[chessmind] Dennis Monokroussos: Biel, Round 6: Carlsen in clear first again; Onischuk proves he's a real American

[Email subscription to blog articles]

Posted by Dennis Monokroussos:
Biel, Round 6: Carlsen in clear first again; Onischuk proves he's a real American
http://chessmind.powerblogs.com/posts/1217108679.shtml


   Three games, three wins! There have only been eight draws in the
   eighteen games so far, and no games without a fight. As far as I'm
   aware, there aren't any paternalistic anti-draw measures in place,
   which just goes to show that what counts is inviting the right
   players. Why can't all the events be like this one?
   On to the games. Pelletier-Carlsen saw the players continue down the
   same path they've been on, with Carlsen playing well and Pelletier
   finding some pitfall along the way. Carlsen enjoyed a slight edge from
   the opening (a Queen's Indian), but hadn't achieved anything with it
   after his 26th move. At that point, in an approximately equal
   position, Pelletier forced Carlsen to create to create a powerful pin.
   White was immediately in trouble, and after a further error on the
   next move Pelletier was lost.
   That ensured at least a tie for first at the end of the round, but
   when Alekseev lost his first game of the tournament to a suddenly
   resurgent Bacrot, Carlsen was guaranteed a clear lead. Bacrot's win
   was very nice; definitely the game of the day, in my book. While he
   didn't achieve any advantage with his pawn sac in the opening (a
   Queen's Indian), the combination he initiated on move 33 was really
   impressive - 35.Qd3!! was an especially subtle point.
   Finally, Onischuk's loss to Dominguez was simply astonishing. Onischuk
   may have achieved a very small advantage on the white side of a
   Gruenfeld, but they quickly reached a very drawish ending. Dominguez
   handled it more adeptly, but was only able to reach a rook and knight
   vs. rook ending. This is a known draw, and much easier for the weak
   side to hold than rook and bishop vs. rook. Yet despite starting with
   an almost ideal defensive position (his king was in the center, while
   Dominguez's king was cut off on the h-file), Onischuk put up
   practically no resistance. His own king was cut off along the a-file
   with alarming rapidity, and even then he put up little resistance and
   then lost without even falling for a subtle trap. A sad loss for
   Onischuk, who had been playing very well up to this point and had been
   in the battle for first place.
   So what do I mean by the title of this post? Over the years, I've read
   (and heard) not just once, but many times, that Americans don't play
   endgames well. Russians (and those from the former USSR) do, but not
   Americans. Well, since Onischuk comes from Ukraine and received his
   chess education there, I guess this makes him a "real" American now -
   he has forgotten (at least this once) how to hold routine draws.
   Jokes aside, some different morals should be drawn. First, as I've
   been mentioning more and more lately, there are far fewer "dead" draws
   than we might like to believe. Exhaustion, a dimmed sense of danger,
   and making a series of small concessions can all lead to even very
   strong players losing "obviously" drawn positions. (And Onischuk
   certainly qualifies as a very strong player - he's #50 in the world.)
   Second, while "real" Americans may not, on average, play endgames as
   well as they ought to, it's probably true that almost no one else does
   anymore, either. Assuming the old stereotype was true, there were two
   reasons why Americans played endgames worse than their Soviet
   counterparts. First, formal instruction in the USSR gave talented
   players serious help in that area, while such instruction was almost
   completely absent here. Second, adjournments were commonplace there
   and almost non-existent here. There's nothing like the pressure of a
   tournament situation and the luxury of a day or two to analyze to
   improve one's understanding of the endgame - especially in the
   pre-computer era. Nowadays, the USSR has broken up and that sort of
   widespread instruction is gone. Further, with sped-up time controls,
   adjournments are a thing of the past. So we're all "real Americans"
   now!
   What should we do about this? Here are some suggestions:
   correspondence chess, training games against computers and peers from
   both theoretical and practical endgame positions, and "adjournment"
   exercises - find some interesting ending, and you and your playing
   partner take an hour, a day, a week or however long to prepare before
   playing it out against each other. With the widespread availability of
   excellent endgame literature and strong playing programs, any
   dedicated player has what he needs to improve considerably in this
   aspect of the game. (And to those who say working on the endgame is
   boring, I say that gaining extra half-points on a regular basis is
   loads of fun.)
   Back to the tournament. Here are the standings after round 6:
   1. Carlsen 4.5
   2. Dominguez 4
   3. Alekseev 3.5
   4. Onischuk 3
   5. Bacrot 2.5
   6. Pelletier .5
   Pairings for Round 7: (On Monday; Sunday is a rest day.)
   Carlsen - Alekseev
   Dominguez - Pelletier (looks like a new tie for first is coming up)
   Onischuk - Bacrot
   Carlsen Watch: [1]Current live rating: 2796.5 (1.5 behind Anand)
   Tournament site [2]here, games with my comments [3]here.

References

   1. http://chess.liverating.org/
   2. http://www.bielchessfestival.ch/cms/index.php
   3. http://chessmind.powerblogs.com/files/biel2008_rd6.htm