Boring World Championship

What was so boring about it? Anand sacked a pawn and after it didn't work out he fought tooth and nail for that draw. He was even down to a minute at one point.

That pawn sack is all this is about. Hilarious.

e3 of game 3 is much more exciting than that. Even that, e3 won't happen again.

They just played a long game, i don't know about hard fought, moved pieces with no clear plan.

Games three and four are both fighting chess. They aint boring. If this continue somebody is going to crack. I hope it aint anand.

Games one and two were a search for truth, they weren't boring neither.

1800 in correspondence, you wouldn't understand a plan of an expert, let alone a GM, let alone these two.

I think todays game is utterly boring.

I think I could see for myself that the pawn sacrifice gave a very long lasting initiative. Which I rather admire.

I think I can also see for myself that Carlsen had to find a whole lot of moves over the board (some only moves) in a line which his opponent had carefully prepared. Which he managed to do very well and, in the end, may have refuted the line as he emerged with at least winning chances if not more. So that is also admirable.

The intricacies of the game were well over my head save with the help of expert commentary. The commentary here, on chess.com, was very enjoyable and helped me follow the cut and thrust of the game well. They both found a whole lot of resource as the game progressed.

That they both finished up tired was clear and I am not surprised. This was fighting chess of world championship calibre and I am glad to have followed the game.

I didn't catch all of the commentary on chess.com, but if the commentators here said that it was Carlsen who got caught in Anand's opening preparation, then that's quite interesting.

Anand himself said after the game that he played the opening poorly, and other commentators were saying that it was Anand who stepped into Carlsen's preparation. Just goes to show how complex the position was.

The 4th game was entertaining and exciting and for me that is more important than who wins. 

All these comments about the match being boring reminds me of the reply by Adolf Anderssen when he was asked why he wasn't doing as well against Morphy as he did against Dufrense--"Morphy won't let me!"  There's very little "swash-buckling" chess at this level because you can't "swash" if the other guy doesn't "buckle."  Neither player has been known to buckle too often, so don't come here expecting what they will not give you.  Appreciate the fact that Carlsen was in trouble in the first game and bailed out, while Anand did the same in game two.  Games 3 and 4 were close to decisive--so where's the boring part?  That you don't understand Super GM chess?  That's not their problem.  They are there to win the match, not to live up to your hype.  They will play the best chess they are capable of, and if you don't like that the games don't look like Anderssen-Dufrense, I'm sure they will not lose any sleep over it.  I think this has been an excellant match so far, and I look forward to the remaining games being of the same high quality--the only thing I don't like about this match is that one of these great players will lose.  I think they are both excellant players and excellant representatives of chess.

I didn't follow any commentary. I'm certain that Anand prepared 9.h3, which is an unusual (but currently "hot") move. He may have prepared up to 16.Ne1. That's my hunch. Here's my commentary on the end of the opening phase.

9.h3

The fourth most popular move made its first appearance, as near as I can discern from ChessBase Online database, in 1978 when played by Nona Gaprindashvili. In that year, she became the first woman awarded the Grandmaster title and also lost the Women's World Championship. She earned the WWCC title in 1962, and defended it successfully several times.

Fabiano Caruana played 9.h3 against Levon Aronian in the final round of the Tata Steel tournament in January, a game that I blogged as it occurred. It finished with many moves of torture in a theoretically drawn ending of rook and bishop vs. rook.

9.Nc3 is overwhelmingly the most popular move, and has usually been Anand's choice. Both Anand and Carlsen have played 9.Rd1+, however, which is the second most popular move. I have neither found games where Anand played 9.h3, nor located any where Carlsen faced this move. ChessBase Online has 169 games in the database with this position and nearly 5000 with 9.Nc3. Both moves are played often enough that changing the move order may transpose into a position that both players have played prior.

9...Bd7 10.Rd1 Be7 11.Nc3 Kc8 12.Bg5 h6 13.Bxe7 Nxe7 14.Rd2 c5

15.Rad1

Anand's move appears to be a novelty. Jakovenko -- Almasi, Khanty-Mansiysk 2007 continued with 15.Ne4 and White won in 102 moves.

15...Be6 16.Ne1

16.Ne2 is an alternative that appears to drop a pawn. However, 16...Bxa2? is unwise. The bishop does not become trapped, as may happen in similar structures without Black's advanced c-pawn. Rather, after some forcing moves, White gets excellent piece play and threats against a vulnerable Black king in exchange for the queenside pawns. 17.b3 c4 18.Nfd4 c5 19.Nb5 cxb3 20.cxb3 Bxb3

Theoretical Position

16...Ng6 17.Nd3 b6 18.Ne2

My computer likes Rf1.

18...Bxa2

Perhaps Anand's knight maneuvers were not the best way to build up pressure. The position is strategically complex with occasional tactics. As in my fantasy position above, White's a-pawn dropped, but there is no risk that the bishop becomes trapped. In this case, however, White's compensation for the pawn appears less clear.

19.b3 c4 20.Ndc1 cxb3 21.cxb3 Bb1 22.f4

Not boring at all...the fourth game was excellent ....I am an Anand fan but I have also become a Carlsen fan now due to the way he plays and conducts himself...very enjoyable stuff for me...I also love the way the two treat each other...

10...Be7 was slightly unusual. It had previously been played by Jon Ludwig Hammer, who is one of Carlsen's seconds. Anand did not seem fully prepared for it. 16.Ne1 was probably a mistake, and the reason that Anand himself said later that he didn't play the opening well.

Game four was an opening victory for Carlsen.

Thanks. I missed that Carlsen announced his seconds. Or is Hammer a suspected or presumed second?

Did the commentators discuss Hammer's game. Did Anand spend a lot of time thinking after 10...Be7?

If Anand really had prepared the pawn sac for the initiative (as suggested perhaps by Kasparov's comments), and Carlsen fought his way through that OTB and ended up with winning chances, that would have to be severely demoralizing for Anand.

I wonder whether after the match is over we'll ever learn the real truths, like whether Anand was fibbing when he implied that he was already drifting by the time they got to the pawn sac position (although note that he carefully did not say that it was unintentional or not planned to arrive at that exact position).

Its not boring

Yep, they don't owe spectators anything and are just there to win.  Top level chess is typically boring anyway in the 21st century.  May as well watch Houdini play against itself.

I hope Anand wins but I think Carlsen will. :1

So, any opening guesses for game 5?

I would really like to see a King's Gambit played at the grandmaster level these days.

Reti! Carlsen will find a way to get equality with this stratgically complex opening, and he will win a game with it before Thanksgiving.