Chess Piece by Bobby Ang
FIDE World Championship
San Luis, Argentina
28 September - 14 October 2005
Final Standings
1 GM Veselin Topalov (Bulgaria 2788), 10.0/14
2-3 GM Viswanathan Anand (India 2788), GM Peter Svidler (Russia 2738), 8.5/14
4 GM Alexander Morozevich (Russia 2707), 7.0/14
5 GM Peter Leko (Hungary 2763), 6.5/14
6-7 GM Rustam Kasimdzhanov (Uzbekistan 2670), GM Michael Adams (England 2719), 5.5/14
8 GM Judit Polgar (Hungary 2735), 4.5/14
Average elo: 2738 <=> Category: 20
Let's talk about the Berlin Defence today, characterized by the moves 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 Nf6.
During the 1998 Torre vs Antonio match Eugene unleashed the Berlin Defence to cool the attacking fervor of his opponent, and he succeeded. Two years later Kramnik used the same weapon vs Garry Kasparov and with it dethroned the seemingly unbeatable world champion.
In an interview shortly after the match Kramnik took some questions on his choice of opening, and his views were pretty interesting. An excerpt:
Question: How did you hit upon the idea of the Berlin Defence as a way to neutralise Kasparov � was it your own idea to play it?
Answer: No! It was just one of the many candidates I looked at with my team. Don�t think for one minute I arrived in London with this as my only defence! Certainly I prepared it for the match � but it certainly wasn�t the only thing I had prepared! But it simply went well, as I suspiciously thought it would.
The Berlin Defence suited my strategy for the match. I had a defensive strategy � Actually, I had in my pocket some other sharper stuff to fall back on � but first I wanted to try the defensive strategy with Black and it worked so well. This was all new to Kasparov � he probably expected me to fight for equality with Black.
Okay, when you start to fight for equality, like Anand did in 1995, you could end up losing game 10, like he did, without putting up any kind of fight. With the Berlin you get a �feel� for the positions. I accepted that the endgame was better for White, but he has to win over the board, not with his legendary home preparation � that�s crucial!
With the Berlin I was able to set up a fortress that he could come near but not breach. When others play against Kasparov they want to keep him distant. I let him in close but I knew where the limit was. I think this surprised him because normally when you fight, you don�t want your opponent to have some advantage, but I gave some advantage from the beginning. Close enough to touch my wall, closer, closer, but not break it. Someone even compared it to Ali�s �rope-a-dope� trick against George Foreman � this was a very good analogy! Okay, I suffered a little, but with some defences Black commits his forces leaving behind openings into his camp. But with the Berlin, I was able to allow him to get near, but not quite near enough, and I knew where to draw the line with the fortresses I had set up.
At some point he seemed to lose all confidence trying to break down the Berlin Wall. He was still fighting as only Kasparov can, but I could see it in his eyes that he knew he wasn�t going to win one of these games. For him it was always a case of �Better, better, better�draw!� This is what broke him down psychologically. It was all very difficult for him as he�s used to winning ever second tournament game. This was my strategy and it worked very well.
Question: Maybe Kasparov should have switched to something else. He can play just about any opening so he should have tried SOMETHING else-anything but playing into your opponents game.
Answer: Well he did just that, opening with 1.c4 in games 5 and 7. That didn't work either so then he went back to the Ruy, after all as points out and the interview indicates he did get a good position in game 3. Still didn't work so in the last game he tried 1.d4 but still to no avail. In a longer match there would have been more room for experiments. Also the strategy of deliberately allowing White a tiny advantage instead of going for equalization and dead draws was interesting in this regard. If Kasparov had gotten nothing out of the opening at all in the first two Berlins he probably wouldn't have returned to it; say if the best he could get was a dead draw like in Leko vs Kramnik, 2004.
Very interesting strategy! And it works. Look at this game, it is not the same opening but the same principle applied:
Nadera,B (2400) - Adianto,U (2610) [E32]
zt 3.2 Yangon MYA (5), 12.12.1998
1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.Qc2 0-0 5.Bg5 c5 6.e3 h6 7.Bh4 cxd4 8.exd4 b6 9.Bd3 Bb7 10.f3 Nc6 11.Nge2 Be7 12.a3 d5 13.cxd5 Nxd5 14.Bf2 Rc8 15.0-0 Na5 16.Rfe1 Bg5 17.Kh1 Qd7 18.Qd1 Nc4 19.Bxc4 Rxc4 20.Qb3 Rfc8 21.Ne4 Ba6 22.Bg3 Be7 23.Rad1 R4c6 24.Nf4 Bc4 25.Qc2 Nxf4 26.Bxf4 Bd5 27.Qd3 Bh4 28.Re3 f5 29.Nc3 Bb3 30.Rd2 Bc4 31.Qb1 Bd5 32.Be5 b5 33.Rd1 Bg5 34.f4 Bh4 35.Rh3 Be7 36.Rg3 Bf8 37.Nxb5 Be4 38.Qa1 Rc2 39.Nc3 R8xc3 40.bxc3 Qd5 41.Rg1 Qc4 42.Qf1 Qc6 43.Qd1 Qc4 44.Qh5 Rxc3 45.Rg6 Rc2 46.h3 Qc6 47.Kh2 Qb7 48.Rg3 Bd5 49.Qxh6 Rc3 50.Rg5 Qf7 51.Rb1 Rc8 52.Rb2 a5 53.a4 Be4 54.Rb3 Rc2 55.Rbg3 1-0
Adianto�s exchange sacrifice on the 39th move was completely unsound and Nadera made him pay for it. One night a few months later over some drinks in Las Vegas I asked the Indonesian legend the reason behind the illogical sacrifice. He told me that he had gotten an advantage in the early middle game and tried very hard to increase it, but Barlo defended excellently. This lack of progress was so frustrating that he forced the sacrifice even though he knew it was dubious.
Another point � does anyone realize that Black has been scoring well in the Berlin these past few years? It has the best statistic of any of the main openings against 1.e4.
Topalov used the Berlin thrice with Black in the just-concluded world championship: he beat Judit Polgar in the 6th round, drew a short game with Anand in the 9th, and drew a fighting game with Kasimdzhanov in the penultimate round.
We gave the Kasim game last Monday, now here is his win vs Polgar.
Polgar,Judit (2735) - Topalov,Veselin (2788) [C67]
WCh-FIDE San Luis ARG (6), 04.10.2005
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 Nf6 4.0-0 Nxe4 5.d4 Nd6 6.Bxc6 dxc6 7.dxe5 Nf5
I have often heard the question why Black can't play 7...Ne4 and so as not to block his own bishop. It makes sense and, if white exchanges queens, it would be an improvement over putting it on f5. However, if White does not exchange queens and plays 8.Qe2 then the knight on e4 is a bit awkward.
8.Qxd8+ Kxd8 9.Nc3 Ne7
There are many possible moves here, for example 9..Ke8, 9...Be7, 9...Be6, 9...Bd7. The authorship of the text move, intending to transfer the knight to g6 to pressure e5, is disputed between American GM Alex Sherzer and the Hungarian Zoltan Almasi. It is also the move played if Black does not want a draw.
10.h3 Ng6 11.Ne4 h6 12.b3 c5 13.Be3 b6 14.Rad1+ Bd7 15.Nc3
Black usually develops his rooks through the a- and h- files, so it might make sense for White to block the advance of his opponent's h-pawn by 15.h4 Kc8 (15...h5? 16.Neg5 the pawn on f7 cannot be defended) 16.h5 Ne7 but now there is a problem, how can he defend his h5-pawn? It is awkwardly placed, and perhaps that is why Judit avoids the entire line.
15...Kc8 16.Nd5 Be6 17.c4 Kb7 18.Bc1 a5! 19.a4 Rd8 20.g4?
Judit fails to realize that she has no more advantage and keeps pushing. This new weakness is pounced on immediately by Topalov and by dint of very accurate play he manages to prove that it is sufficient for a win.
20...h5! 21.Ne3 Re8!
Black avoids exchanges - he is going for the win.
22.Rfe1 Nf4 23.Ng5 Be7 24.Nxe6 fxe6 25.gxh5 Nxh3+ 26.Kf1 Rxh5
Black has won a pawn.
27.Ng4 Bg5 28.Bxg5 Rxg5 29.f3 Rf8 30.Kg2 Nf4+ 31.Kg3 Rh5 32.Kf2
[32.Rh1 Rxh1 33.Rxh1 Ne2+ 34.Kf2 Nd4 wins]
32...Ng6 33.Rd7 Rh3 34.Re3 Nh4 35.Rdd3
[35.Rxg7?? Nf5]
35...Kc6 36.Rc3 Rh1 37.Red3 Nf5 38.Ne3 Nd4 39.Nf1 Rh5 40.Re3 Rf4 41.Rcd3 g5 42.Re4 Kb7 43.Kg3 Rxe4
I was watching this game online in the ICC and at this point the computers were screaming that there is an immediate win with 43...Nxf3! 44.Rxf4 (44.Rxf3?? Rxe4) 44...Nxe5 45.Rff3 g4 46.Rfe3 Rh3+ 47.Kg2 Nxd3 48.Rxh3 gxh3+ 49.Kxh3 Kc6 the endgame is winning. Anyway, the method chosen by Topalov also wins and in a less risky manner, so I'd say he was correct.
44.fxe4 Rh4 45.Nd2 Kc8!
With white's forces virtually paralyzed Topalov brings his king across the board to invade from the h-file.
46.Re3 Kd7 47.Re1 Ke7 48.Nf3!
Judit is not lying down and playing dead - she is averting defeat as best she could. Here she reckons that the rook ending will given more drawing chances.
48...Nxf3 49.Kxf3 Kf7
[49...Rh3+ wins the b3-pawn, but then 50.Kg4 Rxb3 51.Rh1 white has counterplay]
50.Rd1 Rf4+ 51.Ke3 Kg7 52.Rd7+ Rf7 53.Rd1 Kg6 54.Rd8 g4 55.Rg8+ Kh5 56.Rh8+ Kg5 57.Rg8+ Kh4 58.Rg6 Rf3+ 59.Ke2
caption: position after 59.Ke2
White seems to be recovering as he now threatens to wipe out black's pawn base, however the following exquisite king maneuver was doubtless planned before Topalov went for this position.
59...Kg3 60.Rxe6 Kf4 61.Re8 Re3+ 62.Kf2
[62.Kf1 Kxe4 63.e6 Kd3! 64.e7 Kc3 65.Kf2 Re4 does not change the result]
62...g3+ 63.Kg2 Kxe4 64.e6 Kd3! 0-1
The Berlin Defence is now a popular opening, and it is sure to be adopted more frequently after Topalov adopted it in the World Championships. What is important for me is that we all remember � Eugene Torre started it all!
Reader comments/suggestions are urgently solicited. Email address is bang@bworldonline.com
This article first appeared in Bobby Ang s column in Businessworld (Philippines) on 21 October 2005
FIDE World Championship
San Luis, Argentina
28 September - 14 October 2005
Final Standings
1 GM Veselin Topalov (Bulgaria 2788), 10.0/14
2-3 GM Viswanathan Anand (India 2788), GM Peter Svidler (Russia 2738), 8.5/14
4 GM Alexander Morozevich (Russia 2707), 7.0/14
5 GM Peter Leko (Hungary 2763), 6.5/14
6-7 GM Rustam Kasimdzhanov (Uzbekistan 2670), GM Michael Adams (England 2719), 5.5/14
8 GM Judit Polgar (Hungary 2735), 4.5/14
Average elo: 2738 <=> Category: 20
Let's talk about the Berlin Defence today, characterized by the moves 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 Nf6.
During the 1998 Torre vs Antonio match Eugene unleashed the Berlin Defence to cool the attacking fervor of his opponent, and he succeeded. Two years later Kramnik used the same weapon vs Garry Kasparov and with it dethroned the seemingly unbeatable world champion.
In an interview shortly after the match Kramnik took some questions on his choice of opening, and his views were pretty interesting. An excerpt:
Question: How did you hit upon the idea of the Berlin Defence as a way to neutralise Kasparov � was it your own idea to play it?
Answer: No! It was just one of the many candidates I looked at with my team. Don�t think for one minute I arrived in London with this as my only defence! Certainly I prepared it for the match � but it certainly wasn�t the only thing I had prepared! But it simply went well, as I suspiciously thought it would.
The Berlin Defence suited my strategy for the match. I had a defensive strategy � Actually, I had in my pocket some other sharper stuff to fall back on � but first I wanted to try the defensive strategy with Black and it worked so well. This was all new to Kasparov � he probably expected me to fight for equality with Black.
Okay, when you start to fight for equality, like Anand did in 1995, you could end up losing game 10, like he did, without putting up any kind of fight. With the Berlin you get a �feel� for the positions. I accepted that the endgame was better for White, but he has to win over the board, not with his legendary home preparation � that�s crucial!
With the Berlin I was able to set up a fortress that he could come near but not breach. When others play against Kasparov they want to keep him distant. I let him in close but I knew where the limit was. I think this surprised him because normally when you fight, you don�t want your opponent to have some advantage, but I gave some advantage from the beginning. Close enough to touch my wall, closer, closer, but not break it. Someone even compared it to Ali�s �rope-a-dope� trick against George Foreman � this was a very good analogy! Okay, I suffered a little, but with some defences Black commits his forces leaving behind openings into his camp. But with the Berlin, I was able to allow him to get near, but not quite near enough, and I knew where to draw the line with the fortresses I had set up.
At some point he seemed to lose all confidence trying to break down the Berlin Wall. He was still fighting as only Kasparov can, but I could see it in his eyes that he knew he wasn�t going to win one of these games. For him it was always a case of �Better, better, better�draw!� This is what broke him down psychologically. It was all very difficult for him as he�s used to winning ever second tournament game. This was my strategy and it worked very well.
Question: Maybe Kasparov should have switched to something else. He can play just about any opening so he should have tried SOMETHING else-anything but playing into your opponents game.
Answer: Well he did just that, opening with 1.c4 in games 5 and 7. That didn't work either so then he went back to the Ruy, after all as points out and the interview indicates he did get a good position in game 3. Still didn't work so in the last game he tried 1.d4 but still to no avail. In a longer match there would have been more room for experiments. Also the strategy of deliberately allowing White a tiny advantage instead of going for equalization and dead draws was interesting in this regard. If Kasparov had gotten nothing out of the opening at all in the first two Berlins he probably wouldn't have returned to it; say if the best he could get was a dead draw like in Leko vs Kramnik, 2004.
Very interesting strategy! And it works. Look at this game, it is not the same opening but the same principle applied:
Nadera,B (2400) - Adianto,U (2610) [E32]
zt 3.2 Yangon MYA (5), 12.12.1998
1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.Qc2 0-0 5.Bg5 c5 6.e3 h6 7.Bh4 cxd4 8.exd4 b6 9.Bd3 Bb7 10.f3 Nc6 11.Nge2 Be7 12.a3 d5 13.cxd5 Nxd5 14.Bf2 Rc8 15.0-0 Na5 16.Rfe1 Bg5 17.Kh1 Qd7 18.Qd1 Nc4 19.Bxc4 Rxc4 20.Qb3 Rfc8 21.Ne4 Ba6 22.Bg3 Be7 23.Rad1 R4c6 24.Nf4 Bc4 25.Qc2 Nxf4 26.Bxf4 Bd5 27.Qd3 Bh4 28.Re3 f5 29.Nc3 Bb3 30.Rd2 Bc4 31.Qb1 Bd5 32.Be5 b5 33.Rd1 Bg5 34.f4 Bh4 35.Rh3 Be7 36.Rg3 Bf8 37.Nxb5 Be4 38.Qa1 Rc2 39.Nc3 R8xc3 40.bxc3 Qd5 41.Rg1 Qc4 42.Qf1 Qc6 43.Qd1 Qc4 44.Qh5 Rxc3 45.Rg6 Rc2 46.h3 Qc6 47.Kh2 Qb7 48.Rg3 Bd5 49.Qxh6 Rc3 50.Rg5 Qf7 51.Rb1 Rc8 52.Rb2 a5 53.a4 Be4 54.Rb3 Rc2 55.Rbg3 1-0
Adianto�s exchange sacrifice on the 39th move was completely unsound and Nadera made him pay for it. One night a few months later over some drinks in Las Vegas I asked the Indonesian legend the reason behind the illogical sacrifice. He told me that he had gotten an advantage in the early middle game and tried very hard to increase it, but Barlo defended excellently. This lack of progress was so frustrating that he forced the sacrifice even though he knew it was dubious.
Another point � does anyone realize that Black has been scoring well in the Berlin these past few years? It has the best statistic of any of the main openings against 1.e4.
Topalov used the Berlin thrice with Black in the just-concluded world championship: he beat Judit Polgar in the 6th round, drew a short game with Anand in the 9th, and drew a fighting game with Kasimdzhanov in the penultimate round.
We gave the Kasim game last Monday, now here is his win vs Polgar.
Polgar,Judit (2735) - Topalov,Veselin (2788) [C67]
WCh-FIDE San Luis ARG (6), 04.10.2005
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 Nf6 4.0-0 Nxe4 5.d4 Nd6 6.Bxc6 dxc6 7.dxe5 Nf5
I have often heard the question why Black can't play 7...Ne4 and so as not to block his own bishop. It makes sense and, if white exchanges queens, it would be an improvement over putting it on f5. However, if White does not exchange queens and plays 8.Qe2 then the knight on e4 is a bit awkward.
8.Qxd8+ Kxd8 9.Nc3 Ne7
There are many possible moves here, for example 9..Ke8, 9...Be7, 9...Be6, 9...Bd7. The authorship of the text move, intending to transfer the knight to g6 to pressure e5, is disputed between American GM Alex Sherzer and the Hungarian Zoltan Almasi. It is also the move played if Black does not want a draw.
10.h3 Ng6 11.Ne4 h6 12.b3 c5 13.Be3 b6 14.Rad1+ Bd7 15.Nc3
Black usually develops his rooks through the a- and h- files, so it might make sense for White to block the advance of his opponent's h-pawn by 15.h4 Kc8 (15...h5? 16.Neg5 the pawn on f7 cannot be defended) 16.h5 Ne7 but now there is a problem, how can he defend his h5-pawn? It is awkwardly placed, and perhaps that is why Judit avoids the entire line.
15...Kc8 16.Nd5 Be6 17.c4 Kb7 18.Bc1 a5! 19.a4 Rd8 20.g4?
Judit fails to realize that she has no more advantage and keeps pushing. This new weakness is pounced on immediately by Topalov and by dint of very accurate play he manages to prove that it is sufficient for a win.
20...h5! 21.Ne3 Re8!
Black avoids exchanges - he is going for the win.
22.Rfe1 Nf4 23.Ng5 Be7 24.Nxe6 fxe6 25.gxh5 Nxh3+ 26.Kf1 Rxh5
Black has won a pawn.
27.Ng4 Bg5 28.Bxg5 Rxg5 29.f3 Rf8 30.Kg2 Nf4+ 31.Kg3 Rh5 32.Kf2
[32.Rh1 Rxh1 33.Rxh1 Ne2+ 34.Kf2 Nd4 wins]
32...Ng6 33.Rd7 Rh3 34.Re3 Nh4 35.Rdd3
[35.Rxg7?? Nf5]
35...Kc6 36.Rc3 Rh1 37.Red3 Nf5 38.Ne3 Nd4 39.Nf1 Rh5 40.Re3 Rf4 41.Rcd3 g5 42.Re4 Kb7 43.Kg3 Rxe4
I was watching this game online in the ICC and at this point the computers were screaming that there is an immediate win with 43...Nxf3! 44.Rxf4 (44.Rxf3?? Rxe4) 44...Nxe5 45.Rff3 g4 46.Rfe3 Rh3+ 47.Kg2 Nxd3 48.Rxh3 gxh3+ 49.Kxh3 Kc6 the endgame is winning. Anyway, the method chosen by Topalov also wins and in a less risky manner, so I'd say he was correct.
44.fxe4 Rh4 45.Nd2 Kc8!
With white's forces virtually paralyzed Topalov brings his king across the board to invade from the h-file.
46.Re3 Kd7 47.Re1 Ke7 48.Nf3!
Judit is not lying down and playing dead - she is averting defeat as best she could. Here she reckons that the rook ending will given more drawing chances.
48...Nxf3 49.Kxf3 Kf7
[49...Rh3+ wins the b3-pawn, but then 50.Kg4 Rxb3 51.Rh1 white has counterplay]
50.Rd1 Rf4+ 51.Ke3 Kg7 52.Rd7+ Rf7 53.Rd1 Kg6 54.Rd8 g4 55.Rg8+ Kh5 56.Rh8+ Kg5 57.Rg8+ Kh4 58.Rg6 Rf3+ 59.Ke2
caption: position after 59.Ke2
White seems to be recovering as he now threatens to wipe out black's pawn base, however the following exquisite king maneuver was doubtless planned before Topalov went for this position.
59...Kg3 60.Rxe6 Kf4 61.Re8 Re3+ 62.Kf2
[62.Kf1 Kxe4 63.e6 Kd3! 64.e7 Kc3 65.Kf2 Re4 does not change the result]
62...g3+ 63.Kg2 Kxe4 64.e6 Kd3! 0-1
The Berlin Defence is now a popular opening, and it is sure to be adopted more frequently after Topalov adopted it in the World Championships. What is important for me is that we all remember � Eugene Torre started it all!
Reader comments/suggestions are urgently solicited. Email address is bang@bworldonline.com
This article first appeared in Bobby Ang s column in Businessworld (Philippines) on 21 October 2005
