MegaBase 2022: Three Epic Matches

by Nagesh Havanur
1/7/2022 – The MegaBase 2022 is Chess History in Action: It offers 9.210.512 games, the earliest played in 1475 and the most recent played October 2021, many of them annotated. Here our columnist, offers an introduction to three epic matches from the MegaBase with six annotated games. There is a lot more to discover in this treasure trove, grand battles, opening novelties and exemplary endgames.

Mega Database 2022 Mega Database 2022

The ChessBase Mega Database 2022 is the premiere chess database with over 9.2 million games from 1560 to 2021 in high quality.

More...

A friend of mine works for ChessBase. The other day I phoned him and grandly announced, "I am going to review MegaBase." He works on the project, 24 x7. So I thought I should pull his leg a bit.

Of course he was shocked.

"No, not you!"

"Why not?"

"You criticise everyone and everything."

"I criticise only you, not everyone."

I replied tongue-in-cheek.

"That’s bad enough."

"It could be worse"

"Tell me when was the last time you endorsed a ChessBase product whole-heartedly?"

"What is whole-heartedly?" I asked, feigning innocence.

"Without your trademark ifs and buts?"

I racked my memory and admitted,

"Can’t remember."

"That’s what I said. You wouldn’t be you without your nit-picking."

"What can I do? I am a bit of a perfectionist," "But then so are chess players. They know what they want and they are a demanding lot."

So with due respect to the sincerity and hard work that my friend does, let me offer first an introduction to the MegaBase. A detailed review can wait.

Now there are as many as 9210512 games in this database. The first of them, Francisco De Castellvi -Narcisco Vinoles, was played in Valencia, Spain way back in 1475. The last of them, Wesley So-Samuel Sevian, USA Championship play-off rapid game was played in October 2021. So when you see this Megabase on your screen you have more than five centuries of chess before you.

It’s impossible to do justice to this kind of work in one review. So here I shall deal with one theme. For starters, there are three series of epic matches,  De La Bourdonnais –McDonnell 1834, Botvinnik-Smyslov (1954-1958) and Karpov-Kasparov (1984-1990).

De la Bourdonnais – Alexander McDonnell Match 1834

The early half of the 19th Century is best represented by the 1834 Match.

De la Bourdonnais and McDonnell reveled in gambits and enriched opening theory in this area. They also pioneered variations in other openings. Lest we forget, it was in this match that the Sicilian Kalashnikov Variation made its dramatic debut:

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 e5!?

The middlegame was their forte. Both loved combinational play and leapt into a whirlpool of complications in game after game. No wonder that the games of this match were deeply studied and appreciated by great masters. They also lavished rich annotations on these encounters. Here I shall mention only a few of them:

Staunton, Löwenthal, Anderssen and Morphy in 19th Century

Lasker, Tartakower, Keres, Bronstein and Kasparov in 20th Century

The MegaBase offers all games (85 of them) and quite a few are annotated. Here is one of them:

De la Bourdonnais – Alexander McDonnell Match 1834 (21)

 
New ...
Open...
Share...
Layout...
Flip Board
Settings
MoveNResultEloPlayers
Replay and check the LiveBook here
1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 The Bishop's Opening Bc5 3.Qe2 An unusual move preparing 0-0-0 in the long run 3.Nf3 Nc6 4.b4 4.Nc3 Nf6 5.d3 leads to the slower Giuoco Piano. 4...Bxb4 5.c3 Ba5 5...Be7 is the other option. 6.d4 leads to Evans Gambit. 3.c3 Nf6 4.d4 exd4 5.cxd4 Bb4+ 6.Bd2 Bxd2+= 3...Nf6 4.d3 a nice trap here with 4.Bxf7+? Kxf7 5.Qc4+ d5 6.Qxc5 Nxe4 4...Nc6 5.c3 Ne7? Heading for g6.But the move loses control of e5. 5...0-0 was simple and good. Morphy recommended 5...d6 . 6.f4 An aggressive step 6.Nf3 was a sober developing move. 6...exf4 Bilguer's old Handbook recommends 6...d6 and after 7.Nf3 Bg4 it's level accordng to the author. 7.d4 Bb6 8.Bxf4 There was no hurry to capture this pawn. 8.Nf3 still allows d5 Instead 8.Bd3 deserves attention. If d5 9.e5 8...d6 8...d5! would have justified the previous move 6...Ne7. 9.exd5 Nfxd5 10.Bg5 Be6 9.Bd3 Now if Black plays . ..d5 White plays e5. Ng6 10.Be3 Löwenthal prefers 10.Bg5 provoking the weakring...h6. 10...0-0 11.h3 This move preventing...Bg4 amounts to a loss of tempo. The normal developimg move 11.Nf3 is indicated. 11...Re8 12.Nd2 Qe7! Exerting pressure on e-file Routine development with 12...Bd7 was also possible. But Black's move is better. 13.0-0-0 c5 14.Kb1 A standard move evacuating the king to a safer position when White castles on the queenside. cxd4 15.cxd4 a5 Here Anderssen's suggestion 15...Nd5 exchanging one of the bishops deserves attention. 16.Bg5 f6 17.Bc4 Qf7 16.Ngf3 Bd7 16...Nd5?! 17.Bg5 f6 18.Bc4 Qf7 19.Qf2 17.g4 h6? This move cannot prevent g5 and amounts to a loss of tempo. 17...Bc6! with more pressure on White's centre is correct. 18.Bg5 h6 19.Bxf6 Qxf6 18.Rdg1 a4 This advance could have waited. Again 18...Bc6 is indicated. If 19.g5 hxg5 20.Bxg5 Qe6 19.g5 To all appearances White's attack should come first. hxg5 20.Bxg5 a3? A premature advance 20...Bc6 is still necessary. 21.b3? Fritz commends 21.Nc4!± and White simply wins the pawn on a3. The author cites analysis starting with 21.e5 dxe5 22.Ne4 axb2 23.Bxf6 But this is met by gxf6! and Black takes over the game as pointed out by Taylor Kingston in his Chesscafe Review. 21...Bc6! At last the bishop appears on the scene and together with other pieces exerts real pressure on White's vulnerable pawn centre. 22.Rg4 Defending e4 with an imaginative move taking advantage of the pin on f6 22.Bxf6 Qxf6 23.Qf2 is also possible. If 22.d5? Black wins a pawn with Bxd5! 23.Bxf6 Qxf6 and the bishop still cannot be captured on account of mate on b2. 24.exd5?? Qb2# 22...Ba5? This move releasing the pressure on d4 is an error. 22...Ra5!? would have maintained the tension in the position. 23.h4 Bxd2 24.Nxd2 Ra5 In this game both players make imaginative use of rooks. 25.h5? But this is a careless advance that overlooks a tactical stroke by Black. Instead he should have played 25.Rhg1 and it's best met by Qe6 unpinning the queen.Now The exchange sacrifice as in the game would not work here. 25...Rxg5?! 26.Rxg5 Nf4 27.Rxg7+ Kf8 and Black has no compensation for the material he has given up. 26.Bxf6 Qxf6 is fine for Black as pointed out by the author. 25...Rxg5! The tame retreat 25...Nf8 would allow White to continue with 26.Rhg1± or 26.h6± 26.Rxg5 Nf4 27.Qf3 Nxd3 28.d5!? Fighting back If 28.Qxd3 Nxe4 and Black stands better according to Anderssen. But it's hard to see a defence for White here. 29.Rgg1 29.Nxe4?? loses to Bxe4-+ 29...Nxd2+ 30.Qxd2 Bxh1 31.Rxh1 Qe4+-+ Anderssen suggests instead 28.Rhg1! and after Bxe4 White can draw with 29.Rxg7+ Not 29.Nxe4? Qxe4 30.Qxf6 Ne5+ 31.Kc1 Rc8+ 32.Kd1 Qd3+ 33.Ke1 Nf3+ 34.Kf2 Rc2+ 35.Kg3 Nxg1+ 36.Kg4 Qh3+ 37.Kf4 Qf3# 29...Kh8 30.Nxe4 Qxe4 31.Qxe4 Rxe4 32.Rxf7 Nxh5 33.Rxb7 Rxd4 34.Ra7 Nhf4 35.Rxa3 Ne2= 28...Nxd5! 29.Rhg1 29.exd5? Qxg5 30.Qxd3 Qxd5-+ Cary Utterberg/Nagesh Havanur: '(Morphy's continuation) also wins rather prosaically.' 30...Bxd5-+ is as good. 29.Qxd3? Qxg5 30.exd5 Qf6! (Taylor Kingston assisted by Fritz) 30...Qxd5 (Morphy's continuation) also wins rather prosaically. 31.Nc4 Bxd5! 32.Qxd5 Re2-+ 29.Rxd5 Bxd5 30.Qxd3 30.exd5 Qe3-+ 30...Bxe4 31.Nxe4 Qxe4 32.Qxe4 Rxe4-+ 29...Nc3+ 30.Ka1 In his notes La Bourdonnais suggested 30.Kc2? but he overlooked Qxg5! 31.Rxg5 Ne1+ 32.Kxc3 Nxf3 as observed by Morphy. 30...Bxe4? Here Black has the stronger move, 30...Nxe4! 31.Rxg7+ Kh8 32.Nc4 32.Qxd3 Qf6+-+ 32...Ng5‼-+ with the threat of 33...Qe1+. A discovery made by ChessBase and missed by the author. 31.Rxg7+ 31.Nxe4 Qxe4 32.Qxe4 Rxe4 31...Kh8 32.Qg3 Bg6? This looks like the only saving move, it isn't. Here Morphy found 32...Qf6‼ 33.Rg8+ Kh7! 34.Rg7+ 34.Qg7+ Qxg7 35.R1xg7+ 35.R8xg7+ Kh6 36.Rxf7 36.Nxe4 Rxe4 37.R7g2 Re1+ 38.Rxe1 Nxe1 39.Rh2 d5-+ 36...Nb4 37.Rf6+ Kxh5 38.Rc1 Nc2+-+ 35...Kh6 36.Rxe8 Nb4! 34...Kh6 35.Qe3+ Nf4-+ 33.hxg6 Qe1+ 34.Rxe1?? Here Staunton showed the right idea 34.Nb1! Qxg3 After 34...Kxg7 Konstantinopolsky found 35.gxf7+ Qxg3 36.fxe8N+! Kf8 37.Rxg3+- 35.Rh7+ Kg8 36.gxf7+ Kxh7 37.Rh1+! The immediate 37.fxe8Q? only draws after Qxg1 38.Qf7+ Kh6 39.Qf6+ Kh7 Now 40.Qf7+! 40.Qxc3? given by the author runs into Nc5! and it's Black who has the winning chances. 40...Kh8= by perpetual check 37...Kg7 38.fxe8Q 34...Rxe1+ 35.Qxe1 Nxe1 36.Rh7+ Kg8 37.gxf7+ Kxh7 38.f8Q Nc2# Analysis based on annotations to the game from the book, "De la Bourdonnais versus McDonnell, 1834" by Cary Utterberg, McFarland.2005 0–1
  • Start an analysis engine:
  • Try maximizing the board:
  • Use the four cursor keys to replay the game. Make moves to analyse yourself.
  • Press Ctrl-B to rotate the board.
  • Drag the split bars between window panes.
  • Download&Clip PGN/GIF/FEN/QR Codes. Share the game.
  • Games viewed here will automatically be stored in your cloud clipboard (if you are logged in). Use the cloud clipboard also in ChessBase.
  • Create an account to access the games cloud.
WhiteEloWBlackEloBResYearECOEventRnd
De Labourdonnais,L-McDonnell,A-0–11834C24Match Labourdonnais-McDonnell(1)+15-6=421
De labourdonnais,L-McDonnell,A-0–1 C24Match Labourdonnais-McDonnell(1)+15-6=4

https://en.chessbase.com/portals/All/2017/50/220px-Louisdelabourdonnais.jpg

De la Bourdonnais

A magnificent struggle! No wonder that it drew the admiration of great masters who subjected it to critical scrutiny.

In creative terms Alexander McDonnell shone in the match as much as his rival did.

Here is a wonderful example:

De la Bourdonnais – Alexander McDonnell Match 1834 (30)

 
New ...
Open...
Share...
Layout...
Flip Board
Settings
MoveNResultEloPlayers
Replay and check the LiveBook here
1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Nf6 3.d4 exd4 4.e5 Qe7 5.Qe2 Ng8 6.Nf3 Nc6 7.c3 d6 8.cxd4 Bg4 9.Bb5 d5 10.Nc3 Qe6 11.h3 Bxf3 12.Qxf3 0-0-0 13.Bxc6 Qxc6 14.Qxf7 Bb4 15.Bd2 Ne7 16.0-0 Rdf8 17.Qh5 Nf5 18.a3 Bxc3 19.Bxc3 g6 20.Qd1 h5 21.Rc1 Qe6 22.f4 h4 23.Rf3 Rfg8 24.Qe1 Kb8 25.Qd2 Rh7 26.Qd3 Rhg7 27.Bd2 a6 28.b4 Qb6 29.Bc3 Ng3 30.a4 Ne4 31.b5 g5 32.f5 g4 33.hxg4 Rxg4 34.Rc2 h3 35.Rxh3 Rg3 36.Rxg3 Rxg3 37.a5 Qh6 38.Bd2 Qh3 39.Qf1 Rg8 40.f6 Qh5 41.f7 Rf8 42.e6 Ng3 43.Qf3 Qh1+ 44.Kf2 Ne4+ 45.Ke2 Qb1 46.e7 Qxb5+ 47.Qd3 Ng3+ 48.Kd1 The Chess Player's Chronicle 1842, p. 215 1–0
  • Start an analysis engine:
  • Try maximizing the board:
  • Use the four cursor keys to replay the game. Make moves to analyse yourself.
  • Press Ctrl-B to rotate the board.
  • Drag the split bars between window panes.
  • Download&Clip PGN/GIF/FEN/QR Codes. Share the game.
  • Games viewed here will automatically be stored in your cloud clipboard (if you are logged in). Use the cloud clipboard also in ChessBase.
  • Create an account to access the games cloud.
WhiteEloWBlackEloBResYearECOEventRnd
McDonnell,A-De Labourdonnais,L-1–01834C24Match Labourdonnais-McDonnell(2) +4-5=05
McDonnell,A-De la bourdonnais,L-1–0 C24Match La bourdonnais-McDonnell(2) +4-5=0

A game of changing fortunes in which the loser deserves as much credit as the winner.

The legacy of this match was carried forward and enriched by four great players, Anderssen, Morphy, Chigorin and Steinitz. Indeed, the second half of the 19th Century belongs to this quartet. All their games (many annotated) are found in this MegaBase. More about them later.

Botvinnik-Smyslov (1954, 1957 and 1958)

To return to the epic series, the second of them is Botvinnik-Smyslov.

Between them they played three matches, 1954, 1957 and 1958. The first was a draw and Botvinnik retained the title. The second was decisive and Smyslov won. The third reversed it all and Botvinnik won regaining the title.

You would find each of these games in MegaBase. Quite a few of them are annotated and one of them is by none other than Garry Kasparov. His commentary is both in English and German. Before we follow his annotations we need to know what happened in the match and how the players saw this game.

Botvinnik-Smyslov, World Championship Match 1954 (Game 14)

 
New ...
Open...
Share...
Layout...
Flip Board
Settings
MoveNResultEloPlayers
Replay and check the LiveBook here
1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.g3 Bg7 4.Bg2 0-0 5.Nc3 d6 6.Nf3 Nbd7 7.0-0 e5 8.e4 c6 9.Be3 Ng4 10.Bg5 Qb6 11.h3 exd4 12.Na4 Qa6 13.hxg4 b5 14.Nxd4 bxa4 15.Nxc6 Qxc6 16.e5 Qxc4 17.Bxa8 Nxe5 18.Rc1 Qb4 19.a3 Qxb2 20.Qxa4 Bb7 21.Rb1 Nf3+ 22.Kh1 Bxa8 23.Rxb2 Nxg5+ 24.Kh2 Nf3+ 25.Kh3 Bxb2 26.Qxa7 Be4 27.a4 Kg7 28.Rd1 Be5 29.Qe7 Rc8 30.a5 Rc2 31.Kg2 Nd4+ 32.Kf1 Bf3 33.Rb1 Nc6 and White resigned. 0–1
  • Start an analysis engine:
  • Try maximizing the board:
  • Use the four cursor keys to replay the game. Make moves to analyse yourself.
  • Press Ctrl-B to rotate the board.
  • Drag the split bars between window panes.
  • Download&Clip PGN/GIF/FEN/QR Codes. Share the game.
  • Games viewed here will automatically be stored in your cloud clipboard (if you are logged in). Use the cloud clipboard also in ChessBase.
  • Create an account to access the games cloud.
WhiteEloWBlackEloBResYearECOEventRnd
Botvinnik,M-Smyslov,V-0–11954E68World-ch19 Botvinnik-Symslov +7-7=1014
Botvinnik,M-Smyslov,V-0–11954E69World-ch19 Botvinnik-Symslov +7-7=10
Botvinnik,M-Smyslov,V-0–11954E68World-ch19 Botvinnik-Symslov +7-7=10
Botvinnik,M-Smyslov,V-0–11954E68World-ch19 Botvinnik-Symslov +7-7=10
Botvinnik,M-Smyslov,V-0–11954E68World-ch19 Botvinnik-Symslov +7-7=10
Botvinnik,M-Smyslov,V-0–11954E68World-ch19 Botvinnik-Symslov +7-7=10
Botvinnik,M-Smyslov,V-0–11954E68World-ch19 Botvinnik-Symslov +7-7=10
Botvinnik,M-Smyslov,V-0–11954E68World-ch19 Botvinnik-Symslov +7-7=10
Botvinnik,M-Smyslov,V-0–11954E68World-ch19 Botvinnik-Symslov +7-7=10
Botvinnik,M-Smyslov,V-0–11954E68World-ch19 Botvinnik-Symslov +7-7=10

Botvinnik was all praise for his opponent’s play in this game. But he was also a suspicious man. How had Smyslov responded so quickly to his opening moves? Someone must have leaked his preparation. Who? His suspicion fell on Ilya Kan, his second.

Ilia Kan | Photo: Wikimedia

Kan was of course hurt and offended by this unjust imputation. For reasons of space I shall not write here on the 1957 Match that Botvinnik lost and Smyslov won Readers would find all the games in MegaBase. Here we have room for a short silent film that captures Smyslov’s  hour of triumph:

Source: British Pathė

Botvinnik played better in the Return Match to regain the title. Here is a game from that eventful encounter:

Botvinnik-Smyslov, World Championship Match 1958 (Game 12)

 
New ...
Open...
Share...
Layout...
Flip Board
Settings
MoveNResultEloPlayers
Replay and check the LiveBook here
1.c4 Nf6 2.g3 c6 3.Nf3 d5 4.b3 Bf5 5.Bg2 e6 6.Bb2 Nbd7 7.0-0 h6 8.d3 Be7 9.Nbd2 0-0 10.a3 a5 11.Qc2 Bh7 12.Bc3 b5 13.cxb5 cxb5 14.b4 Qc7 15.Qb2 Nb6 16.Be5 Qd7 17.Nb3 axb4 18.axb4 Rxa1 19.Rxa1 Na4 20.Qd2 Rc8 21.Rc1 Rxc1+ 22.Nxc1 Ne8 23.Nd4 Kf8 24.Bh3 Bg8 25.Ndb3 f6 26.Ba1 Qa7 27.d4 Nd6 28.Qa2 Nc4 29.Nc5 Bxc5 30.dxc5 e5 31.Qb1 d4 32.Qf5 Qc7 33.Nd3 Bf7 34.Qh7 Bg8 35.Qe4 Bf7 36.Qa8+ Be8 37.Bg2 Ke7 38.f4 Ne3 39.fxe5 fxe5 40.Qe4 Nxg2 41.Nxe5 1–0
  • Start an analysis engine:
  • Try maximizing the board:
  • Use the four cursor keys to replay the game. Make moves to analyse yourself.
  • Press Ctrl-B to rotate the board.
  • Drag the split bars between window panes.
  • Download&Clip PGN/GIF/FEN/QR Codes. Share the game.
  • Games viewed here will automatically be stored in your cloud clipboard (if you are logged in). Use the cloud clipboard also in ChessBase.
  • Create an account to access the games cloud.
WhiteEloWBlackEloBResYearECOEventRnd
Botvinnik,M-Smyslov,V-1–01958A12World Chess Championship

A difficult battle in which the outcome remains unclear right till the end.

I have spent ages analysing this game and it has defied minds of both the great players and even engines. Here are some of my findings.

 
New ...
Open...
Share...
Layout...
Flip Board
Settings
MoveNResultEloPlayers
Replay and check the LiveBook here
At this point the match had reached half way and Botvinnik was leading by two points and it was necessary for Smyslov to reduce the load by at least one point. 1.c4 Nf6 2.g3 2.Nc3 leads to the English Opening that Botvinnik has played for years. Here he avoids the move to give the game a slightly different character. 2...c6 3.Nf3 d5 A classical response that limits the scope of the White bishop on g2. 4.b3 Bf5 The Lasker System. As Botvinnik points out, Dr. Emanuel Lasker employed this system against Richard Reti in New York 1924. It continues to be viable and bears his name. 4...Bg4 is the Capablanca System. 5.Bg2 e6 6.Bb2 Now we have the Reti Opening. Nbd7 7.0-0 h6 Vacating h7 square for the bishop. 8.d3 Be7 Botvinnik does not favour 8...Bd6 as he thinks, it would invite e4-e5 advance forking the knight and the bishop. Indeed, it is less often played in modern practice. 9.Nbd2 0-0 10.a3 A thematic move preparing b2-b4. 10.Ne5 Nxe5 11.Bxe5 does not offer much. Black has a freer position after the exchange of knights and can now neutralize the White bishop with...Bd6 or even play the aggressive ...Bh6 denying White rooks the use of the c-file. 10...a5 Restraining White from queenside expansion. 11.Qc2 This prepares Bc3, Qb2 followed by b2-b4. Smyslov used to play this line with White. So Botvinnik employs it against him. He admits, it was a rather näive on his part as Smyslov knew how to handle it as Black. Botvinnik's idea of playing it in Reti style results in the following line, 11.Rc1 Re8 12.Rc2 Bf8 13.Qa1 c5 and it is comfortable for Black. 11...Bh7 If 11...Qb6 12.Bc3 White opens lines with b3-b4, the queen would be vulnerable. 12.Bc3 White prepares b3-b4 and Qb2. The ideal example of middlegame strategy to be followed here is Capablanca-Lilienthal, Moscow 1936 (Game No.67582 in MegaBase) according to Ilya Odessky, author of "Play1.b3!" If 12.e4 dxe4 13.Nxe4 Nxe4 14.dxe4 Nc5 12...b5 Foiling White's plan. However, 12...c5 is more thematic. 13.cxb5 Or 13.Qb2 b4 14.axb4 axb4 15.Rxa8 Qxa8 16.Bd4 c5 17.Be5 Qb7= 13...cxb5 14.b4 Botvinnik criticises this move as it results in a weak pawn on b4 according to him. However, his suggestion, 14.Bd4 is met by Bd6 15.Qb2 Qb8 Playing it in the spirit of Reti here won't work. 14.Qb2 b4 15.axb4 axb4 16.Bd4 Ra3 14...Qc7 "Black wins a valuable tempo threatening...Rfc8." Botvinnik. Simpler is 14...axb4 15.axb4 Rxa1 16.Rxa1 Qc7= 15.Qb2 White has taken control of a1-h8 diagonal. A complex line is 15.bxa5 b4 16.axb4 Bxb4 17.Rfc1 Rfc8 18.Bxb4 Qxc2 19.Rxc2 Rxc2∞ 15...Nb6 16.Be5 Qd7 Botvinnik does not question this move. But if the bishop on e5 has to be dislodged, d7 square should be available for the knight.' 21st Century games like Harikrishna-Dominguez, Dos Hermanas 2005 varied with 16...Qb7! 17.Nb3 Clarifying the position with a tactical trick. axb4 18.axb4 Rxa1 19.Rxa1 Na4 19...Bxb4? drops a piece to 20.Qd4+- 20.Qd2 20.Qd4 allows Rc8 and Black arrives first on the c-file. Importantly, d4 square that should be reserved for one of the knights, is occupied by the queen. 20...Rc8 21.Rc1 Seeking to neutralise Black's pressure on the c-file. 21.Nbd4 is a more active continuation. 21...Rxc1+ 22.Nxc1 From now on White has to see how he can activate this knight as well as the bishop on g2. Ne8? Smyslov spent a long time before making this move. Its idea is to play...f6 followed by ...e5 forming a mobile pawn centre. Unfortunately, it turns out to be a wrong decision. Instead Botvinnik recommends 22...Qc8 followed by .. . Nf6-d7-b8-a6. His other suggestion 22...Qb7 is not good as it allows White to occupy c-file. 23.Nd4! Not 23.d4? Qc8! 24.Na2 f6 25.Bf4 g5 26.Be3 Qc4-+ 23...Kf8 Vacating g8 for the bishop. and preparing...f6 The immediate 23...f6 is met by 24.Bh3! Instead he should have played 23...Nc7! and it could have been OK for Black according to Botvinnik. 24.Bh3 Bg8 'Redeploying the bishop on a2-g8 diagonal as there is nothing to do on b1-h7 diagonal. Now the bishop would be useful, guarding e6 before Black plays ...f6 and...e5.' 25.Ndb3 Making way for the bishop in the event of...f6 and also preparing to occupy c5. f6 26.Ba1 If 26.Bd4? Qc7! followed by ... e6-e5. 26...Qa7 " 26...Qd6 27.Na2 e5 28.d4 Nb6 is also reasonable. But Black wants to observe the c-file." Hans Kmoch. 27.d4 "White realizes that he must do something against 27...e5. The text move strengthens c5, but weakens c4." Hans Kmoch. Nd6 27...Nb6 deserves attention as the knight would come to c4 and White bishop on a1 is still passive on account of his pawn on d4. Botvinnik , however, believes, his position is still better. One of the knights would occupy c5 and Black's e6 pawn is weak.' 28.Qa2 "Now 28 ...Nb6 is no longer possible." Hans Kmoch. Nc4 29.Nc5 Botvinnik considers this move premature. Instead he recommends 29.Nd3 Qa6 30.Bc3 followed by Be1. 29...Bxc5 "Black must take the knight as his king pawn cannot be protected nor advanced." Hans Kmoch. 29...Qb6?? 30.Nd7++- 29...e5? 30.dxe5 fxe5 31.Nd7+ 30.dxc5 "This protected pawn has the added value of cutting off Black's knights, particularly the queen knight from home territory. Also, White's queen bishop comes into play." Hans Kmoch. Not 30.bxc5? Qa5 31.Nd3 Ke7 and now Black is better. 30...e5 Over-hasty. Black exposes light squares on his kingside. Botvinnik recommends 30...Qf7! 31.Qc2 Qh5 32.Bg2 e5∞ 31.Qb1! "The queen will take an active position on f5." Botvinnik. d4 "It was more prudent to avoid opening the e4-a8 diagonal." Botvinnik. 31...Kf7? 32.Qf5 Nxc5 33.bxc5 Qxa1 34.Qe6+ Kf8 35.Qc8+ Ke7 35...Kf7 36.Be6+ Kg6 37.Qe8+ also leads to mate as seen in the variation given by Botvinnik below. 36.Qxg8 Qxc1+ 37.Kg2+- 32.Qf5 "Here a basic weakness of Black appears: His pieces are decentralised and his home land open to invasion.White threatens to win a piece by 33.Qc8+" Kmoch. Qc7 If' 32...Nxc5? 33.Qc8+ Kf7 34.bxc5 Qxa1 35.Be6+ Kg6 36.Qe8++- followed by mate-Botvinnik 32...Qa8 33.Nd3 Bf7 33...Ke7? is met by 34.e3 If dxe3 35.f4!+- e2 is innocuous on account of 36.Qe4 and the e-pawn falls. 33...Qc6 34.f4! Ne3? 35.Nxe5! 34.Qh7 Bg8 35.Qe4! Bf7 35...Qb8 preventing the invasion on the 8th rank would have drawn.If 36.Qc6 Nc3 37.Bxc3 37.Kf1 Bd5 37...dxc3 36.Qa8+ Be8 37.Bg2± Ke7 37...Nc3? 38.Bxc3 dxc3 39.Qa1+- and the pawn on c3 is lost. 38.f4 An obvious move to split the Black pawn chain the dark diagonal and set the bishop free. Engines offer the waiting move 38.h3!± followed by h4 and Qe4 to probe Black's kingside. 38...Ne3? A flawed attempt to seek counterplay. Botvinnik and Prins analysed 38...Nc3! 39.fxe5 fxe5 40.c6!? 40.Bf3 looks safer. 40...Nxe2+ 41.Kf2 Nc3 42.Qb7 Kd6 43.Bxc3 dxc3 44.Nc5 Bxc6? However, matters are not so clear after 44...Nd2 45.Bxc6 Qxc6 46.Ne4++- 39.fxe5 fxe5 Threatening to win the bishop with 40...Nc2. 40.Qe4! Threatening both 41. Bxd4 and 41. Nxe5 Nxg2 Desperation. Sadly, there is nothing left. If 40...Nc2 41.Nf4! 41.Nxe5+- Botvinnik sealed this move and the game was adjourned. However, Smyslov did not turn up for resumption. Instead he phoned the Arbiter rather late that he would be resigning the game Sources: 1) "World Championship Match Moscow 1958 Part Two" by Hans Kmoch, Chess review, June 1958 2) "Botvinnik -Smyslov: Three World Championship Matches" by Mikhail Botvinnik, New in Chess. 2009 3)" Play 1.b3!" by Ilya Odessky, New in Chess.2008. White is not going to oblige with 41.Kxg2?? Bc6-+ 1–0
  • Start an analysis engine:
  • Try maximizing the board:
  • Use the four cursor keys to replay the game. Make moves to analyse yourself.
  • Press Ctrl-B to rotate the board.
  • Drag the split bars between window panes.
  • Download&Clip PGN/GIF/FEN/QR Codes. Share the game.
  • Games viewed here will automatically be stored in your cloud clipboard (if you are logged in). Use the cloud clipboard also in ChessBase.
  • Create an account to access the games cloud.
WhiteEloWBlackEloBResYearECOEventRnd
Botvinnik,M-Smyslov,V-1–01958A12World Chess Championship

Both Botvinnik and Smyslov were masters of the endgame. However, they were also human. Besides, they were playing under extraordinary tension. This was a world championship match with very high stakes. Inevitably, there were imperceptible errors of omission and commission. Decades later, with more knowledge and experience of endgame theory & practice we are able to see it all better. Importantly, we have engines to assist us in re-examining these historical games. Here is one under the microscope:

https://en.chessbase.com/post/riddle-solved-smyslov-could-have-drawn

Botvinnik’s crowning event in 1958 was a solemn affair. However, his admirers cheered his achievement:

Source: British Pathė

Kasparov-Karpov (1984, 1985, 1986, 1987 and 1990)

The third of them, Kasparov-Karpov series has been annotated by Garry Kasparov himself in EveryMan Chess books. He has also offered a personal commentary in ChessBase DVDs. Between them Kasparov and Karpov played 5 matches. The first match that started in 1984 was aborted. Now that’s a controversial story. Kasparov won the second in dramatic circumstances. After 23 games he led by one point. So it was imperative for Karpov to win this last game. Here is what happened:

Karpov-Kasparov, World Chess Championship Match 1985 (24)

 
New ...
Open...
Share...
Layout...
Flip Board
Settings
MoveNResultEloPlayers
Replay and check the LiveBook here
"At the decisive moment Karpov remains true to his favourite (until that day!) first move. When with exaggerated confidence he advanced his king's pawn, I felt glad: now the battle would take place on my territory - my opponent was aiming not for protracted manoeuvring, but for a hand-to-hand fight, which would give me a definite competitive advantage (and in the end it was this that told)." 1.e4 c5 "Black also sticks to his principles: he does not avoid the Sicilian Defence, which nearly always leads to complicated, double-edged play"-Kasparov 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.Be2 e6 The Scheveningen Variation was the battleground between these players in this match. 7.0-0 Be7 8.f4 0-0 9.Kh1 Qc7 10.a4 Nc6 11.Be3 Re8 12.Bf3 Rb8 13.Qd2 Bd7 14.Nb3 b6 15.g4 "Instead of the quiet 15.Bf2 (18th game), this move signals the start of an assault. The energetic 15 g4 occurred in the game A.Sokolov-Ribli (Montpellier Candidates 1985), played a week before, and, of course, both players were aware of it. Karpov evidently decided that this attacking plan was most in accordance with the spirit of this last, deciding game." Kasparov. Bc8 16.g5 Nd7 "This position occurred in Sokolov-Ribli, Candidates 1985, played a week before. Of course both Kasparov and I studied that game carefully." Karpov. 17.Qf2 Sokolov had played the weaker 17.Bg2 Although he won the game, improvements were found for Black. Karpov chooses a stronger move. 17...Bf8 Timman analyses 17...Bb7 18.Bg2 Na5 19.Rad1 Nxb3 20.cxb3 Bc6 21.f5 Ne5 22.f6 Bf8 23.Bd4 and writes, "Due to his lack of space, it is hard for Black to find counterplay here." 18.Bg2 Bb7 19.Rad1 g6 Until now both players had used up less than an hour of the playing time. Each was folowing his prepation. But now Karpov took almost 45 minutes for his next move. 20.Bc1 With this move he clears the third rank for the queen's rook so that it can move to h3. Rbc8 Here CC games offer an idea. 20...Nc5!? 21.f5 Ne5 22.Bf4 Nc4 23.Bc1 Ne5 24.Nd4 Qd7 deserves attention. 21.Rd3 Nb4? Now Kasparov also thought for long. Timman gives a line, 21...Bg7 22.f5 Nce5 23.Rh3 gxf5 24.exf5 Bxg2+ 25.Kxg2 exf5 26.Qxf5 Nf8 27.Kg1 Qd7∞ and assesses the position as equal. However, it is far from clear and there is still much play left. Instead Black can try the thematic freeing move, 21...d5!? 22.f5 22.exd5 Nb4 23.Rh3 Nxd5 24.Nxd5 Bxd5 25.Bxd5 exd5 26.Qh4 h5 27.gxh6 Qc4! Restraining White from moving f5 and commencing his own counteplay 22...Nde5 23.fxg6 fxg6 24.Rh3 d4 25.Nxd4 Nxd4 26.Qxd4 Bc5 22.Rh3 Bg7 Timman's line 22...f5!? 23.gxf6 Nxf6 24.f5 exf5 25.exf5 Bg7 26.Bg5 Qd7! 27.Bxb7 Qxb7+ 28.Kg1 Nh5 29.f6 Re5! 30.Qh4 Rf8! still fails to 31.Nd2! Rxg5+ 32.Qxg5 Bxf6 33.Qg4 Nxc2 34.Rd3± 23.Be3? Karpov took only 3 minutes for this safe move targeting b6 and still preserving the option of playing f4-f5. "With 23.f5! I would have retained the crown," Karpov is supposed to have said. But he denied it, "I have never insisted, I had a forced win in the 24th game." However, he maintained, he would have had winning chances if his opponent had committed the slightest inaccuracy in the line he found here. exf5 24.exf5 Bxg2+ 25.Kxg2 Qb7+ 26.Kg1 Rc4 27.fxg6 Rg4+ 28.Rg3 Rxg3+ 29.hxg3 Ne5 30.gxh7+ Kh8 31.Qf5 or 31.Nd4 Ned3! 31...Nxc2!= 23...Re7 He cannot win a pawn with 23...Bxc3? 24.bxc3 Qxc3?? 25.Bd4 Qc7 26.Rxh7! Kxh7 27.Qh4+ Kg8 28.Qh8# 23...f5 24.gxf6 Bxf6 24.Kg1 Played after almost half an hour of thinking. The king is vulnerable on the h1-a8 diagonal. So Karpov moves him to g1. Oher lines are no better as shown by Timman. 24.Bd4 e5 25.fxe5 Bxe5 26.Rf3 Rf8 27.Qh4 Qd8!= in preparation for ...f6 freeing the second rank. 27...Nxc2? is risky on accont of 28.Rh3± 24.f5 exf5 25.exf5 Bxg2+ 26.Qxg2 gxf5 27.Bd4 Ne5 28.Rxf5 Qc6= is harmless. 24...Rce8 25.Rd1 f5 26.gxf6 Nxf6 "The plan of relocating the rooks conceived by Black is quite ingenious, but it involves a pawn sacrifice that I should have accepted at once." Karpov. 27.Rg3? "After this inaccuracy White loses all chances of success." Karpov. He had to play 27.Bxb6! Ng4 Not 27...Qb8? 28.a5± 28.Bxc7 Nxf2 29.Bxd6 Nxd1 30.Bxe7 Nxc3 Or 30...Rxe7 31.Nxd1 Nxc2 32.e5± 31.bxc3 Nxc2 32.Bh4± and White is a comfortable pawn up. 27...Rf7 28.Bxb6 Qb8 29.Be3 Nh5 30.Rg4 Nf6 30...Bxc3 31.bxc3 Na2 31.Rh4 "A draw by repetition with 31.Rg3 Nh5 would have ended this tense game logically, but regrettably, this result was acceptable to only one player. " Karpov. 31...g5! Kasparov sacrifices the g-pawn to open up the f-file for his rook. 32.fxg5 Ng4! 33.Qd2 Nxe3 34.Qxe3 Nxc2 35.Qb6 Ba8! Kasparov has already sacrificed one pawn. It speaks for his incredible self-confidence that he is prepared to sacrifice another with exchange of queens. It was easy to defend the pawn and lose with 35...Rd8? 36.Bh3 Re7 37.g6 h6 38.Qf2 Nb4 39.Bxe6+ Rxe6 40.Qf7+ Kh8 41.Rxh6+ Bxh6 42.Qh7# Engines offer 35...Rc8!? 36.Rxd6 Rcf8 37.Rxe6 Rf2 36.Rxd6? "In serious time trouble White burns his bridges, pursuing illusory chances of victory." Karpov. Not 36.Qxd6?? Qxb3-+ " He could have maintained equality by 36.Qxb8 Rxb8 37.Bh3 (this move was discovered by grandmaster Agzamov) 36...Rb7! 37.Qxa6 Rxb3? Kasparov made this move immediately. A moment's reflection would have shown him the move 37...Nb4!-+ After the queen moves the rook is lost. 38.Rxe6?? A blunder in time trouble. Rxb2? Kasparov had 7 minutes left. He deliberately played fast as Karpov was in terrible time trouble. 38...Ne3! denying access to the White queen on c4 would have deprived White of all counterplay and won immediately as pointed out by Timman. 39.Qc4 Kh8 40.e5?? White has three pawns for the piece and he needs to reduce the fire power of the Black forces. So 40.Rxe8+ Qxe8 41.Nd1 Na3 42.Qd3 Ra2 43.g6 h6 44.Rxh6+ Bxh6 45.Qc3+ Bg7 46.Qh3+ Bh6 47.Qc3+= 40...Qa7+ 41.Kh1 Bxg2+ 42.Kxg2 Nd4+ "Karpov appeared to freeze. A few more agonising minutes passed, and finally he held out his hand and congratulated me on my victory and on winning the title of world champion." -Kasparov "I resigned in this position and was the first to congratulate Kasparov on obtaining the title of the world champion." -Karpov Sources: 1) "Semi-open Game in Action" (Batsford. 1987) by Anatoly Karpov 2)"Kasparov versus Karpov 1975-1985" (EveryMan Chess.2009) by Garry Kasparov 3)"The Longest Game" (New in Chess.2021) by Jan Timman 0–1
  • Start an analysis engine:
  • Try maximizing the board:
  • Use the four cursor keys to replay the game. Make moves to analyse yourself.
  • Press Ctrl-B to rotate the board.
  • Drag the split bars between window panes.
  • Download&Clip PGN/GIF/FEN/QR Codes. Share the game.
  • Games viewed here will automatically be stored in your cloud clipboard (if you are logged in). Use the cloud clipboard also in ChessBase.
  • Create an account to access the games cloud.
WhiteEloWBlackEloBResYearECOEventRnd
Karpov,A2720Kasparov,G27000–11985B85World-ch31-KK2 Kasparov-Karpov +5-3=16
Karpov,A2720Kasparov,G27000–11985B85World-ch31-KK2 Kasparov-Karpov +5-3=16
Karpov,A2720Kasparov,G27000–11985B85World-ch31-KK2 Kasparov-Karpov +5-3=16
Karpov,A2720Kasparov,G27000–11985B85World-ch31-KK2 Kasparov-Karpov +5-3=16
Karpov,A2720Kasparov,G27000–11985B85World-ch31-KK2 Kasparov-Karpov +5-3=16

A tense battle that changed the course of chess history.

Here is a glimpse of the feverish excitement that the match generated among the public:

Karpov and Kasparov played three more matches, 1986, 1987 and 1990. Unfortunately, Karpov did not succeed in wresting the title from Kasparov. He came close to it in the 1987 Match. After 22 games the score was level and only two games remained. This time Karpov’s patient, manoeuvering play was rewarded. Here is the game:

Karpov-Kasparov, World Chess Championship 1987 (23)

 
New ...
Open...
Share...
Layout...
Flip Board
Settings
MoveNResultEloPlayers
Replay and check the LiveBook here
''Kasparov's opening move! It's above all an anti-Grünfeld move.''Jan Timman. 1.c4 c5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Nc3 d5 "Kasparov avoids a pure English set-up and invites a transposition into the Grünfeld Defence. This move order leads to a structure that was completely new for the games between us." Karpov. 4.cxd5 Nxd5 5.d4 5.e4 Nb4 leads to great complications that would suit the style of Kasparov rather than Karpov. 5...Nxc3 6.bxc3 g6 7.e3 "On this occasion Karpov acted in a fundamentally different manner to that in the 24th game of the 1985 match, admitting that e2-e4, his very first move there, was wrong. Not only did he not "throw himself' at Black's position, but, on the contrary, with his entire opening set-up he let it be known to the opponent that he was gearing himself up for a lengthy struggle, in which the dynamic component would be reduced to the minimum. In other words, the ex-world champion followed a sensible rule: always play your own game! The opening was also fully in accordance with this aim. The move order chosen by White was aimed at excluding forced simplification at the start of the game, as well as an abrupt sharpening of the play." Makarychev. 7.e4 is the Main Line of Grünfeld Exchange Variation that both players have played before in this Match. "I was sure that Kasparov would be well prepared for this move, and so I decided to choose a rarer alternative." Karpov. 7...Bg7 8.Bd3 "Here I remembered with pleasure the 12th game of my match with Korchnoi in Meran (1981) 8.Bb5+ Nd7 White has a marked advantage, although Korchnoi managed to hold out. However, this position would certainly have been studied by Kasparov before the game." Karpov. "Of course it had been studied, and I was planning 8 ...Bd7! - the place for the queen's knight is at c6, where it exerts pressure on the centre." Kasparov. 8...Bd7 8...0-0 9.0-0 Qc7 "Until White has decided on the place for his queen's bishop, it is better to delay the development of the b8-knight." Kasparov. He gives the line 9...Nc6 10.Ba3 b6 11.Be4 Bb7 12.dxc5 Qc7 13.Nd4 10.Rb1 b6 Kasparov writes, 10...Rd8 not allowing 11.e4 is more accurate. 11.Qe2 Or 11.e4 Bg4 12.h3 Bxf3 13.Qxf3 cxd4 14.cxd4 Bxd4 15.Bf4 Qc3 Not 15...Be5? (Kasparov) 16.Rbc1 Qd6 17.Bh6± and Black would be forced to give up the exchange with Nc6 16.Rfc1 Qa5 17.Bc4 However, Karpov has other ideas on occupying e4. 11...Rd8 12.Be4 It's the bishop that occupies e4, not the pawn. Meanwhile Kasparov's 12.Rd1 deserves attention. 12...Ba6 12...Bb7 13.Bxb7 Qxb7 14.dxc5 Bxc3 15.Ba3 Bf6= is OK. However, Kasparov goes for a more aggressive continuation. 13.c4? Obvious and still wrong according to Timman. Instead 13.Bd3 Bxd3 14.Qxd3 Nc6= deserves attention. 13...Nc6 "Of course not 13...cxd4? 14.Bxa8 Bxc4 15.Qc2 d3 16.Qa4 "Karpov. If b5 or 16...d2 17.Bxd2 Bxf1 18.Rxf1+- 17.Rxb5 Bxb5 18.Qxb5+- 14.d5 f5 If 14...Ne5? 15.Nxe5 Bxe5 16.f4 Bg7 17.f5± Kasparov and Timman analyse 14...Nb4! 15.Rd1 Qd7 16.Ng5 or 16.a3 Qg4 16...h6 leads to favorable complications for Black. 15.Bd3 15.Bxf5 gxf5 16.dxc6 Qxc6 17.Bb2 Bxb2 18.Rxb2 Qe4 19.Rc1 Rd6 is only good for Black. 15...e5 "All this is forced." Karpov. Not so according toTimman. "If 15...Ne5? 16.Nxe5 Bxe5 17.f4 Bg7 followed by 18.e4." Karpov. Timman prefers 15...Nb4! 16.Ng5 Bc8 17.Bb2 e6= 16.e4 Not 16.Bxf5 gxf5 17.dxc6 Qxc6 16...Nd4 17.Nxd4 cxd4 18.Bg5 A simple developing move like this cannot be bad. Timman, however, suggests an action in the centre. 18.exf5 gxf5 19.f3 18...Rf8? Kasparov reproaches himself for making this instinctive decision defending the f-pawn. As he points out, f8 should be available for the bishop in case he has to undertake operations on a3-f8 diagonal. Imprtantly, the rook is needed on the e-file. So 18...Re8! 19.Rfc1 As Kasparov found out, he could have allowed the capture of the f-pawn. 19.exf5 e4! 20.Bxe4 gxf5 21.d6 Qxd6 22.Bd5+ Qxd5 23.Qxe8+ Rxe8 24.cxd5 Bxf1 25.Kxf1 Re5 26.d6 Rd5= 19...Bf8= (Timman) or 19...f4= (Kasparov) 19.Rfc1 Timman still prefers 19.exf5 gxf5 20.f3 19...Rac8 Defending against c4-cS, but taking this square away from the bishop at a6 and essentially losing a tempo. If 19...f4 20.c5 Bxd3 21.Qxd3 bxc5 22.Qa6 Qc8 23.Qxc8 Rfxc8 24.d6 h6 25.d7 hxg5 26.dxc8Q+ Rxc8 27.Rc4± 19...Rf7 20.Bd2 The bishop was doing nothing on g5. He returns to d2 to prepare a4-a5. Timman suggests the immediate 20.a4! f4 21.a5 h6 22.axb6 axb6 23.Qa2 Ra8 24.d6 Qc5 25.Rxb6!± and adds, "This is a hard variation to find over the board." 20...Rf7 21.a4 "The loss of time by Black makes itself felt. Karpov has gained a concrete initiative on the queenside.' (Taimanov). "The blame for this lies with the obstinacy of the black rooks, which have taken away squares from their bishops." Kasparov. fxe4 " 21...Bf8 is not possible in view of 22.exf5 gxf5 23.Bxf5! Rxf5 24.Qg4++- ." Karpov. If 21...f4 White has an overwhelming position as analysed by Kasparov. 22.a5 Bf8 23.Ra1 Bb7 24.a6 Ba8 25.Qg4 Kg7 26.Be2± Black is practically a piece down with no moves for the bishop on a8. 22.Qxe4 Rcf8 23.f3 Bc8 24.a5 "I thought, my initiative on the queenside was quite strong, and I decided not to force matters." "I could have won the exchange with 24.d6 Qxd6 25.Bb4 Qf6 26.Bxf8 Bxf8 But Black would have gained sufficient compensation thanks to his dark-square bishop." Karpov. 27.a5 Bf5 28.Qe2 Bh6 24...Bf5 not 24...bxa5? 25.c5± giving White two passed pawns 25.Qe2 Re8 26.Be4 not allowing ...e4 advance ''Worthy of consideration was 26.Ra1 Bf8 27.Re1 to improve the positions of his rooks.'' Timman. 26...Bf8 27.Qd3 "White has regrouped his forces and securely blocked the centre. He is now ready to switch to the kingside." Karpov. Bc5 28.Ra1 Qd7 ''More accurate was 28...Bxe4 29.Qxe4 Qd7 to bring the queen to f5 next.'' Timman. 29.Re1 Qc8 ''Now that there is no longer a White rook on the c-file, Black goes back to exerting pressure on c4." Timman. If 29...Bxe4 30.Rxe4 b5 31.cxb5 Qxd5 32.Rb1± 30.Kh1 Rc7 31.Rab1 "With time-trouble approaching White does not think about strengthening his position, but aims to maintain the status quo until the time control and only then find a clear plan." Karpov. Kg7 32.Rec1?! " Karpov decides to give his c-pawn extra protection, but thereby loses his grip in the centre.'' Timman. ''The correct continuation was 32.h3! followed by Kh2 maintaining tension''. Karpov. 32...Bxe4 33.fxe4 This opening of the f-file helps Black. 33.Qxe4 Qf5= 33...Rf7 34.Qg3! "White prevents the doubling of the black rooks on the f-file, deprives the black queen of the g4-square, and himself prepares to occupy the f-file." Kasparov. bxa5? "Black takes away the support from the bishop, incorrectly giving White two passed pawns." Karpov. " 34...Qc7! looks more harmonious." Karpov. 35.Bxa5 ''Strategically, White is winning now.'' Timman. Rf4 36.Re1 "I should have immediately played 36.Qd3 "' Karpov. However, Kasparov writes, Ref8 would have offered him enough counterplay. 36...Qa6! "After 36...Be7?! I didn't like 37.Bd2! Bh4 38.Qd3 Bxe1 39.Bxf4 Bh4 40.Bd2± with an enduring advantage for White: he can play over the entire board, combining threats on both wings. The next moves took place in slight time-trouble for me: for the four moves to the control I had less than five minutes, whereas Karpov had roughly eleven." Kasparov. 37.Bd2 37.Rb5 Bd6 38.h3± 37...Rf7 38.Qd3 ''Almost the same position as 5 moves earlier emerges, only now with a worthless a-pawn for Black instead of a solid pawn on b6.'' Timman. Ref8 39.h3 Rf2 40.Ra1 "If 40.Rb5 there is the reply Qa3 " Karpov. 40...Qf6 Here the game was adjourned and Karpov took only 3 minutes to seal 41.Rg1? ''Karpov sealed his move quickly and I was almost 100 % sure it was the prophylactic 41.Rg1.'' Black is just in time to create adequate counterplay. We devoted our main attention to this continuation, and as a result the quality of our adjournment analysis was again superior to that of Karpov's. We were able to find a mass of interesting nuances, including the refutation of the combination with ... Rf7-f3??. Kasparov. "The combatants did know each other well. However, this was not the time for prophylaxis. The position is too sharp for that. Much stronger was 41.Rfb1. On the kingside, White has no dangers to fear for the time being; he has totry to break the blockade on the queenside, and make his connected passed pawns tell.' Timman. "Two moves later the rook goes to b1, and it could have occupied this square immediately, without loss of time." Karpov. 41.Reb1! h5 41...Qh4?! 42.Be1 Rf1+ 43.Kh2± 41...Rxg2?? 42.Kxg2 Qf2+ 43.Kh1 Rf3 44.Rf1!+- Karpov. 42.Rb5 Qe7 43.Be1 a6! Obviously, the White rook cannot leave the first rank and capture the pawn. 44.Rbb1 Qg5 45.Bxf2 Rxf2 46.Rg1± 41...h5! "The appearance of the pawn at h4 will create threats against White's kingside and thereby divert him from the queenside." Karpov. 42.Ra5 Qe7 43.Rb1 h4! 44.Ra6 If 44.Rxc5?! Qxc5 45.Bb4 Rf1+ 46.Rxf1 46.Kh2? Rxb1! 47.Bxc5 Rff1 48.Qxf1 Rxf1-+ 46...Rxf1+ 47.Qxf1 Qxb4 so far Kasparov analysis. Now 48.c5! Qxc5 49.Qa6= 44...R8f7 45.Rc6 If 45.Be1 Qg5! 46.Bxf2 Rxf2 47.Rg1 Qe3 48.Qd1 48.Rd1 Qg5 draws by repetition 48...d3= Timman. 45...Qf8 46.Rg1 Be7 This is not bad. On e7 the bishop prevents checks by the White rooks, thus allowing easy operations on the f-file. Kasparov analyses 46...Bb4 47.Bxb4 Qxb4 48.c5 Qc3 and Timman continues with 49.Qxc3 dxc3 50.Ra6 c2 51.c6 Rd2 52.Ra3 Rd1 53.Ra1 Rd2 54.Kh2 Kf8= 47.Re6 "White could have tried 47.Be1 Rf1 48.c5 Kh7! 49.d6 Bg5 50.Bd2 Bxd2 51.Qxd2 Qb8= " Timman. 47...Kh7 48.Be1 "This move was dictated by a desire to maintain tension and gain time on the clock." Karpov. Taimanov analysed 48.Rxe5!? Bd6 49.Rh5+! gxh5 50.e5+ Kg8 51.exd6 Qxd6 52.Qxd4 Qf6 and concluded chances were with Black after exchange of queens. However, White can avoid the same and draw as the Black king's position is open according to Kasparov. It's too late for 48.Rb1 a5 If 49.Bxa5?? Rf1+ 50.Kh2 Bg5 51.Bd2 Rxb1 52.Bxg5 Rff1-+ 48...Rf1 49.Bd2 A move repetition to save time on the clock. Bc5 Tempting fate, though the move itself is not bad. "After the game I was terribly angry with myself for avoiding the repetition of moves with 49...R1f2! " Kasparov. 50.Rc6! "Here a draw is the most likely outcome, but for the moment I did not intend to begin peace negotiations. I was simply checking my opponent's intentions. And now Kasparov cracked under the tension and embarked on a faulty combination." Karpov. Not 50.Rxe5?? Rxg1+ 51.Kxg1 Rf1+ 52.Kh2 52.Qxf1 d3+-+ That was the point of 49...Bc5. 52...Qf2 53.Rh5+ gxh5 54.e5+ Kh8-+ 50...R7f3?? "Completely losing control over the situation! After a long and tenacious defence I suddenly suffered one of the most nightmarish hallucinations in my career, and I made an error that lost immediately. I had hardly pressed the clock button, when I immediately saw the simple refutation of my move, and I remembered that we had found it at home in our adjournment analysis." Kasparov. Karpov, Kasparov and Timman each analysed 50...Bb4 51.Bxb4 Rxg1+ 52.Kxg1 Qxb4 53.Qd1 Qc3 Now the calm 54.Kh1! d3 55.Rxg6 Kxg6 56.Qg4+ draws by perpetual check. Timman analyses 50...a5 51.Bxa5 R7f3 52.gxf3 Rxf3 53.Rc7+ Kh8 54.Rc8 Rxd3 55.Rxf8+ Bxf8 and writes, "Black doesno 't run any risk of losing." However, the picture is not all that clear after 56.Kh2! Kg7 57.Bc7 Kf7 58.Bxe5 Bc5 59.Kg2 51.gxf3 Rxf3 "This appears to be decisive, but..." Karpov 52.Rc7+ After 52.Qe2?? Black wins with Rxh3+ 53.Kg2 Rg3+ 54.Kh2 d3 55.Rc7+ Kg8 56.Rf1 Bg1+ 57.Kh1 dxe2 58.Rxf8+ Kxf8 59.c5 Bd4-+ 52...Kh8 53.Bh6!+- Rxd3 54.Bxf8 Rxh3+ 55.Kg2 Rg3+ 56.Kh2 Rxg1 57.Bxc5 d3 and Kasparov resigned. "After 58.Be3 White gives up his bishop for the pawn, when the passed c-and d-pawns cannot be stopped." Karpov. Sources: 1) "My Best games" by Anatoly Karpov, Edition Olms.2007. Karpov 2)"Kasparov versus Karpov 1986-1987 " (EveryMan Chess.2009) by Garry Kasparov 3)"The Longest Game" (New in Chess.2021) by Jan Timman 1–0
  • Start an analysis engine:
  • Try maximizing the board:
  • Use the four cursor keys to replay the game. Make moves to analyse yourself.
  • Press Ctrl-B to rotate the board.
  • Drag the split bars between window panes.
  • Download&Clip PGN/GIF/FEN/QR Codes. Share the game.
  • Games viewed here will automatically be stored in your cloud clipboard (if you are logged in). Use the cloud clipboard also in ChessBase.
  • Create an account to access the games cloud.
WhiteEloWBlackEloBResYearECOEventRnd
Karpov,A-Kasparov,G-1–01987A34World Championship
Karpov,A-Kasparov,G-1–01987A34
Karpov,A-Kasparov,G-1–01987A34

A stunning defeat that saw Kasparov on the edge of precipice. The Spanish Television captured the climax:

Now everything hung on the last game. Sadly, Karpov lost his way in a position that required nuanced play. Kasparov won the game and retained his title. The next and the last match was fought in 1990. Again Karpov was close to the goal, but could not strike the decisive blow. The final score was 12½ -11½.

In terms of form both Kasparov and Karpov were at their peak during the years 1985-1990. They were never to play the way they did thereafter in any match against other opponents. So these games deserve a serious study.

The MegaBase is an ongoing project. Games in recent years are annotated in detail thanks to their main source, ChessBase Magazine. Not so with games from the past. A number of them are unannotated. Others have annotations of varying length and quality. This should not deter a chess player. Seeing the games in the MegaBase is the first step. Thereafter one has to supplement one’s understanding with some good reading and importantly, practice over the board.

Notes

1) The 1834 Match

a)George Walker offered vivid portraits of both the players in Chess & Chess Players

It offers pen portraits of Deschapelles, De la Bourdonnais and Alexander McDonnell. It also gives a fascinating eyewitness account of the match: https://rb.gy/euctb3

(see pp.38-60, pp.148-184 and pp.364-384 of the same book)

b)The following ChessBase article offers an introduction to the players and the match with a celebrated game:

https://en.chessbase.com/post/50-games-mcdonnell-labourdonnais

c) There is only one authoritative account of the 1834 Match. Here is a two-part review:

https://thechessworld.com/articles/reviews/de-la-bourdonnais-versus-mcdonnell-1834-review-part-i/

https://thechessworld.com/articles/reviews/de-la-bourdonnais-versus-mcdonnell-1834-review-part-ii/

2) Botvinnik versus Smyslov

Harry Golombek was an arbiter for the world championship matches, 1954, 1957 and 1958. He wrote books on the first two matches based on his reports in British Chess Magazine. He did not write a book on the last of these matches. But I believe, his reports in BCM 1958 should offer an eyewitness account of this last match as well.

There is of course Botvinnik-Smyslov:Three Matches 1954, 1957 and 1958 (New in Chess.2009) by Mikhail Botvinnik. It’s a little one-sided as the annotations in the main are by Botvinnik and none by Smyslov.  The latter did annotate ten of his world championship duels with Botvinnik and they may be found in Smyslov’s Best Games, Vol.1 and Vol.2

(Moravian Chess.2003)

3) Kasparov versus Karpov

Karpov did not write a book on these matches. However, he offers a wealth of insight in the Batsford opening books published way back in late 1980s. He also annotated 14 games from the world championship matches with Kasparov in his book, My Best Games Edition Olms. 2007.

Kasparov wrote a series of books under the subtitle, Kasparov versus Karpov on every single game they played. They have been published by EveryMan Chess.

There are also several other books, Moscow Marathon by Speelman and Tisdall (Unwin. 1985) and The World Chess Championship 1985 by Averbakh and Taimanov (Raduga Publishers. 1985)

The latest book is The Longest Game by Jan Timman New in Chess. 2021. This offers a comprehensive view of all Kasparov-Karpov Matches with a detailed narrative and deeply annotated games.

ChessBase has produced Master Class DVDs on Botvinnik, Smyslov and Karpov. Kasparov himself has authored a ChessBase DVD, How I became World Champion. This covers the period, 1973-1985.

Links

Buy the Megadatabase in the shop...


Prof. Nagesh Havanur (otherwise known as "chessbibliophile") is a senior academic and research scholar. He taught English in Mumbai for three decades and has now settled in Bangalore, India. His interests include chess history, biography and opening theory. He has been writing on the Royal Game for more than three decades. His articles and reviews have appeared on several web sites and magazines.

Discuss

Rules for reader comments

 
 

Not registered yet? Register

We use cookies and comparable technologies to provide certain functions, to improve the user experience and to offer interest-oriented content. Depending on their intended use, analysis cookies and marketing cookies may be used in addition to technically required cookies. Here you can make detailed settings or revoke your consent (if necessary partially) with effect for the future. Further information can be found in our data protection declaration.