English Chess Forum

Is White winning in Nepo - Naka? I can't work it out, but my phone says it's drawn without the f-pawns. I haven't asked the toaster.

NickFaulks wrote: ↑

Wed Aug 21, 2019 10:55 pm

Is White winning in Nepo - Naka? I can't work it out, but my phone says it's drawn without the f-pawns. I haven't asked the toaster.

Totally stunned by 57...b4. Wonder what Nakamura was thinking as it looks like a beginners error.

After 5 rounds:
1= Caruana, Ding, Anand 3/5
4= Carlsen, Vachier-Lagrave, So, Nepomniachtchi, Mamedyarov, Karjakin 2½
10= Giri, Aronian, Nakamura 2

Rest day tomorrow. Then Round 6:

Nepomniachtc. (2½) 2774 - Ding (3) 2805
Nakamura (2) 2743 - Carlsen (2½) 2882
Karjakin (2½) 2750 - Aronian (2) 2765
Mamedyarov (2½) 2764 - So (2½) 2776
Caruana (3) 2818 - Vachier-Lagr. (2½) 2778
Anand (3) 2756 - Giri (2) 2779

Mmm later Nakamura doing a decent job in the post-mortem with Nepo of showing why ...b4 shouldn't have lost.

you are a hard man Chris! Of course there is always a moment when the loser makes a critical error, but I thought Nepo's pressing in that bishop ending was worthy of Magnus on top form.

Paul Cooksey wrote: ↑

Wed Aug 21, 2019 11:52 pm

you are a hard man Chris! Of course there is always a moment when the loser makes a critical error, but I thought Nepo's pressing in that bishop ending was worthy of Magnus on top form.

Definitely great grinding from Nepo. He's just explaining in an interview now how it was all achieved by a succession of cheapos.

I was intrigued to see that Chessbomb red-marks 68 Kb5 and that it recommends 68 Bxb4 Bc1 69 Kd5 Bb2 rather than the 69...Bxf4 you'd expect. Another bout of wishing I'd looked more closely at those openings books as a kid ensued.

Such an interesting ending in Nepo-Nakamura I thought I'd give the whole game. Nepo said later he thought Naka played 57...b4 because he thought White was going to get in anyway with Kd4-c5. However, GM Mihail Marin said on FB "Naka’s ...b4 is difficult to understand, it should be in your blood that you can’t play it":
1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 d5 4. Nc3 Be7 5. Bf4 O-O 6. e3 c5 7. dxc5 Bxc5 8. cxd5 Nxd5 9. Nxd5 exd5 10. Bd3 Bb4+ 11. Nd2 Nc6 12. O-O Be7 13. Rc1 Qb6 14. Qc2 Nb4 15. Bxh7+ Kh8 16. Qc7 Qxc7 17. Rxc7 Bd8 18. Bd6 Bxc7 19. Bxf8 a5 20. Bb1 Be5 21. b3 Bg4 22. Bc5 Rc8 23. Bb6 Nxa2 24. Bxa2 Rc2 25. Nf3 Bxf3 26. gxf3 Rxa2 27. Rd1 Ra1 28. Rxa1 Bxa1 29. Bxa5 f5 30. Kf1 Kg8 31. Ke2 Kf7 32. Kd3 Be5 33. Bc3 Bd6 34. e4 dxe4+ 35. fxe4 Ke6 36. Bxg7 Bxh2 37. Bd4 b5 38. Bb6 Be5 39. Ke3 Bb2 40. Bd4 Bc1+ 41. Kd3 Ba3 42. Bb6 Bb2 43. Bc7 Bf6 44. Ba5 Be5 45. Bb4 Bf6 46. Bc5 Be5 47. Ba7 Bf6 48. Bd4 Be7 49. Ke3 Bg5+ 50. f4 Be7 51. Bb6 Ba3 52. Kd3 Bc1 53. Bc7 Bb2 54. Bb8 Bf6 55. Ke3 Bb2 56. Be5 Bc1+ 57. Kd3 b4 58. Bb8 Kf6 59. Bd6 Ke6 60. Be5 Ba3 61. Bd4 Bc1 62. Be3 Bb2 63. Bd2 fxe4+ 64. Kxe4 Ba3 65. Kd4 Kf5 66. Kd5 Kf6 67. Kc5 Kf5 68. Kb5 Ke4 69. Bxb4 1-0

But it's not the first time this ending has come up. Here's a couple of famous examples:
[Event "New York Rice prel"] [Site "New York"] [Date "1916.??.??"] [Round "3"] [White "Capablanca, Jose Raul"] [Black "Janowski, Dawid Markelowicz"] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "D11"] [PlyCount "165"] [EventDate "1916.01.17"] [EventType "tourn"] [EventRounds "13"] [EventCountry "USA"] [SourceTitle "HCL"] [Source "ChessBase"] [SourceDate "1999.07.01"] [SourceVersion "2"] [SourceVersionDate "1999.07.01"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. d4 Nf6 2. Nf3 d5 3. c4 c6 4. Nc3 dxc4 5. e3 Bg4 6. Bxc4 e6 7. h3 Bh5 8. O-O Be7 9. Qb3 Qb6 10. Ne5 Nbd7 11. Qxb6 axb6 12. Nxd7 Kxd7 13. Bd2 b5 14. Bd3 Bg6 15. Bxg6 hxg6 16. Rfc1 Ra6 17. a3 Rha8 18. Na2 Nd5 19. Rab1 f5 20. Kf1 Ra4 21. Nc3 Rc4 22. b3 Rxc3 23. Bxc3 Rxa3 24. Be1 Bf6 25. Ke2 e5 26. dxe5 Bxe5 27. f4 Bd6 28. Bc3 Ra2+ 29. Kf3 Bc5 30. Rd1 Ke6 31. Rd3 Bf8 32. Be5 b4 33. Rc1 g5 34. g4 g6 35. e4 fxe4+ 36. Kxe4 Re2+ 37. Kf3 Rh2 38. Kg3 Re2 39. h4 gxh4+ 40. Kxh4 Be7+ 41. Kg3 g5 42. Kf3 Rh2 43. Re1 Rh3+ 44. Ke4 Rh4 45. fxg5 Bxg5 46. Kf3 Rh3+ 47. Bg3+ Kd7 48. Kg2 Rh7 49. Re5 Bf6 50. Rexd5+ cxd5 51. Rxd5+ Ke8 52. Rb5 Rd7 53. Rxb4 Kf7 54. Rb6 Bd4 55. Rd6 Rxd6 56. Bxd6 Kg6 57. Kf3 Bf6 58. Bf4 Kf7 59. Ke4 Ke6 60. Be3 Be7 61. g5 Bd8 62. Kf4 Bc7+ 63. Kg4 Be5 64. Kh5 Kf7 65. Kh6 Kg8 66. Bb6 Bc3 67. Kg6 Bd2 68. Kf6 Bc3+ 69. Ke6 Bd2 70. g6 Bc3 71. Kd5 Bd2 72. Bd4 b5 73. Ke4 b4 74. Be3 Bc3 75. Kd3 Be1 76. Bd2 Bf2 77. Ke4 Bc5 78. Kd5 Be7 79. Kc4 Kg7 80. Bxb4 Bd8 81. Bc3+ Kxg6 82. b4 Kf5 83. Kd5 1-0

[Event "Buenos Aires International"] [Site "Buenos Aires"] [Date "1960.07.04"] [Round "9"] [White "Taimanov, Mark E"] [Black "Fischer, Robert James"] [Result "1/2-1/2"] [ECO "E51"] [PlyCount "174"] [EventDate "1960.06.23"] [EventType "tourn"] [EventRounds "19"] [EventCountry "ARG"] [SourceTitle "MCD"] [Source "ChessBase"] [SourceDate "1999.07.01"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "1999.07.01"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. c4 Nf6 2. Nc3 e6 3. d4 Bb4 4. e3 O-O 5. Bd3 d5 6. Nf3 Nc6 7. O-O dxc4 8. Bxc4 Bd6 9. Nb5 Be7 10. h3 a6 11. Nc3 Bd6 12. e4 e5 13. Be3 exd4 14. Nxd4 Bd7 15. Re1 Qe7 16. Bg5 Nxd4 17. Nd5 Qe5 18. f4 Nf3+ 19. Qxf3 Qd4+ 20. Kh1 Ng4 21. hxg4 Qxc4 22. b3 Qb5 23. a4 Qa5 24. Red1 Bc6 25. e5 Bb4 26. Qe4 Bxd5 27. Rxd5 Qb6 28. f5 Bc3 29. Rc1 Bb2 30. Rb1 Bc3 31. Rc1 Bb2 32. Rc4 Rae8 33. f6 c6 34. fxg7 cxd5 35. gxf8=Q+ Kxf8 36. Qxh7 Bxe5 37. Rf4 Qe6 38. Rf1 b5 39. axb5 axb5 40. Bd2 Ke7 41. Bb4+ Kd8 42. Rxf7 Rh8 43. Rf8+ Rxf8 44. Bxf8 Qf6 45. Bc5 d4 46. Kg1 Qf4 47. Qe7+ Kc8 48. Qf8+ Qxf8 49. Bxf8 Bg3 50. Kf1 d3 51. Bb4 Kd7 52. Be1 Bf4 53. Bc3 Bg3 54. g5 Ke6 55. g6 Ke7 56. Be1 Bf4 57. Bh4+ Kf8 58. g3 Bd6 59. Kf2 Bc5+ 60. Kf3 Kg7 61. Bg5 Kxg6 62. Bf4 Kh5 63. Ke4 Kg4 64. Kxd3 Kf3 65. Bc7 Bf2 66. Bd6 Be1 67. Kd4 Kg4 68. Kc5 b4 69. Kb5 Kf5 70. Kc4 Ke6 71. Bc7 Kf5 72. Kd3 Kg4 73. Bd6 Bc3 74. Kc4 Be1 75. Bxb4 Bxg3 76. Bc3 Bd6 77. Kd5 Be7 78. Bd4 Bb4 79. Kc4 Ba5 80. Bc3 Bd8 81. b4 Kf4 82. b5 Ke4 83. Bd4 Bc7 84. Kc5 Kd3 85. Kc6 Kc4 86. Bb6 Bf4 87. Ba7 Bc7 1/2-1/2

Chess.com reports rounds 1 2 3 4 and 5

I don't think 100 Endgames You Must Know can have been on Justin's childhood reading list. But at this point anyone who does not know the blunders made by both players in Capablanca - Janowski should hang their head in shame!

I think one of the things that made the Nepo-Naka ending fascinating was close to the tablebases but not in them. It is not often you get to laugh at Stockfish, but it was saying 60... fe4 was a significant improvement over 60 ... Ba3. Actually fe4 gets to a tablebase loss

Unusual material imbalance in Caruana v Vachier-Lagrave where Black has three pawns for two exchanges.

Fully refreshed from the rest day there's been four draws so far.

When was the last tournament when Carlsen failed to win a game?

(hasn't happened yet I know, but we are over halfway through now)

There was his match against Caruana

JustinHorton wrote: ↑

Fri Aug 23, 2019 7:41 pm

Unusual material imbalance in Caruana v Vachier-Lagrave where Black has three pawns for two exchanges.

... followed by some silliness. They could reasonably have agreed a draw round about move 40 and certainly by move 46.

JustinHorton wrote: ↑

Fri Aug 23, 2019 10:59 pm

There was his match against Caruana

If you only count classical games, and not a tournament. But nice try

Having done a bit of digging, we might have to go back to his initial appearance in the top Corus group in 2007.

A clean sweep of non-decisive results again, Anand messing up another "won" game in the process.

One thing can definitely be said - the supposed "anti-draw" measures at this event have been an unequivocal failure.