Candidates Matches 3rd - 27th May 2011

[Matt Mackenzie]

Mind you, I expect the same would be true of a match with Gelfand - who has always seemed to fall just short against the very top players.

Still, he deserves it for actually trying to play chess - rather than cynically milking the format

[Peter Roberson]

I really don't understand the criticism towards Grischuk. In the majority of his short draws (last rapid game against Kramnik perhaps an exception) he's obviously been out-prepared and got no real advantage. Thus he's gotten significantly behind on the clock, whilst his opponent sits there, probably fully aware that Houdini assesses the position as +0.0 or +0.1 & knowing the next couple of critical moves. You can hardly blame him for being happy with a draw in those scenarios.

I've been immensely impressed at his resourcefulness/coolness under pressure/defensive ability in difficult positions/play in time trouble. Beating Aronian & Kramnik (even in this format) with the huge handicap of not being a full time chess player and thus not having a white repetoire capable of hurting those players is a great achievement. Surely more so than coming out on top in the 'who can blunder the fewer pieces' competition that the other half of the draw seemed to become.

If Grischuk beats Gelfand, that may well give him the time/motivation/money to improve his preparation, which combined with attributes he's shown so far in this tournament would make him only a very narrow underdog to Anand. (For a start, 12 games still isn't very long!)

[Michael Jones]

I don't blame Grischuk - he's clearly followed the strategy which he thought would give him the best chance of winning the tournament, and so far it's worked. I blame FIDE for staging a tournament which is supposed to determine which player is the best at classical time controls, then choosing a format which enables someone to win by drawing a few classical games then winning in the rapid/blitz. The same strategy isn't going to work forever, though - judging from Gelfand's look of disgust at the 8 move draw...



... he's highly unlikely to agree to the same thing himself. He's already beaten Mamedyarov with black in a standard game and Kamsky in a rapid game, so if Grischuk offers him a quick draw as white he'll quite probably decline it. If the final goes to tiebreaks Grischuk will probably win again, so Gelfand's best chance is to play for a win in the standard games, and to state the obvious somewhat, not taking short draws with either colour will give him six chances to do so instead of three. Having the first move does convey some advantage, but not such a great one that the player without it is compelled to grab any opportunity for a draw which comes his way. Since Grischuk hasn't gone behind in a match so far, it remains to be seen how he'll respond if he does.

Anand will certainly be the favourite against either of the possible challengers (but come to that, he would be against anyone except possibly Carlsen or Aronian), but I'd say Gelfand would stand a slightly better chance than Grischuk would.

[Roger de Coverly]

Anand - Gelfand was a possible Candidates semi final twenty years ago. In the event it was Short - Karpov in 1992, but in the quarter finals Anand had given Karpov a fright, mostly playing 3 e5 against the Caro. Nigel meanwhile had demolished Gelfand, one of the games being a Sicilian Grand Prix attack.

[LozCooper]

I don't blame Grischuk - he's clearly followed the strategy which he thought would give him the best chance of winning the tournament, and so far it's worked. I blame FIDE for staging a tournament which is supposed to determine which player is the best at classical time controls, then choosing a format which enables someone to win by drawing a few classical games then winning in the rapid/blitz. The same strategy isn't going to work forever, though - judging from Gelfand's look of disgust at the 8 move draw...



... he's highly unlikely to agree to the same thing himself. He's already beaten Mamedyarov with black in a standard game and Kamsky in a rapid game, so if Grischuk offers him a quick draw as white he'll quite probably decline it. If the final goes to tiebreaks Grischuk will probably win again, so Gelfand's best chance is to play for a win in the standard games, and to state the obvious somewhat, not taking short draws with either colour will give him six chances to do so instead of three. Having the first move does convey some advantage, but not such a great one that the player without it is compelled to grab any opportunity for a draw which comes his way. Since Grischuk hasn't gone behind in a match so far, it remains to be seen how he'll respond if he does.

Anand will certainly be the favourite against either of the possible challengers (but come to that, he would be against anyone except possibly Carlsen or Aronian), but I'd say Gelfand would stand a slightly better chance than Grischuk would.

I don't think Gelfand would object to easy holds with black and the chance to put pressure on Grischuk when he's white. However Grischuk may well try and make something of his whites against Gelfand as whilst he is a strong 2700 GM Grischuk may not view him as being as formidable as Aronian & Kramnik in terms of preparation and all round game and he may well alter his tactics slightly, especially as the match is slightly longer.

[Mick Norris]

Gelfand is very expressive at the board in terms of body language and facial expressions
http://video.russiachess.org/view/304

Live game here
http://kazan2011.fide.com/live-games.html

Grischuk is white and he's already played 9 moves

[John Philpott]

Gelfand is having a good long think after 14 Bg5. He is already over 40 minutes down on the clock.

[William Metcalfe]

Finally a good game but to this patzer it looks like a flat draw now because of the constant rook checks or am i totally wrong

[William Metcalfe]

lol 1 min after i made my post draw agreed

[AustinElliott]

Was that Grischuk playing for a draw? Wasn't that obvious if so, at least to me.

Speaking off the cuff as an ageing patzer, even once they chopped many of the pieces, with the Q-side pawn majority and Bs of the same colour one wonders whether White shouldn't have had some chances? For instance, if White could have cut the Black K off from the Q-side in the R+B v R+B endgame with 2 v 1 on the Q side? I'm wondering if one could say at least that "Black had to defend accurately to hold the draw", or similar.

Also...before the pair of Rs came off, although White's 30 Rhd1 is a tempo move w the back rank threat, 30...Be6 avoids the mate and tempo-s back as the Bg2 and the c4 pawn are both en prise. Would there be any argument for 30 Bd5 instead?

Would be interested to hear an opinion from any of the resident proper players or endgame wizards.

[LozCooper]

Was that Grischuk playing for a draw? Wasn't that obvious if so, at least to me.

Speaking off the cuff as an ageing patzer, even once they chopped many of the pieces, with the Q-side pawn majority and Bs of the same colour one wonders whether White shouldn't have had some chances? For instance, if White could have cut the Black K off from the Q-side in the R+B v R+B endgame with 2 v 1 on the Q side? I'm wondering if one could say at least that "Black had to defend accurately to hold the draw", or similar.

Also...before the pair of Rs came off, although White's 30 Rhd1 is a tempo move w the back rank threat, 30...Be6 avoids the mate and tempo-s back as the Bg2 and the c4 pawn are both en prise. Would there be any argument for 30 Bd5 instead?

Would be interested to hear an opinion from any of the resident proper players or endgame wizards.

I'm not sure I count as either and I've only just skimmed through the moves but I think it was Grischuk pressing but Gelfand managing to hold.

[Mick Norris]

Some analysis here

http://www.thechessmind.net/storage/che ... 11_f_1.htm

[AustinElliott]

Cheers Mick.

The analysis suggests Loz and my comments were on the right sort of lines - Grischuk pressing with a slightly superior endgame & Gelfand holding on with accurate play. Which I guess is a bit of a moral victory for Gelfand, if he was a lot behind on the clock.

Dunno why I had the move no. of Rhd1 as 30 (??!) in my last comment rather than the correct 21, but pleased to see that they describe my alternative 21. Bd5 as "also possible". Nice to know the move you would have played in that position in a blitz game wouldn't have been a rank lemon.

[Mick Norris]

Game 2 under way - I can access the live games link, but can't see the video stream - is it just me?

[Ian Kingston]

Game 2 under way - I can access the live games link, but can't see the video stream - is it just me?

Video is working for me.

Edit: then it promptly stopped.