Position after 18.Nd4
Topalov, V (2805) – Grischuk, A (2736) [B90]
Linares (5), 18.02.2010
1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.Be3 Ng4 7.Bc1 Nf6 8.h3 Nc6 9.g4 Qb6 10.Nde2 e6 11.Bg2 Be7 12.b3 h6 13.Qd2 g5 14.Ba3 Ne5 15.0–0–0 Qxf2 16.Bxd6 Bxd6 17.Qxd6 Nfd7 18.Nd4 Qf6 19.Qa3 Qe7 20.Qb2 =
20…0-0 21. Nf5?! =+ This does not seem to be a sound sacrifice.
21…exf5 Grischuk accepted the sacrifice and called Topalov’s bluff.
22. Nd5 Qc5 23. exf5 a5 24. h4 gxh4 25. Rxh4 Ra6 26. Kb1 Qf2 27. Ne7+ Kg7? Grischuk would have an overwhelming advantage with 27…Kh7!
28. Rh2 =+ f6? Now Grischuk has thrown away his advantage. 29. Qc1 Nxg4 30. Nxc8 Nc5 31. Rd2 Qxf5 32. Bh3 +=
29. g5? This is not a precise continuation by Topalov. 29.Qc1 is better. But Grischuk is in time pressure so it may not be so easy to find the best moves.
29…fxg5 30. Nxc8 Raf6 31. Ne7 R8f7 32. Nd5 Nf3 33. Bxf3 Qxh2 34. Nxf6 Nxf6 35. a4 Qf4 36. Bd5 Rd7 37. Re1 Qxf5 38. Bc4 Qf2 Even though White is down a pawn, he has enough compensation for it due to Black’s weak King. =
39. Qe5 Qd4 40. Qf5 Qg4 Grischuk barely made time control.
41. Qxa5 Rd1+ 42. Rxd1 Qxd1+ 43. Kb2 Qd6 44. Qa7 Qe5+ 45. Ka2 Qe4 46. Bd3 Qc6 47. a5 Nd5 48. Qd4+ Nf6 = 49. Qe5 Kf8 50. c4 g4 51. Bf5 Kf7 52. Qb8 Ne8? This is the first of a series of fatal mistakes.
53. Qf4 Qc5? 54. Bxg4+ Nf6 55. Qf5 Qd4 56. Bf3 Qf2+ 57. Ka3 Kg7 58. Ka4 b6 59. axb6 Qxb6 60. c5 Qa7+ 61. Kb5 Qb8+ 62. Kc4 Qg8+ 63. Kc3 Qe8 64. b4 Qe1+ 65. Kc4 Qf1+ 66. Kb3 Qb5 67. Bd1 Qc6 68. Bc2 Kf7 69. Bd3 1-0
Topa is a patzer.
I’m trying to find a link to this game as it happens, can’t get it on chessbase. Anyone help me?
http://www.chesspro.ru
Grischuk looks to me that he is trying to lose here after the time control. If he can’t find a perpetual, I think is done for.
Garbage—worse than Shirov.
What’s so pathetic is that even though chess is a played out, dead game, “top” players can still win games by playing coffeehouse trash.
It’s a discouraging statement about the human mind.
Thanks to computers and engines, ordinary chess players can tell chess ‘brilliance’ from chess ‘nonsense’ and they abuse that privilege by insulting those grandmasters who choose to play more creatively by taking risks and winning, rather than by playing boring draws.
Congratulations to Topalov. Mikhail Tal would be impressed by Topa’s game.
The Nf5 sac was probably unsound, but psychologically it was a winner.
Grishchuk must have wondered if it was a well analyzed home line — remember the Nxf7 sac Topa made against Kramnik a few years ago?
It’s fairly safe to say both of these guys were well out of their preparation. Grischuk knew Nf5 was no home analysis, he took it fast because it just wasn’t sound.
Playing badly is not playing creative. Kramnik plays creatively. Topalov has made a career out of confusing opponents with garbage, as has Shirov.
Topalov played an ugly opening and had a position that verged on losing—any master could see that, so he sacced a piece.
Where’s the strategy or deep thinking?
If I want to see gambles I’ll watch some drunk people play tic tac toe.
However, anon 4:37, you’re getting at the point when you notice that computers change the game.
I for one find little aesthetic enjoyment seeing some human play worst move after worst move and win a game. What’s the point?
Doesn’t it matter that the best people in the world can’t even play good chess, objectively?
It’s sad.