Kasparov-Karpov: the Secret of the 24th Game

by Zoran Petronijevic
4/17/2025 – Garry Kasparov and Anatoly Karpov played five matches for the world championship. The fourth match was played in Seville in 1987. After 23 games, the score was 12–11 in Karpov’s favor, putting Kasparov in a must-win situation to retain his title. The final game was adjourned after five hours of play, to be resumed the next day. The sealed position is the subject of this article.

Winning starts with what you know
The new version 18 offers completely new possibilities for chess training and analysis: playing style analysis, search for strategic themes, access to 6 billion Lichess games, player preparation by matching Lichess games, download Chess.com games with built-in API, built-in cloud engine and much more.

Throughout chess history, there have often been two players who have dominated over all others of their time, leading to the question: which of the two is better? The answer, of course, can only really be determined in a match. The first such rivals were De La Bourdonnais and McDonnell, who played six matches (and a mammoth 85 games) in 1834, with De La Bourdonnais winning. A few years later, the dominant players were Staunton and De Saint-Amant, and Staunton proved superior in their 1843 match. These matches, though intense and important for chess development, were not official – there was no world championship title at the time.

Fast-forward to more recent times, and the chess world has seen a number of significant rivalries, such as Botvinnik and Smyslov, who competed in three matches: the first ended in a draw, Smyslov won the second, and Botvinnik won the third. In 1966 and 1969, Petrosian and Spassky played two matches for the world chess championship, with Petrosian winning the first and Spassky the second. Between 1974 and 1981, Karpov and Korchnoi played three matches, all won by Karpov.

From 1984 to 1990, Garry Kasparov and Anatoly Karpov played five matches for the world championship, an absolute record to this day. The first match was unfinished, stopped at 5–3 in Karpov’s favor. Kasparov won the second and third, the fourth ended in a draw, and Kasparov won the fifth. These matches were major events, leading to analyses in every chess magazine of the time and, subsequently, the publication of many books. Kasparov first wrote a book about the second and third matches, with one move analyzed over 27 pages! After finishing his playing career, he commented deeply on all of his matches with Karpov in three exceptional books. Grandmaster Jan Timman also wrote about them in 2019, publishing The Longest Game through New in Chess.

This article focuses on the decisive moment of their fourth match: the 24th and final game, played in Seville in 1987. After 23 games, the score was 12–11 in Karpov’s favor, putting Kasparov in a must-win situation to retain his title. In his later commentary, Kasparov revealed his plan for that game: to play a long and complex game. The game itself was not of the highest quality – Karpov, in an equal position, took a poisoned pawn with 31…Nxa4?, and Kasparov had a clear win. Instead of winning in style with 33.Qb5!, Kasparov misplaced his queen with 33.Qd1, making the position equal again. Karpov then played 33…Ne7?

This article analyzes whether that move lost the game – leaving him a pawn down. In response, Kasparov played the safer but weaker 34.Qd8, rather than 34.Bh5!

At that time, games were adjourned after five hours of play and 40 moves, to be resumed the next day. This game was adjourned at move 42, and that position is the subject of this article.

The Position and Moves to the End

White had an extra pawn but faced difficulties in converting it, as all pawns were on the same wing. Another problem was a "bad bishop"—if Kasparov ended up with just a rook pawn, the position would be a draw (Karsten Müller uses the term "color-blind bishop"). During the evening, most analyses suggested the advantage would be enough for a win, and the next day, Kasparov indeed managed to win. He won the game, the match ended in a draw, and Kasparov retained his world champion title.

In all known commentaries, the adjourned position is evaluated as winning for White. The only note of doubt comes from Kasparov himself: "True, I am still not sure whether this was good enough to win" (Source: Garry Kasparov on Modern Chess, Part 3: Kasparov vs. Karpov 1986–1987, published in 2009). But the general consensus of chess literature to this day is that Kasparov's position is winning.

The question for our readers: is this really the case? Was Karpov’s move 33…Ne7 a losing mistake and had Kasparov retained a winning advantage through to the adjournment position?

And two more questions: In the above-mentioned book, Kasparov states that the move 42... g5 was weak, giving the variation: "43. f4! Qf6 44. Kh3 gxf4 45. exf4, etc." Was Kasparov right?

The third question is: In his excellent book, The Longest Game, Timman claims that if Black had played 45... Nd7 (see the variation in the game), he would have lost anyway. Is this analysis correct?

We hope our readers will help us find the truth.

This riddle was posed by Gady Costeff, who is an Israeli-American chess composer, computer scientist, and marketing analyst. Born on May 7, 1961, he is renowned for his contributions to chess artistry, particularly in the realm of endgame studies. Costeff has composed over 100 chess studies and is celebrated for his creativity and technical expertise in chess composition.


Zoran Petronijevic is an IM with FIDE rating 2405 (highest 2430). Lives in the town of Nis, Serbia. For many years he played for various teams, mostly in the first division in former Yugoslavia and Serbia. His occupation is a teacher of Philosophy and Logic. Since 2003 he has worked as a chess coach. In 2004 he made a CD for ChessBase about Caro-Kann (B13-B14). He was an editor for Encyclopedia of chess endgames: pawn, and Rook Endgames for Chess Informant. His passion is literature. In chess, he is interested in history and endgames.
Discussion and Feedback Submit your feedback to the editors


Discuss

Rules for reader comments

 
 

Not registered yet? Register

zoranp zoranp 4/19/2025 08:25
Albitex: There are many questions in Timman's analysis. The first question is about his move 45...Nd7. Is it the best?
Your suggestion 54...Nf8 is correct. It leads to an even play, while Timman's 54...Nc5 - loses. However, there are some more questions in his line. Are all moves correct?
zoranp zoranp 4/18/2025 02:44
Albitex:
1. You are right about 33.Qd1, but this was mentioned in the article.
2. Regardless 43...Qa3, you are right. One more question appears: is White winning at the end of Kasparov's line?
albitex albitex 4/18/2025 02:19
Third question:
Timman's analysis seems correct, but I wonder: if Black manages not to exchange the Queens, as happens in Timman's variation, could he resist?
Timman in his analysis on move 54° plays 54... Nc5, this move leads to the exchange of the Queens, if instead Black plays 54... Nf8 and subsequently tries not to exchange the Queens could he resist? I think so:
45... Nd7 46. Qd6 Nf6 47. Bf3 Qd7 48. Qc5 Kf7 49. e4 Qe7 50. Qe3 Kg7 51. e5 Nd7 52. h5 g5 53. Qe4 Qf7 54. Be2 Nc5? here Black enters into a variation that forced exchanges the Queens.
Best was (54... Nf8 55. Qd4 Qb7+ 56. Bf3 Qe7 57. Qb6 Kg8 (for no exchanges Queens) 58. Qb7 Qc5 59. Qb8 Qc2 +=)
Karsten Müller Karsten Müller 4/18/2025 01:46
albitex: Well done!
1) Indeed 33.Qd1?= was a mistake and 33.Qb5+- was called for.
2) This is much deeper. But you seem to be correct. At least I can not find a white win.
And there is more to be found...
albitex albitex 4/18/2025 01:18
In my opinion Kasparov was wrong, the move 42... g5 was a good move, a good attempt.
The move 43. f4 does not give an advantage:
42... g5!? 43. f4 Qa3! 44. Qe2 Kg7 45. Kh3 Qc5 and now I challenge White to win ..
albitex albitex 4/18/2025 12:35
According to the engines, and I think it is obvious, the fundamental mistake was not so much Karpov's 33... Ne7 (Nc5 =), but rather Kasparov's previous move 33. Qd1? If Kasparov had played 33. Qb5 he would have won immediately, Karpov lost a Knight:
33. Qd1?
33. Qb5 Nd6 (33... Kf8 34. Nc6 Nd6 35. Qb4 Qc7 36. Qxa4 +-) 34. Qc6 Qe7 35. Qxa4 +-
1