Anand-Gelfand, Game 4: Anand Holds A Draw, Keeps His Title
The odds were against the challenger in the fourth tiebreak game, as he needed a win with Black to force blitz games against the champion. A tall order, but Boris Gelfand managed to achieve a playable and superior position out of the opening. As usual, Viswanathan Anand defended very actively, and when Gelfand failed to swap a pair of rooks (e.g. with 21...Bd8) White took advantage. Anand's counterplay was enough to compensate for Black's extra space and bishop pair - indeed, the latter wasn't a factor and the former threatened to become a liability. Gelfand's usual time trouble didn't help, and Anand drew from a position of strength and kept his title. (For subscribers, my analysis and videos of the games will be sent out later today.)
What a heartbreaker for Gelfand, but Anand earned the match victory, holding on and making the most of almost every opportunity he was given. Congratulations to both players, especially the winner and still champion, Viswanathan Anand!
Reader Comments (7)
All in all, a very good match, if one considers just the openings and early middlegames! The problem was of course that they did not squeeze positions out once equality was in grasp. Some opening preparation was good, and we also saw good middlegame play: and I would like to believe that chess theory has been advanced by this match.
I think Gelfand achieved what he deserved. Namely to lose the match by an extremely close margin. He can be proud, even if he is understandably disappointed now. I salute him, as a chessplayer and a gentleman.
Long live World Champion Anand! Hail to the king!
I do not like this match. Too many short draws, too much opening preparation. Very few real fights to the end. I do not think Anand can defend his title against any of Carlsen, Aronian, Kramnik with such play.
It's been fun reading your and other people's thoughts and impressions of the match here and on other chess sites.
Peter Heine will be giving a lecture about the match on 12 June at Viby Skakklub (Aarhus, Denmark) at 8 pm for those interested, in the area and who can speak Danish!
I booked Peter Heine in 2010 to talk about the Topalov match. It was simply fascinating to hear an insider view of events. Naturally, PHN didn't talk about everything in the lecture then and I expect the same this time -- he has, of course, a contract with Anand and is very professional, so some things will remain private and confidential.
Reading your blogs and other comments gives me an idea of some things to ask him. As your intrepid reporter, I'll mention anything not already known in a relevant blog comment later! Peter Heine, btw, is a fantastic lecturer -- great chess combined with wit.
[DM: That sounds great, and I'll appreciate your report. Maybe you can write a guest post on the topic!]
I actually thought this match was pretty decent. I'd have liked to see more decisive games, of course, but it did illustrate the power of defence -- how hard it is to win a game against a super-GM, and how many defensive resources lurk in every position. Gelfand played some great chess. I was impressed by his tenacity and resourcefulness.
@macuga: You certainly got a point in praising Gelfand's quality in defence, for example in the 12. game. Gelfand was a worthy contender, he was not brushed by Anand as many people predicted. Nevertheless he was the challenger from whom you may expect to show more aggressive chess in order to snatch the title.
[DM: I'm not sure about that. This isn't boxing where you need to impress the judges; rather, one needs to be true to what got one there in the first place. As Anand himself insisted, the match could very easily have gone the other way, and that didn't require further aggression on the challenger's part. In fact, it was at moments where he was if anything overaggressive that he got in trouble.]