Norway Chess, Round 2: Karjakin Leads With a 2-0 Score
It is because of Magnus Carlsen that the Norway Chess tournament exists, but so far it's the Sergey Karjakin show. First he won the preliminary blitz tournament, and now he leads the main event with a perfect 2-0 score. There's a long way to go and his wins have come against the two players who seem likeliest to finish at the bottom, that's true: Teimour Radjabov, on account of his recent disastrously bad form, and Jon Ludwig Hammer, who is by far the lowest-rated player in the event. Even so, it's still a fine start.
Today's win over Hammer was a case of the superior player winning a little at a time. I'll mention some moments I found interesting. The first came after Hammer's 44.Rf5. At first it looks like Black can just take on a4, but after 44...Rxa4? 45.Rxc5! bxc5 46.b6 Ra3/2/1 47.b7 Rb3/2/1 48.b8Q Rxb8 49.Nxb8 White's knight can hold the pawns, e.g. after 49...a4 50.Na6! So Karjakin played the interesting waiting move 44...Rc4, with the neat idea of putting White into zugzwang. He needs his knight on c6 and his rook on the 5th rank for the combination we saw above, and he can't move his king or push the g-pawn because then Black will have a crucial tempo-gaining check - 45.g4? Rxa4 46.Rxc5 bxc5 47.b6 Rb3+ (check!) 48.Kg2 Rb3 (or even 48...a4 for that matter - the extra tempo can pay off in the pawns vs. knight ending as well) and game over.
So Hammer played 45.Rd5, letting Black's king into the game with 45...Kf7, and Karjakin won pretty easily. 45.Rf4 is an obvious move and one the players must have considered, but it seems that Black should win after 45...Rxf4 46.gxf4 Kf7 47.Kg4 Ke6. Black needs to respect White's kingside counterplay, but it seems that if he combines prophylaxis with the inevitable king invasion of White's queenside, the game will be over.
Levon Aronian is in clear second with 1.5 points after defeating Hikaru Nakamura in an Exchange Slav. Aronian has suffered on the black side of that variation against Vladimir Kramnik, so perhaps he thought it might be worth a try from the other side of the board. He may have enjoyed a slight edge in the middlegame, but it may not have been much had Black played something like 23...Rcd8, using the loose position of the bishop on d3 to gain a crucial tempo. If White tried to play as in the game with 24.Ne4, then after 24...Qxe3+ 25.Qxe3 dxe3 26.Nd6 (not attacking the rook, which has left c8) 26...b6! 27.Bxa6 Nb4 is at least equal for Black. After Nakamura's 23...dxe3(?), Aronian's 24.Ne4 followed by 25.Nd6 gave him a serious advantage, which he was able to convert in an endgame. It seems that Nakamura's 43...g4 may have been the decisive mistake, going two pawns down in a bid for some counterplay that didn't succeed. Nakamura eventually regained one of his pawns, but by then Aronian had consolidated and won pretty easily. (As an aside, I didn't see Aronian's press conference, but I'm curious if Nakamura's decision to play on a rook down for 11 moves came up.)
One last note on the game. Ken Regan sent me a beautiful and unusual little variation he found during the game. Had Aronian played 41.Rcc4, which at first glance looks more solid than 41.Rc2, he walks into a nasty tactical shot: 41...Nf6! 42.Rxe5 b5!!, which is not just a fork but a bizarre case where taking en passant leaves both rooks en prise! Odder still is that after 43.cxb6 White also attacks both of Black's rooks, but 43...Rd7+ clarifies matters from a material point of view: Black wins a rook. Ken stopped there, but although this line is certainly worse than Aronian's 41.Rc2, it's worth noting that after 44.Kc2 Rxe5 45.b4! Black may only be slightly better!
How about Carlsen? He had White against Viswanathan Anand, but although he got to do the pressing against the champ he was never able to turn it into anything serious. Although it was a different line than that played in a well-known win by Judit Polgar over Anand (that was a Najdorf that continued 6.Be3 e5 7.Nf3), Carlsen's approach was similar in principle to Polgar's. As noted above, what fun there was in the game was White's to enjoy, but Anand has learned his lessons from the Polgar game and defended successfully. (As he did recently in another tournament game in the aforementioned Najdorf line. People are checking Anand, and he's showing that he has done his homework.)
The game between Veselin Topalov and Teimour Radjabov was also drawn. Radjabov's 10...Ne5 was a new move and a new idea in the Rossolimo Sicilian, preparing to swing the knight to g6 (after White commits to h3). The knight has its pluses there, but it also gets it out of the way and takes away some of White's tactical ideas in the usual lines. Topalov may have earned a very small edge out of the opening, but growing it proved difficult. After the game Topalov thought 16.Nb6 would have been good for an edge, but he liked 16.Qb6 better. Radjabov's 16...Qe5 was a remarkable and surprising rejoinder, as in line after line Black's queen seems to be in trouble and ready to be victimized by some discovered attack. Radjabov admitted to being nervous about it, but neither player could find a concrete refutation, and the engine doesn't find one either. Maybe Topalov maintained a very small advantage, but Radjabov played well and drew. Hopefully this means he has finally regained his form and his confidence.
Finally, Wang Hao defeated Svidler in a 3.f3 Anti-Gruenfeld. Through 13.Qe2 the players followed the game Karjakin-Giri from the Wijk aan Zee tournament this January before Svidler varied. It's not clear where Svidler's preparation ended, but Wang Hao's had continued through 15.Kb1, when he had expected (and had analyzed) 15...Qb6. Svidler went instead for 15...Rd8, which looks objectively weaker but helps set up some tricky tactics.
After 16.Nf3 came the real shocker: 16...b5(?). 17.Nxb5 is of course impossible (it hangs a2), but 17.Bxb5 is possible though risky. What Svidler missed or at least underestimated was 17.a3, after which he was simply busted, bound to lose a pawn without any real compensation. Svidler resisted for a long time, but Wang Hao was up to the task and won the ending.
So what motivated 16...b5? The idea, as Svidler told Wang Hao after the game, was this: he wanted to play 16...c5, with the idea 17.d5 Bxc3. Here 18.dxe6?? loses to 18...Rxd1+, regaining the queen with a piece for interest, while 18.bxc3 is met by 18...Nxd5. What Svidler had missed beforehand was the nice intermezzo 18.Bc4!, when White is slightly better after 18...Qf6 19.bxc3 b5(!) 20.Be2. Getting b5 in for free would be nice, but White didn't have to play some sort of irrelevant move waiting for ...c5 to hit him on the next turn.
One other nice line pointed out by Wang Hao: In case Svidler met 17.a3 with the obvious, coffeehouse move 17...a5, then White should certainly avoid 18.axb4? axb4, when Black is better, and if 18.d5 it looks like Black can get away with 18...Bxc3. As before, 19.dxe6?? loses to 19...Rxd1+ while 19.bxc3?? again loses to 19...Nxd5. Again White has a little trick, but this time it's 19.axb4, winning a piece.
Standings After Round 2:
1. Karjakin 2
2. Aronian 1.5
3-8. Anand, Carlsen, Nakamura, Wang Hao, Topalov, Svidler 1
9. Radjabov .5
10. Hammer 0
Round 3 Pairings:
- Anand - Topalov
- Nakamura - Carlsen
- Svidler - Aronian
- Radjabov - Hammer
- Karjakin - Wang
Reader Comments (2)
Do you like the (English) commentary? Thought it was a bit too frothy, I guess they are aiming for a general audience. I would have liked more in-depth look at variations and openings. In recent times, Hug & Pelletier were the best that way, if somewhat technical.
[DM: Some storytelling is nice, and Agdestein has a rich experience as a player and a long history with Carlsen. But like you, I'd prefer a bit more chess work and a little less storytelling. I thought Grischuk and Polgar did a good job at the Tal Memorial.]
I enjoyed Grischuk's turns at the commentary both at the recent Candidates Tournament in London. (For those that didn't follow it, sometimes when a player's game ended early that player might sit in the commentary both and follow the other games.) Grischuk was fun because of his propensity to get involved in complicated lines and then realize he didn't understand what was going on! I imagine this was partly from having played grueling games himself that same day, but he also would mention that he wasn't a genius like some players, such as ... Svidler! It was hard to tell if he was being truly deferential to Svidler's talent, or if he was just giving his friend a sarcastic hard time. Maybe someone else has insight on that part of it.
Incidentally, I enjoy Svidler's turns at commentary as well. But somehow I suspect the very best commentator would be Kramnik, and I base that on his press conferences. Those press conferences seem like a never-ending stream of variations and judgements. I've even seen Aronian looking cowed during joint sessions, but that's probably more a matter of personality.