Game 1
Game 1
Vladimir Akopian who had White pieces deviated very early from the mainstream theory and directed the game into unknown territory. Akopian held the advantage according to Khalifman until 17. Nxe4 although Akopian insisted that this was still his best chance for a draw and play was probably balanced for a long time. Time had became, however the most important factor of the game. A few impressive moves just before the first time control made his position untenable. Khalifman missed 41…Ng5 and gave Akopian one more chance to complicate the game with 42. Rb1. He could have drawn in several ways, including by playing 53. Rb1 instead of Re1 later on. Result Khalifman win.
Q: Were you surprised by Akopian’s sacrifice in yesterday’s game?
A: Yes, I was surprised—pleasantly surprised. After my opponent makes a sacrifice, I always ask myself, “Do I have to resign now?” In this case I looked at the board, and said, “No, I do not have to resign.” And I realized that my position was good. He had some reasonable compensation, but not more than a draw. If he had not made this sacrifice, he would have had a very good position.
Game 2
Game 2
The game was Nimzo-Indian with Qc7 which was quite rare. The came a position with no advantage for White and Khalifman offered a draw after 18 moves.
Khalifman: I am not so happy about the way I played today.
Q: What about 13 Nd4 instead of 13 Ng5? That looked more promising.
A: Probably 13 Nd5 followed by f4 and f5 was a much better plan. It would have been a comfortable position with no risks, and it would be hard for Black to develop. In the end it was a typical Hedgehog position with no advantage for White.
Q: What do you think about this format for choosing a world champion? Do you think that two-game knockout matches are a fair test?
A: This is the only world championship we have. Everyone calls this format very tough, but the old system of zonals, interzonals, and candidates’ matches also had its drawbacks. In the modern world, such a long system is very hard to arrange. FIDE had the problem of what to do. Perhaps this present system could be improved—for example start the four-game matches earlier in the tournament—but I think in general it is good.
Q: Do you think settling the world championship with blitz games is a good idea?
A: Do you think a 25-minute game with 10-second increments is blitz? Truly, the Fischer clock with time increments is heaven’s gift to me. I was never a very good blitz player. In the past when I faced a blitz specialist, my hands were too slow; he was always slapping the clock while my flag was falling. But 25 minutes is not blitz. I have seen many good-quality 25-minute games. True, it is possible to reach the blitz stage. But blitz chess is not the most illogical way to settle a match between two players who are equal in regular games and equal in 25-minute chess.
Q: What has been your toughest match here in Las Vegas?
A: Gelfand, for sure. He was the toughest player I faced on my way to the Final. But the semifinal against Nisipeanu was also very hard. When I was even with him after four games and we had to continue the tiebreak, that was no fun for me. That was the critical moment for me in the tournament.
Q: Does the lack of elite players in the final of this event show the success or failure of this format?
A: I think the results of this tournament mean that we must examine the very definition of “elite.” If Kramnik and Shirov were playing now in this Final, people would all say this is a good format. So if Khalifman and Akopian are playing, is it not a good format?
Q: How do you assess the quality of chess being played in this world championship Final? Does it compare with other title matches?
A: In the past, both players could prepare for their opponents for many months, because they knew who they were going to play. The result is a strange combination of over-the-board chess and correspondence chess. For example, we see a contest of Kasparov’s team and Kasparov’s computers against Anand’s team and Anand’s computers. Such a contest may be very interesting for professionals, but maybe not so much for the spectators. True, when the game starts at move 25, there is a higher percentage of accurate moves. But this is not real chess.
Game 3
Game 3
Akopian surprised Khalifman in the opening with Bg5 creating some strong pressure on the kingside. In particular the possibility to double the kingside pawns led to long term problem for Black. Khalifman could have offer the exchange of queens early with …Qd7 yet opted with …b5 when White was able to centralize his queen. This became important as Black was behind in development and had to exchange the queens under much less favorable conditions later. And 71. … Rh8 was the final blunder with 71 …Kf7 the game was a draw. According V. Salov this may have been one of the most exciting and complex endings ever reached in the World Championship play. Result Akopian win.
Game 4
Game 4
The two grandmasters managed to surprise each other by their choice for the opening. First Akopian employed the Kings Indian that is not counted among his favorite weapon with Black. Khalifman countered with 7. Be3 a system he doesn’t normally use. Akopian was the first to deviate from he theory with 16…e6. It allowed Khalifman to install his Knight first on b5, menacing Nd6!, then to transfer it on the excellent position of f3. Perhaps Akopian missed his chance on the 21st move when he could have interrupted Knight’s route by playing the counter in the center with 21…e5!? Still, if Khalifman had found the correct reaction to it: 22.Nb3!, he would have retained the opening advantage anyway. Khalifman played 34.a5! which gave him a huge advantage (according to Kasparov Akopian should have played a5 himself to stop this possibility). He calmly realized his advantage. Result Khalifman win.
Question to A. Khalifman:
You seemed to have a comfortable edge after the opening. Did Black make any mistake in the opening?
A: The critical moment was when he played 16 … Be6? Better may be 16 … a6.
Q: Do you feel that you played a good game today?
A: A: I am tired now, but I feel the game was OK. During this whole tournament I have been blundering and losing, and then I have to win back my advantage!
Q: When did you know that you were going to win this game?
A: Akopian is definitely one of the world’s best defensive players. So I did not assumeanything until 58 h6.
Q: Probably 50 … Kf7? is the decisive blunder?
A: Yes, maybe so. I need to analyze it later.
Game 5
Game 5
This was a key day for Khalifman if he survived with black then the title was definitely within grasp. The Ruy Lopez Defense employed by Black meant that the players were really determinate to vary their opening strategy in every game. Perhaps Khalifman was aiming for the sharp Marshall Attack -one of his pet line recently. Akopian thwarted his plans with an early 5.d3 that directly into less known channels. This quiet set-up brought its fruits as Khalifman spend a lot of time striving to neutralize White’s initiative after the break in the center d3-d4. His move 18…Be6!? Was an interesting novelty and probably an improvement over 18…Bb7 or 18…Qc7 employed before. Akopian’s reaction on it 19 Bf4 made inevitable the exchange of the light squares Bishops than yielded to White a slight edge. It was an arguable decision, because he had at his disposal a more aggressive plan connected with advance on his “f” pawn: 21. f4! with a firm control over the center. Akopian opted for 26.b3 after having filed to find anything substantial in the other lines. This situation on the board prompted White to play a highly risky 38.Qd2 but Khalifman decided for a safe and solid 28…Ne4 releasing the tension and liquidating the game to the simplified version of Queen and Rook ending. Despite an extra pawn for White the Rook endgame was drawn comfortably by Khalifman. After the game Alexander said: “Today’s game was tough for me. I used a lot of time during the opening. Later in the game, perhaps I could have played better, but being short of time I did not want to make any risky moves. My position was not really bad at any time. In other games during this tournament I have had some really bad positions, so I know what it feels like. Today I never had that feeling.” Result draw.
Q: Was this a tough game for you today?
A: Yes, especially in the opening, when I was taking much time. In 1996 against Psakhis I had the same opening, and I found the right move order. Today it was different. I think 11 … Nc6 is not the best move, or else I did not follow it up with the correct plan.
Q: Were you prepared for this opening?
A: I have not studied it deeply. I cannot know all theory.
Q: White seemed to have an edge after the opening. Where did he go wrong?
A: Probably 26 b3 was too slow. 27 … Qb7 was quite good, after which 28 Qd2 leads to a draw.
Q: When did you know that the rook ending would be drawn?
A: Early, but already in this tournament I have had some bad experiences with rook endings. Not only in the third game against Akopian, but even in the first game of the tournament against Barua-everybody has already forgotten, this was a rook ending, too. Today I think I was able to calculate the rook ending accurately. The main challenge was to control my nerves.
Q: Did you ever feel that you were in trouble today?
A: My position was not really bad at any time. In other games during this tournament I have had some really bad positions, so I know what it feels like. Today I never had that feeling.
Q: Here’s a question about yesterday’s game. You played 28 g4, but what about 28 Be3 instead, and you definitely win a pawn? Wasn’t that better?
A: Perhaps Fritz [the chess computer program] liked 28 Be3, but I did not. This Fritz is a clever guy; he is very strong, but I didn’t like to play with opposite-colored bishops in an unclear position.
Game 6
Game 6
Khalifman played actively to secure a draw and the title. He said “I told myself, “Come on, this is the final game, I have to play the best moves.” And I think 4 d5 is the best move. At the end of the game, I was no longer fighting to find the win. I said, “Enough is enough. I only need a draw.” Alexander Khalifman by drawing the sixth match game against Vladimir Akopian has clinched a narrow victory in this hard-fought Final and has been proclaimed the fourteenth World Champion.
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | Total | |
| Akopian, V | 0 | ½ | 1 | 0 | ½ | ½ | 2 ½ |
| Khalifman, A | 1 | ½ | 0 | 1 | ½ | ½ | 3 ½ |