World Championship 2018 - Closing Ceremony LIVE

by ChessBase
11/28/2018 – The moment we've all been waiting for! Live games (for Premium members) from the 2018 World Championship match in London. Every two games will be followed by a rest day until Game 12 (if necessary) on November 26th which will be preceded by an additional rest day. All rounds start at 15:00 UT (London time) / 16:00 CEST / 10:00 EST. If needed there would be a rapid tiebreak match on Wednesday, November 28th. | Photos: Patricia Claros

Chess News

ChessBase Account Premium annual subscription ChessBase Account Premium annual subscription

At the airport, in the hotel or at home on your couch: with the new ChessBase you always have access to the whole ChessBase world: the new ChessBase video library, tactics server, opening training App, the live database with eight million games, Let’s Check and web access to


Closing ceremony

Magnus Carlsen won the tiebreak match 3-0 to reclaim the World Championship title. Here the players receive their awards:

All World Championship reports and stories

Final match score


Press conference

Round-up shows

ChessBase commentators break down the day's action in a free live video. The show is available on-demand for replay any time with a ChessBase Premium account.

Click a prior game in the video list to switch


There were be four rapid games in which the players received 25 minutes plus a 10-second bonus per move starting from move 1. 

Live games


Login via the "Chat & Info" box, or in the upper right of the page or at to see live moves!

First 30 minutes of the Tiebreak

Commentary by GM Judit Polgar and IM Anna Rudolf

ChessBase is an official partner of the organiser, World Chess, and ChessBase Premium Membership gives you access to watch the live games, either via your Fritz program on the server or on

ChessBase readers can also get 25% off the official World Chess Premium Broadcast by using this promo code at checkout:


World Chess Premium Subscription Includes:

World Chess logo

  • Official Broadcast
  • Exclusive Live Video from the World Chess Championship
  • Commentary by GM Judit Polgar, IM Anna Rudolf as well as other guests
  • Multi-camera view
  • Advanced chat capabilities
  • 20% of the subscription fee goes to increase the prize fund of players

Game 12 summary

All game summaries

GM Daniel King provides a 5-minute look at the main events of the day:

Click or tap the menu icon in the upper left corner of the player to select additional videos

All games


Schedule and analysis plan

ChessBase will be publishing extensive annotations, both in video and written form with an all-star team of analysts:

Friday 09.11.2018 Game 1 Yannick Pelletier / Jan-Krzysztof Duda
Saturday 10.11.2018 Game 2 Yannick Pelletier / Jan-Krzysztof Duda
Sunday 11.11.2018 Rest day  
Monday 12.11.2018 Game 3 Yannick Pelletier / Jan-Krzysztof Duda
Tuesday 13.11.2018 Game 4 Yannick Pelletier / Michael Adams
Wednesday 14.11.2018 Rest day  
Thursday 15.11.2018 Game 5 Yannick Pelletier / Aryan Tari
Friday 16.11.2018 Game 6 Lawrence Trent / Efstratios Grivas
Saturday 17.11.2018 Rest day  
Sunday 18.11.2018 Game 7 Yannick Pelletier / Daniel Fernandez
Monday 19.11.2018 Game 8 Yannick Pelletier / Wesley So
Tuesday 20.11.2018 Rest day  
Wednesday 21.11.2018 Game 9 Erwin l'Ami / David Navara
Thursday 22.11.2018 Game 10 Erwin l'Ami / Sam Shankland
Friday 23.11.2018 Rest day  
Saturday 24.11.2018 Game 11 Lawrence Trent / Boris Gelfand
Sunday 25.11.2018 Rest day  
Monday 26.11.2018 Game 12 Erwin l'Ami / Wesley So
Tuesday 27.11.2018 Rest day  
Wednesday 28.11.2018 Tiebreak Yannick Pelletier / Daniel Fernandez


Reports about chess: tournaments, championships, portraits, interviews, World Championships, product launches and more.


Rules for reader comments


Not registered yet? Register

PatChessFan PatChessFan 11/28/2018 08:53
Carlsen now has won a single game in 2 matches, a single loss and 22 draws.
SunriseK SunriseK 11/28/2018 08:48
@ Petrarlsen who wrote:
<But I don't understand why the match between the two first players of the tournament part of your system would be so short? In effect, it would exactly play the same role as the World Championship match of the present system, so I would much rather propose to make it longer, and not shorter; probably 16 or 18 games, in accordance with what Carlsen suggested.>

Yes, is possible. I was thinking that the 2 qualified players have already played 14 classic games and so they could be starting to get tired if the final match between them would be too long.

<And I would suggest having 10 players (including the Champion) instead of 8 in the tournament part (for a total of 18 games instead of 14), because 1) with the Champion participating in the tournament, there would be in effect one participant less, in comparison to the present system, and because 2) as this system could directly eliminate the Champion in the tournament phase, I think that a slightly greater number of games would be positive.>

Also this would be perfectly ok in my opinion. Even if with 10 players, we would have 18 games plus the ones in the final match... well after all Kasparov and Karpov played a lot of games in their great clashes and nobody was complaining (apart Campomanes, LOL). But if the players are too many, also the element of luck could play some role...

<And I would suggest calling the tournament "World Championship tournament" and the match "World Championship match".>

Great idea!
ottawahpp ottawahpp 11/28/2018 08:46
Had to go to chessbomb to watch because I could not get access while the thing was live. I was logged on but kept getting a message that I needed an account. NOT IMPRESSED!
AMD_Puma AMD_Puma 11/28/2018 08:46
In competitive e-sports/online gaming, there is a theory so-called "meta", for example, in League of Legends, the meta is early game pressure. It seems like Magnus has perfected his own "meta" for world championships: take the match to the tie breaks where is far superior. Well this reminds me of the book "Winning with Chess Psychology" (Benko/Hochberg), and certainly Magnus employs the highest form of chess psychology in world championships!
michaelriber michaelriber 11/28/2018 08:45
This match has been the worst possible "advertisement" for the game. In every conceivable way. Something really needs to change.
planner99 planner99 11/28/2018 08:33
"Bobby Fischer is the greatest chess player of all time. Look at the record. a perfect 11 won games in US open championship, a 20 consecutive wins including two perfect 6–0 in the Candidates Matches. He who idolizes Fischer, plays like Fischer."

But idolizing Fischer means not defending your should they really idolize him?

Kasparov's dominance over 20 years was much more impressive. What was it all 1st places in tourneys from 1981 to 1991? 17 2820+ tournament performances compared to Fischers 2?

Fischer won just 1 cycle.
SunriseK SunriseK 11/28/2018 08:29

So I believe that my little proposal (or something like that) could solve many problems:
- no more tie breaks with fast time control: we already know MC is by far the best player on earth with that!
- on the 1st phase the things will be much more entertaining: the WC will have to qualify against many different players and not against only one of them; and he could even fail to qualify, so we would have a new WC, to be determined on 2nd phase.
- thus on the 1st phase yet, the actual WC (and also all other players) will have to try to win and not to draw games (otherwise he/they could end on 3rd rank, thus not qualifying for the 2nd phase).
- on the 2nd phase, the 2nd ranked player from the 1st phase will have to try to win at least a game to get the title, so surely we will not have all drawn equal games like this cycle and so again much more entertainment;
- this player could well be even the actual WC (Magnus for example) and then it would be interesting to see how he tries to manage to outplay the opponent (instead than simply try not to lose, as happened in these actual 12 classic games).
My proposal gives "draw odds" to a player, but not necessarily to the actual WC; this seems correct to me, because that player is the one who has won the 1st phase and so is fully legitimate he could have some advantage.
SunriseK SunriseK 11/28/2018 08:29
Congratulations to MC for defending his title!
But at the same time he has clearly shown that this WCC format is doomed!
Nobody is able to compare to MC in rapid or in blitz play, so if the tie-breaks are done with rapid and blitz,... of course he, when compared to a very strong opponent in classic (like Caruana), will steer toward not losing any of the 12 classic games and then crush the opponent like today.

As Petrarlsen said: "The problem isn't with the players, who do their best to win with the World Championship system that is given to them, but with the system itself; it isn't a good thing that in some cases, the interest of the players can be to draw their classical games, and then to go to the playoff."

I completely agree with him! It's also not a good thing with respect of the whole game of chess in fact!
People (ans sponsors!) can get bored and lose interest if in 2020 we will have again the same type of situation.

oseggene oseggene 11/28/2018 08:01
For me, the turning point of this match occurred when Caruana made the passive move h3 in game 8, an inappropriately slow move in a position requiring aggressive moves to convert a superior position into a win.

Despite the result, Caruana demonstrated he is just as strong as Carlsen, when classical time controls are in effect.

Congratulations to Carlsen for a hard-fought victory.
qiqiangzhu qiqiangzhu 11/28/2018 07:56
so the new rapid chess king is born?
Balthus Balthus 11/28/2018 07:33
Sodacat: yep, I fully agree, it should have been incumbent advantage and then there would have been no need for Fabi's annihilation in the rapids.
fixpont fixpont 11/28/2018 07:26
3:0, this was the best day.
Green22 Green22 11/28/2018 06:44
MC up 2 games so far just needs a draw with white right now. Fabi needs a xmas miracle!
Keith Homeyard Keith Homeyard 11/28/2018 05:35
Thank you CB - working fine now.
sodacat sodacat 11/28/2018 05:11
So Carlsen is better at rapid, big deal. It is no way to decide a world chess champion, they may as well play table tennis or draughts to decide the winner.
Keith Homeyard Keith Homeyard 11/28/2018 04:56
I can't see either and also have a premium account
Pionki Pionki 11/28/2018 04:40
@Petrarlsen 11/27/2018 04:12,
You're talking about the days long gone. We are talking about the present. Carlsen could not win the classical championship in 2016 and 2018. Time for a change.
Jason Rihel Jason Rihel 11/28/2018 04:37
I also cannot see the game even though I have a premium account..... it keeps saying to logon, when I AM logged on.
Pionki Pionki 11/28/2018 04:33
Poor Magnus, he's so scared. He should bring a psychologist with him, not a doctor. It's time for a change.
Jon Buckley Jon Buckley 11/28/2018 04:21
I’m logged in, I’m premium, but the system is telling me Sorry, this broadcast is premium only. And so far I’ve watched every game, yet today, no dice 😡
jsaldea12 jsaldea12 11/28/2018 09:45
It is likely this championship match will be decided in the first four play-off games, semi-classical games. Just play casually and be cool.
trackwhack trackwhack 11/28/2018 07:02
@Petralsen, conveniently avoided commenting on my previous comment.
You almost sound like Carlsen himself hiding under a false flag justifying his weak play
imdvb_8793 imdvb_8793 11/27/2018 07:59
"Carlsen being 91 points above Caruana in Rapid and 172 points (!!) above him in Blitz, he has objectively EVERY interest to go in the playoff, rather than to take risks in the last classical games"

If playing this position for a win, with ample time on the clock, and little for the opponent, is taking risks, then why are we playing chess at all?! How does black lose that position without making at least one huge blunder? And why would he?! He's Carlsen. I can't imagine a scenario where black loses, unless he goes insane... (And basically every GM I've seen discuss the final position of the game so far - Kramnik, Seirawan, Ashley, Grischuk, Giri, Svidler, and I assume also Wesley So, but I haven't read that article yet - seems to agree, though I can't be 100% sure.) Is his edge in the rapids really that much bigger than his edge in this game was when he offered a draw? I doubt it. There he could actually lose, without necessarily making any blunders, if Fabi is in great form on the day, and he is still this affected by the pressure of the moment. In this game, from that position... I don't see how. Kramnik himself said that even if he needed a draw to WIN the match then and there he would consider playing on in that position. I think that says it all. He could AT LEAST have played it out until the time control. Just still playing super-cautiously, as he had been doing. Creating little "phantom threats" here and there, which he's very skilled at doing. He didn't have to commit to anything, risk anything. The pressure on Fabi would have still been tremendous. To not even do that is just clear proof that he can't stand the pressure like a true champ. Except maybe in rapid and blitz. There it might be easier for him, as it all happens very quickly and he doesn't have time for his fears to take over, he has to be focused all the time and calculate - I don't know...
imdvb_8793 imdvb_8793 11/27/2018 07:58
"Even so, I hope Fabiano wins the tiebreaks. Carlsen's cowardice today was disgusting, It was a career-defining moment that should settle definitively the question of whether he is the greatest ever."

This - and he's a repeat offender, too. He did something almost identical when he made a quick draw with white in the last game in New York. He just doesn't handle well enough these moments of maximum pressure, at least when the title of World Champion is on the line. As evidenced also by his last round defeat to Svidler in the Candidates in London. (Not that Svidler isn't a great player and couldn't have beaten him anyway, but it seems less likely that this would have happened, with black, had Magnus not felt the pressure so acutely.) I've also heard (I think Giri said this) his hand was shaking when he made the first move in his first match vs. Vishy... (Either I didn't notice this at the time, or I'd forgotten.) This is odd behavior for a great champion and, together with his tournament results over the last 2-3 years (in classical), serves only to strengthen the case (which I've been making for a while) that he's nowhere near the greatest players ever. Regardless of what happens in the tiebreaks tomorrow. His level of "dominance" is in no way superior to Botvinnik's in the early 1940's to mid-1950's (dominated heavily for a few years, then started to struggle and made two 12-12 draws vs. Bronstein and Smyslov in title matches). I still think Botvinnik was a GREAT player, and so is Magnus, but there have been many great players, whereas the likes of Fischer, Kasparov, Karpov and maybe Alekhine and Capablanca (I'd also include people like Lasker, results-wise, but as far as pure accuracy goes, it's true that he wasn't quite at that level) are but a few, and make up a whole other category, in my opinion... Carlsen is definitely below that, at least based on his career so far.
imdvb_8793 imdvb_8793 11/27/2018 07:57
Another solution actually just occurred to me: why doesn't the higher-rated player get draw odds, regardless of who is the reigning champion? Or, better still, the player with the better total rating performance in all recent classical games played over a certain, well-defined period of time... I don't think this is in any way unfair to anybody. Whoever has proven to be stronger in classical tournament play over the last few years (say, two, since the end of the previous cycle) - with, of course, a certain minimum number of games played required of the players (and, if one doesn't meet said requirement, they would of course forfeit the draw odds), to avoid somebody attaining a very high rating at one point and then refusing to play anymore, even though that would be highly detrimental to them in any case, due to lack of practice - is likely to be the actual better player, in the long run, even though they weren't able to detach themselves from their opponent in the match, which, even at 16 or 18 games, is a relatively small sample to determine who is actually best. (Good enough, of course, but statistically pretty small.) Perhaps also excluding each of the two players' games from their tournament with the worst performance in that period of time, in case one is unlucky enough to be in horrible form in one such tournament, like Fabi was in Wijk. I actually like this one even more than my earlier idea (although that seems good too) because it involves absolutely nothing except classical play, in any scenario. A similar principle is already used to qualify players for the Candidates Tournament, and so on, and I don't hear too many people complaining that that one is unfair.
Petrarlsen Petrarlsen 11/27/2018 03:09
@ trackwhack:

"and yeah, there is something called rating inflation. read it up and get an education (...)"

It isn't necessary to debate on rating inflation; what is the link between this: "(...) with a 67-points gap with the World n° 2, this gap being the same as the gap between the World n° 2 and the World n° 17 at the time (...)" (in my last post to you on this page) and the question of rating inflation??

I quite fear that, if I have to "get an education", as you said, you should also have to learn to understand what you read...
Petrarlsen Petrarlsen 11/27/2018 03:03
@ Grandsleeper: "How is this decision by Carlsen reasonably to explain?"

Quite simple in my opinion; 1) The existence of a Rapid + Blitz playoff. 2) The players respective rating differences: + 3 points for Carlsen in classical time controls; + 91 points in Rapid time controls; + 172 points in Blitz time controls.

So, with this system, objectively, Carlsen more or less hasn't any advantage in classical time controls, has a quite significant advantage in Rapid, and a very big advantage in Blitz.

The result: his interest is that the match would be decided in the playoff.

And with the Title (and 200.000 €) on the line, in my opinion, it is more than understandable that Carlsen would choose the approach which is the most favorable for him.

In short, in my opinion, the problem is that the present system can encourage players to choose to draw their games and then to go to the playoff, and not with the players' behavior, as it is just simply normal that the players decide to do what is the best for them.
geok1ng geok1ng 11/27/2018 02:13
A solution to the draw issue: no player will be declared champion, each player gets 35% of the prize pool, each player gets seeded into the next world cup and the remaining 30% is added to the prize pool of the next candidates. A draw means both players lose title, money and the chance to be seeded into the candidates.
trackwhack trackwhack 11/27/2018 12:39
and yeah, there is something called rating inflation. read it up and get an education. rating inflation is impossible to avoid based on the current methodology used.
fisher kaspy et all had a way wider gap with peers, relatively
trackwhack trackwhack 11/27/2018 12:36
@Petralsen ... there is blind adoration and there is blind adoration. you've been spamming these boards defending the Wump Champion of Chess for the last fortnight through really incompetent, scared shitless chess. Take a rest now.

This WCC is a goddamn disgrace. At least half the games were heading to a result before one of the players chickened out. So FTS!
rijslaav rijslaav 11/27/2018 11:11
All whats left are the amateur events, where there are (almost) no politics, big money or bookies involved. This is a bad day for chess.
fixpont fixpont 11/27/2018 10:57
@jsaldea12 : what was Fischer's score at his 3rd title defense?
chessaudio chessaudio 11/27/2018 10:41
I think to add some excitement to the chess tournaments of any kind, time controls should change.

Players should have less time. Such way we can avoid memorized boring long openings and such way may be we can see more human moves, more human errors and more human-like novelties (those novelties that will work against a human opponent if he could not reply correctly). Such way a player can play a surprise risky move that is not seen before because his opponent will have limited time to solve what is going on the board.
Grandsleeper Grandsleeper 11/27/2018 09:46
This end of game 12 is really incredible and shameful. How is this decision by Carlsen reasonably to explain? It makes no sence whatsoever to make a draw at that point (still clear black advantage, risk-free attempts for a win possible, Caruana short of time - Carlsen often tried to win in much less promising positions and situations). That's even worse than Carlsen's mistakes in game 1, throwing away the win.
In the 12th game the "mild" move 25. ...a5 (instead of ...b5) was already a surprise, which could perhaps still be explained with stylistic preferences. But I had already been amazed by Carlsen's very poor opening treatment of game 11, which was completely useless if you aim for a win; I concluded that he might have prepared himself to go for a win as Black in the last game. The whole thing was odd, however, and the end of the 12th game is the inexplicable coronation.
So one has to ask what's wrong at the very top of chess today now, considering what we are now being offered in London? Is it just something with Carlsen's attitude or mental/moral state?
Because the world is about to enter an final age of total deceit, but also of mental confusion as well as abasement of morality. Is the chess world poisoned now by influencial backround circles who direct things according to their will, as the rest of todays world is? Why should chess be better off than soccer/football and almost everything else today?
And as we hear now, betting shall become part of the chess world (if it has not already). That fits perfectly in what I just said ...
Anyway, explain and justify yourself, Mr. Carlsen, for your absurd and disgraceful completion of the 12th game! What's your problem???
jsaldea12 jsaldea12 11/27/2018 08:41
Bobby Fischer is the greatest chess player of all time. Look at the record. a perfect 11 won games in US open championship, a 20 consecutive wins including two perfect 6–0 in the Candidates Matches. He who idolizes Fischer, plays like Fischer.
Petrarlsen Petrarlsen 11/27/2018 07:26
@ lajosarpad: I found what seems to me to be quite an interesting element about fgkdljkag's positions on the World Championship format; if it interests you, I put it as an answer to fgkdjlkag on this page:
Petrarlsen Petrarlsen 11/27/2018 07:00
@ trackwhack: "Carlsen is a wump".

This about a player who peaked at 2882 Elo points with a 67-points gap with the World n° 2, this gap being the same as the gap between the World n° 2 and the World n° 17 at the time (

So ridiculous that there isn't anything to add; the numbers are self-explanatory...
geraldsky geraldsky 11/27/2018 05:51
I think the best and most ideal world championship match is that - if the score is tied after 12 games , the world champion retains his title, but in fairness to the challenger the cash prize shall be 50%-50%. Because, if they play for rapid or blitz for tiebreaks, then whoever wins is not a classical world chess champion, but a rapid or blitz world champion.
trackwhack trackwhack 11/27/2018 05:36
Or maybe even Kasparov v Kramnik. Watching 6 Berlins cant be half as bad!!
trackwhack trackwhack 11/27/2018 05:24
Carlsen is a wump. 4 World Championship matches and not a single creative game.
I did not fault him for taking advantage of Vishy's inaccuracies. Or Kariakins nerves.
But this is downright pathetic.

Chess is dead, thanks Crapsten for killing it.

Can someone come up with a million bucks to sponsor Kasparov v Anand please