World Chess Championship Won GM Viswanathan Anand of India won the World Championship,
September 2007 in Mecico City, a point 🛡 ahead of his nearest rivals, GMs Vladimir
Kramnik of Russia and Boris Gelfand of Israel. Anand's final score was 'plus 🛡 four' (or
'+4'), meaning that he won four more games than he lost. Since he did not lose a single
🛡 game, we can also write his score as +4-0=10, meaning four wins, no losses, and ten
draws. His closest rivals 🛡 finished at 'plus two', both +3-1=10. The diagram shows the
last position from the last game (Rd.14: Anand - Leko). 🛡 White has just played
20.Bg5-e3. The material left on the board is balanced, the Pawn structure is balanced,
and neither 🛡 side has a significant weakness. The game was drawn at this point, making
Anand the new World Champion. In this 🛡 tutorial, we'll look at some of the crucial games
and positions from Mexico City that Anand encountered on his way 🛡 to winning the
championship. We are indebted to the Chessbase site (see the box 'Elsewhere on the
Web'), especially the 🛡 analyses by GM Mihail Marin and the videos by Vijay Kumar of the
post game press conferences. The Openings: Anand 🛡 Playing White (+3-0=4) The strategy of
top tier chess players often uses a simple formula: Win with White; draw with 🛡 Black.
This means that all players follow the same opening strategy. They play opening systems
that maximize their chances of 🛡 winning with White and of drawing with Black. Mexico
City was no different. The eight participants played each other twice, 🛡 and the four
games per round over 14 rounds produced 56 games. White won 18, Black won 2, and 36
🛡 were drawn (+18-2=36). Anand opened all seven of his games as White with 1.e4. One
opponent responded 1...c5, and the 🛡 other six replied 1...e5. Against those six, Anand
played 2.Nf3. Two opponents replied 2...Nf6 (the Petrov [Petroff] Defense), while the
🛡 other four replied 2...Nc6. All four games followed the main line of the Ruy Lopez
(3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.O-O 🛡 Be7 6.Re1 b5 7.Bb3 O-O), and three of those four games
arrived at the position shown in the diagram, known 🛡 as the Marshall Attack (8.c3 d5).
Both the Petrov and the Marshall give Black excellent drawing chances. Black's winning
chances 🛡 aren't very high, but neither is the risk of losing. The Petrov was played
seven times in Mexico City (+0-0=7). 🛡 The Marshall was played four times (+1-0=3), and
would have been played more often if Black hadn't sidestepped it with 🛡 the Anti-Marshall
moves 8.h3 (+0-0=3) and 8.a4 (+2-0=0). The Openings: Anand Playing Black (+1-0=6) As
Black, Anand faced 1.e4 twice, 🛡 answering 1...e5 in both games. In the other five games,
all of which opened 1.d4, he answered 1...d5 2.c4 c6 🛡 twice, and 1...Nf6 2.c4 e6 three
times. The 1.d4 openings provide more opportunity for transpositions between different
systems than do 🛡 the 1.e4 openings. Four of Anand's 1.d4 games converged to the same
position (1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nf3 d5 4.Nc3 🛡 c6). Three of these games continued 5.Bg5 h6
6.Bh4 dxc4 7.e4 g5 8.Bg3 b5, reaching the position shown in the 🛡 diagram. Known as the
Anti-Meran Gambit, it was played in five games overall (+0-1=4). Top tier players spend
much of 🛡 their preparation studying the games of their rivals, in particular their
opening repertoires. They assume that their rivals are doing 🛡 the same. Together with
small teams of trusted assistants, everyone armed with the latest chess software and
data, they probe 🛡 their opponents' openings looking for moves that might surprise. They
also verify their own openings by looking for improvements to 🛡 avoid surprises by well
prepared opponents. It is almost impossible for an observer to explain why a particular
player chose 🛡 a particular opening against a particular opponent in a particular game.
Much depends on the preparation of the two adversaries, 🛡 on their history of playing
together, and on other games in the same event which have seen the most fashionable
🛡 openings. The choice of opening is largely psychological and only the players can
explain their choices satisfactorily. Rd.2: Winning with 🛡 Black
Aronian - Anand; after
22.e4-d5(xP) In the first round, the eight players started cautiously. All four games
were drawn in 🛡 less than 30 moves. In the second round, Anand played Black against GM
Levon Aronian of Armenia, a dangerous opponent 🛡 who was fully capable of winning the
event. The game started with an Anti-Meran Gambit, and followed a known variation 🛡 until
Anand uncorked a novelty on his 17th move. A few moves later Aronian made a temporary
sacrifice of a 🛡 minor piece, arriving at the diagrammed position. Now if the Bishop
retreats with 22...Bb7, White regains the sacrificed piece with 🛡 23.c6, obtaining an
excellent game with pressure against the Black Paxn on g4.. Anand played the surprising
22...Be5!, when White 🛡 was forced to continue 23.f4. After 23...Bg7 24.dxc6 Nxc5, the
White Bishops were passively placed. Anand (video): 'I think he 🛡 missed this plan of
...Be5 and ...Bg7, or he underestimated it. In the whole game I'm playing against his
Bishop 🛡 on e2; my Pawns on h5 and g4, and b5 and c4 control this Bishop. This turned out
to be 🛡 the deciding factor in the game.' Aronian resigned on his 42nd move. This second
round win with Black over a 🛡 dangerous rival was an excellent start for the Indian GM.
Rd.5: Beating the Marshall
Anand - Svidler; after 26.Qd3-d1 Since reigning 🛡 World
Champion Kramnik was the only other player to win in the second round, the two
pre-tournament favorites took the 🛡 lead, a position they maintained by drawing with each
other in round three and against their respective opponents in round 🛡 four. In the fifth
round Anand played against the Marshall Attack for the first time in the event. The
diagrammed 🛡 position is typical of the Marshall. Black is a Pawn down, but Black's
pieces, especially the Rooks, are placed more 🛡 aggressively than White's. A few moves
earlier, Black had weakened his Kingside with 24...g5. The game continued 26...Nf6
27.a4 Ne4 🛡 28.axb5 axb5 29.Ra6. After tying down the Black pieces to the defense of the
Queenside, Anand played Ng2-e3-f5 and broke 🛡 through on the Kingside. Anand (video): 'In
a very complicated position at the end he spotted me a bit of 🛡 time. At the end the
position was unbelievably complicated. Basically I tried to get a position where White
is able 🛡 to hold onto the Pawn at the cost of a significant initiative for Black [. ..]
When he went Nd5-f6-e4, 🛡 it's a pretty good plan, because suddenly I can't swap Rooks
very easily. That means his attack when it comes 🛡 will be very strong. I reacted with a4
and Ra6, probably the only correct reaction.' Kramnik drew his game, and 🛡 Anand was
alone in the lead for the first time. Rd.7: Avoiding the Marshall
Anand - Grischuk;
after 16...Bc8-g4 In the 🛡 sixth round, while Anand and Kramnik both drew, a new front
runner emerged. Gelfand won his second straight game to 🛡 tie Anand at 'plus two'. Faced
with the possibility of playing against the Marshall Attack for the second time, Anand
🛡 varied with 8.a4, an Anti-Marshall move. In the diagrammed position, the Black Knight
is well posted on b4, but White 🛡 has a stronger center. The game continued 17.h3 Bh5
18.g4 Bg6 19.d5!. With the last move, White locked the Bishop 🛡 on g6 out of play. Anand
(video): 'I'm not exactly sure how this plan is in the opening with ...Bg4. 🛡 It's very
forcing because I must play [h3 and] g4, but on the other hand his Bishop gets
sidetracked to 🛡 g6. I felt that I should be better, but the tactics are quite annoying.
A bit later I realized that 🛡 my Bishop on b1 is trapped for a while. So it was a complex
game.' The world no.1 gradually improved 🛡 the position of his own pieces, kept his
opponent's pieces in passive positions, and broke through by sacrificing a Pawn 🛡 on the
Queenside to invade Black's position on the Kingside. Black's d-Pawn fell and the
White's strong, central d- & 🛡 e-Pawns were enough to ensure victory. Rd.8: Drawing with
Black against the Closest Contender
Gelfand - Anand; after 10.Bc1-d2 At the
🛡 tournament's half way point, when all the players had met each other exactly once,
Anand was again alone in the 🛡 lead. At 'plus three' (+3-0=4), he was a half point ahead
of Gelfand ('plus two') and a full point ahead 🛡 of Kramnik ('plus one'). He was to play
Black against Gelfand in the first game of the second half. In 🛡 the diagrammed position,
Anand played 10...Bd6. It was a move that had been played only once before, and that
Gelfand 🛡 had not seen. Anand (video): 'Basically I wanted to surprise Boris with this
idea of ...Bd6. It's a very rare 🛡 move, but I'd done some work on it with some people
some months back. It comes down to the Catalan 🛡 is a story that you play ...e5 or ...c5
or you don't. If you're not in time, you're worse. Here 🛡 I think ...Qb8 and ...e5 were
very important moves.' The surprise worked. Gelfand played 11.Rd1 instead of the more
aggressive 🛡 11.Bg5. The game was agreed drawn on the 20th move. When Kramnik also drew
on the Black side of a 🛡 Petrov Defense, the three leaders retained their respective
positions on the crosstable. Rd.10: Drawing with Black Against the Most Dangerous
🛡 Opponent
Kramnik - Anand; after 28.Qh5-h6(xP) In round nine, Anand agreed to a draw
against after 21 moves Aronian's Marshall. Gelfand 🛡 and Kramnik both lost their only
games of the tournament, stretching Anand's lead to a full point. Round 10, with 🛡 Black
against World Champion Kramnik, would likely be the Indian's most severe test of the
event. In an Anti-Meran Gambit, 🛡 both players had prepared the opening and the initial
moves were played quickly. Black was forced to sacrifice the exchange, 🛡 but received
good compensation in a centrally posted Knight. In the diagrammed position Black played
28...Nf4. Anand (video): 'When I 🛡 played Nf4 I thought it was quite unpleasant for him,
and that's when I started to feel that I was 🛡 better already. He can never take on g5
because of ...Ne2+ and ...Qh2+. He cannot play g3 either because of 🛡 ...Ne2+, ...Qd5+,
and ...Rd8. On Re1, I just go ...Qd5, and so on. So I started to get ambitious, but 🛡 he
found 29.Kh1, which is the best move. I went 29...Qd5 30.f3 Rd8 31.Qg7 Rd7, and here my
Knight is 🛡 too strong. By playing 32.Qf8 with the threat of Rfc1, I thought I could go
32...Qd6 33.Qg7 Qd5, and then 🛡 it's a draw. Probably this was best. I thought 32...Ne2
was very strong because I'm also restraining Rfc1, but completely 🛡 missed 33.Rfe1.'
Kramnik in turn missed the best move. With a lot of fight left in the position, but
tired 🛡 from the constant tactical complications, the players agreed to a draw on the
41st move. Rd.11: Clinching the Title (Almost)
Anand 🛡 - Morozevich; after 30...Rh4-h5
Anand now led by a point with four rounds to be played. In the next round 🛡 he had White
against Morozevich, a daring player who is always full of creative tactical ideas.
Against Anand's 1.e4, the 🛡 Russian played 1...c5, the only game in Mexico where Anand
faced other than 1...e5. Play from the diagrammed position continued 🛡 31.Qf1 Rh4 32.Qg2
Rh5, bringing the game back to the diagram. If Anand had now continued 33.Qf1, the
players would 🛡 most likely have repeated the same move sequence, leading to a draw by
triple repetition. Instead he played 33.Nxa6. GM 🛡 Marin (analysis): 'An important moment
in modern chess history. Anand's most dangerous trailers, Kramnik and Gelfand, had
finished their games 🛡 hours earlier and a draw would have maintained his comfortable
lead in the tournament. The ambitious decision to play on 🛡 will lead to a slightly
irrational position, without any safety net for White. Therefore, Anand deserves the
highest praise for 🛡 the way he chose to climb up to the highest peak of the chess
pyramide. This is the kind of 🛡 World Champion the public needs. Anand's reward for his
daring play was to pull ahead of his nearest rival by 🛡 a point and a half. With only
three games remaining, this was an almost insurmountable lead. Rd.13: Holding a Bad
🛡 Endgame
Grischuk - Anand; after 40.Kd4-c4 Most people believe that chess is not a game
of chance. By any strict definition 🛡 of the word 'chance', they are probably right.
Chess players know better. No matter how far ahead they calculate variations, 🛡 or how
solid their position seems to be, there is always a chance that they have overlooked
something. Going into 🛡 the penultimate round, Anand's lead was still a full point and
only bad luck could steal the victory from him. 🛡 After Grischuk's 40.Kc4, as shown in
the diagram, Anand played 40...Kc8. White's unexpected 41.Rc2! put him in great danger
of 🛡 losing. Anand (video): 'I blundered in the Rook ending, but the funny thing is I
might not have lost anything 🛡 anytime at all. Even if I had gone correctly [via e7] to
f6, he would have gone to e3, checked 🛡 on f3, and we would have had exactly the same
position as in the game. It's funny that you can 🛡 blunder something and still end up in
the exact same situation. I don't know if it's a draw, but I 🛡 remembered once I drew
with [Kramnik] in Monaco like this. You keep attacking one Pawn on the Queenside and
one 🛡 on the Kingside, back and forth. It's a typical idea in Rook endings. It seemed to
hold this time. I 🛡 didn't see a clear win for him and I didn't see a clear draw for me,
but somehow it was 🛡 enough. It's difficult to play a tournament without one bad day,
and for me today was the day I 🛡 chose to play some lousy moves. At least it was not
enough.' Anand held the position by simplifying into an 🛡 endgame of Rook and a-Pawn vs.
Rook and h-Pawn, sacrificing his Rook for Grischuk's a-Pawn, and shepherding his h-Pawn
to 🛡 the promotion to its eighth rank, where his opponent was forced to sacrifice his own
Rook. The draw was a 🛡 question of a tempo: one tempo more and White would have won.
