black would be temporarily up a pawn. but afer 21. Rh6 Ne5 22. Rxh5 Bg4! material is even, but black has to defend very acurately and actively in these lines.  black is often looking like he is just about to be busted is these variations. that is why black goes for these lines.. they are so complicated, white can easily overestimate the position of get confused.

its not the best way to play against a computer.. but not a bad way to play against a weaker opponent when you want to win with black.

remember, shirov specialized in these lines well over 10 years ago..

bumbadum, but if black declines the sac he is not up material?

vodkarov, you're absolutely right it's not possible to calculate all the variations and Rxg6+ has to be played as an intuitive sacrifice. still, if you see that 20 Nxg6 Nf6! is a good defence for black, and get as far as 20 Rxg6+ fxg6 21 Qxg6+ Kf8 22 Nf5!, it's obvious that black is in desperate trouble.  i think that a 2600+ player 'should' be able to find those moves extremely quickly, and it's interesting to speculate on what flores missed. maybe his nerves failed him, or something

if 20. Rxg6+ than just Kf8. If something like Rh6, than something like Ne5.

Black is up material, and needs to be careful but is not losing i dont think.

@sofouuk, maybe you are right about the language problem, since my language isn't english. But I still disagree with you about a main problem we are discussing. Do you really think is that easy to consider 20.Rxg6! as a win for white on board? Let's put it simple. How white gets a forced win after 20. Rxg6 fxg6 21. Qxg6+ Kf8? It requires some work. So the question is, it is really so simple for a GM (considering that he is not an attacking maniac like Shirov) to calculate on board (remember: facing a stronger opponent, with little time, seemingly confident, etc) the forced lines including 22. Nf5! Re7 and all the subvariations? A computer can clearly calculate the lines after 10 seconds running and evaluate black is toasted. But you can say your "should". No problem. ;)

See you my friend.

And again: Congrats Shirov!

vodkarov, i think this may be a language problem. 'should' can be used to describe the probability that something will happen, it's related to 'shall' in the same way that 'would' and 'could' are related to 'will' and 'can'. my point is that a 2600+ player, given the kind of position that flores had after move 19, will go on to win in most cases, and in that case you certainly can say (in English, at least) that he 'should' have won this game - i.e., that on this occasion he failed to play to the standard expected of a player of his ability. i don't think this is a controversial statement at all - the fact is, shirov got lucky

I agree most of the comments - beautiful, creative and his trademark daring chess from Shirov. So good to see him back to the tournament winning ways.

Nice play by Shirov.

@sofouuk, if your argument is correct, we should say for example, 'Tal should have lost many of his (most impressive) games', cause many of his attacks were unsound. But the question is: can your opponnent find the refutation on board? If is expected a 2600 player to make some moves, it dont means he will, cause in hte board there are many, factor, the pressure, psychological, time and so on. Flores didn't find the best moves, so you cannot say a thing like "he should have won".

vodkarov, yes there is such a thing as 'should have lost'. flores has a 2600+ rating, and at that level, Nxg6 has to go down as something of a blunder. 9 times out of 10 (ok, perhaps 8) a player of that strength would find 20 Rxg6, and shirov would have been expecting to lose (im sure he saw Rxg6, btw) in the same way that a club player will feel he 'should lose' if he finds himself a minor piece down without compensation

My favourite player of all time. Too bad his play style will never compete against carlsen's or kramnik's super-computer-style.

Shirov is a world top player.

In chess there's no such things like @UnD3R0a said: "he should be lost". Ex: 'Gelfand should have won the WCC, because Anand allowed 26.Nxe4 in the third rapid game.' You can say a player was objectively lost in a position, but not that he should lost, as it depends on the opponent moves. Shirov was defending and Flores didn't refutate his defence. That's it.

Congratulations Shirov! Great tournament! Amazing games!

re UnD3ROaTh, specifically 20 Rxg6+! preventing the Nf6 defence, and it's a massacre - if 20 ... fxg6 21 Qxg6+ Kf8 22 Nf5 and 1-0 is already playable

Good games from Shirov.

Fascinating to watch a great player take 2500 masters apart.

Very nice from Shirov.