WC-match: day 2

By MI Wouter Sipma

Today GMI Alexander Georgiev somewhat reduced GMI Alexander Schwarzman’s lead by winning the second game of the so-called Lehmann-Georgiev tie-break. Georgiev began with just 19 seconds against 48 for Schwarzman, but the latter lost on time! Moreover, his position was absolutely terrible. Again I will comment on the games.

Classical game

Today’s first game was quite flat. Thus I can’t comment much on the value of the moves played; however, I cán make clear how difference in playing style and perhaps mentalitiy can be seen.

Schwarzman-Georgiev, classical game

In this position Georgiev played 14. … 15-20?! to invite white for the 2-for-2 exchange to 15 with 30-24, 29-23, with a very interesting game. Then white has a very solid centre position and later he can decide what he will do with the future piece on 35. Probably it’s hard to find some counterplay against the massive white centre, but who else than Georgiev might be able to find this? Anyway, Schwarzman chooses a much more quiet way to play and still ignores the 2-for-2 on the next moves. Perhaps he considers the game variation as advantage for white, but the game didn’t become very interesting… For me the exchange to 15 is more promising (to win) for white, but apparently Schwarzman doesn’t agree, or doesn’t want to take the risk that it could go wrong as well. But perhaps this observation is the true reason: if Schwarzman isn’t in danger at all, Georgiev can’t create chances. And when Georgiev takes too much risk in order to get some chances, thén Schwarzman will want to hit hard. 15. 41-37 7-12 16. 49-44 Now Georgiev eventually decides to force flattening of the position. 16. … 1-7?! probably would be met by 17. 29-23?! 19×28 18. 33×22 and black’s right wing is locked. Even though I don’t dare to value the position. 16. … 20-25 (better than 10-15, whereafter black keeps a piece on 15; 25 isn’t necessarily a weak piece) 17. 30-24 19×30 18. 29-23 18×29 19. 33×35 and Schwarzman got a centre position. However, Georgiev didn’t have any real weaknesses and easily secured his position. Eventually Schwarzman made a combination to king, which was caught immediately with very little advantage for black. What advocates Georgiev, is that he still played on to win, even though the chance he would really win this position against Schwarzman is practically zero. Or did he want to exhaust Schwarzman somewhat for the following games?


This game was already a lot more interesting, despite Schwarzman again avoided tension in the opening (12. … 20-24); this however wasn’t bad at all. Besides, some tension that initally remained below the surface, eventally became visible.

Georgiev-Schwarzman, rapid (I)

In this position black is 6 temps ahead, but the white structure is more flexible and white hasn’t lost control of the important squares 27 and 28. Georgiev played 37. 33-28! with a transition to a closed classical game, which is favourable for white, because of the tempo ratio. Another option was 37. 31-26 8-12 38. 42-37 18-22 (otherwise 37-31 follows) 39. 34-29 23×34 40. 40×29 9-13 but this position probably isn’t so pleasant for white; after 41. 29-23 19×28 42. 32×23 the piece on 23 will be endangered. 37. … 20-24?! After 37. … 18-22 38. 39-33 9-13 39. 32-27 23×32 40. 27×9 3×14 41. 38×27 21×32 42. 42-38 etc. the position is equal. 38. 31-27! 8-13 39. 40-35 15-20 40. 38-33 20-25 41. 42-38 3-8 42. 34-30 25×34 43. 39×30 See diagram (II).

Georgiev-Schwarzman, rapid (II)

A standard move for black after this exchange is 43. … 23-29?! (threatens 29-34, 24-29, 18-22) and probably that is what Schwarzman was hoping for when he played 37. … 20-24. However, the white position can perfectly deal with this move. White would play 44. 45-40! and two ideas don’t work out as well as hoped for black:

A: 44. … 18-22(!) (the best) 45. 27×18 13×22 46. 43-39 9-14 47. 39-34 22-27 48. 34×23 8-13 (to prevent 23-18) 49. 40-34 and black has to comply with an equal endgame after 50. … 24-29 51. 33×24 17-22 52. 28×26 19×37.

B: 44. … 19-23? 45. 28×19 (30×19?, 23×14, 33×24, 18-22 etc., with advantage for black) 17-22 46. 43-39! (or also firstly 19-14) 22×31 47. 19-14! 9×20 48. 30×19 13×24 49. 35-30! 24×44 50. 33×15 44×42 51. 48×17! See diagram (III).

Georgiev-Schwarzman, rapid (III), analysis

In this position white wins quite ‘sharp’! 51. … 18-23 52. 15-10 23-29 53. 10-5! 29-33 (29-34, 5-28 etc. with winning on the ‘tric trac’) 54. 32-28! 33×11 55. 5-19! (the only winning move!; after 5-28 black slips with 8-13-19 past the main diagonal) 8-12 56. 19-13 and white wins. A beautiful, but also relevant variation!

In the game Schwarzman played 43. … 8-12 and despite his tempo advantage he reached a draw quite effortlessly.


In this game it was again Georgiev playing very originally in the opening (1. 32-28 19-23 2. 28×19 13×24?!) and Schwarzman playing normally and strong. Eventually a principled battle arose, in which the balance wasn’t gravely harmed. Schwarzman nevertheless had some advantage in the final position, after a small inaccuracy from Georgiev’s side.

Schwarzman-Georgiev, blitz

So in this position Schwarzman didn’t even try anymore, while after 43. 44-39 20-24 44. 45-40 black can’t make a really easy draw. After 44. … 24-29 (17-22, 28×17, 21×12, 33-28, 12-17, 38-33! is even worse for black) 45. 33×24 19×30 46. 28×8/10 17-22 47. 25×34 22×35 black isn’t there yet. However it is a draw (in more ways than one) and Schwarzman probably didn’t think it was worth trying against Georgiev…

Georgiev-Lehmann tie-break (I)

In this type of tie-break the players start with 5 minutes and gain 2 seconds per move; if the game is finished and it’s a draw, then there will be a new game with the remaining time on the clock! In this way there will always be a winner, but there also is a certain risk it will eventually come down to ‘clock ramming’. Perhaps it’s better if the players receive 3 seconds per move, so the quality of the games won’t be lost if both players begin with only a few seconds.

Also in this game a common sight: Georgiev tries about everything in the opening but Schwarzman doesn’t allow him to get interesting play. By playing simple (for example 23. … 14-19, while 23. … 2-7?! would have been very exciting), Schwarzman doesn’t manage to keep an equal position.

Georgiev-Schwarzman, LG tie-break I

In this position Georgiev has some advantage because of the pieces on 20 and 15, but he makes a serious mistake with 42. 37-31? whereafter Schwarzman of course responded with 42. … 29-34! Luckily for Georgiev he still had some time to think of a solution. 43. 35-30! (even 38-32 was possible with the punch line 34-40, 35-30! and black can’t win) 34×25 44. 38-33! Since 17-21 is impossible, 44-39 with a 1-for-2 threat is inevitable and black has to return its piece.  44. … 18-23 If I saw it correctly, Schwarzman offered a draw at this moment; Georgiev however refused. The reason for that probably is because he wants to win some time for the next game. 45. 28×19 20-24 46. 19×30 25×34 47. 32-28 12-18 48. 31-26 15-20 49. 26-21 17×26 50. 28-22 16-21 51. 27×16 and here the players agreed on a draw, with some extra seconds for both.

Georgiev-Lehmann tie-break (II)

Like I said, Schwarzman began with a reasonable time advantage (48 seconds vs 19); to benefit from this advantage he played very actively in this game. However, this worked like a boomerang; firstly he lost his time advantage and furthermore he had a bad position. Eventually Georgiev won after just 27 moves after time exceeding by Schwarzman! It’s a pity a game between these two players has to be decided in such a way; although Schwarzman’s quality wasn’t great either… It reminded about the first day’s blitz game in which Georgiev was crushed severly.

Schwarzman-Georgiev, LG tie-break II

Schwarzman’s intentions in this game were very ambitious (20. 33-29?!, inspired by GMI Roel Boomstra’s recommendation in the reaction on the report of the first day?) with a heavy attack. The inactive pieces on 45, 40 and 35 are compensated by the many pieces on black’s left wing and the open square 2. White reacted wrongly on black’s last move (23. … 2-7?!). He has to take 18-23×23 into account. 24. 32-28? Now black gains a splendid position. A recommendation by Boomstra is 24. 49-43! and since 18-23×23 isn’t possible anymore, the position becomes very exciting. In the game it went from bad to worse for white: 24. … 18-22! 25. 28-23 13-18 26. 42-37 9-13 and here Schwarzman played still 27 .49-43?, but at that moment his clock denoted 0:00. Black however has already an extremely good position after 27. … 14-19! 28. 23×14 20×9, threatening 18-23!, 17-21. White has no choice but to accept 29. 37-32 22-27 30. 32×21 16×27 and in this position there isn’t any compensation whatsoever for the inactive pieces on 45, 40 and 35.

Thus Schwarzman still has the lead (the victory in the blitz game weighs heavier than Georgiev’s victory in the LG tie-break). Today again could be seen how Georgiev tries to ‘make’ the game, but doesn’t get any chance from Schwarzman to do so. That’s why I don’t expect fireworks tomorrow; real fireworks will start when Georgiev has the lead!

Tomorrow the first game will start at 9 o’clock Dutch time and can be seen live via the site: http://www.wcmm2013.fmjd.org/ by clicking on the Live Games button.

<<< WC-match: day 1

>>> WC-match: day 3

Geef een reactie

Jouw e-mailadres wordt niet gepubliceerd.