Carlsen-Caruana World Championship 2018

[Wayne Komer]

Carlsen-Caruana World Championship 2018

December 9, 2018

What Should Have Happened?

Under this title chess.com ran 56 games (from the position in which Carlsen offered the draw) on the top chess engines in the world, with these results:

White wins: 3 games

Black wins: 27 games

Draw: 26 games

The top eight chess engines in the CCC played a 2x-round-robin tournament starting after move 31 of the world chess championship game 12. The time control is rapid chess, 30 minutes plus five-second increment.

The programs were run on Stockfish, Komodo, Ethereal, Fire, Houdini, Andscacs, Lc0 and Laser.

Stockfish won the tournament one point ahead of Komodo.

https://www.chess.com/news/view/comp...arlsen-game-12

_________

The twelfth game again and the final position:

Round 12, Nov. 26, 2018
Caruana, Fabiano – Carlsen, Magnus
B33 Sicilian, Pelikan (Lasker-Sveshnikov) variation

1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 e5 6.Ndb5 d6 7.Nd5 Nxd5 8.exd5 Ne7 9.c4 Ng6 10.Qa4 Bd7 11.Qb4 Bf5 12.h4 h5 13.Qa4 Bd7 14.Qb4 Bf5 15.Be3 a6 16.Nc3 Qc7 17.g3 Be7 18.f3 Nf8 19.Ne4 Nd7 20.Bd3 O-O 21.Rh2 Rac8 22.O-O-O Bg6 23.Rc2 f5 24.Nf2 Nc5 25.f4 a5 26.Qd2 e4 27.Be2 Be8 28.Kb1 Bf6 29.Re1 a4 30.Qb4 g6 31.Rd1 Ra8 1/2-1/2

Final position:



You can download all the computer games that had this as the starting position. The file is named allgames.pgn-1543534095 but wouldn’t load into my chess engine until I renamed it allgames.pgn

I give below, five of the games to show how the computers saw the continuation.

Lc0 0.19.0 (3200) – Stockfish 18112008 (3326)
CCC Game 12 Caruana-Carlsen, Chess.com, 2018.11.26

1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 e5 6.Ndb5 d6 7.Nd5 Nxd5 8.exd5 Ne7 9.c4 Ng6 10.Qa4 Bd7 11.Qb4 Bf5 12.h4 h5 13.Qa4 Bd7 14.Qb4 Bf5 15.Be3 a6 16.Nc3 Qc7 17.g3 Be7 18.f3 Nf8 19.Ne4 Nd7 20.Bd3 O-O 21.Rh2 Rac8 22.O-O-O Bg6 23.Rc2 f5 24.Nf2 Nc5 25.f4 a5 26.Qd2 e4 27.Be2 Be8 28.Kb1 Bf6 29.Re1 a4 30.Qb4 g6 31.Rd1 Ra8 32.Nh3 Bd7 33.Ng5 Rfc8 34.Qa3 Qa5 35.Bd2 Qd8 36.Qe3 Rab8 37.a3 b6 38.Bb4 Qe7 39.Qd2 Nb3 40.Qe3 Nc5 41.Qd2 Nb3 42.Qe3 Rb7 43.Qg1 Nc5 44.Qe3 Kg7 45.Qc1 Nb3 46.Qe3 Rcb8 47.Bf1 Nc5 48.Qd2 Kh6 49.Be2 b5 50.Ne6 bxc4 51.Bxc4 Bb5 52.Nd4 Bxc4 53.Rxc4 Nd3 54.Nc6 Qe8 55.Rc2 Rxb4 56.Nxb4 Nxb4 57.axb4 e3 58.Qe2 Rxb4 59.Ka2 Bd4 60.Ka3 Qb8 61.Rg1 Rb3+ 62.Ka2 Qb4 63.Rb1 Bc5 64.Rxc5 Qxc5 65.Rd1 Qb4 66.Qc2 e2 67.Qxe2 a3 68.Rd2 Rxg3 69.Qd1 axb2 70.Rxb2 Ra3+ 71.Kb1 Qe4+ 72.Qc2 Qe1+ 73.Qc1 Ra1+ 74.Kxa1 Qxc1+ 75.Ka2 Qxf4 76.Rb6 Qxh4 77.Kb3 f4 78.Kc3 Qe1+ 79.Kc4 Qe4+ 80.Kb3 Qe3+ 81.Kb4 Qxb6+ 82.Kc4 f3 83.Kc3 f2 84.Kd3 f1=Q+ 85.Kc2 Qbb1+ 86.Kd2 Qbc1# 0-1

A Stockfish-Lc0 game went 293 moves

Lc019.0 (3200) – Ethereal 11.13 (3400)

1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 e5 6.Ndb5 d6 7.Nd5 Nxd5 8.exd5 Ne7 9.c4 Ng6 10.Qa4 Bd7 11.Qb4 Bf5 12.h4 h5 13.Qa4 Bd7 14.Qb4 Bf5 15.Be3 a6 16.Nc3 Qc7 17.g3 Be7 18.f3 Nf8 19.Ne4 Nd7 20.Bd3 O-O 21.Rh2 Rac8 22.O-O-O Bg6 23.Rc2 f5 24.Nf2 Nc5 25.f4 a5 26.Qd2 e4 27.Be2 Be8 28.Kb1 Bf6 29.Re1 a4 30.Qb4 g6 31.Rd1 Ra8 32.Nh3 Bd7 33.Qa3 Rfc8 34.Ng5 Qd8 35.Bd2 Rab8 36.Bb4 Qe8 37.Rdd2 b5 38.Ne6 Bxe6 39.dxe6 bxc4 40.Bxc4 d5 41.Rxd5 Nd3 42.e7 Nxb4 43.Rb5+ Rxc4 44.Rxb8 Qxb8 45.Rxc4 Bxe7 46.Qxa4 Nd3 47.Rc2 Bc5 48.a3 Kh7 49.Qc4 Qb7 50.b4 Bf2 51.Qc7+ Qxc7 52.Rxc7+ Kh6 53.b5 Bxg3 54.b6 Bxf4 55.Kc2 Nf2 56.Rc8 e3 57.b7 e2 58.b8=Q Bxb8 59.Kd2 Ne4+ 60.Kxe2 Be5 61.Kf1 g5 62.Re8 Bd6 63.a4 gxh4 64.Kg2 Ng5 65.Rh8+ Kg6 66.Rg8+ Kf6 67.Kg1 h3 68.Rc8 h2+ 69.Kg2 h4 70.Rc2 Ne4 71.Rc1 h3+ 72.Kf3 Ng3 73.Ke3 Bf4+ 74.Kd4 Bxc1 75.Kc5 h1=Q 76.Kb6 Be3+ 77.Kc7 h2 78.a5 Qa8 79.a6 h1=Q 80.Kd6 Qhc6# 0-1

Stockfish (3439) – Fire 7.1 (3226)

1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 e5 6.Ndb5 d6 7.Nd5 Nxd5 8.exd5 Ne7 9.c4 Ng6 10.Qa4 Bd7 11.Qb4 Bf5 12.h4 h5 13.Qa4 Bd7 14.Qb4 Bf5 15.Be3 a6 16.Nc3 Qc7 17.g3 Be7 18.f3 Nf8 19.Ne4 Nd7 20.Bd3 O-O 21.Rh2 Rac8 22.O-O-O Bg6 23.Rc2 f5 24.Nf2 Nc5 25.f4 a5 26.Qd2 e4 27.Be2 Be8 28.Kb1 Bf6 29.Re1 a4 30.Qb4 g6 31.Rd1 Ra8 32.Qa3 Bd7 33.Rdc1 Rfc8 34.Nd1 Qb8 35.Qb4 Kh7 36.Rd2 Kg8 37.Rdc2 Bh8 38.Bd2 Bd4 39.Be3 Bf6 40.Nc3 Bd8 41.Nb5 a3 42.b3 Ba5 43.Qxa3 Bxb5 44.cxb5 Bd2 45.Qxa8 Qxa8 46.Bxd2 Rd8 47.Bc3 Re8 48.Bb4 b6 49.Bc4 Kf7 50.a4 Nb7 51.Kb2 Kf8 52.Bc3 Nc5 53.Bd4 Nd3+ 54.Bxd3 Qxd5 55.Bxb6 exd3 56.Rd2 Re2 57.Rd1 Qf3 58.Kc3 Rxd2 59.Rxd2 Qxg3 60.a5 Qe1 61.a6 Qc1+ 62.Kxd3 Qb1+ 63.Ke2 Qxb3 64.a7 Qxb5+ 65.Rd3 Qa6 66.Be3 Kf7 67.Kf2 Ke6 68.Rb3 Qa2+ 69.Kf3 Qa6 70.Kg3 Qa1 71.Bf2 Ke7 72.Rb7+ Ke6 73.Rb3 Qa5 74.Rb2 Qa6 75.Rb3 Qa1 76.Rb2 Kf7 77.Rb3 Ke6 78.Kg2 Qa6 79.Rc3 Ke7 80.Kg1 Qa1+ 81.Kg2 Qa6 82.Rc7+ Ke6 83.Rc1 Kd7 84.Rg1 Qa2 85.Rd1 Qa6 86.Kg1 Qa2 87.Rc1 Qa5 88.Rc2 Qa1+ 89.Kg2 Qa4 90.Rc3 Qe4+ 91.Kg1 Qb1+ 92.Kh2 Qa2 93.Kg2 Qd5+ 94.Kh3 Qa2 95.Bd4 Qa6 96.Rg3 Kc6 97.Rxg6 Qf1+ 98.Kg3 Qd3+ 99.Kh2 Qd2+ 100.Kh3 Qa2 101.Be3 Qa3 102.Rg3 Kb5 103.Bf2 Qa2 104.Rc3 Qg8 105.Kh2 Qa2 106.Kg1 Qg8+ 107.Rg3 Qa2 108.Rb3+ Qxb3 109.a8=Q Qd1+ 110.Kh2 Kb4 111.Qb7+ Ka3 112.Qe7 Qd5 113.Qe2 Ka4 114.Qxh5 Qe6 115.Qf3 Kb4 116.Qc6 Kb3 117.Kg2 Qg6+ 118.Kf1 Qg4 119.Qxd6 Qf3 120.Qd4 Qh3+ 121.Ke2 Qg4+ 122.Kd2 Qg2 123.h5 Qh1 124.Qb6+ Ka4 125.h6 Qf1 126.h7 Qc4 127.h8=Q Qxf4+ 128.Be3 Qb4+ 129.Qxb4+ Kxb4 130.Qd4+ Kb3 131.Kd3 f4 132.Bc1 f3 133.Qc4# 1-0

Fire 7.1 (3326) – Lc0 0.19.0 (3200)

1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 e5 6.Ndb5 d6 7.Nd5 Nxd5 8.exd5 Ne7 9.c4 Ng6 10.Qa4 Bd7 11.Qb4 Bf5 12.h4 h5 13.Qa4 Bd7 14.Qb4 Bf5 15.Be3 a6 16.Nc3 Qc7 17.g3 Be7 18.f3 Nf8 19.Ne4 Nd7 20.Bd3 O-O 21.Rh2 Rac8 22.O-O-O Bg6 23.Rc2 f5 24.Nf2 Nc5 25.f4 a5 26.Qd2 e4 27.Be2 Be8 28.Kb1 Bf6 29.Re1 a4 30.Qb4 g6 31.Rd1 Ra8 32.Qa3 Rb8 33.Rdd2 b6 34.Nd1 Bg7 35.Nc3 Rf7 36.Nb5 Bxb5 37.cxb5 Qa7 38.Qb4 a3 39.b3 Rc7 40.Rc4 Re7 41.Rdc2 Qa8 42.Qd2 Kh7 43.b4 Nd3 44.Rc7 Rb7 45.Rxb7 Rxb7 46.Bxd3 exd3 47.Qxd3 Qa4 48.Bd2 Re7 49.Rc1 Re4 50.Rc2 Re7 51.Rc6 Re4 52.Rc2 Bf6 53.Kc1 Bb2+ 54.Kb1 Kg8 55.Rc8+ Kf7 56.Rc2 Kg8 57.Rc8+ Kh7 58.Rc7+ Kg8 59.Rc8+ 1/2-1/2

Komodo 2199 (3404) – Stockfish 18112008 (3283)

1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 e5 6.Ndb5 d6 7.Nd5 Nxd5 8.exd5 Ne7 9.c4 Ng6 10.Qa4 Bd7 11.Qb4 Bf5 12.h4 h5 13.Qa4 Bd7 14.Qb4 Bf5 15.Be3 a6 16.Nc3 Qc7 17.g3 Be7 18.f3 Nf8 19.Ne4 Nd7 20.Bd3 O-O 21.Rh2 Rac8 22.O-O-O Bg6 23.Rc2 f5 24.Nf2 Nc5 25.f4 a5 26.Qd2 e4 27.Be2 Be8 28.Kb1 Bf6 29.Re1 a4 30.Qb4 g6 31.Rd1 Ra8 32.Qa3 Bd7 33.Rdc1 Rfc8 34.Nd1 Qb8 35.Qb4 Kh7 36.Nc3 a3 37.b3 Qc7 38.Bf1 Qd8 39.Be2 Kh6 40.Nd1 Ra6 41.Nc3 Raa8 42.Bf1 Qe7 43.Rd2 Qg7 44.Nd1 b6 45.Rdc2 Qf8 46.Nc3 Qh8 47.Nd1 Rab8 48.Bd2 e3 49.Bc3 Ne4 50.Qxa3 Bxc3 51.Nxc3 Nd2+ 52.Ka1 Ra8 53.Qb2 Qd4 54.Rd1 Qc5 55.Bd3 Qb4 56.Rdxd2 exd2 57.Rxd2 Re8 58.Nb1 Re1 59.g4 hxg4 60.h5 Rf8 61.hxg6 Kxg6 62.Rg2 Kf7 63.Rh2 Re7 64.Rh8 Rxh8 65.Qxh8 Kg6 66.Qh4 Qc5 67.Qxg4+ Kf7 68.Qh5+ Kg8 69.Qg5+ Kf7 70.Qh5+ Kg8 71.Qg5+ Kf8 72.Qf6+ Rf7 73.Qd8+ Kg7 74.Qg5+ Kf8 75.Qd8+ Be8 76.Kb2 Re7 77.Kc2 b5 78.Nd2 Qa3 79.cxb5 Qxa2+ 80.Kc3 Qa1+ 81.Kc2 Qa2+ 82.Kc3 Qa1+ 83.Kc2 Qa2+ 1/2-1/2

__________

It seems that you could fill a book with an analysis of Game 12!

[Wayne Komer]

Carlsen – Caruana World Championship 2018

December 7, 2018

Maxime Vachier-Lagrave, World No. 6, analyzes the match between World Numbers 1 and 2 at:

http://www.mvlchess.com/en/2018/12/06/carlsen-caruana/

This is well-worth reading and keeping a copy of.

His conclusion on the format:

Format

12 games is clearly not enough. I think the number should be raised to 16.

But I see another problem in the many rest days, one of them after every pair of game. It is just not in the spirit of the match. You could see the match dragging on at the end, rest before game 11, then before game 12 because it was the last, and again before the tie-breaks!

Guys, we still have six months to prepare the match! And the slow pace of the match, in a context where finding new ideas becomes increasingly difficult, kind of annihilates the efforts. Indeed, when you find a new idea, the opponent will have the next day, with colours reversed, then the rest day, all in all almost three days, to have his team working on a response.

In tournaments, there’s generally a rest day every four rounds, and it should be the same for the World Championship match.

Incidentally, I guess it would be better for the public, as well as for the journalists over there, to have a few more games in fewer days!

If things go this way, it would also be logical to speed up the rhythm of play, avoiding 7-hour long games. It’s too long for the audience, but it’s also too long for players to make differences. It’s already not easy in some Rapid games, so in classical ones…! I’m advocating to choose the 90+30 (+30”) rhythm of play.

Karjakin recently took over the idea of organizing tie-breaks before the match. It’s interesting, though I would be afraid of the side effects, as the winner could be tempted to opt for an utterly defensive strategy…

For his part, Carlsen just evoked the idea, though vaguely, of a « bit of Rapid games in the match ». I fully understand this development, and maybe the quicker time controls will be the norm in the future.

But for the time being, it seems to me that we have distinct championships (Blitz, Rapid, Classic), and I would support the idea of mixing the rates of play as rarely as possible!

[Wayne Komer]

Carlsen – Caruana World Championship 2018

November 30, 2018

Further debate on the W CH format:

Sergey Karjakin –

It should be 11 or 13 games, where World Champion decides if he wants to have extra white or not, and the player who has more whites has to win the match! If it is draw, then player who had more blacks wins the match. With this format we will not see short draws!

• We can’t decide a world champion on the basis of performance in rapid chess
• Carlsen #1 rating since 2011, #1 also in rapid and blitz now and highest rating in history in all time controls. no need to cry about spirit of chess because he really is undisputed champion of this great game
• I could not disagree more.
• There is only one way for me (personally) to accept a classical WC and that is by actually winning in classical regardless the colour. A draw is not a win, rapid is not classical, blitz is meaningless. As far as I'm concerned - there is no current WC.
• At least if nobody won a classic game you can say that the current champion still is the champion, don’t you think?
• I understand your point but then, how can he be the champion if he can't beat the challenger? Then the "WC" becomes, what, a space filler? This is not meant to be a game of switching chairs. It's supposed to be about finding out who is the best. If no one is the best no1 is WC
• The idea that someone can become World champion without winning a match, doesn't sit right with me.
• It's not about becoming world champion, it's about challenging the world champion. The world champion then remains the world champion if the challenger fails to defeat him to becoming the new world champion.
• I think we already have world chess championships for blitz and rapid format, why include it in classical world chess championship match?
• Because the match has to be decided somehow. In the World Cup if a match is a draw they don't just keep playing more games, they decide the game with extra time, followed by penalty kicks. I don't understand why people are so upset by tiebreakers.
• Or start with 4 rapid matches, where a draw is 0 points, win is 1/2 point. Resulting score carries through into the classic time section... that way it's a more well-rounded championship title with some possibly early chasing / risk taking needed, come classical time format...
• Sergey, maybe you and the other challengers should practice chess more and memorize lines less
• Alternatively, immediately after a draw a second game is played with reversed colours with the players getting the times remaining on the original clock, no increments.
• I love this idea very much. However, what happens in the event of another draw? Then maybe you play again with the remaining time from the second game.
• Yup, you keep reversing colors until someone wins. It certainly adds a lot to consider. Black is going to play for a fast draw to get the White pieces with plenty of time. White is going to want to avoid exchanges to try and maintain an advantage.
• A well-played game that ends in a draw can still be an exciting and enjoyable event, but when every attack is parried it gets a lot more predictable.
• Karjakin’s idea is very interesting. That said, I don’t think it’s unfair for Magnus to retain the title by excelling at faster time controls. There may be better systems, but the current system is better than the old way where the WC retained the title in a drawn match.
• Sergey I love your idea! Thank you! I pray it's accepted and put into action next world championship. I think the classical chess title should not be decided by rapid or blitz chess! That's why there's a rapid and blitz championship!

[Paul Bonham]

The New Yorker:
The Change in The World Chess Championship

https://goo.gl/X6pvue

Some choice quotes:

"Like all the recent greats,[Carlsen] has learned from the lines generated by supercomputers, but he is better known for his preternatural intuition, his feel for the board. With a board cleared of most of the pieces—the stage known as the endgame—and both players in a seemingly equal position, he has a way of provoking a tiny mistake from his opponent and finding a path to victory. When it comes to winning at chess, he can wring water from a stone."

The author says that this playing style means Magnus has a "feel for the board" presumably that no other player has. But what it really amounts to is Magnus has conditioning and stamina. He is FATIGUING his opponents, betting that he can last longer and not make the first critical mistake.

The author mentions nothing about what this means for the business of chess. It is exactly NOT what is needed to sell / promote chess at the highest levels. We've heard from a few people on this forum who say they like to watch this kind of high-level accurate play, and good for them. But the world outside of them DOES NOT like to watch such play.

The business of chess has to recognize who comprises its needed market. If they keep the status quo and appeal only to these very few chess purists, chess at the top level will stagnate. But someone mentioned that Magnus may have deliberately steered all 12 games into draws, then pounced in the Rapids, all in order to make the "chess gods" realize that shorter time controls is the way to go.

I should also note: the author didn't mention that Magnus cannot beat the minimax chess engines he emulates. Not even close. That needs to be mentioned, to put things into proper perspective. Because if we aren't watching the best, most accurate chess possible (i.e. supercomputer chess), then what is the point of watching at all if the two players aren't going to take risks?


"Where Carlsen relies on his intuition, Caruana has incredible powers of calculation—the ability to see a position and compute the unfolding of a game, to anticipate the minuscule advantages or disadvantages that would result from a particular move, and to find the best option."

Here the author loses all credibility. Who is she to decide that Caruana's powers of calculation are superior to or more pronounced than Carlsen's? Or to imply that Carlsen is perhaps not even calculating at all, but deciding moves by "intuition"?


I have to wonder what Gary Kasparov really is thinking right now. Kasparov was imho the last player who really took risks over the board as a matter of routine. When he was playing, you could really watch to see what he might uncork in terms of something unforseen. Not so imho with Anand, with Karjakin, with Gelfand, with Topolov, with Caruana, with Carlsen. Perhaps Kasparov is even considering.... whether he should return to competitive chess for a redux of his match against Deep Blue.... which is to say, man against computer, with Deep Blue replaced by Carlsen, the most minimax-engine-like human player of all time.

One of the things that could encourage Kasparov (if he is even considering such a thing) is that the AlphaZero chess engine of recent fame seems to be making moves that minimax engines consider slightly weaker... even some moves that minimax engines would estimate as dubious.... indicating that absolute accuracy may not be all it is built up to be. And AlphaZero does this because its learning algorithm is similar to a human's; it plays games out to completion and keeps track of results. In other words, depth-first search rather than breadth-first search. Humans do this too, except they have to actually PLAY the games out and so obviously don't get to learn nearly as quickly as AZ.

[Francis Rodriguez]

The New Yorker:
The Change in The World Chess Championship

https://goo.gl/X6pvue

[Wayne Komer]

Carsen – Caruana World Championship 2018

November 29, 2018

A novel suggestion

From Christopher Kreuzer on the ecforum:

Has anyone suggested that if a match is drawn, that the players share the title?

[Traditionally, this would be a big break, as the world title has never been shared, has it?]

Would need slight tweaks around a rematch. Maybe the 'junior' co-holder would have to go through the process again to be the next challenger? Or maybe another rematch before the next cycle (but how to fit that into the calendar)?

https://www.ecforum.org.uk/viewtopic...224900#p224900

[Wayne Komer]

Carlsen – Caruana World Championship 2018

November 28, 2018

Postings on-line about the Match


Fabiano Caruana – This was a hard fought match to the end, and I want to congratulate Magnus on defending his title. I was up against one of the most talented players in the history of chess, and I gave it everything I had. Throughout the championship I’ve heard from fans around the world and want to thank them for their support. I feel that we put his beautiful game back on the map in America and hope it will inspire a new generation of players. I look forward to the opportunity to make another bid for the title.

This is Fabianio right at the end, as cool and collected as when he made the first move of the match, treating triumph and disaster just the same. Really great challenger who will come back stronger.

Congrats to Caruana on qualifying for the next Candidates.

Olimpiu Urcan - As it's often the case with hard-fought contests, Fabiano Caruana's final resignation is a heart-wrenching thing to watch. Chess is the most ruthless of all games for the road to the very top is a hard, long climb at the end of which a Viking cyclop awaits you.

Carlsen: "The first game was quite even and exciting. Then I managed to trick him in time trouble. The second game was very complicated, but I had a good feeling even though I knew my position wasn't good. The third game was maybe more nervous, but I never felt afraid of losing.

Caruana: "I had a bad day."
"The second game was a disaster I didn't even put up a fight."
"I wasn't seeing anything that second game that was of course a disappointment."
"I just wasn't playing at his level or anything close to it."

Thank you @chess24com, @polborta, @anishgiri, @Sopiko20, Sasha and Sasha's baby for the being the best commentary team in this WCC!

Jonathan Rowson - Magnus on his predecessors Kasparov and Kramnik saying he made a mistake not playing out game twelve. “They are entitled to their stupid opinions.”

Vidit Gujrathi - Although, I was rooting for @FabianoCaruana who showed extremely high level play in the classical games , @MagnusCarlsen was completely ruthless in the Tiebreaks. Deserving winner!

Tarjei J. Svensen Retweeted chess24.com

Excellent job by @chess24com, chess fans could not have gotten more entertaining commentators.

Excellent work team. You've even managed to get my wife interested in chess for the first time ever. Good work.

Anish Giri - Congratulations to @MagnusCarlsen for another impressive title defense and to @FabianoCaruana for putting up a truly great fight!
Should also congratulate myself, for I got a chance to kibitz this epic match together with the brilliant Peter Svidler and Alexander Grischuk!

Jonathan Rowson - All said and done, Caruana is a thinker first and a warrior second. While with Carlsen it’s the other way around. As the tempo quickened and the importance of each move intensified, it was always likely that Magnus’s martial qualities would prevail.

Magnus: "I'm very happy with how the match ended but I don't think we've seen the last from Fabiano in this context!"

Magnus: "I’ve been a chess professional now for many years & my chess career dates even further back than that & one of the things that I’ve never done very well is listen to other people’s advice. I’ve always gone my own way... and it’s brought me this trophy today!"

Peter Svidler - Congratulations to @MagnusCarlsen who once again showed his best chess when it counted. Covering the match for @chess24com was exhausting, but also exhilarating, and I want to thank everyone who sent us words of encouragement. I said this on air today, but it bears repeating. I keep getting unbelievably lucky with co-pilots. Many thanks to @Sopiko20 , @Anishgiri, and of course the one and only Alexander Grischuk (and his lamp) - this has been a blast, and I loved every minute of it.

N. Vitiugov - Now it is time to admire @SergeyKaryakin and his expensive preparation to New-York match (it was worth it!) Only today we can estimate properly, how close he came to dethrone @MagnusCarlsen. Despite ups and downs in London, this match didn't seem so uncontrolled.

Peter Doggers - Carlsen won 550,000 euros ($625,100); Caruana got 450,000 euros ($511,400).
"I felt like I had a really good day at work today. Everything kind of went perfectly," said Carlsen.

Caruana is just not good enough. When was the last time he beat Carlsen in a classical match? And I don't agree with Magnus that Caruana was his toughest match. Karjakin pushed him much harder. Fabi's opening choices were baffling. Even when he got out of the opening with big advantage, it was the kind of position he doesn't excel at, so he gave the advantage away with couple of nothing moves.

I do not really understand why everyone complains about the draws. Draw is inherent in the nature and the rules of the game, as an example the stalemate rule. It actually makes it much more interesting because there are three results in a game rather than two. It was an amazing match with fighting chess and missed chances from both players. I would gladly have watched an extra 6 classical games with great content and intense moments even if they resulted in a draw.

Arguably, the worst World Chess Championship in history. No decisive games in the classical time control. I still don't understand why the Classical World Chess Championship is decided via blitz games. I would recommend if the score is tied after 12 games, that they keep playing until someone wins a game.

Jennifer Shahade - I am obviously on #TeamFabi but let’s be real. Magnus’s victory in rapid doesn’t diminish his accomplishment in the least. Finding moves like Rd1! Re7! (Game 1) and 28...Kh7! (game 2) In rapid is fitting for a World Championship defense. We can be Fabi fans and still say #Bravo

[Francis Rodriguez]

Closing ceremony:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vTqFy6GM99w

[Hans Jung]

I agree with Tom. Magnus knew what he was doing to the point of promoting graphically faster time controls.

[Wayne Komer]

Carlsen – Caruana World Championship 2018

November 28, 2018

Tie Breaks

Rapids

Game 3, Round 15

An interesting quote from one chat room:

They ran marathons 12 times and ended in a tie, so let's have a race to the corner for the winner

Game 3, Round 15, Nov. 28
Rapids 25 + 10
Carlsen, Magnus – Caruana, Fabiano
B40 Sicilian Defence

1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 e6 3.c4 Nc6 4.d4 cxd4 5.Nxd4 Bc5 6.Nc2 Nf6 7.Nc3 O-O 8.Be3 b6 9.Be2 Bb7 10.O-O Qe7 11.Qd2 Rfd8 12.Rfd1 Ne5 13.Bxc5 bxc5 14.f4 Ng6 15.Qe3 d6 16.Rd2 a6 17.Rad1 Qc7 18.b3 h6 19.g3 Rd7 20.Bf3 Re8 21.Qf2 Ne7 22.h3 Red8 23.Bg2 Nc6 24.g4 Qa5 25.Na4 Qc7 26.e5 dxe5 27.Nxc5 Rxd2 28.Rxd2 Rxd2 29.Qxd2 Ba8 30.fxe5 Qxe5 31.Nd7 Qb2 32.Qd6 Nxd7 33.Qxd7 Qxc2 34.Qe8+ Kh7 35.Qxa8 Qd1+ 36.Kh2 Qd6+ 37.Kh1 Nd4 38.Qe4+ f5 39.gxf5 exf5 40.Qe3 Ne6 41.b4 Ng5 42.c5 Qf6 43.c6 Ne6 44.a4 Nc7 45.Qf4 Ne6 46.Qd6 Qa1+ 47.Kh2 Nd4 48.c7 Qc3 49.Qc5 Qe3 50.c8=Q f4 51.Qg4 1-0

Final position



Carlsen wins the tie-breaks 3-0 and the World Championship

[Ken Craft]

3-0 Carlsen.

[Wayne Komer]

Carlsen – Caruana World Championship 2018

November 28, 2018

Tie Breaks

Game 2

Game 2, Round 14, Nov. 28
Rapid 25 + 10
Caruana, Fabiano – Carlsen, Magnus
B33 Sicilian, Pelikan (Lasker-Sveshnikov) variation

1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 e5 6.Ndb5 d6 7.Nd5 Nxd5 8.exd5 Ne7 9.c4 Ng6 10.Qa4 Bd7 11.Qb4 Qb8 12.h4 h5 13.Be3 a6 14.Nc3 a5 15.Qb3 a4 16.Qd1 Be7 17.g3 Qc8 18.Be2 Bg4 19.Rc1 Bxe2 20.Qxe2 Qf5 21.c5 O-O 22.c6 bxc6 23.dxc6 Rfc8 24.Qc4 Bd8 25.Nd5 e4 26.c7 Bxc7 27.Nxc7 Ne5 28.Nd5 Kh7 0-1

Final Position



Stockfish gives moves 26.c7 and 28.Nd5 in red

[Ken Craft]

2-0 for Carlsen.

[Egidijus Zeromskis]

Other funny note - Caruana resigned with a piece advantage. Carlsen was drawing a game without a piece. That's how Nr 1 and Nr 2 differ in class LOL

[Egidijus Zeromskis]

Seems we'll not see the World Blitz championship this time LOL