Kasparov-Short 1 - a personal reporter's view
Seggev Weiss
of the start of the Kasparov-Short festivities by the _Chess Horizons_
match reporter, hopefully a bit more humoristic, objective and less chessified
than our Schiller tidbits (*not* to take anything away from their value):
Well, folks, I spent much of the 7th at the pressroom in
Simpsons-at-the-Strand, close to the Savoy Theatre. There were no seats
left within the theatre itself for press by the time I arrived. The
pressroom is a bit chaotic and disorganised, with Eric Schiller in charge
[is there a correlation?!]. By now, I suppose you've all seen the game,
I'll just give you my personal impression.
Kasparov - Short (1)
1 e4 [A slight surprise according to the bulletin put out by Wolff, but I
don't understand why] 1...e5 [Nigel's reply against Timman in their match.
But, I think he will eventually try the French, another favourite, as
Kasparov doesn't seem to have found the best method of meeting it, playing
the Exchange, Tarrasch, and mainline Winawers among others] 2 Nf3 Nc6 3 Bb5
[Nigel also had to be ready for the Bishop Opening and the Scotch] 3...a6 4
Ba4 Nf6 5 0-0 Be7 6 Re1 b5 7 Bb3 0-0 [The spectators in the theatre had
headphones with live commentary. Here, the commentators went wild and hoped
Short would play the Marshall. Unfortunately, a lot of people had their
headsets at full volume, and Kasparov gave a glare at this point. Could he
have overheard, making the commentators responsible for his sidestepping
the Marshall?!] 8 a4 [Hodgson boldly said that Black had already achieved
equality, but can you believe someone who makes a living from 1 d4 d5 2 Bg5
and 1 d4 Nf6 2 Bg5 Ne4 3 h4?!] 8...b4 [ So far, both players had been
moving briskly, having spent 3 minutes each. From now, on I give the total
time after each move] 9 d3 [0:16; Why such a long think, was Gary trying to
calm down, or was the opening a surprise? Meanwhile, Wolff was ranting and
raving because nobody had access to ChessBase, making it difficult to look
up theory] 9 ...d6 [0:04] 10 a5 [0:20; Not a TN, although the GMs thought
so at the time] 10...Be6 [0:09] 11 Nbd2 [0:21] 11...Rb8 [0:15] 12 Bc4
[0:27] 12...Qc8 [0:15. With hindsight, 12...Bxc4 may be better] 13 Nf1
[0:49] 13...Re8 [0:30] 14 Ne3 [0:55; Kasparov was way behind on the clock,
without having achieved anything spectacular. In the pressroom, the general
consensus was that Nigel would hold the draw- some even told their editors
not to expect a win. Meanwhile, we were more entertained by the
simultaneous 2nd Karpov-Timman game, whose moves were coming in by fax- the
game certainly looked more interesting than these Lopez manouevres]
14...Nd4 [0:48; Short's first long think, and a big mistake, overlooking a
shot later] 15 Nxd4 [1:01] 15...exd4 [0:49] 16 Nd5 [1:02] 16...Nxd5 [1:17;
Short's longest think, after which he was always behind on the clock] 17
exd5 [1:03] 17...Bd7 [1:17; apparently, Short missed 17...Bg4 18 Bxa6] 18
Bd2 [1:08] 18...Bf6 [1:28] 19 Rxe8+ [1:26] 19...Bxe8 [1:28] 20 Qe2 [1:28]
20...Bb5 [1:32; Karpov-Timman still looked more interesting, many of the
journalists had wandered off or lost interest by this point as we resigned
ourselves to a draw after a few more hours play] 21 Re1 [1:30] 21...Bxc4
[1:43; Surely Short's Bishop was looking ugly after this?! Actually, he has
worked things out] 22 dxc4 [1:30] 22...h6 [1:43] 23 b3 [1:32] 23...c5
[1:45] 24 Bf4 [1:46; Suddenly it's clear, Black has a target on a5.
Kasparov had a long think, and still didn't look happy after making this
move. Everyone expected 24 dxc6, but apparently Kasparov wasn't satisfied
with the resulting position] 24...Qd7 [1:49] 25 h3 [1:47] 25...Rd8 [1:51]
26 Qe4 [1:52] 26...h5 [1:54; With a time scramble in progress, people were
again paying attention to the monitors. The general opinion was that
Short's position was still solid] 27 Re2 [1:55] 27...g6 [1:54] 28 Qf3
[1:55; At this stage Kasparov makes more effective use of his time, making
a lot of his moves almost instantly, while Short still hesitates.] 28...Bg7
[1:56] 29 Re4 [1:55] 29...Bf8 [1:57] 30 Qe2 [1:55] 30...Qc7 [1:58] 31 Bg5
[1:57; This is when the game really gets interesting. Unfortunately,
Wolff's bulletin stops giving any analyses. The Times today had some
analysis based on exclusive comments by both players which suggests that
both sides played imprecisely] 31...Rc8 [1:58] 32 g4 [1:57] 32...hxg4
[1:58] 33 Bf6 [1:57; Kasparov now says 33 hxg4 was better] 33...gxh3 [1:59]
34 Qg4 [1:57] 34...Ra8 [1:59] 35 Qxh3 [1:58] 35...Bg7 [1:59] 36 Bxg7 [1:58;
Right after the game, both players were supposed to give a press
conference. Only Gary showed up, and he said he missed a win here with 36
Re7, the idea being 36...Qxa5 37 Rxf7!. Apparently, he did not have enough
time to calculate the ending after 36...Qc8 37 Qxc8 Rxc8 38 Bxg7 Kxg7 39
Rd7] 36...Kxg7 [1:59] 37 Rh4 [1:58] 37...Rg8 [1:59] 38 Rh7+ [1:58;
Apparently Nigel refused a draw offer here] 38...Kf8 [1:59] 39 Qg4 [1:59]
39...Ke8 [2:00]
All hell broke loose in the press room. From the monitors or video, it
wasn't clear what had happened. For an instant, Gary's time was shown at
2:00- had he lost on time?! Meanwhile, all we could see was the arbiters
approach the players. It took a couple of minutes before the news petered
out that it was Nigel who had lost. In the press conference, Gary said that
if Nigel had more time, he would have tried to force a draw with 40 Qe6+,
but Short now claims he is better after that. Gary also magnanimously
stated that he thought his chances in the match no worse than they had been
before the game. Short can take heart from the fact that he was not really
outclassed. Some supporters even jokingly said he had to win the match now,
referring to his legendary habit of losing in the early stages of a match.
Seats were apparently sold out for the game, but it remains to be seen if
this level of interest can be kept up. To be honest, except for the time
scramble, I found the rest of the game rather boring, and I cannot imagine
non-chess enthusiasts feeling differently. Channel 4 had 2 hours of
commentary, with GMs Speelman and King. Although they tried, I suspect the
level of analysis was still above anyone without some knowledge of the
game.