Category: English

This is indeed the 9th time I’ve been here for the Grand Open at the beginning of the year in Gibraltar’s Caleta Hotel, a tournament that I particularly enjoy. After the tension of the last months of 2019 with the Grand Chess Tour and the qualifying tournaments for the Candidates, it was nice for me to play an Open, most of the time with opponents I had never played against before.

Round 1: MVL – SUKANDAR (2402) 1-0

This game against an Indonesian IM was a good warm-up to get into the tournament. There were many lines to calculate, after 14…Qb6 already, a move that forced me to sacrifice a pawn. Generally speaking, there were quite concrete things to evaluate, including a few nice lines 🙂 . For example, after 22.b4 :

My opponent played 22…Qa7, but in case of 22…Qxc4, I had planned 23.Nb6 Qxb4 24.Nxa8 Rxa8 25.f6! exf6 26.exf6 Ne8 (26…Re8 27.Qc3) 27.Nxc6 bxc6 28.Rxa6!.

Round 2: FLOM (2510) – MVL 1/2

The French IM played a line from the Grunfeld Exchange that I knew, of course.

In this position, I was well aware that 20…Bxe5 was leading to a draw. So I decided to play something else, but well, that didn’t bring much; I remembered that 20…Bd7 was probably not so good, but playable to avoid an immediate draw. But then I felt wings sprouting; indeed, after 21.Rhg1 Bb5 22.Rc3 Kh8 23.f4 Rd5 24.Kc2 Bxd3+ 25.Rxd3 Rc8+ 26.Kd2 Rcd8 27.Rxd5 Rxd5+, I didn’t expect 28.Kc2, but 28.Ke2. Then I realized that if I allowed him to play 29.Rd1, it would be a draw right away. So I calculated 28…f6? to continue the game, for example after 29.exf6 Bxf6 30.Rg6 Rf5. But he played 29.Rg6! and I then realized that there is no 29…fxe5 30.fxe5 Rxe5? because of 31.Bd4, white’s King being on c2, and not on e2! So I had to give two pawns away and pray that it would work… Well, it seemed like it should draw anyway after 30…Bxe5 31.Rxh6+ Kg8 32.Rxe6 Fd4, but it was a bit of a sport, let’s not kid ourselves.

Indeed, the final position is the famous Vancura draw in the Rook endgame, known for a century. So if there is any refutation, it would already have been found 🙂 .

In fact, I got Vancura’s position, but with a pawn on h5 in addition, which however plays no role. I had a little scare because it took me a little while to find the exact path to the draw, but I finally managed it before my opponent tested my knowledge! After 51…Rf6 52.Kc5 Rf5+! (but not 52…Rh6? 53.Kb5 Rxh5+ 54.Kb6 Rh6+ 55.Kb7 and the fact that there is no check on the 7th costs the game) 53.Kc6 Rf6+ 54.Kd7, I saw the drawing pattern with 54…Rb6 (in this exact position, 54…Rf7+ is even simpler). 55.Kc7 Rf6 (only move) 56.h6+ Kh7 (only move) 57.a7 Rf7+ (only move!) and as soon as the White King wants to get out of lateral checks, he must let the Black Rook pass on the a-file, with a trivial draw.

Round 3: MVL – BARON (2529) 1-0

A power outage was the highlight of the round 🙂 . It affected the whole neighbourhood! Luckily, the Caleta Hotel had quite a few small desk lamps that worked without electricity, which were to be used for the closing ceremony. Some brave players had chosen to continue the game in this kind of subdued atmosphere… Others, including my opponent Tal Baron, kept thinking in half-light, clock stopped; which turned out to be counterproductive in his case, since he made a fatal miscalculation as soon as play resumed!

Round 4: VAIBHAV (2593) – MVL 1/2

Round 5: MVL – SANAL (2569) 1/2

After a near-theoretical draw against Vaibhav, I had white against the Turkish GM Sanal; the only one of my 6 white games that I didn’t win 🙂 .

That game had gotten off to a bad start due to a miscalculation…

Here, I had anticipated 13.d4, but finally, the position after 13…Qc7! 14.dxe5 dxe5 15.Nxe5 0-0! 16.0-0 (16.Bf4 Rd8) 16…Qxe5 (16…Rd8 17.Qe1) 17.Bf4 Qh5 18.Bxb8 Bg4, I didn’t like it.

So I played 13.h3 0-0 14.c4, with the idea of surrounding the b3 pawn. But it’s a slow plan and I think he didn’t react very well because he let me regain the advantage. Except that I myself mishandled the position back, and I even had to be careful in the endgame in order to draw.

All in all, the first half of the tournament was quite uneven, with a few games where I calculated rather well, and some quite ugly games, I’m thinking in particular of those against Flom and Sanal.

Round 6: MVL – PERALTA (2574) 1-0

A rather well-controlled game on the whole, notably because I refuted his conception in the opening :

I didn’t know 10…Na5 immediately, and I found on the board the very interesting move 11.h4!?, while 12 other moves had already been tried in this position!

I don’t know if it’s that strong, but in any case, he fell directly into my trap, because after 11…h5?! 12.Ne3 Nxe3 13.fxe3, I already have a clear advantage. We’ll move on to the final episode of this game, already well documented on specialized websites 🙂 . In a completely winning position, I played a move that let him back in the game, but he had the same hallucination as me, thinking he was being mated, and he resigned!

Round 7: KARTHIKEYAN (2606) – MVL 1/2

Karthikeyan is a young Indian who beat me in the last round last year, despite my Najdorf turning out pretty well for me. This time, he played the opening well and managed to get the advantage, but luckily he underestimated his position twice, and allowed me to stabilize the game.

Round 8: BASSO (2600) – MVL 1/2

Round 9: MVL – CAN (2600) 1-0

After another draw with Black in a very theoretical Grunfeld against Italian GM Basso – without ever being able to play for the win – I faced the Turkish Can in the penultimate round :

I think he made it easier for me by quickly entering a Queenless middlegame:

Can certainly thought that the position was not so dangerous, but in fact it seems to me really inferior because in addition to the isolated pawn, the Bb7 is badly placed and the a6-pawn is weak too. Here, he should still have tried to be active by 17…Re4 18.Bg3 Rde8 19.Kf1 Bc6, rather than allowing 17…Nf8?! 18.a5!, and the position becomes a long torture for Black after 18…Ne6 19.axb6 Bxb6 20.Bd2 Nd4 21.Nxd4 Bxd4 22.Bd3!. Maybe I had a more concrete solution after 22…Re6 23.Ra4 Ff6 24.Rb4 Bc8. Instead of 25.Ra1, 25.Rxe6 fxe6 26.Rb8 (idea 27.Ra8) probably would have won the a6-pawn. But then, do you want to make concrete decisions in this position? Not at all, actually! Because even if I take a6, Black may have counter-play with …Rc8 and …e5. There are a lot of details to check, and the position does not require such an approach from a practical point of view, in my opinion.

Round 10: MVL – MAGHSOODLOO (2674) 1-0

A win in this last round game wold give me a small chance to finish in the leading pack, and I had the pleasant surprise of doubling white against the former world junior champion. I played 1.d4, which seemed to me a relevant choice against this specific opponent.

J I got an ending a pawn up, but it was definitely a draw. Here, the easiest for him was 30…Rxc5! (instead of 30…Rd8) 31.dxc5 Ne4+ (31…Nc4 should also be a draw, but the possible pawn ending to be foreseen from afar after 32.Rc3 Rc8 33.c6 bxc6 34.Bxc4 dxc4 35.Rxc4 Kd5 may be frightening) 32.Bxe4 dxe4 and Black will end up ok without difficulty. In the game, after 30…Rd8 31.Rac3 Rd7 32.a4, he certainly didn’t need to give me the c6-square with 32…b6? 33.Rc6 Rdd8 34.Ke2 Rd7 35.Rc1 Rh8 36.a5! and black’s position only holds by a thread. I may not have played optimally afterwards, but it’s always difficult not to allow any counter-play at all.

The balance of this tournament is contrasted; 5.5/6 with white is very correct, but drawing all my black games against weaker players on paper cannot satisfy me. Of course, I finish in the leading group at 7.5/10 (with 6 other players). But as a symbol of the year, I ended up 5th in the tie-break (Elo performance), a very small point behind the fourth and last player qualified for the tie-breaks awarding the £ 30.000 first prize 🙂 .

I don’t have any tournaments scheduled before April or May, so it’s a good time to take stock and find ways to improve!

No need for the federation to bring together one of the strongest french teams ever. Maxime, with Etienne Bacrot (2669 Elo), Maxime Lagarde (2655), Romain Edouard (2653), Christian Bauer (2625), Yannick Gozzoli (2599), Matthieu Cornette (2556), Fabien Libiszewski (2526) and Kévin Bordi (2288), is playing the prochessleague 2020. After 6 rounds, the French are 2nd in the Central Division.

Les parties de Maxime à Gibraltar :

Les parties de Maxime en ProChessLeague

I arrived in London on December 1st, in a familiar environment and in a city I like, to compete in the Grand Chess Tour final, with the same 4-player format than the previous year.

I learned of my qualification at the last minute, as it depended on the results of the other players, especially Anand. It wasn’t the most likely, but I qualified instead. It obviously overloaded my December calendar, at a time when the qualification for the Candidates was about to be decided. But I was pretty happy to be qualified anyway. The challenge was highly interesting; first playing against Magnus of course, and then the second match as well, against Aronian or Ding Liren. So I was motivated, in a format that generally suits me well. The match against Magnus was very, very tense. In the first game, for example, it was really extremely complex and anything could have happened. It ended up being a perpetual after we missed a lot of stuff. After several other draws, I was the first to win in the Blitz, from a position where I had nothing at all, by the way. However, he struck back immediately, in a game where, on the contrary, I had a very good position, but made further bad decisions. Generally speaking, the level of our match was still quite high. Maybe the key moment was when I defended the last Blitz with little time on the clock and a definitely unpleasant endgame.

Then of course, there was the first game of the tie-break with black, which was completely crazy; the advantage changed sides all the time, it was so tactical, but I ended up winning. After that, all that was left to do was to draw the second game; which I did .
Of course, I was very happy to win a 10-game match against the world champion, especially with a mix of cadences. Psychologically, it was a boost, because who else can claim such a result? Unfortunately, we had to go on to the final, and Ding Liren made me come down from my cloud right away, by putting me under enormous pressure in the first classical game. After that, he wasn’t precise enough in an ending that was completely lost for me. Well, I hung in there as best I could, and he freaked out a few times. I finally held the draw in a crazy four-queen position!

In the second game, I found myself in trouble from the start in an English opening. I misjudged the position, and with the advantage, it was clinical from him. It’s mostly a game where there hasn’t been much to do. I wasn’t alert enough, and he was impeccable….. Then in the Rapids, I tried to come back but it quickly went wrong! I still saved the honor by winning the Blitz match by a wide margin.

Overall, the balance of the Grand Chess Tour 2019 is not so bad, as I ended up second for the third year in a row.

Then, the switch to the FIDE Grand Prix was complicated because I couldn’t arrive in Jerusalem until late Tuesday afternoon after a long journey, while the tournament already started the next day. The good news, though, is that the draw looked rather good. Unfortunately, I could see right away that I wasn’t playing at my best. Already in the first game against Topalov I was in great danger; I managed to hang on and I remained unscathed by a little bit of a miracle, but I was really close to disaster. So I decided not to take any undue risks in the classical games. Especially since I quickly understood that the bonus points would serve absolutely no purpose, which was indeed the case. The important thing was to be qualified after each round…

So I focused on the Rapids. First against Topalov, and then against Andreikin, after my opening in the first classical game petered out into a draw, due to a memory error!
On the other hand, in the Rapids, it went well; against Andreikin, the first game was ultra hot. But in the end, I saw more stuff than he did, so it’s only natural that I won 🙂 .

Then there was the decisive match against Nepo, and I have to admit I didn’t make the right decisions, that’s for sure. First, I was surprised by the rare 8.Be3.

So I wasted a lot of time looking at 8…Ng4 9.Bg5!?, which could have been his idea. On 9.e5, which he played, I had several possibilities, not only that of taking e3. But I said to myself: “We’ll go for the simplest”; unfortunately, the simplest in question was not the best… So he took a large advantage, but then he allowed me counterplay. The critical moment was obviously after 19.Qa3…

Of course, I saw the natural 19… c5 20.dxc5 Qc8, which I remember having rejected because of 21.exf6 Bxf6 22.Bc4! Bxh4+ 23.Rxh4 Nxh4 24.Rd6!. I haven’t analysed the game at all since then, but on the board, it looked very suspicious for me. What happened in the game after my choice 19…fxe5 20.dxe5 Qe8 (with the idea of counterplay based on …Qc6-b6), is that I realized only after he played 21.Bg2 that the planned continuation 21…Bxe5 22.fxe5 Nxh4+ 23.Kg1 Nxg2 was refuted by the dreadful intermediate move 24.Ne4! and White wins.

With my back to the wall, I managed to introduce a good opening idea in the second game. And I got a very good position; unfortunately spoiled by bad decisions… First of all, 15.Nf4 was less accurate than 15.Bd2!.

But above all, 19.b4? turned out to be really catastrophic, instead of the normal 19.Nfe2 which kept the edge. In fact I completely forgot while playing 19.b4 – too fast! – that the black’s Queen was going to land on c4 via a6.

And finally, there is the last big mistake 25.Ng3? instead of 25.Nd3. In fact, after 25…f5, I wanted to go 26.e5 f4 27.Bxf4 gxf4 28.Nh5, but I quickly realized that Black is winning after 28…Bxe5! 29.dxe5 0-0-0!. As a result, I accepted to be worse after 26.exf5, and I quickly offered a draw. Anyway, there was really nothing to do here, except to lose! And I’ve lost enough games stupidly in must win situations, remember Jakovenko two years ago in identical circumstances…

Eliminated, I caught an early plane the next morning and found myself having to wait at home for the Nepo-Wei Yi final match. My destiny was no longer in my hands, but a victory for the Chinese would still have sent me directly to the Candidates! Unfortunately, the coin fell on the wrong side again, but I still made the decision not to give up the Rapid & Blitz World Championships in Moscow. I knew I was completely cooked physically, but in terms of effort it was less complicated anyway, and still quite fun. I also know that I have an ability to bounce back, so I went to Moscow full of innocent enthusiasm 🙂 . But let’s be honest, I’ve done a bit of a mess there… I’ve had three disastrous days, the first and third Rapid, and the first Blitz; that’s only two ok days… In the end, finishing 14th in the Rapid and 4-5th in the Blitz in these conditions, There’s not much to strut about, but given my state of form, I’ll take it! And given the level of my games, I have to take it even more 🙂 .

Now let’s look ahead to 2020, which is going to be a much lighter season. It will be an opportunity for me to get back to basics, both technically and physically. In terms of events, I will play in Gibraltar at the end of the month, Norway Chess at the beginning of June, and I will participate in the Grand Chess Tour 2020 for which I am qualified.
These are the only certainties at the moment!

If you want to know more about everything concerning the world championship cycle, the qualification for the Candidates, Laurent Vérat’s open letter on wild-card, the controversy that followed, but also the relationships between French players of the elite, the possible French naturalization of Firouzja, and many other subjects, read without delay the long interview given by Maxime a few days ago to www.chess.com .

Maxime’s games in London:

Maxime’s games in Jerusalem:

Maxime’s games in the Rapîd World Championship:

Maxime’s games in the blitz world championship:

There are still two places to be distributed on sporting criteria for the Candidates’ Tournament, via the 2019 FIDE Grand Prix which is coming to an end. The Hamburg tournament has just ended, and the final stage is scheduled from December 11 in the heart of the historic district of Jerusalem.

In Hamburg, it was therefore a question of getting ahead before the sprint… For the occasion, the large port city of northern Germany had made a theatre available for the event. Some have been disturbed by the level of the organization. For my part, I have few complaints about the playing hall. Just that it was a little difficult to reach the toilet level; there was a big staircase to climb, not a very convenient access during a game. But it is true that it was linked to the configuration of the premises, in the heart of an old theatre. For the rest, I didn’t have noise problems to deal with, I found the room quiet, quite spacious too, even when there were 16 of us. Maybe a little dark, but hey… It was no luxury, but there was really nothing to complain about, unlike what we saw in Zagreb this summer! (Editor’s note, stage of a Grand Chess Tour event).

Round of 16:

MVL – WEI YI (2724) 1.5-0.5

In the first game, I was able to place a nice prep against the Najdorf, which had been cooked by Matthieu Cornette during the Top 12 in May. He sent me a file by email during the Norway Chess in June. I liked the idea of playing 6.g3 without putting the Bishop in g2, and I decided to try it at the next opportunity! So it worked well and I took and advantage out of the opening.

Later, I wasn’t sure about my move 21.Nd5.

Of course, after 21…Nxd5 22.exd5 Rc7 (if 22…Rc5 23.Nxb6 Rd8 24.Bc4! followed by b4-a5 is very favorable to white) 23.Nxe5 (now 23.Nxb6 would be worse because of 23…Rb8 24.a5 Bc8!, idea …Bg4 and he has counterplay) 23…dxe5 24.d6 Rd7 25.dxe7 Rxe7 26.Rd6, with a clearly superior endgame, but not sure it is objectively winning. Before the pure Bishop endgame, I’m not sure what I could have done better? I had considered 35.Rxe5 (instead of 35.Bf1) 35…Rc1+ 36.Bf1, but he has 36…Kf6! and after 37.Re3 Bd5 38.Ra3 (and not 38.Rd3? as I had initially planned, because of 38…Bc4 39.a7? Rxf1+!) 38…Bc4 39.a7 Bxf1 (39…Rxf1+? was loosing very nicely after 40.Kg2 Rd1 41.a8=Q Bd5+ 42.Rf3+! counter-check 🙂 ) 40.f3 Bc4+ 41.Kf2 Bd5 and draw.

In the transition to the Bishop endgame, he stumbled with 42…Kd4? 43.Rxc5 Kxc5 44.Re3 +-, while 42…Rxb5 43.Bxb5 f4! should have guaranteed the draw. During the game, I was counting on 44.g4!?. Unfortunately, that probably wouldn’t have been enough; after for example 44…Kd4 45.Bd7 Kc5 46.Bc8 Kb6 47.Kc3 Kc7 48.Bb7 Bxb7 49.axb7 Kxb7 50.Kd4 Kc6 (but not 50…e3? 51.fxe3 f3 52.Kd3 Kc6 53.Kd2! Kd5 54.Ke1 Ke5 55.Kf2 Ke4 56.h3! zugzwang, while 53.e4? would have missed the target: 53…Kd6 54.Ke3 Ke5 55.Kxf3 Kd4 56.h3 Kc5! – only move – 57.Ke3 Kc4 =) 51.Kxe4 Kc5 52.Kf5 Kd4 53.Kg6 Kd3! (not the other route 53…Ke4? 54.Kxh6 Kf3 55.Kxg5) 54.Kxh6 Ke2 55.Kxg5 f3 56.h4 Kxf2 57.h5 Kg3 58.h6 f2 59.h7 f1=Q 60.h8=Q Qf4+ =.

All in all, I would say that it was a pretty controlled game (1-0, 51 moves).

Najdorf again, but with reversed colours, for the second leg. In the 6.Nb3 variation, it was Peter Svidler who explained to me after my match against him in the World Cupthat the easiest way was 6…e6. I was obedient and actually got a good position pretty quickly, before even taking over.

I know there are people who didn’t understand why I often accepted draws in favourable positions during these mini KO matches. First of all, because the Elo race from the Candidates’ perspective has been over for me for some time . Secondly, because in this context, ensuring the bonus point remains the most important. And finally, I have no reason to spend two more hours playing, because the energy saved for the next round is also a factor. (1/2, 27 moves).

¼ Final:

MVL – TOPALOV (2740) 1,5 – 0,5

In the first game, I played a kind of delayed Benoni with black. I managed to keep delaying taking on d5 for a long time, and I regretted finally doing it on the 14th move.

If I had started with 14…a6, I would have allowed 15.Nf1 exd5 16.exd5 with a structural change, even if 16…Ta7 now would still have been comfortable for me. So, I preferred 14…exd5 15.cxd5 (15.exd5 Bf5! would now be inferior) 15…a6 16.Bf1 Nd7 (now that the c4 square is free, after 16…Ra7, white would have 17.Nc4 Rae7 18.Bg5! h6 19.Bh4 g5 20.Bg3 and if 20…Nxe4 21.Nxe4 Rxe4 22.Rxe4 Rxe4 23.Nxd6 with a clear advantage) 17.Na2 (I was rather expecting 17…f4, but as a good Benoni player himself, Topalov felt it was dangerous after 17…Bd4+ 18.Kh2 Nf6 19.Nf3 Bg4! 20.hxg4 Nxg4+ 21.Kg3 Bf2+ 22.Kh3 Qd7, like after 18.Kh1 Nf6 – or even 18…f5!?) 17…Ra7 18.Nc4 Ne5 with a balanced position.

The critical moment afterwards was when he decided to give the exchange with 28.Re3!?.

An interesting sacrifice in practice, especially since 28.Rd3 f5 was not particularly attractive to him. After 28…Bf4 29.Bf3 Bxe3 30.Bxe3 Rc8 31.Qd4, I saw the variation 31…Qe5 32.Qxb4 Rc3 33.Ff4 Rxb3! 34.Qxb3 Qxf4 more or less forced the draw, with the other move order looking identical 31…Rc3 32.Qxb4 Qe5. Except that starting with 31…Qe5?! gave him the extra option 32.Qa7!, and the position really gets out of control; 32…Be8 33.g3 Rc3, and then he should have played 34.Ff4!, even if it’s counter-intuitive not to put the Bishop on the long diagonal. After 34…Qf6 35.Qb8, I would have had to find 35…Rxf3 36.Qxe8+ Kg7 37.e5 Qf5 38.exd6 (38.e6 fxe6 39.dxe6 g5 40.Be3 Rxe3!) 38…Qxd5! 39.d7 Qd1+ 40.Kg2 Rxf4! – only move – 41.gxf4 Qd5+ 42.Kg3 Qd3+ 43.f3 Qd1! with perpetual.

In the complications, he erred with 36.Bf1? Rxb3 and white can no longer generate counterplay. (0-1, 44 moves).

I had seen that 36.Kg2? didn’t work either, because of 36…Qxe2 37.Qe7 Qf3+! 38.Kh2 Rc8. But the paradoxical move 36.Kh2! would have saved white: after 36…Rc7 (certainly not 36…Qxe2? now, because of 37.Qe7 Rc8 38.Qf6 Kf8 39.Qxd6+ Kg8 40.Qf6 Kf8 41.d6 +-) 37.Qxc7 Qxd4 38.Kg2 Qxe4+ 39.Bf3 Qe5 40.Qa5! =.

I controlled the secong game with white pretty well, playing the Exchange variation against the French, recently used a few times by Etienne Bacrot.

I locked everything up, but the important thing in these cases is to play with a plan, however basic it may be, and not to wait stupidly; in this case, a4 then b4-b5.

Dans la position finale, je ne me suis pas rendu compte que 27.Ta1! était si fort. Mais encore une fois, si je gagne ça ne change vraiment rien… (1/2, 26 cps).

In the final position, I didn’t realize that 27.Ra1! was so strong. But again, if I win it doesn’t really change anything… (1/2, 26 moves).

1/2 Final :

MVL – GRISCHUK (2771) 0.5-1.5

With white, I was surprised by his choice of the Arkhangelsk Spanish. As a result, I hesitated between 13.Bc2 and the resulting ton of theory, and 13.Be3, which is less risky. I chose the latter and got a very small plus, but I started making small miscalculations…

Especially when here I played 23.Ba4?! and instantly noticed that I was allowing 23…Nd5!. What Sacha and I both missed is that after 24.Nc6, black doesn’t only have 24…Qh4 25.g3, but also 24…Qf6! 25.Qxd5 Qxf4, and the position turns in his favor. So, while Sacha was thinking, I had decided, in case of 23…Nd5, to go for 24.Qf3 with a slight advantage for black.

Maybe if I had focused a little more on the position, I would have chosen 23.Ba2 with the idea Qd2-Rad1, and a microplus for white.

The rest of the game was a quick path towards the draw (1/2, 27 moves).

In the second game, in my usual English line with black (1.Nf3 Nf6 2.c4 c5 3.Nc3 d5 4.cxd5 Nxd5 5.e3), I had decided before the beginning of the tournament that I would not play again 5…Nxc3, but rather 5…e6.

During the game, I chose to avoid 12…Bb7 13.d5 exd5 14.Bxd5 Rad8 15.c4, even if it seems to be ok for black. I preferred 12…Rd8, with the idea that in case of 13.d5, I was ready to play 13…Na5 14.Bd3 c4 15.Fc2 e5!?.

After 13.Be3 Na5 14.Bd3 Bb7 15.h4!, I realized how unpleasant this kind of position was. So I played 15…b5!?… and after 16.Bxb5 Bxe4, I was all focused on 17.Ng5. He didn’t play it because of 17…cxd4 18.cxd4 a6, but I was rather on 17…Bf5!? 18.g4 Bg6 19.h5 Bxg5 20.Bxg5 Rd5 which seemed very messy to me. So when he played 17.dxc5, he took me by surprise and I reacted badly with this inopportune 17…Bxf3?, which I analyze as being just a bug in the understanding of the position. I thought about 17…Bd5, first choice of the machine, but I didn’t believe it… On the other hand, I rejected the natural 17…Bxc5 because of 18.Rxd8+ Rxd8 19.Bg5 Rb8 20.Qxe4 Rxb5 21.Rd1 and with such badly placed pieces, the position looked suspicious to me.

After 18.Qxf3 Bxc5, we both missed the 19.Bg5 Be7 20.Rd7! refutation, which was hard, but not impossible to find: 20…Rxd7 21.Bxd7 Rb8 22.Bxe7 Qxd7 23.Qg3 Nc6 24.Bf6 g6 25.Qf4 with great danger on black squares.

Nevertheless, after 19.Bf4 Qb7 20.Qe2, white remained better. But I thought to myself that, since the opening was not successful, I was bound to have a bad time, but maybe not so catastrophic.

Then, it seems he missed a machine win with 26.Qe4! instead of 26.Qd1?!. He didn’t play it because of 26…Qc1+ 27.Kh2 Rf8, and if 28.Rxa7 Qc5! with quadruple attack, but the computer improves this variation with 27.Bf1! Qc6 28.Qd3, and claims that white’s advantage is decisive.

In the game, after 26…h6 27.g3 Rf8 28.Rxa7 Nc6 29.Rd7 Ne5 30.Rd8, I saw this endgame Q+N vs Q+B with the passed a pawn coming, and thought I should find some resources. The truth is that it’s really hard to be precise in this position, a very difficult one to play. I chose the endgame transition 30…Qc7 31.Rxf8+ Kxf8 32.a4 Ke7;in fact, I wanted to have the King in the center, and not cornered after 30…Rxd8 31.Qxd8+ Kh7. I thought it was more important than keeping my Queen active; but again, these are really extremely difficult decisions to make.

Then, he offered me a little respite with 37.Qd7?! ; I had seen that in case of 37.Qa8!, threatening to take my King for a walk, I would have been in dire straits!

After move 40, I realized that if I kept Queens, I wasn’t going to hold the position. It is counter-intuitive, because normally you tell yourself that the Queen will allow you to generate counterplay and leave the white’s King at a distance. But in reality, as my Knight is out of the game, it is actually the Q+B couple that does too much damage, especially after forcing me to weaken the white squares by touching my f7 pawn!

After that, the resulting minor pieces ending is too hard to evaluate, I still don’t know if it is a win or not.

What is certain is that I should have played 47…Ke6! (instead of the defensive withdrawal 47…Kf6? 48.Kh5 Kg7 which gives white a clear plan to win: attack the d5 pawn on the long diagonal, force it to move to d4, then come back with the King towards e4 to surround it) 48.Kh5 d4 49.Kxh6 Kd5 and if it exists, which is well possible, it would take Sesse to show us the win ! It’s too hard, there’s too much to calculate 🙂 .

Anyway, Sacha played very well in this game. Sometimes you just have to accept that you haven’t played a good game and that your opponent has. (1-0, 53 moves).

All in all, even if it ends on a bad note, the tournament is not a bad one either. I am currently in second place, a qualifying one for the Candidates. I am a little ahead of my pursuers, and my fate in my hands before the last tournament in Jerusalem.

But what’s rather funny is that as far as the qualification for the Candidates is concerned, it doesn’t really change much whether I’m eliminated in the first round in Jerusalem, or whether I make the semi-finals! If Mamedyarov or Nepo go far, I better go far too. Otherwise, I can still score 0 and qualify. The difference in percentage of chances of qualifying between losing in the first round and going to the semi-finals may climb from 40 to 80%, whereas we have the impression that it should be from 20 to 100%! Finally, it should not be forgotten either that all players who have between 1 and 5 points in the overall ranking still have a theoretical chance to qualify, certainly infinitesimal for the former!

What is certain, however, is that clearly, the drawing of lots will be decisive…

I will also say a word about the announcement made by the Russian Federation concerning the famous wild card for the Candidates….

In principle, giving this privilege to a Russian is not a big concern in itself. Not only was it quite expected , but I’m not that fond of qualifying through this method; I think the wild card should definitely be deleted…

On the other hand, the timing of the announcement was really crazy. As in 2017, they do not wait for the tournaments to be completed, they do not wait for the cycle to be completed. As a result, they generate an unclear situation. What happens if, for example, Karjakin or Jakovenko is 3rd in the Grand Prix?

And then, why make us play a match for third place at the World Cup? I played that match, I won it, and it’s no use at all.

I will end on a positive note by congratulating Sacha Grischuk on his success in Hamburg, and for what looks like a quasi-qualification for the Candidates!

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/JsyEX9iIN-I" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>

The Ile-de-France Chess League and the Beaux-Arts de Paris organized, within the framework of the autumn festival and Anna Boghiguian’s exhibition « The square, the line and the ruler », several chess activities. Especially on October 31, for Halloween, there was a « Meeting of Spells » in the form of an Escape game « Arts, chess and mathematics », in which Maxime participated, a few days before his departure for Hamburg.

Played in the Chapelle des Beaux-Arts – staged for the occasion – this Escape Game consisted in solving mathematical, logical and artistic puzzles using the game of Chess, and this in limited time.

By the way, Maxime’s team won… 🙂

Maxime’s games :

¼ FINAL:

MVL – ARONIAN (2758) 2.5-1.5

In the first game with black, I knew what I was getting into when I entered this line of the 5.Bg5 Grünfeld. A position slightly difficult to defend where I will have to find one or two precise moves to equalize completely; which was the case after 25…f5! (draw, 44 moves).

In the second game, I improved the variation of the Italian I played a few days earlier against Jakovenko, with 15.Ne4 instead of 15.Qe4.

But I quickly made the mistake 19.Bg5? which doesn’t make any sense in fact, and that I played much too fast. In my mind 19…h6 20.Bh4 didn’t change anything, but in fact 20…g5 21.Bg3 Kg7 followed by …f5-f4 was clearly unappealing, so I had to resort to the sad 20.Bxe7.

It’s a pity because almost everything was better for White with the Bishop pair, for example 19.a4, or 19.Nd2-c4, or even 19.Bf4 (draw, 31 moves).

In the first Rapid game, I got a good opening position with black.

At one point, while trying to put pressure on the clock, I got a little carried away with 15…Bc6, forgetting 16.Ne4!. I should have played 15…Nc6. I know that Magnus, who was commenting live, rather criticized the next move 16…Bxe4, but at the board, I had the feeling that I had already spoiled the advantage. So Magnus and I come to the same conclusion but with a one-move delay!

After that, in my mind, I was still playing for the initiative. Besides, I’m puzzled that this position is not so good for Black, because when you look at it, it doesn’t seem bad at all! Still, I was a little surprised that he offered me a draw, because I saw a complex endgame coming up, where everything was still up for grabs (draw, 31 moves).

In the second tie-break, I had a good position but I really got tangled up with it.

Here, I realized that black’s Knight was going to land on c5 and that I would have nothing left to play for. So I decided to go 22.Qc1 Nd7 23.Qa3 Nc5 24.f4. Obviously, I was very wrong because of 24…exf4 25.Nf5 Qf8 26.gxf4 Rf6 followed by the exchange sacrifice 27…Rxf5!, exploiting the absence of white’s Queen around the King. But you had to see the sac from the beginning of the variation, and I missed it throughout the line. Without this sacrifice, what I did would not have been so criticized! So it came as a cold shower to me, because at no point did I realize that there was this 27…Rxf5! looming. A few moves later, Levon missed a direct win, which I hadn’t seen either 🙂 ; but in Rapid games and tactically rich positions, these are inevitable things, you can’t see everything as the machine does.

After that, I felt that he no longer had much of an edge; and instead of taking the draw by perpetual check, he screwed it up horribly by giving a piece. Obviously, he understood right away what he had done and his face kind of crumbled (1-0, 53 moves).

It has to be said though that the World Cup format is very violent; we had the same day the dramatic Armaggedon game between Yu Yangyi and Vitiugov, a true breathtaking highlight of its kind….

½ Final:

MVL – RADJABOV (2758) 0.5-1.5

In the first game, I played the first move of the tournament I was proud of; it was 11.Re1.

Besides, it’s not the move I had in my file 🙂 but at the board, 11.Re1, with the idea to play Be3, I really liked it. I was thinking it was a bit of a Grischuk move! You think about this position for 15 minutes, everybody wonders why as it seems to be useless; then you play this little move that looks harmless!

Fortunately for him, after 11…Nf7 12.Be3, he has 12…Qb7, only move. If 12…Qxb2? 13.Rab1! Qxc3 14.Bd4 Qd3 15.Rbd1 and the Rook protects e4! And if 12…Qa6 13.Qxa6 Bxa6 Fxa6 14.Rad1 followed by 15.c5 is unpleasant for black. After 12…Qb7, the problem for me is that I can no longer play 13.c5 because b2 can now be taken, as black’s Queen comes out of the trap via d3 and a6.

So I played 13.Qb3, and I was pretty happy with myself at the moment! I thought I was a little better, which was indeed the case in the game, but because he missed 13…Rb8! 14.Qxb7 Rxb7 15.b3 f5 16.Bd4 e5! and his dynamic counter-play compensates for what I thought was a static white advantage. On the other hand, after 13…Qxb3?! 14.axb3 Rb8 15.Rxa7 Rxb3 16.Na4 Rb7 17.Rxb7 Bxb7 18.Nb6!, I could claim an edge.

Unfortunately, there was a time when I didn’t quite understand the position. After 18…d6 19.c5 e5, I should have played 20.Ra1! instead of 20.b4?!.

In fact, I rejected it because I didn’t like the position after 20…d5 21.Ra7 Rb8, and 21.exd5 cxd5 22.b4 d4 also seemed very messy to me; I thought it could easily go wrong… But the truth is that it’s just a clear advantage for me, even though the position gets much more tense, and without any guarantees! As I played, I just gave up the advantage straight away (draw, 31 moves).

In the second game, as usual, I failed in the opening. I know I shouldn’t have played so fast…

… What happened in my head is that instead of 10…0-0, I was planning 10…Bc6, but I saw the very unpleasant 11.b4!; if 11…cxb4 12.cxb4 Bxb4 13.Qb2!, and if 11…b6 12.b5 Bb7, white will manoeuvre the Knight towards c4. So I came back to 10…0-0, and I just thought that if 11.e5, I had 11…Bc6; I prevent 12.Qe4; I also prevent 12.Bg5, and that’s it.

And just when I put my King on g8, I saw 11.e5 Bc6 12.Ng5! and could contemplate the horror of my position!

Then there was not much to do, white’s attack is terrifying. What I should have played in practice – but I didn’t find the idea – was 12…g6 instead of 12…h6. After 13.Nxh7, certainly 13…Kxh7? loses on the spot to 14.Qh5+ followed by 15.Bxg6, but I had 13…c4!?, which complicates matters and was much less easy for him than in the game.

Later, the commentators felt that I would have had a small chance by exchanging Queens, which I could have done twice. But for me, the resulting endings were technically lost, so it wasn’t really an option either (1-0, 45 moves).

As a result, I came out of the World Cup through the back door, missing my direct qualification for the Candidates at the last hurdle once again. That night, I was disgusted and I would have flown back to Paris right away, but no way it could be! There was still a week left to play the match for third place against Yu Yangyi!

MATCH FOR 3rd PLACE:

MVL-YU YANGYI (2763) 4-2

So I tried to think of something else, I did a little bit of everything for the two days off before this last match. I had already been in « power saving mode » for some time, and it was even more so against Yu.

In the first game, he played a new move in the main line of the 5.Qb3 Grünfeld.

I’ve been waiting for this 15.e5 for so long! It’s been 6 years since I’ve had it in my files, including the endgame position we got after 15…. Ng4 16.e6 fxe6 17.h3 Ne5 18.dxe6 Bxe6 19.Qxd8 Raxd8 20.Bxb5 Bc4 21.Bxe8 Nd3+ 22.Kf1 Bxc3 23.bxc3 Nxc1+ 24.Kg1 Ne2+ 25.Kh2 Rxe8 26.Rhe1 🙂 . I think all the specialists of this line were also aware of this move 15.e5, and knew that it gave positions where black must make 2-3 precise moves to equalize (draw, 36 moves).

In the second game, I didn’t expect him to play a Russian line he had tried a few weeks earlier against Wei Yi, but which seemed a little artificial to me. But the fact is, I didn’t get anything… (draw, 30 moves).

In the third game, I was in trouble in a very rare line of the Exchange Grünfeld, with an early 9.d5 push.

I decided to react in a very concrete way by amplifying the central tension with 12…f5, which was clearly not necessary. He responded very effectively!

… And it was after 21.Re2! that I realized I was clearly not doing well. Luckily, after 21…Rfc8 22.Qa5 Rc4 23.Nd5 Dd4 24.Re7 Rac8, he didn’t play 25.Qa3! which would have left me in great difficulty after 25…Qc5 26.Qxc5 R4xc5 27.g4! and my position is hanging only by a thread. During the game, it was impossible to measure precisely what was happening, but the fact is that I didn’t feel particularly reassured; I imagined that there were things that could easily go wrong! My belief is that he thought he took a clear advantage with 25.Rd1 Rc1 26.Ree1, but that he overlooked 26…Nc4 27.Qb4 Rxd1 28.Rxd1 Qb2 29.Qe7 Qg7! and the worst is behind me (draw, 32 moves).

In the last classical game, Yu made a surprising new choice in the Russian Defense. I thought I was a little better in a position that reminded me of the Topalov-Giri game, Wijk aan zee 2012, won by white.

It seemed to me that in the long run, as in Topalov’s game, white’s King was safer than his counterpart. It’s true I had forgotten the doubled c pawns of Giri, which were an aggravating factor for black.

In our game, I may have overestimated my position because in fact, I can’t play g3 and f4 to fix the structure, in which case I could have pounded the e6 pawn and claimed the advantage. Unfortunately, if instead of 19.Td2 in the diagrammed position, I had played 19.f4 – which was indeed my first idea – black completely equalizes with 19…Qf7! 20.g3 e5 and a drawn endgame is coming up. As a result, I couldn’t find any realistic way to play for the win (draw, 30 moves).

In the first tie-break game, Yu gave up defending a third Russian Defense! Overall, I played a good game, even if I missed a quick mate that would have ended his suffering earlier!

Here, I opted for a winning heavy pieces ending after 42.Rxa6 Qf5 43.Kg2 Qxh5 44.Rxe6, but of course, 42.Rc8! Rxc8 43.Qxf7+ Kh8 44.Bg6 was more effective! (1-0, 66 moves).

In the second Rapid game, he had to win but he completely screwed up in the opening and I won easily.

23…Bb5+ 24.Ke1 Bc3+ 0-1 illustrates the power of the Bishop pair!

Even if a bronze medal at the World Cup remains an excellent result, I still have mixed feelings about the month of September I spent in Russia 🙂 . However, before the World Cup, I was counting much more on the FIDE Grand Prix series. The World Cup was a ” bonus attempt ” to qualify for the Candidates; I considered that I had a 15-20% chance to succeed.

Of course, it’s frustrating to lose in the semi-finals and to end up being the first unqualified player once again. But on the other hand, there were a lot of very shaky moments, and I could really have been ousted of the tournament earlier! Overall, I didn’t play as well at this World Cup as I did in 2017, when I think I really deserved more.

Now, I have the last two FIDE Grand Prix tournaments in Hamburg and Tel-Aviv left; I think I have a good chance of qualifying, over 50%. As for the speculations on the wild card that the Russian organisers will give, I prefer to leave them to the commentators.

That’s not my subject right now… Mine is to be at the top on November 5th in Hamburg!

The French team is currently competing in the European Team Championship in Batumi (Georgia). As he had the opportunity to explain several times, Maxime had decided at the beginning of 2019 that this year’s international calendar would not allow him to participate. It is clear that this problem of flagrant imbalance between the two semesters of the year, one very airy, and the other very congested, will have to be resolved as a priority for the 2020 season.
Let’s take advantage of the European Championship underway to watch a nice video animation that traces many figures on the French chess Elite since the beginning of the century… (thanks to Natacha for the realization) 🙂 .
An opportunity to learn that Maxime has just celebrated another birthday than his 29th one, since with 106 months spent as France’s top player, he has beaten the old record held until now by Joël Lautier (105 months between 1990 and 2004)!

Les parties de Maxime :

The World Cup is a format I like… I’ve played them all since 2009, with two semi-finals and a quarter-final to my credit. First of all, it’s a competition that changes a little bit from our ordinary life; there’s more show and more at stake every game, it’s as well nice for the spectators. But it’s also a very difficult tournament of course, and a very long one; unless you’re eliminated in the first round of course! But when you go through the whole process, it’s almost a month in the same place (in this case Siberia 🙂 ), with the pressure in each of the games, because all are decisive. It has a huge impact on the physical strength of the players; for my part, I think that in Khanty-Mansiysk, I was pretty ok physically until my quarter-final, but then it got worse very quickly. I felt there was nothing I could do anymore in the evening, I was just in autopilot mode to try to get as much rest as I could.

But let’s start at the beginning!

Round 1:

MVL – ANWULI (2284) 2-0

A first round against a much lower rated opponent is always an introduction to the subject where you have to show a minimum of application. Though I did it, I still caused myself some minor problems. I’m mainly referring to the first game, where the Rook endgame was maybe objectively drawn.

I feel that after 38.g4! (instead of the 38.Kg4? he chose), the best thing for me would have been to get the famous ending with h and f, which remains a theoretical draw, though very difficult to reach.

I did also sputter a bit from a very promising position in the second game. I must say that the Nigerian IM has defended his chances quite well overall. But it’s hard when you don’t have a real opening repertoire, which is his case :-).

Round 2:

MVL – KOVALENKO (2674) 2-0

I was surprised by his choice in the opening of the first game (a Sicilian with …e6), and he found himself in very big difficulty. Moreover, it is not at all his style to defend positions of this kind.

Nevertheless, there was a mistake just before move 40, when I forgot …Rc8 in a critical variation… The worst part is that I had thought long before playing 40.b5? in the diagrammed position. But it turns out the breakthrough is too hasty! It had to be better prepared, because after 40…axb5 41.Bxb5 Rc8! I had to admit that my advantage had evaporated; 42.Rb1 Rc2+ 43.Kg1 Nc8 44.Rd7+ Rxd7 45.Bxd7 and fortunately here, he played 45…Nd6? instead of taking on b6, despite a long reflection! After 45…Nxb6!, I could still have tried 46.Bb5!? – with the idea Bd3-e4 – which still poses problems, even if it is certainly not enough objectively. Apart from this poorly controlled breakthrough on b5, it was still a good game, especially in the middlegame phase when I had to conquer the advantage (24.Ra3!).

In the second game, a draw was obviously enough, which is a rather pleasant situation. Against his slightly baroque opening, 1.e4 c5 2.Nc3 d6 3.Nge2 Nf6 4.f3!?,I probably should have played 4…e5, but on the board, 4…d5 didn’t seem so bad. But in fact, the position I obtained was not so trivial….

… and even a bit unpleasant after I played 13…Ke7?! a little too fast. On 14.Bb5 Rd8 (originally, I planned 14…Bd7 15.Rhe1 Rhd8 16.Nf5 Kf8 17.Nd6 Rab8, but I had forgotten 18.Nxb7! Rxb7 19.Bxc6) 15.Bxc6 bxc6 16.Rxd8 Rxd8 17.f4, white has a slightly more pleasant endgame. In the position of the diagram, I had also rejected 13…Bd7 because of 14.Nc4 Ke7 15.Nd6, but it was in fact the equalizing line, because I now have the nice comeback 15…Bc8!, justified by the variation 16.Bb5 Rd8 17.Bxc6 Rxd6 =. After that, I think he had ways to press a little harder than what he did. He brought his King to c3 a little too quickly and in fact, it happens to be useless! By the way, he came back to c1 soon afterwards… Then he tried everything possible to complicate matters, but by doing so, he just deteriorated his position from “equal” to “much worse”. I gave him the chance to settle for a draw for a long time, but he went so far he even lost it!

Round of 32:

MVL – JAKOVENKO (2681) 3.5-2.5

A complicated match, against an opponent who is also complicated for me! You have to know that Jakovenko has an excellent score against me and that he therefore has the confidence… And you could see it! He was really there to play his luck to the fullest. Compared to, for example, Svidler in the next round, you clearly feel the difference in state of mind. And it was bad luck for Peter, since apparently he has kind of a monster score against Jakovenko!

The first game didn’t go too well, despite the draw… It was the first of a long series of omissions on my part in the opening! Fortunately, he relieved my position by making two bizarre central exchanges.

The Berlin in the return leg was my first game under control, even if not to the end. I took an edge, but from then on, he defended really well. Maybe I missed some opportunities.

I suspect that at this point after 27…Be6, it is objectively winning for white, but I did not find how. And then I thought what I was doing was ok, but strangely enough after move 40, I just couldn’t find the win and in fact, there certainly isn’t one anymore…

So, first tie-break!

In the first rapid game, troubles started as soon as I played 11…b6. In fact, that’s a constant in my Grünfeld, I forget the possibility that d5 can be strong for white! I made exactly the same mistake against Aronian in London last year. And besides, the game was really very similar: same material balance, same difficulties, and same attempt at counter-play. Except Levon had screwed up at one point, and not Jakovenko!

So, after 11…b6 12.d5, I realized that if 12…Ne5 13.Nxe5 Bxe5, I was going to face the central onslaught f4-e4-e5, like against Levon! Quite obvious of course, but it’s like a bug I have on this theme….

Then I had a hesitation on move 19, which was fatal.

At first, I wanted to play 19…Qa3 without thinking. And then I thought to myself, “19…Qh5 idea 20…Bg4, I have play on the Kingside”, and it attracted me.

In fact obviously, 19…Qa3! was the correct move, to keep an eye on d6 and have counter-play on the Queenside. But my misjudgment is that I thought the Queen on h5 was going to be closer for the King’s defense; whereas it is the opposite, and it is also too exposed on h5!

Then, he missed a forced win with 25.Rb5!, but it’s a computer move, not a natural one, and we both missed it… After that, I didn’t have much to blame myself for, I found all the defences, but he just played the perfect game, including in the tricky tactical complications with heavy pieces.

Here, instead of 35…Qe6, I could have chosen the passive defense with 35…Kg7 of course. I let him play 36.Qe7, and then I throw my Queenside pawns forward… But I was pretty sure that at some point he was going to play h3 to parry the back rank mates; then, Qh4 or Qd8, threatening Re7, and I didn’t see in which world it could hold this.

As a result, he brilliantly concluded after 36.Qd8+ Kf7 37.Rf1+ Rf5 38.Qc7+ Kg8 39.Rd1 Qe2 40.Qc1! Rg5 (40…Rf8 41.d7 Rd8 offers zero chance of survival) 41.Qc8+! Kg7 42.Qb7+ Kf8 43.Rg1! and the passed pawn decides.

With the back against the wall and in view of how the opening went, it is true that the fact that I tied the match with a win on demand was a miracle! First of all, because I played 15.Qe4 instead of 15.Ne4 as I had planned 🙂 ; it turns out that I would have the opportunity to play this 15.Ne4 move a few days later against Aronian…

Take it from Jakovenko’s point of view, and it’s always the same old story; you need a draw, you equalize in the opening and then at some point, you want to simplify matters as much as possible. For example, when he went for the Rook + opposite coloured Bishops ending.

Here, 27…Bxe4 28.Bxe4 c6 was in no way mandatory. It wasn’t even necessary, but on the other hand, it simplifies the position and you think you’re never going to lose that; basically, he was sitting on the fence, and it’s never good to be sitting on the fence! Of course, normally this endgame should still give nothing to white objectively, but it can also easily go wrong. And when I got the position after 29.g3 g6 30.b4 Kf7 31.a4 a6 32.Kg2 Rd7 33.Rb2! with the idea of a breakthrough on b5, I knew that I now had at least a 40% chance of winning. And I actually ended up winning and staying alive in the tournament!

The second set of rapid 10′ games was also tense (two draws), and then finally, I won a nice game with white in blitz.

And in the last blitz, I did the opposite of what Dmitry did when a draw was enough for him! I played my normal, dynamic game, and in fact, these positions with asymmetric pawn structures, you get the impression that it’s less drawish but for me, it’s so much easier to play!

Round of 16:

MVL – SVIDLER (2729) 1.5-0.5

Peter doesn’t usually play the Spanish Chigorin. My theory is that he didn’t expect me to accept the Marshall Gambit at all, which is now known to be over analyzed and drawish in most lines. So I think it upset him.

So I got an edge quite convincingly out of the opening, leading to what looked like a good pawn up position.

During the game, I had no idea that he could completely equalize with 31…Bd6! as the machine shows. The problem is that in this case, I don’t install the Bishop on b4 as in the game, since 32.Bb4? Qc2! would be unpleasant. So after the inaccurate 31…Rc8? 32.Bb4 Qc1+ 33.Qd1 Qc4, I played 34.g3 because I understood that there was a really good chance he would fall into the trap 34…Qxe4? 35.gxf4 Rc6, forgetting the resource 36.f5! Qxf5 37.Bd6!. Besides, I also saw that 36.f3 would probably leave him defenseless too. But anyway, knowing Peter, I felt he was going to take on e4!

After that, I was surprised that he resigned so quickly, even though he’s known for that. Because you can still play a little bit in the final position:

My pawn is only on a3, my King is not yet completely safe, it could have been worth a few more moves…

Overall, I consider this to be a good game of me.

In the second game, Peter made a fine opening choice in the sub-variation of the Najdorf 6.Nb3. I got a little carried away with 7…h5, but I wanted to avoid his prep.

I suspected that it was 7…b5 8.a4 b4 9.Nd5 e6 the critical line. And that’s what was in my notes, of course! But I thought to myself, “I don’t remember anything more; that’s necessarily what he looked at first. So, we’re going to get him out of his prep, while playing a move that makes a little bit of sense”. 7…g6 8.g4 could quickly become unpleasant, so I decided to improvise completely with this 7…h5.

After that, I still think white is a little better, and I was very surprised by his choice of 13.Qd4?!. I also understand that in his situation, keeping a little edge with 13. Na5 seemed less promising to him than a variation that leads to the win of the a6 pawn. However, after 13.Na5 with f4-f5 to come, it could quickly become complicated for me – there have to be some small disadvantages to putting the pawn on h5!

I also think he chose 13.Qd4?! because after 13…Rb8 14.Bxa6 0-0 15.Qd3 Bxa6 16.Rxa6 Nc4, he forgot that he couldn’t play 17.Ra7? because of 17…Nxb2!

As a result, he had to fall back to 17.Bc1, and after 17…e6 18.0-0 Nd7, I got the dream position. His pieces are not coordinated, and he cannot redeploy them without losing his Queenside pawns. In fact, he even went too far and found himself much worse. But I preferred to avoid complex variations, even favourable ones, and forced the draw that qualified me for the 1/4 finals.

(to be continued)

The day after his return from the World Cup, Maxime went to Asnières City Hall, where his club organized the “Trophée des Petits As”, an invitational competition bringing together eight French hopes under 8 years old. The idea was to offer these young players a context worthy of high level chess, with games played in excellent playing conditions, and broadcast live on the Internet. Maxime came to launch the last rounds of Sunday, then gave a number of tips to the players, including to some of his little clubmates 🙂 .

Maxime’s games: