Very surprising indeed. It doesn't look like the game has been incorrectly recorded. I wonder what happened 
Beat the Masters...
Sort:
Jun 11, 2010
0
#2
A couple of things-Wells was rated 2335 at the time not 2500. My db has the move 5...Ndf6 which does not allow the mate. The moral of the story--Be careful of your database sources. 28....Nc4 is the losing mistake--Nxd7 allows Black to hold
Yeah I think the database is getting some moves confused or mixed up.
Could you elaborate on ...Nxd7 aansel? what if Qh4 Nf6 Bxf6? I suppose black can give the piece back with ...g5 or something, but it still looks very bleak.
No, never mind! ...g5 in that position would allow Qh8+!
Elubas, ...f6 is the key.
Qe2 isn't a crappy move, it's a system in the caro where you later fianchetto the bishop -- also Qe2 pops up in other caro lines as well... playing it on the 5th move isn't ordinary but it should still be fine... not a senseless cheapo move like you're suggesting.
khpa21 wrote:
Elubas, ...f6 is the key.
lol, whoops 
orangehonda wrote:
Qe2 isn't a crappy move, it's a system in the caro where you later fianchetto the bishop -- also Qe2 pops up in other caro lines as well... playing it on the 5th move isn't ordinary but it should still be fine... not a senseless cheapo move like you're suggesting.
5.Qe2 is a poor move in the Smyslov Caro Kann. I didn't say Qe2 is never played in any caro kanns...I didn't say Qe2 is never played in the smyslov variation of the caro kann. I said 5.Qe2 in this variation ... is a crappy move... and ok, it's not losing or anything... it's just exceedingly drab IMO. It does nothing to disrupt the basic plan of the smyslov caro kann. When played against intelligently it sends the game down very dry channels.
I've searched for the Qe2 + fianchetto position you say occur and I can't find any down 5.Qe2 ... The lines that involve Qe2 in the Smyslov variation don't involve a white fianchetto. If you're talking about some caro kann that doesn't include 4...Nd7 (that is, that isn't the Smyslov variation) and which has Qe2 coming at some later move... you're talking about an entirely different circumstance, one that doesn't apply here.
aansel wrote:
A couple of things-Wells was rated 2335 at the time not 2500. My db has the move 5...Ndf6 which does not allow the mate. The moral of the story--Be careful of your database sources. 28....Nc4 is the losing mistake--Nxd7 allows Black to hold
I'm very happy to believe this is a recording error. It is much much easier to believe that Ndf6 was played, than the score as given here!
Of course, this still leaves me arguing the (de)merits of 5.Qe2
After 5.Qe2 Ndf6 is basically forced, as is the exchange of N's. This results in White exchanging away his developed N in a way that brings Black's kingside N into play. A classic way to lose tempo in the opening. This is what makes 5.Qe2 a weak move.
JG27Pyth wrote:
orangehonda wrote:
Qe2 isn't a crappy move, it's a system in the caro where you later fianchetto the bishop -- also Qe2 pops up in other caro lines as well... playing it on the 5th move isn't ordinary but it should still be fine... not a senseless cheapo move like you're suggesting.
5.Qe2 is a poor move in the Smyslov Caro Kann. I didn't say Qe2 is never played in any caro kanns...I didn't say Qe2 is never played in the smyslov variation of the caro kann. I said 5.Qe2 in this variation ... is a crappy move... and ok, it's not losing or anything... it's just exceedingly drab IMO. It does nothing to disrupt the basic plan of the smyslov caro kann. When played against intelligently it sends the game down very dry channels.
I've searched for the Qe2 + fianchetto position you say occur and I can't find any down 5.Qe2 ... The lines that involve Qe2 in the Smyslov variation don't involve a white fianchetto. If you're talking about some caro kann that doesn't include 4...Nd7 (that is, that isn't the Smyslov variation) and which has Qe2 coming at some later move... you're talking about an entirely different circumstance, one that doesn't apply here.
Well I did look before I posted 
although I admit I play the caro advance as white and not at all as black.
In this game white has a clear edge going into the middlegame, and through the first half has an advantage. Then black sacs a pawn to activate his bishop... and then gets even more activity to crush white. Sure black may not have played the best opening moves, and my engine gives 5.Qe2 as = already (which makes nearly no difference to us non super-GMs) ... but even so the point is it's not crappy move.
Here's a very hard to understand double blunder from a 2300 and a 2500(!) ... White threatens mate-in-1 early in the opening(with a well-known rather third rate move whose only point is the easily-parried mate threat) ... Black misses it leaving mate-in-one on the board... AND WHITE FAILS TO PLAY THE MATE. A real forehead slapper.
Play thru the moves from the beginning and see if you can spot what these titled players missed...