Candidates Tournament, Round 4: Carlsen Wins, Catches Aronian in First
Magnus Carlsen is now fully awake, so his fellow Candidates had better stay (or get) sharp if they hope to compete with him. With his second consecutive win, Carlsen has caught up with Levon Aronian; both are +2 after four rounds.
Carlsen got there by defeating Alexander Grischuk on the white side of a 4.d3 Berlin. Grischuk played very aggressively, hoping that his bishops and space would offer him good attacking chances, but after some inaccuracies in the early middlegame it was Carlsen's structural pluses that gave him a material and a positional advantage. Grischuk did his best to complicate, but with plenty of time to work out the tricks Carlsen neutralized his opponent's attack and won the game.
Aronian came into the round half a point ahead of both Carlsen and his opponent in round 4, Peter Svidler. With the white pieces Aronian surely had some hopes, but Svidler parlayed some fine prep to the already drawish 3.Nf3 a6 line of the Queen's Gambit Accepted to split the point.
The world's #3 and #4 players (on the Live List) faced off, both hoping to move to a plus score in the tournament. Unfortunately for Teimour Radjabov and Vladimir Kramnik, their game was a draw. A well-played draw in the Karpov Variation of the Nimzo-Indian, but a draw nonetheless.
Finally, tailenders Boris Gelfand and Vassily Ivanchuk drew their game as well, but it was probably the most interesting game of the round. Ivanchuk's creative play was sound, too, and the combination he initiated with 20...c5 was simply brilliant. These two don't look like they're going to fight for first place, but all the same this game is absolutely worth examining.
Speaking of which, you can replay the games (with my annotations) here.
Standings:
1-2. Carlsen, Aronian 3
3. Svidler 2.5
4-5. Kramnik, Radjabov 2
6. Grischuk 1.5
7-8. Gelfand, Ivanchuk 1
Round 5 Pairings:
- Ivanchuk - Carlsen
- Svidler - Gelfand
- Kramnik - Aronian
- Grischuk - Radjabov
Reader Comments (3)
Thanks for staying up all night working hard to keep us informed in a timely manner! :)
On Gelfand-Ivanchuk: GM Ramirez on Chessbase writes "25...Rc2! The computer says this wins, but why it does is beyond me." He then gives the 'sample variation' 26.a3 Bxa3! 27.bxa3 Qa4! 28.Bd1 Rc1+ 29.Ka2 Qa5 30.dxe6 Qb6-+ . My (freeware) Houdini doesn't find all this, at least not immediately, but eventually agrees that it's much better for black.
Nigel Short did the live commentating, and at first he didn't understand Ivanchuk's piece sacrifice. But the it dawned on him: Ivanchuck planned 23.exd5 Rxd5 24.Qf3 Bd2! I followed the game with an engine and therefore knew that Nigel was wrong: Ivanchuk planned, of course, the queen sacrifice suggested in this blog. However, to my amazement, he did not! At the press conference afterwards he and Gelfand only gave the line suggested by Nigel Short. I haven't checked their line with an engine, but the question then is whether or not "the simple line" mentioned in the blog would "completely refute 20...c5 were it not for" the queen sac. Would black have compensation after 24...Bd2 ?
[DM: Thank you for this - they seem to be right! White's very badly placed pieces on the kingside, the N@g5 and B@h2 in particular, allow Black enough of a free hand on the queenside to equalize here too. Or maybe even more than equalize! I may update on this variation later. Thanks again!]