World Championship Game 6: Carlsen wins marathon

by Carlos Alberto Colodro
12/3/2021 – In what will surely be remembered as a highlight of World Chess Championship history, Magnus Carlsen defeated Ian Nepomniachtchi in a 136-move marathon which included missed chances, deep time trouble and a number of subtle manoeuvres worthy of a combat for the highest prize in the world of competitive chess. Find here the fantastic encounter annotated by super-GM and elite analyst Anish Giri. | Photo: Eric Rosen

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 longest in history


Replay full analysis of the game by world number six Anish Giri at the end of the article!


Magnus Carlsen, Ian NepomniachtchiBack in 1978, world champion Anatoly Karpov played his first match to defend the title after getting the world crown by default in 1975. He faced Viktor Korchnoi, a fierce fighter, in Baguio City, Phillipines. The fifth game, played on July 27, followed a streak of four very short draws. The game also ended in a draw, but by no means was it a short one — it would become the longest-ever game (in terms of moves) in a World Championship match up to that point, and it held that record for over 43 years. Until the sixth game of the 2021 match between Magnus Carlsen and Ian Nepomniachtchi.

After 136 moves, not only did Carlsen and Nepomniachtchi break the aforementioned record, but the game also saw Carlsen obtaining the first win in a classical encounter at a World Championship match in a bit over five years — the Norwegian had defeated Sergey Karjakin with white in game 10 of the 2016 match on November 24.

It was a full-blown fight, which lasted 7 hours and 45 minutes. Since games kick off at 16:30 local time in Dubai, the first decisive encounter of this year’s match finished fifteen minutes past midnight!

A rollercoaster battle, the game saw Carlsen employing a non-forceful opening setup with the white pieces, apparently trying to take the struggle to the middlegame. Nepo responded in kind, as he rejected an opportunity to swap queens on move 17. Uncharacteristically, Carlsen found himself in deep time trouble, and a sharp skirmish saw him missing a major chance to play a winning sequence nearing the first time control. In the endgame, piece setups continued to shift, but Carlsen never stopped trying, and he was eventually rewarded with a remarkable victory. 

As per the contract signed by the contenders, they were obliged to attend a press conference no matter the length of the game. Nepo was visibly downhearted, but also extremely polite when giving his responses, while a chirpy world champion reflected: 

It was never easy, nor should it be. [...] You have to try for every chance, no matter how small it is.

Going to the press conference must have felt as only a small inconvenience for the players though. Especially for Nepo, it is rather unfortunate that this marathon took place in the first of a three-game series to be played on consecutive days. The players will return to the board on Saturday and Sunday, with the Russian getting one more black during the weekend.

Going for a middlegame

Perhaps avoiding either a Petroff or a Berlin, Carlsen played 1.d4, and after 1...Nf6 2.Nf3 d5 3.g3, delaying a pawn push to c4, the world champion asked the challenger what kind of setup he wanted to establish on the board. The sneaky move order avoided any forceful lines that might give White an advantage from the get go, but in exchange took the battle to the middlegame, where the Norwegian intended to demonstrate his superiority.

Nepo was more than up to the task, rejecting a pawn sacrifice on move 10 and going for activity instead. Moreover, on move 17 the Russian chose not to trade queens, expecting to get good play despite doubling his pawns on the kingside.

 
Carlsen vs. Nepomniachtchi

Instead of 17...Qxf6 18.Qxf6 gxf6, Nepo immediately went for 17...gxf6. In his annotations, Anish Giri explained:

An interesting choice, perhaps stemming from some ambition. Queen trade would have also been fine. Sometimes in those endgames White can claim a good d3 knight against a “bad” bishop, but with Black pieces so active and bishop being on b6, there is little talk of White fighting for anything.

With so much talk about draws in the World Championship match, this was a clear sign that it had little to do with the players’ willingness to fight. As Olimpiu G. Urcan put it:

Black was doing fine, and Carlsen was burning quite a lot of time on each move. Nepo’s choice on move 25 only made matters more complicated.

 

Black could have played 25...b4, more or less keeping things under control, while with 25...Rac8 he agreed to enter an imbalanced position with a queen against a pair of rooks after 26.Qxc8 Rxc8 27.Rxc8. Giri:

This is not neccessary, but it did lead to chaos, so the fans should be grateful to Ian.

Magnus Carlsen, Ian Nepomniachtchi

Chess is hard! | Photo: Eric Rosen

Time trouble

Unlike in previous World Championship matches, FIDE decided this year to only give the contenders an increment after move 61. Thus, in both time controls — on move 40 and move 60 — players are forced to make their moves with the clock ticking down incessantly, without getting a 30-second breather after each decision. For the first time in the match, this factor played a major role in game 6.

With Carlsen’s clock dangerously ticking down, the engines suddenly showed he had a +2 advantage after move 32!

 

Maurice Ashley asked Carlsen if he had analysed 33.Rcc2 in this position, with the world champion rather dumbfounded by the question. He went for 33.Rd1 instead, which is understandable given how low on time he was and how “hard to spot and calculate” the winning variation was (Giri).

The idea is that after 33.Rcc2 Bxa3 White has 34.Nf4, giving up a second pawn on the queenside — 34...Qxb4 35.Rd7 e5 36.Nxh5+ Kg6

 
Analysis diagram

The surprising winning move here is 37.Rc6, since 37...Kxh5 leaves the black king in a mating net after 38.Rxf7. As Giri explains:

You have to see what your follow-up is here, otherwise the whole sequence makes little sense. [...] The move itself is not obvious, giving up both queenside pawns, but the attack is devastating.

In the game, Nepo was fortunate that his opponent did not see this line, but also missed some chances of his own in the time scramble — he did not have that much more time on his clock than Carlsen during this phase of the game.

Magnus Carlsen, Ian Nepomniachtchi

Over 7 hours of deep focus | Photo: Niki Riga

The endgame

At the press conference, Mike Klein compared the game to a miniseries, implying the existence of episodes and turning points. We can take the comparison further and note that the endgame was in itself a miniseries, with sub-episodes and turning points of its own — we will surely get a more in-depth look to the intricacies of the ending by our in-house specialist Karsten Müller, perhaps in the next instalment of the ‘Endgame Magic’ show.

First, Black seemed to have enough counterplay with his passed pawn on the a-file.

 

Once that pawn left the board, it seemed like — as long as the black queen remained active — White would not be able to break through.

 

White then grabbed both f-pawns and the bishop in exchange for a rook. Nepo’s task was not enviable, but his previous play seemed to demonstrate he would be able to hold the balance.

 

Finally, when White’s g-pawn and Black’s h-pawn left the board, we were in tablebases territory — the game was drawn with perfect play. However, well into the eighth hour of play and facing the ever-fighting world champion, it was never going to be easy for Nepo. 

The losing move according to the tablebases was Black’s 130th! Six moves later, the Russian challenger threw in the towel.

It was nothing short of a fantastic chess game!

Expert analysis by GM Anish Giri

 
New ...
Open...
Share...
Layout...
Flip Board
Settings
MoveNResultEloPlayers
Replay and check the LiveBook here
1.d4 Nf6 2.Nf3 d5 3.g3 A sneaky move order, trying to go for a Catalan-like setup, but not exactly, as White delays the move c4. e6 Black had plenty of options, but not surprisingly Ian sticks to his repertoire and offers a transposition into the Catalan. 4.Bg2 Be7 5.0-0 0-0 6.b3 The point of Carlsen's move order, trying to sidestep the main line with 6.c4, which is what happened (through the conventional Catalan move order) in game 2. c5 7.dxc5 Here too 7.c4 transposes into some kind of theory. With this move, Magnus is hoping to take Ian into the relatively unknown territory. Bxc5 Given the reply, 7...Nc6!? also deserved attention. 8.c4 More natural is 8.Bb2, but it takes a lot to surprise a well prepared top player who fights for the World Championship crown and so another unusual move followed. dxc4 9.Qc2!? Creative opening play by Magnus. The c4 pawn is not being recaptured yet. Qe7 Protects the c5 bishop and forces White to recapture the pawn, or so you would think. 10.Nbd2!? Very creative piece of preparation, sacrificing the pawn. Nc6! Ian wants to have none of it and doesn't accept the sacrifice. From now on, for some reason, Magnus started taking quite a bit of time. Strange, given that so far, all of Ian's moves have been the top choice of the engines. 11.Nxc4 b5 Alternative was 11...e5 or the passive 11...Bd7, but this adventurous move got a lot of praise by the commentators. 12.Nce5 Nb4! The point, now Black avoids losing material on the diagonal. 13.Qb2 There is no action around the h7 square (which could be the case if the bishop had been on b2 and the e5 knight not in the way, threatening Ng5 and Bxf6) and so the queen is better placed here than on b1. Bb7 14.a3 An exciting deviation would have been 14.Bg5!?. 14.Bg5 h6 15.Bh4 Here Black can go after the h4 bishop with immediate 15...g5!? or 15... Bxf3 16.Bxf3 g5!? and the eventual complications lead to some sort of equality as well, as always, but the lines are much more exciting than after 14.a3. 14...Nc6 15.Nd3 Keeping more pieces on the board. 15.Bg5 Is quite drawish, for example Nxe5 16.Qxe5 Bxa3 17.Bxf6 gxf6 18.Qxb5 And now Black can just give up one of the bishops to simplify. Rab8 19.Qa4 Bxf3 20.Bxf3 Bc5 A position like that is totally fine for Black, as with the full control over the dark squares, there is little danger to the somewhat open king. 15...Bb6 16.Bg5 16.a4 Seemed like a natural inclusion at first, but likely Magnus disliked the simplifications after Rfd8!? 17.axb5 Nd4 And it looks like mass exchanges are likely. 16...Rfd8 Useful move, there is no need to push White to take on f6. 17.Bxf6 White takes anyway, as Nd4 was coming. gxf6 An interesting choice, perhaps stemming from some ambition. Queen trade would have also been fine. Sometimes in those endgames White can claim a good d3 knight against a "bad" bishop, but with Black pieces so active and bishop being on b6, there is little talk of White fighting for anything. 18.Rac1 Nd4 Alternative 18...e5!? would be very double edged, weakening the f5 square, but it isn't easy to exploit that, as 19.Nh4 can be met with 19... Nd4!. 19.Nxd4 Bxd4 20.Qa2 Bxg2 There were many ways to play this, but Ian chooses to activate the queen and send it to e4. 21.Kxg2 Qb7+ 22.Kg1 Qe4 23.Qc2 Sort of grabbing the c-file. From now on Rac8 is always an option, though it's never neccessary. a5 24.Rfd1 Kg7 This allows 25.e3!?, instead Black could have gone for 24...f5 when after 25.e3 the bishop has some nice squares to retreat to- f6/g7. 25.Rd2 Commentators like 25.e3, using the fact that the bishop has no comfortable retreating square and 25...Be5 26.Qe2 Bd6 27. Nc5! gives White some risk free pressure. Magnus maybe disliking 25...Rc8 or for some other reason, chose to keep the status quo. Rac8 This is absolutely not neccessary, but it did lead to chaos, so the fans should be grateful to Ian. 26.Qxc8 Rxc8 27.Rxc8 Qd5 28.b4 a4 29.e3 First critical moment. 29. Bb2 forces the matters, but Ian chooses against it. Be5?! There was a reasonably easy draw in 29...Bb2, but maybe Ian didn't want to look for it from a position of weakness. 29...Bb2 30.Rc5 Qd6 31.Rxb2 Here this is a must. Qxd3 32.Rbc2 Another only move, otherwise White can't keep the queenside pawn from falling, as 32.Ra2?? is 32...Qb1+!. Qxa3 33.Rxb5 and now the natural 33...Qb3 is met by 34.Rc1! which is still within a draw, but the easiest is to setup a perpetual. Qa1+ 34.Kg2 Qb1 And the threat of a3-a2 combined with the Qe4-Qb1 perpetual ideas secure Black a draw. 30.h4!? Magnus realizing that Nepo has no follow up, makes a useful move and asks Ian if he wants to play Bb2 after all, but now in a worse version. h5?! Ian makes another waiting move. But so does Magnus. 30...Bb2 was still alright here. 31.Rc5 Qd6 32.Rxb2 Qxd3 33.Rbc2 Qxa3 34.Rxb5 Qa1+ 35.Kg2 Qb1 the h2 square is there, but the king can't escape. 36.Rc3 Qe4+ 37.Kh2 Qb1 intending Qf1. 31.Kh2!? Bb2? Actually exactly here, this idea that was always a bail out for Black, loses. 32.Rc5 Qd6 33.Rd1? The win was very hard to spot and calculate, but it was there. The sequence Magnus goes for, gives up a pawn and it is not entirely clear what he missed there (perhaps Qd7! idea). 33.Rcc2! The move itself is not obvious, giving up both queenside pawns, but the attack is devastating. Bxa3 34.Nf4! Qxb4 and now White goes all out for the king. 35.Rd7 e5 36.Nxh5+ Kg6 You have to see what your follow up is here, otherwise the whole sequence makes little sense. 37.Rc6! The knight can go, as the Black king finds itself in the mating net and Black's pieces are unable to setup a defense. Kxh5 and now both Rxf6 as well as Rxf7 first just lead to checkmate eventually, as the king is basically inside a mating net. 38.Rxf7 33.Rxb2 was though a safe option, leading to a drawn endgame once again. Qxd3 34.Rbc2 here besides Qxa3 Black can also go 34...Qf1!?, when I don't see how White untangles, but Black also doesn't have any reasons to play this for a win. 33...Bxa3 34.Rxb5 Qd7! 35.Rc5 e5 Somehow the b4 pawn never got captured. Either Ian didn't see it hanging, or was afraid of some discovery on the queen after Bxb4 Rcc1. 35...Bxb4! 36.Rcc1 Be7 Here White is on the defensive. 37.Ne5 Qb5 38.Rd7 Qxe5 39.Rxe7 Qb2 40.Rf1 a3 41.Rd7 a2 42.Rdd1 and 2 rooks should hold here, but White is very passive and the a-pawn is alive. 36.Rc2? Still giving up the b4 pawn. Instead, the rather loose looking 36.e4! is pointed out by the engine, intending 36....Bxb4 37.Rd5, while if 36...Qd4 then 37.Ra5!. Qd5? Ian starts to drift. He could have collected the b4 pawn. 36...Bxb4! 37.Rcc1 Now White would be OK, but Black has a strong sequence, saving the extra pawn. Ba3! Not giving White time for a break. 38.Ra1 Qg4! The queen steps out of the x-ray. 39.Rd2 Be7 and Black could well be winning here, as he can combine the a-pawn with f5-f4 ideas. Very unpleasant for White, though very often you see that there are some fortress ideas eventually. 37.Rdd2 Qb3 38.Ra2 e4 This is panic. It loses, but also in general, it is incredibly risky to kill the mobility of the kingside pawns. 38...Bxb4 would probably hold, but not in a fun way. 39.Rdb2 Qxd3 40.Rxb4 f5 41.Rbxa4 Qf1 With pawn on e5 and not on e4, Black has f4 push when neccessary and White is probably not able to pose any real problems here, though he can move around forever, without any risk. 38...f5 is the engine way to hold it, but it's a bit far fetched. 39.Nxe5 Bc1 40.Re2 a3 41.Rac2 Bb2 42.Nc4 Bf6 with zeros. 39.Nc5 Qxb4 40.Nxe4? Magnus was probably happy to survive the time trouble and that too, with what looks like a promissing position. Instead, he had 40.Rdc2!!, winning the a4 pawn and reaching a won endgame. 40.Rdc2! f5 41.Nxa4 Qxa4 42.Rc3 Qd1 43.Rcxa3 This endgame looks winning. The idea is that White can smoke the queen out of f1 by using zugzwang. A random example line: f6 White can anyway provoke this push later. 44.Ra4 Kg6 45.Rd4 Qf1 46.Rd8 Kh6 47.Rd5 Kg6 48.Rad2 This is the zugzwang position. Once the queen moves, White goes Kg2, the queen is out and then White will join the rooks to target something, for example the 7th rank, or an f-pawn. Black probably has to push f4 and the conversion will take some time, but it feels inevitable and the high engine evaluation suggests the same. 40...Qb3 Good move, Black stays in the game, as he keeps his a-pawn. 41.Rac2 Bf8 42.Nc5 42.Rc8 is fun, but there is not more than a draw, after a3 43.Rdd8 a2 44.Rxf8 a1Q Black king is almost in a mating net, but not quite. White doesn't have a mate here, only different kinds of perpetual checks. 42...Qb5 43.Nd3 a3 Black gets the passer quite far, protected by the f8 bishop. It is now hard for white to do much, though obviously it is White that can press without any risk here. 44.Nf4 Qa5 45.Ra2 Bb4 46.Rd3 White is not in time to pick up the h-pawn with Rd5 and then prevent Qa4-Qb3 counterplay. Kh6 47.Rd1 Qa4 48.Rda1 Bd6 49.Kg1 Qb3 50.Ne2 Qd3 51.Nd4 Kh7 52.Kh2 White can move around endlessly, but Nc2 is not a threat, due to Be5. It seemed as though Black has achieved a fortress, but suddenly he decided to give White a chance to change the nature of the position. Qe4?! Possibly a miscalculation. There was no need to trade the a-pawn for the h-pawn and the arising position is not too pleasant to defend, even if still holdable. 53.Rxa3! Qxh4+ 54.Kg1 Qe4 moving to g4 seems more accurate, as it allows a pawn trade. 54...Qg4 55.Ra4 Be5 56.R1a2 alternatively 56.Kg2 is met with either 56...Qd7!? or 56...h6!? 57.Rh1 Bxg3! which holds after 58.fxg3 Qe4+! and some further complications. 56.Kg2 h4 57.Rh1 Bxg3 58.fxg3 Qe4+ 59.Nf3 Qc2+! 60.Kf1 Qd3+! 60...Qxa4? 61.Rxh4+! 61.Kf2 Qc2+! an important line, that is very hard to spot. 56...Qd1+ 57.Kg2 h4! Trading the weak h-pawn, definitely an achievement for Black. 58.Nf5 hxg3 59.Nxg3 Black is still suffering, but he is closer to a draw I would feel than before h4-hxg3. 55.Ra4! Be5 56.Ne2 Qc2 57.R1a2 Qb3 58.Kg2 Also Kh2 deserved attention here. 58.Kh2 Kg6! The move to hold on, but Black might not have such an easy task in the rook endgame. 59.Nf4+ Bxf4 60.gxf4 though most likely it holds with patient defense. 58...Qd5+ 59.f3 Intuitively one wouldn't be thrilled to push the pawn forward, creating the weaknesses, but Carlsen wanted to dislodge Ian's bishop and found a safe spot for his king on f2. Still, 59.Kh2 was definitely a worth alternative, trying to maneuvre around with ideas like Ng1!?. Qd1 Black could push f5 right away, but he chooses not to commit yet. 60.f4 In the following phase of the game a lot of random moves are happening. Black is trying to tie white's pieces to the weak e3 pawn, not to allow White to coordinated his forces and collect the pawn weaknesses, or even worse, deliver a checkmate somewhere. Bc7 61.Kf2 Bb6 62.Ra1 Qb3 63.Re4 Kg7 64.Re8 f5 65.Raa8 Qb4 66.Rac8 Ba5 67.Rc1 Bb6 68.Re5 Qb3 69.Re8 Qd5 70.Rcc8 Qh1 71.Rc1 Qd5 72.Rb1 A lot of shuffling back and forth, Black must stay alert. Ba7 Understandable to keep the bishop on the diagonal hitting the e3 pawn, but there are some concrete issues now. Alternative 72...Bd8! seems to have been better. 72...Bd8 73.Re5 Qd3 74.Rbb5 h4 75.Rxf5 hxg3+ 76.Nxg3 Bh4 Black is holding here, as the White king is too exposed. 73.Re7 Bc5 74.Re5 Suddenly Black has to make only moves. Qd3 75.Rb7 The queen far from h1, allowing White to create all kinds of threats with the rooks. Qc2 76.Rb5 Ba7 Black finds a way not to lose the f5 pawn for nothing, but the ensuing position is extremely unpleasant, even though objectively drawn. 77.Ra5 Bb6 78.Rab5 Ba7 79.Rxf5 Qd3 Black managed to create some play now, as Bxe3+ is there, but now we reach another kind of endgame. 80.Rxf7+! Kxf7 81.Rb7+ Kg6 82.Rxa7 We get a terribly unpleasant endgame for Black, which, with perfect defense should be holdable. A lot of shuffling ensues. Qd5 83.Ra6+ Kh7 84.Ra1 Kg6 85.Nd4 Qb7 86.Ra2 Qh1 87.Ra6+ Kf7 88.Nf3 Qb1 89.Rd6 Kg7 90.Rd5 Qa2+ 91.Rd2 Qb1 92.Re2 Qb6 93.Rc2 Qb1 94.Nd4 Qh1 95.Rc7+ Kf6 96.Rc6+ Kf7 97.Nf3 Qb1 98.Ng5+ Kg7 99.Ne6+ Kf7 100.Nd4 Qh1 101.Rc7+ Kf6 102.Nf3 Qb1 103.Rd7 Qb2+ 104.Rd2 Qb1 105.Ng1 Magnus decides for the Ne2, Rd4 and e4 setup. Qb4 106.Rd1 Qb3 107.Rd6+ Kg7 108.Rd4 Qb2+ 109.Ne2 Qb1 110.e4 Qh1 111.Rd7+ Kg8 112.Rd4 Qh2+ 113.Ke3 h4 Opening more files should easen Black's defensive task. 114.gxh4 Qh3+ 115.Kd2 Qxh4 116.Rd3 Kf8 117.Rf3 Qd8+ 118.Ke3 Now as rightly pointed out by Magnus, getting the knight to g3 was of a great importance for him. Therefore Black had to give a check on b6, inviting the knight to a more central square, but giving White king less safe space on the board. Qa5? 119.Kf2! Qa7+ 120.Re3 Now Magnus gets quite some hopes, as he has a plan of pushing the pawns forwards and with the knight on g3 and king on f3, his king is quite well positioned. Qd7 121.Ng3 Qd2+ 122.Kf3 Qd1+ 123.Re2 Qb3+ 124.Kg2 Qb7 125.Rd2 Qb3 126.Rd5 Ke7 127.Re5+ Kf7 128.Rf5+ Ke8 129.e5 Qa2+ 130.Kh3 Qe6 The losing move according to the tablebases. Keeping the queen behind, would still hold objectively, but by this point it was no easy task. Practically speaking, I feel on move 118 a major mistake happened. 131.Kh4 Next is Nh5 and the White king gets to hide in front of the pieces, leaking in via g5-h6. Qh6+ 132.Nh5 Qh7 133.e6! The clincher, using the fact that the rook can't be taken because of the fork. Qg6 134.Rf7 Kd8 135.f5 Qg1 136.Ng7 A very elegant win. White runs the king up the boards to g8, where it hides from checks and then e7-e8 decides. What a game!
  • 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
Carlsen,M-Nepomniachtchi,I-2021Wch Match Dubai 2021

Magnus Carlsen

Up on the scoreboard — world champion Magnus Carlsen | Photo: Eric Rosen

All games

 
Loading...
New ...
Open...
Share...
Layout...
Flip Board
Settings
MoveNResultEloPlayers
Replay and check the LiveBook here
  • 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.

Links


Carlos Colodro is a Hispanic Philologist from Bolivia. He works as a freelance translator and writer since 2012. A lot of his work is done in chess-related texts, as the game is one of his biggest interests, along with literature and music.

Discuss

Rules for reader comments

 
 

Not registered yet? Register

Jimbo100 Jimbo100 12/7/2021 10:54
@Master_Patzer, @rakerchess: If you are fans of Firouzja's attacking chess over Magnus's endgame grinds I recommend their game from the Tata Steel Masters in Jan 2021 (Carlsen-Firouzja, Round 1, TSM 2021 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TCfyFxQCSQM). White sacrifices two pawns to gain piece activity, he then further sacrifices an exchange to open the black king; white's active pieces swarm the black king and black resigns, ahead on material but with his king trapped in a mating net. It's a fine example of attacking chess and shows that classical time control chess between super GM's is not dead. Should have you connoisseurs purring. Beware - some websites think Magnus had the white pieces that day, but that can't be right can it?
Michael Jones Michael Jones 12/5/2021 07:38
If it requires an engine to identify that a move is a blunder, then as far as humans are concerned, it essentially isn't a blunder. The fact that it was theoretically losing has zero practical relevance if the winning line was so deep that no human could ever have found it. I feel a bit sorry for the top players - up until c2000, only supercomputers could compete with them, so an engine running on a home computer wasn't in a position to judge whether a GM's move was a blunder. Nowadays anyone can go out and buy an engine which is much stronger than any human player, so the world elite get lectured on their 'blunders' by complete patzers.
lajosarpad lajosarpad 12/5/2021 03:50
@MauvaisFou Carlsen's style is to avoid risks, obtain a playable position with a minuscule or no advantage and slowly outplay his opponents. There are examples of Carlsen taking risks and playing brilliantly, but I do agree with you that those are not very frequent. He is certainly capable of playing in that style, but he tends to do that when he is in a must-win situation. Yet, the very fact that you do not see brilliant combinations being played on the board does not mean that there were no such lines. It just means that those lines were seen by Carlsen and he has seen the refutation or his opponent has also seen it. In top level chess unbrilliant risky play is often seen by both players and the would-be-loser avoiding the loss. Carlsen tends to be brilliant in strategic play. Look at game 6 here, where in an inbalanced game he created a phalanx with his remaining pieces and slowly taking over. And, by the way, the end was brilliant, yet, risk-free for the champ. You can argue that there were more entertaining players in the past and I agree. But Carlsen is really really good at chess and here preciseness is more important than pleasing the audience.
dumkof dumkof 12/5/2021 02:35
@Master_Patzer,

"Carlsen’s chess tends to be boring at times" because he sees things on the board that we don't. Players at his calibre understand and appreciate his moves and don't find them boring.
MauvaisFou MauvaisFou 12/5/2021 10:56
Take Tal for instance. Yes he played inferior moves. But the complexity was such that his opponent did not find the right moves. Even after post-portem (human post-mortem !) it was sometimes still unclear. Maybe it is not deserved, as you say MC has some brilliant games, but he will not be remembered for excessive risk taking. This does not mean that he is not extremely strong and deep. Maybe, when he gets older, he will be bolder, like Kramnik ?
maxharmonist maxharmonist 12/5/2021 07:03
On the subject of Carlsen not playing any brilliant games where he takes real risks, I think there are lots of them if one just is interested in looking at them. But the question is also what taking real risks mean. Is it playing inferior moves and hope the opponent blunders, or going for unclear positions in general? For example the second game here was one where Carlsen sacrificed both pawn and exchange, and this in a title match, so it’s not as if he doesn’t take risks.

I like for example the last three rounds from Gashimov Memorial two years ago. This just three games in a row from one single event:

https://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1952433

https://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1952431

https://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1952440

All of them sacrificing material and winning nicely. But most top level games tend to be a bit drier today than once upon a time, still I think there are numerous tactical and fun Carlsen games if one wants to find them.
Master_Patzer Master_Patzer 12/5/2021 12:54
I’ve studied chess for over a decade and I regretfully agree,Carlsen’s chess tends to be boring at times. I actually enjoyed all that opening prep that Kasparov used to beat his opponents. Yes I know these powerful engines have changed the game. But everyone has access to them so use them.

Okay let the criticism to my comment begin!
MauvaisFou MauvaisFou 12/4/2021 10:59
to lajosarpad : (about point 2)
yes, maybe, but this is also because Alekhine and even Kasparov were not trained as early and easily, with full knowledge of everything. And can you give me some brilliant - I mean tactically - games
by Carlsen, where he took real risks ? Even moves or combinations, apart from Dh6+ against Karjakine ? Whereas Kasparov, Chirov, Ivantchuk, Anand, Polgar, have plenty. I am sorry for Topalov, but the first examples that come to mind are Kasparov-Topalov where the Black king ends on the first row, or ... Fh3 by Chirov. These are things that you remember. So OK MC grinds, it is not dishonourable, but Karpov did it much better.
rkpuia rkpuia 12/4/2021 09:29
@rakerchess: you seem to be some 1000 rated player who don`t know 50 moves rule and who`s using computer lines to criticize the best chess player in the world. And oh, Carlsen has got the highest CAPS rating, which mean he is the most precise players to ever grace this game. Higher than Kasparov, Fisher and everyone else in your list. Did you know that they just play the most accurate game in any world championship in game 3? I suggest you analyze Fisher/Kasparove game with your same engine. You`ll find out that they make blunders/mistakes more than Carlsen so I don`t really know what you are talking about “Fisher/Kasparov in their peaks didn`t play this badly”
If you think Carlsen is not creative, I suggest you watch some of his recent games (2019-2020). Check his wins against Giri.
He can defend worst position better than anyone, he can grind out the most drawish position with slight edge, he`s the one who`s mostly making the best strategy to win his games, proven by many of his supertournament win, chess world championship win etc. In tactical skirmish also, he`ll be the one standing at the end. He`s the most intuitive strongest players to ever grace this game where you cannot calculate every lines(Shown by his blitz/rapid accolades) And yet here you are, a genius with computer lines calling them(Magnus/Ian) without chess abilities.
Did you know that when Carlsen play rd1 he has got only 2-3 mins left. Time matters too. It becomes incredibly hard to calculate to 100% accuracy as your time run out.
I can point out so many wrongs in your comment, but let this be enough. Study and play chess enough, you`ll see that they are the best of the best in the world.
mc1483 mc1483 12/4/2021 07:39
@rakerchess: you don't seem know how the 50 moves rule works, yet you harshly criticize the game of the best players in the world. If you are so sure they aren't worth and even blunder that much, why aren't you the world champion?
PCMorphy72 PCMorphy72 12/4/2021 03:04
Ok, I will no longer reply to fixpoint (I think it is not an entity to which replies are worth, but just a troll to create flames) but, talking as usual of WCh formats, I would like to mention that for a decade I tried to spread from a webpage ( https://sites.google.com/site/pcmorph72/articoli/wcc-cycle ) ideas for a fully unbiased WCh that should help to produce the best quality games from the best qualities of both players. I admit the systems containing those ideas were too difficult to fully adopt, but I think the closest ways to fit with current FIDE rules are:

1. Obviously, turn back the “Fischer Clock” with the 30 sec increment from move 1
2. Increase the bonus prize split for who wins without tiebreak (let’s say 70% to the winner and 30% to the loser)
3. Ask the challenger if he prefers two last (classical) games both with White as tiebreak:
If Game 1 has a winner, he is the new champion;
If Game 1 is a draw, there is Game 2;
If Game 2 has a winner, he is the new champion;
If Game 2 is a draw, the former champion retains his title.
(note that it is not a trivial “former champion privilege”, since he risks to lose his title by two aggressive “nothing to lose” games from an opponent who will have White in both games)

Unfortunately, nowadays both World champions, challengers for the WCh title, and generally top players, prefer avoiding risks instead of strenuous risky “their-best-quality” games: for this reason they would prefer to play matches with a 51%-49% prize spit and with blitz tiebreaks after game 2 (they would even prefer a sword fight tiebreak after a strenuous draw). The solution should be to not ask the format to top-players, but to the chess-community with some true knowledge (and not necessarily money).
Resistance Resistance 12/4/2021 02:12
at fixpoint ---
There is a very important difference between a game played with increment from move one, and a game played without increment till move 61 onwards. During the portion of the game where there's no increment (moves 1 to 60), your time invariably decreases with every move played. In games where there's increment from move 1, on the other hand, you always keep a certain time shield, a 'time buffer zone', so to speak, that guarantees players protection from potentially deadly time scrambles (-- whenever it is the case that you approach the limits of the pre-established time control. --). This is very useful for chessplayers, because it is not unusual for them to use big amounts of time at certain moments during games, especially at middle-game positions (-- where you really need to focus in order to see where the game is headed, or where is it that you want it to go --). Consequently, you can use a big portion of your time, say, at just one or two moments, and then be left with very little on your clock. Increment from move one avoids this conflict, a very frequent one among chess players.

FIDE, on the other hand, has managed to basically eliminate time increment from the WC match, since only very few games end after move 60. I guess they weren't thinking on CHESS this time, but CHE$$... (-- what a shame --).

.
lajosarpad lajosarpad 12/4/2021 02:11
@Resistance I would argue that the clock is a chess factor...

@Rakerchess I believe that the Carlsen of today would beat Alekhine or Kasparov at their best. I do not speak about opening theory, let's assume that they would start in a position where they are both already out of book. Yes, Carlsen is a grinder, but so was Karpov at his best. Looking for blunders with an engine will mislead you. Have you analyzed Kasparov's games with the same engine looking for blunders? If so, did you find Kasparov playing more engine-like than Carlsen? I'm asking you because I'm not using an engine while I look at top chess games.
lajosarpad lajosarpad 12/4/2021 02:05
After the first fascinating and interesting 5 draws we arrived to the epic 6th game. I guess we will always receive complaints. In the first 5 games, even though they were very interesting, people looking only at the results called it a draw fest. Now that the game was not drawn, a thing which did not happen since 2016, some other complainers, who are only looking at engines dislike this game. I guess that it is impossible to make everyone happy.
Karsten Müller Karsten Müller 12/4/2021 01:54
Yes of course. Krennwurzn gives:

130... Qc2 131. Rf6 Qd1 {only drawing move} 132. Kh4 Qe1 {again only move - the knight pin is one motif to stop White's progress} 133. Rg6 Qf2 134. Rg4 Qh2+ 135. Kg5 Qh7 {together with Qh8 again the only defence} 136. Nh5 (136. Nf5 Qg8+ {a repetition is threatened}) 136... Kf7 {again the only drawing move} 137. f5 Qg8+ {logical - again the only move} 138. Kf4 Qb8 {the only defence - Black must use pin motifs} 139. Rg7+ Kf8 {it should not be worth mentioning that this is the only move} 140. f6 Qb5 141. Re7 Qf1+ 142. Kg5 Qg1+ 143. Kh6 Qc1+
144. Kh7 Qg5 145. Ng7 Qh5+ $3 {yes there are stalemate motifs} 146. Nxh5 stalemate

Over the board even much more complicated of course than in the Krennwurzn analysis.
ChrisHolmes ChrisHolmes 12/4/2021 01:48
Could Karsten Müller repeat that in English ?
Karsten Müller Karsten Müller 12/4/2021 01:41
Krennwurzn vor 4 Stunden






130... Qc2 131. Rf6 Qd1 {einziger Remiszug} 132. Kh4 Qe1 {wieder
einziger - die Springerfesselung ist ein Motiv um Weiß bei Fortschritten zu
behindern} 133. Rg6 Qf2 134. Rg4 Qh2+ 135. Kg5 Qh7 {mit Dh8 wieder die einzige
Verteidigungsmöglichkeit} 136. Nh5 (136. Nf5 Qg8+ {und es droht schon eine
Stellungswiederholung}) 136... Kf7 {wieder der einzige Remiszug} 137. f5 Qg8+ {
logisch der einzige Remiszug} 138. Kf4 Qb8 {der einzige Remiszug - Schwarz
muss immer wieder Fesselmotive ausnutzen} 139. Rg7+ Kf8 {da muss man einziger
Zug kaum dazuschreiben} 140. f6 Qb5 141. Re7 Qf1+ 142. Kg5 Qg1+ 143. Kh6 Qc1+
144. Kh7 Qg5 145. Ng7 Qh5+ $3 {ja es gibt Pattmotive} 146. Nxh5 PATT

In der Realität und am Brett noch viel komplizierter als in dieser Krennwurzn-Analyse.
Das ist ganz klar ein Fall für die Superendspielprofis a la Karsten Müller & Co!!
rakerchess rakerchess 12/4/2021 01:19
On current form (the atrocious 2d & 6th games with all their blunders), Carlsen is not playing like a World Champion. Fischer and Kasparov at their respective peaks did not play like this, this badly.
Additionally, one sees no strategic and tactical brilliance in Carlsen's games, as opposed to Alekhine and Kasparov (for example).
There is just a pathetic opening, which hands the initiative to Black right away (really, is this the best Carlsen's team can do with hours of computer analysis?). Carlsen was visibly shaken by Nepo's 11...b5, as his body language showed after this move (home analysis in pieces after just 11 moves!).
Then once the home analysis is finished, and the players have to start playing on their own, numerous blunders after another!
Finally, the endgame. Nothing to brag about here as well, just a very long slog of piece shuffling over 90 moves (isn't there a rule that a draw is imposed after a certain number of moves?), followed by another blunder by Nepo, probably out of sheer fatigue and frustration! Grinding down your opponent with almost eight hours of play says a lot about Carlsen's physical fitness, but nothing about his abilities as a chess player.
I'm hoping that Firouzja can beat Carlsen at the next World Championship, he plays much more creative and interesting chess.
The player whom Carlsen resembles the most, in my opinion, is Reshevsky, another child prodigy, who played like an old man in his youth, just like Carlsen. No creativity, imagination, or strategic/tactical brilliance, just a gritty grind to wear down his opponent, boring, stale, and unimaginative chess. Both players are/were old men in their chess styles at a young age, probably because they've been playing since childhood, way too long for us spectators.
At this rate, Carlsen is killing classical chess.
Resistance Resistance 12/4/2021 01:14
Fantastic game! Great battle. I wish all games were as hard-fought as this one. Congratulations to Magnus and Ian for their effort.

Regarding the issue of time control, I agree. Players should be encouraged to be creative, to take risks. No increment from move one means time scrambles (randomness, stupidity) becoming a much bigger factor, a much bigger threat to players, and consequently, a much bigger influence in the way they approach the games and the match in general (safe, 'I don't wanna lose'-chess becomes religion). In an event as important as the classical world chess championship match (or the Candidates Tournament, or the qualifyers for the Candidates Tournament, etc), the clock should not be the reason players lose games. Hours of creative, emotional and physical effort; months, years of preparation, ruined because of an entirely non-chess related factor: the clock.

Players should win on merit; they shouldn't lose because they tried to come up with something memorable; with something great.

.
rakerchess rakerchess 12/4/2021 01:06
What an atrocious game, replete with blunders galore by both players! Difficult to understand how some commentators can call this a "great" game (like the well known 6th Games from the Fischer - Petrosian Candidates' Match, Buenos Aires 1971 and the Fischer - Spassky World Championship Match, Reykjavik 1972).

Comments based on analysis by the Beast (Fat Fritz 2 running on 48 cores):

1 Nepo blundered first with 31....Bb2??+-, when 31....Qb3 32 Ne5 fe5 33 Rc7 Qa3 34 Rdd7 Qb2 35 Kg2 a3= was dead equal.
2 Carlsen blundered next with 33 Rd1??? (going from a winning position to one where Black has a large advantage in one move surely deserves three question marks), when 33 Rcc2 (removing the pin on the Nd3) Ba1 34 Nf4 Qe7 35 Rc8! Qb7 36 Rdd8 f5 37 Rh8 Kf6 38 Nh5+ Ke5+- was clearly winning (+5.55).
3 Nepo made a mistake with 35....e5?=, when 35...Bb4 36 Rcc1 Be7 37 Nf4 Qb7 38 Rd2 a3 39 Nh5+ Kh6 40 Nf4 Bb4 41 Ra2 Bd6 would have kept his large advantage (-0.71).
4 Carlsen made a mistake on the next move with 36 Rc2? with large advantage for Black, when 36 e4 Qd4 37 Kg1 Qe4 38 Rc2 Qd5 39 Rcd2 Kh6= was equal.
5 Not to be outdone, Nepo reciprocated with his own mistake 36....Qd5?=, when 36....Bb4 37 Rcc1 Ba3 38 Ra1 Qg4 39 Rd2 Be7 40 Ne1 Kh7 41 Raa2 Qc4 42 Rdc2 Qb4 43 Re2 a3 44 e4 Bd6 would have kept a large advantage for Black (-1.57).
6 Nepo continued to blunder with 38....e4??+-, when 38....f5 39 Ra1 f4! 40 ef4 ef4 41 Nf4 Bb4 42 Rda2 Qf3 43 Ra4 Qf2+ 44 Kh3 Bd6 45 Nh5+ Kh8= would have led to equality.
7 Carlsen continued to blunder in turn himself with 40 Ne4??= (one move too early!), when 40 Rdc2 (protecting Nc5) Qb1 41 Ne4 Kg6 42 Nc3 Qb3 43 Na4! Bd6 44 Nc3! (0nly move!) Be5 45 Ne2 Qe6+- was a clear win (+4.11).
8 The players then proceeded to shuffle pieces in an essentially equal endgame from moves 40-130 (over 90 moves!), until Nepo made the final blunder with 130 Qe6??+-, when 130....Qc2 131 Rf6 Qd1 (only move) is only a slight advantage for White.
fixpont fixpont 12/4/2021 01:05
@PCMorphy72: there is no meaningful difference between the 2 systems, what are you talking about???? your (accumulated) time is the exact same after move 40, 60, and every move after 61 in both systems
PCMorphy72 PCMorphy72 12/4/2021 12:55
@fixpoint Apart that increment is useful mainly to avoid endgames with “unnecessary pressure”, that is a thing that even a monkey would understand, as pointed out by dumkof, the increment from move 1 is useful in forcing to use your time between moves, move by move, in order to control the remaining time until move 40 or 60, that is a different thing than using your time spread into arbitrary portions over the whole game, as even a child would understand (if you are an adult, I think that Fischer would have spit in your face).
fixpont fixpont 12/4/2021 12:16
there is no real difference between this and older time controls, for example against Caruana the time control was the following:

"2018: The match was organised in a best-of-12-games format. The time control for the games was 100 minutes for the first 40 moves, an additional 50 minutes added after the 40th move, and then an additional 15 minutes added after the 60th move, plus an additional 30 seconds per move starting from move 1. "

so 100 minutes for 40 moves and 30 secs increment (40*30 secs = 20 minutes) 100 mins + 20 mins = 120 mins for 40 moves, todays rule: 120 minutes for 40 moves, it is almost the exact same time conrol (with a very very little pace difference), 50 mins for 20 moves + 20*30sec increment (= 10 minutes) 50+10 = 60 mins for the next 20 moves, today's rule: 60 minutes for 20 moves.... it is almost the same... again

(2021: The time control for each game is 120 minutes for the first 40 moves, followed by 60 minutes for the next 20 moves, and then 15 minutes for the rest of the game, with an increment of 30 seconds per move starting from move 61.)

i have a question for people who are complaining about the time control: what the hell are you talking about?
rodame rodame 12/4/2021 12:11
It was an incredible battle of ideas this 6th game. It calls me the attention that starting on move 116.Td3.... the total points of white is 10 (rook 5, Knigth 3, pawns 2= 10) against the 10 points of the black Queen. For an amateur in chess this equal numbers would appear that the game is equal or draw, but as we know the value of those pieces is for the position that have in the board, and the dynamic action developed together attacking at the black King.
dumkof dumkof 12/4/2021 11:26
I fully agree with PCMorphy72.

Chess without increment is a disaster. İt only adds unnecessary pressure to the players to blunder and ruin the quality. These are the best players who are unfortunately forced to play much worse than their potential.

What's the point to start increment after move 60 when most of the games are already decided much earlier? What kind of sick brain chemistry is required to do that? How much do these brains weigh, how do they look like?
Alexandru27 Alexandru27 12/4/2021 11:21
Fantastic will indeed!
MauvaisFou MauvaisFou 12/4/2021 11:20
the problem is not so much the lack of increment at the beginning of the game, as the lack of additional time every x moves at the end of the game. It is a shame to see an interesting endgame spoiled by the lack of time, both players being on increment ONLY, i.e., perpetual zeitnot. Of course, adding say 1 hour or 30 minutes every 20 moves would lengthen the game (in time) but would result in a better play.
gingerbreadman gingerbreadman 12/4/2021 11:14
This game was every bit equal to Game 13 of Fischer-Spassky, and that game looked like it came from SPACE. Dynamic imbalances make for great game; one over almost 8 hours and 136 moves (much of it in hideous time pressure) is like a boxing match that elevates both men. Bravo to both, they deserve a rest day even though they won't get one!
Jarman Jarman 12/4/2021 11:12
@PCMorphy72 As it turned out, for Fischer (whose grave is still in Iceland as far as I know) a WC match was ruined already without the unlimited number of games clause. But FIDE did indeed a mockery of the whole thing already with the introduction of the tie breaking rapid games.
PCMorphy72 PCMorphy72 12/4/2021 10:30
“Unlike in previous World Championship matches, FIDE decided this year to only give the contenders an increment after move 61.”
I was happy for the changes in the format like the 2 more games (14 vs 12) and the bonus prize split to avoid tiebreaks (55-45 with tiebreaks, 60-40 without), but as always FIDE had to ruine all of it by introducing this stupid abrogation of the useful time increment from move 1. Perhaps they thought increment would have been useful only in late endgame, while in move 1-59 the “new rule” would have led to games more fitting with the “old fashioned” 20th century WCh matches. Instead, Fischer would be turning in his grave (if he had one) by knowing of a WC match ruined by a “new rule” that practically annulled his “Fischer Clock” principle after it was adopted successfully for decades even in minor matches.
karavamudan karavamudan 12/4/2021 04:36
Poor Nepo, But now he must play freely and create chances. He must counterattack immediately. throw everything at Carlsen to equalize. Otherwise Carlsen will just sit tight
Petrosianic Petrosianic 12/4/2021 03:01
I really don't think it's an exaggeration to call this one of the greatest games in World Championship history.
KrushonIrina KrushonIrina 12/4/2021 03:00
Epic.
bbrodinsky bbrodinsky 12/4/2021 02:40
More respect for Carlson then ever. His endgame play was fabulous. Only he could have won that endgame, especially in “increment territory”.

The match will sharpen now.
Nogalex Nogalex 12/4/2021 12:02
Titan chess !!
genem genem 12/4/2021 12:01
Very frustrating that the game score does Not display the 'Time Remaining' after each move. Ten years from now, most fans who replay this game will misunderstand the overall forces that together determined each move.
WillScarlett WillScarlett 12/3/2021 11:42
Amazing ! The only thing I can imagine myself doing for eight hours is sleeping.
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.