Photo by Fred Lucas for the official Corus website
Carlsen, M (2810) – Kramnik, V (2788) [E04]
Corus A (9), 26.01.2010
1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nf3 d5 4.g3 dxc4 5.Bg2 Bb4+ 6.Bd2 a5 7.Nc3 0–0 8.a3 Be7 9.Qa4 c6 10.Qxc4 b5 11.Qb3 Ba6 12.Bg5 Nbd7 13.Bxf6 gxf6 14.Qc2 b4 15.Na4 Rc8 16.0–0 c5 17.d5 exd5 18.Bh3 Bb5 19.axb4 axb4 20.Rfd1 d4 21.Bf5 Ne5 22.Bxh7+ Kg7 23.Nxe5 fxe5 24.Bf5 Rc6 25.Qe4 Rh8 26.Qxe5+ Bf6 27.Qe4 Re8 28.Qg4+ Kf8 29.Be4 c4 30.Bxc6 Bxc6 31.Qh5 Re5 32.Qh6+ Ke7 33.e4 d3 34.Qe3 Bxe4 35.Nb6 Bb7 36.Qf4 Qxb6 37.Qxc4 Re2 38.Rf1 Black wins 0–1
Click here to replay the game.
Chess Daily News from Susan Polgar
And with black, no problem whatsoever!
Great stuff.
And Naka once again tricked tacktically, twice in row. He promised us it was his territory?!
Boring player this Kramnik? Well, replay this stuff from the start!
Drawnik???? Whoehahahaha! Think nót!
What a hideous piece that knight on a4 was!
Reminds me of Gavaskar. Most of you probably haven’t heard of him. He was a player from another game (cricket) in another era (1970 – mid 1980s). Was the best batsman in the world, held just about every record on the book.
But he was a defensive player. Very very patient, just like Kramnik.
Then, in his sunset years (1983), he found his defensive armor broken. Malcolm Marshall of the West Indies kept attacking him body-line, and Gavaskar, for the first time in his life, was having difficulty.
People wrote him off. The press said he should retire. Gavaskar went into deep brooding. Then he came back, and for the first time in his career, went on the attack. Marshall will bowl bouncers. Gavaskar would hook them for six. And he would connect perfectly every time. The man was unstoppable.
See the same thing in Kramnik!
…c4 — what a move! I thought he would sac the exchange with …Qc7, but …c4 was so much stronger.
…d3 — perfect execution.
To Carlsen’s credit, he did fight back. But his Knight was just too badly placed.
Carlsen had only some minutes on the clock around move 30. Kramnik had more than 20 minutes at this point and started to play fast, too. Objectively not the best moves, but Carlsen messed things up in time trouble. 35. Te1 or Qf4 should have hold — according to engines.
Indeed, Sunny Gavaskar achieved the record for the fastest 100 in a one-day international in 1987, the last year of his career (82 balls, which has since been obliterated by a 37-ball century).
But in 1975, he scored only 36 during 360 balls faced by him and his partner(s). That’s like drawing 13 straight Petroff games!
The analogy doesn’t bode well for Kramnik becoming a coach like Kasparov is, since Gavaskar and Kapil Dev collaborated on some very long winless Test-match streaks for India. But during that time they also led India to the 1983 World Cup upset of the West Indies, which I watched live on TV.
People who were reading here and in the know, know I predicted all this against all the doubters:
a] Well, it is early but we can clearly see the outlines of a Kramnik victory. One point behind Carlsen and 1.5 behind Shirov, perfect positioning without showing off. True World Champion class, like Lasker.
b] 47% voted for Carlsen to win Corus A
http://susanpolgar.blogspot.com/2010/01/47-voted-for-carlsen-to-win-corus.html
Only 2% voted for Kramnik (8 votes) but it was even less because I voted twice!
c] Kramnik is making his move as Shirov stumbles and falls back. Like the Tal Memorial and Dortmund all over again!
Need I say more about how great Kramnik is and also me for detecting the greatness?
People should listen next time.
Just because Carlsen is young and at the top, that doesn’t mean he is invincible. Nakamura may be a rising star, but he still needs to learn to play more positionally. Both players need to develop better positional understanding; Kramnik’s positional understanding was demonstrated when he defeated Kasparov.
@anon Tuesday, January 26, 2010 2:42:00 PM CST
How would we know in the future that it’s you? You need to identify yourself 🙂
Bah, nobody matches Kasparov in at least one respect: he found game winning shots more than any other player in history.
He would not have missed the win around move 19 with rfd1, qf5 nd4 and be4.
There are lots of other similar examples in “top” games today.
Kasparov was the most accurate player ever, when it counted.
Topalov, even though I find his chess distasteful, has some of that quality; Anand most certainly does not.
kramnik could be changing his game but he also played a couple of young players that were attacking alot.
nakamura just was throwing haymakers in that last game. marching his pawns down the board with reckeless abandon.
Carlsen has certainly become more aggressive since he started getting trained by kasparov. Kramnik is a very good counter attacker. he beat kasparov that way.
hes not a guy you want to attack unless you know for certain your punches are gonna land. If you lunge and miss hell make you pay for that..
kramnik just used that pawn wall like he has done before to create all kind of problems for carlsen. those three pawns marching down the board forced carlson to sack a piece and then his postion just fell apart.
Ain’t that essential in ány attack: that one is certain ones punches will land?
you want to land the punches but thats not always going happen. landing a punch requires precise calculations. if your calculations are off its not gonna land.
especially with someone like kramnik who understands king safety and pawn structure. hes not going to give you many openings. if you try and force a punch through his defense it probably wont work.
to me the critically bad move was 17 d5. that allowed kramnik to create that pawn wall. from there it was formality.. he just executed like the professional he is known to be..
by the way kramnik has always been one of my favorite players. i just enjoy his knowledge of pawn structure and positional advantages. hes also very good at tactics when hes provoked or hes in the mood for a good rumble. he has no weaknesses like most other players..
Yes, I understand what you mean. That’s true. You could compare executing an attck against a computer: if you fail in one line he will find it. Indeed he’s a very compleet player.
Wolverine,
d5 was a very strong move,
and ed was a losing move by black.
The game would have been over by move 30 with a black loss if Kasparov had been sitting at the board at that point.
what are you basing this on. what moves did carleson have available.. i dont see anything.. that was the move that created the pawn wall.. that was what pushed carleson back and made him sac his pieces.