Jon Speelman: Remember 1963 (plus other worthy exhortations and an assertion)

by Jonathan Speelman
12/4/2024 – Grandmaster Jon Speelman delves into the ongoing World Chess Championship match in Singapore, offering insightful analysis and drawing fascinating parallels to historic encounters like Botvinnik v. Petrosian in 1963. With Gukesh and Ding trading psychological blows as much as tactical ones, Speelman highlights critical moments that reveal each player's mindset and strategy under immense pressure. From Gukesh's bold refusal of a threefold repetition to Ding's cautious attempts to regain control, Speelman's commentary illuminates the evolving dynamics of a closely contested match. | Photo: FIDE / Eng Chin An

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.

The importance of keeping a level head

[Note that Jon Speelman also looks at the content of the article in video format, here embedded at the end of the article.]

I'm going to write this column incrementally, updating it after each game of the World Championship. Of course, these have been annotated in great detail all over the place, but I want to focus on just a few moments and what they reveal about the players and the state of the match.

My preliminary title, "Remember 1963", is an exhortation that presumably only a tiny proportion of my readers will be able to take literally. I was very much alive myself, and indeed had been taught the moves of chess on Boxing Day 1962 (which I recently discovered was the eve of the great freeze in the UK). But I wasn't really aware of Botvinnik v. Petrosian until my mum bought me my first "real" chess book – not a beginner's book like Bott and Morrison's excellent Chess for Children, and later The Chess Apprentice, which as I've said here before was Bob Wade's account of that match.

Ding wasn't born until 1992 and Gukesh until more than 40 years after Botvinnik v. Petrosian in 2006, but I think that that match does teach us something about the importance of keeping a level head. I gave games one and five here a month ago so I won't repeat them, but the important point is that Petrosian, who had never beaten Botvinnik, played utterly abysmally in game one and, rather than panic, simply carried on as if nothing had happened. This seemed to confound Botvinnik, and Petrosian famously won game five and later the match.

Tigran Petrosian, Mikhail Botvinnik

Tigran Petrosian v. Mikhail Botvinnik in 1963

We'll see over the coming days how the match pans out but my advice to Gukesh today would have been very much not to take the game to heart and just to carry on and if possible not try "too hard". This applies to Ding too, of course. He was exceptionally nervous in game one because he hadn't won a classical game since January when he beat Gukesh himself and Max Warmerdam at Wijk ann Zee.

The most important thing under the crushing pressure of a match is to create a space in which you can operate and that has to happen in real time but can be planned for.

Game two was something of an interlude but also interesting, of course. After the opening, Gukesh needed to play accurately to avoid a long-term positional disadvantage, but he found a couple of good moves, solved the problem and drew (seemingly) pretty easily.

Then came game three, in which Gukesh created complicated tactical problems from the off. Ding reacted well to start with, but it seemed hubristic to leave his bishop trapped on c2, and Gukesh was able to take advantage. Admittedly retreating the bishop to f5 and then e6 would have been very complicated too. Computer engines find ways to get decent compensation, but that isn't really the point. If he'd just retreated the bishop to f5, then Ding would have had a very decent position and the engines even give him the edge.

As it was, Gukesh won the piece, consolidated really well and then won time as he was about to emerge a whole rook ahead. It was his first-ever win against Ding at classical chess, and at that moment I felt that the match tipped clearly in the challenger's favour again.

World Chess Championship 2024

Gukesh levelled the score in game three | Photo: FIDE / Eng Chin An

In game two, Ding as White had created some strategic problems for Gukesh which needed to be met accurately. He did something similar (in a different opening) in game four, but again Gukesh was well up to the task and when Ding had the choice between hand-to-hand fighting and equalising, he probably pretty sensibly chose the latter. The pattern which has been emerging is of Ding trying to get control but shying away from messy positions, the more so after he was out-calculated in game three.

In game five, Gukesh returned to 1.e4 and, when Ding persisted with the French, switched to the Exchange Variation. It soon got quite tense, but as Gukesh strove to create opportunities for himself, he somewhat overstepped the mark and was in some danger, at least for a move or two. But he pulled himself together and found a decent defence, and Ding really didn't seem to believe that he had real winning chances since he immediately bailed out. Neither of them was hugely impressive in this game, and if I were to add another fairly empty exhortation, it would be to both of them to believe in themselves when they have real chances. Apart from game one, this probably applies more to Ding than Gukesh, who has been pretty optimistic for the rest of the match.

Gukesh was certainly optimistic in game 6, when in this diagram, he spurned a draw by threefold repetition which at this moment he could have claimed: by writing 26...Qg5-e7 on his scoresheet.

Ding v. Gukesh
"Tis but a scratch!"

As I've noted in the game file, by refusing the draw, he asserted regarding the gaping wound on his queenside, "Tis but a scratch". Later in the press conference, he said, "I thought I always have counterplay... It's not for playing for a win or anything. I just wanted to make a few more moves and see what happens". But I think that he was being pretty optimistic, and our lords and silicon masters broadly agree.

Of course, Gukesh did survive pretty easily and emerge more or less without a scratch. This looks as I write like a psychological victory for him. But maybe Ding has been sucking him in playing rope-a-dope?

World Chess Championship 2024

Ding Liren during game six | Photo: FIDE / Eng Chin An

New ...
Open...
Share...
Layout...
Flip Board
Settings
MoveNResultEloPlayers
Replay and check the LiveBook here
1.e4 The overwhelming impression of this game is the extreme nervousness of both players. Of course it was Gukesh's first ever game in the World Championship while Ding hadn't won a classical game since January. e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.e5 Nfd7 5.f4 Given that he's going to play Nce2 next move, it's interesting that he didn't do so here: 5.Nce2 c5 6.c3 5...c5 6.Nce2 Nc6 7.c3 a5 After 28 minutes! 8.Nf3 a4 9.Be3 Be7 10.g4 Gukesh was still following his preparation and played this novelty after less than 30 seconds. It's presumably a perfectly decent move, and what it does show is that he wanted to hit the ground running because he thought, or at least hoped, that Ding would continue his bad form. Qa5 After about 14 minutes. 11.Bg2 a3 12.b3 cxd4 13.b4 If 13.Nfxd4 Bh4+ 14.Bf2 Bxf2+ 15.Kxf2 g5! undermines the defence of the crucial e5-pawn 13...Qc7 14.Nexd4 Nb6 15.0-0 Engines suggest instead Nb5 or even Bf1, but castling is obvious for a human. Nc4 16.Bf2 Bd7
Gukesh had played quickly up to here, but he now thought for 33 minutes and produced a not especially good move. 17.Qe2 17.Nd2 Looks like the most sensible to me with a very decent game and no danger. 17...Nxd4 18.Nxd4?! Playable, but Bxd4 was much easier. 18.Bxd4 Bb5 19.Rfe1 18...Nb2! An excellent idea which seemed to discombobulate Gukesh. 19.Qe3 I think I'd have acceded to 19.Rfc1 Qc4 but it's already getting unpleasant for a person. 19...Rc8 20.Rac1 20.Rfc1 h5 21.g5 g6 is very pleasant for Black and a miserable way to start the match as White - but safer. 22.Kh1 0-0 20...Qc4
21.f5? A very human move but bad. Qd3 22.Qe1 22.Qf4 h6 22...g5 23.f6 g5 22...Bg5! 23.Rc2 Rc4 threatening Rxd4 23...0-0 was also strong but not 23...Ba4?! 24.fxe6! with massive complications. 24.h4 Bf4 25.Qb1!
A clever defence thretening Rxb2. 25...Rxc3!? Perhaps the best move but allowing huge complications. Instead 25...Na4!? 26.Rd1 Nxc3 27.Rxd3 Nxb1 28.Rxc4 dxc4 29.Rh3 h5 gives Black a clear advantage without too much mess, so looking at it now it doesn't feel that clear, so Ding's Rxc3 was a reasonable decision. 26.Rxc3 Qxc3 27.fxe6 I presume that Ding calculated up to the Qd4+ trick and so aimed for it. fxe6? 27...Bxe6! 28.Ne2 Qxe5 29.Nxf4 Qxf4 would have kept control 30.Qc2 Qc4 31.Qxc4 Nxc4 32.Rd1 Kd7 33.Bxd5 Bxd5 34.Rxd5+ Ke6 28.Ne2 Qxe5 29.Nxf4 Qxf4
Here Gukesh thought for 6 of his remaining 10 minutes and made an extraordinarily bad choice. I think that this is the moment in the game which most exemplifies the enormous pressure he was under and how much it affected him. 30.Qc2 30.Bc5! Qxg4 was obvious and now, discouragingly for White, the clever hit Qxh7 fails, but Rf3! is very decent. 31.Rf3! threatening both Qf1 and Rxa3. 31.Qxh7? Qd4+! 32.Bxd4 32.Kh2 Qxh4+ 33.Qxh4 Rxh4+ 34.Kg3 Rh8 32...Rxh7 and the extra pawns should win. 31...Nc4 31...Na4 32.Qxh7 Qd4+ 33.Bxd4 Rxh7 34.Bf2 And with the a-pawn falling, White is OK. 32.Qf1 Kd8! 33.Qf2 with a total mess which could go either way. 33.Rf4 Qg3 34.Rf3 Qxh4 33...Kc7 33...h5 34.Rf4 Qg6 35.Kh2 e5 36.Rxc4 dxc4 37.Bb6+ Ke8 34.Rf4 Qd1+ 35.Kh2 Qh5 36.Rxc4 dxc4 37.Bb6+ 30...Qc4! 31.Qd2 0-0!-+ Now Black is in control. 32.Bd4 Nd3 33.Qe3 e5! 34.Bxe5 34.Rxf8+ Kxf8 35.Bxe5 Nxe5 36.Qxe5 Qxb4 should win but was perhaps a better chance for White. 37.g5 34...Rxf1+ 35.Bxf1 Qxg4+ 36.Bg2 Bf5 37.Bg3 Be4 38.Kh2 h6 38...Bxg2?? 39.Qe8# 39.Bh3 Qd1 40.Bd6 Making the time control with just a second remaining, but he is completely busted. Qc2+ 41.Kg3 Qxa2 42.Be6+ Kh8!
A good game by Ding but pretty terrible by Gukesh. I've been trying to decide whether he played worse than Tigran Petrosian did in game one in 1963, given here last month. It's quite a close-run thing. But not 42...Kh7?? 43.Qxe4+ dxe4 44.Bxa2 42...Kh8 Now if 43.Qxe4 Qf2+ Gukesh 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
Gukesh,D2783Ding,L27280–12024C11FIDE World Championship 20241.1
Ding,L2728Gukesh,D2783½–½2024C50FIDE World Championship 20242
Gukesh,D2783Ding,L27281–02024D35FIDE World Championship 20243
RBB v RB--2024Generic position4
Ding,L2728Gukesh,D2783½–½2024A06FIDE World Championship 20244.1
Gukesh,D2783Ding,L2728½–½2024C01FIDE World Championship 20245.1
Ding,L2728Gukesh,D2783½–½2024A45FIDE World Championship 20246

Select an entry from the list to switch between games



Two Super Grandmasters from India explain the ins & outs of Attack, Tactics an Calculations in these two video courses.


Links


Jonathan Speelman, born in 1956, studied mathematics but became a professional chess player in 1977. He was a member of the English Olympic team from 1980–2006 and three times British Champion. He played twice in Candidates Tournaments, reaching the semi-final in 1989. He twice seconded a World Championship challenger: Nigel Short and then Viswanathan Anand against Garry Kasparov in London 1993 and New York 1995.

Discuss

Rules for reader comments

 
 

Not registered yet? Register

hansj hansj 12/4/2024 09:13
Yes, I remember the match 1963. At that time there was no Internet, but the games were brought in the newspaper.
I was 14 and did not understand these games at all. But was fascinated nonetheless.
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.