Aronian-Kramnik Match: Kramnik Wins a Crazy Game 3
After a dry pair of games in the Levon Aronian-Vladimir Kramnik match, today's battle was incredibly complicated - thanks to Aronian. Kramnik played 1.e4 for the first time in a long time, but not as a prelude to anything interesting; rather, he trotted out the disgustingly dull Scotch Four Knights. (The motto of the Scotch Four Knights player: "Not everyone's brave enough to play the London System".) Thankfully, after the exchange on d4 Aronian avoided the boring equalizing line with ...Bb4 and tried ...Bc5 instead, and then a few moves later found a great queen sac that set the board ablaze.
While I'm happy to heap scorn on Kramnik for his horrible opening choice (at least it wasn't a Ponziani), once the game got sharp he rose to the occasion. He played very well in the tactical maelstrom, and it seems that both his tactical sight and his assessments were more accurate than Aronian's. When the smoke (kind of) cleared, White had a small material advantage and an easier position to play, and he turned the tables from game 1, as this time he took advantage of Aronian's time trouble to wrap up the game.
Now this six-game match is even at 1.5-1.5, and Aronian will have White in game 4 tomorrow. Will he go bloodthirstily for revenge and pull out his best openings, or will the trend of the last two games continue, with each player using sidelines to save their main prep for other events? We'll see, but now that both players have tasted the sting of defeat I anticipate that the battles will grow more intense through the finish.
Here is today's game, with my annotations.
Reader Comments (5)
Dennis, after your suggestion 36.c5, couldn't Black build a fortress with 36...Bxc5 37.bc Rxf5 38.Qxb7 Rxc5+ ?
[DM: Maybe! It's at least possible enough that Kramnik's choice is better practically and maybe objectively too.]
my observations:
Kramnik doesnt like to *initiate* sharp tactical positions.
When he is pushed into them, and with his back to the wall, he does very well in sharp positions.
(Naiditch during the game 3 said he thought Kramnik is a better calculator than positional player)
This could mean a couple of things
1 he could be lazy, or his temprement isnt suited to lots of high energy endurance work
2 maybe he doesnt have the nerves for it
3 maybe he is really just loss averse, and doesnt mind drawing but hates losing.
If I were playing him, I would constantly push him into sharp lines, even if it would backfire the first few times I think it would take its toll eventually.
Shirov beat Kramnik in a match with such a strategy. KIDS and grunfelds.
Anand played very sharp semi slavs and beat Kramnik with black twice I think.
Kasparov played into the berlins and QGAs (he didnt assess Kramniks characteristics correctly, very strange for Kasparov)
I dont remember how Grischuck knocked out Kramnik in blitz, whether he steared it into sharp lines? probably not too relevant.
I see ur clearly in favour of Aronian? Too bad he had to lose then to a disgustingly dull Scotch Four Knights. What would you rather have seen Kramnik play? A Spanish game? Like a Marshall Gambit at their level isn't dull. I mean, how do you surprise one another at that level still? I think ur being pretty negative towards Kramnik's opening choices. You should keep ur opinion of his openings to urself.
[DM: First of all, if you've read this blog for any length of time you'd know that I'm a serious Kramnik fan. Second of all...sorry, too bored to continue. It's okay for you to criticize me, but not for me to criticize Kramnik's opening choices? Sorry troll, take it elsewhere. Goodbye.]
By now it's obvious to all of us that your creative impotence miserable fail to find beauty in this, and some other openings as well. Someone should brought to your attention that comments like this make you look ridiculous.
[DM: Don't be offended, just keep playing your opening if you like it. I'm not obligated to share your tastes, but you could note that Aronian seemed to have a similarly dismissive attitude towards the excitement level of the main line with ...Bb4, while Shipov (certainly a very strong player with a high level of appreciation for chess beauty) referred to the Four Knights thusly: it's an "ancient opening which nowadays isn't popular at all. The paths to equality for Black have been trampled and worn out by thousands of players."
So don't be offended, but if you insist on taking offense there are many other sites for you to visit. By the way, I wonder why you and the previous commentator think it's terrible for me to criticize an abstract entity like a chess opening, but think it's perfectly splendid to criticize a flesh-and-blood human being who takes the time, for free, to analyze these games for you. Anyway, I've used up my troll time for this month; the subject is closed.]
My take on the opening debate: Maybe Kramnik chose this line because he "knew" or at least suspected that Aronian wouldn't go for the boring and drawish ...Bb4. Actually it could be that Aronian doesn't consider the resulting positions completely equal but slightly better for white - when asked why he didn't play 15.-Bf5 (leading to an endgame with an extra pawn for white) he said something like "if I want this, I could have played 5.-Bb4".
[DM: I didn't take his statement as claiming any edge for White, but rather as saying that if he had wanted a safe, dry game he would have opted for it much earlier. He played the queen sac for the complications rather than as a route to making a draw.]