Cover Story / 2014 Sinquefield Cup Best Performance in History?
Many saw Caruana’s result in St. Louis as the best ever for a single classical tournament. Let’s see if that conclusion holds up to objective scrutiny, if there is such a thing. This table does not factor in any ratings inflation and only includes events with at least eight rounds. AVG. RATING
PLAYER
1. Fabiano Caruana 2. Magnus Carlsen 3. Magnus Carlsen 4. Vassily Ivanchuk 5. Anatoly Karpov 6. Vassily Ivanchuk
7. Alexander Morozevich 8. Vladimir Kramnik 9. Garry Kasparov 10. Garry Kasparov
EVENT
St. Louis, 2014 Nanjing, 2009 London, 2012 Sofia, 2008
Linares, 1994 Gibraltar, 2011 Chisinau, 1998 Manila, 1992 Belgrade, 1989 Tilburg, 1989
⁄2
OF OPPOSITION 2802
2762 2740 2737 2681 2602 2536 2514 2599 2604
SCORE 81
⁄2 /10
8/10 61
⁄2 /8 8/10
11/13 9/10 ⁄2
91 91
81 ⁄2
/10 ⁄2
/9 /11 12/14
PERFORMANCE RATING
3103 3002 2993 2977 2899 2968 2936 2914 2912 2908
The list doesn't include estimated ratings of historical players, like Emanuel Lasker’s 18/22 in London, 1899 or Alexander Alekhine’s 13/14 in San Remo, 1930. Nor does it factor in combined events like Fischer’s two 6-0 drubbings of Bent Larsen and Mark Taimanov in 1971. Performances like Sofia Polgar’s 81
100-point estimated lead enough to sway all audiences? As with most chess history of this ilk, the debate may never be settled.
Qc8, was much simpler. 42. Bf2 Rxc1!? Consistent, but it was not too late to
return to d7 with the queen. 43. Rxe6 fxe6 44. g4! fxg4?! “I felt that I had complicated the win
quite a lot,” admitted Caruana, “and here I missed his Qd3-e2-d3 maneuver. I completely missed 44. ... Bh4! 45. Bxh4 R8c3—that would have been a nice way to end the game.”
28. … Nf5 29. Bxf5 gxf5 30. f4?! Only now does Nakamura’s drift become
irreversible. Had Nakamura spent more than six seconds on this move he might have realized that the resulting blocked position is awful for him and he should be trying to attack the f5-pawn using a plan such as 30. Ne2 Rh8 (30. ... Qxb5 31. Qc2!) 31. Qd3.
30. ... g4 31. Qd3 Rac8 32. Rc1 Rc4! 33. Ne2
(see diagram top of next column) White’s intended try 33. Qxf5 Nxd4!
leads to an endgame highly favorable for Black.
33. ... Nc7!! 34. Nc3?! Now the pressure builds inexorably.
32 November 2014 | Chess Life
White should have sought solace in a rook ending after 34. Rxc4 dxc4 35. Qxc4 Nxb5 36. a4 Nxd4 (36. ... Nd6!? offers a safe advantage for Black.) 37. Nxd4 Bxd4 38. Qxd4+ Qxd4 39. Bxd4+ Rxd4 40. Re7.
34. ... Rc8 35. h3!?
Desperation, but White could not wait for ... Ne8 and ... Bd8-a5.
35. ... gxh3 36. Kh2 Nxb5 37. Nxb5 Qxb5 38. Kxh3 Qd7 39. Kg2 b5 40. Rb1 a6
The time control has been reached with Caruana a safe pawn ahead and the win should be a matter of technique. However, here for the first time in the tournament, Caruana begins to show some uncertainty.
41. Rbc1 Qe6 41. ... R8c6! intending to follow with ...
45. Qe2 Kf7 46. Qd3! R1c2 47. Qh7+ Ke8 /9 in Rome, 1989 offers differing numbers due to players with low ratings. Is Caruana’s
48. f5? The move 48. Kf1 would have made any
win for Black very difficult, especially given Caruana’s time trouble.
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76