Click to follow
Indy Lifestyle Online
THE FINAL of the Intel Grand Prix in London last month saw both brilliance and incompetence from the same player. After Vassily Ivanchuk had beaten Viswanathan Anand in the opening game, he seemed to be heading for victory in game two:

----------------------------------------------------------------- White: Anand ----------------------------------------------------------------- Black: Ivanchuk ----------------------------------------------------------------- 1 e4 c6 16 g4 Nd7 2 Nc3 d5 17 g5 Nxe5 3 d4 dxe4 18 Nxe5 Nc3 4 Nxe4 Nd7 19 Qg4 Nxa2+ 5 Bc4 Ngf6 20 Bxa2 h5 6 Ng5 e6 21 Qxh5 Qxa2 7 Qe2 Nb6 22 Nb3 Bxf2 8 Bb3 h6 23 Rd3 Rac8 9 N5f3 c5 24 Rh3 Rxc2+ 10 Bf4 Nbd5 25 Kxc2 Rc8+ 11 Be5 Qa5+ 26 Kd1 Qb1+ 12 Nd2 b5 27 Ke2 Qe4+ 13 dxc5 Bxc5 28 Kxf2 Rc2+ 14 Ngf3 0-0 29 Kf1 15 0-0-0 Bb7 -----------------------------------------------------------------

Until here, Ivanchuk had played superbly. 18 . . . Nc3] was a fine trick that should have decided the game. After 19. bxc3 Ba3+ 20. Kb1 Qxc3 21. Nd3 Rfd8 White is lost. 20 . . . h5] is a neat intermezzo, keeping the K-side closed long enough for Black's Q-side attack to develop. 24 . . . Rxc2+] looked a killer. After 29. Kf1, they reached the diagram:


Everyone in the hall now saw that Qxh1 was mate. Everyone except Ivanchuk, that is. He thought for a full minute, then played 29 . . . Qf4+ going on to lose the game after 30. Nf3. Nigel Short just shook his head and said: 'Now you can understand why this guy is not the world champion.' There was a happy ending, however, when Ivanchuk won the play-off.