Foreest - Grandelius Offered a Thrilling Conclusion to Tata Steel Masters 2021
... and chess fans are calling on top level organizers to expand their invitation rolodex
One feature of the pandemic-riddled chess landscape (though, probably not limited merely to the world of chess) is uncertainty. Many events in 2020 were cancelled, and it remains something of an open question as to which events will go forward in 2021. At the same time, event organizers cannot necessarily even count on the participation of the top players at each event. Travel restrictions, personal preferences, and positive tests can disrupt plans at a moments notice. When Tata Steel announced their lineup, they announced that, in addition to David Anton Guijarro, who earned his spot in the 2021 Tata Steel Masters Event by winning the ‘B’ group, “Tata Steel Challengers,” in 2020, there would be 3 other “debutants” on the main stage: Andrey Esipenko (18), of Russia, Nils Grandelius (27) of Sweden, and Aryan Tari (21) of Norway.
Shakhriyar Mamedyarov (world #8), would inform the organizers at the last minute that he was unable to attend this year’s event, and be replaced by world #21 Pentala Harikrishna.
And ever since, the chess world has loosely grappled with a question about chess at the elite level: is the game better served by the inclusion of a variety of players who find themselves outside of the top 10 in the world live rankings? Many “lesser” GMs who find themselves in the top 1500 chessplayers in the world, but somehow outside of the top 10 lament that it can be really difficult to maintain your Elo rating when forced to play round after round in Open events against opponents rated 200-500 points lower than themselves, while 2700+ players generally only face other 2700+ players at round-robin, invitational events and on the top boards of Olympiads.
And then, there’s the creative and competitive aspect of things. Often lower rated players who find themselves invited to top events are simply outclassed, losing a majority of their games. On the one hand, it isn’t particularly exciting to see a weaker player get repeatedly smashed by the world’s elite, but on the other hand, the existence of a weak link in the tournament cross-table can put a tremendous amount of pressure on the tournament leaders, who all of a sudden may feel that even a draw against such an opponent is insufficient to aid in their tournament ambitions. In your author’s opinion, this is the crucible that creates decisive chess. Not “Sofia Rules,” or 3-1-0 scoring, or Armageddon, but simply, necessity. Organize the tournament in such a way that only a a player with a truly superior score like +3 or +4 could ever hope to win, and all the players will have to push, in every round.
But then, here we are, pretending that players outside of the world’s top 50 “can’t hack it” at events like Tata Steel, when this year’s tournament was won by a player rated below 2700, who gained 30 rating points at the event and gate crashed the world’s elite. Such results offer chess fans plenty to be excited about. And more than a few were rooting for Jorden van Foreest when he started the final round of Tata Steel 2021, only a half point behind the tournament leader Anish Giri. Obviously, he caught him. Jorden’s spectacular, final round, MUST-win win over Nils Grandelius is this week’s “Game of the Week.”
Game of the Week #21:
Jorden van Foreest vs. Nils Grandelius (1-0), Tata Steel Masters 2021, Wijk Aan Zee, Rd. 13
e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 a6 6. Qd3!? (diagram)
Opening fashions are a bit odd, to the uninitiated. The Najdorf is, of course, one of the best and most popular defenses for the black player, against the open Sicilian. And in this position, white has the flexibility to try many different things, as black has delayed causing any immediate crisis in the center of the board, and preferred to maintain a solid structure over quickly developing his pieces. The main line, 6. Bg5, Caruana used to destroy MVL earlier in this tournament. There is Fischer’s favorite move, 6. Bc4. There is a large body of theory around Karpov’s favorite move, 6. Be2, and then the so-called, “English Attack,” 6. Be3. In modern times, players have tried a more sedate approach like 6. g3, or 6. h3, intending a later g2-g4 and Bg2, with the idea to slowly gain space on the kingside. And then there’s even the bizarre and straightforward move 6. Rg1!? intending g2-g4-g5, and arguing that checkmate is in the forecast. But 6. Qd3 is truly an oddity, at least at first glance.
The “idea,” behind 6. Qd3 (other than the idea to get your opponent out of his prep) is to overprotect the e4 pawn, which allows the c3 knight to jump to d5 without a moment’s hesitation. If black plays with 6. … e5, in the spirit of the Najdorf, where … a6 is played to deny white pieces access to the b5 square before hitting back in the center with … e5, then white may claim the knight can land on d5 sooner than he would have otherwise been able to. For example, 6. … e5 7. Nf5 g6 (7. … Bxf5 8. exf5 d5 9. Bg5 with a double edged position) 8. Ne3 when the hole on d5 looms large. Of course, the queen on d3 blocks the development of the f1 bishop, but white is claiming that the bishop was only going to be developed to e2, anyway. Attempts to “refute” white’s play directly are misguided. Things like Nc6-b4 will gain a tempo, but misplace the black knight. The real problem with Qd3, to the extent that there is one, is that it’s a committal move - placing the queen on d3 before the position has clarified that d3 is the best place for the queen. So, as the battle lines are drawn, black seeks to engineer a position in which the queen is misplaced on d3 and cost white a tempo, while white hopes to quickly seize control of the light squares in the center of the board.
The truth is: Carlsen has played this a few times, and again recently, so it’s moderately fashionable. Whaddayaknow?
… Nbd7 7. Be2 b5 8. a4!? (offering a pawn sacrifice, which Grandelius accepts) Nc5 9. Qe3 b4 10. Nd5!? (into the d5 square) Ncxe4 11. a5 (diagram)
There is actually quite a lot to be said about the last few moves. On move 8, short castles is a strong candidate move, which makes this pawn-grabbing operation Grandelius went in for exceedingly dangerous. 8. 0-0 Nc5 9. Qe3 b4 10. Nd5 Ncxe4 11. Bf3 Nxd5 12. Qxe4 e6 13. Qe2, when white is already winning an exchange because the e6 pawn is pinned, and when the knight moves, the a8 rook is hanging. The computers seem to also like the ugly move 8. b4, which puts a stop to any b4 nonsense from black straight away, but I find this to be aesthetically unappealing. With 8. a4, van Foreest provokes black to go for this pawn grab, and claims some compensation in the form of the far advanced a5 pawn, which threatens to become a passed pawn at some point in the future, on a good day, and in the form of a weak black pawn on b4, which can be gobbled up at the appropriate moment. For his part, Grandelius is playing principled chess. If your opponent offers you a pawn for unclear compensation, the way to refute it is to start by taking the pawn.
… Nxd5 12. Qxe4 e6 13. 0-0 (diagram)
Obviously the game is a close cousin to the variation mentioned above after 8. 0-0, but white has spent a few valuable tempi on a4-a5, and black has time to defend the d5 knight and cover the a8 rook. Black would like to play 13. … Be7 and castle, but he must control the c6 square first, lest he allow 14. Nc6, exchanging off the dark square bishop and giving white the bishop pair on the open board. 13. … Bb7, 13. … Qc7, and 13. … Bd7 all seem to be strong candidate moves in this position. 13. … Bb7 feels most natural to this author, placing the bishop on its long diagonal and threatening the e4 queen with discovered attacks. Of course, some calculation is required because the d4 knight and centralized queen are bearing down on e6. After 13. … Bb7 14. Bg4!? (threatening to sacrifice on e6 immediately, like a neanderthal) Be7, nothing immediately decisive is apparent for white. 15. Nxe6 fxe6 16. Bxe6 Nc7! 17. Qxb7 Nxe6, for example, or 15. Bxe6 fxe6 16. Nxe6 Qd7 17. Nxg7+ Kd8 18. Rd1 Bf6!. But then, there’s also the idea of using the a4-e8 diagonal, with 14. c4!? bxc3 15. Bd1!? Qc7 16. Ba4+ Kd8, with unclear complications.
Of course, Van Foreest was playing very quickly and obviously still in his computer-assisted opening preparation, so it’s hard to fault Grandelius, who preferred to keep his bishop on the c8-h3 diagonal, where it guards against these types of shenanigans. But it must be said that d7 is less “ideal” for the light squared bishop:
… Bd7 14. Bd2 Be7 15. Bf3 0-0 16. Qd3 Qb8 17. c4 (diagram)
Jorden would later say after this game that his preparation went through 17. c4 (though to be sure, he was aware of the ideas in the position after 17. c4), and that he had had this very position on his analysis board on the morning of the game. He must have felt thrilled that he was in the position he was aiming for. Of course, white is not winning here, by any stretch, but as van Foreest is about to demonstrate, there are lots of tricky ideas in this position, and black must be precise to survive. Obviously 17. … bxc3 (e.p.) is forced…
… bxc3 18. bxc3
… and now Grandelius must decide how to deal with the threat of 19. c4. Currently the d5 knight is pinned to the rook on a8. A computer-ish solution presents itself: 18. … Bf6 19. c4 Nb4 20. Qa3 Bxd4 21. Bxb4 Bxa1 22. Rxa1 is evidently survivable, but it’s a mess. For one thing, Bxd6 is threatened. If the d6 pawn moves, the f8 rook falls, the a8 rook is hanging, and if Bxd6 is ever allowed, the c-pawn all of a sudden looks very threatening, as white’s bishops control key squares: c5-6-7. I would venture to suggest that this position looks very dangerous and extremely difficult to evaluate at move 18. Komodo says 0.00 dead equal - go figure. 18. … Qc7 was possible, simply sacrificing the exchange and claiming that black’s excellent structure, bishop pair, and extra pawn are enough compensation. But Grandelius was still playing principled chess, and looking to maximize:
… Ra7 (stepping out of the pin to hold on to the material) 19. Rfb1 Qc8 20. c4 Nf6 (diagram)
And here, Van Foreest had in mind a really cool looking idea, which the computers evaluate as clearly better for white, and the only real try for an advantage in the position. It’s not winning immediately, by any stretch, but it is a strategically rich, interesting idea for the white player. White to play:
Nb5!
First of all, 22. Nxd6 and 22. Nxa7 are threatened, so something must be done about the knight. But when it is captured, white is able to create two, well advanced, connected passed pawns, both supported by ideally placed rooks, and with his bishops raking across the board to assist in their advancement. But white is down a full piece in this position!
… axb5 (what else) 22. cxb5 (diagram)
Those pawns are just really fast. To illustrate - an attempt to shore things up by shutting out the f3 bishop, like 22. … d5 fails immediately: 23. b6 Ra8 24. b7 and black has already committed an oops. 22. … Nd5 is possible, with the idea to bring the d7 bishop out to f5: 23. Bxd5 exd5 24. b6 Bf5 25. Qb5 Bxb1 26. Rxb1, when black will be giving the rook back immediately: 26. … Ra8 27. b7
Grandelius chose to simply give the piece back in order to get rid of one of the offending pawns, which seems to be a decent practical choice:
… Bxb5 23. Qxb5 Nd7 24. Bb7 Qd8 25. a6 (diagram)
But this is surely a dream position for white. He’s only a pawn down, with the bishop pair on a wide open board, the a6 pawn threatening to queen, soon, and completely secured by the b7 bishop and a1 rook. Incidentally, black’s a7 rook is completely dead in the water:
… Bf6 26. Ba5 Qe8 27. Bc7 (Of course, 27. Ra2 or 27. Ra4 are also possible) Bxa1 28. Rxa1 (diagram)
Here, Grandelius to move, with only 12 minutes remaining on his clock. Precision is required.
… d5?
The correct defensive idea was 28. … Nc5! after which black will either give back an exchange for a blockade, or sacrifice the knight for the a6 pawn and defend R vs. 2 Bishops, but with two pawns to show for it. For example: 29. Qb6 Qd7! (threatening … Qxc7 on 30. Qxa7) 30. h4 Nxa6 31. Rxa6 Rxa6 32. Bxa6, and white has a lot more work to do.
Bd6 Qd8 30. Rc1 (or 30. Bxf8 Nxf8 31. Rc1) g6?
Black could have been more tenacious: 30. … Re8 31. Bc7 Qe7 32. g3! (creating space for the king so that the rook can leave the back rank) and black is simply going to end up sacrificing the a7 rook for the a6 pawn, potentially exchanging the knight for the dark squared bishop if white plays Bb6, which leaves him defending an ending with 2 pawns for a bishop. After the game continuation, the weak dark squares around black’s king allow white to come up with all sorts of ideas, including mating attacks, even after the a6 pawn is removed from the board.
h3 Re8 32. Rc7 Nf6 33. Be5 Ne4 34. Qc6 Rf8 35. Bd4 Qb8 36. f3 (diagram)
The knight is doing yeoman’s work on e4, and f3 threatens to simply push it away. After 36. … Nd2, for example, 37. Bxa7 Qxa7 38. Qc5! and white is going to get a new queen, same as the old queen. So Grandelius just takes the a6 pawn, and hopes to wreak some havoc on the dark squares around the white king… unfortunately, there’s no perpetual in sight:
… Rxa6 37. Bxa6 Qb4 38. Be5 Qe1+ 39. Kh2 Nf2 and the rest of the game is Nils hoping in vain for a perpetual (or a mating net) to materialize - it does not.
Qc3 Qh1+ 41. Kg3 Qg1+ 42. Rc8 Nh1+ 43. Kh4 Qf2+ 44. g3 g5+ 45. Kxg5 f6+ 46. Kh6 fxe5 47. Qxe5 resigns 1-0
Fantastic preparation by Jorden Van Foreest and his second, Max Warmerdam, and fearless, daring play after the computer assistance ran out. A well deserved win en route to a brilliant tournament victory for the 21 year old.
Hopefully many more invitations are finding their way into his inbox. And let this be a lesson to organizers around the world - maybe the most interesting ideas at the chessboard are not monopolized by the top 6-10 players in the world at any given time…
Puzzle of the Week #22:
But first, a solution to last week’s puzzle:
… Qb2! deflecting the queen from defense of the d1 square, and threatening to deliver a back rank mate with the rook. Bernstein resigned immediately, in view of: 2. Kf1 Qxc3 or 2. Qxb2 Rd1#.
This week’s puzzle is another example from Capablanca’s games, but this one has to do with accurate defense. In the following position, Capablanca played 29. Qa8?! and his opponent resigned immediately, in view of 29. … Rxb8? 30. Rxb8, when mate is unavoidable. But the Cuban’s poor opponent must have been hypnotized, he can still save the game! Can you find black’s (correct) defense to 29. Qa8?! ?
(Bonus points, which count for nothing, will be given for a better 29th move for white - YOU TOO can improve on Capablanca’s play…)
If you think you have the solution(s) feel free to shoot me an email: JensenUVA@gmail.com, or DM on twitter @JensenUVA.
Also - for those of my subscribers who have enjoyed finding these in your inbox on Friday afternoon, I’ve been busy professionally, and I’m not sure when I’ll get back to the regular Friday publishing schedule. That said, I do think that even irregular emails can be a nice little chess related surprise, and if you think so too, please FORWARD, LIKE, SUBSCRIBE, etc. etc. because that’s more fun for everybody.
Until next time, ARGH! SHAKHMATY!