Dutch Treat
by Hans Ree

PATZER'S PARADISE

At the door of the press room in the Olympic Museum in
Lausanne, the site of the match between Karpov and Anand, my
colleague Gert Ligterink, reporter for the Dutch newspaper
"Volkskrant", is addressed by Alexander Roshal, editor of the
Russian chess magazine 64. Roshal is obviously in a happy mood.
He asks: "You have a FIDE title I think?" This is confirmed.
Ligterink is an IM. Roshal grins merrily, he beats his fist against
his breast and says: "Me no title!" in a way which makes it appear
a hero's accomplishment.

Inside the press room we see why Roshal is so happy. A blitz
tournament is announced for "professional journalists and media
representatives" who report on the World Championship. Total
prize fund $50,000. Once again our president Kirsan Ilyumzhinov
is showing his magnanimity. The formula is more or less the same
as in the knock-out world championship tournament in Groningen,
which means that everybody will share in the loot, even those who
hardly know the rules and will be eliminated in the first round.
That is to say, everybody except strong chessplayers. Journalists
who have a FIDE title are excluded from participation.

Slightly sour-faced my "Volkskrant" colleague and I look around
in the press room and take stock of the strength of the professional
journalists. We are the strongest chessplayers there. First prize
$9,000, second prize $6,000, but not for us. It could have been an
interesting final between the two of us.

Then Leontxo Garcia, reporter for the Spanish newspaper "El Pais"
joins us. He cannot play in the tournament either, for he is a FIDE
Master. Poor guy. He has a title that doesn't bring one anything, no
invitations at all, but now it brings him an exclusion. But Leontxo
looks at it from the bright side. "At least it saves us from a difficult
ethical dilemma," he says cheerfully. And he is right of course. At
the end of the FIDE congress in Erevan 1996 Ilyumzhinov
organized a blitz tournament for the delegates. That too had a nice
prize fund. Not everyone found it an edifying sight to see
Ilyumzhinov's opponents, who had spoken bravely of corruption
and "big pockets," grubbing their snouts in his trough only a few
hours after their defeat in the elections. 

In itself there is not much wrong with a tournament for journalists.
But many journalists have speculated about the origin of
Ilyumzhinov's millions. Have they all been earned by honest work?
One can imagine that these speculations might have been less bold,
had the journalists been carrying part of that money in their own
pockets.

Anyway, these ethical considerations seemed strangely restricted to
those who have been condemned to stand aside. It was a true
miracle, all these guys who suddenly turned out to be professional
journalists; who could have guessed. The chief organizer of the
Groningen tournament suddenly revealed himself to represent a
Groningen newspaper. The FIDE official who directed the
questions during the short press conferences of Karpov and Anand
after their games, claimed successfully that this made him a
journalist, eligible to play.

A special case was Dimitri Bjelica, who really is a journalist, but
unfortunately also a FIDE Master. He claimed loudly that he was
not and that his title was taken from him by the Yugoslav chess
authorities, and he could only be silenced when Ilyumzhinov
promised to play a private match with him. 

"It's patzer's paradise" said Christophe Bouton, reporter for the
French "Figaro," with a touch of self-deprecation which was not
quite justified, because Bouton is a good chess player. He won the
tournament and a few hours later he brought ten bottles of
excellent champagne to the press room for all his colleagues, titled
or not.

Alexander Roshal was in third place. He is not a patzer either. He
is "master of sports" in Russia and that is quite an accomplishment,
but because of the lack of possibilities for Russian masters in the
days of the Soviet-Union to play in international tournaments, he
never earned an international title. Now at last this has turned out
to be a blessing. Roshal used to be Karpov's regular companion
during trips abroad. Every time I meet him, he explains that he is
not a friend of Karpov anymore and in fact never was. "I was a
professional friend. Who has important friends, has important
money. I know. But not anymore now."

Maybe not, but he might still be well informed about Karpov's
doings and I asked him if he knew who all those unknown names
on the list of Karpov's delegation were. An impressive delegation
of fifteen people, and Karpov's business partner Ron Henley, who
was also present, was not even on the list. There is Karpov's wife,
his lawyer, an interpreter, five seconds, probably a doctor and a
body guard. But even so many names remained unexplained.
Roshal said they were probably sponsors of Karpov who, as a
reward, were made members of the team that is to carry the
champion into his next two years of reign. Nice to put that on your
business card later.

 I studied the names. Grigory Kalashnikov might make a good
bodyguard. Anyway, it is an impressive list. Anand's delegation,
which consists of himself, his wife and three seconds, looked quite
humble in comparison.

Diagram

This is the position after white's 25th move in the first game
Karpov- Anand. Anand played 25...Qe7-d6, a good move. But why
didn't he play 25...Qxe4? That forces the exchange of queens. If
white does not have anything forcing quickly, black would be
better. That forcing line to refute 25...Qxe4 should start with 26.
Qxe4 Nxe4 27. Re1 Rc4, but what then? I couldn't find it. The
next day the Belgian IM Luc Winants, who was one of the
French-language commentators, showed me a beautiful analysis.
After 27...Rc4 white first plays 28. b3 and after 28...Rd4 comes a
truly difficult move: 29. Rf2!, with the threat 30. Rd2 with decisive
material gain. When black prevents this with 29...Ndf6, comes 30.
Rf4. This move would not have been right a move earlier because
of 29. Rf4 Ndc5. But now, one move later, it wins on the spot
because of the threat 31. Bxf6. The main line of Winants' analysis
was more complicated. After 26. Qxe4 Nxe4 27. Re1 Rc4 28. b3
Rd4 29. Rf2! he follows up with 29...h6 30. Rd2 Rb4 31. a3 hxg5
32. axb4 Ndf6 33. Rd4 Rh4 34. b5 and white wins. Beautiful and
deep. I payed Winants a heart-felt compliment for his nice analysis,
and then he laughed and said: "Of course I put a computer to work
on it." Anand is not a computer and maybe he did not see the exact
refutation of 25...Qxe4 during the game. But he must have smelled
the danger. This sense of danger badly failed him on the next
move, when after 25...Qe7-d6 26. Qb7-a8+ he did not play the safe
26...Qb8, which would have led to an equal game, but 26...Ke8-f7?
which was refuted nicely by Karpov.

Diagram

And this diagram gives the position after black's 34th in the fourth
game. White Anand-black Karpov. An important moment. At the
time we reporters thought it was at this moment that Anand lost the
world championship. We didn't know yet that he would force a
tiebreak later and lose the match only then. Anand played, far too
quickly, 35. c4-c5 and he lost. A much better chance was 35. Qd8
Qxh5 36. Be3. When I wrote my report that day I left unsaid,
because of ignorance, whether this would draw or would only put
up stronger resistance. In fact it would draw, as Michael Gurevich
showed the next day in his match bulletin.

After 36. Be3 he gives a)36.....a6 37. Qd6 a5 38. Qxe6. B)36...Qf7
38. Qa8 and c)36...Bc6 37. Qd6 Be4 38. f3, when black can
sacrifice a piece. Variation B is a clear draw, A and C are messy
and risky ways for Karpov to play for a win. This is not the way
Karpov plays chess, he would have taken the draw.

Anand's mistake was not decisive, he got his chance later. But it
was to prove significant. Here and in other moments in that fourth
game he relapsed to the sins of his youth: playing quickly and
impulsively when serious thinking was in order. It would be his
undoing in the first tiebreak game.

This column first appeared in the Dutch newspaper
"NRC-Handelsblad" January 10, 1998. Copyright 1998 Hans Ree,
All Rights Reserved. 