A note on Smith-Mackingtosh, 2006 (for game score see above)
21.Ne5, Bxe5
22.Rxe5, Note that White has covered all approaches of the Black Queen to the h-file.
22........., fxg3
23.hxg3! (This was an important novelty; Anand played 23.fxg3 here in 1999 against Adams. The difference will soon be clear)
23.............., Bg4 24.Qe1 (I think that White can maintain an edge with 24.Qf1! protecting d3)
24..............., Bf3In Anand-Adams (
after 23.fxg3) Adams played Bh3 threatening Rf1+ thx to the open f-file.
Interestingly Anand played 20.Ne4 iso 20.Nf3 in two games the next year (2000 against Adams in Dortmund and Khalifman in Dehli),
As it seems unlikely he didnt analyse hxg3 after the game, he must
have found something he didnt like (while Adams who was ready to repeat the game must have found something against hxg3 as well)25. Ra7!This is the critical position
Note that Black can't take on d3:
25.....Qxd3 26.Rg5!,g6 27.Qe6+ wins at once.
So black must do something about the threat 26.Rg5 anyway.
In the game Black chose:
25....., Ra8 26.Rxa8,Rxa8 27.Bd1! and white was a solid pawn up in the endgame. He converted the point showing excellent technique.
But I think Black can hold this position by going into an endgame in which the oposite bishops play an important role.
25....,Kh8! (freeing the knight on d5):
26.Bxd5,exd527.Qe3 ,........ (renewing the threat Rg5)
27......., h6
28.Ree7, Rbe8
29.Rxe8, Qxe8
30.Qxe8, Rxe8And I think that Black can draw without to much difficulty
Note that 31.Be3 (to avert a mate on e1) is answered by d4! 32.xd4,Ra8 exchanging into a drawn opposite bishop endgame.