The shortest game of the match so far and in fact there was only one critical moment in it.

Carlsen opened with 1 c4, adding more options right from the start. Would Caruana try to go for QGD set-ups with 1…e6 or would he go symmetrical with 1…c5 or would he go for a Reversed Sicilian with 1…e5? Caruana chose the latter and they followed his recent game against So, from the Paris Grand Chess Tour blitz.

Carlsen introduced a novelty, the engine’s first choice and naturally Caruana wasn’t surprised even a bit, so he continued to blitz out his moves. Carlsen declined the invitation to force the game immediately with 12 Nd4 and chose the preparatory 12 Rb1.

After this move Caruana stopped to think for a while and I am not sure whether he was trying to remember his preparation and if he succeeded because after 12…Nf3 (12…Bg4 was interesting) 13 Bf3 his move 13…a6 appeared to give White a promising possibility.

That was the critical moment of the game. After a really long think, “to b5 or not to b5” Carlsen chose the latter and the game quickly lost its edge. In the analysis I found it hard to find a straight-forward way for Black towards equality after 15 b5. Probably there is one, but it is quite certain that playing b5 would have put more pressure on Caruana.

After Carlsen’s choice of 15 Re1 Caruana didn’t have any problems whatsoever. In the ensuing endgame he efficiently solved all his problems.

Another White game went to waste for the players. But things are slowly starting to change – in Game 3 Caruana had an advantage after the opening, while today Carlsen had the promising option of 14 b5. The players still do not make the maximum of their chances, but they will.

The match is also approaching a turning point because after Caruana’s next White game in Game 5 it will be Carlsen with two Whites in a row and it is clear that he will do his utmost to score in at least one of them. Interesting times ahead.

A rather unconvincing showing by both players.

Caruana deviated from Game 1 and chose the rare 6 0-0 in the Rossolimo (I’m afraid we won’t be seeing an Open Sicilian any time soon). The omission of h3 introduces many subtleties in the upcoming middlegame as a lot depends on the plan Black chooses.

Carlsen also chose a rare move, 6…Qc7, as the queen is often not placed here in the Rossolimo structures. After some natural moves were made it transpired that White had the more comfortable position. As Grischuk put it, he had a good version of the Anti-Berlin (and I joked on Twitter that everything in modern theory is about the Anti-Berlin, even the Sicilian!).

Caruana decided to keep control and not grab the c5-pawn and on move 10 it seems that Carlsen miscalculated something because after the exchange on f3 and b4 White had the obvious pressure on the queenside. But then it was Caruana’s turn to commit an inaccuracy – he even called his 15th move a blackout.

Even though he still kept chances to maintain some pressure, it seems that Caruana immediately switched to playing for a draw and this premature change of direction shifted the momentum to Carlsen.

Momentum is extremely important in chess, often more important than the objective evaluation of the position. All top players sense the momentum and its changes and I would even go as far as to say that Carlsen, together with Karpov before him, are the best “momentum” players, easily switching to playing for a win after they had felt that they are not in danger anymore.

Carlsen did start to apply pressure, but luckily for Caruana the position was too simple for him to go wrong. Perhaps it was possible for Carlsen to be even more precise in the endgame, but I doubt that would have altered the final result.

A disappointing game for Caruana, who easily misplayed his opening advantage, and for Carlsen, whose opening preparation wasn’t up to the task.

The first and this game got me thinking about whether the choice of the Rossolimo is the best suited one for Caruana. In the maneuvering positions that arise it appears that Carlsen feels more comfortable, at least for the time being. A mistake in the strategy (allowing to end up in positions that are better suited for the opponent) can cost Caruana dearly. As a comparison, I’d remind you of Tal’s choice of the Advance Variation in the Caro-Kann in his return match against Botvinnik. Tal was well-prepared and was obtaining decent positions after the opening, but the character of the positions was more in Botvinnik’s style and he managed to outplay Tal in the ensuing middlegames. Are we going to witness something similar in London?

Here’s Game 3 with detailed analysis.

The players keep surprising me.

In my Preview I argued that Carlsen would play 1 e4 because after it the preparation can successfully be narrowed down. The point is that after 1 d4 Black has more satisfactory defences than after 1 e4 (where basically on this level there is only 1…e5 and 1…c5).

And in spite of that logic Carlsen went 1 d4 today. I have noted that Carlsen is a very theoretical player in World Championship matches and with this choice he showed that he was fully prepared for everything – the Slav, Semi-Slav, Semi-Tarrasch, Ragozin, QGA, Vienna and the opening we got – the QGD.

It was exciting for me to follow the opening phase of the game after having made a complete repertoire for Black based on it for the site Chessable. You can check this repertoire clicking the image on the right, just above my yellow newsletter subscription box. (Alternatively you can check my posts on the QGD on this search page.)

And I wasn’t disappointed. Caruana played the extremely rare 10…Rd8 instead of the very popular 10…Re8 (the move I also recommended in my analysis). This was a huge surprise for Carlsen who immediately started spending a lot of time. Usually people don’t look for alternatives in positions where everything seems to be going well and this makes Caruana’s introduction (and preparation!) even more impressive.

I am convinced that Caruana was in his preparation well after move 20. Stellar preparation, especially if you take into account that Carlsen wasn’t always choosing the most testing moves.

The most exciting moment in the game arose on move 17 when Carlsen could have sacrificed a piece for what looked like a promising attack. The analysis shows that the complications should lead to a draw, but the lines are amazing and quite complex. Perhaps it wasn’t surprising that Carlsen declined the offer and decided to steer the game towards a draw. Even though he was on the worse end of an equal position, he didn’t have trouble holding it.

So what do we have after 2 games? Both players showed their fantastic preparation with Black and in both games White was suffering. Such is the importance of an opening surprise, with the aim to take the opponent into one’s own territory and preferably a line he hasn’t analysed very deeply.

However, with more information becoming available with every game played I expect White to be able to determine the boundaries of the opponent’s Black repertoire for the match and then pose more problems. It won’t be easy though as it is obvious both are superbly prepared with Black. Just remember how Karjakin failed to pose a single problem with White throughout the whole match in 2016.

Contrary to my predictions the players switched the first move – Caruana went 1 e4 and Carlsen went 1 d4. Will it remain so? I am really looking forward to Game 3 to see whether the Sicilian was a one-off surprise by Carlsen or a mainstay defence. Game 4 will also indicate the same for Carlsen’s 1 d4.

Here’s Game 2 with detailed analysis.

What a start of the match!

I never expected Carlsen to be that aggressive from the get-go. In fact, I never imagined he could play something other than 1…e5. It was quite a shock for me to see the Sicilian! Is this a match strategy to be more aggressive with Black? The next games will give the answer.

I immediately wondered what Sicilian he had prepared, but Caruana was quick to play the Rossolimo. My guess would be the Sveshnikov, a variation he regularly played almost 10 years ago. It has a good theoretical reputation and even Anand (who had Peter Heine Nielsen as his second back then!) couldn’t do anything against it when Gelfand chose it as his mainstay defence in their match in 2012.

Another thing about the opening is whether this is a one-off thing or we will see the Sicilian on a more regular basis? I’ve written more than once that Carlsen has the habit of playing one-off openings in his World Championship matches – against Anand in 2013 it was the Caro-Kann and against Karjakin in 2016 it was the Trompowsky. I am very curious to find and I am rooting for the latter option! It’s been quite a while since we’ve seen open Sicilians in a World Championship match (we have to go back to Kasparov-Anand for that! The odd outing of the Kan in the second Carlsen-Anand match does not really count.)

Carlsen’s choice of the sub-line in the Rossolimo was also very deeply thought through. He went for a line with long-term prospects for Black – he had the bishop pair and the perspective to push the pawns on the kingside. The drawback was that White had a quick development, but he was taking into account the surprise factor and as a result of it the inability of Caruana to play in the most precise way. This small “gamble” paid off handsomely and Carlsen immediately got a wonderful position on the board and a huge time advantage on the clock. In a way, this choice was similar to his choice in their game from 2015, when he also went for the long-term prospect of a kingside attack (even though there it was more risky as he completely abandoned the queenside).

He then proceeded in a forceful manner and even though he may have been hasty on move 21 his energetical play brought him a winning position. And then something happened and he became hesitant. He started missing wins and as it usually happens eventually he let it slip completely. Of course, credit also goes to Caruana for his tenacious defence, but this time it was all in Carlsen’s hands. The best Carlsen could do was to liquidate to a drawn endgame that he played for 3 hours, without creating anything substantial.

A curious start of the match and an unnerving reminder for Carlsen of his missed chances against Karjakin. If you don’t score your chances, you concede. For Caruana this was an opening catastrophe – to end up worse and with a huge time deficit after 15 moves is definitely not how you want to start the match.

So neither would be happy, but I suppose the happier will be Caruana – after all he did save a lost game. And he was suffering from start to finish but he didn’t succumb. Resilience will definitely be a key factor in this match.

Tomorrow is the second game and I am very curious to see both players’ strategies with colours reversed.

Here’s the game with detailed analysis.

This match will probably be called a classic, no matter which way it goes and how it goes.

The previous match was between childhood rivals, but one was afraid of the other, and the fearful tried to dry it out. This match won’t be like that. This time there is no fear.

The challenger is younger than the Champion. Historically speaking, and having in mind the “classical” lineage (where the Champion is the one who beat the previous Champion in a match) Botvinnik drew Smyslov in 1954, Petrosian defeated Spassky in 1966, Kasparov defended his title twice against younger challengers – against Short in 1993 and Anand in 1995 and Anand did the same against Topalov in 2010. Not a very frequent event in chess history, an older champion to emerge victorious against a younger challenger.

An aspect that I see as very important in this match is the possible tie-break. In case of a 6-6 tie, a rapid tie-break will follow. This may have huge influence on the match strategy of both players, if we take into account that Carlsen is clearly superior in rapid and blitz time controls to Caruana. Caruana surely has done some preparation for this scenario, but I’d still see Carlsen as the clear favourite in rapid and blitz.

This means that it may be Carlsen who won’t mind drawing the match. Not necessarily playing for a draw (I sincerely doubt he’d go down that road), but generally playing with the knowledge and confidence that a 6-6 is in his favour. This can put pressure on Caruana not to let the match go to tie-breaks, but only if he’s not confident enough for that phase. But I have the impression he will be.

What distinguishes this match from all the previous Carlsen matches is that Caruana feels confident when playing Carlsen. He has shown he can beat him and will openly play to win. I don’t expect him to change his usual style for the match – mostly because his style is uncomfortable for Carlsen.

Caruana’s approach of concrete opening preparation, aimed at obtaining advantage (as opposed to Carlsen’s “just to get a game” – more on this below), followed by forceful play based on very precise calculation is one that should pose Carlsen problems. It is in a way similar to Kasparov’s approach against Karpov’s. Karjakin also had that kind of opening preparation prior to the match with Carlsen, but in the match he modified it in order to obtain safe positions and draw the games. Caruana will not change like Karjakin and I expect him to go for the most critical lines and also to unveil new theoretical paths.

I also expect Carlsen to continue to do what he usually does, only on a higher level, both theoretically and practically. I have noticed that Carlsen is in fact a very theoretical player in World Championship matches, as opposed to tournaments. He will also introduce his own ideas and I won’t be surprised if they are of a forcing character (remember the 8th game from the match in Sochi or the 6th game from the match in New York, both times drawing effortlessly thanks to his excellent preparation).

In terms of general match strategy and play I expect both players to do what they do best with no changes in style and approach a-la Kramnik against Kasparov. A typical clash of two styles and one that should produce fascinating struggles. Please bear in mind that I expect fascinating struggles, even though this may mean that the majority of the games end in draws – it is the substance that will make the excitement.

Concerning the openings, usually the World Championship matches pick up the latest developments and then build on them. So a quick glance at what the best players have been playing lately should give an idea what openings we will see. This doesn’t mean that there won’t be any surprises, but generally the matches follow the trends.

The major question is what Caruana will opt for on move 1. Only 1 e4, only 1 d4 or a mix of both (with 1 c4 also being an option). This will largely determine the array of openings we will be seeing. Against 1 e4 Carlsen will stick to 1…e5, both the Berlin and Marshall (as in the match with Karjakin) have proven to be 100% reliable. The Giuoco Piano is also a very probable option, with many ideas being discovered in the last several years it is still a fertile ground for further developments.

Against 1 d4 Carlsen has more choice – he prepared the Slav against Karjakin, while he can play pretty much everything (QGD and Nimzo, to name just the most solid ones), including the Grunfeld (against Anand in Sochi). Lately in tournaments he toyed with the King’s Indian, but I doubt we will see it. It is difficult to sense what opening he will prepare for this match.

With Carlsen as White, I expect to see 1 e4 more. I also expect to see Carlsen start the match with something he won’t play afterwards – in Chennai he essayed the Caro-Kann in Game 1, never to return to it in the remainder of the match, and in New York it was the Trompowsky. Against 1 e4 Caruana will also most likely stick to 1…e5 and the question is how much he will depend on the Petroff.

The Petroff served Caruana beyond expectations and Capablanca taught that one should always play the openings that bring good results. So probably the Petroff will feature in London, but how often and what will Carlsen have to show against it?

In their last encounter Carlsen came up with a fresh idea and convincingly outplayed Caruana. Then he hesitated and missed the win. Here’s the game with the comments I published in the September edition of the British Chess Magazine.

Normally people prepare two openings for Black in these matches, one is the main defence and the other one is the back-up. The question is then, if the Petroff stays, what will be Caruana’s back-up?

A relatively recent (starting with Wijk aan Zee this year) development in Carlsen’s opening approach was his increased use of the main lines – he’s played the English Attack against the Taimanov, the Yugoslav Attack against the Dragon, and even the most aggressive 6 Bg5 against the Najdorf. Previously I wrote that I see this development as a way to prepare and pose theoretical problems in the match. Personally I would be delighted to see both players slugging it out in the most topical variations!

To conclude, I am expecting a great match! When two players who are confident in themselves and go out to beat the other guy meet, the result can only be a ferocious fight. And this time I see no favourites.