Carlsen wins London Chess Classic
16 December 2009, 10.38 CET | Last modified: 17:04 | By Peter Doggers | Filed under: Reports | Tags:
Magnus Carlsen won the London Chess Classic yesterday with a score of 13 out of 7: three wins, four draws and no losses. His +3 was enough to officially become the youngest world’s number one player ever on the next FIDE rating list.
The London Chess Classic took place December 8-15 in Kensington, Londen. Venue was the Olympia Conference Centre. The time control was 2 hours for 40 moves, then 1 hour for 20 moves and then 15 minutes plus 30 seconds increment to finish the games. Magnus Carlsen, Vladimir Kramnik, Hikaru Nakamura, Nigel Short, Michael Adams, Ni Hua, Luke McShane and David Howell played.
Round 7 report by John Saunders
For many years now there has been a unique and rather touching tradition that the people of Norway make an annual Christmas gift to Britain of a 20-metre high Norwegian spruce tree, which is put up in Trafalgar Square and festooned with Christmas decorations. This year the Norwegian tree was sent to London as usual and can be seen in all its glory in the famous square, but Norway also thoughtfully sent another present – not as tall but every bit as impressive to anyone who appreciates top-quality chess. 19-year-old Magnus Carlsen came, saw and conquered at the London Chess Classic and, in the process, launched himself to the top of the official world chess ratings. Nobody has ever achieved this at a younger age.
So, “Magnus venit, vidit, vicit” (I knew all that school Latin would come in handy one day)… but, before we get too carried away with all this hyperbole, we must give credit to his last-round opponent, Nigel Short, who gave him a terrific run for his money and provided excellent entertainment for the chess fans at the Olympia Conference Centre.
Let’s take things chronologically. The first game to finish was Nakamura-Kramnik, in which both players made strenuous efforts to win. Ex-world champion Vladimir Kramnik, needing a win to give himself a realistic chance of the first prize, gave up a rook for a bishop and pawns, and some threats against White’s king but the American stood firm and the players eventually repeated the position for a draw. Both players will be slightly disappointed with their final results in London but they both deserve great credit for their part in making the tournament a roaring success and entertaining the audience in the commentary room.
Three-time Chinese champion Ni Hua played the Ruy Lopez opening against England’s top-rated teenager David Howell. The young man from Seaford in Sussex played an excellent game. First he made an energetic pawn sacrifice to block up Ni Hua’s bishop in the corner of the board and then attacked the weakened white defences in the centre. Ni Hua used too much time at the critical juncture and made some mistakes as his time ebbed away. David Howell made no mistake and launched a lethal counter-attack. As the lowest-rated player in the field as well as the least experienced, David’s final score of one win, six draws and no losses, and third place after the two megastars, was a superb achievement. Asked afterwards where this result ranked in his chess career, David had no hesitation in pronouncing it his best ever.
England’s Michael Adams too had an excellent last round, making the same final score as David Howell and remaining unbeaten. His game against Luke McShane started as a classic Adams squeeze: he applied gradual pressure to the weak spots in his opponent’s position, to the point where Luke could barely move. But Luke then demonstrated why he is such a dangerous fighter. His ingenious attempts to wriggle out of trouble brought about an exceedingly complicated position, but Adams somehow defused all the counterplay and won. This will be great fillip to Adams and should help to narrow the rating gap between him and England’s number one, Nigel Short. For McShane, there was tangible consolation in the shape of the tournament brilliancy prize of 10,000 euros, given for his win against Hikaru Nakamura in round five.
That just left Magnus Carlsen’s crucial game against Nigel Short. It lasted around five and a half hours and was a game of considerable fluctuations. Once Kramnik had agreed a draw, Carlsen only needed a draw to secure the first prize. However, the tournament rules precluded the agreeing of a draw in a position with life in it, so the two players got on with the job of playing the game through to its logical conclusion. After a fairly equal opening, Nigel Short made a mistake around move 25, and Carlsen seemed to be on the verge of victory. As with many sports stars on the brink of victory (e.g. a tennis player needing to serve out for a grand slam title or a golfer needing a straightforward putt for an open championship), nerves played their part. Magnus sometimes plays chess like a machine but he is human like the rest of us.
The game swung in favour of Short as they reached a queen and pawns endgames where Nigel had checkmating threats and even the chance of having two queens operating together on the board. It was an enthralling finish for the spectators but Carlsen recovered his equanimity and picked his way through a minefield of tricks laid for him by the former world title challenger. At the end of the game, just the two kings were left on the board – and there can be no better proof of a game fought to the bitter end.
Games round 7 with notes by John Saunders
Game viewer by ChessTempo
You can still replay GM Dimitri Reinderman’s live commentary of the 7th round in London. We’ve been covering the World Cup and the London Chess Classic for free; starting from 2010 our live commentary will be subscription-based. You’ll find more info here.
That is not quite the end of the story. At the gala prizegiving, held at Simpsons in the Strand in the evening, where the trophy and winner’s cheque for 25,000 euros were presented to the tournament winner, and the 10,000 euros prize for the tournament’s brilliancy prize awarded to Luke McShane for his round five win against Hikaru Nakamura, tournament director Malcolm Pein announced that there would be another London tournament (dates not yet fixed) in 2010 and also that it was the intention to hold a world chess championship match in London in 2012.
Videos
London Chess Classic 2009 | Results
London Chess Classic 2009 | Final Standings (football system)
London Chess Classic 2009 | Final Standings (regular system)
Links
 ShareThis
|  Print
|
Some achivements by Magnus Carlsen this year:
Winner of Nanjing.
Word Blitz Champion.
2nd in Tal Memorial.
Winner of London Classic.
#1 on the FIDE Elo list.
Becoming the youngest #1 in history.
- He deserves the Chess Oscar 2009!
Who has the alltime high Fide record, Kasparov I guess? How many points is Emperor Magnus away from that?
If i remember correctly it was 2851. So to answer your question : 41 points.
Certainly Carlsen deserves the Oscar 2009.
!)
Still, as strong as he is, he was also lucky in the drawings at Tal Memorial and World Cup: nr. 1 twice (twice white against Kramnik nr. 8!).
At this top level this can make quite a difference.
Only solution: double rounds as in Nanjing (where Carlsen drew also nr.1
Give him 2-3 years to be world champion and 6 years to break 2851.
How much did Magnus get for his victory?
Carlsen won 25 000 euros. Not bad, but at the same time McShane got 10 000 just for the brilliancy prize he was awarded for his win against Naka. Carlsen-Kramnik was maybe the game of the year while Naka blundered away the draw against McShane in a much worse game while for some reason playing blitz in the endgame, but maybe there is a home player advantage with regards to what is seen as brilliant.
@Rothschild: having 2851 ELO in 6 years from now is not the same as Kasparov having it in 2000. And keeping a 2800+ rating since. Lowest Kasparov had was 2804 in Januari 2005!
Magnus has something to do yet. I would say he has to reach at least 2870 to be comparable.
I’m looking forward to Corus. When the average player is Dominguez or Shirov, that’s a strong field.
Participants grandmaster group A
Name Country Rating
GM Magnus Carlsen NOR 2801 Photo
GM Viswanathan Anand IND 2788 Photo
GM Vladimir Kramnik RUS 2772 Photo
GM Peter Leko HUN 2752 Photo
GM Vassily Ivanchuk UKR 2739 Photo
GM Sergey Karjakin RUS 2723 Photo
GM Leinier Dominguez CUB 2719 Photo
GM Alexei Shirov SPA 2719 Photo
GM Hikaru Nakamura USA 2715 Photo
GM Nigel Short ENG 2707 Photo
GM Sergey Tiviakov NED 2664 Photo
GM Fabiano Caruana ITA 2662 Photo
GM Loek van Wely NED 2652 Photo
GM Jan Smeets NED 2650 Photo
Congratulations to Magnus Carlsen! As lucky as he was, he is enormously talented for sure. Thanks to ChessVibes! This one was especially nicely put. This was a great event, and I wish I could have been there or at least following live (I had final papers due). I am impressed by the shows of all the fights. This is one of those events that makes me want to congratulate all participants (I know some of them are not feeling too good about their results). They all showed some good fights, and Kramnik’s come back promises some really good chess. We have so many great guys now, and I am sure that Magnus has to work hard to keep his current place. Exciting!
@PP
The truth is that the inflation in ELO is not fully understood and agreed upon. If Kasparov was down to 2804 i 2005 (surely not his lowest rating btw. He didn’t START from 2805+, did he?), then being 2810 now seems quite descent.
We are not discussing what is “the same” we are simply discussing yet another record. Noone started to demand more from Kasparov to be comparable to, say Capablance. In the end it’s all a matter of taste since times and competitive fields continuously change.
GREAT annotations on the Short-Carlsen game. Thank you so much!
Awarding the brilliancy prize to McShane for his round 5 game against Naka is ridiculous. Nake stumbled into a bad exchange and McShane literally didn’t know what to do with it – demonstrated by his topsy-turvy play and his witless post-game analysis, where he was thrown by a series of lines suggested by the commentators.
Compared to (for instance) Kramnik’s absolute mastery of the lines he played and analysed, McShane’s prize is a blemish against the tournament.
“Awarding the brilliancy prize to McShane for his round 5 game against Naka is ridiculous”
At least surprising, if they wanted stunning moves and spectacular tactics Carlsen-McShane (45. Be2 followed by 47. Nc5) is on a much higher level than the blunders that decided Naka-McShane. Naka could have won if he hadn’t blitzed out his 42nd (Re8 was the move) and a draw with 44.axb4 followed by Rb5, and if they wanted sheer positional brilliance Carlsen-Kramnik was the game to pick. It doesn’t matter really, but with the biggest brilliancy prize ever it is weird that it ended up like this.
Don’t forget McShane-Kramnik: highly original as early as move 10 (-Bf2:+) , the positional brilliancy 21.-Qb3, altogether sheer domination from start to finish with the black pieces. Of course this is only possible if white makes a few mistakes and/or shows lack of ambition.
Maybe the organizers should have honestly announced beforehand that “the brilliancy prize goes to the best game played by one of the English participants” – but even then McShane-Nakamura wasn’t the most obvious choice … .
Agreed that the brilliancy prize should not have gone to McShane. If it had to go to a Brit, Howell’s last round game would have been a better choice. Or if it was really objective, the Carlsen games mentioned above. Giving a brilliancy prize to Carlsen is hardly surprising but under similar circumstances Kasparov would have insisted that he played a better game then the patzer awarded by the jury.
On a positive note, perhaps this prize will convince Luke that he should stop his silly banking adventures and become a decent chess professional.
Great tournament, and second half of the year for Carlsen, and Kramnik has been tearing it up, too!
I must disagree with suggestion that “White may be able to hold” after 43… Qe2+, 44 Qxe2 Nxe2. In fact, the win for Black seems forced:
45 Bf1 Ng3 46 Bxa6 h3 47 b4 h2 48 Bb7 Ke8! (only the King can stop the Q-side pawns in time) 49 a5 bxa5 50 bxa5 Kd8 51 c4 h1=Q 52 Bxh1 Nxh1 53 Kc3 Nf2 54 Kd4 Ng4 55 a6 Kc7 56 c5 Nxf6 57 Ke5 Ne8 58 Kf5 and now the White King could hold off the N+P and draw, because Black can’t gain a tempo with his K against the a+c pawns without letting one of them Queen . . . But Black can switch the roles with 58 … Kd7!! 59 a7 Nc7 60 Kf6 Ke8 and now Black’s King can escort the f-pawn to promotion while the N watches both White pawns effortlessly – even losing a tempo when needed.
It’s long and a bit tricky at times, but mostly forced and well within the calculation abilities of Magnus Carlsen, especially after making the time control.
That comment refers to Short-Carlsen, of course – sorry if that wasn’t clear.
Estragon, did you see my comments too? “43… Qe2+ 44. Qxe2 Nxe2 gives some chances: for example 45. Bf1 Ng3 46. Bxa6 h3 47. b4 h2 48. Bb7 Ke8 49. c4 Kd7 50. Kc3 Kc7 51. Bf3 h1=Q 52. Bxh1 Nxh1 53. Kd4 Kc6 54. a5 bxa5 55. bxa5 Ng3 56. Ke5 Nf1 57. a6 Ne3 wins. Probably white draws by moving his king to the h-pawn though. ” With the last line I hinted at 45.Kc2. Not 100% sure it draws, but it doesn’t look like a forced loss at least.
GM Reinderman ~ Thank you for the response. No, I regret I did not see your comments on this game, although I have in earlier rounds and events and find them most enlightening. Sometimes, whether due to my connection or the traffic, the games seemed to hang up on the live feed here, and I had to switch to the official site feed.
I see your point with 45 Kc2. By refraining from taking the Pa6, White’s Bishop can restrain the Ph4 until his King comes over, without sacrificing himself. This will necessitate a shift in strategy for Black, who will have to beat a hasty retreat with his Knight when the White monarch attacks, and with the Bishop’s proximity (on f3 for example, covering the d5, e4, g4, and h5 squares the N would like) may not be able to snatch the Pf6 so readily.
Black will have to adopt an encircling strategy to win the Pf6 in this case, including his King via f8-e8-d7 etc., probably leaving Ph4 where it sits to distract White’s pieces, and then mount a combined attack on the Q-side after a timely a4-a5. If White defends with the Bishop, the Black K+N should prevail, so the White K must return in defense, whereupon Black attempts to advance the K-side pawns.
Your suggestion is undoubtedly White’s best try, and the moves are less forced than after 45 Bf1, so I concede I cannot demonstrate a clear win in this line – however, you will at least agree Black has the better chances, and cannot possibly lose.
I find this ending fascinating for the minor pieces’ play. In the 45 Bf1 line, Black’s Knight travels from h1 to stop a promotion on a8, showing a Knight can play on both sides of the board. In your 45 Kc2 line, the Bishop stays home to fight up close and personal, denying the Knight his preferred squares and tactics in the short-range game which is his supposed advantage. How broad the horizon of possibilities in this infernal game!
Thank you again for your post – where else can an amateur from halfway around the world get a respected GM’s answer to a question?
No problem! And yes, it would have been a good winning try, though in the game he had good chances too of course, if he would have taken on f6.
Good to see some fighting chess in London, compared to the worldcup chess games (draws, draws draws after 20 moves) earlier this month.