MARK RUBERY CHESS

Rook and pawn endgames are the most frequently reached endings by virtue of the fact that the rooks enter the main arena normally later than any other piece, and are thus more likely to survive to the final phase. They are also notoriously difficult to win, for instance a rook with a + c (f + h) or a + h pawns is usually insufficient to win against a lone rook even with the two pawn advantage. In the Novgorod (New City) tournament held in Russia two decades ago, Kramnik with White wheeled out the supposedly harmless Exchange Variation against Judit Polgar’s French Defence and reached a fairly innocuous rook and pawn ending. It was at this stage Kramnik was able to display his impeccable technique, reminiscent of Akiba Rubinstein a century earlier, to conjure a win out of virtually nothing…

Kramnik,v (2765) - Polgar,j (2665) [C01]

Novgorod (4), 1996

1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.exd5 exd5 4.Nf3 Bd6 5.c4 Nf6 6.Nc3 c6 7.Bg5 0–0 8.cxd5 h6 9.Bh4 Qb6 10.Qd2 Nxd5 11.Bg3 Bxg3 12.hxg3 Bg4 13.Bd3 Re8+ 14.Kf1 Nd7 15.Nxd5 cxd5 16.Rh4 Bxf3 17.gxf3 Nf8 18.Kg2 Ng6 19.Rh5 Qxd4 20.Rd1 Rad8 21.Bxg6 Qxd2 22.Bxf7+ Kxf7 23.Rxd2 d4

(It is difficult to imagine how a top class GM is going to lose this position as Black, yet Kramnik like only a few people in chess history, is able to squeeze the utmost out of the position) 24.Rh4 d3 25.Rf4+ Kg6 26.Re4 h5 27.Rxe8 Rxe8 28.Rxd3 Re2 (Certainly Polgar would have preferred to have an f-pawn rather than a h-pawn, yet with an active rook and White’s extra pawn being doubled, holding the draw seems a formality) 29.Rb3 b6 30.Rb5 Kh6

31.g4! (A move that is aesthetically ugly yet very powerful)… g6 32.g5+ Kg7 33.f4 Rc2 34.Kg3 Rd2 35.f3 Rc2 36.Rb3 Kf7 37.Ra3 Rxb2 38.Rxa7+ Kg8 39.f5! (Now it all becomes a lot clearer)… Rb5 40.Ra8+ Kf7 41.fxg6+ Kxg6 42.f4 Rb1 43.Rg8+ Kf5 44.Rf8+ Ke4 45.Re8+ Kf5 46.Re5+ Kg6 47.Re6+ Kf5 48.Rf6+ Ke4 49.g6 b5 50.Kh4 Rh1+ 51.Kg5 h4 52.Re6+ Kf3 53.g7 Rg1+ 54.Kf6 h3 55.Re8 1–0

The chess writer Taylor Kingston was asked what questions he would like answers to?

Why do certain chess writers lie so much, and so obviously?

What was the full extent of Soviet political manipulation in chess? Did it affect Bronstein in 1951, Keres after 1948, etc.? Would Alekhine have played a rematch with Capablanca, if all his demands had been met?

Would Fischer have played Karpov in 1975, if all his demands had been met?

Will computers ever solve chess? Barring that, will they kill the game?

Why do magazine ads with chess pictures almost always show a dark square at the lower right corner?