1. 1. 7

6 �iV I. � I. 6 5 :t. iL 5

4 /j, 4

a b c d e f g h

22. Aa3

The logical completion of White's strategy was 22. e4!? Y!ia6 23. e5, when the advantage of the two bishops is more apparent. Now the black queen comes out into the open.

22 . . . Wa6! 23. Ab2 Wxa4 24. Axc6

196

L. Aronian - M . Carlsen

dxc6 25. �b4

Since 25. 'Wxc6 a6 26. �c5 'Wxc6 27. �xc6 §a8 28. Axf6 gxf6 leads to a rook endgame a pawn down, Aron ian prefers to keep the queens on , with prospects of an attack against the somewhat exposed black k ing .

25 . . . 'Wa5 26 . .1xf6 gxf6 27. �g4+ �h7 28. Wxc6

The suggestion of M ikhai l Golubev was more subtle: 28. 'Wd7 �f8 29. �f4!? and if 29 . . . h5 (cutting off the rook from g4), only now 30. 'Wxc6.

a b c d e f 9 h 8 K 8

. 7 .l s

�'-...!-' 5

M 4 8 3

8 8 8 2

a b c d e f 9 h

29. 'Wc2+?

A crit ical moment . White qu ite logical ly aims to provoke the weakening . . .f6-f5 , but he carries it out inaccurately, al lowing an important transposit ion of moves . I t was correct to beg in with 29. �a4! . S ince 29 . . . 'We1 + 30. �g2 �d1 is i neffective on accou nt of 31 . We? ! , the queen wou ld have to move off the important d iagonal - 29 . . . 'Wb6, and now 30. 'Wc2+ f5 31 . e4! fxe4 32. �xe4 exposes the k ing, forcing Black to concern h imself with i ts defence.

Chess history knows many examples of the conversion of an outside passed pawn with the same number of heavy pieces - remember the famous 34th game of the Alekh ine- Capablanca match (Buenos Ai res 1 927). But there the king was covered by a cont inuous pawn chain .

29 . . . f5 30. �a4?

Too late, as now the in itiative passes conc lusively to B lack . 30 . �g2 was better, with the faint hope of 30 . . . We1 ?! 31 . 'We?, but Black plays 30 . . . �d2! 31 . �a4 'Wd5+ 32. e4 fxe4 33. 'Wxe4+ 'Wxe4+ 34. �xe4 �a2, transposing into a rook endgame with an outside passed pawn and real winn ing chances.

30 . . • 'We1 + 31 . �g2 �d1 32. Wc7

32. �xa7? 'Wh1 + 33. �h3 �g1 leads to mate .

32 . . . �g6!

Played in the style of Ste in itz - the k ing can defend itself.

33. �f3!

Aron ian is not lacking in ingenu ity, and with in a couple of moves Carlsen's ambit ions wi l l be curbed somewhat.

33 •. . Wh1 + 34. �e3 �a1 !

The kings have succeeded in defending themselves. Magnus offers to take play into a queen endgame.

35. Wc2

White cann ot refuse: 35 . �c4? �a3+ 36. �d2 'Wd5+ 37. �e1 �a2.

35 . . . �xa4 36. Wxa4

197


a b c d e f g h 8 8

7

6

5 5

4 4

3 � 8 3

2 8 8 8 2 a b c d e f g h

36 . . . 'Wc1 +

The transit ion i nto a pawn endgame by 36 . . . 'M'e4+ 37. 'M'xe4 fxe4 38. <;!;lxe4 is for lovers of painstaking home analysis, but, speaking on general grounds, it is unreal to hope to save this ending where the opponent has an outside passed pawn.

37. �f3 Wc3+ 38. �g2 a5 39. g4

39. e4 was objectively somewhat stronger.

39 . . . We5 40. gxf5+ �xf5 41 . We8 �g6 42. 'Wf8 a4 43. e3 'We4+ 44. �g3 Wd3 45. h4

I t is poi nt less to p lay 45 . 'M'g8+ <;!;lt6 46. Wh8+ <;!;le7, when the king escapes from the checks.

45 . . . a3 46. �h2 'Wf5

Black also wins by 46 . . . a2 47. h5+ <;!;lt6 48. 'M'xh6+ <;!;le7 49. Wg5+ <;!;Ita 50. Wf6 'M'd1 .

47. Wxa3 Wxf2+ 48. �h3 'Wf3+ 49. �h2 �h5 50. 'Wf8 'Wf2+ 51 . �h1 �g4

White resigned.

Game44

M. Carlsen - L. Aronian Grand Slam, Bi lbao 2008 Semi-Slav Defence [ 047]

1 . d4 d5 2. c4 c6 3. �f3 �f6 4. �c3 e6

5. e3 �bd7 6. J.d3 dxc4 7. J.xc4 b5 8. J.d3 J.b7

a b a .! 7 I. .i. 6

c d e f g h

iV • ..t. i. J!l\ 1. 1. 1.

I. I. J!a\ 5 �[

8 1 4

3 CiJ i, 8 CD 2 8 8 8 8 8

8

7

6

5

4

3

2 1 1:, i, � � 1:, 1

a b c d e f g h

Currently the main continuation, which has supplanted the c lassical 8 . . . a6 9. e4 c5 1 0 . e5 cxd4 1 1 . &Dxb5 axb5 1 2 . exf6 gxf6 13 . 0-0 'M'b6 14 . 'M'e2. Of the recent battles on this theme, mention should be made of the Kramn ik-Anand duel in the match for the world championsh ip (Bonn 2008), where Black was able to demonstrate an integrated plan of attack on the king side. The 5th game of the match continued 14 . . . Ab7! 1 5 . Axb5 l::!g8! (the most accurate move order) 1 6 . Af4 Ad6 1 7. Ag3 f5 1 8 . l::!fc1 ! f4 1 9 . Ah4 Ae7 20. a4 Axh4 21 . &Dxh4 <;!;le?! with compl icated play.

9. a3! b4 1 0. �e4 �xe4 1 1 . J.xe4 bxa3 12 . 0-0 �f6

Black's play is based on nuances. By delaying the development of h is dark-square bishop, he hopes to save a tempo in comparison , for example, with the game Aronian - Grischuk (Grand Prix, Sochi 2008),

1 98

M . Carlsen - L. Aronian tD ------------------

which cont i nued 1 2 . . . Ad6 1 3 . b3 �f6 1 6. Ab5+ �d7 1 7. �e5 with a mortal p in) 14. �d2 Y!ic7 1 5 . Af3 ! Axh2+ 1 6. <!>h1 Ad6 1 6. �d4! Ae7 1 7. �f5, and now in the event 17. �c4 Ae7 1 8. Axa3 0-0 1 9 . Ac5! );!.fd8 of cast l ing - 1 7 . . . 0-0? Black comes under 20. b4 with a spatial advantage for White. a mating attack: 18 . �xg7! <!>xg7 1 9. Y!lg4+

If 1 2 . . . Ae7 there can fol low 1 3. b3 0-0 <!>h8 20. Axf6+ Axf6 21 . Y!if5 . 14 . Axa3 Axa3 1 5 . l;!.xa3 Y!ie7 1 6 . b4 with

1 6. tbe5 tbfS 1 7• Y!Va4 .tb4 18. tbxc6 pressure for White on the queenside.

.txcS 1 9. Y!VxcS+ me7 20. �fd1 �c8 13 . .td3 axb2 14 . .txb2 a5 21 . 'Wf3 'Wb6

Black is ready to develop his bishop on b4, Vacating the square for the rook. neutral is ing White's pressure on the open

22 . .td4 'WbS 23 . .tas �cdS 24 . .tb7!? files on the queenside.

a b c d e f g h

'if • .i. .I 8

7 • • .\ 7 6 . "' 6

4

3 2 � 1 _:

a b

5

c d e f g h

By b lock ing the queen , Wh ite prepares an exchange sacrifice on b4, after wh ich the b lack k ing w i l l come under the dangerous cross-fire of the b ishops. I n the event of the d i rect 24 . l;!.ab1 with the idea of 25 . Ac5+ B lack can e i ther sacrif ice his q ueen : 24 . . . l;!.he8 25. Ac5+ Axc5 26 . l;!. x b8 l;!. xd 1 + 27. Y!ixd1 .§ x b8 with a defens ib le posit ion , or mechan ica l ly forestal l Wh ite's threat: 24 . . . l;!.d6 25. Ab7 .§hd8 , prepari ng the evacuation of the k ing .

15 . d5! a b c d e f g h

A pawn sacrifice , wh ich character ises Carlsen's concrete th inking style . I t resembles h is pawn sacr if ice agai nst lvanc h u k (Foros 2008) . Wh ite opens the diagonal for h is dark-square bishop, and now the king wi l l be u nab le to cast le . Before th is the game Gelfand - Kramn ik (World Championship, Mexico 2007) went 1 5 . Y!la4 Ab4 1 6 . Aa3 �d5 1 7. e4 �b6 1 8 . Y!ib3 Y!ie7 1 9 . l;!.ab1 Axa3 20. Y!ixb6

'if .I .I 8 8

� • • • • 7 7 l . "' 6 6

5 5 • .i. � 4 4

3 3 [j � 2 2 [j [j [j

: : � a b c d e f g h

Ab4 21 . �e1 0-0, and B lack maintained 2 h ? 4 . . . 5 . the balance.

15 . . . tbxd5

The main idea of the pawn sacrif ice is revealed after 15 . . . exd5 (not 15 . . . cxd5?

Black has succeeded in coord inating h is forces, but this move g ives a new impetus to White's i n itiative. Correct was 24 . . . e5 ! 25 . Ab6 .§d6 26 . .§xd6 Y!ixd6 (not

199


26 . . . Axd6 27. l::!xa5 with the threat of !::!a?) It is hard to comment on this type of care-27. Ax aS Ax aS 28. l::!xa5 l::!d8, and Black lessness without taking the preceding play completes h is development. into account. It seems incred ible that such

25. h3 a powerfu l grandmaster as Aronian was unable to assess the consequences of

If 25. l::!ab1 there fol lows 25 . . . tbg4 26. g3 f6 , Wh ite's attack after the obvious 28. Ac5+.

preparing an escape square for the king. But s imi lar 'b lack-outs' often occur with

25 . . . h4

Here too 25 . . . e5 should have been played .

26. S:ab1 ! e5

Too late!

27. S:xb4!

8 7 6

a b c

if j,

5 I. 4 � 3 2

d e f 9 h .I .I

.,.,. "'

I. j, I.

�VIii � � �

� � a b c d e f g h

27 • . . axb4?

8 7 6 5 4 3 2

Carlsen's opponents, who are unable to withstand the prolonged tension , when they have to find a series of only moves. Now the black king ends up in a mating net and the game concludes quickly. 27 . . . exd4 28.l::!bxd4 'lflc7 was essential , parrying the d i rect threats, although the i l l -considered advance of the h-pawn has seriously compromised Black's posit ion. For example: 29. AdS tbxd5 30. l::!xd5 l::!xd5 31 . 'lflxd5, and in view of the threat of '/flg5+ he can hard ly avoid a further weaken ing of h is position - 31 . . .f6.

28. Ac5+ �e6 29. S:a1 !

The game is decided.

29 . . . S:d6 30. Axd6 �xd6 31 . 'Wc6+ �e7 32. S:a8! 'Wd6 33. 'Wxd6+ �xd6 34. S:xh8 b3 35. Aa6 ttid7 36. S:xh4 ttic5

Black resigned.

At the Olympiad in Dresden Carlsen performed as a genuine leader. He confidently led the Norwegian team in al l eleven matches, in which he contributed 71/2 points. The entire team also played wel l and fin ished in 1 9th place, its most successfu l in recent h istory.

Among the young player's games, special note should be made of the one with the veteran Alexander Bel iavsky, in which Magnus was g iven another master class by one of the outstanding grandmasters from the 'golden age' of chess.

200

M. Carlsen - A. Bel iavsky

Game 45

M. Carlsen - A . B el iavsky Olympiad , Dresden 2008

Ruy Lope z [ C84]

1 . e4 e5 2. �f3 �c6 3 . .tb5 a6 4 . .ta4 �f6 5. 0-0 .te7 6. d3 d6 7. c3 0-0 8. It e1

Alexander Be l iavsky i s known for being faithfu l to the open ings he employs. Therefore in h is preparations for the game Carlsen was probably expecting the variation with 8 . . . tDd7, which Bel iavsky had employed against h im in the 'R ising Stars' tournament in Amsterdam 2006 in reply to 8. tDbd2, and also in this Olympiad against Bachman, who in fact played 8. l::!e1 . But the experienced g randmaster changes course. Besides, the game with Bachman, wh ich developed i n very unusual fash ion - 8 . . . tDd7 9 . d4 exd4 1 0 . cxd4 tDb6 1 1 . Axc6 bxc6 1 2 . tDc3 aS 13. Ae3 f5 14 . e5 f4 1 5. Ac1 d5, left some questions unanswered .

8 . . . .tg4 9. h3 .th5 1 0. �bd2 �d7 1 1 . �f1 �c5

a b c d e f g h 8 .!. 'iV .!. • 8 7 .l.l .i..l.l.l 7 6 .l l.il.l 6 5 "' }. .i. 5 4 jL £::, 4 3 t::, t::, CiJ t::, 3 2 £::, £::, £::, £::, 2 1 1:: iL�l::Cb�

a b c d e t g h

1 2 . .txc6

It is hard to surprise Carlsen in the open ing.

He undoubted ly knew that after the bishop retreat 1 2 . Ac2 with 12 . . . tDe6 13 . tDg3 Axf3 14 . �xf3 Ag5 Black can exchange his 'bad ' dark-square bishop and obta in the better game. I ndeed , in the immediate future White cannot advance d3-d4, whereas Black has a clear plan - . . . g7-g6, . . . f�g7, . . . �g5 and the preparation of . . .f7-f5 .

1 2 . . . bxc6 13. g4

The main l ine is considered to be 1 3 . tDg3 Axf3 1 4 . �xf3 tDe6 1 5 . Ae3 c5, where Black has a comfortable game.

13 . . . .tg6 14. �g3 �e6 15. mg2

White delays with the logical 1 5 . d4, and after Black's reply it is no longer a real ity.

1 5 . . . c5 1 6. It h1 f6 1 7. h4 d5

a b c d e f g h 8 .!. 'iV .!. • 8 7 .l .i. .l .l 7

l.il .l .i. 6 5 .l.l 5 4 £::, £::,{:::. 4 3 t::, t::, CbtD 3 2 £::, £::, £::, � 2 1 1:: iL � 1:: 1

a b c d e f g h

18. c4

Carlsen recognises in good time that he has not achieved anyth ing from the opening and has even ended up in an inferior posit ion. Therefore he fixes the pawn structure in the centre, real is ing that otherwise Black h imself wi l l play . . . c5-c4 and gain control of the important d3-point. But now the d4-point becomes weak, and it may prove an excellent outpost for the black pieces.

201


18 ..• dxe4

There is no point in B lack avo id ing the exchange of queens (1 8 . . . c6), s ince after 1 9. tDfS White has active play on the kingside. I n the endgame Black gains control of the d-fi le, and the attractiveness of the d4-point is not reduced .

1 9. dxe4 'Wxd1 20. !axd1 !afd8

This rook, since the f8-square has to be freed in the event of tDfS .

21 . .ie3 et:\d4 22. !ad2 .tf7 23. !ac1 IaabS 24. et:\e1

a b c d e f g h 8 I. I. • 7 £I .J...J.. £t£ 6 £. £ 5 £ £ 4 B�B BB 3 � tLJ 2BB :: Bil 1 I :: tLJ

a b c d e f g h

24 ..• a5!

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

Bel iavsky g ives the young grandmaster a good lesson in strategy. Having establ ished control of the b-fi le with . . J!ab8 and . . . a7-aS, he at the same time weakens the dark squares in White's posit ion.

25. et:\d3 .te6! 26. f3 a4 27. et:\f5 .tf8 28 . .tf2

I n the event of the exchange on d4 -28. tDxd4 cxd4 29. Af2 g6 30. E!cc2 cS B lack strengthens h is centre, and after . . . Ad6 he prepares . . .f6-fS .

28 • . . et:\c6 29. !acc2 .tf7!

The bishop makes way for the knight , exploit ing the fact that the cS-pawn is taboo: 30. AxeS E!xd3 31 . E!xd3 AxeS; or 30. tDxcS tDb4 31 . E!xd8 E!xd8 32. E!c1 E!d2 33. tDxa4 E!xf2+ 34. �xf2 tDd3+ 3S. �e3 tDxc1 , and White has to make considerable efforts to regain the knight.

30. et:\e3 et:\d4 31 . !ac1 et:\e6 32. !acd1

8 7 6 5

3

a b c

I.

B 2BB

d e

I. f g h

.J..e .J..££ � £

£ B BB tiJtiJB :: � � ::

a b c d e f g h

32 ..• !ad4!

8 7 6 5 4 3 2

A move i n the sty le of the n i nth world champion T igran Petrosian . B lack disp lays h is read iness to sacrif ice the exchange: in the absence of his dark-square bishop, Wh ite wi l l have nothing with which to defend the dark squares . 32 . . . E!xd3?! wou ld have been a false tra i l : 33. E!xd3 tDf4+ 34 . �g3 tDxd3 3S . E!xd3 E!xb2 36. E!d8 g6 37. tDd1 !, and i n v iew of the th reat of AxeS B lack is forced to g ive up the exchange: 37 . . . E!xf2 38. �xf2 Axc4 39. tDc3 �f7 40. E!a8 , when he has a diff icu lt endgame.

33. �h2

Removing the threat of . . . E!xd3.

33 . •• !abd8 34. et:\d5 !axc4 35. b3 axb3 36. axb3 !ad4!

202

M . Carlsen- A. Bel iavsky __. _________ ttJ.::::;;,·

Nevertheless forc ing the acceptance of the exchange sacrifice, as otherwise after . . . c7-c6 the p in on the d-fi le goes into operat ion.

37. Axd4 �xd4 38. �g2 �xb3 39. f!:b2 c6 40. �e3 c4 41 . �f2 �d4 42. f!:b7

a b c d e f 9 h 8 .! .i.. 8 7 .i. .t. .t. 7 6 5 4 3 2

42 . . . c3?

a b c d e f 9 h

6 5

3 2

The 37-year handicap nevertheless means something! After safely reaching the t imecontrol , the t ired Bel iavsky continues playing 'automatical ly' and blunders a pawn. After 42 . . J:Ia8! he would have had a strateg ical ly won position.

43. f!:d3 c2 44. �xc2 c5

A material advantage, although a min imal one, is now on White's side. Beliavsky faces a d ifficult struggle for a draw, in which he successfu l ly demonstrates h is defensive mastery.

45. f!:d2 f!:a8 46. �e3 c4 47. �fd1 �e6 48.f!:db2

48. �d5!? was more energetic, with the idea after 48 . . . �d4 of playing 49. fidb2, intend ing the exchange of rooks, and in the event of 49 . . . Axd5 50. exd5 Black has to reckon with the passed d-pawn .

4 8 . . . h5 49. f!:b8

a b c d e f 9 h 8 .! .: .i. . 8 7 .i..t. 7 6 �I. 6 5 .t. .t. 5 4 fj, fj,fj, 4 3 I:£J!j, 3 2 .: � 2

a b c d e f 9 h

49 . . . f!:a3!

In an endgame the exchange down, it is important to retain the rook to create counterplay.

50. f!:c8 hxg4 51 . fxg4 �h7 52. f!:b7 Ag6 53. f!:xc4 �c5

a b c d e f 9 h 8 .i. 8 7 .: ....7 6 .t. .i. 6 5 � .t. 5 4 .: fj, fj,fj, 4

I:£J 3 2 � 2

I:£J a b c d e f 9 h

54. f!:bb4

54. fib8! Ad6 55. fic8 was stronger. For example, 55 . . . Axe4+?! does not work in view of 56 . �g3 with the threat of fixc5. 55 . . . fia2+ 56. �f3 (56. �g1 fia5 57. �f2 �e6 58. �f5 is also interesting) 56 . . . �b3 is safer, but here White can return the ex-

03


change by playing 57. �c3 (57. c!>g3 �d2 58. fk2 !!xc2 59. !!xc2 �xe4+ leads to a reduction in the material) 57 . . . �d2+ 58. c!>e2 !!b2 59. c!>d3 with dangerous threats.

54 . . . iia2+

54 . . . Af7 55. !!c3 !!a1 was stronger.

55. mg3

Black's defence wou ld have been more d ifficult after 55. c!>f3!? �e6 56. �c3 !!h2 57. !!b8 (57. h5? �g5+) 57 . . . !!h3+ 58. c!>e2 Ac5 59. �f5 .

55 . . . iid2 56. h5 .tf7 57. iic2

a b c d e f 9 h 8 .i. 8 7 .t..t.•7 6 5 4 3 2

6 [j_ 5

[j_ 4 � 3

2

a b c d e f 9 h

57 . . . iid4!

An accurately-calculated exchanging operation with a reduction in the number of

pawns, in which by some mi racle the d3-pawn survives. 57 . . . !!d3!? 58. !!e2 g61ooks more prosaic, but perfectly sound.

58. iixd4 exd4 59. �f5 d3 60. iib2 �xe4+ 61 . mt4 �c5 62. �f2 g6

The number of pawns is i nexorably reduced.

63. hxg6+ mxg6 64. me3 J.e6 s5. �h4+ mg5 ss. �t3+ mgs s1. iibs mt7

After 67 . . . Ah6+ 68. c!>d4 d2 the passed d -pawn cont i n ues to survive: 69 . !!c6 (69 . f!b1 �d7 70. c!>d3 �C5+ 71 . c!>d4 �d7) 69 . . . �b3+ 70 . c!>c3 Ad5 71 . �h4+ c!>g5 72 . !!d6 Ab7! 73. �f5 (73 . !!b6 �c5) 73 . . . Af8 74. !!d7 �c5, and now 75. !!xd2 �e4+ 76. �xe4+ Axe4 leads to the loss of the last pawn.

68. iic6 .td7 69. iic7 mea 70. �d4 Ah6+ 71 . mt3 �e6 12. �xe6 Axe6 73. �xd3 f5 74. gxf5 Axf5

Already here peace cou ld have been concluded.

75. �e5 Af8 76. iia7 Ad6 77. �c4 Ah2 78. �e3 .td7 79. me4 Ag1 so. iia8+ mt7 81 . iia7

Draw.

The year 2009 began i n an un usual way for Carlsen . The Norweg ian's ad m i rers were su rpr ised by h i s peaceab leness at the su per-tournament i n Wij k aan Zee (FI DE category 1 9) . I t seemed that th is was the very t ime to bu i ld on the success of the previous year, s ince for various reasons the main favou rites for the chess crown had dec l i ned to p lay in the tournament: Anand , Kramn ik and Topalov. But a longs ide Carlsen's name in the tournament table a depress ing ser ies of ' ha lfpoints' appeared . However, it was c lear to the experts that the reasons were of a personal nature . It is wel l known that Carlsen never p lays de l iberately for a draw, as i nd icated at the least by the length of h is games. One of the reasons for such

04

M. Carlsen - L. Dom i nguez

an occurrence was h is g reat ly increased prest ige: opponents began p lay ing more caut iously against h im . But there were also some notable set-backs. P laying ' by techn iq ue' i n the endgame d id not always work, as, for exam ple , i n heavy piece end ings with Radjabov and Karjakin , which by their protracted nature resemb led ind iv idua l games. Neverthe less, by w inn ing i n rounds 1 0 and 1 2 against Dom inguez and Smeets , Carlsen jo i ned the batt le for the fi rst pr ize. But his strength was on the wane, and i n the last round he was outplayed by Wang Yue. Com pared with the fai ry-tale previous year, h is fi na l score of + 1 with ten draws and a share of 5th-6th places looked very modest indeed .

Game 46

M. Carlsen - L. Dominguez Wijk aan Zee 2009

G runfeld Defence [ 081]

1 . d4 �f6 2. c4 g6 3. �c3 d5 4. 'Wb3 dxc4 5. 'Wxc4 .tg7 6. e4 0-0 7 . .te2 �fd7 8 . .te3 �b6 9. 'Wd3

9 . . . f5

a b c d e f g h 8 --�..t'if ... 8

6 5

��..t�7 � 6

5 4 � � 4 3 ti:J�il, 3 2 � � il, � � � 2 1 � <;t> tt:J� 1

a b c d e f g h

Dominguez tries to carry out this idea more accurately than in h is game with Kramn ik from the Olympiad in Dresden, where he played 9 . . . &Dc6 1 0 . l::!d1 f5 .

1 0. l::!d1 f4 1 1 . .tc1 e5 12 . d5

The critical continuation. This pawn has the prospect of becoming passed. The featureless 1 2 . &Df3 exd4 13 . &Dxd4 c5 14 . &Ddb5

Wxd3 1 5 . l::!xd3 &Dc6 1 6 . 0-0 &DeS gives Black an easy game.

12 . . . c6 13. �f3

For the moment it is too early to separate the d-pawn from its base. I n the event of 13 . d6 Ae6 14. &Df3 Wf6 Black is threatening to surround it: 1 5 . Wc2 l::!d8 1 6 . 0-0 &DeB.

13 . . . cxd5 14. �xd5 �xd5 1 5. 'Wb3

6 5 4 3

a b c d e

a b c d e f g h

8

6 5 4 3

This was undoubted ly prepared at home. The exchange of queens, carried out in the game Jakovenko- Mamedyarov (Grand Prix, E l ista 2008), did not g ive White anyth ing : 1 5 . Wxd5+ Wxd5 1 6 . exd5 Af5 1 7. 0-0 &Dd7. Carlsen is not against the queen exchange, but in a better version. For example : 1 5 . . . Wb6 1 6 . Ac4 Wxb3 1 7. Axb3 &Dc6 1 8 . Axd5+ �h8 1 9. h3.

15 . . . �h8

205


The pawn sacrifice 1 5 . . . Ae6 1 6. exd5 Af7 1 7. 'l!flxb7 tDd7 looks promis ing, but after Carlsen's meteoric rise the psychological approach of his opponents was al ready d ifferent. For example, after 1 8 . d6 Axa2 1 9 . 0-0 Ae6 20. f!fe1 the wh ite pieces coord inate very harmoniously, and the d6-pawn may cause Black certain problems. Dominguez sensibly prefers not to throw caution to the winds and to retain a stable posit ion.

1 6. Ac4 �c6 1 7. Axd5 Y!le7 18. h3 �b4

The alternative was 1 8 . . . tDd4 1 9. tDxd4 exd4 20 . f!d3 (20 . 0-0? f3) 20 . . . Af5 21 . 'l!flxb7 'l!fte5! with good compensation for the pawn. For example: 22. 0-0 (22. f!f3 g5 looks unnatural) 22 . . . f!ab8 23. 'l!ffxa7 Axe4 24. Axe4 'l!flxe4 25. f!a3 f!a8 etc .

1 9. Ac4

Carlsen avoids the exchange of his act ive b ishop, over look ing B lack's rep ly. Meanwhi le , after the s imple 1 9 . 0-0 tDxd5 20. exd5 'l!fff7 21 . f!fe1 (otherwise there follows the blockad ing tDf3-g5-e4) 21 . . . Wf5 22. d6 th is pawn causes B lack considerable problems. For example: 22 . . . f!b8 23. 'l!ftc3 (23 . Ad2 e4 24. Ac3! exf3 25. f!e7 is tempt ing, but Black can play 23 . . . Ae6) 23 . . . Ae6 24. f!xe5! Axe5 25. tDxe5 <;!;lg8 26. d7 Wf6 27. 'l!ffc7.

a b c d e f 9 h

I. • 8 'iV .i. .t. 7

6 .t. 6 5 5 4 �it 8.t. 4 3 � t2J 8 3 2 88 8 8 2

it 1:. � 1:. 1 a b c d e f 9 h

1 9 . . . b5! Now Black solves h is open ing problems.

20. Axb5 Also after 20. Ad2 bxc4 (weaker is 20 . . . a5 21 . Axb4 axb4 22. Ad5) 21 . 'l!flxb4 '�!ftc?!? (21 . . . Wxb4 22. Axb4 f!e8 23. 0-0) 22. Ac3 Ab7 23. tDg5 f!ae8 Black has noth ing to fear.

20 . . . �xa2 21 . Ad2 §b8 22. Y!la4 Y!lb7 23. 0-0 Y!lxb5 24. Y!lxa2 Y!lxb2 25. Y!lxa7 Y!lb7 26. Y!lc5 The position has stabi l ised . The weakness of the e5-pawn is compensated by the weakness of the e4-pawn.

26 . . . Ae6 26 . . . 'l!ffxe4 is also possible, but Black has to withstand some in itiative by White: 27. Ac3 Ab7 28. Axe5 Axe5 29. f!fe1 f!bc8 30. Wa3 f!a8 31 . Wb3 Wa4. From the practical point of view, with time-trouble approaching, the move in the game is safer.

27. Y!ld6 Ab3 28. §b1 Y!lxe4 29. Ac3

a b c d e

8 I. 7 6 � 6 5 .t. 5 4 'if.t. 4 3 .I. it t2J 8 3 2 88 2

1:. 1:.� a b c d e f 9 h

29 . . . §bd8?! It is from such trifles that the precond itions for an attack are created . If one looks at the d ifference in the defences of the kings, it is obvious that after exchanges on e5 the black k ing wi l l to subject to a 'draught' along the adjacent a1 -h8 and a2-g8 diagona ls , wh ich i s dangerous with the

2 06

M. Carlsen - L. Dom i nguez ---------------------

queens on the board . Meanwh i le , after the simple 29 . . . �dS the th reat of . . . eS-e4 wou ld have forced Wh ite to exchange the queens - 30. AxeS AxeS 31 . �xeS+ �xeS 32. tDxeS AdS with an i m m i nent d raw.

30. 'Wa3 Ac2?

Taking into account what was said earl ier, the bishop should have been kept on the a2-g8 d iagonal , for example 30 . . . AdS. Carlsen immed iately exploits Black's mistake.

31 . gb5! 'Wa4?

Another inaccuracy. The queen coord i nates better with the other pieces after 31 . . . �c6 , and a lthough Wh ite can sti l l torment h i s opponent, there i s n o d i rect win : 32 . .!;xeS!? (or 32. �b2 §c8 33. AxeS AxeS 34. tDxeS �c3 3S. �a2 .!;c7) 32 . . . §a8 33. �b2 Ae4! (after 33 . . . .!;fc8 34. Ad4 Wh ite is dominant on the long d iagonal : 34 . . . .!;ab8 3S . .!;e7! ,l;xb2 36 . .!;xg7 with the win of a pawn - 37 . .!;xg6) 34. tDd4 �b7 3S . .!;bS �f7 etc.

32. Wb2

a b c d e

8 .I 7 6 6 5 :: 5 4 'iV .l 4 3 J, � � 3 2 � .i. � � 2

:� a b c d e f 9 h

Over the last three moves the situation has changed sharply.

32 . . . .td3?

The b ishop shou ld have been u rgently switched to the a2-g8 d iagonal - 32 . . . Ae4 33. AxeS �a? 34. tDgS AdS 3S . .!;d1 h6 36 . .!;bxdS ,l;xdS 37 . .!;xdS hxgS. Black has a broken pawn structure, but the win is sti l l a long way off. One ga ins the impression that Dominguez fai ls point-b lank to see the vital d iagonal .

33. gb7! Wc2

There is no longer any way of saving the game. Th ings are hope less after both 33 . . . Axf1 34. AxeS .!;d7 3S. Axg7+ and 33 . . . .!;d7 34. CD xeS AxeS 3S. AxeS+ �g8 36 . .!;xd7 �xd7 37. �b3+ ,l;f7 38 . .!;c1 , when the threats of .!;c7 or Ab2 and �c3, with an attack on the long d iagonal , are i rresist ib le.

34. 'Wb4 gfe8 35. ge1

3S. AxeS! AxeS 36. tDxeS .!;xeS 37. �xf4 was more energetic .

35 • . . Ae2

3S . . . Aa6 36 . .!;a? .!;a8 37. AxeS wou ld merely have de layed B lack's i nevitable defeat .

36. �xe5 Axe5 37. Axe5+ gxe5 38. Wxf4 Wf5 39. Wh6

Black resigned .

I n Linares (FI DE category 21 ) Carlsen as though by inertia cont inued h is 'Wijk' drawing series and began the tournament with five draws. But the essence is not i n the number of draws - in such stel lar company this is natural - but i n the qual ity of the play. And here open ing preparation comes to the fore. G iven the modern state of theory, it is only

207


with the wh ite pieces that it is real istic to hope to win against a player of equal class. But this demands painstaking work and searches in the labyrinths of theory, which is not to Magnus's taste. Typical , for example, is th is admission in one of his interviews: 'I have never l i ked studying opening theory. For me a normal position is sufficient. If I have an advantage in an end ing , I can play for a long t ime, trying to force the opponent to make a mistake. ' But in super-tournaments it is na"lve to rely on players making mistakes. And the deficiencies of Carlsen's opening preparation were seen already in the second round, when with White he was obl iged to force a draw in h is game with Dominguez after m issing a trick.

1. c4 c5 2. tbf3 tbc6 3. d4 cxd4 4. tbxd4 tbt6 5. tbc3 e6 6. g3 'Wb6 7. tbdb5 tbe5 8 . .tf4 tbfg4 9. 'Wa4 (9 . e3 is more often played) 9 . . . g5! 10 • .txe5.

a b c d e f

8 J. 7 �� 6 if 5 ttJ 4 � 3 2 /J /J 1 1:,

a b

.i. � J

[J ttJ

c d

•.a �

� iL

[J[J �iL

e f

g h

.1. 8 � 7

,! 6 5

1.& 4 [J 3

[J 2 1:, 1

g h

1 0 . . • 'Wxf2+! ( in the game Aron ian - Leko, Morel ia/Linares 2008, 10 . . . tL!xe5 was played) 1 1 . �d1 tbxe5 12. tbc7+ �d8 1 3. tbxa8 'Wd4+ 14. �c2 tbxc4, and Carlsen went in for a repetit ion of moves: 15. �b3 tbd2+ 1 6. �c2 tbc4 1 7. �b3 tbd2+ 18 . �c2 112-112.

However, i n the 6th round Magnus neverthe less managed to ach ieve what he wanted - he gained a m in imal endgame advantage and in a drawn-out game he defeated Anand for the fi rst t ime. But th is proved to be a 'pyrrh ic ' victory. Magnus began the second ha lf of the event with

two successive losses, to Aron ian and Wang Vue, in wh ich , p lay ing Wh ite, he not on ly fai led to extract anyth ing from the open ing , but even ended up in i nferior posit ions. And only an important win in the 1 Oth round over the leader Grischuk enabled h im to fin ish the tournament worth i ly in 3rd p lace.

Game 47

M. Carlsen - V. Anand

Linares 2009

Semi -Sla v Defence [ 045]

1 . d4 d5 2. c4 c6 3. tbc3 tbt6 4. e3 e6 5. tbf3 tbbd7 6. 'Wc2 .td6 7. g4 tbxg4 8. lag1 'Wf6 9. laxg4 'Wxf3 1 0. laxg7 tbf6 1 1 . h3

a b c d e f g h

8 .1. .i. • .1. 8 7 � � �:�7 6 �.*-�'.& 6 5 � 5 4 /J/J 4 3 ttJ [J 'iV [J 3 2 [J [J 'Jfi [J 2 1 : iL �iL

a b c d e f g h

2 08


Beg inn ing a chase of the queen - l:!gS and Ag2 is th reatened . I f Wh ite beg ins with 1 1 . l:!gS, then 1 1 . . .l��e4 1 2. tDxe4 (1 2 . Ag2 'Wf6) 12 . . . d xe4 1 3 . Ag2 'Wf6 14. l:!g4 eS is poss ib le , with roughly equal chances.

11 . . . Wf5

It is hard to explain Anand 's decision to go into an obviously i nferior endgame (possib ly the reasons were of a personal nature), where the presence of the pawn islands dS, fS , f7 and h7 condemns B lack to a cheerless defence. Apparently he doubted whether it was possible to break open such a fortress. But it is wel l known that Carlsen is not afraid of hard work, and he is ready to play an endgame with a stable positional advantage.

The play was more l ively in the game Aron ian - M o rozev ich (More l i a/Li nares 2007): 1 1 . . . h 6 (prevent ing l:!gS with the th reat of trapp ing the q u een by Ag2) 12. Ad2 eS 13 . §g3 'WhS 14. cxdS exd4 1S. tDe4 tDxe4 1 6 . 'Wxe4+ 'WeS 1 7. 'MixeS+ AxeS 1 8. §f3 cxdS 1 9. AbS+ �e7 20. exd4 Ad6 (20 . . . Axd4? 21 . Ab4+ �e6 22. 0-0-0 AeS 23. l:!e3 leads to the loss of the bishop) 21 . �f1 Ae6 with equal chances.

1 1 . . .eS is risky: 1 2 . dxeS AxeS 13 . l:!gS tDd7 14 . cxdS cxdS 1 S. l:!fS with advantage to White, Tisdaii- Sidselrud (Norway 2002).

12. Wxf5

Of course, if 1 2 . Ad3 B lack w i l l happi ly capture the pawn - 12 . . . 'Wxh3.

12 . . . exf5 1 3. cxd5 cxd5

The exchange of knights came into consideration: 13 . . . tDxdS 14 . tDxdS cxdS 1 S . Ad3 �e7 fol lowed by . . . Ae6 and . . . l:!ag8.

14. t'Ub5 Ab4+ 1 5. Ad2 Axd2+ 1 6. �xd2 �e7 1 7. Ad3 Ae6

a b c d e f g h .!,a

6 5 tZJ 4 3 2 � � 1:1

a b c

1S. t'Uc7!?

• .t.:t.t. -*.'.&

... � � � �

d e

...

� f

�

g h

7 6 5 4 3 2

An ind ication of a deep understand ing of the endgame. Few would have conceived the idea of exchang ing the knight for the 'bad ' bishop. But Carlsen observed that the bishop was fulfi l l i ng the important task of defending the fS- and dS-pawns. For the solving of a strateg ic objective White uses a tactical feature of the posit ion: the presence of the rook on g7 forces Black to capture the knight with h is king , which wi l l be t ied to the defence of the fS- and dS-pawns.

1S . . . laagS 1 9. t'Uxe6 �xe6 20. laxgS t'UxgS

Black does not want to concede the c-fi l e after 20 . . . 1:!xg8 21 . l:!c1 .

21 . �e2

If 21 . l:!c1 there fo l lows 21 . . . tiJe7 22. l:!c7 l:!b8 and then . . . �d6.

21 . . . t'Ue7 22. �f3 lacS 23. a4 lac7 24. a5 h6 25. h4 �f6 26. h5 t'UcS 27. �f4

Whi le Black has been forced to adopt a wait ing posit ion, Wh ite has been seizing space.

27 . . . t'Ud6 2S. lag1 lacS 29. f3 �e6

It was hard to decide on the further weaken ing 29 . . . a6, but th is was possibly the

2 09


on ly way of not a l lowing the rook i nto the rear. White wou ld have had to look for other ways to strengthen h is posit ion: 30 . .§e1 (both 30. Ab1 �e6 and 30. fta1 .§g8 31 . .§a3 .§g5 are insuffic ient) 30 . . . ftg8 31 . Ac2 t2Jc4 (weaker is 31 . . . ftg2 32. Ab3 .§ x b2 33. Axd5 .§b5 34. e4) 32 . Axf5 (32 . b4 .§g5 33 . .§h1 �e6 34. Ad3 tDd6) 32 . . . t2Jxa5 33 . .§c1 tDc6 34 . .§c3 tDb4 (34 . . . ftg2 35. Ac8) 35. Ag4 etc.

30. §g7

With the threat of .§h7.

30 . . . §h8

a b c d e f g h

8 .Ia £:S 7

6 ,.. . • 6 • • £!:, 5

4 £!:, � 4 3 � 8 £!:, 3 2 £!:, 2

a b c d e f g h

31 . Ac2!

A subtle manoeuvre of the bishop to b3, creating the threat of e3-e4.

31 . . . §c8 32. Ab3 §h8 33. §g1 §c8 34. §g7 §h8 35. §g2 §c8

8 a b c

.I 7 ££ 6 5 £!:, 4 3 � 2 £!:,

d e

,.. . • £!:,

f

• �

£!:,£!:,

g h

• £!:,

:s a b c d e f g h

8 7 6 5 4 3 2

36. §g1 !

White g ives h is opponent the move (compare th is position with the one after Black's 33rd move) . Since Black cannot concede the c-fi le, he is forced to move h is knight.

36 . . . �e8

In the event of 36 . . . t2Jc4 Black has to reckon with the possibi l ity of White transposing into a favourable rook endgame: 37. Axc4 .§xc4 (or 37 . . . d xc4 38 . .§g7 .§h8 39. e4) 38 . .§g7 .§a4 39. b4 .§xb4 40 . .§h7 .§a4 41 . .§xh6+ �e7 42 . .§h8 .§xa5 43 . .§b8. He can also consider 37. e4!? fxe4 38. fxe4, putting the d5-pawn under pressure, since 38 . . . dxe4? fai ls to 39 . .§c1 , transposing i nto a won pawn endgame: 39 . . . �d5 40. Axc4+ .§xc4 41 . .§xc4 �xc4 42. �xe4. At the same time the manoeuvre Ab3-d1-g4+ is threatened .

37. e4!

White changes the pawn structure, gaining access to the h-pawn .

37 . . . fxe4 38. fxe4 �f6 39. e5 �e4

In the event of 39 . . . ttJxh5+? 40. �e3 Black could have lost h is knight.

40. �e3

a b c d e f g h

8

6 5 8 4 3 2

� £!:,

a b

• •

£ 8 8,..

�

:s c d e f g h

2 1 0

M . Carlsen - V. Anand

40 . . . b6

If 40 . . . ttlg5 B lack has to reckon with the th reat of sacr ifi c i ng the exchange for two pawns: 41 . §.f1 ttle4 42 . §.xf7!? �xf7 43 . Axd5+ �e7 44. Axe4! (44 . Axb7 §.b8

45. Axe4 §.xb2 is i nsuffic ient) 44 . . . §.c1 (44 . . . §.c4 45. d5 §.a4 46. �f4) 45. d5 and the pawns, ' taken by the hand' , advance towards the queen ing square: 45 . . . §.f1 (or 45 . . . b6 46. axb6 axb6 47. �f4 §.f1 + 48. Af3 �d7 49 . d 6 �e6 50 . b4! b5 51 . �e4 and the k ing goes to c5) 46. d6+ �e6 47. Af3 §.e1 + 48. �d4 §.g1 49. Ad5+ �d7 50. Axb7 etc.

41 . axb6 axb6

Another posit ional ach ievement by White: his rook obtains new manoeuvring possibi l it ies.

42. �d3 �f2+ 43. �e2 �e4 44. �e3

Again g iv ing the opponent the move by the 'tr iangu lat ion' method. B lack has to decide whether to al low the rook into h is rear or b lock the g-fi le .

44 . . . f6

44 . . . ttlg5 was more resi l ient: 45. §.a1 (here 45. §.f1 ttle4 46. §.xf7 �xf7 47. Axd5+ �e7 48. Axe4 �e6 is now insufficient) 45 . . . f6!? (weaker is 45 . . . ttle4 46. §.a6 §.b8 47. Ad1 with the threat of Ag4+) 46. exf6 ttle4 47. f7 §.f8 48. §.a6 §.xf7 49. §.xb6+ ttld6, setting up a new defensive l ine .

45. Elg6 Elc1 46. Elxh6 Elh1 47. Ac2 Elh3+

47 . . . §.e1 +! 48. �d3 §.h1 was stronger.

48. �f4 Elh4+ 49. �f3 �d2+ 50. �e2

50. �g3! §.xd4 51 . §.xf6+ �xe5 52. §.f5+

�e6 53. h6 was stronger, when the h-pawn must decide the game.

50 . . . Elh2+ 51 . �d1 �c4 52. Elxf6+ �e7 53. Ag6 Eld2+

a b c d e f g h 8 8 7 • 7 6 :s� 6 5 .l8 8 5 4 �8 4 3 3 2 8 .!. 2

� a b c d e f g h

54. �c1

54. �e1 was more accurate: 54 . . . f!xd4 55. h6 §.h4 56. Af5 d4 57. §.e6+ �f7 58. b3! ttle3 59. f!f6+ �e7 60. Ac8! f!h2 61 . f!d6 �e8 ( in the event of 61 . . . �f8 62. h7 White exchanges the rooks and wins the d4-pawn) 62 . Aa6 ttlf5 63. Ab5+ �e7 64. f!xb6 ttlxh6. White wins by coord inating the actions of his pieces and the e-pawn: 65. Ac4 ttlf5 66. f!b7+ �e8 67. Ab5+ �f8 68. e6 ttle7 69. Ac4.

54 . . . Elxd4 55. b3 �xeS 56. Elxb6 Elh4 57. Ats

8 7 6 5 4 3 2

a b c d e f g h

• ·�� 8

.!.

a b c d e f g h

8 7 6 5 4 3 2

2 1 1


57 • . . tbf3?

This was obviously not one of Anand's best days. By 57 . . . .lah1 + he could have h indered the advance of the h-pawn . 58. �b2 tDc4+! 59. bxc4 .!axh5 60. Ag6 .lah2+ 61 . �c3 dxc4 leads to the theoretically drawn ending rook and bishop against rook. After 58. �c2 tDf3 59. Ag4 tDg5 Black somehow holds on, and without the passed b-pawn White cannot get by.

58. h6 tbd4 59. h7!

A wel l -known techn ique. Now the h-pawn wi l l cost the exchange.

59 . . . tbxf5 60. §b8 tbd4 61 . mb2 md6 62. h8'W §xh8 63. §xh8

The game enters the techn ical conversion phase.

63 . • . mc5 64. §h5 tbc6 65. §h4 tbb4 66. ma3 d4 67. §h5+ tbd5 68. mb2 mc6 69. ma3 mc5 70. §h4 tbb4 71 . §h8 tbc6 72. §h5+ md6 73. b4 d3 74. §h3 tbe5 75. mb3 d2 76. mc2 tbc6 n. �ah4 md5

Black resigned .

Game 48

L. Dominguez - M. Carlsen Linares 2009


1 . e4 c5 2. tbf3 d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. tbxd4 tbt6 5. tbc3 g6 6 • .te3 .tg7 7. f3 tbc6 8. 'Wd2 0-0 9 • .tc4 .td7 1 0. 0-0-0 labS 1 1 . .tb3 tba5 1 2 . .th6

(see next diagram)

The exchange of bishops deprives . . . tbc4 of much of its strength . But i t also has drawbacks: in certain l i nes Black can drive

8 a b

I. c d e

� f 9 h

... . 8 7 .t .t .i..t.t.S..t 7

-� ..=-

.-·.t 6 5� 4 CiJ B 3 il,CiJ 2 BB BW/ 1 �M

a b c d e

�.til, 6 5 4

B 3 B B 2

M1 f 9 h

away the kn ight by . . . e7-e5. I n this case the d6-pawn is not so vu lnerable, since after . . . b7-b5 Black has the mult i-purpose manoeuvre . . . .!ab6, when the rook defends the pawn whi le also taking part in an attack on the king ( . . . .!aa6, . . .'<WaS). True, al l the same the shadow of tDd4-f5 hangs over the k ing's posit ion.

12 . . • .txh6

I t is useful to d ivert the queen from the centre - in the event of the wing attack h2-h4-h5 there is the reply . . . g6-g5.

1 3. 'Wxh6 b5 14. g4

It is an eternal d i lemma in the Dragon- with which pawn to beg in the assau lt? White beg ins with the g-pawn , not al lowing 14 . . . e5 i n view of 1 5 . tDf5 ! , but now Black succeeds in i n it iat ing counterplay.

The alternative is 14 . h4 e5!? 15 . tDde2 b4 1 6 . tDd5 tDxb3+ 1 7. axb3 (there is no particular point in 1 7. cxb3 tDxd5 1 8. §.xd5 Ae6 19 . .!ad2 .!ab6, when apart from the attack with . . . .laa6 and . . .'<Was Black has the d istant prospect of a favourable endgame, L:Ami -Tiviakov (Leeuwarden 2004) 1 7 . . . tDxd5 1 8 . .!axd5 Ae6 (1 8 . . . .!ab6 is also good , with the idea of 1 9 . h5 g5!) 1 9. §.d3 (1 9. h5 is not dangerous in view of 19 . . . We?!

212


20. hxg6 fxg6 21 . .§xd6 .§fc8 22. c4 bxc3 23. eDxc3 .§b6 with a good game for Black, Lastin - B. Savchenko, Sochi 2007) 19 . . . .§b6 20. f4 Ag4 21 . h5 V!/c7 22 . .§g3 .§c8 with chances for both sides, Bologan - B. Savchenko (Sochi 2007).

14 . . . �xb3+

It is pointless playing 14 . . . eDc4 15 . h4 e5? 1 6 . eDdxb5.

15. �xb3

a b c 8 .!. 7 � 6

5 4

d e t 9 h

5 4 3

£::, 2 1::r 1

a b c d e f 9 h

With this move Wh ite effectively abandons the potential threat of eDd4-f5, for the sake of which g2-g4 was played . 1 5 . axb3!? b4 1 6 . eDce2 came i nto cons iderat ion , and now i f 1 6 . . . e5?! there is the good reply 1 7. tDf5 ! gxf5 1 8 . gxf5 �h8 19 . .§hg1 .§g8 20 . .§xg8+ eDxg8 21 . Wxd6 and then 22. V!/xe5, obtain ing three pawns for the knight . Apparently the best for B lack is 16 . . . .§b6, defending the pawn beforehand in the event of 1 7. h4 e5 1 8 . eDf5 g xf5 1 9 . gxf5 �h8 20 . .§hg1 .§g8.

1 5 . . . b4 1 6. �d5 �xd5 17. exd5 !ab6!

The best square for the 'Ch inese' rook. From here it is ready for an attack on the k ing, and in the g iven specific case it also supports the . . . e7-e5 advance.

18. !ahe1

Abandoning the f lank strategy - 1 8 . h4 e5 1 9 . dxe6 fxe6 20. h5 g5 .

1 8 . . . e5 1 9. dxe6 fxe6

a b c d e 8

7 � 6 .!. 5 4 3 tZJ 2£::,£::,£::,

�1::r1::r a b c d e

f 9 h

5 £::, 4

£::, 3 £::, 2

f 9 h

Objectively speaking, Black's position is already the more promis ing . Wh ite's f3-pawn is weak, and at the same t ime the d6/e6 'smal l centre' is ready to take up more active posit ions. I n addit ion, an attack on the king looks more real for Black than for White.

20. !ae3 !af7

Alexey Kuzmi n recommends 20 . . . e5 !? 21 . h4 V!/c7 22. h5 Ae8 with good play for Black .

21 . �d2 d5 22. �b3

The e6/d5 pawn pair - which is usual ly a headache for Black in the classical variation of the French Defence - does not constitute a problem here, since it cannot be blockaded by the knight. On the contrary, in a number of variat ions it can become mobi le. For example, White cannot fix this pair with 22. f4. By playing 22 . . . V!/f6 23 . .§f3 Ab5 (with the threat of . . . Ae2) 24 . .§f2 e5 Black breaks through in the centre.

2 1 3

Chapter 3 Life at the Top

22 . . . Wc7 23. �b1 labS 24. lade1

It is obvious that White's play on the kings ide has come to a standst i l l , whereas Black's threats on the opposite wing are real . Therefore it was logical to bring back the queen to support the other p ieces: 24. �h4 .!::!c8 25. �f2, going onto the defensive.

24 . . . lac8

26 . . . d4!

Black clears the approaches to the king.

27. lae5 d3 28. cxd3 laxf3 29. d4?

Car lsen's energy has had its effect . Dominguez, as though hypnotised , watches the opponent 's act ions. The queen should have been urgently brought back to the defence - 29. �d2.

29 . . . Ab5 30. la2e3 Ad3+ 31 . �a1 Whi l e Wh ite has been seek ing the re-qu i red regroup ing , B lack has taken firm possession of the c-fi le and is ready for act ion .

25. la1e2 Wb6

a b c d e f g h 8 .i • 8 7 I. j_ .i I. 7

6 'iV I. I.Vjf 6 5 I. 5 4 I. fj, 4 3 tLJ �fj, 3 2 /j,/j,/j, � fj, 2

� a b c d e f g h

26. h4

A pointless move. The advance of the dpawn should have been prevented , but this is not easily done. For example, after 26 . .!::!d2 .!::!c4 27 . .!::!ed3 .!::!cf4 Black switches to a siege of the f3-pawn - 28. �d4 �c7 and prepares . . . e6-e5 (the d irect 28 . . . e5 29. �e2 leads to simpl ification of the position), retaining a serious in itiative.

Possibly the best for White was 26. �c1 , setting up a distant defensive l ine: 26 . . . .!::!cf8 (26 . . . d4) 27. h4.

8 a b c d e f g h

8

5 5 4 I. 3 tLJ 3 2 fj, fj, 2 1 �

a b c d e f g h

31 .. • Wxd4!?

The consequence of the back rank being undefended . It is hard to resist such a move, but the ruthless Rybka points out that 31 . . . .!::!f2 ! , with the same threat, is more effective. 32 . .§e1 al lows a mating attack: 32 . . . .!::!xb2! 33. �xb2 .§c2+ 34. �a1 �c6! 35 . .§c5 .§xa2 36. �xa2 �a4+ 37. �b2 �a3#.

32. laxe6 laf1 + 33. lae1 Wxg4

With the threat of 34 . . . �d1 + .

34. laxf1 Wxe6 35. �c5 We2 36. lac1 At5

White has somehow plugged the holes in h is posit ion. But Black has an extra pawn

2 14

M. Carlse n - A. Grischuk

and prospects of a pawn storm against 49. 'We3 E[e8 50. 'Wc3 E[e2 the k ing's residence. 50 . . . Wd4! was more forcefu l .

37. Wf4 aS 38. h5 51 . �b3 E[xc2 52. Wxc2 We5+

With the faint hope of 38 . . . YNxh5? 39. YNc4+ c;!>f8 40. Wd4.

38 • . . We7 39. Wc4+?

In t ime-trouble Dominguez fai ls to exploit h is last chance. The preparatory opening of the h-fi le by the exchange 39. hxg6 hxg6 would not have done White any harm. After 40. Wc4+ the reply 40 . . . Ae6 is now insufficient in view of 41 . 'Wd4 with the threat of �h1 . Black would have had to restrict h imself to 40 . . . �g7 41 . Wd4+ Wf6, reducing the tempo of the attack. However, this would not have saved the game for White.

39 .• • .te6 40. Wc2 Wg5!

a b c d e f 8 .I 7

6

5 . ttJ 4 •

--.-

3

9 h

• 8

• 7

• 6

'i¥' � 5 4 3 2

a b c d e f 9 h

Now White is tied , as they say, hand and foot . Dominguez cou ld have calm ly resigned, but he was as though in a lethargic s leep. The rest is al l B lack.

41 . hxg6 hxg6 42. a3 bxa3 43. Wc3

A piece is lost after 43. bxa3 'We5+ 44. 'Wb2 �xc5.

43 .• • axb2+ 44. �xb2 Wd5 45. E[c2 a4 46. �a1 a3 47. We3 .tf7 48. Wc3 g5

The trap 52 . . . YNxb3?? 53. YNg6+ is only for beg inners.

53. �b1 �g7 54. Wd2 £xb3

White resigned .

Game 49

M. Carlsen -A. Grischuk Linares 2009


1 . e4 c5 2. �f3 d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. �xd4 �f6 5. �c3 a6 6 • .te2 e6 7. 0-0 .te7 8. a4 �c6 9 . .te3 0-0 1 0. f4 Wc7 1 1 . �h1 E[e8 12 . At3 At8 1 3. Wd2 E[b8 14. Wf2

This variation was wel l known to Grischuk from h is Candidates match with Rublevsky (Eiista 2007), where he upheld the wh ite side. In the 8th game of the match Grischuk played 14 . �ad1 and after 1 4 . . . e5 1 5 . tDde2 b5 1 6 . axb5 axb5 1 7. f5 b4 1 8 . tDd5 tDxd5 1 9. Wxd5 Aa6 20. 'Wd2 tDd4 21 . Axd4 exd4 22. �fe1 Axe2 23. Wxe2 Ae7 24. �xd4 Af6 25. �c4 WaS White had the better chances.

15

a b c d e f 9 h 8 .I j.J .111.. 8

7 .'i¥' • • • 7

6 . �.& • • �.& 6

5 5 4 � tt:J � � 4 3 ttJ JtJt 3 2 � � VIIi � � 2 1.: .: � 1

a b c d e f 9 h


14 . . . e5

After 1 4 . . . Ad7 1 5 . g4! e5 White gains an important tempo for the attack on the kingside. The game Carlsen -Anand (Wijk aan Zee 2008) continued 1 6. tDf5 exf4 1 7. Axf4! Ae6 18 . .§ad1 tDe5 1 9. AxeS dxe5 20. g5 tDd7 21 . tDd5 Wc6 22. Ag2 Wc5, and here Magnus launched an attack on the king: 23. Wh4 Wxc2 24 . .§c1 Wxa4 25. b3!?

K K..te � � � � �

� A tjj� tjj£::,

'iV !::, � !::,

!Jl,£::, : : �

Analysis diagram

25 . . . WaS? 26 . .§c3 g6 27 . .§h3 h5, and here instead of 28. Af3 Axd5! 29. exd5 Ag7, after which Black was able to defend, according to analysis by Maxim Notkin White could have concluded the game in spectacular fashion: 28. tDg3! ! (with the threat of tDxh5) 28 . . . Ag4 29. tDxh5! gxh5 (or 29 . . . Axh5 30. Wf2 f5 31 . gxf6 .§e6 32 . .§xh5 gxh5 33. Ah3) 30. Wf2! f5 (30 . . . Ae6 31 . f!xh5+) 31 . gxf6 and wins.

It remains to add that, in the diagram posit ion, instead of 25 . . . WaS? Black could have seized the in itiative with a queen sacrifice: 25 . . . Wxb3! 26 . .§c3 Axd5! 27 . .§xb3 Axb3 28 . .§f3 .§bc8! 29 . .§ x b3?! .§c1 + 30. Af1 .§xf1 + 31 . �g2 .§f4! (Notkin).

1 5. fxe5

Carlsen, as usual , is concrete in his decisions: 'At fi rst s ight it looks a bit i l logical , lett ing Black get rid of h is backward pawn on d6 and opening up for h is bishop on

f8 , and leaving White with a bad bishop on f3 . However, the move has some points as wel l : the bad bishop might turn out to actually be very strong after a subsequent tDd5 tDxd5 exd5, and the possibi l ity of creating a passed pawn and a dangerous queenside majority is generally dangerous for Black.'

15 . . . dxe5

The capture with the kn ight 1 5 . . . tDxe5 leads to loss of material after 1 6 . Ag5! Ae7 1 7. Axf6 Axf6 1 8. tDd5 Wd8 1 9. Ah5.

1 6. �b3

This is where a subtle point of the pawn exchange on move 1 5 is seen. If instead of 1 5 . fxe5 White had retreated 1 5 . tDb3, then after 1 5 . . . b5 1 6. axb5 axb5 1 7. tLld5 tDxd5 1 8 . exd5 exf4 Black would have obtained the e5-square. But now 1 6 . . . b5 wou ld be a blank shot - 1 7. axb5 axb5 1 8 . tDd5 tDxd5 1 9 . exd5, and the knight is driven to a less good post.

1 6 . . . �b4 1 7. j,a7

A wel l-known technique: before placing his bishop on b6 White drives the rook to its in it ial square, removing a defender of the b7-pawn, which may be of importance in some variations.

17 . . J;!:a8 18. j,b6 'We7 1 9. Elad1

8 7 6 5 4

a b c d e f 9 h

K j_ K.t.e .l 'if .l .l .l

.l � 1.1\ Bl.l\

.l .,L---J B

8 7 6 5 4

ti:Jti:J � 3 3 BB VJ!I B B 2 2

I;! I;! � a b c d e f 9 h

2 16

M. Carlsen - A. Grischuk

19 . • . Ae6?!

A rout ine move, which leads to White creating a dangerous passed pawn. 'Safer was 1 9 . . . Ag4! , which looks paradoxical , as B lack offers to exchange h is "good" bishop for my "bad" bishop, but actual ly it makes a lot of sense, as the key move now wi l l be less dangerous. White sti l l keeps a s l ight in it iative, but Black has a perfectly decent posit ion. ' (Carlsen)

20. tUd5 Axd5 21 . exd5 e4 22. d6 'We6?

It is wel l known that the queen is a poor b lockader, and 22 . . . �d7 23. tbc5 �f5 wou ld have led to a posit ion from the game, but why present the opponent with a tempo? 22 . . . �e5 23. d7 tbxd7 24. l;!.xd7 exf3 25. �xf3 f6 26. tbd4 �e4 was the best way out of the situat ion.

23. tUc5 'Wf5 24. Ae2 'Wxf2 25. flxf2 tUbd5

a b

8J. 7 .l 6 ·� 5 4 t::o

c d

t::o tb�

e f 9 h

J...t• 8 .l.l.l 7 � 6

5 .l 4

3 3

a b c d e f 9 h

26. a5?

the plac ing of h is p ieces and prepare a breakthrough on the queenside.

26 . . • tUxb6 27. axb6 flab8?

Grischuk returns the favour. He should not have clung on to the pawn - the position could have been held by the activation of the rook: 27 . . . l;!.ec8 28. b4 l;!.c6 29. d7 Axc5 30. bxc5 (30 . d8�+ is also insuffic ient : 30 . . . l;!.xd8 31 . l;!.xd8+ Af8 32. Axa6 l;!.xb6) 30 . . . l;!.d8 31 . Axa6 l;!.xc5 (31 . . . bxa6 32. b7 leads to the loss of the exchange) 32. Axb7 l;!.b5, picking up the pawns.

a b c d e f 9 h

J...te 8 .l.l.l7 � 6

5 4 3

a b c d e f 9 h

28. flxf6!

Clearing the barrier in front of the passed pawn. Carlsen confidently converts h is advantage.

28 • . . gxf6 29. tUd7 15 30. c4 a5 31 . c5 Ag7 32. tUxb8 flxb8 33. Aa6! Af6 34. Axb7 flxb7 35. c6 flxb6 36. flc1 !

Throwing away the fruits of h is previous The final subtlety - after 36. c7? l;!.c6 White

work, whereas after 26 . l;!.xf6 tbxf6 the would have lost .

move 27. a5 would have practical ly placed 36 • • . Axb2 37. d7 Black in zugzwang . It is hard for him to find a move, whereas White can calmly improve Black resigned .

2 17


Carlen's fi rst appearance at the Mtel Masters super-tournament in Sofia (FI DE category 21 ) was reassur ing. In the very fi rst round he defeated the main tournament favourite Topalov. In the second half Magnus gained add it ional wins over Dominguez and Wang Yue and was wearing the yel low jersey going into the last round, half a point ahead of Shirov and Topalov. The fate of the fi rst prize was decided in the Shirov- Carlsen game. It was sufficient for the Norweg ian to make a draw, and it appeared that the game was fol lowing a perfected scenario: he played h is favourite Chelyabinsk Variat ion, where he had the reputation of being invincible. But it was here that a serious hole in Magnus's open ing preparation was revealed - he fel l into a prepared l ine by Shirov and lost . As a result , the fi rst prize was won by Shirov, and Carlsen had to be satisfied with a share of 2nd-3rd places with Topalov.

Game 50

M. Carlsen - V. Topalov Sofia 2009

Semi -Sla v Defence [ 043]

1 . d4 d5 2. c4 c6 3. �f3 �f6 4. �c3 e6 5 . .tg5 h6 6 . .txf6 Wxf6 7. e3 �d7 8 . .td3 dxc4 9 . .txc4 g6

a b c d e f 9 h

8 .!. ..t • ..t .!. 8 7 �� 1.& � 7 6 � �'i¥�� 6 5 5 4 JL� 4 3 ttJ � ttJ 3 2 � � � � �2 1 .s: �� .s: 1

a b c d e f 9 h

The o ld variat ion 9 . . . Ad6 1 0. 0-0 V!Je? 1 1 . �e4 Ac7 1 2 . f!c1 , where Black has a cramped posit ion, has hardly been played in recent t imes.

1 0. 0-0 .tg7 1 1 . e4 0-0

Castl ing usually leads to more compl icated play, which is in accordance with Topalov's style. Another critical branch , 1 1 . . . e5, pre-

venting the squeezing of Black's posit ion, occurred in the rapid game Carlsen - Karjakin (Nice 2009), which cont inued 12 . d5 �b6 13 . Ab3 Ag4 14 . f!c1 ! ( in the event of 1 4. h3 Axf3 1 5 . V!Jxf3 V!t!xf3 1 6 . gxf3 �e7 Black central ises h is king) 1 4 . . . 0-0 15 . h3 Axf3 1 6. V!Jxf3 V!Jxf3 1 7. gxf3 gfd8 1 8. gfd1 Af6 1 9. dxc6 bxc6 20. gxd8+ f!xd8.

.! • .l .l

� · .i..l� .l fj,

Jblb fj, fj, fj, fj, fj,

� � Analysis diagram

I t used to be t h o u g ht t h at t h e e n d g a m e ari s i ng i n th i s var iat ion was not dangerous for B lack . However, it is by no means easy to make a d raw. Wh ite has a sma l l advantage , not on ly thanks to h i s su per ior pawn structu re (weak pawns on a? and c6) , but a lso the favourable opposite-co lour b ishops : the l i g ht-square b ishop t ies the b lack k ing to the defence of the f7-pawn , whereas the dark-square b ishop i s passive.

2 18

M . Carlsen - V. Topalov

Carlsen happ i ly p lays th is type of ending : 2 1 . ti":ld 1 §.d6 22 . §.c5 �f8 23 . �f1 h5 24 . ti":le3 �e7? ! (the b ishop shou ld have been freed from hav ing to defend the e 5 - pawn - 24 . . . Ah4! 25. �e2 f6) 25 . �e2 Ag7 26. ti":lc2 , and B lack was unable to defend h i s weak pawns .

12. e5 Y!/e7 1 3. Y!/e2

A typical structure in the Moscow Variation. B lack's counterplay involves developing h is b ishop at b7 and preparing . . . c6-c5. Wh ite prepares the manoeuvre of his bishop to e4, in order to meet . . . c6-c5 with the exchange of the l ight-square bishops and the possib le central breakthrough d4-d5 .

a b c d e f g h

13 ..• b5

1 3 . . . b6 is more often preferred: 14 . §.fe1 §.d8 (after 1 4 . . . Ab7 1 5 . Aa6 Wh ite advantageously exchanges the l ight-square bishops) 1 5 . §.ad1 . Now Black has to decide whether to forestal l the exchange of bishops by 1 5 . . . a5 or continue manoeuvring - 1 5 . . . §.b8. a) 1 5 . . . a5 ( in combinat ion with . . . c6-c5

th is move somehow does not look right, s ince i t leads to a weakening of the queenside) 1 6 . Ad3 Ab7 1 7. Ae4 b5

1 8. h4 ttlb6 1 9. Ab1 c5 20. tt::lxb5 Aa6, and here instead of 21 . h5 g5 with double-edged play (Kramnik-Svidler, World Championsh ip , Mexico 2007), 21 . Ad3! wou ld have retained the better chances.

b) 1 5 . . . §.b8 1 6 . Ad3 Ab7 17. Ae4 c5 1 8 . Axb7 §.xb7 1 9. Y!/e4 §.bb8 20. ti":lb5 (20. d5 exd5 21 . ti::lxd5 is also possible) 20 . . . cxd4 (20 . . . a6 21 . ttla7) 2 1 .ti":lbxd4, and the weakness of B lack's l i g htsquare periphery guarantees White an enduring advantage.

14 • .td3 .tb7

In the game G raf- Kraemer (Bundesl iga 2007) B lack prematurely forced the . . . c6-c5 advance: 1 4 . . . b4? ! 1 5. tDa4 c5 1 6 . §.ac1 cxd4 1 7. Y!/e4 §.b8 1 8 . §.c7 and White gained the advantage.

15 . .te4 E:fd8

Black carries out the standard rook deployment in this variation, preparing the freeing . . . c6-c5. The immediate 15 . . . §.ab8 is also possible, although here too after 1 6 . §.ac1 a6 1 7. §.fd1 it is not easy to make th is advance, since 17 . . . c5? is parried by 1 8 . Axb7 §.xb7 1 9. tt::le4 with the occupation of d6. Its preparation requ i res t ime. For example: 17 . . . §.fc8 1 8 . h4 h5 1 9 . tt::lg5! Aa8 20. We3 c5 21 . f4 cxd4 22. Wxd4 with advantage to White in view of the chronic weakness of the d6-point .

1 6. E:ac1

I f 1 6 . ti::lxb5 there wou ld have fo l lowed 1 6 . . . tt::lxe5.

16 • • . E:ab8 1 7. E:fd1 a6

(see next diagram)

219


a b c d e f 9 h

8 .I .I • 8 7 .i. l.tJ 'iV .l .i. 7 6 .l .l .l .l .l 6 5 .l 8 5 4 8 � 4 3 tt:J tt:J 3 2 8 8 V/i/ 8 8 8 2

1 8. h4

1: 1: � a b c d e f 9 h

The manoeuvre 1 8 . �b1 ! was more in the spi rit of the posit ion, exploit ing the respite (1 8 . . . c5? is not possible on account of 1 9. Axb7 .!:!xb7 20. dxc5) to play the knight to b3. A possible continuation is 1 8 . . . .!:!dc8 1 9. �bd2 Aa8 (now if 1 9 . . . c5? there follows 20. Axb7 .!:!xb7 21 . �e4 with an invasion at d6) '20. '1Mfe3! (a great preparatory move, shown by the engines. 20. �b3 c5 21 . Axa8 .!:!xa8 with equal ity is what dis-couraged me from playing 1 8 . �b1 ) 20 . . . c5 21 . Axa8 .!:!xa8 22. �e4, and since 22 . . . cxd4 can now be met by 23. 'Wxd4, White has a clear i n it iative.' (Carlsen)

1 8 . . . Aa8

Here 1 8 . . . c5 is now poss ib le , s i nce 19 . Axb7 .!:!xb7 20 . �e4 i s less effective because of 20 . . . cxd4 21 . .!:!xd4 (21 . �d6 .!:!bb8 22 . .!:!xd4 �xe5) 21 . . . �xe5 22 . .!:!xd8+ Wxd8 23. �xe5 Axe5 24. �c5 '1Mlc7 25. �d3 Ah2+ 26. �h1 '1Mlb8.

1 9. Etc2

1 9 . h5 g5 20. �h2 was more energetic, switching the knight to g4.

1 9 . • . Etdc8 20. Etdc1 'Wf8

Since 20 . . . c5?! 2 1 . Axa8 .!:!xa8 22. tLle4 leads to a pin on the c-fi le, B lack defends h is rook on c8.

21 . a4?!

21 . 'We3 c5 22. Axa8 .!:!xa8 23. d5 came into consideration.

21 . • . c5?!

'After the s i m p le 21 . . . b4 22 . �b1 c5 23. Axa8 .!:!xa8 24. dxc5 .!:!xc5 (24 . . . tL!xc5 25. Wc4!) 25. �bd2 .!:!xc2 26 . .!:!xc2 .!:!c8 Black even has a sl ight in it iative, thanks to the weaknesses on e5 and a4. It's hard to explain why both players had missed this. ' (Carlsen)

22. axb5 cxd4 23. �xd4

a b c d 8.i_ .l .l 7 ,.. 6 .l 5 8

e f 9 h

'if . .l .i.

.l .l .l 8

4 tt:J � 8 3 tt:J 2 8 1: V/i/ 8 8 1 1: I �

a b c d e f 9 h

23 . . . Axe4?

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

A strateg ic m istake, a l lowing complete domination by the knights in the centre of the board . After 23 . . . axb5 24. Axa8 .!:!xa8 the weakness of the b5-pawn is balanced by the weakness of the e5-pawn , which gives Black adequate counterplay. If 25. f4 there is the good reply 25 . . . 'Wd8 (with the threat of . . . tL!xe5) 26. 'Wf2 and Black has a choice between 26 . . . g5 and 26 . . . b4.

24. �xe4 Etxc2 25. Etxc2 axb5

25 . . . Axe5 is dangerous because of 26 . .!:!d2 ! , when the black pieces are hanging (tLlc6 is threatened).

26. �c6! Etb6 27. f4

2 2 0

M. Carlsen - Wang Yue

Playing for a complete bind; it only remains 33. 'Wd3! 'Wxe7 to 'seal ' Black up with tDd6. 33 . . . \Wxc7 a l l ows a m at i n g attac k :

a b c d e f g h

8 'if . 8 7 1.& .l .l. 7 6 .i 4J .l .l .l 6 5 .l B 5 4 4J B B 4 3 3 2 B l:. � B 2

* a b c d e f g h

27 . . • 'Wa8

The queen is more active after 27 . . . tDb8 28. tDa7! �b4, but it cannot do anything on its own: 29. h5 !!b7 30. tDc8 !!d7 31 . tDcd6 etc.

28. tile7+ �h7 29. h5 Eta6 30. hxg6+ fxg6 31 . Etc7! Eta1 + 32. �f2?

'I thought that the most natural 32. �h2 would give Black unnecessary counterplay after 32 . . . tDxe5, but this fai ls to the s imple 33. tDf6+ Axf6 34. tDd5+ Ag7 35. \Wxe5 �f8 36. !!xg7+ \Wxg7 37. tDf6+, when Black is mated or loses the queen. ' (Carlsen)

32 • • • 'Wd8

32 . . . !!a4 33. tDc6! tDf8 34. tDf6+ also does not help.

a b c d e f g h

8 'if 8 7 l:. '.& 4J .�. . 7 6 .l .l .l 6 5 B 5 4 4J B 4 3 3 2 B � * B 2 1 .1

a b c d e f g h

34. tDg5+! hxg5 35. \Wxg6+ �h8 36. \Wh5+ Ah6 37. \Wxh6#.

34. Etxd7 'Wh4+ 35. �f3 'Wh5+

If 35 . . . �h8, then 36. !!xg7 �xg7 37. tDf6 is decisive.

36. �g3

Black resigned .

Game 51

M. Carlsen - Wang Vue Sofia 2009

Sla v Defence {015}

There are few players who do not have awkward opponents. Carlsen is no exception. He was one of the Lviv player Andrey Volokitin 's 'c l ients' (0-5!). But that was a long t ime ago (by Magnus's standards) -in 2006, and with the exist ing rat ing table their paths are not l ikely to cross in the near future. But another 'offender' , Wang Yue, is among h is present-day rivals. The Chinese grandmaster is one of Carlen's most awkward opponents: in the ir s ix games before the present one with the classical time control he not only did not suffer a s ingle loss, but he also twice forced the Norwegian to lay down his arms. Moreover, this was in the main tournaments of 2009, in Wijk aan Zee and Linares, where Carlsen was a real contender for fi rst prize.

1 . c4 c6 2. d4 d5 3. tilf3 tilf6 4. tilc3 a6

The Chebanenko Variation, named after the wel l -known Moldovan trainer, who made a detai led analysis of this system of defence. Wang Yue is one of the most fervent supporters of th is variat ion.

221


5. c5

The most critical reply: Wh ite tries to gain space on the queens ide. In a previous game with Wang Vue (Linares 2009), the . . . a7-a6 theme was performed in a different scenario: 1 . d4 d5 2. c4 c6 3. �c3 �f6 4. e3 a6 and after 5. �f3 b5 the play took on a qu ite d ifferent aspect .

5 • . . .tf5

Wang Vue's favourite reply in this variation. The main continuation is considered to be 5 . . . tbbd7, with which Black prepares the undermin ing of the pawn chain by . . . e6-e5 and . . . b7-b6. 6. t'ilh4

Magnus takes the decision to exchange the bishop, giv ing the position clear strateg ic contours. In the main l ine - 6. Af4 tbbd7 7. e3 e6 S . Ae2 there is the possible S . . . tbe4, when Black's l ight-square bishop plays an important role.

6 . . . .tg6 I n the event of 6 . . . Ag4 7. h3 Ah5 S . g4 Ag6 al l the same the bishop has to retreat to g6. The inclusion of h2-h3 and g2-g4 not only expands White's space on the kingside, but also gives h im a tempo for developing h is bishop with 9. Ag2, from where it supports the e2-e4 advance.

7 . .tf4 t'ilbd7

a b c d e f g h

8. tilxg6!?

The concrete nature of Carlsen's thinking is one of the important components of his p laying style. Wh ite n ips in the bud the possib i l ity of . . . e6-e5 .

At the Amber Tournament (N ice 2009) in h is rapid game with Wang Vue, Anand made this exchange after S. e3 e6 9. h3 Ae7 1 0. tbxg6 hxg6 1 1 . Ad3, and also resolved his main strateg ic objectives: along with . . . tbe4 he also excluded . . . e6-e5. The game cont i nued 1 1 . . .'�cS 1 2 . 0-0 0-0 1 3 . b4 !XeS 1 4. Ah2! AdS 1 5 . f4! b6 1 6 . a3 a5 1 7. �c2 �b7 1 S . g4 Ac7 1 9. �g2 axb4 20. axb4 !!xa1 21 . !!xa1 !!aS 22. !!xaS+ �xaS 23. �a4 �xa4 24. tbxa4, and White ach ieved the better endgame. Apart from Black's compromised pawn structure on the kingside, his c6-pawn is also weak, and if 24 . . . b5 he has to reckon with the sacrifice of a piece for a pair of connected passed pawns.

However, after S. e3 Black could also play S . . . e5. Now noth ing is promised by 9. Axe5 �xe5 1 0. dxe5 tDd7, whi le in the event of 9. dxe5 tDh5 the move Ag5 is no longer possible.

8 . . . hxg6 9. h3!

Immediately preparing the retreat of the bishop. If 9. e3 there would have fol lowed 9 . . . e5! .

9 . . . b6

Here if 9 . . . e5 there is 1 0. dxe5 tDh5 1 1 . Ah2 Axc5, and if White does not l i ke the compl ications after 1 2 . g4 �b6 1 3 . e3 �xb2 1 4 . !!c1 d4, he can restr ict h imself to 1 2 . �d2 �e7 13 . g4. Now after 1 3 . . . d4 it is possible to transpose into a favourable endgame: 14 . tbe4 Ab4 15 . tbd6+ �xd6

222

M. Carlsen - Wang Yue

16 . exd6 Axd2+ 1 7. �xd2 lDhf6 1 8 . .§d1 . Instead of 1 0 . . . lDh5, 1 0 . . .'�c7 1 1 . e3 tDxe5 12. b4 Ae7 13 . Ae2 0-0 14 . 0-0 a5 1 5 . a3 lDfd7 looks more sol id , with an acceptable game. For example, if 1 6 . e4, then 16 . . . axb4 1 7. axb4 .§xa1 1 8 . �xa1 d4! 19 . lDa4 lDf3+ 20. Axf3 �xf4 21 . �xd4 tDe5 22. Ad1 .§d8 23. �c3 Af6 is possible, with excel lent compensation for the pawn. 16 . �d2!? is more c ircumspect .

10. cxb6

If 1 0. b4?! there fo l lows 1 0 . . . bxc5 1 1 . bxc5 e5! .

10 . . . 'Wxb6 1 1 . §:b1 e 6 12 . e 3 c5

a b c d e f g h

8 .I • -*. .I 8 7 � • • 7 s . 'tW · � · 6 5 • • 5

4 � jb 4

3 Qj � � 3 2 � � � � 2

1:. 'iV� jb 1:. 1 a b c d e f g h

Although the opening battle has concluded safely for Black, certain problems sti l l remain . White has the advantage of the two bishops, and the exchange of the darksquare pair w i l l enhance the role of the l ight-square bishop in support ing a pawn offensive on the queenside.

13. a3

White's plan i s to advance h i s pawns and create a passed pawn. If 13 . . . Ae7, for example, there fol lows 1 4. dxc5 tDxc5 15 . b4 tDce4 1 6. lDa4 �d8 1 7. Ad3, and the queenside pawns, supported by the

bishops, are ready to advance.

13 . . . Ad6

After the other version of the bishop exchange - 1 3 . . . cxd4 14 . exd4 Ad6 - White gains a serious posit ional p lus : a pawn majority on the queenside. This could have been avoided by the rad ical 1 3 . . . c4, but then Black sti l l has the problem of defending h is queenside in the event of b2-b3. For example: 1 4. Ae2 (after the immediate 14 . b3 there is the good reply 1 4 . . . �a5!) 1 4 . . . Ad6 1 5 . Axd6 �xd6 1 6 . 0-0 0-0 1 7. �a4 .§fb8 1 8 . b3 lDb6 19. �a5 cxb3 20 . .§xb3.

14. �a4 Wc7

The provocative 1 4 . . . �a5+? 1 5 . b4 cxb4 1 6 . Axd6 b3+ 1 7. Ab4 �xa4 1 8 . �xb3 �xb3 19 . .§xb3 leads to the two bishops being a real advantage.

1 5. Axd6 Wxd6 1 6. �xc5 �xc5 17. dxc5 Wxc5 18. Wa4+ �e7 1 9. Ad3 a5

The position has clarified . To play for a win White must not only create a passed pawn, but also keep the queens on, as otherwise this pawn wil l be easi ly blockaded.

20. c.!;le2!

A high ly concrete move, which as regards the opponent's reply also has a psychological impl ication: White d isplays his readiness to g ive up his two rooks for the queen. I n the event of 20 . 0-0 .§hc8 21 . .§fc1 �xc1 + 22 . .§xc1 .§xc1 + 23. �h2 .§b8 Black succeeds in activating his rooks. If the rooks are retained, it is not easy for White to create a passed pawn: 21 . .§fd1 (21 . �d1 a4) 21 . . . .§a? 22 . .§d2 �b6 23 . .§c2 .§xc2 24. �xc2 .§c7 (24 . . . a4 25 . .§c1 ) 25. �a4 .§a? etc.

23


a b c d e t g h 8 J. .I 8

7 • • .t .t 7

6 .l�.l 6

5 .l iV.l 5

4 � 4 3 B � B B 3 2 B � D B 2

M M 1 a b c d e t g h

20 . . J;thc8

A critical moment. Focused on a passive stance, Wang Yue misses an opportun ity to exploit the position of the king on e2 by 20 . . . d4! . After 21 . \Wxd4 Wxd4 22. exd4 �hd8 the pawn is regained: 23. �e3 fbd5+ 24. �f3 lbf6 , and in the endgame there is nothing to fear, whi le if 21 . exd4 Black obtains an excel lent post at d5 - 21 . . . Wh5+ 22. g4 \Wd5 (G ieizerov) .

21 . �hc1

Usual ly it is not considered dangerous to exchange two rooks for a queen, but i n the given specific position the long-range bishop, supporting the passed pawn, may be able to restrict the rooks' mobi l ity.

21 . . . Wxc1

After 21 . . . Wb6 22. �xc8 �xc8 23. b4 axb4 24. �xb4 We? 25. Wb3, thanks to h is outside passed pawn, White has a smal l but enduring advantage.

22. �xc1 �xc1 23. b4

(see next diagram)

a b c d e t g h 8 J. 7

6

a b c d e t g h

23 . . . q;,f8?!

8

7

6

5

Passive defence has no chance of success. Black shou ld have decided on 23 . . . 1be4!?. In the event of the exchange of minor pieces - 24. Axe4 dxe4 25. b5! (after 25. bxa5 �c7 26. Wxe4 �ca7 Black picks up both pawns) 25 . . . f5 (25 . . . �b8!? 26. Wxa5 �bc8 27. Wb4+ �8c5 looks tempting, but after 28. f4! the king escapes from the danger) 26. f3 exf3+ 27. �xf3 e5 28. Wb3 it is easier for the rooks to fight against the passed pawn , although even here the chances of saving the game are i l l usory. However, Wh ite is not obl iged to exchange his bishop; he can also consider 24. �f3!? fbd2+ 25. �f4, and although it looks provocative to br ing the k ing out, B lack has no real threats: 25 . . . �f6 26. bxa5 lbc4 27. \Wb4 �xb5 28. '!Wb8 etc.

The other active possib i l ity 23 . . . e5!? is parried by 24. �d2 �cc8 25. bxa5.

24. bxa5 q;,ga 25. a6

White has a big advantage, but its conversion should take a considerable time.

25 . . . �c7 26. Wf4 �ca7

26 . . . �ac8 was more res i l ient . Now i n the event of 27. \Wb4 lbe4 28 . Wb6 �c6

224

M. Carlsen - Wang Vue

Black somehow holds out, but 27. f3 tDd7 28. 'Wd6 iDeS 29. Ab5 is stronger, when White should win .

27. 'Wd4!

The queen ties down both rooks. It is no longer possible to return: 27 . . .1k7 28. Wb6 l:!ac8 29. a7.

27 . . . �e4 28. 'Wb6

Preventi ng . . . tDd6 with the switch ing of the knight to c4.

a b c d e

a .! 8

7 .! 7

6 fj V/11 6

5 5

4 4

3 fj 2 2

a b c d e f g h

28 . . . e5?

Inappropriate activity, leading to a weakening of Black's position and a rapid defeat . He should have tied the queen to the defence of the a6-pawn - 28 . . . tDf6 29. Ab5 tDd7. However, th is is a reciprocal l i nkage. By the cyc l ic manoeuvre 30. Wd6 tDb8 31 . Wd8+ <.!?h7 32. Wb6 tDd7 33. Wd4 tDb8

34 . . . tDd7?! 35. Ac6) 35. h4 l:!c7 36. Wb6 lka7 37. g4. By advancing h4-h5 at the appropriate moment, Wh ite breaks up the king's defences and gains new offensive l ines: a) 37 . . . tDd7 38. Wd6 tDb8 39. Wd8+ <.!?h7

40. h5! tDxa6 41 . hxg6+ fxg6 42. Wb6 tDb4 43. Wxe6;

b) 37 . . . <.!? h7 38. h5 gxh5 39. Ad3+! g6 40. gxh5 tDxa6 41 . hxg6.

29. �e1

El im inat ing the threat of a check on c3. Th is same aim would have been achieved by 29. Wc6 fol lowed by the driving back of the knight and an attack on the central pawns: 29 . . . l:!b8 30. f3 tDf6 31 . Wd6 l:!b2+ 32. <.!?d1 or 29 . . . l:!d8 30. f3 tDf6 31 . Wb6 �da8 32. Wc5.

29 . . . �g5

If 29 . . . tDf6 White attacks with 30. a4 tDd7 31 . Wd6.

30. J.b5 �e6 31 . a4 d4

Black loses after 31 . . . tDc7 32. Ac6 but , in view of the threat of 32 . Wd6, he also cannot get by without advancing his pawn.

32. a5 f!.c7?

Overlooking the loss of the exchange. But 32 . . . dxe3 33. fxe3 tDf8 34. Wd6 would have led to the loss of the e-pawn.

White gains a tempo for a pawn offensive: 33. J.c6

34. a4 <.!?g8 (not 34 . . . �c7? 35. Wh4+, or Black resigned .

For Carlsen the next super-tournament, the Sparkassen G M in Dortmund (FI DE category 20), fol lowed a s imi lar pattern to the tournament in Sofia. The final result was also s imi lar. I n the fi rst round Magnus won against Jakovenko, and after a present in the 5th round from Naid itsch, who blundered a pawn, he cou ld on ly be stopped by Kramnik , who by trad ition is especial ly formidable in Dortmund (he al ready had nine victories to h is cred it) . Carlsen played against the favourite as though sleep-walk ing, making mistakes in a fai rly s imple posit ion. Defeat i n the decisive game, the th ird in

225


that year (after Wijk aan Zee and Sofia) , was a warn ing symptom in the forming of his champion's character. However, in such company it is not customary to cal l a share of 2nd-4th places a fai lu re.

Game 52 M. Carlsen - D. Jakovenko

Dortmund 2009 Ruy Lope z [ C67]

1 . e4 e5 2. ttif3 ttic6 3 . .tb5 ttif6

The Berl in Defence was employed when the study of the Ruy Lopez was sti l l in its infancy, inc lud ing matches involv ing the fi rst world champion Wilhelm Stein itz. But for its popu larity in the 21 st century it is indebted to Vlad imi r Kramnik , after he revealed it as h is main weapon against 1 . e4 in his match for the world championsh ip with Garry Kasparov in 2000 in London.

4. 0-0 ttixe4 5. d4 ttid6 6. Axc6 dxc6 7. dxe5 ttif5 8. 'Wxd8+

White has no reason to avoid the queen exchange, since 8 . Yf/e2 1{)d4 9. l{)xd4 Yf/xd4 10 . .§d1 Ag4 leads to the same th ing, whi le the attempt to be stubborn with 1 0 . l{)c3 Ae6 1 1 . .§d1 Yf/c4 1 2 . .§d3 Ac5 g ives Black a comfortable game. For example, if 13. l{)e4?! there fol lows 13 . . . Af5.

a . . . mxd8

6

5

4

3

a b c d e f 9 h .J. s .l 7

=·�--' --"'""'-,'-'=- ,..'

a b c

6

5

4

tiJ 3

£:::. £:::. £:::. 2 ;g: �

d e f 9 h

The start i ng pos i t ion of the variat ion , w h i c h s i n c e the t i m e of the Kasparov - Kram n i k match has been cal led the ' Ber l i n Wal l ' . Even the 1 3th wor ld cham pion was unable to breach i t . As for Dmitry Jakovenko, l i ke no one else he knows about its sol id ity, s i nce he has often attacked it from the wh ite s ide . H owever, w h i l e the cho ice of th is defence against Carlsen has a psychological imp l icat ion , it can hard ly be deemed a successfu l one. Everyone knows with what p leasure Magnus p lays a compl i cated endgame, al beit with a smal l but endur ing advantage. In the g iven position Wh ite can hope to make use of his pawn majority on the k ings ide .

9. ttic3 mea

Kramnik played 9 . . . Ad? and moved his king to c8, but later experience in defending the Berl i n Wal l recommends keeping the k ing i n the centre. Therefore Black moves it away from possib le checks on g5 and d1 .

1 0. h3 h5 1 1 . ttie2 Ae7 12 . Ag5 Ae6

This path was laid by one of the best Soviet defensive players , Ratmir Kholmov. The p lan with the deve lopment of the bishop at b7 has been tr ied by the Chinese grandmaster Wang Yue, who also has the reputat ion of being an expert on the Berl i n Wal l .

1 3 . ttif4 .td5 14 . .txe7 mxe7 1 5. ttig5 ttid4

226

M . Carlsen - D. Jakoven ko

a b c d e f g h s .!. 7 .\ .l

.I s

* " " 7

6 .l 6 5 .i. � CD .l 5 4 1.& CD 4 3

a b c d e f g h

16. l:Xad1

Strictly speaking, a novelty. But you don't have to be a Carlsen to make such a logical move - in the g iven situation the rooks are best deployed in the centre at d1 and e1 , since al l the same Black wi l l not capture the c2-pawn (1 5 . . . tbxc2? 1 6 . tbxd5+ cxd5 17. lk1 ) . Nevertheless, previously 1 6 . f!fd1 was played . For example, the game Hracek- Kholmov (Pardubice 1 999) continued 16 . . . tbe6 1 7. Cbxe6 Axe6 1 8 . h4 f!d8 1 9. f3 g6 20. <!>f2 Af5 21 . c3 f6 22. exf6 <!>xf6 23 . Cbe2 c5 with equal play.

16 . . .tile6 17.�gxe6 Axe6 1 8. h4

It is important not only to fix the h5-pawn , but also to secure the knight at f4 against . . . g7-g5.

18 . . . a5

7

6

4 3

a b c d e f g h

.I s

e .t .t 7

.i. �

CD

6 .l 5 � 4

a b c d e f g h

By the march of the pawn to a4 Black prepares the development of his rook via a5 , and at the same t ime he threatens to capture the a2-pawn, since the bishop cannot be cut off by b2-b3 on account of . . . a5-a4 .

1 9. a3 a4 20. l:Xfe1 g6 21 . f3 l:Xa5 22. c3 l:Xb5 23. l:Xe2 l:Xa8 24. l:Xd4 l:Xaa5 25. <!>f2

In the event of 25. !!b4 !!xb4 26. cxb4 !!b5 27. <!>f2 Black plays 27 . . . c5.

25 . . . l:Xxe5

As a ru le , it is sound practice to exchange a wing pawn for a central one. In add i t ion , i n the g iven specif ic posit ion B lack e l im inates Wh ite's main advantage in the Ber l i n Wal l - his pawn majority on the k i ngside.

26. l:Xxe5 l:Xxe5 27. l:Xxa4 l:Xb5

27 . . . b6 28. !!a? <!>d6 is also possible, with approximate equal ity.

a b c d e f g h s s

7 .l .l 7

6 .l 6 5 .!. 4 : CD 3 � � � 3 2 � � � 2

a b c d e f g h

It is hard to imagine that Black can lose such a solid posit ion, but one of Carlsen's strengths is h is abi l ity to exploit the s l ightest chances, the opponent only need ing to weaken h is concentration.

28. b4 c5 29. l:Xa7

227


White could have won a pawn: 29. tbxe6 �xe6 30. c4 .!ab6 31 . bxc5, but the transit ion i nto a rook endgame wou ld have d ispel led all h is i l lusions: 31 . . . .!ab3 32 . .!ab4 .!axa3 33 . .!axb7 �d7 with a draw.

29 . . . cxb4 30. cxb4 �d7

This would appear to be an insign ificant transposition of moves, but it a l lows White to improve the position of h is k ing. The accurate 30 . . . i.c4 31 . �e3 �d6 would have restricted White's poss ib i l it ies.

31 . ttie2! !ab6

Another s l ight inaccuracy. B lack should not have conceded the 5th rank to White, which he can use for an attack on the h5-pawn after preparing g2-g4. 31 . . . �c8 was s impler, not feari ng 32. tDd4 .!ae5.

a b c d e f 9 h 8

5

4 [3::, 3 [3::, 2

a b c d e f 9 h

32. �e3 .tc4

8

7

6

3

2

The rook's position should have been improved - 32 . . . .!ad6, intending 33 . .!axb7 .!aa6.

33. ttid4 �d6?

Here also it was not too late for 33 . . . .!ad6.

34. l:ta5!

Now g2-g4 is threatened , with the idea of creating an outside passed pawn on the kingside.

34 . . . !aa6?

The decisive m istake. The exchange of rooks on ly favours White. B lack should have retreated with 34 . . . i.e6.

35. !axa6+ bxa6 36. g4!

After this move the game is decided. Black faces a d i lemma: whether to allow the creation of an outside passed pawn, or a weakness on h5.

a b c d e f 9 h 8 8

7

5

4 3 [3::, 2

a b c d e f 9 h

36 . . . hxg4

7

6

3

2

Black fol lows the fi rst course. The second would also have lost. Play involving 36 . . . c5 i s too late: 37. gxh5! gxh5 (37 . . . cxd4+ 38. �xd4) 38. tDf5 �e5 39. tDg3. No better is 36 . . . �e5 37. gxh5 gxh5 38. f4+ <;!>f6 (or 38 . . . �d5 39. tDf5 Ab3 40. tbg7 i.d1 41 . tDe8! etc.) 39. �e4 Aa2 40. a4, and in view of the threat of a4-a5 and b4-b5 Black has to go in for new concessions -40 . . . �e7 41 . tDf5+ �f6 42 . tDg3.

37. fxg4 �e5 38. ttic6+ �f6 39. �f4 �e6 40. h5! gxh5 41 . gxh5 Ad3

Also after other cont inuations the coord ination of the h-pawn with the knight is decis ive. For example: 41 . . .f6 42. tbd8+ �e7 43. h6 i.d3 44. tbb7 �f7 45. tDc5 Af1 46. h7 �g7 47. tbe6+ �xh7 48. <;!>f5 , and after capturing the f6-pawn White also picks up the remain ing pawns.

42. �e3!

228

M. Carlsen - D. Jakovenko

The king moves closer to the queenside.

42 . . . At1 43. h6 �f6

a b c d e f 9 h 8 8

7 i i 7

6 i tiJ • fj, 6

5 5

4 fj, 4

3 /j, 3 2 2

.i. a b c d e f 9 h

44. �e5!

A study- l ike theme! The knight is attacking the f7-pawn.

44 . . . Abs 45. �d4 Aa4 46. h7 �g7 47. �xf7 �xh7 48. �g5+ �g6 49. �e6

Black resigned .

For any representative of the el ite (apart from those seeking the champion's regal ia), consistently fin ish ing in the top three in tournaments can in no way be regarded as a fai lure. For any, but not for Carlsen . H is swift rise impl ied other summits. He h imself real ised that, despite outward successes, i n recent t imes he had slowed down and too often fin ished on the immediate approaches to the tournament pedestal .

The kind of stupor that had occurred with Carlsen d id not go unnoticed . After Dortmund there was a storm of crit ic ism. The comment by Konstantin Landa, publ ished in the magazine 64 Shakhmatnoe obo z renie, looks qu ite fair : 'What, i n my view, is preventing the Norwegian from conquering the summits? Previously chess was h is favourite game, he was cal led the second Fischer, a genius . . . but at some point for Magnus it became d ifficu lt everyday work (which in fact is true; powerful preparation is needed). Serious mistakes are occurring, and even one-move b lunders are creeping in. I don't know what he is doing and how he is preparing with h is trainers, but, i n my view, the freshness in his play has gone. Something needs to the changed ! '

This d id not last long. After al l , Carlsen h imself real ised perfectly wel l that i t was unfai r to put h is problems down to fate. For everyth ing you have to answer yourself, and in particular you have to get to the bottom of what is happen ing. One of the causes h indering h is further progress was qu ite obvious. He needed to review h is own conception of work on the opening, since a correctly organised game wou ld lead to comfortable play. Apparently help was also needed in overcoming a certain psychological barrier, which was h indering h is further improvement.

Help for the strongest player i n the West came from the East . I n the late summer of 2009 sensational news flew round the chess world . Garry Kasparov had begun working with Magnus Carlsen! From two weeks in August they trained in Croatia, and then they worked for a few days in September. Apart from face-to-face meetings, chess

229


problems were regularly d iscussed by emai l and Skype. The resu lts were immediately apparent! After h is contact with the Maestro, Magnus began appreciat ing more deeply the importance of open ing organisation. This was undoubted ly an important result of his contact with Kasparov! The resu lts of the col laboration were al ready seen in October at the super-tournament in Nanj ing (FI DE category 21 ) . The chess world was staggered by the ease with which Carlsen defeated h is opponents one after another, al lotting them the ro le of observers in the battle for fi rst prize.

In the h istory of tournaments of such standard it is un l i kely that one can find an analog ue of the fi rst half, when four of Magnus's five opponents fi n i shed on a minus score, the exception be ing Wang Yue, who gained a draw. Their 'm inuses' c lu bbed together to make M agnus's 'p l us' . Garry's shadow hovered over Magnus in the very fi rst round , when in a Scotch Game he confidently defeated Leko. There then fo l l owed wins over Topalov, Jakovenko and Radjabov. The confidence and strength issu ing from M agnus were adm i rable . ' I t seems to me that an enormous role is p layed i n part icu lar by the emotional aspect of th is col laborat ion , ' commented Alexey Kuzm i n , who was present at the tournament. ' For Carlsen such contact, apart from the undoubted chess benefit , also has a great psycholog ical effect. Carlsen's respons ib i l ity has sharply increased: he is now answerable not only to h imself, hut also to Garry K imov ich . '

I n the second ha l f of the tournament Carlsen eased off, but he ended with the enormous (for such a un iformly strong field) lead over h is nearest rivals of 2% points. Such a th ing was ach ieved only by Alexander Alekh ine in the years of his greatest ach ievements!

From the very fi rst rounds the play of his main rivals gave the impression of a kind of doom. ' I f was as though Magnus d id not do anything at a l l , except that , l i ke a python, he simply appeared on the path and lay down, ' the reviewer of the Chesspro website, Sergey Zagrebelsky, p icturesquely commented on h is play. But if you dig deeper, in the games with Leko and Topalov the strategy of playing for restriction can be traced .

Game 53

M . Carlsen - P. Leko Nanj ing 2009

Scotch Game [ C45]

Before this game Peter Leko was the only representative of the el ite who Carlsen had not succeeded in beating in play with the classical t ime contro l . He was the fi rst to experience the consequences of the collaboration of the young Norwegian with Garry Kasparov.

1 . e4 e5 2. �f3 �c6 3. d4

Here it is , the fi rst s ign ! Up t i l l then the Scotch Game d id not appear in Carlsen's repertoi re, whereas in Kasparov's it used to occupy an honourable place. Among those to suffer was Leko.

3 . . . exd4 4. �xd4 Ac5

For those who l ike history we wi l l also give Leko's only 'Scotch' experience with Kasparov (Ti lburg 1 997). Peter went in for a re-

230

M . Carlsen - P. Leko

serve variation: 4 . . . Ab4+ 5. c3 Ac5 6. tt::lxc6 1 1 . tt::ld2 Vi!!t'g6 1 2 . tLlb5. bxc6 7. Ad3 Vi!!t'h4 8. Vi!!t'e2 tLlf6 9. h3 0-0,

10 • • . 'Wxe4 1 1 . Af2 Axd4 12 . cxd4 tLl5g6 where he decided to try and refute Garry's pawn offensive 1 0 . g3 Vi!!t'h5 1 1 . g4 Vi!!t'e5 12 . g5 with the piece sacrifice 12 . . . tt::lxe4? 13. Axe4 �e8 14. Af3 Vi!!t'xe2+ 1 5. Axe2 Aa6 16. c4 Axc4 1 7. tLic3 and lost.

5. Ae3

One of the main opening trends, along with 5. tt::lxc6 bxc6 or 5 . . . Wf6 6. Vi!!t'd2 dxc6, which in recent times has occurred more often .

a b c d e f g h 8 .i .i. 'Vi' . � .i 8

7 • • • • • .f. 7 6

5

4

1.& .i.

6

5

Cjj � 4

ib 2 � � � � � � 2 1 :( Cjj � � ib : 1

3 3

a b c d e f g h

5 • .. 'Wf6 6. c3 tt:lge7 7. Ac4 tLle5 8. Ae2 'Wg6 9. 0-0 d6

The sharp continuat ion 9 . . . d5 1 0 . Ah5! Wxe4 1 1 . tLld2 al lows White to develop a strong in it iative. For example, the game Eh lvest - Be l iavsky (World Cup, Reykjavik 1 99 1 ) went 1 1 . . . Wd3 1 2 .tt::l4f3 Ad6 (1 2 . . . Axe3 13 . tLixe5 'Wxd2 14. 'Wf3! favours White) 1 3 . tt::lxe5 Axe5 14 . Ac5 g6 1 5. Ae2 'Mif5 1 6. tt::lf3 Af6 1 7. �e1 0-0 1 8. Ad3 Wd7 19. tLie5 'Mld8 20. Wf3 �g7 21 . h4! and Black came under an attack.

1 0. f4

a b c d e f g h

6

5

4

3

2 � � 1 : CiJ

1 3. g3!?

a b c

• .i s �.& • • • 7

• 1.&

d e f g h

6

5

This move, which was introduced by Morozevich, takes the game onto posit ional l i nes: after defending the f4-pawn, White intends d4-d5, when the two bishops are a real advantage. The attempt to l i nk th is idea with 13 . tt::lc3 'Mixf4 and now 1 4. d5 !? (14. tt::lb5 0-0 15 . tLixc7 �b8 16 . d5 is usually played, but after 16 . . . b6 fol lowed by . . . Ab7 White's i n it iat ive comes to a standst i l l ) was tried in the game M ikhalchish in - Bel iavsky (Lviv 2002): 14 . . . 0-0 1 5 . tt::lb5 Ad? 1 6. tLixc7 �ac8 1 7. �c1 Wg5 1 8 . Axa7 Ah3 19 . Af3 tLlh4 20. We2 tLieg6 21 . Ae3 V!fe7 22. tLlb5 tLixg2 23. �xc8 tLixe3 24. �xf8+ �xf8 25. �e1 tt::lf4 26. Wxe3 Wg5+ 27. �f2 V!fh4+ 28. �g1 Wg5+ %-%.

13 • • • 0-0?!

A careless move, al lowing White to carry out the ma in idea of 1 3 . g3 . B lack p layed more energet ical ly i n the game Morozevich - Kramn ik (Dortmund 2001) :

Sergey Rublevsky, one of the main Scotch 1 3 . . . Ah3! 14 . Af3 Vi!!t'f5 1 5 . �e1 d5 1 6. Vi!!t'b3 devotees, usual ly sacrifices the pawn with 0-0 (1 6 . . . 0-0-0 is also interesting) 1 7. tt::lc3 a prophylactic king move - 1 0. �h1 Vi!!t'xe4 c6 1 8 . Vi!!t'xb7 �fb8 1 9 . Vi!!t'c7 Vi!!t'f6 %-%.

231


14. �c3 'Wf5 15. d5

8 I 8

6 6

5 5

4 4

3 3

a b c d e f g h

1 5 . . . a6

The posit ional pressure could have been avoided only by returning the pawn: 15 . . . c5!? 1 6 . dxc6 �xc6 1 7. 'Wxd6 l::!d8 1 8. 'Wa3 Ae6 1 9. l::!fd1 �ge7, when Black succeeds in coord inat ing his p ieces. For example: 20 . Af3 'Wg6 2 1 . l::!ac1 Ag4 22. l::!xd8+ l::!xd8 23. Ag2, and although White retains pressure on the queenside, the position is defensible. I n the opin ion of Arshak Petrosian , consideration should also have been g iven to the return of the queen to the rear - 1 5 . . . 'Wd7!? fol lowed by the fianchetto of the bishop, tying White to the defence of the d5-pawn .

1 6. �e1 �h8!?

An i nterest ing idea. B lack i ntends to transfer his kn ight to f6 . Carlsen th inks that B lack's problems wou ld hard ly be solved by 1 6 . . . b5 1 7. a3 , since he cannot play 1 7 . . . Ab7? on account of 1 8 . Ag4 'Wf6 1 9. Ad4, when the queen is trapped . But here also it was not too late for 1 6 . . . 'Wd7, when Black holds the position.

1 7. �c1 Ad7 1 8. Af3!

A mult i-purpose move: White not only de-

fends the d5-pawn , rel ieving the queen of this duty, but also prepares the central isation of his knight via �c3-e2-d4, attacking the queen with gain of tempo.

18 . . . �ac8 1 9. Wb3 b5

19 . . . b6 was more circumspect , h indering the attack on the pawn weaknesses.

20. �e2 Wh3 21 . �d4 Ag4?

A loss of t ime. 21 . . . �g8! was correct. Now the attempt to win a pawn by 22. 'Wa3 tDf6 23 . Wxa6 runs i nto 23 . . . �g4, when after 24. Axg4?! 'Wxg4 White's l ight-square periphery is weakened. Also insufficient is 22. �c6 �f6 23. Ag2 'Wf5 (23 . . . 'Wh5? 24. Ad4) with a defensible position. 22. Ag2 is more accurate, provoking 22 . . . 'Wh5, and now 23. �c6 l::!fe8 fol lowed by . . . �g8-f6 with a tenable posit ion.

22. Ag2 Wh5

a b c d e f g h 8 I I • 8

7 .l � .l .l .l 7

.l � 6

5 B 'ii' 5

4 t:2J B .i. 4

3 � B 3

2 B B ib ib B 2 1!l 1!l �

a b c d e f g h

23. h4!

'The key move. Now al l the black pieces on the kingside look rather stupid, whi le the b lack queenside pawns are r ipe for harvesting. ' (Carlsen)

23 . . . �g8

Now this manoeuvre is too late, but Black's position is so compromised , that it is hard

32

M. Carlsen - V. Topalov

to offer h im any good advice. Apparently there was no longer any way of saving the game. If 23 . . . Ad7 there fol lows 24. J::!c3 with the doubl ing of the rooks.

24. :E!:c6 �f6 25. :E!:xa6

The gathering of the harvest begins.

25 • .. Ad7

25 . . . J::!fe8 26. J::!xe8+ J::!xe8 27. J::!a7! is also hopeless for Black.

26. �xbS :E!:b8 27. a4 �g4 28. Af3 Wh6

Black also cannot be satisfied with 28 . . . 'Wf5 29. Ae4 'Wh5 30. J::!a7.

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

a b c d e f g h

.!. .!. • .l .t .l .l .l

1: .l � 'if tZJ �

� 0

� � � � � � � �

--;

1: w a b c d e t g h

29. Wc4

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

' I spent q u ite a bit of t ime around here trying to al low as l ittle counterplay as possible. With th is move I prevent 29 . . . tilxf2 30. <;!;>xf2 tilxh4. ' (Carlsen)

29 • • • �xh4

Desperat ion, but otherwise Black wi l l suffocate.

30. Axg4 Axg4 31 . gxh4 Af3 32. fS

8 .!. 7 .l 6 J: .l 5 tZJ � 4 � � 3

2 �

a b c d e t g h

32 • • • WhS 33. Wf4 AxdS 34. �xc7 Ab7 3S. :E!:b6 f6 36. Ad4 Wt7 37. �e6 :E!:g8 38. g;,f2 :E!:bc8 39. Ac3 AdS 40. aS :E!:c4 41 . �d4 Aa8 42. Wxd6 WhS 43. Wf4 :E!:cc8 44. :E!:be6

Black resigned .

Game 54

M. Carlsen - V. Topalov Nanj ing 2009

King's Indian Defence [ E90]

In 2009 Vesel in Topalov headed the F IDE rat ing l ist , but surpris ing ly, it was against h im that Carlsen p layed especial ly successfu l ly, compared with the other representatives of the top ten . After the tournament in Nanj ing he improved the score to 5-3 (with 4 draws) .

1 . d4 �f6 2. c4 g6 3. �c3 Ag7 4. e4 d6 s. �f3 0-0 6. h3

Carlsen avoids the Classical Variat ion, beg inn ing with 6 . Ae2, and prepares the development of his dark-square bishop at e3.

6 • • • �a6 Only accuracy is requ i red of White - the check at g6 was threatened . The main continuation here is 6 . . . e5 7. d5

33


a5 or 7 . . . tlla6. Also, 6 . . . c5, which is more in accordance with Topalov's style, is often played .

7. J.e3 e5 8. d5

The rel ieving of the pawn tension 8. dxe5 dxe5 is harmless after the queen exchange 9. 'Wxd8 f!xd8, since the e5-pawn is indirectly defended (1 0 . .'Dxe5 .'Dxe4). But Black has to reckon with 9. c5. For example, in the game Radjabov-V. M i lov (Warsaw 2005) after 9 . . . .'Db4 1 0. Wa4 a5 1 1 . f!d1 We7 12 . a3 .'Dc6 White could have gained an advantage by 13 . Ab5!?. However, here too 9 . . . 'Wxd1+ 1 0. f!xd1 .'Db4 would have rel ieved Black's problems: 1 1 . f!d2 Ae6 12. a3 tlla2 13 . .'Dxa2 Axa2 14 . Ad3 f!fd8 with the idea of 1 5 . 0-0 f!xd3 16 . f!xd4 Ac4.

8 . . . c6

a b c d e f g h

Kasparov preferred the classical 8 . . . .'Dh5 with the idea of playing the knight to f4 and advancing . . .f7-f5 . In the game C. Hansen - Kasparov (Svendborg 1 990) Wh ite forestalled this by 9 . .'Dh2 'We8 1 0. Ae2, but nevertheless Kasparov carried out this idea with a pawn sacrifice - 1 0 . . .f5! 1 1 . exf5 .'Df4. Now, as in a number of s imi lar variations, the exchange of the f4-knight is advantageous to B lack: 1 2 . Axf4 exf4 1 3 . fxg6

'Wxg6 1 4 . Ag4 Axg4 1 5 . h xg4 f!ae8+ 1 6 . <;t?f1 IlleS (Kasparov) . The game cont inued 1 2 . 0-0 Axf5 (1 2 . . . .'Dxe2+ 13 . .'Dxe2 gxf5 is also possible) 13 . f!e1 Wf7 1 4 . .'Df1 , and here, accord ing to Kasparov's analysis, Black could have maintained equal ity by 14 . . . .'Db4! 1 5 . .'Dg3 .'Dc2 1 6. Axf4 .'Dxe1 17 . .'Dxf5 gxf5 1 8. Ad2 .'Dxg2 1 9. <;t?xg2 <!>h8 with compl icated play.

9. g4!

White prevents Black's standard play on the kingside.

9 . . . �c5 1 0. �d2 a5 1 1 . a3

White prepares to drive away the knight. After the standard development 1 1 . Wc2 IDea 1 2 . 0-0-0 f5 B lack has sufficient counterplay. With a Samisch structure there is the interest ing idea of switching the dark-square bishop to the queenside: 1 1 . f3 .'Dfd7 1 2. h4 Af6 1 3. Af2 'We8 14 . Ae2 Ad8 15 . 'Wc2 Ab6 with compl icated play (Kolev- Kaminski , Odessa 1 989) . Topalov tries to carry out this idea in the course of the game.

1 1 . . .�fd7

Black prepares not only . . .f7-f5, but also a b ind on the q ueenside with . . . a5-a4, which does not work immediately - 1 1 . . . a4 1 2 . Axc5 dxc5 1 3 . .'Dxa4.

12 . lag1

1 2 . b4 is premature: 12 . . . axb4 13. axb4 f!xa1 1 4. Wxa1 .'Da6 1 5 . Wa3 c5 and the knight establ ishes itself at b4. The move in the game has the aim of preventing . . .f7-f5.

1 2 . . . a4 1 3. 'Wc2 �b6 14. 0-0-0 .td7 1 5. �b1 cxd5

Black determines the pawn structure too

Q34

M. Carlsen - V. Topalov

soon, which is immediately exploited by Carlsen . The prophylactic 1 5 . . . �h8, prepari ng . . .f7-f5 , was more in the spi rit of the posit ion.

16. cxd5 l:!:c8

1 6 . . . l;!a5 came into consideration , when although the rook occupies an unusual position for the King's Ind ian Defence (usually the queen is brought out to a5), it performs the important task of supporting the knight on c5 and contro l l ing the b5-square.

8 8

7

6

5 5

4 . 4

2 2

a b c d e f g h

17. Ab5!

Who said that Carlsen lacks 'school ing'? The move in the game as though copies the style of Tigran Petros ian , who knew al l about such exchanges. White exchanges h is 'bad ' bishop (which is runn ing up against his own pawn chains) for the 'good' bishop on d7.

1 7 . . . Axb5 1 8. �xb5 'Wd7 1 9. �c3 Af6?!

A rather artificial manoeuvre. Black takes h is bishop to a5 , but, as the song goes 'the road is long'. And if it is taken i nto account that a barrier - the knight on b6 - wi l l have to be removed , which wi l l weaken the defence of the a4-pawn, doubts beg in to

creep in about the prospects of the bishop manoeuvre.

Meanwhi le , the posit ion demanded a more concrete decis ion - the preparat ion of . . . b7-b5. Th is wou ld have been answered by 19 . . . l;!c7!? 20. h4 l;!a8 21 . h5 tDc8 or the immediate 19 . . . l;!a8!?, preparing . . . tbc8 and . . . b7-b5.

20. g5

I n contrast to h is opponent, Magnus's play is always concrete. He 'urges' the bishop towards its dubious goal and prepares an attack on the k ing.

20 . . . Ad8

Black should have admitted the fault iness of his idea and reverted to the plan with the preparation of . . . b7-b5 - 20 . . . Ag7 21 . h4 l;!c7 22. h5 l;!a8 23. l;!h1 tbc8.

21 . h4! �a8?

If th is is a pawn sacrif ice, then for what benefits? But Black's pieces are so uncoord inated , that possibly th is is an attempt to bring them together. An intervention such as 21 . . . �h3 22. l;!h1 �g4 23. h5 merely assists White's i n it iative.

22. AxeS! l:!:xc5 23. Wxa4 Wc8 24. l:!:c1 �b6

a b c d e f g h

Q35


An adm iss ion of the fai l u re of the idea 29. gxf6+ I::ixf6 24 . . . Aa5, after which there fol lows 25. l;!g3 with the threat of b2-b4.

25. Wd1 !

Carlsen , as we know, i s able to deploy h is pieces in their best positions. If White places his queen in an advanced post with 25. Wb4, the b lack queen sets off on a journey into the opponent's rear - 25 . . . Wh3 26. t/Jb3 l;!c8 27. l;!h1 Wf3 , eyeing not only the f2-pawn, but also the queenside. For example, if 28. Wxd6?! B lack can sacrifice the exchange - 28 . . . .§xc3 29. bxc3 Wxe4+, causing the king to become nervous: 30. �a1 t!Jc4 31 . Wb4 Ae7! 32. Wxe7 .§a8.

25 • . • 'Wh3 26. Wf3 Wd7

a b 8

7 at 6 � 5

4

c d

.i. 'iV at

e

.!. � at �

3 � Qj� 2 � a QJ 1 � I

a b c d e

30. h5!

f g h 8

• at 7

.!. at 6

5

� 4

3

� 2

a 1 f g h

When an attack can be launched , Magnus is not afraid to sacrifice material .

30 . • . I::ixf2 31 . hxg6 h6

If 31 . . . hxg6 there fol lows 32 . .§xg6+ �xg6 33. Wg3+ Ag5 34. Wxf2.

26 . . . Wxh4? 27 . .!::!g4 leads to the loss of the queen , whi le after the queen exchange 32• ti)d1 !

26 . . . 'Wxf3 27. t/Jxf3 t/Jc4 White sets about Simpl ification is the most effective way of

convert ing his pawn majority: 28. b4! .§c8 29. t/Jb5 with the threat of doubl ing rooks on the c-fi le. For example, if 29 . . . f6 there can fol low 30 . .§c2 t/Jb6 31 . l;!xc8 t/Jxc8 32 . .§c1 Ae7 33 . .§c7 with a decisive rook invasion, whi le in the event of 29 . . .f5 30. exf5 .§xf5 31 . .§xc4! .§xc4 32. t/Jxd6 .§xb4+ 33. axb4 .§xf3 34. t/Jxb7 Ab6 35. d6 Black has to reckon with the passed pawns.

27. Wd3

27. h5 suggests itself, but with an extra pawn ' i n hand' M agnus does not rush , preferring prophylaxis i n the event of possible counterplay for Black such as . . . Ae7, . . . t/Jc4 and . . . .§fc8.

27 . . • �g7 28. I::ic2 f6

28 . . . .!::!h8 fol lowed by . . . h7-h6 would possibly have g iven Black better chances.

converting the material advantage.

32 . . • I::ixc2 33. ti)xf2 I::ic8 34. ti)g4 .tg5 35. ti)f3 ti)c4 36. ti)xg5 hxg5

a b c d e

8

7 at 6

5

4

3 � 2

37. ti)e3

� �

a b

.!. 'if at � at

� � �

c d e

f g h 8

• 7

� 6

at 5

Qj 4

3

2

a f g h

Only here does Carlsen make an error. 37. Wh3! t/Jd2+ 38. �a2 l;!h8 39. Wxh8+! �xh8 40 . .§h1 + �g7 41 . .§h7+ was more forcefu l .

36

M . Carlsen - T. Radjabov

37 . . . �xe3 38. 'Wxe3 Wa4

By playing 38 . . . 'We7 39. �xg5 �h8 Black could have retarded, but not prevented White's offensive - 40. �f5 ! .

39. Wxg5 Wxe4+ 40. �a1 J;le8 41 . J;lc1

Black resigned.

Game 55

M. Carlsen - T. Radjabov Nanj ing 2009


1 . e4 c5 2. �f3 �c6 3 . .tb5!

A pragmatic approach, typical of the 'new' Carlsen. In the main branches of the Chelyabinsk Variat ion Radjabov has analysed everyth ing, and there is no point in competing with him in knowledge. It is more log ical to switch to positional l i nes, where Magnus is stronger. Especia l ly s ince i n Linares that year they had already played a very interesting game in this variat ion.

3 . . . e6

The greatest expert on this variation, Evgeny Sveshn ikov, considers th is move to be the strongest . Earl ier Radjabov chose other variat ions , but d id not p lay them in the best way. For example, the game Grischuk- Radjabov (Moscow 2002) went 3 . . . d6 4. 0-0 Ad7 5. �e1 tDf6 6. c3 a6 7. Af1 Ag4 8 . d3 Axf3 9. "1Wxf3 g6 1 0 . "1Wd1 Ag7 1 1 . tDd2 0-0 1 2 . tDf3 lDg4 13 . a3 �c8 1 4 . �b1 tDge5 1 5 . tDxe5 tDxe5 1 6 . Ag5 Wd7 1 7. "1Wd2 me8 1 8 . �bc1 b5 1 9. h3 tDc6 20. Ae3 with comfortable play for White.

4. 0-0 �ge7 5. c3

Other sol id continuations are 5. b3 and 5 . �e1 . Carlsen sticks to central strategy.

a b c d e f g h

8 .I .t 'if fl � .I 8 7 .t .t .t l.&l .t .t .t 7 6 "' 6

5 ii. .t 5 4

a b c d e f g h

5 • . . a6 6 . .ta4 b5

6 . . . c4 7. "1We2 b5 8 . Ac2 tDg6 prevents White from setting up a powerfu l centre, but he gains the opportun ity to attack the queenside - 9. b3! .

7 . .tc2 Ab7

The central pawn counter 7 . . . d5 8 . e5 d4 9. Ae4 lDd5 leads to a very compl i cated posit ion . For exam ple , the rap id game Sh i rov - lvanchuk (Ta l l i n n 2006) continued 1 0 . d3 Ab7 1 1 . c4 lDb6 1 2 . Af4 Ae7 13 . lDbd2 g5 14 . Ag3 h5 1 5 . h3 'Wd7 1 6. �e1 0-0-0 1 7. cxb5 axb5 1 8. a4?! tDxa4 1 9. tDc4 bxc4 20. �xa4 cxd3 21 . 'Wxd3 , and the position was so compl icated that only the players themselves could understand it .

8. We2 d5

I n Linares 2009 Radjabov played 8 . . . tDg6 aga inst Car lsen . There fo l l owed 9 . d4 cxd4 1 0 . cxd4 �c8 1 1 . a3 Ae7 1 2 . tDc3 0-0 1 3 . �d1 tDa5 14 . g3 tDc4 15 . h4 tDxa3 1 6 . bxa3 (1 6 . Ab3!?) 1 6 . . . �xc3 1 7. h5 Vflc7 1 8 . Ad3 tDh8 1 9. Ab2 �b3 20. �ac1 Vfla5 21 . d5 Axa3 22. Axa3 �xa3 23. "1We3 with sharp play, where White has compensation for the sacrificed pawns.

237


The inclusion of 8 . . . c4 9. b3 d5 would have led after 1 0 . exd5 ti:)xd5 1 1 . bxc4 ti:)f4 1 2 . �e3 Ad6 to a very compl icated posit ion, where Black has real counterplay.

8 . . . g6 is a log ical continuat ion, and it may possibly be the theme of future encounters .

9. e5 d4 1 0. Ae4

a b c d e f g h

a i. .i. 7

6 .l ,.. 5

4

3

a b c d e f g h

1 0 . . . 'Wb6?!

6

5

4

3

A rather rare move. The ma in move is 1 0 . . . ti:)d5, as Kasparov h imself played in a rapid game against Grischuk (Moscow 2002). The continuation was 1 1 . cxd4 ti:)xd4 1 2 . ti:)xd4 cxd4 13 . a4 b4 14. d3 �c7 15 . f4?! flc8 1 6 . ti:)d2 ti:)e3 1 7. flf3 Axe4 1 8 . dxe4 d3! 1 9 . �xd3 ti:)c2 20. flb1 ti:)e1 , and Black won the exchange.

1 0 . . . ti:)g6 looks i nsuffic ient ly log ica l : 1 1 . cxd4 cxd4 1 2. d3 Ae7 13 . g3! 0-0 14. h4 with an unpleasant in it iative for White on the kingside.

1 1 . d3

1 1 . a4 deserved consideration, but Carlsen , a devotee of the c lassical style of p lay, wants to complete h is development as soon as possible.

1 1 . . . lad8 1 2. a4

A standard device, with which White opens the fi le for h is rook. Black cannot prevent this: 12 . . . b4 weakens the c4-square, which w i l l be occupied by the kn ight on b1 . If 1 2 . Ag5 White has to reckon with 12 . . . h6 1 3 . Ah4 g5 14 . Ag3 Ag7.

1 2 . . . ttid5 1 3. axb5 axb5 14. cxd4

The exchang ing operat ion 1 4 . Ag5 Ae7 1 5 . Axd5 flxd5 1 6 . Axe? ti:)xe7 1 7. ti:)a3 fld7 1 8. c4 b4 1 9. ti:)bS 0-0 would not have g iven White anything real .

14 . . . cxd4

The knight exchange 14 . . . ti:)xd4 1 5 . ti:)xd4 cxd4 would have opened the way for the wh ite queen to the kingside: 1 6 . Ag5 flc8 1 7. ti:)a3 Ae7 1 8 . Axd5 Axd5 1 9 . Axe? <llxe7 20. �g4 and it is not easy for the king to find a qu iet refuge (20 . . . flhd8 21 . �h4+ <llea 22. �xh7 etc.).

1 5. ttibd2

a b c d e f g h 8 i. e .I. 7 .i. .l 6 'if ,.. .l 6

5 .l ,.. � 5

4 .l i;, 4

3 � tiJ 3

2 � tiJ VJJJ � � � 2

1 .: i;, .: � a b c d e f g h

1 5 . . . ttif4?

It was more logical for Black to complete h is development by 1 5 . . . Ae7 1 6 . ti:)b3 0-0 1 7. Ag5 , when White merely retains the advantage of the fi rst move. But Radjabov, with h is active style, is a iming to seize the in it iative.

38


16. Wd1 �b4?!

16 . . . tbg6 was safer. But Teimour did not declare war, in order to retreat!

17. �b3 Axe4 1 8. dxe4 �fd3

All in the same style - only forward ! But 18 . . . tbg6 1 9 .tbfxd4 tbxe5 20. �h5 tbc4 21 . Ag5 would no longer have solved the main problem - the rapid development of the pieces.

19. Ags

19 . . . Ae7? wi l l not do, since after 20. Axe? �xe7 21 . �d2 Black has problems with his knights. For example, 2 1 . . J !e8 22. tbc1 �xc1 23. �xb4+.

19 . . . ftc8 20.�fxd4 �xb2

If 20 . . . tbxe5 there fo l lows 21 . f!a5 ! , w inn ing the b5-pawn. The development of the k ings ide wou ld also have led to the loss of th is pawn: 20 . . . h6 2 1 . Ae3 �b7 22. f3 tbxe5 23 . �e2 Ae7 24. f!a5 0-0 25. f!xb5.

21 . We2 �c4 22. ftfc1

8

7

6

5

a b c d e f 9 h

.I • -*- .I

'if I .t. ... £::,

... ... ...

!k,

8

7

6

5

4 4 J!&\ J!&\ttJ £3:, ttJ 3 3

2 2 V/!f £::, £::, £3:, � � � a b c d e f 9 h

22 . . . AcS?

22 . . . Ae7 was better, although here too after 23. tbxb5 �xb5 24. Axe? �xe7 25. f!a7+ �f8 26. f!a5 �b6 27. f!xc4 White has a very dangerous in it iative.

23. �xbS! 0-0?

Overlook ing the loss of a p iece. True , 23 . . . Axf2+ 24 . �xf2 �xb5 25. �e2 0-0 26. tbd4 �c5 27. Ae3 would also have led to an obvious advantage for White.

24. �xeS �xeS

Things would not have been changed by 24 . . . f!xc5 25. Ae7 �xb5 26. Axc5.

2S. Ae7

Black resigned.

Participation in the Tal Memorial Tournament has particular impl ications for Carlsen. It is not only a matter of continu ing the strong rival ry with the best players in the world , but also an opportun ity to make contact with the rich chess and cultural trad it ions of Moscow. The fi rst tournament after the fai ry-tale victory i n Nanj ing also imposed certain obl igations. Something extraord inary was expected of Magnus, although certain reviewers warned that a repetit ion of Nanj ing was not possible i n Moscow. And i t was not only a matter of the very h igh level of the participants (FI DE category 21 ) , but above al l the powerfu l potential of the grandmasters themselves. After a l l , most of them, to some degree or other, were products of the famous Soviet Chess School and were in the top ten of the world rat ing l ist .

In the very fi rst round he had to withstand the pressure of Vlad im i r Kramn ik , who with Black l iteral ly r ight from the open ing forced Carlsen onto the defensive. But the fo l lowing series of draws had a qu ite mundane explanat ion: during the fi rst days

239


Magnus was unwe l l , and in such a condit ion he was unable to play for a win . The turn ing point came in the second half of the tournament, when after five rounds the main favourites Kramn ik and Anand were confidently lead ing . The game with the current world champion was awaited with part icular i nterest . This was a fierce batt le between two powerfu l fighters , who proved worthy of one another. The dynamic nature of the p lay ind icated that Magnus had recuperated , and although in the 7th round the drawing series conti nued - he was forced to conclude peace with the Russian champion Peter Svid ler, his courage was now restored . In the next two rounds Carlsen won against Ponomariov and Leko, and fi n ished among the tournament winners, sharing 2nd-3rd p laces with lvanchuk, only half a point beh ind Kramnik. A worthy performance i n such ste l lar company, confi rm ing h is status as the No.1 p layer from the West .

But the cu lm ination of Carlsen's performance in Moscow was h is uncond itional victory in the World B l itz Championship. In a double-round tournament of 22 grandmasters Magus scored 31 points, fin ishing 3 points ahead of Anand and 6 ahead of the th i rd-placed Karjakin .

Game 56

M. Carlsen - V. Anand Mikhai l Tal Memorial Tournament

Moscow 2009 Queen 's Gambit {039}

1 . d4 �f6 2. c4 e6 3. �f3 d5 4. �c3 dxc4

The acceptance of the pawn sacrif ice is currently topical not on ly i n the Catalan Open ing , but also in the Queen's Gambit , for example i n the Botvinn i k Var iat ion or the Moscow Var iat ion . But for the moment B lack is on course for the Vienna Variat ion .

5 . .tg5 .tb4 6. a3

Carlsen avoids the V ienna Var iat ion , to which 6. e4 would have led , demonstrating h is read iness to sacrifice a pawn.

6 . . . .txc3+ 7. bxc3

a b c d e f 9 h 8 .! 1.1\ .t 'Vi • .! 8

7 . . . • • • 7 6 . �.�� 6

5 � 5 4 · � 4

3 � � tD 3 2 � � � � 2 1 .:g � � � .:g 1

a b c d e f 9 h

7 . .. h6

Black clarifies the opponent's i ntentions and al lows the regain ing of the pawn . 7 . . . b 5 8 . a4 c 6 i s more crit ical . The game Grischuk-van Wely (Wijk aan Zee 2005) cont inued 9. g3 h6 1 0 . Axf6 (1 0 . Ac1 also deserves consideration, retaining the bishops with the idea of exploit ing the weak dark squares on the a3-f8 d iagonal) 10 . . .

240

M. Carlsen - V. Anand --------------------

gxf6 (after 1 0 . . .'�xf6 1 1 . Ag2 Ab7 12 . �e5 it is not easy for Black to complete h is development) 1 1 . Ag2 Ab7 12 . Wb1 a6 1 3 . �d2 We? (�xc4 was threatened) 14 . 0-0 �d7 15. Wb4 c5 1 6. dxc5 Axg2 1 7. �xg2 Wc6+ 18. �g1 �e7 and Black maintained the balance.

Instead of 1 5 . Wb4 White can consider the preparatory exchange 1 5 . axb5 axb5 (or 1 5 . . . cxb5 1 6 . Axb7 Wxb7 1 7. �xc4) 1 6 . �xa8+ Axa8, and now 1 7. Wb4 with the better game in view of the threats of �e4 and �a1 . For example: 1 7 . . .f5 1 8 . �a1 Ab7 1 9. e4 c5 20. Wxb5 cxd4 21 . cxd4 (21 . �xc4 0-0 22. �a7 is also good) 21 . . . c3 22. �c1 ! .

8. £xf6 Vkxf6 9 . e3

Magnus did not sacrifice the pawn in order to regain it: 9 . Wa4+ Ad7 1 0 . Wxc4, since after 1 0 . . . Ac6 1 1 . e3 �d7 Black successfu l ly completes his development.

9 . . . b5 1 0. a4 c6 1 1 . �e5 a6

a b c d e f g h

8 .!. � .a. • .!. 8 7 • • 7

6 . . 'iV • 6

5 • ttJ 5

4 fj, . fj, 4

3 fj, fj, 3

2 fj, fj, fj, 2

1 M � � Jt M 1 a b c d e f g h

possible - 1 2. g3 Ab7 1 3 . Ag2, or, as in the game, 12 . g4 !? Ab7 13 . Ag2.

12. g4!?

A fresh idea, combining the fianchetto with the idea of an offensive on the king side - an ind i rect ind ication of Carlsen's recovery.

1 2 ..• .tb7 13 . .tg2 Vke7

There are two methods of playing as Black with th is q ueenside pawn structure: he can do his utmost to hold on to the pawn, displaying h is read iness to withstand an attack by White on the queenside ( in the Catalan Opening this course is successfu l ly adhered to by Evgeny Sveshn ikov), or at an appropriate moment he can return the pawn for the sake of complet ing his development. Anand prefers the former course, demonstrat ing his i ntention of fighting for a win (by no means the last consideration here was Carlsen's physical exhaustion), whereas he could have demonstrated h is peacefu l intentions and returned the pawn with 1 3 . . . �d7!?, provoking s impl ificat ion: a) 14. Axc6 Axc6 1 5 . �xc6 0-0 1 6. 0-0,

and now after 16 . . . �b6 or 16 . . . e5 the g4-pawn looks out of place. It is hard to bel ieve in the real ity of an attack with such l im ited reserves;

b) 14 . axb5 axb5 1 5 . �xa8+ Axa8 1 6 . Wa1 Wd8 1 7. �xc6 Wc8, and all that remains for White is to force a draw by repetit ion - 1 8 . �a7 Wb8 1 9. �c6 Wc8 (variations by Shipov).

If 1 1 . . . 0-0 there cou ld have fo l l owed 14. 0-0 0-0 15. f4 1 2 . Ae2 Ab7 1 3 . Wb1 (an 'X-ray' of the queen on the b7-bishop, typical of th is (see next diagram) type of pawn structure) 1 3 . . . a6 1 4. �xc4, regain ing the pawn in a favourable situa- White has seized the in it iative, and with tion . The fianchetto of the bishop is also the ' hook' on h6 the attacking pai r g4/f4

241


a b c d e f 9 h 8 !. 1.1\ !. • 7 .i. 'ii l. l.

8

7 6 £ I. I. 1. 6 5 I. ttJ 4 � ... � � �

� � 3

5

4 3

2 JL � 2

1 l;l VJ!i : w a b c d e f 9 h

looks far more active than B lack's rig id pawn construction on the queenside. This is where the idea of the move 1 2 . g4!? is revealed.

1 5 • .. �d7

Anand becomes aware of the real ity of White's attack and he returns the pawn, exchanging the active knight. In the event of the preparatory 1 5 . . . 'fie? he wou ld have to reckon with 1 6. g5! with dangerous threats, for example: 1 6 . . . hxg5 1 7. 'fih5 tLld7 (1 7 . . . g4 1 a . f5 exf5 1 9 . flxf5) 1 a . CL!xd7 'fixd7 1 9. fxg5 with the threat of switching the rook onto the h-fi le .

1 6. �xc6 'Wd6

threats to his k ing, and now he rel ieves the pawn tension on the queenside, hoping to exploit the a-fi le. 19 . . . b4 also came into consideration , not only getting rid of the potentia l ly weak b5-pawn (after the exchange 20. axb5 axb5 it is very vulnerable), but also creating a passed c-pawn. If 20. 'fie2 there can fol low 20 . . . flea 21 . cxb4 'Wxb4, not fearing 22. g5 hxg5 23. fxg5 c3, when the c3-pawn diverts White from the attack on the king.

20. axb5 axb5 21 . !!xa7 'Wxa7

8 a b

7 'iV 6 1.1\ 5 I. 4 3

c d e

�. � � �

� �

I.

a b c d e f 9 h

22. 'Wa1

8

7 6 5

4 3

White switches h is attention to the queenside.

1 6 . . . Axc6 is weaker: 1 7. Axc6 flaba 1a. axb5 axb5 1 9. fla7 flfda 20. 'fif3 b4

22· · ·'*'e7

(20 . . . 'fid6? 21 . g5) 21 . flc1 with the in it iative for White.

17. �e7+

U nderstandably, a p layer with classical convictions rejects moving into a pin by 1 7. 'fif3 , with unclear consequences after 1 7 . . . �ha.

17 • . . 'Wxe7 18 . Axb7 Eta7 1 9. Ag2 �b6

Logical . Only by keeping the queens on can Black hope to get at White's weaknesses. After the exchange 22 . . . 'fixa1 23. flxa1 CL!a4 24. fla3! flea 25. �f2 White retains a smal l but enduring advantage in the endgame. Carlsen p lays such endings with great pleasure, and therefore such a turn of events could not satisfy Anand.

23. e4

Black has succeeded in neutral is ing the Time wi l l not wait . After the inclusion of his

242


rook Black can set up a passed pawn on 26. We2 the queenside, and White forestal ls th is with the threat of an attack on the king.

23 . . J:ia8 24. 'Wb2 EtaS 25. e5!

Showing an excel lent fee l i ng for the dynam ics of the posit ion ! Wh ite inc l udes h is b i shop in the p l ay and i ntends to cont inue the advance of his pawn phalanx by f4-f5 .

8

7

a b c d e f 9 h

• 'Vi' I. I.

8

7

6 I. I. 6

5 .!. 1. � 4

3

2

�. � � � �

VJH a b c d e f 9 h

25 . • • Wh4

5 4

3

By launch ing a counterattack, d isclosing the drawbacks of g2-g4, which has led to a weaken ing of the k ing 's defences, Anand demonstrates h i s read i n ess to play for a win . However, he is taking a r isk. At a press-conference after the game he ment ioned i n passing that 25 . . . �d5 wou ld have guaranteed an easy d raw. A stra ightforward analysis enables us to ascertain that the world champion 's assessment was correct: 26. f5 (26 . Axd5 exd5 27. f5 �gS) 26 . . . �e3 27. �f3 �xg2 28. *xg2 �gS !? (28 . . . �h4 29 . h3 hS 30. �f2 leads to more crit ical p lay) 29. h3 exf5 30. �xfS �e3 , and the queen penetrates i nto the opponent 's rear, forc ing Wh ite to concern h imself with h is own k ing.

This carefu l move gives Black an important tempo for inc lud ing h is rook i n the counterattack, whereas the resolute 26. f5! wou ld have forced h im to switch to defence. If 26 . . . �xg4 there is the unpleasant 27. h3 �gS (27 . . . �g3 leads to s imi lar play) 28. fxe6 fxe6 29. �b4! �a? 30. �d6 �a2 31 . �xe6+ *h7 32. �g4 Wxg4 33. hxg4 and the passed e-pawn is very dangerous.

26 . . • Eta3! 27. f5!

It would be fatal to switch to defence. After 27. �c1 or 27. �b1 there fol lows 27 . . . �a4.

27 . . J:ixc3 28. fxe6 fxe6 29. We4! 'Wd8! 30. Wg6 Wxd4+ 31 . �h1 Ete3!

Attack and defence are at the highest level .

a b c d e f 9 h 8 � 8

7 I. 7

6 � I. 6

5 4

3

2

5 4

3

� � 2

:1 � 1 a b c d e f 9 h

32. Wxe6+

Carlsen forces a draw in a situation where there was a last possib i l ity of test ing the sol id ity of B lack's posit ion by 32. Ac6 ! , with the threat o f 33 . �f8+ *xf8 34 . �e8 mate, which Anand mentioned in the press conference. B lack has to f ind the only defence 32 . . . Wc5! . He loses after 32 . . . �d8 33. g5 hxgS 34. �f7+ *h8 35. �h5+ *g8

243


36. Ae8, renewing the threat of 37. f!f8+. But after Black 32 . . . �c5! B lack holds on by a fine thread of only moves: 33. �xe6+ *h7! (33 . . ·*h8? 34. �e8+ *h7 35. g5 hxg5 loses to 36. f!d1 ! with the threat of 37. �h5+ *g8 38. f!d8+) 34. g5 hxg5 35. Ae4+ f!xe4 36. �f5+ *g8 37. �xe4 �d5! 38. �xd5 tbxd5 39. f!d1 with a draw.

32 . . . mh7 33. Wf5+ mhs 34. wta+ mh7 35. Wf5+ mha 36. wta+

Draw.

Game 57

M. Carlsen - R. Ponomariov Mikhai l Tal Memorial Tournament

Moscow 2009 Sicilian Defence [ 890}

1 . e4 c5 2. �f3 d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. �xd4 �f6 5. �c3 a6 6 . .te3 e6 7. f3 b5 8. 'Wd2 �bd7 9. g4 h6 1 0. 0-0-0

a b c d e f 9 h

8 .!. j_ 'iV • j_ .!. 8 7 1.1\ 1. 1. 7

I. I. 1.1\ I. 6

a b c d e f 9 h

1 0 . • . �e5

In a number of recent games the more resolute move 1 0 . . . b4 has occurred , with good results for Black. Here are some examples: a) 1 1 . tba4 tbe5 1 2 . b3 Ad? 1 3 . tbb2 d5

14. Af4 �c7 1 5 . tbd3 tbxd3+ 1 6. Axd3

�b6 1 7. tbe2 dxe4 1 8 . Axe4 !adS with excellent play for Black (Leko- lvanchuk, Mukachevo 2007);

b) 1 1 . tbce2 �c7 1 2 . h4 d5 1 3 . tDf4 e5 14 . tDfe6 fxe6 1 5 . tbxe6 �a5 1 6. exd5 �xa2 1 7. �d3 *f7 1 8. g5 tbxd5 19. Ah3 tb xe3 20. tDd8+ *e7 2 1 . tbc6+ �f7 22. g6+ *g8 23. �xe3 with very comp l icated p lay (Morozev ich - VachierLagrave, Biel 2009).

1 1 . We1 !

A new idea i n th is variat ion After . . . b5-b4 White moves away his queen in good t ime in the event of . . . tbe5-c4. Despite his fai lu re in this game, Ponomariov did not change h is assessment of 1 0 . . . tbe5 at the World Bl itz Championship, which was held immed iately after the end of the tournament. H is opponents played differently.

The modest 1 1 . a3 was tried in the game Dominguez- Ponomariov, which continued 1 1 . . .tDfd7 1 2 . �f2 �c7 1 3 . f!g1 g5 14 . h4 f!g8 15 . *b1 f!b8 16 . tba2 Ae7 17. f!h1 �b6 1 8 . tDb4 tDbc4 1 9. Axc4 bxc4 20. hxg5 hxg5 21 . Ad2 a5 22. tba2 c3! 23. Axc3 tbc4 with compl icated play.

But in his game with Ponomariov, Morozevich made a reckless pawn sacrifice: 1 1 . f4!? tbexg4 1 2 . e5 b4 1 3 . exf6 bxc3 14. �xc3 tbxf6 (14 . . . gxf6 suggests itself) 1 5. Ag2 Ad? (1 5 . . . d5 16 . f5 would have allowed White scope for an attack) 1 6. Axa8 �xa8 17. f!hg1 tbe4 18. �a5 g6 19. tbe2! Ag7 20. Ad4, and White gained the advantage.

1 1 . . . Wc7 12 . h4 b4?!

Premature, apparently. The more natural 1 2 . . . Ab7 1 3 . Ae2 tbc4 1 4. Axc4 �xc4 1 5 . g5 tbd7 1 6 . g6 tbe5 would have led to an unclear posit ion with chances for both sides.

244

M. Carlsen - R. Ponomariov

13. ti:\ce2 ti:\c4

13 . . . d5!? comes into consideration.

a b c d e f 9 h 8 .i .i. • .i. .i 8

7 'W 1. 1. 7

6 1. 1. 1. � 1. 6 5 5

a b c d e f 9 h

14. ti:\t4!

An amazingly bold move, since all the double attacks associated with . . . e6-e5 had to be calcu lated .

14 • .• ti:\xe3

I n the event of 14 . . . e5 1 5 . �d5 �xd5 16. exd5 exd4 1 7. Axd4+ �e5 1 8 . f4 B lack faces d ifficu lties.

15. Wxe3 Wb6?

The primary cause of Black's later problems. He al lows the development of the bishop on c4, after which the concentrated pressure on e6 may become unbearable. 15 . . . e5?! wou ld have been a mistake in view of 1 6 . �d5 �xd5 1 7. exd5 Ab7 1 8 . f4! with a dangerous position for B lack. He shou ld have completed his development with 1 5 . . . Ae7.

16. Ac4!

In the style of Bobby Fischer, who so l i ked to attack the e6-point!

16 ..• Wc5?!

The . . .'�c7-b6-c5 manoeuvre is unsuc-

cessfu l . It was better to transfer the knight to c5 - 1 6 . . . CL!d7, not fearing 1 7.�fxe6 fxe6 1 8 . Axe6, after which 1 8 . . . �c5 (or immediately 18 . . . Ab7) 1 9 . AdS Ab7 is possible.

17. Wb3!

White has focused his attent ion on the e6-pawn: the threat of a piece sacrifice becomes real .

17 • .. d5

The open ing of the posit ion merely aggravates B lack's problems: h is k ing has been caught in the centre and presents an easy target for White's mobi l ised pieces. The only way to hold the position was by 1 7 . . .'�e5.

1 8. exd5 Ad6

a b c

8 ,1 .i. 7

d e

• f 9 h

.i 1. 1.

6 I. ,-------- .i. I. � I. 5 'W B 4 l. � ttJ ti:J B B 3 � B 2 B B B

8

7

6 5

4

3

2

1 w � � 1 a b c d

1 9.ti:\fxe6

e f 9 h

The fru it was ripe, but 1 9 .�dxe6! looked stronger and more natural . Magnus occasionally makes l ittle 's l ips' in the conversion of an advantage.

19 . . • fxe6 20. dxe6 Ae7 21 . Wd3!

The queen has performed its role on b3, and now it moves closer to the opponent's k ing.

245


21 . . . 0-0

a b c d e f g h 8 8 !. .i. I. e 7 7 .i. .t 6 6 .t 8 1.1 .t 5 4 3 2

'if .t ii. tt:J

� 8 8 8

� g

8 8 8

g a b c d e f g h

22. J.b3

5 4 3 2

White wants to win in comfort: move in to g6 with h is queen fol lowed by tDf5 . But, strangely enough , even with such a concentration of force a delay in the attack al lows a respite. There was a qu ick win by 22. g5! tDe8 23. gxh6 Ab7 24. hxg7, completely e l im inat ing Black's pawn defences with a continu ing attack.

22 • . J �d8?

Ponomariov misses the only chance to fight on with 22 . . . Ab7, when Black somehow sets up a defence: 23. \Wg6 tDe8 24. tDf5 f!f6 or 23. g5 tDh5 24. gxh6 tDf4. Now his game goes downh i l l .

23. g5 �h7

Of course, 23 . . J �xd4 24. '1Wxd4 '1Wxd4 25 . .§xd4 tDe8 26. gxh6 would have enabled Black to avoid a mating attack, but there was no serious hope of saving the game.

24. gxh6 �h5 25. �e4 �xh6+ 26. mb1 laa7 27. �f5 laxd1+ 28. laxd1 �f6

8 a b

7 J. 6 .t 5 4 3

c d e

.i. .i.

f

8 'Yi' tZJ

� 8

g h

• .t l.i

8

a b c d e f g h

29. lad7!

8

7 6 5 4 3 2

I n conclusion, a l ittle combination in the style of Capablanca, which decides the game. The 'crude' 29 . .§d8+ would have led only to the win of the bishop.

29 . . . .txd7 30. exd7+ mta 31 . �d5

Black resigned .

The last tournament of 2009 was the London Chess C lassic with the part ic i pation of e ight g randmasters (FI DE category 1 8) . The fie ld was selected in accordance with Eng l ish trad it ions with respect to the i r com patr iots . The four strongest Engl ish p layers were granted the opportun ity to cross swords with the ma in chal lengers for the world crown , V lad im i r Kramn ik and Magnus Carlsen . The favourites were drawn together i n the very fi rst round , and Carlsen 's w in over the ex-world champion determ ined the further course of the tou rnament. He confidently converted h is lead i nto victory in the tou rnament (5 poi nts out of 7), a l lowi ng h is rival to close on ly with in half a point .

246

M. Carlsen - V. Kramn i k ------------------------

I n h is game with Kramn ik , Magnus was able to demonstrate those attr ibutes of h is , in wh ich he is su perior to the strongest p layers in the world - an abi l ity to conduct lengthy p lay, balanc ing on the barely d iscern ib le boundary separat ing a m in imal advantage from equal ity. Here it is normal ly the opponent who makes the fi rst m istake.

1. c4

Game 58

M. Carlsen - V. Kramnik London 2009


For Carlsen , games with Kramn ik have a specia l imp l icat ion . Despite the fact that in his i nterviews he does not demonstrate any interest i n the f ight for the chess crown, Magnus regards the p lay of the 1 4th world champion as a k ind of beacon , by which he should be gu ided. Since for the present he is i nferior to the ex-champion as regards the scale of h is home laboratory, th is attempt to avoid surprises with the he lp of the Engl ish Opening, which he rarely plays, is fu l ly justified . It should be mentioned that Carlsen also used a s im i lar idea i n h is game with Topalov i n L inares 2008.

1 . . .e5 2 . tbc3 tbf6 3. tbf3 tbc6 4. g3

I n the game with Topalov, Magnus played 4. d3, provoking h is opponent i nto a reversed Sici l ian. He adopts the same tactics in the present game.

4 . . . d5 5. cxd5 tbxd5 6. Ag2 tbb6 7. 0-0 Ae7 8. a3

(see next diagram)

White prepares a pawn offensive on the queenside. 8 . d3 0-0 9 . a3 leads to an insign ificant transposition of moves.

a b c d e I 9 h 8 !. .i. 'iV • !. 8

? .l .l .l .i. .l .l .l ? 6 � � 6

5

4

5

4

3 8 t2J QJ 8 3 2 8 8 8 8 � 8 2 1 .: � WH .:t �

a b c d e I 9 h

8 . . . 0-0

8 . . . Ae6 is also possible, since if 9. b4 White has to reckon with 9 . . . tbd4 with the threat of 1 0 . . . Ab3, and after 1 0 . .§b1 f6 1 1 . e3 (nothing is g iven by 1 1 . tbxd4 exd4 1 2 . tbe4 AdS 1 3 . Ab2 fS) 1 1 . . . tbxf3+ 1 2 . 'Wxf3 c6 13 . bS .§c8 Black has good play.

White's flank attack can be prevented by 8 . . . aS 9. d3 0-0 1 0. Ae3 Ae6. This variation occurred in the famous game Botvinnik- Portisch (Monte Carlo 1 968), where the 6th world champion carried out a combination in which he twice sacrificed the exchange: 1 1 . tba4 tbxa4 1 2 . 'Wxa4 AdS 13 . .§fc1 .§e8 14 . .§c2 Af8 1S . .§ac1 tbb8? (1 S . . . 'Wd7 is correct; the hope of playing . . . c7-c6 is i l lusory) 1 6 . .§xc7! Ac6 1 7 . .§1 xc6! bxc6 18 . .§xf7! and White won . Nowadays 1 1 . tbd2 is preferred , but here too after 11 . . . tbdS 1 2. tbxdS AxdS 13 . AxdS 'WxdS 14 . .§c1 fS Black has adequate counterplay (Cvetkovic-Mikhalchishin, Yugoslavia 1993).

247


9. b4 .te6 1 0. lab1

1 0 . b5 is premature , as after 1 0 . . . tDd4 White cannot play 1 1 . tDxe5? because of 1 1 . . .Ab3.

1 0 . . • f6 1 1 . d3

A wel l-known position in the Engl ish Opening: White has deployed his forces as in the Dragon Variat ion of the Sic i l ian Defence. This type of ' reversed ' play has a certain impl icat ion. I n dynamic Dragon structures an extra tempo is important, and Carlsen, who has a fai r amount of experience in such posit ions, is satisfied by such a turn of events.

a b c d e f 9 h

a i 'it' I . a 7 1. 1. 1. .a 1. 1. 7 6 �� j_ I. 6

5 5

a b c d e f 9 h

1 1 . . . a5

Before placing h is knights on the central squares d4 and d5, Black aims to determine the pawn structure on the queenside and obta in an outpost for his p ieces at b3, but after White's obvious reply he has problems with his other queenside pawns. It looks more promising to pursue central strategy with 1 1 . . . tDd4, which Carlsen encountered in his game with Radjabov at the 2008 Grand Prix tournament in Baku. There fol lowed 12 . tDd2 c6 1 3. e3 (1 3 . tDde4 tDd5) 1 3 . . . tDb5!? (with the idea after 14 . &Dxb5

cxb5 1 5 . &Db3 tDa4 of attacking the weaknesses on the queenside) 14 . �c2 &Dxc3 1 5 . �xc3 �d7 with a good game for Black in view of his pressure on the d3-pawn .

It remains to add that after 1 2 . Ae3 tDxf3+ 1 3 . Axf3 c6 fol lowed by . . . tDd5 Black also has roughly equal chances.

12 . b5 ttid4 13. ttid2

After the exchange of knights White's c3-square would have been weak.

1 3 . . . 'Wc8

The main continuat ion is considered to be 1 3 . . . Ad5 (not 1 3 . . . tDd5? 1 4 . Axd5 Axd5 15 . e3, when Black loses a piece) 14 . tDxd5 tDxd5. The central ised knights ensure Black a good game.

14. e3 ttif5 15. 'Wc2

4

a b c d e f 9 h

a b c d e f 9 h

4

The price of driving away the knight is a weakening of the d3-pawn , which has to be defended . The alternative is 1 5 . �e2 with the idea of attacking Black's centre by f2-f4, but in this case the problems with the defence of the d3-pawn are not rel ieved . For example, the game Sarg issian -Yakovich (Moscow 2009) cont inued 1 5 . . . tDd6 1 6 . tDde4 tDf7 1 7. f!d1 Ag4 1 8 . f3 Ae6 1 9. d4, and here instead of routine play

248

M. Carlsen - V. Kramn i k

against an ' isolan i ' - 19 . . . exd4 20. exd4 �e8, which in general is not bad , 19 . . . �d8!? came into consideration, with the idea of 20. tDc5 Ac4 21 . �e1 tDd5, contro l l ing the central squares.

In Bareev - Sh i rov (Poi kovsky 2006) White preferred 1 6. a4, but this weakens the b4-square, which expands the possibi l it ies of the black bishops. The game continued 1 6 . . . Ag4 (1 6 . . . �d8 is also good, intend ing to answer 1 7. Aa3 with 17 . . . tDe4!?, gain ing the advantage of the two bishops) 1 7. f3 Ae6 1 8 . f4 tDf7 19 . tDb3 Ab4! 20. �c2 (the queen's journey to e2 has proved fru itless) 20 . . . Ah3 with excel lent play for Black.

1 5 . • J ad8 1 6. �b2 a4

Black prepares the surrounding of the b5-pawn and takes control of the b3-square, restricting the manoeuvrabi l ity of the wh ite knights. The drawback to this move is that the a4-pawn may become a target , as in fact happened in the game.

17. �fc1

A logical move; i ntensifying the pressure on the c-fi le is i n the spi rit of the posit ion, and Wh ite is i ntend ing to transfer h is kn ight to c5. After the rout ine 1 7. �fd1 tDd6 both wh ite knights are ' hobbled' by the need to defend the b5-pawn and the b3-square.

17 . . . tDd6 18. tDde4 tDe8

Black not only prevents tDe4-c5, but also defends the c7-pawn, not ru l ing out the poss ib i l ity of retu rn ing to the attack on the b5-pawn.

19. 'We2!

A concrete approach to the posit ion. Magnus transfers his queen to a more comfort-

able post , not only removing the threat of an attack by the bishop, but also preparing f2-f4.

a b c d e

a b c d e f g h

1 9 . . . �f8

The result ing posit ion can be assessed as one of dynam ic equ i l i bri um , wh ich is not easy to unbalance. By making th is wait i ng move, Kram n i k i nvites h i s opponent to do th i s . More active p lay for B lack cou ld have been associated with the preparat ion of . . . f6-f5 - the pivotal idea of the given variat ion. In this respect, cons iderat ion shou ld h ave been g iven to 1 9 . . . Ah3 20. Ah1 ( i f 20. Af3 , then 20 . . . Ae6 is appropriate, emphasising that Wh ite's hopes associated with f2-f4 are i l l usory) 20 . . .f5 2 1 . tDd2 Ag4 22 . �f1 (if 22 . tDf3 , then 22 . . . �e6 with the th reat of . . . e5-e4 is good) 22 . . . e4 23. f3 exf3 24 . tDxf3 �e6 , keeping Wh ite's so-cal led ' l itt le pawn centre' under contro l .

20. f4

There is no other active possib i l ity. The attempt fi rst to regroup the rooks encounters a refutat ion , for example : 20 . �d1 (with the idea of d3-d4) 20 . . . Ag4 21 . f3 Ae6 22. d4 Ab3 or 20. �f1 �d7 21 . �bd1 Ab3 22. �d2 f5.

249


20 . . . exf4

An essential ly forced exchange, conced ing ground in the centre: Black does not want to al low the isolat ion of h is e-pawn and the open ing of the f-fi le for the wh ite rook.

21 . gxf4 'Wd7 22. d4

Persist ing with the �e4-c5 manoeuvre, exchanging the dark-square bishop. The passive 22. gd1 is met by 22 ... Ab3 23. gd2 f5! 24. �g5 �d6 with excel lent play.

a b c d e f 9 h

22 .. . c6

'Th is was more or less the on ly move I considered , as I thought that Black had to do something to prevent b7 from collapsing completely,' Carlsen comments. '22 ... Ac4!? 23. Wf2 Ad3 was actually quite good , but Kramn ik may have decided that there was no reason to start concrete play, since 24. �c5! looked strong during the game. Sti l l , Black is probably f ine here after 24 ... Axc5 25. dxc5 �c4! (25 ... Axb1 26. gxb1 gives White excel lent compensation for the exchange, as Black cannot play 26 ... �c4, due to 27. Ad5+) 26. Axb7 Wg4+ 27. Wg2 Wxg2+ 28. Axg2 gabS.'

23. �cS AxeS 24. dxcS �c4

By l ift i ng h i s contro l of the a4-pawn , Black embarks on a forceful tactical path, which compl icates the defence. The natural 24 ... �d5 suggests itself: 25. �xd5 (25. bxc6 bxc6 26. �xd5 leads to a s imi lar position) 25 ... Axd5 26. e4 We7 27. bxc6 bxc6 28. Af3 Ab3, and by contro l l i ng the d-fi le Black holds the posit ion without any part icular d ifficu lty.

2S. �d1

a b c d e f 9 h

2S . . . 'Wc7 26. Ac1 �as

The consequence of/the i ncaut ious 24 ... �c4. Since Black has to reckon with the exchanges on c6 and d8 with the loss of a pawn , he is forced to return h is knight, defending the more valuable of the pawns. With the loss of the a4-pawn the conversion of the passed pawn is too distant and Black has t ime to activate h is pieces. 26 .. . cxb5? d id not work in view of 27. gxb5 �a5 28. �d5 Wf7 29. �b6, when a pawn is nevertheless lost , and the rook remains out of play.

27. bxc6 bxc6 28. �xa4

'I was very happy to d iscover that th is move does not lose any mater ia l , even though it looks a bit loose. 28. gb4 was another move I considered , but I d id not

250

M. Carlsen V. Kramnik

l i ke 28 .. .tt:lb3 (28 ... Ab3 29. �xd8 �xd8 30. Af1 , and a4 fa l l s without any real compensat ion) 29. tDxa4 tDxc1 30. �xc1 f5 , when Black has some counterp lay. However, Wh ite is probably sti l l a bit better, and I should probably have gone for th is.' (Carlsen) 28 • • J1xd1+

The alternative 28 ... Ab3 29. �xd8 �xd8 30. tDb6 (if 30. tDc3, then 30 ... 'fie? 31. Axc6 Ac4! 32. Wg2 Ad3 and .. .'�xeS is possible) 30 . .. �d1 + 31 . <;!;>f2 We? 32. �xb3 �xc1 33. �d3 would have led to s impl ificat ion, but a l lowed White to activate h is rook. 29. V!Yxd1 lidS 30. V!Yc2 V!Yf7 31 . �c3

By bringing up h is knight to the centre of events, Wh ite not only prevents the rook invasion at d1 , but also coord inates h is forces. I n t ime-trouble one cou ld hard ly expect h im to decide on 31. tDb6. After 31 . . . Ab3!? (if 31 .. . tDb3, then 32. e4 tDd4 33. Wf2 fo l l owed by Ae3 is poss ib le) 32. Ylf!c3 �d1 + 33. <;!;>f2 Ylffh5 34. �xb3 tDxb3 35. Ylftxb3 <;!;>f8 White wou ld have gained a material advantage. However, h is forces are uncoord inated , and it is only possible to defend the bishop by 36. Ylftc4 or 36. Wc2 (36. Ab2? loses to 36 . .. �d2+), but then there fol lows 36 ... Ylf!h4+, when Black picks up the h2-pawn, not leaving the king in peace. 31 .•. V!Yh5?!

An i m p u ls ive m ove, wh ich s ign if icantly comp l icates the defence, whereas the bishop manoeuvre 31 ... Ab3 (wh ich Black must undoubtedly have considered) 32. Ylffe4 Ac4 would have enabled him to hold the position. For example, in the event of 33. �b6 Ylftf8 Black regains the c5-pawn, since 34. Ylfff5 �d3 35. Ab2 �xe3 is not good for White.

32. �e2

a b c d e f g h

8 Il.i) • 8

7 1.1. 7

6 I. .i.l. 6

sl.j) B 'iV 5

4 B 4

3 B B 3

2 � tZJ �B 2

I( � � a b c d e f g h

32 • .. .tf5?

'Perhaps his only real mistake in this game. He could have retained dynamic equality with the amazing 32 ... <;!;>f8!! , with the idea of 33 . . . Ab3,' comments Carlsen. 'The point, which we probably both m issed , is that White cannot play 33. tDd4 because of 33 ... �xd4 34. exd4 Af5, and Black is at least not worse, as 35. Ae4 fai l s to 35 ... Ylffg6+ 36. Ylftg2 Ylf!xg2+!. 32 ... Ag4 33. tDg3 �d1+ 34. Ylftxd1 is probably why he decided to play 32 ... Af5.' However, it should be mentioned that to find the saving computer move 32 ... <;!;>f8!! i n t ime-trouble is practical ly impossible. But the move in the game is also hard to expla i n , s ince after the opponent's obvious reply Black's posit ion is untenable. 33. e4 .tg4 34. �g3 V!Yf7 35 • .tf1 !

In fin ish ing off the opponent, Magus, as always, is accurate. First a technical procedure, shutt ing the knight out of the game. 35 • • • .te6 36. V!Yc3!

And now the rook is driven into the corner. 36 . • • 1Ia8

Otherwise the knight cannot be saved . If 36 ... tDc4 (b7) there would have fol lowed 37. f5.

251


37. �b4 'Wd7 38. t5 At7 39. At4 'Wd1 40. �f2

(see next diagram)

40 . . . ttlb3?

Now Black loses his knight. He should have brought h is queen back.

41 . Ae2 'Wb1 42. Ac4 �xa3 43. ttle2

Black resigned.

a b c d

aJ. 7 • 6 I. 5 � 8

e f g h

� • .i.l.l. I. 8

4 : 8 � 3 8 VJH 2

1

a b c 'iV

d e

tiJ � 8 �

f g h

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1

Carlsen began the year 2010 as the clear rating favourite, now establ ished at the 2810 mark, and after the positive end to the previous year, few doubted h is ambit ions at the super-tournament in Wijk aan Zee (FI DE category 19). And that is what happened. For the fi rst t ime Magnus won the fi rst prize (if you don't count the share of 1st-2nd places in 2008, where on the t ie-break the prize was awarded to Aronian). And the fact that he d id th is i n competit ion with the strongest players in the world , inc lud ing the last two champions Kramn ik and Anand, consol idated h is status as a real contender for the world championsh ip. But in qual ity of play it was as yet premature to talk about Carlsen's total superiority. Especially painful was h is loss to Kramnik , the only player whom he had both beaten and lost to in 2009. However, h is ability to play with full concentration was something that not all h is famous opponents could withstand.

Game 59

S. Karjakin - M. Carlsen Wijk aan Zee 2010

French Defence [C11}

For Carlsen, games with Karjakin have a particular implication. Since their chi ldhood years the chess paths of the two prodig ies have taken the course of a secret rival ry, and they fi rst crossed here i n Wijk aan Zee, where Karjakin was the fi rst to break through to the A tournament and the fi rst to win the main prize. Th is had occurred in the previous year in the presence of Carlsen, who by that t ime had confidently overtaken Karjakin i n the rat ing l ist. How-

ever, in ind ividual meetings in 'classical' chess, neither had won - five draws. In the 1Oth round of the current 'Wijk' the two players arrived with the same number of points, but different moods: the previous day Carlsen had lost with White to Kramn ik , whereas Karjakin had won with Black against Nakamura. 1 . e4 e6 Undoubted ly a surprise for Karjakin - apparently for the fi rst t ime, Carlsen plays the French Defence. But here is his motivation: ' In my younger years I used to consider it at best a second-rate opening. I bel ieve that 1 ... c5 and 1 ... e5! are better choices, but since I desperately wanted to win this

252

S. Karjakin- M. Carlsen

game ( I was trai l ing the leaders Kramn ik and Shirov by a point at th is stage) I decided to try something new.' It can be assumed that Carlsen was fol lowing the path of Rodriguez Vi la , who at the 2009 World Cup in Khanty-Mansiysk used the French Defence to try and save h is m in i -match against Karjaki n , and d rew appropriate conclusions from this experience. 2. d4 d5 3. CC!c3 CC!f6 4. e5 CClfd7 5. f4 c5 6. CClf3 CC!c6 7 • .te3 .te7

I n recent t imes this move has often been employed by one of the last Mohicans of the French Defence, Mikhail Gurevich. The c lassical continuation is 7 ... cxd4 fol lowed by ... �b6. 8. 'Wd2 0-0 9 . .te2 a6 10. 0-0 b5 11 . �h1

a b c d e f g h

8 .1. .i.'ti' .�. 7 �.&.t.••• 6 . "' •

5 ....... 8 4 8 8 3 t2J ittb 2 8 8 8 Wiit 8 8

8 7 6

5 4 3 2

1: : <;i(1 a b c d e f g h

Karjakin decides not to continue with the standard 1 1 . a3 and he d iverges onto a l ittle-studied path, although in the aforementioned game with Rodriguez Vi la he was able to bu i ld up a very dangerous attack on the k i ng: 11 ... �b6 1 2. tbd1 a5 1 3. c3 a4 1 4. tDf2 tba5 1 5. �ad1 Ab7 1 6. Ad3 tbc4 1 7. �e2 tbxe3 1 8. �xe3 b4 1 9. f5 Aa6 20. f6 gxf6 21 . �h6 f5 22. dxc5 �xc5 23. axb4 �b6 24. �h1 f6 25. g4 Axd3 26. tbxd3 fxg4 27. �g1 f5 28. h3 �f7 29. hxg4 f4!. And although White's attack

sufficed on ly for a draw, the competitive objective of qualifying for the second round of the World Cup was fu lf i l led.

The waiting move 1 1 . �h1 retains the option of tba4 if Black carries out the plan of ... b5-b4, ... a6-a5 and ... Ac8-a6, although moving the knight to the edge of the board has its drawbacks and demands additional justification compared with the retreat to d1.

11 . .. 'Wc7

Carlsen also sticks to wait ing tactics, to c larify Wh ite's p lans , not consider ing it necessary to check 11 ... b4 1 2. tba4. Meanwhi le, the game N ijboer- M. Gurevich (Amsterdam 2006) showed that Black has quite good prospects. There fol lowed 1 2 ... cxd4 13 . tbxd4 tbxd4 1 4. Axd4 Ab7 1 5. f5 exf5 1 6. �xf5 Ac6 1 7. b3 Axa4 18. bxa4 tbc5 1 9. �af1 tbe6 20. Aa1 a5, and it was rather White who had problems.

12. a3 .tb7 1 3. laad1 laac8 14. 'We1

Strictly speak ing , a new, although qu ite logical move. White switches his queen to the kingside, but h is formulation of the idea is unsuccessful. Before this the routine 14. dxc5 AxeS 15. tDd4 was played.

14 • • • cxd4 15. CC!xd4 CC!xd4 16 • .txd4 .tc5

a b c d e f g h

8 .i .�. 8

7 .i. 'YJV"' • • • 7 6 . • 6

5 •.t.• 8 5 4 it 8 4 3 /j, t2J 3 2 8 8 it 8 8 2

.SiV.S <;i( 1 a b c d e f g h

253


1 7. 'Wh4?

A surpris ing ly na'ive m ove for such an erud ite grandmaster. Surely White wasn't seriously hoping for an attack on the king? After al l , for this he would need to have at least a pair of m inor pieces aimed at the kingside. In the spirit of the position was 1 7. �f2, from where, in the event of ... f7-f6, the queen retains control over the central dark squares (in part icular d4). True, the loss of t ime on the king move to h1 makes itself felt , and White has no grounds for gain i ng a real advantage. For example: 1 7. �f2 f6 1 8. exf6 �xf6!? (more interesting than 18 ... tDxf6 1 9. AxeS �xeS 20. �xeS �xeS 2 1 . *g1 , after which Black has to forget about any ambitions) and White has to reckon with the threat to his f4-pawn. For example: 1 9. AxeS tDxcS 20. �d4 tDe4!? 2 1 . tDxe4 dxe4 22. c3 �cf8 23. g3 gS! , or 1 9. �e3 �cf8 20. *g1 Axd4 2 1 . �xd4 �b6, i ntending a possible ... tDd7-b8-c6. Apart from 17 ... f6 Black can a lso consider 17 ... tDb6 1 8. Ad3 ( intending f4-fS, which for the moment is p remature - 1 8 . fS?! Axd4 1 9. �xd4 f6! 20. fxe6 fxeS) 1 8 . . . tDc4 1 9. Axc4 (not 1 9 . b3? tDb2!) 1 9 ... Axd4! 20. �xd4 �xc4 with an equal game.

1 7 ... Axd4 1 8. §xd4 f6!

Of course. As is wel l known, in the French Defence there are two standard undermining moves: . . . c7-cS and .. .f7-f6. It now transp i res that there is noth ing for the queen to do on h4.

19. Ad3 h6 20. exf6

Noth ing is g iven by 20. �g4 �b6 2 1 . exf6 tDxf6 22. �d1 eS! , when White cannot play 23. fxeS �xd4 24. Ah7+ tDxh7, since it turns out that his back rank is weak. There only

remains 23. �b4 d4 24. fxeS dxc3 2S. exf6 cxb2 26. �xb2 �xf6 with the better game for Black.

20 . . . §xf6

8

7

a b c d

.1. .t'ii�

e f

6 � �.I. 5 JA1 � 4 l:r 3 12 tij� 2

1 12 12

a b c d e

12

11 f

g h

• 8

.l 7

� 6 5

Wi{ 4

3

1212 2

<i!f1 g h

The simplest , since it becomes clear that White's play has come to a standst i l l . The rook on d4 is bad ly placed , and not only is ... �cf8 threatened, but he also has to reckon with the threat of ... e6-eS. 20 .. . tDxf6 is also possible, eyeing the option of playing the knight to e4. For example: 2 1 . �d1 (21 . �e1 tDe4!?) 21 ... eS 22. fxeS �xeS with the idea of .. . tDe4.

21 . f5

The opening of the position merely increases the activity of the black pieces. But the attempt by White to consol idate his forces by 21 . �g4 �cf8 22. �f3 does not succeed after 22 ... tDb8! with the threat of . . . tDc6. For example: 23. Ag6 Ac8! 24. �g3 tDc6 2S. �d2 tDe7 26. Ad3 �xf4 and Black wins a pawn.

21 ... §cf8

Real is ing that Wh ite is condemned to passive defence, Black calm ly increases the pressure, assuming that w inn ing the exchange by 21 ... eS 22. tDxdS AxdS

254

S. Karjakin - M. Carlsen

23. !!xd5 tDb6 24. '!We4 tDxd5 25. '!Wxd5+ 27 ... Eif1 28. �d4 Eixg1+ 29. �xg1 Eie8 is an insuffic ient return for h is advantage.

22. Eig1 �c5! 23. fxe6 �xe6 24. Eig4

After 24. !!xd5 tDf4 25. !!d4 '!Wc5 or 24. tDxd5 Axd5 25. !!xd5 tDf4 26. !!d4 Yf/c5 White has to g ive up the exchange.

24 . • . �f4 25. Wg3

a b c d e f g h

8 .I tit 8

7 .t. 7

.I .t. 6

5 5

4 �.&:r 4

3 £::, tb� � 3

2 £::,£::, £::,£::, 2

:r � 1

a b c d e f g h

25 . • • We7!

An accurate move. By taking control of the e2-square with the threat of ... d5-d4, Black puts h is opponent in zugzwang. A character ist ic variat ion is g iven by earlsen: 26. h3 d4 27. tDd 1 (27. tDe2 tDxe2 28. Axe2 Ac8 leads to the loss of the exchange) 27 ... Ac8 28. !!e1 Vff/f7 29. !!h4 Ab7 30. !!g1 tDxg2! 31 . !!xg2 !!f3 32. Yf/g4 !!e8, and Wh ite cannot defend aga inst ... !!e1 .

26. Eixf4

White could not find anyth ing better than to g ive up the exchange. But now it is merely a matter of technique.

26 ... Eixf4 27. �e2

27. Vff/g6 !!8f6 28. Vffih7+ 'i!?f7 was hopeless for White.

5

Forc ing the exchange of queens, after which Black can set about convert ing his exchange advantage without any particular problems.

30. h4 We1+ 31. �h2 Wxg3+ 32. �xg3

a b c d e

8 8

7 7

5 5

4 £::, 4

� 3

2 £::, 2

a b c d e f g h

32 . • . �f7!

The techn ique of p laying s imple posit ions is a favourite 'hobby-horse' of Magnus Carlsen. He i s not tempted by the w in of a pawn after the invasion of the rook: 32 ... !!e1 33. 'i!?f4 !!b1 34. b3 !!a1 35. 'i!?e5 !!xa3 36. 'i!?d6, and he prevents any activity by the wh ite king with the support of the blockad ing kn ight on d4 - 33. 'i!?f4 'i!?f6, threatening ... g7-g5.

33. �f2 �f6 34. g3 Ac8 35. c3 A g4 36. Ac2 g5 37. hxg5+ hxg5 38. Ab3

Against the attem pt to stand fi rm with 38. Ad3 Black decides matters by 38 ... !!h8 39. 'i!?g2 Ah5 with the switch ing of the bishop to g6.

38 • .. �e5 39. Ac2 Eif8+ 40. ®g2 Ad7 41. �f3+ �f6 42. Ab3 g4 43. �d4 �e5

(see next diagram)


a b c d e f g h

8 I. 7 .i.

5 • • 4 tiJ • 3 � �� 2 � �

a b c d e f g h

8 7

6 5

4

3

2

The black pieces occupy ideal positions. White is unable to prevent the advance of the b-pawn .

44. Ac2 a5 45. Ad1 c!>e4

White resigned.

After h is victory in Wijk aan Zee the leader of the world rat ing l i st permitted h imself to miss the prest ig ious L inares tournament and to re lax in N ice at the regu lar Amber Tournament of Joop van Oosterom. It stands to reason that here too a complete tri umph was expected of Carlsen. After al l , in 2009 he had been on ly fou rth after Aron ian , Kramn ik and Anand . Magnus was so sure of success , that he perm itted h imself to beg in the tournament with the move 1. a3 in his b l i ndfold game with lvanchuk . I n th is way he so motivated the outstanding Ukrain ian grandmaster, that the latter won both games and developed such a pace, that to catch h im Magnus had to score seven ( ! ) successive wins. He began with a bri l l iant attack, conducted b l i ndfo ld .

L. Aronian - M. Carlsen N ice 2010

a b c d e f g h

8J. 'iV J. .8 7 .i. "' .i. • 7

6 • • '-" • 6 5 . �·· 5 4 t{j·� � � 4

3 � � 3

2 � �ii,fij� � 2

l:iV .: a b c d e f g h

18 ... fxe4! 19. fxe4 cxd5 20. exd5 �exd5! 21 . cxd5 �xd5 22. <!>g1 e4!

'Th is is what Aron ian had missed . Once the bishop joins the attack via e5 or d4, Wh ite's days wil l be numbered , ' Carlsen comments. The fu rther comments also belong to him, and were publ ished in the Russian magazine 64 Shakhmatnoe oboz

renie and also in New in Chess.

23. �xe4 Ad4+ 24. Etf2

'24. �g2 looks very dangerous, but might have been White's best chance, together with Ag5 on the next move: a) 24 ... �h4 was what I had actual ly i ntended, and it does indeed work very wel l after the obvious 25. Ag5 (25. Af3 is the only move

256


that a l lows Wh ite to defend) 25 ... ttie3+ 25. tbxf2? 26. Axe3 Axe4 27. Af3 �xg4+; b) 24 ... �e7! 25. Af3 !!xf3 26. �xf3 ttlf6 27. !!ce1 Axe4 'This move, which my opponent made in-

2S. �xe4 ttlxe4, and Black is a clear pawn up, but there is sti l l p lenty of fight ahead.'

24 ... l!xf2

'When I played th is , I bel ieved that I was winning on the spot, but then I immediately noticed his only defence.'

a b c

ali 71 ..t. 6

5 .t 4 CLJ.t 3 � 21�

d e

.t � ..t.tt:J

1 I :� a b c d e

f g h

�

f g h

stantly, loses trivial ly. Had he taken a bit more time, he would surely have noticed the resource 25. Ag5! , which, surprisingly enough, keeps White in the game. I had intended to play the s imple 25 .. . Ae3. Now, after the more or less forced l ine 26. Axe3 !!g2+ 27. �h1 ttlxe3 2S. �d4+ �gS 29. �xe3 !!xe2 30. �xe2 �e7 Black wil l once again emerge with an extra pawn, but not without some drawing chances for his opponent. 25 ... Af6 is probably best, but l ines l ike 26. ttlxf6 ttle3!! 27. �d4 !!g2+ 2S. �h1 !!xe2+ 29. ttle4+ �gS 30. AxdS lacS!! 31. �xe3 !!xe3 32. !axeS !!xe4! 33. Axa5 AxeS are not that easy to calculate bl indfolded.'

25 .. . Wh4 26. We1 l!fS 27 • .tf3 l!xf3 2S. We4 Wxf2+

White resigned.

Before the last round Carlsen sti l l had real chances of sole victory in the tournament, but in his bl indfold game with Grischuk he left his queen en prise. The result was a share of 1st-2nd places with lvanchuk and an overall score of 14% points from 22 games. The winners also made the same scores in both categories: in the bl indfold they scored 6% points (the same as Kramnik), but in the rapid they were unrival led with S points.

The double-round tournament of six grandmasters in the smal l Romanian town of Bazna (FI DE category 20) received the prefix 'super' thanks to the part ic ipat ion of the leader of the world rat ing l ist Magnus Carlsen and the winner of the World Cup Boris Gelfand. And although the echo of Carlsen's victory by a marg in of two moves (+5 in 10 games!) was in keeping with h is victory in Nanjing, i n the course of the tournament h is superiority did not seem so ind isputable. At a certain moment he could have been chal lenged by Gelfand , i n the game with whom the Norweg ian had to defend by finding virtual ly the only moves. In the fi rst three rounds Carlsen had to be satisfied with draws, but at the critical moment he as though acquired a second wind and won four games in a row. What operated was the phenomenon of Magnus's 'Fischer style' of play, ready to fight unt i l resources are completely exhausted, and winn ing apparently drawn positions. According to Gelfand: 'Carlsen has an incred ibly developed "ki l ler

257


i nstinct": to players who are not i n their best form , he gives no quarter - neither with White, nor with Black.' The impression is such that, under the magic of his powerful play, some players, inc lud ing ones with h igh rat ings, come along to a game as though doomed beforehand.

Game 60

L.-0. Nisipeanu - M. Carlsen Bazna 201 0


1. e4 c5 2. �f3 d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. �xd4 �f6 5. �c3 g6 6. J.e3 J.g7 7. f3 �c6 8. 'Wd2 0-0 9. 0-0-0

The fi rst 'warn i n g be l l ' , i n d i cat i n g the mag ica l effect of Car lsen on h i s opponents. N is i peanu is open ly afraid of Magnus , and he avo ids the cr it ical move 9. Ac4, in wh ich the latter had ga ined several b r i l l iant wins , i n favour of the old cont i nuat ion. After 9. 0-0-0 Wh ite need not fear B lack's counterplay after ... Ad?, ... l::!:c8 and ... &Dc6-a5-c4, s ince h is b ishop can capture the kn ight on c4 not from b3 (to where it retreats after being deve loped at c4), but from f1 , sav ing a whole tempo. But he has to reckon with the attack i n the centre, as occurred in the game.

9 ... d5 10. �b1

The second 'bel l ': N is ipeanu avoids the main continuation 1 0. exd5 &Dxd5 1 1 . &Dxc6 bxc6 , where White wins a pawn i n the variations 1 2. &Dxd5 cxd5 1 3. 'Wxd5 and 1 2. Ad4 e5 1 3. Ac5 l::!:e8 1 4. &Dxd5 cxd5 1 5. 'Wxd5, with active counterplay for Black. The tactical justification of 1 0. �b1 is that 1 0 ... dxe4? is not possib le on account of 1 1 . &Dxc6 Wxd2 12 . &Dxe7+. But Carlsen is also prepared for th is turn of events, as is ind icated by h is 1 3th move.

a b c d e f 9 h

s.!. ..t.'ii' .�.. 7�� .i.� 6 � �� 5

,---} �

4 li:J!j, 3 o/ ib, fj,

fj, fj, fj,'fl fj,fj, 2

8

7 6

5

4

3

2

1 � :g ib, :g 1 a b

10 .. Jab8

c d e f 9 h

N is i peanu was probab ly a1m1ng for 1 0 ... 6Dxd4 1 1 . e5! (an important i nterposit ion) 1 1 ...6Df5 1 2. exf6 exf6 (1 2 ... Axf6 1 3. &Dxd5 'Wxd5! 14 . Wxd5 &Dxe3 1 5. Wd2 &Dxd1 1 6. Wxd1 Ae6 leads to very sharp play, where Black has compensation for the sacrificed queen) 13. Ac5 d4 14. Axf8 Wxf8, being gu ided by the game Short - Carlsen (London 2009), which cont inued 1 5. &Db5 &De3 1 6. l::!:c1 Ah6 1 7. 'Wxd4 &Df5 1 8. Wc3 Axc1 1 9. �xc1 Ad? 20. Ad3l::!:c8 21 . 'Wd2 Axb5 22. Axb5 Wc5 with equal play, where he had most probably prepared a surprise.

But in the Dragon it has already been establ ished that 1 0 . . . l::!:b8 is a usefu l move (an ind ication being the emergence of the 'Ch inese Dragon' in the variation 9. Ac4 Ad? 1 0. 0-0-0 l::!:b8), after which it is unfavourable for White to capture &Dxc6, and at the same t ime he has to reckon with the threat of ... e7-e5. The tactical justification of the rook development at b8 is reinforced

58

L.-D. Nisipeanu- M. Carlsen ctJ ----------------------�

Not 1 4 ... tDd7? 1 5. exd5 exd5 1 6. tDxdS tDxa7 1 7. Axa7 f!a8 1 8. Af2 with an overwhelming advantage for White.

by the fact that 1 1 . Af4? is unfavourable, as there fol lows 1 1 ... e5! 1 2. tDxc6 bxc6 1 3. Axe5 tDxe4 14. �d4 c5! 1 5. �xe4 dxe4 1 6. f!xd8 AxeS 1 7. f!xf8+ �xf8 18. �c1 exf3 1 9. gxf3, and White has a strateg ically

15· Af2?!

lost position. The impression is that Carlsen has outwit

11 . tildb5

The most popular move - White plays h is knight to a7 with the idea of exchang ing the bishop on c8. After the retreat 1 1 . tDb3 Black can go into an endgame- 1 1 ... dxe4 1 2. �xd8 f!xd8 1 3. f!xd8+ CDxd8 1 4. Axa7 f!a8 15. Ab6 Af5= (L. Mi lov- Ovsejevitsch , N ikolaev 1 995).

11 .. • a6 1 2. tila7 e6 13. g4

N oth ing i s g iven by the s i m p l i fy i n g 1 3. exd5 exd5 1 4. tDxc8 f!xc8 1 5. tDxdS tDxdS 1 6. �xdS �xdS 1 7. f!xd5 tDb4 1 8. f!cS (or 1 8. f!d2 f!fe8 with the idea of 1 9. Af2 Ah6!) 18 ... f!ce8! 1 9. Ad2 f!d8 with equal chances (Sjugi rov - Narayanan , Kir ish i 2006).

13 .• Jae8!

Black prepares for the opening of the position after the capture on dS.

14. g5 tilh5

8

5

4

3

8

4

3

B 2 g 1

a b c d e f g h

ted his opponent, and it has to be admitted that the knight raid to a7 has proved ineffective. If 1 5. tDxc8 White has to reckon with 15 ... d4! , whi le i n the event of 1 5. exd5 exd5 1 6. tDxdS Ae6 1 7. c4 tDeS the knight cannot escape from a7, and he is forced to return the pawn by 1 7. tDxc6 bxc6 1 8. tDf6+, transposing into an inferior endgame. But after the move in the game White is unable to exchange his knight, which 1 5. Ac5 wou ld perm it, preventing 1 5 ... Ad7? because of 1 6. exd5 exd5 1 7. tDxdS! with the threat of 1 8. tDxc6 bxc6 1 9. tDe7+. Better here is 1 5 ... �a5 1 6. �e3 with the alternative of sacrificing a pawn - 1 6 ... d4 17. tDxc6 �xc5 1 8. tDxd4, obtain ing a powerfu l darksquare bishop as compensat ion, or going into a roughly equal endgame - 1 6 ... Axc3 1 7. �xc3 �xc3 1 8. bxc3.

15 • • • Ad7!

The loss of a pawn is of no s ign ificance, since the knight on a7 is not even a notorious 'Tarrasch knight' , but rather a 'donkey' in a trap.

16. exd5 exd5 1 7. 'Wxd5

After 1 7. tDxdS Ae6! Black has more than sufficient compensation for the pawn. For example , White cannot p lay 1 8. tDxc6? bxc6 1 9. tDf6+ tDxf6 20. gxf6 �xf6, when without loss of material be is u nable to withstand the massed attack of the black p ieces. But possib ly he al ready had no choice other than to go 'fish ing in troubled waters', by playing 1 8. c4 tDeS.

259


1 7 ... tbe5 l:!bd8) 2 1 . 'Wc1 c'llc4, with c lear and easy p lay for Black.

The trap has operated - the knight is out f f

18 ... 'Wxg5 19. tbe4 'Wf4 o play or ever.

8

a b

X 7 QJ I. 6 I. 5

4

3 Qj 2� ��

�

�I.&

M a b c d e

18. Wb3?

8

6

4

� 3

Ji � 2 Ji M 1

f g h

W h ite g i ves u p h i s g 5 - pawn , w h i c h c o u l d h ave b e e n d efended: 1 8. Ae3 'We? 1 9. Ae2 (or 1 9. f4? Ae6 20. 'Wa5 c'llg4 and Wh ite loses after 2 1 . Ac5 b6 22. Axe? bxa5 , wh ile after 2 1 . Ab6 the p lac ing of his p ieces looks strange, to say the least: Black can cont inue either 2 1 ... Axc3 or 2 1 ... Af5 with the th reats of ... c'llxf4 and ... Axc3) 19 ... Ae6 20. 'Wd2 l:!bd8 (20 ... c'llc4 21. Axc4 Axc4 22. c'lle4

The outcome is decided, s ince Black is effectively playing with an extra piece.

20 . .te2 .te6 21 . Wa3 tbc4 22 . .txc4 J.xc4 23. tbd6 .tf8 24. fld4 We5 25. f!xc4 .txd6 26. Wd3 .tf8 27. a4 I:Ibd8 28. Wb3 'Wd5 29. I:Ic3 Wd2 30. Ae3 We2

8

a b

7 QJI. 6 I. 5

c d e f g h

3

� 2 M 1

a b c d e f g h

31 . .tb6?

and White res igned, without wait ing for 31 ... l:!d1 + 32. l:!xd1 'Wxd1 + 33. �a2 l:!e1 .

I n the fol lowing game it was a top-class player who fel l under the magic of Carlsen's i nfal l ib i l ity. After obtain ing an almost winn ing position , at a crit ical moment Ruslan Ponomariov took Carlsen 'at h is word ', was frightened by some i l lusory threats, and in the end he lost.

260

R. Ponomariov- M. Carlsen

Game 61

R. Ponomariov - M. Carlsen Bazna 201 0

King's Indian Defence [ E81]

1 . d4 t'Of6 2. c4 g6 3. t'Oc3 b.g7

I n recent t imes, poss ib ly under the i nfl uence of Garry Kasparov, the King's Ind ian Defence has appeared in Carlsen's reperto i re . But his cho ice of it at a decis ive stage of the tournament, in the game with Ponomariov, apparently took account of the variat ion employed by Ruslan against Radjabov at the start of the tournament.

4. e4 d6 5. f3 0-0 6. t'Oge2

It was this move, employed by Ponomariov against Radjabov, the leading King's Ind ian player of modern t imes (the classical cont inuation is 6. Ae3), that drew Magnus's attention in preparing a new line of play.

a b c d e f 9 h

8 .!. 1.1\ .i.. 'iiV .!. • 8

7.\.l .l.l.i...\ 7 6 �· 6

5 5

4 888 4

3 � 8 3

288 CD 88 2 1 .: .!,��.!, .: 1

a b c d e f 9 h

6 • • • t'Obd7

Radjabov played 6 .. . e5?!, and after 7 Ag5! he experienced some d ifficu lt ies. Therefore Carlsen develops h is knight, reducing the potential of 7. Ag5. But it should be ment ioned that, when White delays the development of h is b ishop, Black most

often responds with an immed iate flank attack - 6 ... c5.

7. b.e3 c5

Here is the surprise. It transp i res that Carlsen is not even contemplating ... e7-e5 and he prefers to transpose into a Modern Benon i structure, where the bishop at e3 is not on its best square.

8. d5 fOeS 9. t'Og3 h5

The play is based on nuances. Black hurries to drive the knight to f1 , as White cannot prevent the advance of the pawn by 1 0. h4, since in this case, because of the weakness of the g4-square, he wi l l never be able to carry out the thematic f3-f4. After 9 ... e6 1 0. Ae2 exd5 1 1 . cxd5 a6 1 2. a4, a natural move order for the Modern Benon i , 12 ... h5 proves ineffective, since after 1 3. 0-0 h4 14 . tDh1 the knight switches to the excellent post f2 , from where it forestalls Black's threats on the kingside.

10. b.e2 h4 11 . t'Of1 e6 1 2. t'Od2

1 2 . f4 suggests itself, but then Black is not obl iged to retreat , s ince after 1 2 . . . tDeg4 1 3. Axg4 tDxg4 1 4. �xg4 exd5 1 5. f5 d4 he regains the piece, obtain ing good play.

12 • • . exd5 13. cxd5

6

5

4

3

8

7 6

5

.l 4

3

a b c d e f 9 h

61


13 .. . Ad7

At fi rst sight this is a transposition of moves compared with 1 3 ... a6 1 4. a4 Ad7 1 5. 0-0 b5, which has been played in numerous games. The best known of these, Vyzhmanavin -J. Polgar (Gron ingen 1 994), continued 1 6. axb5 axb5 1 7.l::!xa8 �xa8 1 8. h3?! c4 1 9. �e1 (1 9. f4 tbd3 20. Axd3 cxd3 21. b4 �a3 is advantageous to Black) 19 ... b4 20. tDd1 �a2! 2 1 . �xh4 Aa4 22. f4 tDd3 with good play for Black. But, of course, 1 8. Axb5 Axb5 1 9. tbxb5 �a6 20. tbc3

l::!b8 is more crit ical , with compensation for the pawn typical of such structures (Psakh is- Piket , Amsterdam 1 990), or immediately 1 7. Axb5 Axb5 1 8. tbxb5 l::!b8.

Peter Heine N ielsen recommends 1 3 . .. h3!? with the idea after 1 4. g4?! of sacrificing the bishop by 14 ... Axg4 1 5. fxg4 tDfxg4 1 6. Af4 Ah6 1 7. AxeS tbxe5 with excel lent compensation in the form of complete control of the dark squares. Therefore 1 3 ... h3 should be answered by 14 g3.

14. 0-0 b5

This is the idea of 1 3 ... Ad7, but after the next few moves one gains the impression that the prepared l ine is not too successful. But there are no sensible alternatives. If 14 ... a6, with the idea after 1 5. a4 b5 of transposing into the fami l iar posit ion, Wh ite can play 1 5. h3! with the threat of f3-f4. It is too late for 1 4 . . . h3 1 5. g4 a6 in view of the unpleasant 1 6. g5! fol lowed by f3-f4, and therefore strong measures are necessary.

15. �xb5 Axb5

If 1 5 . . . �b6 Wh ite rep l ies with the typical manoeuvre 1 6. tba3 �xb2 1 7. tbc4, obtain ing a serious posit ional advantage. 1 5 . . . �e7 came into considerat ion, defend-

ing the d6-pawn, and then attacking the knight with . .. l::!ab8.

16. Axb5 :Sb8 17. a4

a b c d e f g h

1 7 . • . �h5

I n princ ip le , a dubious sort ie , removing Black's control of the g4-square - after a l l , Wh ite wi l l not a l low the kn ight to go to f4. But Carlsen was undoubted ly looking further ahead. I n the event of 1 7 ... h3 1 8. g4 (1 8. gxh3 �c8) 1 8 ... a6 1 9. Axa6

l::!xb2 20. l::!b1 White exchanges the active rook and Black has no compensation for the extra passed pawn. The compensation for the sacrificed pawn is also insufficient after 17 ... �a5 1 8. �e2 (or 1 8. �c2 a6 1 9. Ae2l::!b4 20. b3) 1 8 ... a6 1 9. tbc4 ttlxc4 20. Axc4 tbd7 21 . l::!fb1 . It would appear that Carlsen recognises how d ifficu lt his position is , and he openly bluffs, calmly staking everything.

18. f4!

After this move White has an obvious advantage, but al l the mi racles l ie ahead.

18 •.. �d7 19. 'Wg4 a6! 20. Axa6

After 20. Axd7 tDf6 2 1 . �xh4 tbxd7 22. �xd8 l::!fxd8 Black regains one of the

Q62

R. Ponomariov- M. Carlsen ---------------------- ----------�========

sacrificed pawns (23. �c4 �b6 24. �a5 .§e8), retain ing qu ite good compensation for the other one. Ponomariov prefers to have a passed pawn.

20 ... laxb2 21 . laab1 I

Aiming for the exchange of the active rook. But Carlsen carries out h is plan of an attack on the king, begun with his 1 7th move.

21 • . • laxd2!

Everything else is hopeless!

22. Axd2 Ad4+

a b c d e f g h

8 'iV .!e 7 1.&\ • 6 Ji • • 5 ·� 1.&\ 4� .i.��· 3

2

g a b c

23. laf2?

iL

d e

�� g �

f g h

8

7

6

5

4 3

2

The b l uff works! Pon o mariov, tak i ng Mag nus at h i s word , b locked w i th his rook a lmost without th ink ing . Of course, commenting on the game on the I nternet, and especia l ly in the qu ite of one's study, one can consu lt with Rybka and in a few m inutes obtai n an answer regard ing the safety of 23. �h1 �df6 . It is another matter to take such a decis ion at the board. Ponomar iov obv ious ly i m agined there were th reats i nvo lv ing kn ight leaps to g3, when his king wou ld come under a cross-fi re not only on the a7-g1 d iagonal , but a lso the h -fi l e. These th reats were

by no means ephemeral , for example , i n the variat ion 24. �xh4 �xe4 25. �xd8 .§xd8 26. Ae1 ? �g3+! 27. hxg3 �g7 etc. But is it so s imple , when short of t ime, to fi nd a l l the nuances in the defence of the king? Apart from 24. �xh4 Wh ite also has to calcu late 24. �f3 �g3+ 25. hxg3 hxg3 and fi nd a series of exact moves: 26. Ae1 ! , with the calcu lat ion branches 26 ... �g7!? 27. Axg3 .§h8+ 28. Ah2 �xe4 29 . .§b8! and 26 ... �xe4!? 27. Axg3 �xg3+ 28. �xg3 �g7 29 . .§f2!. Such resources, inc idental ly, a l ready on the 7th move of the calcu lat ion (beg inn ing with 23. �h1 ) are not easy to d iscover. But now the advantage passes to Black .

23 ... Axf2+ 24. �xf2 �df6 25. Y«f3 We8!

The e4- and a4-pawns are under attack . Which of them should be defended?

a b c d e f g h

8 'i¥.1. 8

7 • 7

6 Ji '-' • 6

5 1.&\ 5

4 � • 4 3 3

a b c d e f g h

26. e5

Ponomariov takes the more energetic decision. In the event of 26. Ad3 �xa4 27 . .§c1 �d4+ 28. �f1 .§e8 29. Ac3 �xe4 30. Axd4 �xd2+ 31 . �f2 �xf3 32. �xf3 cxd4 White sti l l has problems. 26. Ab5 ti:)xe4+ 27. �e3! �xd2+ 28. �xd2 is stronger, with a defensible position.

263


26 ... 'Wxa4 27. exf6?

This is the consequence of the psychological shock, fol lowing the loss of a certain advantage. After the straightforward 27. Ab5 &De4+ 28. �e1 &Dxd2 29. Axa4 &Dxf3+ 30. gxf3 &Dxf4 31 . exd6 �d8 32. d7 &Dxd5 33. �c1 White could have hoped to save the endgame.

27 . . . 'Wxa6 28. Ac3 'Wc8?

Carlsen too has to pay for his past experience. He intends to switch his queen to f5 , whereas the game wou ld have been quickly conc luded by 28 ... �c4 with an attack not only on the d5- and f4-pawns, but also indirectly on the f6-pawn (29. f5 &Dxf6! 30. Axf6 �C2+).

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

a b c

�

d e f g h

.. . I. �·

'.& � I. 'if ��

a b c d e f g h

29. �g1?

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

Ponomariov misses a chance opportunity to exchange the queens, making it harder for Black to convert his advantage: 29. f5! �xf5 30. �xf5 gxf5 31 . �b6! �d8 32. �f3. And since if 32 ... �h7 there is the strong reply 33 Ae1 ! h3 34 gxh3 �g6 35 Ag3!, Black wou ld have had to find 32 ... �a8! with winning chances (variation by Nielsen).

29 ... 'Wf5

Now, despite the material equality, White's position is strategical ly hopeless.

30. l:!f1 l:!e8 31 . Aa1 l:!a8 32. 'We3 �h7 33. Ab2 Iib8 34. Ac1 Iib1

By placing his rook on its optimum square, Black has put White in zugzwang. The d5-and f6-pawns cannot be simu ltaneously defended.

35. 'We8 Wxd5 36. f5 gxf5 37. 'We3

a b c d e f g h

8 8

7 I. • 7

6 � 6

5 I. '.& 5

4 I. 4

3 3

2 � � 2

.1 � :g� a b c d e f g h

37 ... Wd4

37 ... f4 was more forceful: 38. �f2 (38. �h3 �d4+ 39. �h1 �xf6) 38 ... �g6 39. �xh4 �d4+ 40. �f2 �xf2 41 . �xf2 d5. However, the passed d-pawn also guarantees a win. Carlsen's subsequent technique is impeccable.

38. 'Wxd4 cxd4 39. Ag5 l:!xf1+ 40. �xf1 h3 41 . gxh3 �g6 42. Ah4 <tlf4 43. Ag3 �g5 44. Af2 <tle6 45. �e2 f4 46. �f3 d3 47. h4+ �f5 48. Ab6 <tics 49. h5 d2 50. �e2 <tle4

White resigned.

264

M. Carlsen - E. Bacrot

I n Ju ly 201 0 Mag nus su rpr ised the chess world by beg i n n i n g an 'alternat ive career' - with h i s rugged good looks he became a fash ion model fo r the fi rm G -Star Raw. A few weeks later he took part in the Raw Wor ld Chess Cha l lenge in N ew York, with over 40 ,000 opponents vot ing on l i ne for the best move out of those selected by an e l ite g randmaster pane l , and Garry Kasparov among the commentary team. Whether th is was a l l prov ing a d istract ion i s not c lear, but i n Car lsen's next event , the Arct ic Secur i t ies Chess Stars , a rap id -p lay event of fou r p layers he ld in h i s home cou ntry and organ ised by the fi rm wh ich was now sponsor ing h i m , he i n it ia l ly had to p lay second f idd le to V ishy Anand. The wor ld champion dominated the a l l -p lay-a l l sect ion by scori ng 5/6 as opposed to Car lsen's 31/2, but the format prov ided for a two-game p lay-off between the top two, and here Car lsen preva i led 1 %-1/2.

Carlsen opted to lead the Norweg ian team at the 39th Olympiad , he ld i n the remote S iber ian town of Khanty- Mansiysk, although he must have known that he wou ld main ly be fac ing lower-rated p layers and i n danger of los ing rat ing poi nts. Wh ich is what in fact happened, as he suffered as many as th ree defeats with Black, i nc lud ing one to Michael Adams after ventu r ing the experi mental 'North Sea Defence' 1 . e4 g6 2. d4 tDf6 3 . e5 tDh5. Then i n the Grand Slam Masters i n B i lbao (F I DE category 22!) , he fi n ished th i rd beh ind Kramn i k and Anand in th is four-p layer doub le- round event , his on ly win coming at the expense of the bottom-p laced Alexey Sh i rov.

Talk of a crisis in Carlsen's play was d ispel led by h is fine victory in the th ird Pearl Spring tournament in Nanjing (FI DE category 21 ) . Facing five 2700+ grandmasters, inc lud ing world champion Vishy Anand and former F IDE champion Vesel in Topalov, Carlsen went through the ten rounds undefeated and with 7/1 0 fin ished a point ahead of the 2nd-placed Anand. An incis ive attack against Etienne Bacrot made a part icu larly pleasing impression.

Game 62 M. Carlsen - E. Bacrot

Nanjing 201 0 Scotch Game [ C45]

1. e4 e5 2. �f3 �c6 3. d4 exd4 4. �xd4 Ac5 5. �b3

as innocuous as it doesn't pose Black any part icular problems.

5 ... Ab6 6. �c3

Carlsen played 6. Y!fe2 in four games at the World Bl itz Championsh ip in November, but i n a 'real game' he prefers someth ing

Kasparov tended to favou r 5. Ae3 or more mainstream ... 5. tbxc6, but his protege prefers this sl ightly quieter treatment. Some would describe it 6 ... �f6

265


a b c d e I g h

a .I .t'ii'• .I a

7AAAA AAA 7

6 .tl.a\ 1.1\ 6

5 5

4 � ]= 4 3 Qjt[j 3

2� �� 2 1 ,S ib��ib .s 1

a b c d e I g h

7. Y«e2!?

... or does he? This seems to have been fi rst played by the 1 1 -year-old Sergey Karjakin, and not very successfu l ly at that. To date it has not had a good track record in terms of resu lts scored. Added to his dubious open ing experiments at the Olympiad, further questions might have been asked of Carlsen's state of mind had this game gone awry, but this proves to be one of h is more inspired ideas.

7 ... 0-0

The sol id 7 . . . d6 has scored wel l for Black, with 8. Ag5 h6 9. Ah4 and now 9 .. . g5 being a possib i l ity, as Black has yet to castle kingside.

8 • .tgs h6 9. Ah4

9. h4?! d6 1 0. f3? hxg5 1 1 . hxg5 tbg4! (anything else and White wi l l p lay f4 fol lowed by '11Vh5) 1 2. fxg4 'Wxg5 1 3. '11Vf3 Axg4 and Black al ready had a winning position in the game Rublevsky-Anand, Bastia Rapidplay 2004.

9 .•• a5 10. a4 ttld4 1 1 . Y«d3!

Carlsen's judgement, that the forthcoming

weakening than on the c-fi le (after 11. tbxd4 Axd4 and 1 2 ... Axc3) proves to be spot on .

11 • .. ttlxb3 1 2. cxb3 9:e8 13. 0-0-0

a b c d e I g h

a .I .t'i¥.1 • a

7 AAA AA 7

6 .t 1.1\ A 6

5 A 5

4 � � ib 4 3 �QJW/ 3

2 � �� 2 �.s ib .s 1

a b c d e I g h

White s igna l led h i s i ntent ion to castle queenside as soon as he played 7. 'We2. His pressure along the d-fi le and the h4-d8 d iagonal compensate for the structural weakness of his queenside.

13 .. • d6 14. Y«c2 Ad7?!

14 ... c61ooks more natural, depriving White of the use of b5 and d5 for his minor pieces.

15. Ac4 Ae6

Moving th is piece twice along the same d iagonal gives the impression that Bacrot is unsure of h imself. Perhaps he intended 1 5 ... Ac6 but then feared an imminent gpawn advance by Wh ite. Whatever his th i nki ng, we can adapt an o ld proverb and conclude that 'he who hesitates (when playing Black against Carlsen) is lost '.

16. 9:he1

1 6 . e5? wou ld cost Wh ite a pawn after 1 6 ... Axc4 and a capture on e5, but now the e-pawn advance becomes a real threat.

doubled pawns on the b-fi le wi l l be less 16 ... Y«e7

266

M. Carlsen- E. Bacrot

Black's opt ion was to be brave and try 1 6 ... g5 to drive away the annoying bishop, but the result ing weakness of his kingside would be a problem.

a b c

a !. d e

I. f g h

• 7 .t..\ 'iV.t..t. 6 .i. ... .�.� ... 5 ... 4 [j, iL [j, iL 3 [j,{jj 2 [j,� [j,[j,[j, 1 �:;g:;g

a b c d e f g h

17. e5! dxe5 18. §:xe5 Y«f8

a

7

6

5

4

3

2

1

This al lows a weakening of Black's kingside, but it may be the best of a bad job. 18 ... c6 would prevent the deadly threat of tDd5, but 1 9. tDe4 is sti l l very strong; 1 8 . . . g5 is sti l l a possib i l ity, but with the same drawbacks as before.

19 . .txf6 gxf6 20. §:e2 Wg7 21. J.xe6 a:xe6 22. §:xe6 fxe6 23. §:d3 �h8 24. a:g3 Wh7 25. Wd2

a b

a !. 7 ... 6 .i. 5 ... 4 [j,

c d e

3 [j,{jj 2 [j, �

�

f g h

• 'iV ...

:;g [j,[j,[j,

a b c d e f g h

a

7

6

5

4

3

2

advantage. Black's queen is overworked trying to defend the vulnerable king and he now tries to get h is poorly-placed bishop back into the game.

25 . • . .tc5 26. �e4 .te7 27. §:h3! �g7?

Of course, not 27 ... Wxe4? when 28. Wxh6+ soon leads to mate, but the text move also has a tactical flaw. 27 ... l::!.d8 28. l::!.xh6l::!.xd2 29. l::!.xh7+ �xh7 30. tDxd2 is better, but it leaves White a pawn up in a probably w inn ing endgame. 27 . .. �g8 28. Wf4 f5 29. l::!.xh6 Wg7 30. l::!.h3 also costs Black a pawn.

28. 'Wd7! �f7

28 . . . Wxe4 l oses to 29. Wxe7+ �g6 30. l::!.g3+ �f5 31. Wh7+ �e5 32. l::!.e3 etc.

a b c d e f g h

7

6

5 ... 4 [j, 3 [j, 2 [j,

� a b c d e f g h

29. �g5+!

8

5

4

Computers points out that 29. tDxf6! is s imi larly lethal.

29 ... fxg5 30. §:f3+ �g8 31. Wxe6+ �h8 32. §:f7 .td6

If the queen flees with 32 . . . Wd3, then 33. Wxh6+ and mate next move.

With a series of straightforward moves 33. §:xh7+ �xh7 34. Y«f7+ �h8 35. g3 White has establ ished a clear posit ional a:a6

267


35 ... f!f8 36. 'Wg6 .§xf2 37. 'Wxh6+ �g8 36. �b1 .lb4 37. f4 gxf4 38. gxf4 38. 'Wxg5+ and the k ingside pawns wi l l decide. Black resigned.

The next el ite event - the Tal Memorial Tournament in Moscow - came too soon for the Nanjing contestants to take part , but Carlsen travel led to the Russian capital for the World Bl itz Championship which fol lowed immediately afterwards. After his stunn ing victory the previous year, Carlsen was the clear favourite, especial ly as the players from the Tal Memorial had enjoyed just one day's rest before the start of the 20-player double-round bl itz event. But Leven Aronian, one of the joint winners of the Tal Memorial , overcame his fat igue to score a deserved win , and Carlsen , who lost as many as ten games, had to be content with th ird place. However, Magnus was del ighted to be presented with the 2009 Chess 'Oscar', the resu lt of a vote organ ised by the Russian chess magazine 64.

Around th is t ime Carlsen shocked and disappointed the chess world by announcing that he was withdrawing from the world championship Cand idates matches, due to be held in the spring of 201 1 . The reasons he gave were the changes made during the cycle, and the fact that he considered the current system to be insuffic iently 'modern and fair '. There was speculation that advice from his former mentor Garry Kasparov was beh ind the decision , but the ex-world champion flatly denied th is.

I n the second London Chess Classic, held in December 201 0, i n it ial ly it seemed un l ikely that Carlsen would repeat his success of the previous year: a surprise loss in the fi rst round to Luke McShane was fol lowed by another in round 3 against Vishy Anand. And yet, with the aid of his fight ing spir it , a miraculous endgame save against Vlad imi r Kramnik i n the penult imate round, and also the 'football' scoring system (3 points for a win , 1 for a draw) Carlsen nevertheless emerged the winner.

I n January 201 1 , as usual most of the world 's top p layers l i ned u p i n the Tata Steel tournament in Wijk aan Zee. Carlsen made a hesitant start: two draws were fo l lowed by a sensat ional loss to the 1 6-year-old Anish G i ri - it must have been a novel experience for the Norweg ian to lose to a player so much younger than h imself. Things improved , and a sacrific ia l attack in the 8th round against the leader Nakamura brought Carlsen r ight back i nto contention. But th is was fo l lowed two rounds later by a bad loss against lan Nepomniachtch i , and in the end Carlsen had to settle for a share of th i rd p lace, beh ind Nakamura, who ach ieved the best result of h is career, and the world champion Anand .

268

M. Carlsen- H. Nakamura

-=Ga=me 63

M. Carlsen- H. Nakamura

Wijk aan Zee 201 1

Sicilian Defence [892}

1. e4 c5 2. tilf3 d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. tilxd4 tilf6 5. tilc3 a6 6. �e2 e5 7. t"ilb3 �e7 8. �e3 0-0 9. g4

a b c d e t g h

8 I. 1.&\ .i. iY I. • 8

7 .i. • • • 7 1.&\ 6

5 • 5 4 � � 4 3 tiJtiJ Jt 3 2�� Jt� � 2 1 .a. �� .a. 1

a b c d e f g h

An unusual twist, with the aim of catching the opponent off-balance. Normally White quietly castles k ingside in th is posit ion , whereas i f he wants to castle queenside he prepares it with f2-f3 (rather than Ae2).

9 ... �e6 10. g5 tilfd7 11. h4

This position has occurred in very few toplevel games. An alternative for Black is to advance his a-pawn, with the aim of inducing the weaken ing a2-a4. For example , the game Khal ifman - Gelfand (Las Vegas 1 999) went 1 1 . �d2 aS 1 2. a4 tilc6 1 3. f4 fS with double-edged play.

11 ... tilb6 12. Wd2 til8d7 13. f4 exf4 14. �xf4 tile5 15. 0-0-0 lacS 16. t,!;>b1

The outcome is a fair ly standard type of posit ion from the Engl ish Attack, where White has advanced h is pawn to f4 in one go, but h is bishop may not be best placed on e2.

a b c d e f g h

8 .Iii .�.. 8

7 • .i. • • • 7 6 .I.&\ • .i. 6

5 J!a\ � 5 4 �Jt � 4 3 tiJtiJ 3 2 ��V/�Jt 2

� .a. .a. 1 a b c d e f g h

16 ... Wc7 17. h5 Elfe8 18. t,!;>a1

A prophylactic move, aimed against a possible knight check on a3 after the immediate 1 8. tild4 tilbc4 1 9. �e1 �b6 20. Ac1 tila3+ 2 1 . �a1 �xd4 or 21 . .. tilc6.

18 ... �f8 19. tild4

a b c d e f g h

8 I. l..i.9> 8

7 .ii • • • 7 6 .I.&\ • .i. 6

5 1.&\ ��5 4 tiJ�Jt 4 3 tiJ 3 2 ��V/�Jt 2 1 � .a. .a. 1

a b c d e f g h

19 ... Wc5?

Black is evidently aiming to bring his queen to an attacking position at b4 or aS , but this real ly is too slow. After the game Nakamu ra suggested 1 9 ... g6 , the log ical consequence of h is preced ing p lay, but then White can cont inue 20. hxg6 hxg6 21 . tilxe6 l;!.xe6 22. Ae3, the point being that 22 ... tilbc4 23. Axc4 tilxc4 a l lows

69


24. Ad4! (or 24. '1Wh2 Ag7 25. Ad4). However, the immediate 1 9 ... tbec4 1ooks quite adequate for Black.

20. g6 �ec4 21. Axc4 �xc4 22. 'Wd3

White has to keep h is kn ight on c3 protected in the event of ... tbxb2.

22 . . . fxg6 23. hxg6 h6 24. Wg3 Wb6 25. Ac1 Wa5

After this White has to counter the threat of Black capturing on b2 and then on c3, fol lowed by mate on a2. After some twenty minutes' thought Carlsen found a good reply.

26. l::idf1 �e5

a b c d e f g h

8 .!. • 8

7 .l 7

5

4

3

29. Axh6! gxh6

�· 6 5

4

3

2

If 29 . . . '1Wxd4 White gives mate with 30. Ae3 fol lowed by 31 . �h8+.

30. g7 Ae7

30 . .. Axg7 loses immediately to 31 . tbf5 If now 26 .. . tbxb2, then White's rook on d1 �c? 32. tbxh6+ fol lowed by 33. tbg4+ or is no longer attacked , and after 27. tbxe6 r....

�xc3 28. Wf4 he is the one who forces mate.

27. �d5 Axd5 28. exd5 Wxd5

After th is White's attack crashes through.

33. <uf7+.

31. §xh6 �f7 32. Wg6 �xh6 33. Wxh6 At6 34. Wh8+ rJ;Jt7 35. g8W+ i::ixg8 36. Wxf6+ rJ;Jea 37. l::ie1+

Black resigned.

For the past two decades years the Melody Amber tou rnament , with its generous sponsorsh i p by Joop van Oosterom and its u n ique format of b l i ndfo ld and rap id chess, has been one of the h i g h l i g hts of the e l ite chess ca lendar. Sadly, i t was annou nced that the 20th event , he ld in Monaco in March 201 1 , was to be the last . As usua l , a tru ly ste l l ar l i ne -up had been i nvited. Car lsen made the same score as the prev ious year when he f i n ished equal f i rst - 1 4% out of 22, i nc ludi ng a phenomena l 9% out of 1 1 i n the rap id games! - but th is t ime it was good enough on ly for second p lace beh i nd the i nsp i red Levon Aron ian , who fi n i shed a fu l l po int ahead.

With no Linares tournament in 201 1 , and with Carlsen not taking part in the Candidates matches, he had a lengthy break between Monaco and his next tournament in Romania in June. Meanwhi le the Candidates matches went ahead in Kazan and produced a deserved but unexpected winner, Boris Gelfand. But there was also a

storm of crit ic ism, as only three of the th irty main games produced a decisive result,

270

M. Carlsen - L.-0. Nisipeanu

there was a spate of short draws, and four of the matches were decided in rapid or even bl itz games. The feel ing was that Carlsen's principled stand against the current worlp championsh ip format had been justified.

After a ten-week break Carlsen was g lad to be back in act ion in Romania at the 5th K ings Tournament , a s ix-p layer doub le-round event (F I DE category 2 1 ) , he ld th is year i n Med ias. He began with an inc is ive win over the Wijk aan Zee v ictor Nakamura , and after smooth ly overcoming N isi peanu after an i nnocuous- look ing open ing he led at the half-way stage with 3%/5 . H is on ly rea l r iva l was Sergey Karjaki n , who d rew level i n the penu l t imate round with a crush ing 22-move win over the u nderperform ing Vasi ly lvanchuk. The stage seemed set for a grandstand fi n ish , with the two p layers pai red together in the last round. But Magnus had one of those days that he wou ld ' l i ke to forget ' , and i n the end, despite p lay ing Wh ite, he was rel i eved to d raw and share fi rst p lace with his opponent on 6% out of 1 0 , two points ahead of the rest of the fie ld. Carlsen was p laced fi rst on the t ie-break, and his resu l t was good enough to rega in h i m the No. 1 spot in the world rat ing l i st , pub l ished on 1 July 201 1 .

Game 64 M. Carlsen- L.-0. Nisipeanu

Medias 201 1 Queen's Gambit Accepted {027]

1. d4 d5 2. c4 dxc4 3. e3 �f6 4. J.xc4 e6 5. �f3 c5 6. 0-0 a6 7. dxc5

A seeming ly i nnocuous l i ne , lead ing to an early exchange of queens, but Wh ite retai ns a nagg ing edge and Black has to defend accurately. It was a favourite with Boris Spassky in the later years of his career (in part icu lar, he p layed it four t imes against Bobby Fischer i n the i r ' return match ' in 1 992), and it also su its the techn ical style of V lad im i r Kramn i k (for example, he played it against Garry Kasparov in their world championsh ip match in 2000).

Psycho log ica l ly th is wou ld seem to be a good cho ice aga inst L ivi u -D ieter N isipeanu , the lead ing Romanian player, who is noted for h is aggressive style. For example, in four of h is games in Medias

he sacrificed a pawn for active play, and, although heavi ly outgraded by the rest of the players, this gained h im a very respectable resu lt.

7 . . . Axc5

7 ... 't'/xd1 8. l:!xd1 AxeS is the more usual continuat ion.

8. 'Wxd8+ �xd8

a b c d e f g h

7 6 . 5

4

3

J. a • • • 7

•�.&J 6

5

4

a b c d e f g h

9. Ae2

71


9. �bd2 is more popular, although th is may simply transpose.

9 • .. me7 10. ctlbd2 Ad7

An alternat ive set-u p i nvolves 1 0 ... b6, ... Ab7 and ... �bd7.

11 . ctlb3 AdS

Now Black wi l l be more or less obl iged to a b c d e t g h

concede the bishop pair, which he could have avoided by 11 ... Aa7. 22 ... mea

12. ctla5 §a7 13. ctlc4 Ab5 14. b3 §d8 15. Ab2 Axc4 16. Axc4

a b c d e f g h

8 � 8

. ... ... ... 7

..t.t.� 6

5 5

4 il 4

3 D, D, Cjj 3

2 D, il D, D, D, 2 1 1:, 1:. � 1 '

a b c d e f g h

This looks rather passive. Perhaps N i sipeanu should have aimed for counterplay with 22 . . . �cb4: a) 23. a3 �a2 24. l;txc8 l;txc8 25. Ad3 b5,

and Black's control of c3 promises h im reasonable chances, despite the exotic position of his knight on a2;

b) 23. e4 l;txc1 24. l;txc1 �xa2 25. exd5 �xc1 26. Axc1 l;tc8 27. Axh6 l;tc3 28. Ae3 l;txb3 29. h5, with a sharp ending where the wh ite h-pawn is more of an immediate danger than Black's connected passed pawns on the queenside.

23. g5 hxg5

White's two bishops give h im a s l ight ad- It would surely have been safer to keep the

vantage, but as yet there are no real weak- h-fi le c losed by 23 ... h5.

nesses in Black's position. 24. hxg5 Ae7 25. mg2

16 .. • ctlc6 17. §fd1 §aa8 18. h3 g6 19. g4

White sets about gain ing space on the kingside.

19 .. • h6 20. Af1 §ac8 21. §ac1 ctld5 22. h4

A necessary preparation for the planned invasion on the h-fi le.

25 • . • ctlb6

Again too passive. 25 ... �cb4 26. a4 �c6 fol lowed by ... �a5 would have given Black some counterplay against White's queenside pawns.

72

M. Carlsen - L.- 0. Nisipeanu

26. Ad3!

A nice pawn sacrifice, which activates the light-square bishop and clears the way for a rook to go to h1.

26 .. • !0b4 27. Ae4 !Oxa2 28. §xd8+ mxd8 29. §h1

(see next diagram)

Suddenly Black is lost. Al l the white pieces are very active and there is no satisfactory defence against the invasion by the rook.

29 ... !Od5 30. !Oe5 f5 31. Axd5

Black resig ned in view of 31 ... exd5

a b c d e f 9 h

8 ... . 8

7 • ..t. . 7

6 . �.�� • • 6

5 � 5

4

a b c d e f 9 h

32. �h8+ �c7 33. �h7 �d6 (or 33 ... �d8 34. Ad4) 34. Aa3+ �xe5 35. �xe7 mate.

'I think I p layed a very decent game!' (Carlsen)

The world championship match scheduled for 201 2 wil l be between two players wel l into their forties. Magnus Carlsen is less than half their age - it i s abundantly c lear that time is sti l l wel l on his side!

273

Tournament and Match Record

I n d ex


Sven Magnus 0en Carlsen born 30th November 1 990 in T0nsberg , Norway. Gained the I nternational Master title in 2003, and the International Grandmaster tit le in 2004. Became the No. 1 rated player in the world in January 201 0, a position which he regained in July 201 1 . Awarded the Chess 'Oscar' in 2009 and 201 0.

MAJOR TOURNAMENTS

2001 + =

Trol l Masters, Gausdal 40th-45th 3/9 2 2 5 Norweg ian Open Championsh ip, Oslo 9th-1 3th 5%/9 5 1 3 Gausdal Classics 8th 2Y2/9 0 5 4 Nordic Championships, Bergen ?1 st-80th 3%/9 2 3 4 Bavarian Open Championship, Bad Wiessee 5/9 Norweg ian Junior Championship, Porsgrunn 1 st 6/7

2002 Trol l Masters, Gausdal 24th 4%/9 3 3 3 Gausdal Classics 8th 2%/9 2 1 6 I nternational Shakkinet Tournament, Helsinki 1 0th 4/1 1 3 2 6 Open Tournament, Bergen 1 1 th-1 8th 5/9 4 2 3 Open Tournament, Kiel 1 5th 6/9 European under-1 2 Championship, Pen iscola 6th 6/9 World under-1 2 Championship, Herakl io 2nd 9/1 1

2003 Trol l Masters, Gausdal 3rd-6th 7/1 0 6 2 2 Val le d 'Aosta Open 73rd 5/9 Gausdal Classics 1 1 th-1 2th 4/1 1 2 4 5 Norweg ian Championship, Fredrikstad 3rd-7th 5%/9 3 5 Pol it iken Cup, Copenhagen 7th-1 6th 8/1 1 6 4 Schwarzacher Open 2nd-8th 6Y2/9 5 3 European Under-1 4 Championship, Budva 3rd 6%/9 6 2

274

Tournament and Match Record tb

+ =

World Under-1 4 championship, Halkidik i 9th-1 3th 7%/1 1 7 3 Pecaut Memorial , Taormina 2nd-5th 5%/9 3 5 1 Fi rst Saturday, Budapest 4th-5th 8/1 3 5 6 2

2004 I nternational Tournament, Wijk aan Zee C 1 st 1 0%/1 3 9 3 1 Aeroflot Open , Moscow 40th 5%/9 5 1 3 Reykjavik Open 33rd-43rd 4%/9 4 1 4 Dubai Open 2nd-1 1 th 6%/9 4 5 0 Sigeman Tournament, Malmo/Copenhagen 3rd 5%/9 4 3 2 Norwegian Championship, Molde 1 st-2nd 7/9 6 2 1 Pol it iken Cup, Copenhagen 4th-1 3th 7%/1 0 5 5 0 5th Young Masters, Lausanne 5th 6%/1 1 4 5 2 Gausdal Classic 5th 5/9 4 2 3 Essent Crown, Hoogeveen 4th 2/6 1 2 3

2005 Smartfish Masters, Drammen 8th-9th 3/9 1 4 4 I nternational Tournament, Wijk aan Zee B 7th 7/1 3 3 8 2 Gausdal Classic 6th-8th 4/9 3 2 4 I nternational Tournament, Leon (rapid) 3rd-4th 1 /4 0 2 2 European Championship, Warsaw 1 8th-53rd 8/1 3 5 6 2 Norweg ian Championship, Sandnes 1 st-2nd 7/9 6 2 1

Play-off v. Agdeste in , Oslo 2nd 3%-4% 2 3 3 I nternational Tournament, Biel 6th 4/1 0 0 8 2 6th Young Masters, Lausanne 5th 5%/8 4 3 1 Bygger'n Masters, Gausdal 1 st 8/9 7 2 0 Scanda Cup, Skanderborg 8th 4/9 1 6 2

2006 I nternational Tournament, Wijk aan Zee B 1 st-2nd 9/1 3 6 6 1 Open Tournament, Reykjavik 6th-9th 6%/9 6 1 2 I nternational Tournament, Sarajevo 1 st-3rd 5%/1 0 1 9 0 Midnight Sun Tournament, Tromso 2nd 7/9 6 2 1 Norweg ian Championship, Moss 1 st-2nd 7/9 6 2 1

Play-off v. Agdeste in , Oslo 1 st 3-1 2 2 0 I nternational Tournament, Biel 2nd-3rd 6/1 0 4 4 2 Ris ing Stars v. Experience, Amsterdam 1 st 6%/1 0 4 5 1 World Bl itz Championship, Rishon Le Zion 8th 7%/1 5 5 5 5 I nternational Tournament, Cap d 'Agde (rapid) semi-final 7/1 1 4 6 1 Tal Memorial Tournament, Moscow 8th-9th 3%/9 0 7 2

75


2007 + =

I nternational Tournament, Wijk aan Zee 1 3th-1 4th 4%/1 3 0 9 4 I nternational Tournament, Morel ia/Linares 2nd 7%/1 4 4 7 3 Melody Amber Tournament, Monaco 8th-9th 1 0%/22 3 1 5 4 International Tournament, Gausdal 1 st 7/9 5 4 0 Sparkassen Tournament, Dortmund 6th 3/7 0 6 1 International Tournament, Biel 1 st-2nd 5%/9 4 3 2

Bl itz play-off v. Onischuk 1 st 3/5 1 4 0 Open Tournament, Tromso 2nd-4th 7/9 5 4 0 Bl indfold World Cup, Bi lbao 2nd-3rd 6/1 0 4 4 2 Tal Memorial Tournament, Moscow 3rd-5th 4%/9 1 7 1 World Bl itz Championship, Moscow 9th 20%/38 1 5 1 1 1 2

2008 I nternational Tournament, Wijk aan Zee 1 st-2nd 8/1 3 5 6 2 I nternational Tournament, Morel ia/Linares 2nd 8/1 4 5 6 3 Melody Amber Tournament, N ice 2nd-5th 1 2/22 7 1 0 5 Grand Prix Tournament, Baku 1 st-3rd 8/1 3 4 8 1 Aerosvit Tournament, Foros 1 st 8/1 1 5 6 0 International Tournament, Biel 3rd 6/1 0 3 6 I nternational Tournament, Mainz (rapid) 2nd 4%/1 0 7 2 Tal Memorial Bl itz Tournament, Moscow 3rd 21/34 1 6 1 0 8 Grand Slam Final , B i lbao 2nd-3rd 1 3/30* 3 4 3 I nternational Tournament, Cap d 'Agde (rapid) semi -final 8%/1 3 5 7 1

2009 Aker I nternational Tournament, Gjovik (rapid) 2nd 4%/8 3 3 2 I nternational Tournament, Wijk aan Zee 5th-6th 7/1 3 2 1 0 International Tournament, L inares 3rd 71/2/1 4 3 9 2 Melody Amber Tournament, N ice 4th 1 3/22 8 1 0 4 Mtel Masters Tournament, Sofia 2nd-3rd 6/1 0 3 6 1 International Tournament, Leon (rapid) 1 st 7%/1 3 4 7 2 Sparkassen Tournament, Dortmund 2nd-4th 5%/1 0 2 7 1 Pearl Spring Tournament, Nanjing 1 st 8/1 0 6 4 0 Tal Memorial Tournament, Moscow 2nd-3rd 51/2/9 2 7 0 World Bl itz Championsh ip, Moscow 1 st 31/42 28 6 8 Chess Classic Tournament, London 1 st 1 3/2 1 * 3 4 0

2010 I nternational Tournament, Wijk aan Zee 1 st 8%/1 3 5 7 1 Melody Amber Tournament, N ice 1 st-2nd 1 4%/22 1 3 3 6 King's Tournament, Bazna 1 st 7%/1 0 5 5 0

276

Tournament and Match Record ttJ

+ =

Arctic Stars Tournament, Krist iansund (rapid) 1 st 5/8 3 4 1 Grand Slam Final , Bi lbao 3rd 2%/6 1 3 2 Pearl Spring Tournament, Nanjing 1 st 7/1 0 4 6 0 World Bl itz Tournament, Moscow 3rd 23%/38 1 9 9 1 0 Chess Classic Tournament, London 1 st 1 3/21 * 4 1 2

2011 I nternational Tournament, Wijk aan Zee 3rd-4th 8/1 3 5 6 2 Melody Amber Tournament, Monaco 2nd 1 4%/22 1 1 7 4 King's Tournament, Med ias 1 st-2nd 6%/1 0 3 7 0 I nternational Tournament, Biel 1 st 1 9/30* 5 4

*These tournaments employed the scoring system of 3 points for a win and 1 point for a draw.

I NDIVIDUAL MATCHES

FIDE World Championship 2004 v. Aron ian, Tripol is (1 st round) 1 %-2% 0 3 2007 v. Aronian, El ista (Candidates 1 /8 final) 5-7 3 4 5

FIDE World Cup 2005 Khanty-Mansiysk

v. Azmaiparashvi l i (1 st round) 3-1 3 0 v. Amonatov (2nd round) 1 %-% 1 0 1 v. Cheparinov (3rd round) 3-1 3 0 1 v. Bareev (4th round) 2%-1 % 1 3 0 v. Lautier (places 9-1 6) 1 %-% 1 0 v. Malakhov (places 9-1 2) 3%-2% 2 3 v. Kamsky (places 9-1 0) 1 -3 1 0 3

2007 Khanty-Mansiysk v. Zhao Zong Yuan (1 st round) 2-0 2 0 0 v. Naid itsch (2nd round) 3-1 2 2 0 v. Dominguez (3rd round) 1 %-% 1 1 0 v. Adams (1 /8 final) 1 %-% 1 1 0 v. Cheparinov (1/4 final) 1 %-% 1 1 0 v. Kamsky (1 /2 final) %-1 1/2 0 1 1

77


Other Matches + =

2004 v. Kasparov (rapid) %-1 % 0 1 1 2006 v. Svid ler, Longyearbyen (rapid) %-1 % 0 1

v. van Wely, Schagen 5%-2% 4 3 2007 v. Radjabov, Porto Vecchio 2-3 1 2 2 2008 v. Leko, Miskolc (rapid) 5-3 2 6 0

TEAM EVENTS

World Chess Olympiad 2004 Calvia, board 1 3/5 2 2 2006 Tur in , board 1 6/8 4 4 0 2008 Dresden, board 1 7%/1 1 5 5 1 201 0 Khanty-Mansiysk, board 1 4%/8 4 1 3

European Team Championship 2007 Crete, board 1 6%/9 5 3

European Club Cup 2001 Panormo, board 6 4%/7 3 3 2003 Rethymnon, board 1 3%/7 3 1 3 2007 Kerner, board 3 4%/7 3 3 1 2008 Kal l ithea, board 1 3/6 2 2 2

278

I ndex of Carlsen's Opponents

I ndex of Carlsen's Opponents

A L Adams, M . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84, 1 43 Leko, P . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 230 Ad ly, A . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 9 Lie, K . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62 Amonatov, F . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71 M Anand, V . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 208, 240 Aronian, L . 1 7, 20, 1 1 2 , 1 1 5 , 1 1 8 , 1 23 , 1 66 ,

1 95 , 1 98, 256

Maki Uuro, M . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 4 Morozevich, A . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90, 9 5 , 1 01

N

B Naid itsch , A . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 9

Bacrot, E . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 265 Nakamura, H . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 269

Bel iavsky, A . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77, 80, 201 N ielsen , P. H . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50

Bindrich , F . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 5 N ikol ic , P . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57 Nis ipeanu , L . -D . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 258, 271

c Nunn , J . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81 Cheparinov, I. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55, 1 49 0

D Onischuk, A . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 7, 1 25

Dolmatov, S . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 P Dominguez, L. . . . . . . 140, 1 87, 205, 2 12 Palo, D . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43

E Pavasovic, D . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 6

El. p 1 55 Pedersen, C . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 8 Janov, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ernst, s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 Pel letier, Y . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 25 , 1 84

Ponomariov, R . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 244, 261 G

R Grischuk, A. · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · 2 1 5 R d ' b T 1 29 1 74 1 91 237 a Ja ov, . . . . . . . . . , , ,

H Rozental is , E . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 6 Harestad , H . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23

s

Shaposhn ikov, E . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 lvanchuk, V . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 07, 1 78 Shi rov, A . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51 , 99

J Short, N . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46

Jakovenko, D . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 35 , 226 T

Jobava, B . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66 Topalov, V . . . . . . 1 07, 1 63 , 1 69, 2 18 , 233

K v

Kacheishvi l i , G . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 4 Vlad imirov, E . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41

Kamsky, G . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 8 , 73 W

Karjakin , S . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 252 Wang Yue . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 221 Kasparov, G . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 Ked ik , D . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 5 Z

Kramnik , V . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 33, 1 58 , 247 Zhigalko, S . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26

279

I ndex of Openings

I ndex of Open ings

Alekhine Defence [ 804 ] 1 63

Caro-Kann Defence [ 81 9 ] 31

Catalan Open ing [ E05 ] 1 33

Engl ish Open ing [ A28 ] 1 69, [ A29 ] 247, [ A30 ] 1 1 2 , 1 58 , [ A32 ] 1 95

French Defence [ COS ] 57, [ C1 1 ] 252

Queen's Indian Defence [ E1 2 ] 66, 1 1 5 , [ E1 5 ] 1 84

Reti Open ing [ A04 ] 34

Ruy Lopez [ C67 ] 226, [ C84 ] 201 , [ C88 ] 1 66, [ C91 ] 77, [ C95 ] 51 , [ C98 ] 23

Gri.infeld Defence [ D81 ] 205, [ D87 ] 1 07, Scotch Game [ C45 ] 230, 265 [ D91 ] 1 55

I rregular Open ing [ 807 ] 1 29

King's I ndian Defence [ E62 ] 62, [ E66 ] 1 01 , [ E81 ] 261 , [ E90 ] 233, [ E97 ] 90, 1 78

N imzo- lndian Defence [ E20 ] 84, 1 35 , [ E32 ] 43 , [ E36 ] 1 43, [ E38 ] 35

Queen's Gambit Accepted [ D27 ] 271

Queen's Gambit [ D37 ] 46, [ D39 ] 240, [ D43 ] 1 25

Semi-Slav Defence [ D43 ] 2 18 , [ D45 ] 208, [ D47 ] 1 98

Sic i l ian Defence [ 830 ] 95, 237, [ 833 ] 26, 55, [ 843 ] 73 , [ 867 ] 41 , [ 876 ] 258, [ 878 ] 1 74, 1 87, 1 91 , 2 12 , [ 885 ] 2 15 , [ 890 ] 71 , 81 , 244, [ 892 ] 1 40, [ 892 ] 269

Slav Defence [ D1 5 ] 221 , [ D1 7 ] 1 1 8

Torre Attack [ A48 ] 1 49

280

Documents

Adrian Mihalchishin - Fighting Chess With Magnus Carlsen