Aronian Wins Alekhine Memorial On Tiebreaks Over Gelfand

Coming into the last round of the Alekhine Memorial, Boris Gelfand led Viswanathan Anand, Levon Aronian, Mickey Adams and Maxime Vachier-Lagrave by half a point. Gelfand faced Anand in the last round, played it safe with the white pieces, and Anand drew without much trouble. That eliminated one rival and made it such that no one could catch him unless he or they won their games.

Unfortunately for Gelfand, Aronian defeated Vachier-Lagrave in a generally impressive game, finishing with some very nice tactics. Through the first 28 moves, everything was going smoothly, and had Aronian played 29.d6 he would have been well on his way to a clean victory. Instead, 29.Rxb8+ was a mistake, and after 29...Rxb8 30.Rxa7 Bxc3! 31.Rxd7 Rb4 Vachier-Lagrave had reached an objectively drawn position. This is a pure abstraction though, and would remain so as long as White's d-pawn was alive and dangerous. After 32.d6 Rxc4 33.Be7 some care was required.

Black's best move would have been 33...f6, immediately eliminating all the dark-squared mating nets around Black's king and allowing it to join in the fight against White's d-pawn. Maybe there's a sly trap both players thought was winning, but I'm not seeing it. Instead, it just looks like a relatively straightforward draw, e.g. 34.Ra7 Kf7 35.Bd8+ Ke6 and now White seems to have nothing better than 36.d7 Rd4 (36...Rf4 first is an interesting finesse, threatening mate starting with 37...Bd4+. White plays 37.g3 and only then Black's rook goes to d4. The point is that after the same moves given in the 36...Rd4 line, the presence of a White pawn on g3 makes it easier for Black to liquidate the kingside and draw. Remember that he can give up everything he has for White's kingside pawns, his bishop included, and then draw with his king parked in the a8 corner.) 37.Bb6 Rxd7 38.Rxd7 Kxd7 39.Bxc5, when White's outside passer won't give him any serious winning chances.

Vachier-Lagrave played 33...Kg7 instead, and while it wasn't losing it kept him in danger. For one thing, it keeps the king away from the d-pawn; for another, it doesn't yet save the king from possible mating nets. After 34.Ra7 Black had to play 34...Re4!, and it still seems that he should hold the game. White can promote: 35.d7 Rxe7 36.d8Q Rxa7, but it appears that Black has a fortress, despite the presence of White's a-pawn. Of course if it's exchanged for Black's c-pawn the result is a dead draw, so let's see what happens if White tries to keep it: 37.Qd5 Bf6 38.Qc4 (threatening to start making progress with a2-a4) 38...Ra3! Now White's only winning idea is to bring the king over to b1, so the queen can go to c1 to push Black's rook away. (And even that is just a first tiny step.) This plan is incredibly slow, however, and Black has many ways to deal with it - just pushing the kingside pawns, for instance, easily generates sufficient counterplay.

Unfortunately for Vachier-Lagrave (and Gelfand and their fans), but fortunately for Aronian (and his fans and for those of us who can appreciate the aesthetics of his winning combination), Black played the losing move: 34...Rd4(?). It looks like an obvious blunder, but Black had a nice trick in mind. After 35.d7 Rd1+ 36.Kf2 Vachier-Lagrave played 36...c4!, a move with not just one but two points. The first, obvious point (though not so obvious when you have to think it up several moves in advance) is that if Aronian promotes (36.d8Q??) then Black saves the game with 36...Rxd8 37.Bxd8 Bd4+ and 38...Bxa7. But the really brilliant point was that if Aronian had played something obvious like 36.Rc7(?) Black has a de facto perpetual check! 36...Rd2+ 37.Kf3 (37.Ke1?? Rxd7+ and it won't be a perpetual; Black will simply win) 37...Rd3+ 38.Kg4 h5+ 39.Kf4 (39.Kh4 Bf6+ 40.Bxf6+ Kxf6 41.Rxc4 Rxd7=) Rd4+ 40.Ke3 Rd3+ etc.

But Aronian was up to the challenge, and played the only clear winning move: 37.g3! This eliminates the perpetual, allows Black to play ...Bd4+ if he wants (which he doesn't, as 38.Ke2 Bxa7 39.Kxd1 is a trivial win). The remaining moves were pretty simple, and in the final position White plays 43.Ra8 and starts pushing the a-pawn, with our without first interpolating Rc8.

The reason all this was bad news not just for Vachier-Lagrave but for Gelfand as well is the same reason why the last round of the London Candidates was a triumph for Magnus Carlsen despite his loss: tiebreaks. The same one, in fact, that cost Kramnik in London: it was number of wins of that determined the official winner of the event: Carlsen then and Aronian now. As then, and even before then - I've expressed similar complaints going back to the introduction a few years ago of chess tournaments with 3-1-0 scoring - I object to privileging a win and a loss over a pair of draws. Going +1, -1 doesn't show that someone played better chess or more enterprising chess than the player who drew twice; it doesn't even necessitate more fighting spirit. (Look at some of Kramnik's events here, or Nakamura's marathon draws in Zug.) It's impossible to discern anything about a game's quality just by knowing that it was drawn. What one does know, however, is that decisive games contain mistakes. So we know that the player who went +1 -1 made at least one error, and we don't know that his win was of particularly high quality. Maybe his opponent made a gross blunder in a perfectly good position.

It's also true that the draws might have been fightless and dull while the decisive games were dazzling and daring. It could be, but the point is that we don't know this a priori without looking at the games, and the games hadn't been played when the decisions about tiebreaks were being made. I'd prefer to skip out on tiebreaks altogether, either having co-champions when possible or a playoff when necessary. If tiebreaks are necessary though, I'd propose eliminating the "most wins/losses" tiebreaker or putting it much further down the list. (And why isn't head-to-head the first tiebreaker? It wouldn't have affected anything here or at the Candidates', but when it is relevant how is that not the most obvious and natural way to distinguish the players? Still another idea, aiming for objectivity over the kinds of dumb luck rewarded by the Sonneborn-Berger tiebreak: what about factoring in something like Ken Regan's Intrinsic Performance Ratings, both for the player's moves and his opponent's? It's not perfect, but it at least tries to isolate the most relevant factor: the quality of a player's moves.)

Rant over. In other games, Kramnik was successful today where he wasn't yesterday, this time winning the 7-hour game. Adams (his opponent) was doing fine for a long time, but a couple of loose moves between moves 30 and 40 got him in trouble. 33.Ne2 would have been better than 33.Nf1, but the bigger culprit was 36.Nd5? Adams must have missed or underestimated Kramnik's 36...f4! It's antipositional and ugly as sin, but it sets up the threat of ...c6, exploiting the knight's lack of squares to win the b-pawn. (Note that ...c6 needed to be prefaced by ...Be5, as White could have met 37...c6? with 38.Nf6!=.) From there it was a long, hard grind, and while Kramnik in general handled the ending extremely well and was a deserved winner, he seems to have erred on moves 61 and 65. I'm not 100% sure that Adams could have drawn even then, but at the very least Kramnik endangered the win.

In both cases Adams returned the favor; the first with inaccuracies on moves 62 and 64; the second with 70.Rf5. I'm not sure Kramnik is winning after the immediate 70.Rf8, e.g. 70...Rd3+ 71.Kc2 Re3 72.Nf6+ Kg6 73.Ng4 Rg3 74.Ne5+. White's setup is incredibly effective: the f- and g-pawns are frozen and the poor Black king can't go to its otherwise ideal square, h5, on account of Rh8#. The h-pawn has a little freedom, but it's limited. Continuing a bit: 74...Kg7 75.Rf7+ Kh6 (75...Kg8 76.Kd2 h3 77.Rf6 eventually comes to the same thing) 76.Rf8 h3 77.Kd2 Kg7 78.Rf7+ Kg8 79.Rf6 may just be drawn. When Black's king goes to the 7th rank, White plays Rf7+ and then goes to f6 or f8 - whichever rank is opposite Black's king. If there is a win in there, it's not easy to find. Anyway, Adams missed this chance and played 70.Rf5(?), after which Kramnik only had to find the simple but nice finesse 70...Rd3+! and only after 71.Kc2 Rg3. With the king on d1 White could capture and draw, but with the king on c2 it's an elementary win for Black. Adams played a few more moves, and then resigned.

Nikita Vitiugov and Ding Liren slugged it out in the Anti-Saemisch Gambit line of the King's Indian. For a while Vitiugov looked like he would be able to keep the material and win, but he never quite figured out how to extinguish his opponent's activity and the game finally ended in a draw. There are various improvements available to White, but the last chance to keep winning chances was with 32.Rc1 rather than 32.Rd1. After 32.Rd1 Rc4 followed by doubling on the 2nd rank, the game was equal. The difference is that if Black goes for the same plan with 32.Rc1 Rd4 White has 33.Rc6. In the 32.Rd1 Rc4 version, 33.Rd6 is ineffective due to 33...Bd4+, when White is lucky that he can still draw. In the 32.Rc1 Rd4 version, 33...Bd4+ is illegal, so White is winning. 32...Rd4 isn't forced, but White can still fight for the full point.

Finally, the game between Peter Svidler and Laurent Fressinet also finished in a draw. Fressinet was better most of the way and probably could have pushed a bit more, but in general it looked like the players were happy to vacuum up the board and draw at move 40 - which they did.

Final Standings:

1-2. Aronian (first on tiebreaks), Gelfand 5.5
3. Anand 5
4-8. Vitiugov, Fressinet, Kramnik, Adams, Vachier-Lagrave 4.5
9. Ding Liren 3.5
10. Svidler 3

Candidates' Tournament, Round 12: Kramnik Beats Aronian, Ivanchuk Beats Carlsen; Kramnik Leads!

What a round! Magnus Carlsen had been in first place at the Candidates', either shared or alone, from round 4, and he entered today's round with a half point lead over Vladimir Kramnik and a full point ahead of Levon Aronian. With White against the erratic, self-destructive Vassily Ivanchuk he seemed well situated to increase his lead, especially with Kramnik having the black pieces against Aronian.

Instead, another "miracle" happened - or two. Kramnik came up with a fascinating plan with 10...f5 in a typical IQP position, and it looked good enough to equalize. Practically, it was even better. Aronian's best choice at a certain moment early on was to force a draw by repetition (starting with 15.Bxb5 f4, as I recall), but in his tournament situation that would have been hard to do. So he played on and was worse, but soon the board exploded with tactics. Kramnik made an error that could have allowed Aronian to escape with a draw, but missed it. Instead of finding that move - 21.Ne5 - Aronian played 21.e4?, and Kramnik was very ready for that one. A very nice tactical sequence left Kramnik with a probably winning technical endgame...but again Kramnik slipped. Aronian had several ways to draw the resulting piece-down ending (all based on the wrong-colored bishop + rook pawn combination), but when he played 50.g6?? his last chance was gone. It's hard to know what was going on in Aronian's mind, but it looks as if he was trying to win. It's tough to balance fighting spirit and self-preservation, and in this case Aronian chose wrongly - especially as it was clear by this point that Carlsen would have to struggle to draw.

Turning to that game, Carlsen played the opening poorly with White and was slightly worse. After Ivanchuk's odd 18...a5, however, Carlsen equalized, but then by the end of the first time control Chuky, with Black, was again somewhat better. Still, it wasn't clear for a long time what the result should be, and not only due to the ever-present concern that Ivanchuk would do something completely insane. This time around, he didn't, and when Carlsen failed to maintain his usual insanely high level of technical prowess the Ukranian great managed to convert his material advantage. Overall, Ivanchuk played very well, while Carlsen immediately labeled his play "absolutely disgraceful."

Thanks to that loss, and Kramnik's remarkable run in the second cycle (4.5/5; three in a row) it is now Kramnik who leads by half a point, with Carlsen in second and Aronian a point and a half behind with two rounds to go. Tomorrow is the rest day, and then they finish up on Easter Sunday and Monday. Before giving the full standings and pairings for the last two rounds, a quick note about the other two games, games which could in fact prove very important.

Boris Gelfand and Peter Svidler drew a game without fireworks, but that looked like a model squeeze by Gelfand before the inaccurate 32.Qa7. According to Svidler, 32.Qb3, maintaining the squeeze, would have kept an enduring advantage based on the bishop pair and the possibility of b4-b5. Teimour Radjabov-Alexander Grischuk was also drawn, and as in the Gelfand-Svidler game White may have missed an opportunity for more. Nothing much happened until 40...h5, but that was a serious error allowing White to target Black's f-pawn after 41.h4. Maybe 43.Rxf5+ would have given Radjabov better winning chances than 43.Bxf5; as it was, Grischuk had to wriggle before reaching the theoretically drawn ending with a rook against a rook and f- and h-pawns.

Why were these games important? The answer is that the tournament regulations have a very unfortunate provision for settling a first-place tie: tiebreaks! This is the second-most important event in the chess calendar, behind only the world championship itself, and the geniuses at FIDE are going to allow the challenger's identity to be decided by which player won more games, or how the tailender does in the last round against the next-to-last placed finisher. This is just insane, especially as plenty of far less prestigious events run playoffs in case of a tie.

About the games: I managed to goof my back up (for the second straight year; let's hope this doesn't become a tradition!), so for now I can't sit long enough to work up an in-depth analysis of the games. If things improve I may try to make up for it tomorrow, during the rest day; otherwise, my apologies.

Standings After Round 12:

1. Kramnik 8
2. Carlsen 7.5
3. Aronian 6.5
4. Svidler 6
5-6. Grischuk, Gelfand 5.5
7. Ivanchuk 5
8. Radjabov 4

Round 13 Pairings (Sunday):

• Radjabov - Carlsen (Clearly a big opportunity for Carlsen to bounce right back.)
• Grischuk - Aronian (Will Aronian burn his bridges trying to stay alive, or just play "correct" chess?)
• Kramnik - Gelfand (Gelfand has traditionally matched up well with Kramnik, and rarely loses games to him at a classical time control.)
• Svidler - Ivanchuk

Round 14 Pairings (Monday):

• Carlsen - Svidler
• Ivanchuk - Kramnik (Will Ivanchuk rise to the occasion again, or (indirectly) harm Carlsen a second time?)
• Gelfand - Grischuk
• Aronian - Radjabov

Candidates Tournament, Round 11: Kramnik Wins, Aronian Loses, Carlsen Continues to Lead

Magnus Carlsen is still in front in the Candidates' tournament, but with three rounds to go a resurgent Vladimir Kramnik is hot on his heels. Carlsen got an easy draw with Black against Alexander Grischuk (not that it was necessarily his aim before the game), and then waited to see if Levon Aronian would catch him or if Kramnik would draw nearer.

In the case of Aronian, he self-destructed in a slightly worse position with the wild 22...g5 and the follow-up error 23...b5. The idea behind 22...g5 was interesting but way too optimistic. Peter Svidler was able to capitalize pretty easily, and as a result Aronian's chances for first took a big hit. For Vladimir Kramnik, however, the round was a boon to his prospects. He defeated the crumbling Teimour Radjabov, getting Radjabov to fall into a nasty trap in the latter's time pressure. Kramnik has scored 3.5/4 in the second cycle, and the difference is in part a more pragmatic approach. In the first cycle he played completely "correctly" but failed to maximize his chances; this time around he's being a bit more tricky, and the points are dropping in his lap. Now Kramnik is just half a point behind Carlsen, and his game with Aronian tomorrow will be of huge importance.

The other game was a lame 17-move draw by repetition between Vassily Ivanchuk and Boris Gelfand. Lame, but understandable: for Ivanchuk, who had White, the tournament has been a disaster, so getting it over with makes sense. Gelfand is out of the running for first, so a quick draw with Black makes sense for him too. (Things could have been very different for Gelfand, though. He was outplayed by Carlsen yesterday, but before that he had won his last two games and had winning positions in the two games before that!)

The games, with my comments, are here. And now for the standings and pairings:

1. Carlsen 7.5
2. Kramnik 7
3. Aronian 6.5
4. Svidler 5.5
5-6. Gelfand, Grischuk 5
7. Ivanchuk 4
8. Radjabov 3.5

Round 12 Pairings:

• Carlsen - Ivanchuk (clearly a big opportunity for Carlsen; better still, he gets Radjabov next round)
• Gelfand - Svidler
• Aronian - Kramnik (whichever player finishes the round without at least 7.5 points can kiss his chances goodbye)
• Radjabov - Grischuk

Candidates Tournament, Round 10: Carlsen Remains In Clear First After All Leaders Win

It's often Magnus Carlsen who turns up the "lucky" winner, but today he has grounds for annoyance if anyone does. He won a nice game with White in a Rossolimo Sicilian against Boris Gelfand. Maybe not a perfect game, but one that was clear and convincing. That assured him of remaining in clear first with four rounds remaining at the Candidates' tournament in London, but the margin is small.

Levon Aronian is just half a point back, thanks to another patented time trouble-induced suicide by Vassily Ivanchuk. Ivanchuk played the Budapest Defense and achieved a good game, but he played so slowly that he managed to lose on time making his 30th move. By then the position had been ruined, but while he had played too riskily given his time situation he was still objectively equal after Aronian's 28th move.

Vladimir Kramnik was also the recipient of a time trouble-induced gift. Alexander Grischuk went into the Berlin ending, and without being well-prepared. Kramnik enjoyed the very, very slightly better chances, but the game was headed for a draw when Kramnik played 27...Bf5. Objectively this is a terrible move, as it turned a slightly better position into one that would require almost a "miracle" (Kramnik's favorite word when his opponents save difficult positions against him) for him to hold - but only if Grischuk made the right decision on move 30. Grischuk was fully aware of the correct option, but happily for Kramnik thought that the move played, 30.Bxd4(??), was the simplest way to hold the draw. Unfortunately for him, it lost in elementary fashion (at least it's elementary when one has a little more time than Grischuk did to calculate things). The right move was 30.Ke3, after which Black must play very accurately not to lose! (In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if my analysis is flawed and Kramnik is losing that ending.)

Kramnik was rolling the dice, and given the tournament situation it was the right thing to do. His chances aren't very good a point behind with four rounds to play, but to catch up from a point and a half back would require a...miracle.

The fourth game was a bit embarrassing but understandable, a 21-move draw (by repetition, to avoid the tournament's 30-move rule) between Teimour Radjabov and Peter Svidler. Radjabov certainly could have played on, but in clear last place coming into the round he's clearly interested in putting this tournament behind him without suffering any further damage.

The games, with my notes, can be replayed here (and as ChessBase has deigned to fix their server you can finally see my analysis of the round 9 games as well).

Standings After Round 10:

1. Carlsen 7
2. Aronian 6.5
3. Kramnik 6
4-6. Gelfand, Grischuk, Svidler 4.5
7-8. Radjabov, Ivanchuk 3.5

Round 11 Pairings:

• Grischuk - Carlsen
• Kramnik - Radjabov
• Svidler - Aronian
• Ivanchuk - Gelfand

Candidates Tournament, Round 9: Gelfand Beats Aronian, While Carlsen Holds Off Kramnik And Leads

With five rounds to go, Magnus Carlsen finished today's round of the Candidates with a double dose of good news. First, though under serious pressure from Vladimir Kramnik, he managed to survive a pawn down to keep a full point lead over the ex-champion. Second, Levon Aronian, with whom he (Carlsen) was tied coming into the round, lost to Boris Gelfand. That leaves Carlsen in clear first with three white games left and no more games against his main rivals. Good news for him, and bad news for Aronian and Kramnik.

In the other games, Vassily Ivanchuk played more quickly against Teimour Radjabov, and was rewarded with his first win of the tournament. Finally, the game between Peter Svidler and Alexander Grischuk was a spectacular draw that was far more interesting (if less competitively significant) than the Kramnik-Carlsen and Gelfand-Aronian battles. You can check it out, with my notes, here.

Standings After Round 9:

1. Carlsen 6
2. Aronian 5.5
3. Kramnik 5
4-5. Gelfand, Grischuk 4.5
6. Svidler 4
7. Ivanchuk 3.5
8. Radjabov 3

Round 10 Pairings (Wednesday; Tuesday is a rest day):

• Carlsen - Gelfand (Gelfand is 2-0 this cycle; but 3-0?)
• Aronian - Ivanchuk (Also interesting, now that Ivanchuk seems to have realized that practicality has its place.)
• Radjabov - Svidler
• Grischuk - Kramnik (Kramnik is rapidly running out of opportunities, and may have to take some risks with the black pieces.)

Candidates Tournament, Round 6: Carlsen, Aronian Win and Extend Their Lead

Going into the second rest day of the 2013 Candidates' tournament in London, the tournament is quickly becoming a tournament of haves and have-nots. Near the end of the first half, there are two "haves": Magnus Carlsen and Levon Aronian, both of whom sport impressive +3 scores (4.5-1.5). Aside from them, no one else even has a plus score. Eight rounds remain, so the tournament is not over by any means, but the clock is certainly ticking on the rest of the field.

Both of the leaders won today. Carlsen outplayed Peter Svidler in impressive fashion on the black side of a Ruy Lopez. As is sometimes the case in his games, he didn't seem to do anything amazing, but the result was the speedy demise of a great player and Ruy specialist who had seemed in good form in the preceding rounds. Such is chess in the Carlsen era. Meanwhile, Aronian overcame Teimour Radjabov, also winning with the black pieces. This game was roughly balanced for a long time, and although it was Aronian who did most of the pushing Radjabov was almost never in any serious trouble in the game. Exhaustion may have played a role in the end, when in a very tenable position Radjabov committed an outright blunder and resigned almost immediately afterwards.

Vladimir Kramnik has been playing good and interesting chess, and has been close to a win in several games. Today he went into sacrifice mode against Vassily Ivanchuk, first giving up a pawn, then an exchange, and then a piece for a pawn - the latter two sacrifices for the sake of a kingside attack. Ivanchuk burned lots of time, but defended perfectly, and after 27 moves Kramnik was faced with a fascinating decision. He could take a perpetual check (or something close enough to it), or try to play on. Ivanchuk had just over a minute left at that point to make 13 moves; the problem for Kramnik is that declining the perpetual wouldn't result in a murky position but a lost one. He looked for a long time to find some way to keep the game going without excessive risk, but he couldn't and took the right decision, painful though it clearly was to him. Six games, six draws for Kramnik.

Alexander Grischuk blundered a pawn in the early middlegame against Boris Gelfand, but although the latter had an advantage he objectively should have won with, he made a few errors - some even after the time control - and Grischuk escaped with a draw. The players are fighting hard, but some early signs of tiredness are seeping in. Hopefully the rest day is just what they need.

The games, with my notes, are here. Meanwhile, here are the standings in Noah's Ark after six rounds:

1-2. Carlsen, Aronian 4.5
3-4. Kramnik, Svidler 3
5-6. Grischuk, Radjabov 2.5
7-8. Ivanchuk, Gelfand 2

Finally, here are the round 7 pairings, for this Saturday:

• Carlsen - Radjabov
• Aronian - Grischuk
• Gelfand - Kramnik
• Ivanchuk - Svidler

Candidates Tournament, Round 3: Aronian Wins Again; Carlsen, Svidler Also Win

It didn't take long for the Candidates tournament to heat up. There were four draws in round 1, but all the decisive results the last two days have really stratified the field. Levon Aronian's score of 2.5/3 will pressure the other players to push a bit harder to keep up, while Boris Gelfand and Vassily Ivanchuk's score of half a point out of 3 leaves them almost out of contention already, even with 11 rounds to go.

Let's review the round 3 action. Aronian won on time with Black against Vassily Ivanchuk. Aronian had been winning on the board with a crushing counter-attack after Ivanchuk's kamikaze handling of a Trompowsky-turned-Torre Attack, but in his opponent's time trouble got sloppy and let him off the hook at the board. From a competitive standpoint it didn't matter much, as Ivanchuk had something ridiculous like 15 seconds to make 17 moves, and that simply wasn't going to happen.

Peter Svidler defeated Teimour Radjabov, going to +1 while sending Radjabov back to 50%. Svidler's preparation on the white side of a Saemisch King's Indian was excellent, and Radjabov's attempt to handle it in a Benko Gambit style didn't give him anything for the pawn. Svidler had a hiccup on move 38 when he didn't play 38.Rc1, but that was just an aesthetic blemish; Svidler still won pretty easily and confidently.

The last game to finish saw Magnus Carlsen grind out a win with the black pieces against Boris Gelfand. A misjudgment at the end of the first time control turned a practically sure draw into something a bit less clear, but only the blunder 47.Qxd8+?? turned it into a loss.

Finally, the one draw was a well-played game between Vladimir Kramnik and Alexander Grischuk. Kramnik prepared well and had Grischuk under serious pressure, but a well-timed pawn sacrifice by the latter gave him enough counterplay to hold the draw. Some commentators felt that Kramnik may have had better chances, and Kramnik didn't rule it out, but it was hard to find something that worked for him. They couldn't in the post-game press conference, and the engines don't reveal anything either, at least nothing obvious. (You can see what I did - or didn't come up with - by replaying this and the other round 3 games here.)

Standings After Round 3:

1. Aronian 2.5
2-3. Carlsen, Svidler 2
4-6 Grischuk, Kramnik, Radjabov 1.5
7-8. Gelfand, Ivanchuk .5

Monday is a rest day, and round 4 will be on Tuesday, with the following pairings:

• Carlsen - Grischuk
• Radjabov - Kramnik
• Aronian - Svidler
• Gelfand - Ivanchuk

Candidates Tournament, Round 2: Aronian, Radjabov Win

Happily, it didn't take too long to get some decisive wins in the 2013 Candidates. Levon Aronian and Teimour Radjabov both won with the white pieces to seize the early lead with 1.5/2.

The first win of the tournament belongs to Aronian, who won a very nice game against Boris Gelfand. Gelfand chose a line against the English that has long had a reputation of being rather unpleasant, and so it was on this occasion as well. Gelfand suffered for a long time, but thought he was finally escaping when he played 25...Rc8. This was instead the losing move, and Aronian finished brilliantly - 30.g4!! was an especially fine idea. After bumpy starts in the 2007 World Championship and the last Candidates' event, it will be very interesting to see how he does when coming out to an early lead.

Radjabov's win over Vassily Ivanchuk was mostly convincing and even one-sided, but could have been ruined if Ivanchuk had a little more time at the end. Ivanchuk's handling of the Leningrad Dutch wasn't terribly convincing - 12...Rf7 in particular looked pretty dubious, and likewise his failure a bit later to play ...Bf8. After 17.Ng5! Black was pretty close to lost, and after 21.Bxe5! it was objectively resignable.

It turned out, however, that Ivanchuk started playing better at this point, and in mutual time trouble Radjabov started playing a bit worse. 29.Qxa7 was a somewhat risky decision, and then 33.Rxb6 was a blunder that went unpunished. Ivanchuk was in horrific time trouble; in fact, after 33...Bxb6 34.Qxb6 he lost on time making his next move. It would have taken him some time on the clock and a bit of imagination as well, but it looks like 33...g4!! (it seems g4 is the brilliant move of the day, for either side!) would have saved the game. This incredible possibility aside, the game was very one-sided, and not an auspicious beginning for Ivanchuk by any stretch.

The game that would have been the headline had either player won it was Magnus Carlsen vs. Vladimir Kramnik. Carlsen played a sideline in the Symmetrical English that resulted in a slight lead in development, but with a few accurate moves Kramnik neutralized the pressure and the game resulted in a very quick draw.

Alexander Grischuk and Peter Svidler also produced a draw in what is so far the only game in the tournament to begin with 1.e4. The game was always around equality in an Anti-Marshall, with perhaps first Grischuk and then Svidler enjoying a micro-edge. The game made it to the end of first time control, and was agreed drawn.

The games, with my notes, can be replayed here.

Standings After Round 2:

1-2. Aronian, Radjabov 1.5
3-6. Carlsen, Kramnik, Grischuk, Svidler 1
7-8. Ivanchuk, Gelfand .5

Round 3 Pairings:

• Gelfand - Carlsen
• Ivanchuk - Aronian
• Svidler - Radjabov
• Kramnik - Grischuk

Interviews with Aronian, Wang Hao and Ipatov

After browsing the WhyChess website in the context of the previous post, I noted several interviews that might be of general interest. First, there's a short one with world #2 Levon Aronian, in which, in passing, he (sort of) names Alexander Alekhine the best player of all time. ("For me he's the best.")

Next up, a medium-sized interview with a player mostly unknown to those of us in the West, Biel winner Wang Hao.

Finally, there's a longer interview with newly crowned World Junior champion, federation-hopper and professional elbower Alexander Ipatov.

Anand-Gelfand, The Aftermath

Here's a nice summary article over on ChessVibes, with among other things, video clips of both Anand's and Gelfand's homecomings and a compilation of various Tweets on the match. Here's a funny exchange:

Levon Aronian
Congrats to World Champion Anand! Great comeback in the later stage of the match! Gelfand deserves a praise for his creative & dynamic play!

Mig Greengard
@LevAronian What, did they play another match? ; )

Levon Aronian
@chessninja How come the less a person knows about a subject, the more he treats it with disrespect.

I'm with Aronian on this one. To put the match in restaurant parlance, the problem wasn't with the food, which was generally tasty, but with the size of the portions. If Mig had complained about that, then my sympathies would be on his side.