Well Anand still has to draw this, despite everyone saying its a draw its much easier to play for White  - I like Gelfands h4, maybe he can probe with h5 later.

22...Qc6 looks like an accurate move from Anand though. I didn't think much of Chessdoms suggested move 22...Rfe8.

So far this match has been the best advert for how desperately chess needs to get back to 24 game world title matches I can imagine. There has to be a way to fund it to save us from this. It backs Steve Giddins view that computers are killing the game. What do we have to do to get an assymetrical pawn structure that stays that way past move 25 ?

ANDREW BRETT wrote on 05/18/12 at 07:58:43:


Its a fair point. He can keep trying to crack it or else come from another angle with 1.Nf3 or 1.c4 but I suspect he'll stick with 1.d4

Gelfand's prep is excellent- but has he got something stronger v semi slav. Vishy hasn't shown anything significant yet but I suspect he'll have another 1e4

Gilchrist is a legend wrote on 05/18/12 at 02:17:28:


This is a bigger problem the shorter the match is. In contrast, there will always be another US championship. Hence, no wonder Nakamura and Kamsky will likely produce more entertaining games against opposition in another class than Anand and Gelfand than the match Anand vs Gelfand does.

ghenghisclown wrote on 05/18/12 at 05:45:40:


Gelfand could play more ambitiously in the lines he's chosen so far.

After game 2, Anand said,  "White did have a slight edge initially but in the end there were many defensive structures for Black.” This suggests that white could have played more accurately, or at least more ambitiously than he did. 

IM Pein seemed to suggest that 10.e4 would offer better winning chances. 

In game 4, GM Romain Edouard suggested that 19.Nf3 is more complex and offers white more chances than what was played. 

So yes, there are definitely places where White had a small advantage but elected not to push too hard.

Again, Anand has had the better of the openings so far. I never said Gelfand was winning at any point. I said his advantage was "microscopic", but that he also elected not to push even his small advantages.

Gilchrist is a legend wrote on 05/18/12 at 01:33:14:


It is just my opinion. I have learned a lot more about chess by watching Kamsky and Nakamura pick apart their opponents round after round than by flicking through the Anand-Gelfand games.

I find interesting the arc of the match so far. Gelfand has been content in the first two games as white to strive for a microscopic advantage, but not push even there. 

Anand has played two Grunfelds and had the advantage in both, if only for a few moves. 

But today, after the second day off, he played 1.e4. Was it just to find out what Gelfand had prepared, or has Anand run into a brick wall in his Grunfeld preparations?   

Anand could reasonably expect an advantage in either the Grunfeld or the Sveshnikov, but in order to play for the win, he may have to play something offbeat. 

I still think Anand is the one who's trying to win in regulation more than Gelfand, but the match is tilting toward Gelfand.

Individual games may not be terribly exciting. But that's nothing new. Who remembers each game of the Kramnik-Leko match?  Or even every game of the Petrosian-Botvinnik match?