OstapBender wrote on 01/15/07 at 21:58:57:

I dont see much else to play. Plus it is both the bishop and rook pair that disappear from the board.

The fortress position is quite well known and I find it hard to believe black didnt take it into account with Qxc2. I suspect it was his main reason not to resign directly.

An example of it, certainly. But Kotov gives at least one very good example in the book of what he means – the knight and rook against knight and bishop with the extra pawn, and he just shows the set-up White wants. That’s what he means. Or Google somewhere for Kosteniuk’s annotations of her oppo-bishop ending against Dembo; similar sort of thing later in the game. It’s not about what move to play but the position she’s trying to reach, and once she sees that, everything else is easy.

GMs differ very widely in my experience in their formal knowledge of this sort of thing. Of the ones I know reasonably well I am quite sure William Watson would have no idea about this fortress unless he happened to have run across it in his own games, while Jonathan Parker might well know it. In Holland, I’d guess Timman would probably not only know it but be able to reach down the relevant edition of Grigoriev from his shelves; Stellwagen probably wouldn’t. I’d be staggered if Kiriakov didn’t – classic technically strong well-educated Russian of the old school.

While watching the game live on ICC, GM Kiriakov (aka "Petrovich") predicted the final fortress position sometime before the time control on move 40.  Though to foresee the final outcome as far back as the move 27 would be truly amazing.

Would be interesting to know whether Karjakin knew this fortress or worked it out. Probably the former - I think even I at some point knew it, although remembering it if it ever matters is another thing altogether.