The fourth game was quite interesting for me. Anikeev wasn't really much worse at any point in the fourth game, but so far in the match, he has sometimes opted for a flattening, slightly disadvantageous choice, even though there was constructive play available. Additionally, I realized that the Ukrainian - at least at this moment in the match - doesn't seem to have any trouble repeating openings that don’t seem to bring him anything.
Especially with that last point in mind, I decided not to repeat 1.34-29. I didn't actually want to play 5.29-24, but I hadn't found any significant improvements on my own play from the third game. The chance was too high that after 1.34-29, he would just play 19-23 again and head towards the same kind of play, with slightly passive but clear play.
We decided to return to 1.32-28, after which his response would most likely again be 17-22x21. I felt it was too risky to repeat the variant from the first game because he would probably now play the annoying move 10...19-23x23 after studying the game with his team. Therefore, we decided to take a different approach.