Endgame Riddle: Did Kasparov miss a chance?

by Karsten Müller
3/12/2021 – Karsten Müller once again sets out to find truth in a famous endgame. This time he looks at the 27th game of the 1st World Championship match between Anatoly Karpov and Garry Kasparov, which is generally regarded as a fine example of Karpov's outstanding technique. But how well did Karpov and Kasparov really play the endgame in this famous game?
Let endgame expert Dr Karsten Müller show and explain the finesses of the world champions. Although they had different styles each and every one of them played the endgame exceptionally well, so take the opportunity to enjoy and learn from some of the best endgames in the history of chess.

The 27th game of the 1st World Championship match 1984/1985 between defending champion Anatoly Karpov and challenger Garry Kasparov is legendary. The match began on September 10, 1984 and ended on February 13, 1985, the winner was to be the first to win six games, draws did not count. But after only nine games Karpov was already leading 4-0 and the match seemed to be decided. However, then followed a series of 17 draws, some of them very short and boring, until Karpov finally managed to win the 27th game, which gave him a 5-0 lead.

But in the next 21 games Karpov was unable to win another game and to win the match, and after 48 games the match was aborted without a winner though Karpov still led 5-3.

The second World Championship match between Karpov and Kasparov began six months later, on September3, 1985. This match went over 24 games and Kasparov won 13-11 to become new World Champion.

However, the 27th game of the 1st match between these two great rivals is not only legendary because it was Karpov's last victory in the 1st World Championship match, but also because Karpov seemed to demonstrate his great technical skills in this game. After surprising Kasparov in the opening, Karpov managed to outplay his opponent in a seemingly equal and rather harmless position and eventually gained material and won a pawn. Particularly stunning was Karpov's paradoxical 17th move (17.Rfc1): White put his rook on the c-file where it seemed to be blocked by a white pawn on c3. On first sight this rook move appeared to be senseless but it soon turned out to be quite dangerous.

Karpov's technique is legendary, and after winning the pawn he seemed to convert his advantage smoothly. But as Jan Timman reveals in his fine book The Longest Game, an insightful and gripping account of the five World Championship matches between Karpov and Kasparov, Kasparov did not think that Karpov handled the technical phase of this famous game particularly well.

So Karsten Müller decided to take a close look at this encounter and invites ChessBase readers to join his search for the truth. Is this endgame – as has been generally assumed so far – really another example of Karpov's outstanding technique or is Kasparov right when he claims that the endgame contains a number of mistakes?

 
New ...
Open...
Share...
Layout...
Flip Board
Settings
MoveNResultEloPlayers
Replay and check the LiveBook here
1.Nf3 d5 2.d4 Nf6 3.c4 e6 4.Nc3 Be7 5.Bg5 h6 6.Bxf6 Bxf6 7.e3 0-0 8.Qc2 c5 9.dxc5 dxc4 10.Bxc4 Qa5 11.0-0 Bxc3 12.Qxc3 Qxc3 13.bxc3 Nd7 14.c6 bxc6 15.Rab1 Nb6 16.Be2 c5 17.Rfc1 Bb7 18.Kf1 Bd5 19.Rb5 Nd7 20.Ra5 Rfb8 21.c4 Bc6 22.Ne1 Rb4 23.Bd1 Rb7 24.f3 Rd8 25.Nd3 g5 26.Bb3 Kf8 27.Nxc5 Nxc5 28.Rxc5 Rd6 29.Ke2 Ke7 30.Rd1 Rxd1 31.Kxd1 It is very interesting to read what Jan Timman writes about this game: "For this game, Karpov received the Best Game prize in Chess Informant, put up by the Dutch insurance company Interpolis. The prize was 1000 US dollars: 800 for the winner and 200 for the loser. A representative of Interpolis asked me to present the loser’s prize to Kasparov. I was going to see him in Cologne in the summer of 1985, right before his match against Robert Hübner in Hamburg. To my surprise, Kasparov didn’t want to accept the 200 dollars. He vehemently disagreed with the decision to give Karpov the prize. Agitated, and fiercely gesticulating, he made it clear to me how bad the game had been. Now, so many years later, and after a thorough investigation, I can understand what he meant." (Jan Timman, "The Longest Game: The Five Kasparov - Karpov Matches for the World Chess Championship", New in Chess 2019, p. 48-49) Now it's your turn: What did Kasparov mean and why did Timman agree? Where are the mistakes in this endgame? Kd6 32.Ra5 f5 33.Ke2 h5 34.e4 fxe4 35.fxe4 Bxe4 36.Rxg5 Bf5 37.Ke3 h4 38.Kd4 e5+ 39.Kc3 Bb1 40.a3 Re7 41.Rg4 h3 42.g3 Re8 43.Rg7 Rf8 44.Rxa7 Rf2 45.Kb4 Rxh2 46.c5+ Kc6 47.Ba4+ Kd5 48.Rd7+ Ke4 49.c6 Rb2+ 50.Ka5 Rb8 51.c7 Rc8 52.Kb6 Ke3 53.Bc6 h2 54.g4 Rh8 55.Rd1 Ba2 56.Re1+ Kf4 57.Re4+ Kg3 58.Rxe5 Kxg4 59.Re2 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,A2705Kasparov,G27151–01984D55World-ch30-KK1 Karpov-Kasparov +5-3=4027

Share your analyses and findings in the commentary!

Links

Karsten Müller is considered to be one of the greatest endgame experts in the world. His books on the endgame - among them "Fundamentals of Chess Endings", co-authored with Frank Lamprecht, that helped to improve Magnus Carlsen's endgame knowledge - and his endgame columns for the ChessCafe website and the ChessBase Magazine helped to establish and to confirm this reputation. Karsten's Fritztrainer DVDs on the endgame are bestsellers. The mathematician with a PhD lives in Hamburg, and for more than 25 years he has been scoring points for the Hamburger Schachklub (HSK) in the Bundesliga.

Discuss

Rules for reader comments

 
 

Not registered yet? Register

Karsten Müller Karsten Müller 3/14/2021 08:50
albitex: OK good. Indeed it seems that Black can hold after 42.gxh3.
albitex albitex 3/13/2021 10:59
I don't think White can really win after 42. gxh3. And anyway 41 ... h3 is not the best (41 ... Rh7 better)
Karsten Müller Karsten Müller 3/13/2021 05:11
malfa: Very good question. Please check this deeper. One starting point can be Jan Timman's line: 42.gxh3 Bf5 43.Rh4 e4 44.Bd1 Ke5 (Timman). Can White win?
malfa malfa 3/13/2021 01:48
If I remember correctly, Kasparov claimed that 42.g3 is a mistake and that 42.gxh3 would have won easily, but is this true? It''s hard to imagine, given that White would have inflicted upon himself two doubled rook pawns promoting on the wrong square WRT his bishop's color, and I suppose that Karpov pushed g3 without even thinking over it.
Keshava Keshava 3/13/2021 03:05
It seems like a deliberate insult to offer an elite player the loser's share of a brilliancy prize.
albitex albitex 3/12/2021 11:18
It seems that only 40. c5 + maintains an advantage, and no other plausible moves. However it is a theoretical advantage, I think it is really difficult to turn this advantage into win. At the table game the game probably ends in a draw also after 40. c5+.
Karsten Müller Karsten Müller 3/12/2021 08:29
Albitex: Yes very good! That 40.a3? is equal is a new finding.
albitex albitex 3/12/2021 08:18
Minor inaccuracy: 37. h4 was best of 37. Ke3?! played from Karpov
albitex albitex 3/12/2021 08:04
After a quick first glance, we can surely say:
Move 40. a3? makes White lose the advantage (40. c5+ + -).
Move 45. .. Rxh2? makes Kasparov lose the game (45. Rb2 =).
Karsten Müller Karsten Müller 3/12/2021 01:37
tcbull: Is 40.a3? an error, after which it is drawn? Indeed 45...Rb2!= would have drawn.
tcbull tcbull 3/12/2021 01:05
Playing through without an engine 34.e4 from Karpov felt premature. 3...e5 from Kasparow was giving up the stable structure of the bishop and can be questioned. 40.a3 control move seemed to be strange at that special moment. But the real turn of events I foundlater just with the help of an engine. It was when Kasparow was missing 45.Rb2! Anyway I like the game showing the fighting spirit. I do not like the idea to offer Garry a fraction of the price.
Karsten Müller Karsten Müller 3/12/2021 11:09
More new insights into this fascinating game can be found in Johannes Fischer's interview with Adrian Mikhalchishin, who was one of Karpov's seconds:
https://en.chessbase.com/post/an-interview-with-adrian-michalchishin-player-coach-author-part-ii
1
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.