Chess (#1169)

It is difficult to find psychological explanations for the World Cup Final. There were many outright blunders from both players. But that made for an incredibly exciting contest, which went into six tiebreakers before Sergey Karjakin clinched it, beating Peter Svidler 6-4.  

Both players should actually have been freed from some tension since they were guaranteed Candidates slots. They were playing "only" for honour, rating points, and the not inconsequential reward of an extra $40,000 payoff for the winner. The one explanation that makes sense is sheer tiredness. The WC lasted 25 days and the finalists had to absorb plenty of tension and expend much energy to get that far.

The first game was close to perfect. Karjakin made minor errors, which Svidler exploited beautifully. Game #2 saw Svidler going 2-0 up. Karjakin blundered horribly, twice. Two up, two to play should be pretty comfortable and Svidler was within a move of clinching a win in #3. Then he blundered and Karjakin was back in contention. Fighter that he is, Karjakin managed to win #4, which saw several errors from both players again.  

That forced a tiebreak of two paired games at 25 minutes plus 10 seconds increment. In #5, Svidler went down again, with Karjakin extending his winning streak to three in a row. Then Svidler equalised in #6, forcing two more tie breaks at an accelerated control of 10 minutes plus 10 seconds increment.

Those games were split again. Svidler won #7 and Karkjakin won #8. That meant paired tiebreakers at 5 minutes plus 3 seconds increment. Karjakin won #9 when Svidler blundered a full rook in a winning position. Finally, Karjakin took #10 as well after Svdiler failed to make something out of a big initiative. It is rare (if not unique) for 10 decisive games in succession at this level. Both players had ample chances.

The DIAGRAM, Black to play (White: Svidler Vs Black: Karjakin Game #3 Baku WC 2015). Black's down 0-2 and a draw is as good as a loss for him. He avoids 25.--Qxf2+ 26. Qxf2 Nxf2 27 Rf1 exd5 28. Nxd5 Rd6 29.Nc7 Re7 with flat equality.

But the move played is bad, 25.--  Nxf2? 26.Rf1 Qe4 27.Rbe1? [Wrong rook - it offers a saving move with Rxf1+ unlike 27.Rfe1! exd5 28.Qxf2 Rxf2 29.Rxe4 winning (Rxf1 is not on). Also 27.Qc3!? Qd3  28. Qb2 e5 29. Nd7 looks good.]

The game continued 27...exd5 28.Rxf2?? [ Now 28.Qc3! kills it 28.--d4 29. Rxe4 dxc3 30. Rxe8; 28.--Qd3 29. Qxd3, etc. all win material.) 28...Qh4 29.Qd2?? [29.Qxe8 Qxf2+ 30.Kh2 Qxb6 31.Re7+ Kh6 32.Rd7 Qf2 33. Qg8 may draw.] Rxf2 30.Qc3+ d4 (0-1).

Devangshu Datta is an internationally rated chess and correspondence chess player