Tuesday
May112010
Game 12, With Notes: A Closer Look at the Game that Retained Anand's Championship Title
Tuesday, May 11, 2010 at 10:48PM
Game 12 was a terrific victory by Viswanathan Anand, whose 6.5-5.5 match win over Veselin Topalov earned him a continued reign as World Chess Champion. It can't be denied that his win in game 12 was greatly helped by Topalov's 1-2 punches to his own face (31.exf5? + 32.fxe4??), but Anand played well before that and found all the moves he had to afterwards as well. He had an interesting opening idea, played dynamically, fought hard, found all the tactics he needed to and didn't choke under pressure. He's a deserving winner.
Here's the game, with my comments.
Reader Comments (14)
Terrific game by Anand. Tons and tons of congratulations to him on the win.
Finding Qe8 was very, very tough...Anand deserved to win the game just for that move! I have seen some rudimentary analysis that Qd8 after that was immediately crushing, but I guess Anand, being the gentleman that he is, found the most humane way to smash Topalov.
The Tops blunders were, anyhow, overdue.
All said and done now, this WCC was:
a) the Championship of blunders
b) a Championship where Anand decided 11 games (games 1-11), and Tops decided 1 (game 12)
c) proves that Tops is not a chump after all. He eked out a win in game 8 from an even position (the Carlsen 'keep-on-trying' effect), and came back from the dead in game 9, and
d) proves that, end of the day, Anand is simply KING.
* Many thought he'll crumble (especially after games 8 and 9); he didn't, instead coming back stronger.
* Many thought he does not have the killer instinct of Tops; he showed he has the killer instinct in loads; he killed Tops in a number of games, and, tongue-in-cheek, he also applied the instinct in himself as well.
* Many thought he's not fit. Well, each chess game tires one out like a full 90 min football game. Well, how many can play a 90 min footie game after a 40 hr journey? He proved that he's fit enough to beat the best that can be thrown at him
e) proves, conclusively, that as a role model, Anand is perfect. Gentle yet tough, uncompromising yet human, brilliant yet erratic
Thanks.
I didn't know anyone thought Topalov was a chump. Maybe a little unsportsmanlike at times (little?), but never a chump.
Yes, many congratulations to Anand- a deserving winner. I don't think any world champ can dominate the modern game in quite the way Kasparov did 1985-2000, yet the Indian has shown himself, for now, to be very much the first among nearly-equals.
You have got to wonder where Topalov goes from here. Probably at or near the top of his game (aged 35), with home advantage and yet he never really looked a winner. Take away three or four of his opponent's more horrible blunders, and he would have been destroyed.
Congratulations to Anand, and good to see a win with black as well.
5 decisive games in 12 seems a good return for the spectators.
Actually, it's kind of tragic for Topalov that (much thanks to constant messing with the cycle) despite being the top rated player in the world for a long time he actually may never become the World Champion. The upcoming Candidates will probably be won by Carlsen, and, whether he beats Anand or loses to him this first time, when he finally gets a firm grip on the World Champion title he may not let it go easily.
Kosteniuk after move 16: ". . . as a compensation for this weakness on c5 Black has a very strong light-squared bishop on b7."
After move 21: "Black has a good position of course he has to remember about his weak pawn on c5 but his bishop on b7 is a great compensation for this weakness."
After move 28: "White always has to keep in my mind this dangerous bishop who is looking directly at the White monarch. "
I'd say those comments were on the money. What WAS Topalov thinking on 32 fxe4??
Go Anand! Justice is served!
Congrats to Anand!! Not easy holding on to that title
What a fantastic match! Exciting (if not entirely accurate) games from start to finish, even the 'dull' position were shown to be full of possibilities by the players and various commentators on the web.
But most of all I am pleased that we had a great contest between two top grandmasters fighting for the biggest prize in our beloved game over the board. Despite the best attempts of an errant volcano there were no off the board unpleasentnesses (if that is a word) to tarnish the match as has happened in the past. I hope that this is the beginning of good times again for chess, that FIDE (maybe under some new leadership) can sort out the candidates system so we return to a stable and regular system for determining our champion.
Finally a massive thank you to Dennis for providing us with his insightful comments as the games happened live and the excellent post games analysis. Keep up the good work, this is by far my favourite chess site to visit.
Black's move 39 was an error. Anand would have saved himself a lot of trouble by playing 39... Q-g5 and winning on the spot. There is no defense. 40. Rf8+ is just a spite check. 40. Nf5 fails to R-h4+. A surprising miss, though Anand was still winning. Did Anand, just before time control, not notice that W cannot play Qc4+ because the square is covered by B's rook?
I enjoyed the great fighting spirit of the match. No quarter asked nor granted!
I am looking forward to the candidates tournament. As for draws in that tournament, at least Carlsen and Topalov will keep things alive. Hopefully some of the others will also fight hard. I hope Carlsen wins.
I do not see how 39..., Qg5 "wins on the spot." 39..., Qg5. 40.Rf8,Kg7. 41.Qf2
39...Qg5 also wins (though not instantly), and it is (and already was) covered in my notes, though you might not have noticed it - it's given after the 39...Rf7 variation.
@Kajetan Wandowicz - Your post contains two myths:
1) Topalov was the top-rated player for a long time.
In response to a similar claim at Dailydirt, I checked FIDE rating lists since January 2005, comparing Anand and Topalov:
- advantage Anand 1/2005 and 4/2007-7/2008
- advantage Topalov 7-10/2006 and since 4/2009
- "too close to call" for the remaining periods/lists, when they were separated by less than 10 points. Or would anyone claim that Topalov (2804) was clearly superior to Anand (2803) on the 4/2006 list?
I was slightly surprised myself, it seems that Topalov fans make much more noise whenever their hero is #1 and/or >2800 !?
2) Topalov suffered from "constant messing with the cycle".
While that is bad news by itself, Topalov cannot really complain. Let's summarize his results in the latest WCh cycles:
- "Classical world championship": In 2002, he lost the final qualifying match against Leko [so much for people stating that Leko wasn't a worthy challenger for Kramnik, and he was absolute world top at the time]
- FIDE KO events: He participated in 1999, 2000, 2002 and 2004, but never made it to the final.
- San Luis 2005: He won convincingly - as far as world championships are concerned, this was his only case of "winning when it matters most". At that stage, I considered him "a" world champion, but the unification match against Kramnik was yet to come.
- Elista 2006: Everything else aside, he lost the match (in case of need, tiebreaks are obviously part of the match).
Then he was excluded from the Mexico WCh tournament, but apparently "team Topalov" had insisted on such a clause in the match regulations - not considering that he might lose the match? They then tried to "mess with the cycle" claiming a rematch against Kramnik. Eventually, Topalov was provided with a shortcut towards his next world championship match.
- Sofia 2010: Topalov lost against Anand.
Altogether I fail to see "much [or indeed, anything] thanks to constant messing with the cycle". A player losing a qualifier shouldn't get to play a WCh match - it's another story that an exception was once made for Kramnik. A player losing a WCh match shouldn't keep, obtain or "merge" his title.
Maybe it can be called a bit tragic for Topalov how he lost his matches against Kramnik and (referring to game 12) Anand, but it has nothing to do with changes to the cycle.
Reflections of both Anand and Topalov. NY Times: http://gambit.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/05/12/day-after-championship-victor-and-vanquished-reflect-on-the-match/