Carlsen continues his winning way right off the bat in Biel. He is now once again unofficially rated #2 and inching closer toward the #1 crown.
GM Carlsen (2775) – GM Pelletier (2569) [E15]
20.07.2008 / Biel – Round 1
1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nf3 b6 4.g3 Ba6 5.Qc2 Bb7 6.Bg2 c5 7.d5 exd5 8.cxd5 Nxd5 9.0–0 Be7 10.Rd1 Nc6 11.Qf5 Nf6 12.e4 d6 13.e5 Qd7 14.Qxd7+ Nxd7 15.exd6 Bf6 16.Re1+ Kf8 17.Nc3 Nb4 18.Bg5 Nc2 19.Re7 Bxf3 20.Bxf3 Bxg5 21.Rxd7 Rd8 22.Rxd8+ Bxd8 23.Rd1 Nd4 24.Bg2 h5 25.a4 a6 26.Bb7 Rh6 27.d7 Rd6 28.Bc8 Nf3+ 29.Kg2 Rxd1 30.Nxd1 Ne1+ 31.Kf1 Nf3 32.h4 Ke7 33.Ne3 g6 34.Bxa6 Kxd7 35.Ke2 Ne5 36.f4 Ng4 37.Bb5+ Ke7 38.Nd5+ Kd6 39.Bc4 Nh6 40.Ne3 Bf6 41.Bd3 Bd8 42.Kf3 Ng4 43.Nxg4 hxg4+ 44.Kxg4 Ke6 45.Bc4+ Ke7 46.Kf3 f5 47.Ke2 Kf8 48.Kd3 Bf6 49.b3 Bb2 50.Bd5 Ba3 51.Kc4 Bb4 52.Kb5 Ba5 53.Bc4 Ke7 54.Kc6 Kf6 55.Bd3 Kf7 56.h5 gxh5 57.Bxf5 Kf6 58.Be4 Kg7 59.Bf3 Kh6 60.Kb5 Kg6 61.Bd1 Kh6 62.Be2 Kg6 63.Bf3 Kh6 64.Bc6 White wins 1–0
Click here to replay the game.
GM Alekseev (2708) – GM Bacrot (2691) [D15]
20.07.2008 / Biel – Round 1
1.d4 d5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.c4 c6 4.Nc3 a6 5.c5 Nbd7 6.Bf4 Nh5 7.Bd2 Nhf6 8.Qc2 Qc7 9.e4 e5 10.exd5 cxd5 11.b4 Be7 12.Be2 0–0 13.0–0 e4 14.Ne1 Nb8 15.Qc1 Be6 16.Nc2 Nc6 17.Rb1 Bd8 18.a4 Ne7 19.Bf4 Qd7 20.b5 Ba5 21.Rb3 Bg4 22.Bxg4 Nxg4 23.Ne3 Nxe3 24.fxe3 Nf5 25.Ne2 axb5 26.axb5 g6 27.Qb2 Bd8 28.Rc1 Be7 29.c6 bxc6 30.bxc6 Qe6 31.c7 Rac8 32.Rb6 Qd7 33.Qb5 Qxb5 34.Rxb5 g5 35.Rxd5 gxf4 36.Rxf5 fxe3 37.Rc6 Ra8 38.Rf1 Rfc8 39.d5 Ra2 40.d6 Bxd6 41.Rxd6 Rxc7 42.Rd8+ Kg7 43.Ng3 White wins 1–0
Click here to replay the game.
GM Dominguez (2708) – GM Onischuk (2670) [C78]
20.07.2008 / Biel – Round 1
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.0–0 Bc5 6.c3 b5 7.Bb3 d6 8.a4 Bg4 9.axb5 axb5 10.Rxa8 Qxa8 11.h3 Bh5 12.d3 0–0 13.Bg5 Nd7 14.g4 Bg6 15.Nh4 Kh8 16.Bd5 h6 17.Bc1 Nf6 18.b4 Bb6 19.Bb3 Ne7 20.Qf3 c5 21.bxc5 dxc5 22.Bxh6 c4 23.Bg5 cxb3 24.Bxf6 Nc6 25.Bg5 b4 26.Qd1 bxc3 27.Qxb3 Ba5 28.Be3 Qd8 29.Nxg6+ fxg6 30.Nxc3 Qxd3 31.Qa4 Nd4 32.Qxa5 Nf3+ 33.Kg2 Nh4+ 34.Kg1 Nf3+ 35.Kg2 Nh4+ 36.Kg1 Game drawn ½–½
After having watched this, and several similar endgames from Carlsen, it almost looks like the books on endgames with opposite colored bishops needs to be rewritten.
In practice it seems they are far more unclear than what I’ve at least been taught.
I am just a patzer but I think Pelletier twice blundered badly: First when he exchanged Knights giving away a pawn for nothing, and secondly when he let white play h4-h5, loosing his f5 pawn.
Why didn’t he simply bring his King to h6 instead of f6?
“I am just a patzer but I think Pelletier twice blundered badly”
You’re probably one of many patzers who just look at the analysis from their chess programs and enjoy bashing GMs for making “bad blunders”.
If you call those moves blunders, then you really have no idea what a bad blunder is. Try playing this endgame without assistance from a computer, and you’ll realize that it’s harder than just looking up some computer variations on a monitor.
If you don’t play perfectly vs Magnus, you lose even dead draw endgames. Must be scary for the opponents 🙂
This is a bad of Pelletier, Carlsen will be the first to admit.
“…bashing GMs..”
ANON at 1:47:00 PM.
I think that giving a pawn for nothing was stupid and few patzers would have done this.
Please provide the rationale behind Pelletiers decision if you try to hold up his flag.
“You’re probably one of many patzers who…”
Why don’t you provide your own analysis instead of speculating?
“Try playing this endgame without assistance from a computer…”
ANON at 1:47:00 PM:
I just did that and came up with my plan Kh6. Why don’t you answer this instead of saying stupid things?
It wasn’t giving a pawn for nothing- but for the opposite bishop endgame after exchange of knights. Opposite bishops is known to be drawish and black would have really wanted to exchange knights very much to reach it. Quite understandable- I would have considered the pawn sacrifice too.
55.. Kf7 just walked into the trivial trap h5 winning.
Ke6 (which is what I would have played- why does he think Carlsen played Bd3 previous move?) puts up much more resistance with reasonable drawing chances (if 56 g4 fg4 Bg6 it is not so clear cut)
Anyone can justify how he chose Kf7? He is not a beginner but that move was like one. Bd3 and h5 is baby level trap.
It is still lost after 55…Ke6 actually- must be with those passers. So Kf6 was not the losing blunder.
It’s interesting to note that Magnus himself felt that his winning chances would be better if he accepted the knight exchange on g4 (from his father’s blog):
“When Pelletier played 42…Ng4 to force a seemingly drawn ending, Magnus had plenty of time left and spent a long while analysing the position. He concluded that his best winning chance was indeed to exchange knights and go for the opposite coloured bishop endgame a pawn up.”
It only goes to show how deep Magnus is able to see in these kind of endgames.
For info I was told by a very good source that Magnus (and maybe also Pelletier) considered the endgame lost for black also after Ke6 (instead of Kf7) so Kf7 can hardly be considered a blunder.
Only a year ago, Magnus lost rook and pawn ending to Aronian, after making a blunder!
Can you imagine that.
How do Carlsen’s wins help people in need of food and shelter??
By the way,
Sen Hillary Rodham Clinton reports raising US$2.7 million (S$34.1 million) from donors in June and ending the month with US$25.2 million in debts after suspending her quest for the presidency.
The former first lady owes US$12 million to vendors and lent herself US$1 million in June for a total loan to her campaign of about US$13.2 million. She suspended her campaign for the Democratic nomination on June 7.
Sen Clinton aides say she is giving priority to paying back money owed to small vendors.
Sen Clinton ended her campaign with more than US$23 million designated for the general election. She is asking donors whether she can convert that money to the campaign account for her 2012 Senate re-election.
What does this has to do with anything???
Take your SPAM elsewhere.
It’s not to hard to see white is winning after the knight exchange. Any solid player with endgame knowledge notice the 2 important factors:
1. black has pawns on white squares f7 and g6.
He can’t solve that properly without letting white get a passed pawn, or/and in need of his king around the kingside pawns.
2. Opposite pawns in general win when you get two passed pawns, that are NOT connected. With the black king in need of the kingside, white’s king can infiltrate the other side.
I’m just a modest player of around 2400, but that’s all ‘bed and breakfast’.
An underlying theme of the endgame was the threat of b4 with some zugzwang problems for black. Maybe this is what caused Kf7.
2400 is bed and breakfast …YEAP ! WELLLLL ! 2800 is PALACE in Switzerland !!!
Then what is 2200 ?
Buckingham Palace?
Carlsen is just 2 wins away from being virtual world number 1 and 2800+
He is one win away from 2797.6, and Anand is still 0.4 up.
The way to analyze the position as a win is all “bed and breakfast”. It means it is no rocket science. It means for your understanding: it is easy, a piece of cake. At least for someone of 2400, you should expect Carlsen not even to spend words on it.
I read in one post “theory of opposite colored bishops should be rewritten”. What a naive response, of course this is all known, perhaps over 100 years or more.
Were you born from an egg or something? With all reespect to people who are.
It is not so trivial otherwise Pelleier would not have decided that it was his best chance for a draw. He can now be seen to have been mistaken- the pawn sacrifice failed- but he is over 2500 even and it was not ‘bed and breakfast’ for his evaluation.
that’s exactly the disappointing thing (or blunder) about Pelletier’s decission. He bluffed, but I, and many others, don’t understand such.
I mean, Pelletier clearly was playing like a chicken with no head on. The knight already reached the g4 square about 3 or 4 moves earlier and there was no need to go for the passive Nh6 and return to g4 giving a pawn!
This is no good chess. Maybe he was in time trouble, maybe the match was fixed; it beats me.
Folks, give it a break, really. The average rating of this tournament is 2687 ELO, so why consider this “weak”?!
Pelletier was certainly tired from defending all along and tried to make things easier by transposing into an opposite-colored bishop ending with one pawn down.
True, giving a pwan away after Ng4 was not exactly a brilliancy but in view of the long game and the drawing tendency in the ensuing endgame it sure was worth a try.
And now some idiots even suggest the result was fixed! It is just incredible what kind of stupid people see the need to share their “comments” with others…
Sorry, but this is just sad.
DV
In fact there might be some value in the remark of match fixing. If a tennis player purposely hits a ball way out the field, it will pose some questions too. I think a GM giving away a pawn like this at least smells a bit questionable.
I agree on Anon 9.30: not saying it is, but there is a chance.
A GM can’t be tired of game 1 in a tournament, can he? That would be something!
Tired of 40 moves … pffff. Chess is no sport.
I followed the game on playchess and everyone commenting was sure that black can hold a draw without much troubles eventhough he was a pawn down.
So don’t say that it was ‘bed and breakfast’ ending. If it was ‘bed and breakfast’ for you, then I don’t know what you are doing here. You should be at least in Biel now if not in Bonn this October.
It’s easy to talk now, but at that time you were clueless, just like almost everyone else.