Today’s games were again very interesting. The least interesting, however, from a point of view of independent play, was the duel of the former World Champions. In a Vienna, it was all preparation, from beginning to end. The only difference was that Kramnik refreshed his memory before the game so he was more confident, while Anand had to dig into his memory a bit more in order to remember how the line went. But it was an important theoretical game, one of the many the pair has had in the past. Their press conference was much more interesting, especially when they got to the philosophical themes. I particularly liked Kramnik’s comment of not needing to understand chess too much! Understanding it a little bit better than the opponent is all you need, according to the Russian and he knows what he’s talking about. I can actually relate to that, because once you get in too deep (in any area, for that matter, not only chess) you start to become too philosophical, you start to think about the meaning of it all and that takes away the competitiveness, the sharpness and the aggression, all of which are needed for a successful outcome of the game.

Karjakin probably surprised Topalov with 1 c4, but that was all he achieved. Topalov has a lot of experience in the Reversed Dragon in the English so he didn’t have too many problems throughout the game. A solid draw, but that means different things for the players. Karjakin so far continues in line with my prediction that he will be solid and not push too hard, while Topalov might get nervous if he doesn’t win a game soon. He still hasn’t had a chance to win a game and usually a long drawing series ends with a loss. Tomorrow he’s black against the disappointed Svidler, so anything is possible…

Aronian beat Svidler and they changed places in the standings. Svidler was principled and went for the Grunfeld (compare this decision with the one from London when he surprised Aronian with a rare line in the QGA and drew without problems), but I warned about this in my Preview – the Grunfeld is a risky opening, no matter how well prepared you are. Here again we saw a very deep preparation from both players (just remember that “These People Cannot Be Trusted” when Aronian says he didn’t know the line) – it was preparation at least until move 27 (and almost certainly much deeper), the first critical moment when Svidler had a big thing whether to draw (by taking on d4 – I’m sure he knew this was a draw even before the game) or continue the game, which he did. This decision speaks volumes of Svidler’s psychological disposition: he showed great courage and self-confidence by continuing the game in a position which is easier to play for white against one of the favourites of the tournament, against whom a draw with black is a great result. Eventually he regretted this decision and Aronian won a good game, but this courage shows that Svidler has matured. But on the other hand, he repeated the same scenario from London when he was completely winning against Gelfand in round 5 (a win would have brought him to +2, just like the win against Kramnik would have two days ago) and after the disappointment with the draw in that game he lost to Carlsen the next day – this time he lost to Aronian (is Svidler losing to the eventual winners?). Svidler showed character, but Fate has her own ways and maybe this showing of characted was in fact a good omen for Aronian, who won a point from a brave Svidler while he may have only achieved a draw had Svidler been the old one. Such twists of Fate usually favour the chosen ones. Whether Aronian is the chosen one in this tournament we will see, but this game, for me at least, makes Aronian the main favourite to win the tournament (even though he’s still half a point behind Anand at this point). Until the next twist of Fate, of course.

Mamedyarov and Andreikin also switched places in the standings after the former’s victory. It was a topsy-turvy game, showing that both players aren’t in very good form. I found it interesting watching Mamedyarov in the press conference when he showed a line where he thought he couldn’t take the pawn on f6 with his queen from f3 because he thought he was losing the queen after Bg7, only to realise that he could go back to f3! The horror on his face made it obvious that in that moment he realised that this was not the usual way he calculates variations and that if it continues like this it will soon get much worse. Andreikin was more collected, but he too was disappointed as he was also trying to win. Neither of the players was happy with the quality of their moves, the only difference being that Mamedyarov got the point. I am curious to see how they try to get over these lapses in their thinking (a situation way too familiar from personal experience! I’ve always found it almost impossible to improve the quality of my brain work during a tournament).

Tomorrow’s big game is Kramnik-Aronian. Let’s see what they come up with this time!

Anand is leading after 3 rounds, with two very nice wins. Honestly, I am not surprised by this, because, like I said in my Round 1 analysis, his preparation and training for the Carlsen match, which didn’t work against Carlsen, is working against the other players. In Round 2 against Topalov he got his preparation in and I wouldn’t be surprised if the whole game was preparation for him. In Round 3 he didn’t have any problems in the opening and took advantage of Mamedyarov’s over-ambitious play with precise play on his part.

Kramnik’s saved draw with Svidler is no less important for him than the win against Karjakin. He introduced a conceptual novelty (and a new direction in the whole line – something I said I was looking forward to in my Preview) against Karjakin’s QGA already on move 9 and went on to win a good game. In the press conference he even said he tried to play unpleasant moves, which shows that he tries to learn from Carlsen! He was lost against Svidler in Round 3, but he kept on fighting and took his chance when it was presented to him. Making difficult draws is usually a good sign for a successful tournament!

Svidler was undoubtedly surprised by Andreikin’s choice of the Labourdonnais Sicilian in Round 2 and didn’t achieve much in the opening, but his subsequent play was very powerful. He simply made moves of higher quality than his opponent and won the game because of that. This is a very encouraging sign for him, but he must be disappointed by his draw against Kramnik as he outplayed him and was winning. Luckily, he has a day off to recover from that disappointment.

Aronian recovered quickly after his loss in Round 2, but this was thanks to a horrible blunder on Mamedyarov’s part. He played a wild game against Topalov in Round 3, but some of his decisions weren’t up to his usual standards (19…Re8?!). However, when it came to calculation and saving his skin, he was his usual self and defended accurately. He still needs to produce a game of quality on par with his level.

Topalov is the king of draws so far. In Round 2 against Anand he didn’t really have a chance for anything more because of Anand’s superb preparation, while in Round 3 he got a nice attacking position against Aronian, but couldn’t break through because of the latter’s precise defence. He may be in good shape (I attribute his shaky play in Round 1 to the initial nervousness), but he also needs to win a game or two soon if he wants to fight for victory in the tournament.

Karjakin lost the only game he actually played, against Kramnik, even though in his own words he “played well.” In Round 3 both he and Andreikin wanted to make a draw after their losses in the previous rounds. It is yet to be seen in what form he is in.

The same more or less applies to Andreikin. He was outplayed by Svidler in Round 2, after surprising him in the opening and achieving a comfortable position. I’d say that game showed a difference in class. So, pragmatic as he is, he made a draw in the next round and has a day off to think things through.

Mamedyarov is in grave danger of being labeled the outsider in this tournament, repeating the role of his compatriot Radjabov from last year. Even he seems confused by his atrocious play (repeating Radjabov’s explanation in the press conference that possibly it’s his lack of practice the reason for his blunders). Practically a one-move blunder against Aronian in Round 2 and a typically open-tournament style of play against Anand show that he really must pull himself together. The free day comes just in time for him.

After 3 rounds 3 players have shown that they are in good form, Anand, Kramnik and Svidler, Topalov and Aronian still seem to need time to get into the tournament while the others will have to show their character and will to overcome the first setbacks.

So when I arrived in London, the games of the first round of the Candidates had already finished. Honestly speaking, thinking of chess when seriously lacking sleep sends the brain in a completely different dimension. Let’s see what my brain came up with when I looked at the games and the statements of the players.

Andreikin-Kramnik was the first game to finish. The moves of this game weren’t particularly interesting, as they were following the Mamedyarov-Kramnik game from the last Tal Memorial for a long time and the line is practically a forced draw. Andreikin deviated just to draw in 32 moves instead of Mamedyarov’s 26. What I found interesting were the statements of the players after the game: Andreikin said that he expected “almost anything” against his 1 d4 (really? Kramnik is known for his consistency, especially with black, and even though he could have prepared “almost anything” during the 3 months or preparation, the Nimzo is one of the things that he’s been playing since the 90s). Then he said that he had a “special philosophy when preparing for Kramnik” but he didn’t want to go into details, to which Kramnik responded that he already knew what this “special philosophy” meant, but he also didn’t want to elaborate. But for the careful observer this is pretty obvious – Andreikin goes for drawing lines against Kramnik, and if the latter forgets his theory (like in the drawing line in the Berlin from the Russian Championship last year) then he gets an advantage. The same was applicable today, but I don’t think he expected he would get something – he said he had a “safe line” prepared for the Nimzo and that’s what happened. As it transpired, neither of them minded starting the event with a quiet draw, something Kramnik confirmed in the press conference.

Karjakin-Svidler showed that both players suffered from the usual nerves in Round 1. Svidler went for the Taimanov Sicilian, unusual for him, as he primarily opts for the Kan or the Najdorf. He did play the Taimanov against Caruana last year at the European Club Cup, but to say that it was the “very likely” choice (like Karjakin said) it’s just a plain lie. This just goes against the following statement of Karjakin when he said that he couldn’t remember his analysis after 9…Ng4 – if it was that likely, how come he couldn’t remember the first move after the branch he chose (9 f4)? So we are led to believe that Karjakin expected the Taimanov, so he was prepared, went for the English Attack, 6 Be2 a6 7 Qd2 Nf6, then chose 8 f4 (instead of 8 0-0-0) and after 8…b5 9 e5 Ng4, he couldn’t remember his analysis??? Oh please… Svidler’s statement that he “forgot to repeat” the lines after 9 f4 also shouldn’t be taken seriously as Svidler is famous for this kind of misleading comments. The game itself was interesting, but I have the impression both players were just looking for the first opportunity to start repeating moves – the tension was starting to tell.

To sum up statements of the Russian players, I’ll quote one political slogan that can be seen on the streets of Skopje: “These people cannot be trusted!”

Mamedyarov-Topalov was another case of nerves, but it’s interesting to observe how these fighting players, who don’t (or can’t) go for drawing lines resolved this issue. Mamedyarov went for the innocuous 4 Nbd2 in the Slav, something he played in one game at the European Team Championship last year (against Erdos) and in 4 rapid and blitz games at the Sportaccord rapid/blitz event, also last year. Topalov introduced a novelty as early as move 6 and equalised comfortably. And here the nerves started to show, these fighting players with dynamic styles started to allow innacuracies which are not typical of them. Topalov’s 19…a5 was a miscalculation (in his own words) and then Mamedyarov started missing his opponent’s moves. Eventually it all ended in a perpetual check, but the notable difference between the other two drawn games is that when uncompromising players (or, perhaps, characters) play, they almost never draw timidly or search for the first opportunity to repeat moves and their nervousness is shown not in the premature end of the game, but in the oversights that happen in their calculations.

The only player who seemed not to suffer from nerves was Anand. In spite of Aronian’s novelty in the Anti-Marshall on move 11, he continued to play sound chess and it was the latter that showed signs of nerves. This doesn’t bode well for the Armenian, as many (myself included) have pointed out that it is his nerves that prevent him from winning tournaments of this type, where the stakes are high. He even said it in the press conference, that his calculations “weren’t serious.” He even got into time-trouble, something that doesn’t happen with him. Maybe it’s understandable that Anand was so carefree, the burden of the world title is off his shoulders so he can just play chess and enjoy it. And he played a great technical game, probably the training he did for the Carlsen match finally starts to show (he did say that he trained with the idea of matching Carlsen in his endgame and technical skills). This win undoubtedly gives him confidence while it dents Aronian’s. It will be interesting to see how both adapt in their new situations.

Tomorrow is Round 2 and I will be up in the air flying from London to Skopje when they start at 10am EST. Another sleepless night awaits me…