Mark Podolski (most left person with cup in hand) and Aleksey Domchev receive the beauty prize for their game in the 2007 World Championship. Photo: Geb Kos
In 2007, the world championship featured an incredible
lineup of top players. The 20-player round-robin tournament included
the "big 4" —Georgiev, Schwarzman, Chizhov, and Valneris—who had
dominated the draughts scene since 1988. There was also a strong
contingent of Dutch players (Scholma, Thijssen, and Van den Akker),
African players (Kouogueu, Ndjofang, and Samb), and numerous European
top players like Amrillaev, Anikeev, Domchev, Lagoda, and
Misans.
Personally, the 2007 world championship was a big deal for
me as it was my first time making it to the final round after not
qualifying in 2005. I was keen to compete against such strong
opponents and ready to show what I could do. Winning the championship
was my clear goal, and I was prepared to give it all.
The
tournament kicked off with some surprising results. Chizhov beat
Valneris in Round 1 and then took down Schwarzman in Round 4 (you
should definitely check out those games!). This made Chizhov the
early favorite. But world championships are long and
unpredictable—Georgiev defeated Chizhov in a complex game in Round 7,
shaking things up again.
After 16 rounds and several twists and
turns, Chizhov, Schwarzman, and I were at the top of the leaderboard,
each with a score of +4. I had a slightly easier schedule for the
last three rounds, facing Domchev, Otgonbayar, and Valneris. To have
a good shot at the overall victory, I needed to win two out of three.
As history showed, that wasn’t enough, as Schwarzman managed to
defeat both Van den Akker and Thijssen in consecutive rounds.
In
this context, the game against Domchev in Round 17 was crucial. Known
for being tough to beat, I had to approach the game very carefully.
While this game won the beauty prize in the World Championship 2007,
I want to focus on the psychological aspects and how they influenced
my decisions.
At the last moment, I decided against the Keller system and opted for a different, soon-to-be very complex variation. By this point, I had already anticipated Domchev's next moves and prepared a surprise for him.
19-23 6.28x19 14x23 7.32-28 23x32 8.38x27To understand this move, we need some history. In the 80s
and 90s, there was one essential Russian book by V. Agafonov ("Курс
дебютов: международные шашки" or, in English, "Opening courses:
international draughts") that covered contemporary draughts theory in
depth. Every serious player, who grew up in the Soviet Union, knew
this book and its main variations.
The move 7. 32-28?! was
discussed in this book along with the potential black responses, so I
knew Domchev was familiar with it. What he didn't know was an
extremely sharp sideline I analyzed in detail in the early 2000s.
As expected, Domchev followed Agafonov's recommendation. According to old theory, the best option for white is a simple exchange with 10. 29x18 22x13, leading to a simplified position. But I had different plans...
10.27x18!? 19-24Agafonov's book shows black threatening both 11...24-30 and 11...23-28, making it seem like white has no choice but to play the passive 11. 18-13 09x18 12. 50-45. But...
11.35-30!? 24x35 12.38-32!What an unusual sharp position! Exactly
what the doctor ordered in such a tournament situation. Strictly
speaking, this position had appeared in literature and was even
played in the Ukrainian championship, but it was neither widely known
nor well-studied.
I recall the shock on my opponent’s face when he
encountered this position. He had to
spend a lot of time
figuring out what was going on.
A logical
choice but not the best one.
Let’s highlight the obvious:
Now the difference between 12...09-14! and
12...10-14 becomes clear. White
plans to play 14. 32-28 and 15.
42-37 with a better position. To prevent this, black plays:
What a position! This must have been another shock for my opponent. At first glance, it looks like black should be able to win the white piece on 18, but it’s not possible. Even worse, black's position isn't even better, and now it's up to black to find a reasonable move.
20-25After spending an hour
on the first fourteen moves, Domchev decided to go for
simplifications.
Let's highlight some variations:
The first stage of the game is over, and it’s time for a summary. Black has spent a lot of time, and white has emerged with a better position. Psychologically, I need to maintain the tension in the position to bring my opponent into time trouble when the last and most important stage of the game arrives.
5-10 17.41-37We’ve entered the build-up phase of the game. To build an efficient position, I move pieces from the right flank to the left flank. Domchev takes a similar approach.
19.38-33 17-21My opponent decides to break the tension in the center. This gives me the opportunity to develop my pieces on 36 and 46.
20.31-26 4-9 21.26x17 11x22 22.28x17 12x21 23.49-43 8-12 24.43-38 3-8 25.36-31 13-18An important decision by black. The presence of the black piece on field 18 activates my formation at 38, 33, 29, 34, and 40.
26.31-27 9-13 27.46-41 7-11 28.41-36 11-17 29.33-28 14-20My opponent chose a safer route in what could have been an explosive position. Fireworks on the board would have emerged after:
In the position after 29...14-20, the
first move that comes to mind is 30.39-33 30x39 31.29-23 18x29
32.33x24 20x29 33.44x24 35x44 34.50x39 13-19 35.24x13 8x19, but
white's position isn't better due to a weak right flank and no option
of playing 36.28-22. How to solve this problem? After some time, I
came up with the unexpected:
What a move in a must-win game!
But at this stage, my brain was busy with emerging variations after 30. 36-31.
And yet again, we get another unusual position!
6-11?The decisive mistake in time trouble.
Other moves are quickly losing.
43.32x3 21x41 44.31-27 41-46 45.19-13 46-10 46.38-32 10x46 47.29-23 46x35 48.48-42 35x8 49.3x12 25-30 50.12-45 16-21 51.27x16and Domchev
gave up.
This is what I call a complete game of draughts,
filled with twists and turns, precise calculations, and perfect
execution of the game plan.