 Hello and welcome to Gibraltar Masters, our first masterclass with the one and only Hikaru Nakamura. Hikaru, welcome. Good to be back in Gib. Yeah, it's good to be back. I've been here for many years now in a row, so it's pretty good. Just hopefully I can play well this first one I've started off, I think with two draws, so it hasn't been ideal, but it's a long tournament. Long tournament to go indeed and now you won this event four times and you keep coming back here. What do you like about Gibraltar so much? There are many things. I think the restaurants are good, there's Lamamala close by, there are also some restaurants down the marina that I've been to. The people are quite friendly, it's a very nice mix between Gibraltarans. I think Gibraltarans, I talked about this on my stream last night as well, but Gibraltarans is sort of this mix between British and Spaniards, so it's quite an eclectic mix and just the weather as well is also quite nice, it tends not to be raining, windy or snowy like in certain other parts of the world. In your eyes how have you seen the festival grow and evolve over the years that you've been here? Yeah, it's changed a lot. I think when I first played here I think it was 2005, if I remember correctly, it was around that time, the years sort of all blend together after a while, but when I came here the first time I remember there was a restaurant downstairs, Nuno's, and it was actually open back then. You could play your game, go down and eat dinner there and I think from probably 2008 or 2009 there are always people playing downstairs so the restaurant is never open. I think it's a sign to how big the event has become, there's so many people playing now that all the space here is being used by everyone to play, to analyze, and it's a fantastic atmosphere. Okay, so we're going to look at a game that I played against Pavel Elianov in the Isle of Man tournament this past October and there are a couple of reasons that I'm going to show this game. First of all, this was the game in the last round of the event, so I've lost the previous round to Arkady Nightich which basically cost me any shot at winning the event, but there are other things too, so one thing I think everyone assumes is we're professional players, so normally we don't make amateur mistakes, we tend to be very focused, it's all about the game and in this game there actually was a certain outside event that affected me and luckily it didn't cost me the game but it turned from being what should have been a simple, smooth, short victory into a very long seven-hour game where I was fortunate to win at the end. So there's a bit of everything in this game. That's quite interesting. I'll get to that at a certain point. Because that's quite a challenge for a lot of us in fact, where we've got other factors affecting us while we're playing. I think the professionals just do it better, the idea of really focusing and blocking things out, but sometimes even that doesn't work. Yeah, I mean, I'll explain it anyway, well I might as well just say it. Now, basically what happened is my stepfather who I think probably a fair amount of you have heard of, Snow War Montree, he's going to be coming out on Friday so everyone can go ask him about this in a couple of days, but basically he had to leave early from the event. So I started the last round game, he took a buy and he had to fly back to New York. The thing was his flight I think was at maybe 5 p.m. in the round start at 1.30, something like this. So he had to leave around like 3.30 or 4 o'clock. Now normally it wouldn't matter, I was just going to play a normal game, but it turned out that I got a very good position, we'll get to that in a second, but I got a very good position and at a critical moment I'm like, okay, I'm just going to win this game, play a simple move, and that way I can see him off, it's all good, the tournament's over, just a nice easy three-hour win, and of course the one move I played then as soon as I played the move I realized that it didn't work because when Pavel made his move I thought for 40 minutes. So, but anyway that's just a little sidebar as far as another reason I'm showing this game. So without further ado I think we should probably get into the game. So it started D4, Nf6, C4, E6, Nb3, B6. This can turn into many different things that can become standard Queens Indian. Normally Black plays like Bb7 here for example and it's just castles, castles, and like you can play Nc3, Rr1, many different moves here, but Pavel played Bb4 which is a completely reasonable move as well, not as common, certainly. Bb2, Bb7, castles, and now he played the move C6. So Hikaru, could you explain to us this idea that Black employs many times of playing Bb4, provoking Bd2, and then just going back. It might seem like a waste of a tempo, but it's really not. Yeah, I mean the main reason Black does this is because normally, for example, if you, this wouldn't happen in normal theory, but for example, let's just say you play something like C6 here. White can play B3, D5, Bb2, let's just say Nd7, and White can put the knight on C3 or D2 here, and the bishop is much better placed on B2 than it is on C3. So for example, if you look at the game, in the game I played Nc3, but for example, if I were to play move like Bc3, Black can play D5, let's say B3, and Black can even start with something like Nd4 here, gaining a tempo and hitting the bishop on C3, and after Bb2, maybe something like F5 or just even standard development with castles. But the bishop's a little bit awkward on C3, whereas you'd like to just put it on B2 in one go. So the idea of Bb4, Bb7 is to stop White from getting an ideal setup with Bb2 and Nc3 very easily. Yeah, pretty much, because like here, like in the game I played Nc3, and this is theory because you kind of don't have a choice, but I really would like the bishop on B2. I'd like it on the long diagonal. I would much prefer that as opposed to having the bishop on D2, where like it can still go to G5 or F4, but it's not as good. I mean, obviously, you still have to play the position because this is known, but that's the reason Black does this. You don't want the bishop on the long diagonal. So all right, so the game went C6, Nc3, now D5. It's worth noting C6 also is a critical move because if Black were to play D5, E takes D5. The structure with the pawns, let's say C6 or even a C5, it's a little bit unpleasant for Black potentially with these hanging pawns on C5 and D5, something like Bg5 and Nc1, Nc2, for example. And so for that reason, that's why Pavel played C6 because in this position after C6, Nc3, D5, if I take on D5, Black can just take with the C pawn as opposed to having this structure. Like this is a structure Black wants to avoid. So if Black takes with the C pawn, he can just play Nc6 or Nd7 and it's symmetrical, open C file and Black is completely fine. So in the game, I played Qb3 here to protect the pawn on C4. You can also play many things, Rc1, Qc2, play for E4, but I had this little idea that I'd looked up before the game and I thought it might confuse Pavel. Because you're not really afraid of giving the C4 pawn because of all the play you get in the center with E4 if Black does take on C4 anyway. Correct, but again, the thing is in this day and age with computers. Everyone wants to grab a pawn. Well, everyone can grab the pawn and prove that it's okay, first of all. And then secondly, beyond that, that you won't even really get a chance if they know what they're doing. So for that reason, you try to come up with little ideas. Now like, for example, I mean, people are gonna see that I played this game today. I know it wasn't really, it's so no one actually saw it, but I played this game today against this 2400 Spanish IM and basically he blitzed out the first 25 moves without using any time. And one of the moves he played in fact was even a novelty. So like, that's kind of the point is that you're always looking for little ideas to try and surprise your opponents. If you don't, it's not a good feeling. You know, if it's like Levan or some top guy, it's annoying, but it's like, okay, you move on when it's like a 2400 or someone and they do that, you're like, why are you even playing chess sometimes, so. The level of preparation is so high across all levels now. Yeah, it is. So like, so that's why in this game I play this Queen B3 move. It's just a little nuanced idea, not a whole lot. Behind it, other than simply trying to develop the Rooks D1 and C1 and play for 91 and E4, so 97, Rooks C1, Pavel played H6. I don't know if this was necessarily required. Maybe you could have played Rooks C8. It's all about little nuances. I mean, if the computer says you should play H6, you play it even though maybe, I mean, it's hard to really rationalize what the best order of moves are. Black does in general want to play C5 here, right? Exactly, so like, I think, I suspect after Rooks C8 there might be some trick with E4 and Ng5, something like this. This might be the reason that Pavel played H6 first. I mean, I know all these moves are more or less interchangeable, but sometimes, I mean, when I look at it now, it's like H6, it seems like a slightly strange move, but of course if I had the computer on, it's like H6, I mean, obviously it's a very rational move. So anyway, the game continued 91 and the idea is just to play for E4, try to open up the center. And in this whole structure where Black gets these pawns on C6, D5, and E6, normally it's a question of does Black get C5 first or does White get E4 first? So for example, if Black plays Rooks C8, White can maybe even play E4 here and if you get this position with takes, takes and the diagonal being closed, it's almost always preferable for White, yeah, it's almost always better for White, whereas if, let's just say for example, I mean, let's just say I play some random moves like H3, if Black can get this position and play C5 here and open up the diagonal and offer the bishops to be exchanged, then it's completely fine for Black. So it really comes down to Black playing for C5 and White playing for E4. Right. So that's why here Pavel played C5, which is very natural, but it leads to a very unusual position here, because after C5 I take, he took on D4 and now has this very nice in-between move D6, a point being that if Black takes on C3, you can take on E7, Queen E7, and I think Bishop C3 is fine, or even Bishop takes B7 probably here is fine, but the main thing is that if you don't play D6, you're worse. So for example, if you move the Knight to B5, Black can play Knight C5, and after you move the Queen anywhere really, you lose this pawn on D5 and Black's much better, not winning. So D6 was played, he took, I took, and now again, this is modern day theory, he had Knight C5 here, Queen C4, Knight takes B7. Knight C5 is a nice trick. I mean, it's the only move because Dc3 just runs into, you just take it with Bishop. Dc3, I think you just take on A8 actually. Dakes on D2 and D6 Bishop hangs. Then the D6 Bishop hangs, so you're just up in exchange, you've got a rook for a minor piece. Yeah. So that's why Knight C5, Queen C4 takes, Queen D4, very flashy, but it all sort of simplifies. Like, it looks really cool, D6 looks nice and Knight C5 looks like a nice move, but then just simplifies into a much more normal position. So Queen E7, Queen H4, A6, Knight F3. So you said Queen B3 was a subtle idea that you prepared in your preparation. Did you have this position as well? Yeah, I had it up to this position. I think I might have had it with Rook D8 instead of Rook C8, but I had looked at very similar positions and I felt that it could be a little bit tricky to play for black because it looks completely fine. You've got an open C file, a D file's open, not a whole lot's going on, but white does have one big advantage here, which is that after E4, white is threatening to play E5, and it's a little bit awkward for black because playing E5 is a natural reply, but after G4, it starts to get a little bit messy. The point being that if you play some normal moves like Knight C5, I can play G5 takes and then I actually don't know which one's better. Or Bishop to E5 and Knight to E5. Probably Knight to E5, just so I've got Knight to E5. Removing the knight and then creating this mate thread on H7. I mean, you can probably go Knight E6, right? Knight E5? Ah, yes, Knight E5 anyway. Knight to E5 anyway, and you've got E, yes. It's a check, it's a check, so you don't get Knight F3. I don't have Knight F3. That's a nice little tactic if you can reach the position. So the thing is, it's obviously even. Everything in chess is equal in a general sense, but you try to find little positions where it's a little bit trickier to play, or it's not so obvious what the best ideas are. And this position is very hard because Pavel probably saw E5 G4 and he was very afraid. So he played Rc4, which is probably okay, but you have to be extremely precise. And it doesn't, there's no harmony to it. So when you play a move like Rc4 here, you're just hoping it works. Because if it's not holding, you're gonna lose on the spot. Because if there's some E5 trick, you're just gonna lose. So like B3, Rc5, without Rc5 it's losing, by the way, if he plays like Rc8, just E5. Just E5. But you're sort of hoping that there aren't any tricks, because Knight A4 even looks interesting, like Knight A4, Rc1, Bishop c1 with E5 ideas. I didn't play this because I think after Knight A4, I think I walk into this little doozy. Oh, that's nice. Kind of trapping my queen on H4. That was not a very successful attack if this would have happened. Right, but see the thing is it's like, so when he plays Rc4 though, like you're still hoping, because you can't calculate everything to the end. And so you're looking in sequences of a couple of moves and you're hoping that you don't blunder something. But it's very hard because when you do this you also start to second-guess yourself. You start to think like, well, okay, if it's fine, it's fine, but if it's not, you just lose. And it's a very unpleasant feeling. I mean, when everything transpires, if you're fine, it's a great feeling. It's like, okay, I saw everything and you're happy. But if it goes the other way, it's just, it's very hard. And it sort of plays with your mindset as well. Because in the game, black is still fine here. So in the game, I played the move E5 here. Bishop takes E5, Knight to E4. Black can't take the knight because the queen hangs on E7. So Rc1, Rc1. And now here, Pavel Blunder with Bd6. It's already a tough position to play. Black is still okay in the game if he finds this incredible Bb2 move. But I would really not expect the human to find this because it's just, it's not natural for a few reasons. First of all, there's something like Rc2 and having to go Bb1, like the bishop holds the knight on f6, but it just, it feels very unnatural. And even beyond Rc2, there's also this other very nasty idea of Bb4 here. You can't take on B4 because of Nf6 and the queen falls. Yeah, because queen takes B4, Nf6 is checked, and then you pick up the queen on B4. So black has played Nc5, and now white plays Rb1 here. And it's very hard for black to play. So black can play Qb7, and black is fine. I mean, this is a long computer line. Yeah. But again, like once you get to this point, it's a human. Qb7 is a very beautiful move and probably the only one, no? Because he's just losing a piece, otherwise the bishop doesn't have a square. And everything's pinned as well. Yeah, exactly. Yeah, like you can't take anything because everything is pinned here. The queen has pinned. And the point with Qb7 is that the f3 knight hangs. Right, exactly. But still, even after Qb7, it goes on. So I can still play Nd2 here. And your bishop has still dropped on B2. And I still don't have a square for my bishop. And now if you play like Nd3, you lose Rf8 as well. So like here, black is still okay because the computers show that black can play Nd5. And now you have to play Rxb2. If you play Bxc5, again another intermediate move in between, Bxb6 hitting the queen. You had obviously seen all of this. No, I mean in the game I had seen up to this, Rb1 or Rc2. I had seen up to this point, I wasn't sure what was going on. But I mean, I didn't have a choice. I had to go for this already when I played e5. Yeah, I wanted to ask you when you saw e5 because you're giving a pawn. So you're just seen till this position and you thought it was messy enough and interesting enough to just go for it without because you really can't spend all your time calculating till the end. Well, there's also the secondary problem that if I don't play e5. You're losing your queen with Rh5? I think I might even just be worse because it's hard to find other moves. How do I stop Rh5? So Rh5 for example, I mean, I guess I can play something like g4. It does not look correct at all because something like Rc8. And if I play like g5, probably Nh7 for example. Or even just takes because I can't take with the bishop now because I lose the knight on c3. G4 is a very sort of, it's an ugly move. Maybe it has to be played. And if you're playing a move like g4, it makes a lot more sense if black has committed e5 like you said earlier so that the d5 square is free for the knight. Right, exactly. That makes a big difference too. So it's like, it's one of those things where like, by doing this, Pavel sort of forced me into the situation where I kind of had to go into this. And that's also another thing that it doesn't play as much of a role I think when you're playing other top players but when you're playing slightly weaker players, it plays a big role in terms of trying to confuse them. Cause of course, as I said before, essentially, A equals B, everything is equal at the end of the day. So it's like, you try to confuse them but you want to pick lines where there are many ways or many options for your opponent to sort of go wrong as opposed to having one option. Cause like when you play something like e5, it's very forced. Black has to take on e5, black has to take on c1. And now he sort of has really two moves, bishop d6 or bishop b2. So kind of, for both of us, we sort of were forcing each other to go into the slide. And I think, well, obviously I won the game so it certainly worked out for me but I think in retrospect, it was a lot harder for black to play and therefore it wasn't the right decision and probably should have played e5. Cause it was just too hard to play over the board at least for Pavel. So takes, now e4 takes and now he played bishop d6, not bishop b2. Bishop b2 is a scary move to make with black. I mean, you know your piece doesn't have any more squares after rook b1 or rook c2 and it does get very tricky to play a move like that. Right, and that's kind of the point is like, again, you know everything should be fine but there's always a limit when you start playing these moves like rook c4, rook c5, you sort of start to second, get yourself, you start to have doubts and that also doesn't help because then it's like, once you reach the suspicion, I assume Pavel probably had not really, probably he, I assume he had seen probably up to here and he figured there were no real threats. Maybe he thought he just had some simple way to bail out here. And then once you reach the position, it's like, oh, I've done something wrong. Why did I play rook c4? And then the whole thought process just got screwed up. So in the game, he played bishop d6, now I took, traded and I played this very nice move, rook c6 first, the point being that after bishop h6, I think black can play, well, black has many moves but I think rook b8, rook c6 and just bishop c5 here followed by knight d6 or knight d8 and black is probably still worse but not losing the way he is in the game because here this rook on c6, it looks really nice, it can go to c7, but black doesn't really have any targets either here. Like the bishop protects the pawn very nicely on b6 and if I play b4, then here black can play knight d8. Right, and then take on b4. And then with c7, bishop takes b4, right? Because the b6 pawn is hanging otherwise. Right, takes, takes and just, I mean, even this maybe but yeah, it's... So that's the difference, if you take bishop a6, you don't have b4 for bishop c5. Exactly, yeah, exactly. So yeah, I mean, yeah, you're saying everything. So bishop c5, exactly. I played b4 here, that's the whole point, knight d8 and now I played the brilliant blunder of the day, rook c7. Now it looks like a completely reasonable move, it's still quite a bit better for white but the thing was, during the game at this point, I'm like, once Pavel actually played, once we reached this position after rook c6, I was so happy because it's like, okay, I'm gonna win the game, I looked at my watch, it's like three, three, eight. Was this that moment? You're gonna get to see your dad now. This is the moment. So it was like, at rook c6, I started to have these thoughts and then, yeah, then as soon as he played knight d8, it's like, okay, I'll just use five minutes and it should be winning, it's all straight forward and I knew rook c8 should be winning and rook c8 is the best move but the reason I played rook c7 was because I very brilliantly thought, I saw bishop d6, rook d7 and I thought, okay, he has to go bishop e5, I just take, I can take on h6, he goes rook e8 and I just play like rook d6, collect the pawns on the queen side, win the game, smooth, simple, easy and just like, go relax, go have a good evening and then as soon as I played rook d7, Pavel played bishop b8 and I sort of said some choice words to myself under my breath or muttered them because I realized as soon as he played this, it is not so easy. So the reason rook c8 was winning was because basically in this position, when you reach this position after rook f8, a four black pieces are all tied up. Like he can't move the knight to b7 because there's rook c7 and I'm gonna win a piece. I mean, I guess he could play bishop d6 but even bishop d6, rook a8, just collecting pawns again is quite simple and so therefore blacks just completely tied up. He can't really untangle his knight and his bishop and his rook here and so eventually I'm just gonna go rook b8 or rook a8 and win these queenside pawns and pretty much win the game very quickly but as I realized in the game after rook c7, bishop d6, rook d7, bishop a8, the problem here is that even though blacks pieces are very passive, they aren't gonna be passive for long because he has knight c6 followed by knight e5 and if the knights come off, it's gonna be very hard to win this end game. So, and also at the moment black is also up a pawn which is important to note as well. After bishop d6, couldn't you have any ways on rook a7? Rook a7 here, I think there's knight c6. But that's... Rook a6 and bishop b4. I mean, how is that different from the line with rook a8? Okay, so the line with rook a8 is that I'm still gonna pick up the... A knight c6? Well, I picked up the pawn, my pawn's on a4 and I picked up the h6 pawn. That's the difference, that's actually the difference. The difference is that I won the pawn on h6 because in this line that we were just talking about, where is it? With rook c7, bishop d6. Oh yeah, yeah, rook c7, bishop d6. Right, like in this position, you have to remember, I'm actually down a pawn here. I can take h6 now to get the pawn but then rook b8 and bishop c5 and black's completely fine. Black's more than fine now. Yeah, it's like, yeah. Maybe black can even play bishop a5 and knight b4, I mean. But, so that's why I realized, like as soon as bishop b8 occurred on the board, it's like, uh-oh, this is not gonna be easy at all. And I used like 40 minutes here pretty much. I was up on the clock so I could do that but probably for about like the first 20, I was just like really just yelling at myself in my head for what I had done because it was just very frustrating. Good thing you play fast but you've got 20 minutes to yell at yourself. Right, sometimes, yeah, sometimes. Yeah, so in the game I played bishop h6, rook e8, I came back with bishop e3 and now the point is knight c6 because like, again, the materials even and white is better but if black can ever exchange knights or somehow exchange these pawns on the queen side, it's just gonna simplify really into something that should be drawn. So I played a3, he played b5 and this is the other issue is that here I can't easily attack these pawns. Like if I play knight d2, black can play knight to e5 and rook b7, I think something like f5 even here or knight c4 maybe, actually knight c4 probably is quite good. The point being if I take then this pawn becomes very fast and if I don't take, black can go bishop e5 and like, if you look at this position, it's changed very quickly. So before black's pieces were all passive and tied up and now in fact, black has an active knight and active bishop, he can go like rook d8, rook d3 or rook d1. Black is probably not worse now. Yeah, black might even be better actually at this point. So that's why like I realized as soon as this happens, like I actually be very careful, not just like, not just to prove that I'm still better, but just not to even just draw the game on the spot. So a3, b5, I played rook b7, played rook c8, now I played rook b6 and Pavel played bishop a7 and this is another critical point in the game because one thing I think that stronger players do very well is we're good at conceptualizing. So in this position, you have two choices. You can either take the pawn on a6 like I did in the game or you can take the knight. And it's very hard sometimes to make decisions because in the game I realized that if I take bishop a7, rook c3, king g2, takes, I can play bishop b6. And it's very hard because on one hand, you're never really sure. You feel like technically this should be winning because for example, rook b3, you can always put the bishop on a5 so black can never break and create a pass pawn either on the a file or the b file, but at the same time, you're not really sure is it really winning? Like something like h4, e5, is this actually winning? Because I mean, during the game, you sort of think about what are the ideas? So here, one idea is try to get the knight to c5, win a6, go to c7, and win b5. That's one idea. The other idea I guess is to try and go g4, h5, knight h4, knight a5, but it's never really clear because when you play something like h5, king h7, g4, something like king h6 here for example, or even rook c4, king g3, king h6 followed by like f5, and king h5, you're never really sure what's going on and black is up upon here too. So that matters because in any of these end games, if you get like a two on one, black can maybe sack somewhere on b4 way down the line. But it's very hard because like when you see this position, at least when I saw it during the game, I thought to myself that this probably should be winning technically, but I couldn't quite see it. And for that reason, after about 10 minutes of thinking, I chose not to go for this because I wasn't 100% sure and I felt that after rook a6, it might not be technically winning, but there are better chances of winning if you're not 100% sure. So that's why I took on a6. He took on e3. I took and now I played 97. And just to go back to that variation, Hikaru, which you were explaining with the rook c6, bishop a7, you can't really put your bishop on c5 because you want to avoid the a5 break. So it's kind of important to put your bishop on a5, it's not the ideal square. Right, so yeah, that is important. So for example, if I go bishop c5, then black can play a5 and create a pass, b pawn later on. Yeah, and the bishop on a5 is just not active enough to help the other pieces to come into play very easily. Yeah, I mean, it feels like somehow there should be some way to win. I mean, actually, this kind of reminds me a little bit of there's a Magnus against Chakrar this year and Vike. Kind of the same thing I think is where like Magnus had a bishop and a pawn and he had a knight and he was able to go around the knight behind the pawns and collect them all and win the game very smoothly even though it should not have been that smooth. But he was able to do that. And so like, you sort of feel like in any of these end games you should be able to do that. But if you don't see it for sure, then- To keep more chances you want to try for rook a6 then. Right, because if you're not 100% sure, it's very hard. Like you can technically think it should be winning, but if you're not certain then you kind of have to just, you kind of just have to make the most practical decision, I guess. So that's why I took traded, 97. And now this looks like it should also be quite straightforward after 94, but after 95, king f2, rook c1. It's not as easy as it looks because I've got this weak e-pawn and I've got a weak h-pawn. So if I were to play like even something like knight b5, for example, I think black can play rook c2, king f3. And I'm not sure if black should play rook h2 or f5, let's just say f5 first. And it's not so simple here because if you play like h3, I think there might be some, is it e5 here or knight, and I think it's knight f6 here first. And there's some tricks. Knight e4. Yeah, it's not so simple. And also the other thing is in this position after I take, I have these two connected pawns, but it's going to be very hard to advance them. I can't really advance the a-pawn because I lose b4 and the knight is preventing me from pushing the b-pawn up the board really quickly. And furthermore, even like, if you think about it conceptually, let's just say I waste a couple of moves just randomly, if you get to a position like this even, it's still going to be hard to go a5 because on a5 there's always e5 and then you'll lose the b5-pawn. And you also can't go b6 because it's covered twice by both the knight and the rook. So it's very tricky, yeah. So that's why I played rook c6 here. He played rook h1 and now I played e4. I played e4. I think the reason I did not play h4 again was something similar. I think there's, again, more of this rook h2. And then f5, knight f6. f5, knight f6 stuff. And like e5, knight g4, knight e4. And it's very hard because there is some danger here that you could end up in a position where you have these two pawns, but you lose these two pawns and it could become some sort of a race eventually. So that's why I played e4. And I played e4 because I thought also here in this position, I'm up a pawn at the moment. But I thought this knight on d5 is really good and if I can play e4, I kick the knight to a bad square. Like the knight ideally would like to stay close to my king so there's some fork threats or some ideas. But by playing e4, the knight is to go back to e7, which is bad. And it's worth noting King g1 runs into rook d2. And I think this is, yeah, it takes rook d4 and this is also just a draw because there's just rook d3 to win the a3 pawn in a couple of moves. D6, just King g7 or what? If d6, I actually remember this. If d6, I think King f8, I think, to go King e8. Because check, then you go King g7. And if rook d8, I think just like f5, King f6, King e5. And I suspect black should be fine. Maybe it's not so simple because you can maybe go like d7 and a4 maybe, but I think it should be okay for black. D7 and a4 and then black just takes on a4, what's your... Oh, you're right. The a pawn's quicker than the b pawn. Sorry, yeah. That would be a very nice way to make a loss, actually. Just to point it out, if I go like d7, King f6, I just forgot that this a pawn is actually a lot quicker than the b pawn going down the board. So I saw this, but I mean, but everything I did, like playing e4 was with the idea of going King f3 because I figured the knight has to go back to a bad square, it's not centralized. And I can win the pawn and the knight also will be much further away, like e7. It's gonna be hard to stop these pawns from going up the board. So King f3, knight e7, I played rook c3, rook to a2, and now I played knight takes b5, and now Pavel played f5 correctly, trying again to get the knight back to the centralized square because the knight on e7, it needs some room to breathe. And you can't do any, both the c-squares, c-file squares are covered by my rook. And knight g6 is possible, but it's still, the knight's gonna be far away, like knight d6, knight e5, King e3, and b5, b6, b7 is just coming immediately. And even after the knight comes to e5, it really doesn't have anywhere else to go. So he's got to do something in the center, try to create some counterplay, otherwise you're just gonna push your pawns. Yeah, and like that's the other thing, like here with the knight on e5, you can't really stop the pawns. I mean, that's kind of the point, like something like this, I'm still just going e5, a6, b6, a7. Yeah, knight d7, rook c7, yeah. And yeah, it's just winning. So yeah, so that's why Pavel played f5, and now I played a very bad move. I, again, one thing, another thing that sometimes I think top players do is you try to sort of play, not play perfect moves, but you sort of try to play moves that conceptually make sense, more so than like a brute force method, which is why here I played knight d7 because I thought, again, I was playing on the same theme. So the theme that I had in mind for the last like 10 moves of the game pretty much was how to play against this knight. Basically, find a way to dominate this knight and just run the a and b pawns down the board eventually. So like I played knight d7 because I thought, okay, it's a great move. It stops knight d5. Now the knight, now black can't stop the pawns from just going down the board straight away. And it looks very logical because it seems that if I ever get, let's just say black plays just some random moves, like rook b2, a4, I'll just make some more random moves. Like I can just go like a5, a6, b6, a7, and it seems like black can never stop the pawns here. Yeah, so for that reason, I thought knight d7, I'm a genius. I'm gonna win this game. I'm just gonna have these two pawns. It's gonna be very smooth and simple. And so Pavel played king f8. Something about the c7 square in this game. Yeah, that's true. Yeah, yeah, c7, yeah, the c and d files, everything kind of weird going on. So like Pavel played king f8, I played b5 all according to plan. But now I played rook b2 and I sort of started to realize that I'd done something wrong because the problem here is, well I played a4 in the game but after takes, if I were to take, black can play rook b4, king e5 and rook takes a4. The weird thing is here, the knight actually is very badly placed. Like the knight does not help the pawn here. Like if I go b6, there's rook b4. And also, even if I play like rook b3, black can maybe just play knight c8 for example or actually rook a7, so rook a7 is the way to go because you can go rook b7 and... Knight a6. Because here you have knight c5. Knight c8, yeah. Yeah, but here you have knight c5. Oh yeah, rook b6, knight a7. In this one order it doesn't quite work, but what did I see? There are many lines that I saw with this where I wasn't sure if it would be winning. And as well, like you have to remember this was a very long game. So like I had already missed for sure. I knew rook c8, even at the board, I knew rook c8 was winning. You did realize at the board that you... I knew rook c8 was winning. And that's a difficult feeling to deal with when you know that you missed an immediate win or something that was much stronger. It's almost better to not find out over the game but find out much later. Yeah, I mean, I think when you have a good position, generally it's still under control to the point where it doesn't matter. But I mean, it's really unpleasant when it happens in a game where you think you missed something where you're completely fine and you're still under a little bit of pressure. And actually, it's only happening like once or twice, but I remember there was a game against Anand in Zurich in 2013, I think it was, or 14, where basically we played a queen's game of decline. There was this position where I could have sacked a queen for two rooks. And in the game, I didn't do it. And for the rest of the game, I was like, why didn't I do that? I'm sure it had to be okay. And so I was sort of doubting myself and second guessing myself for the rest of the game. And I did lose that game as well. So when you have a good position, generally it's not a huge issue. I mean, if you have a really good position, you can normally still convert, but it's always bad when you realize. It's better not to realize. I mean, it's like, for example, in my game yesterday, there was, I missed a tactic where I could have had a much better position. And I didn't realize it over the board. If I'd realized it over the board, like a few months later, I'd been really, really angry. But I didn't realize, so like the game just continued and it was fairly normal. So all right, so rook b2, a4, fb4, I played king f4 because I didn't want to give up this pawn on a4. So king e4 runs and rook b4. And it's also worth noting, practically speaking here, the only way I'm going to win is with keeping both pawns on the board. Like if I only have one pawn on the board, there probably are some tricks and actually something very similar happens in the game as well. But basically I figured, okay, if I give up like a pawn here even, it doesn't matter. These pawns are not going down the board quick enough. My pawns are going up the board pretty fast. And my pawns should, realistically, you should not be able to stop them, realistically. And I think one big reason for that and an important thing in these pawn races is where the king is. Your king is very close to your opponent's pawns, but his king is really far away to stop your pawns. Right, exactly. And you can kind of then judge from few moves ahead that your pawns are going to be much stronger than his pawns. Right, right. So I mean, again, like this whole game, up until like this point, it was all about concepts. So about like, where do I put the knight so that I can push the pawns up the board and dominate his knight and prevent his knight from getting the key squares. So king g7 was played and now I played a5. He played knight to d5. And actually, see, so you played king g7, I thought, okay, Pavel, what are you doing? I just go a5. And so it's like, knight d5, I take, you take, and I just go b6. And I should just be winning this pawn race. Because I saw d4, this is winning. I remember this as winning. Let me try and remember exactly why. So this is actually a little bit tricky. I think it goes d4. Can't you just go rook c4? Rook c4, I think there's rook b5. Rook d, no. You just take on d4, rook b4? Oh, this, maybe this is simpler. I saw some line during the game where we were both basically getting queens, but I was quicker. So, I mean, but actually, rook c4 probably works too. Maybe, or no, no, no, e3, no, no, rook c4 doesn't work, so there's e3. This I saw during the game. And then rook b4 in the end. Yeah, exactly, rook b4. Yeah, yeah, this I remember seeing during the game. Because yeah, actually, because I thought, yeah, like. But you can just have that. That's a beautiful position. Let's just have that off. Rook b4, e3, takes, e2, Rook b4, and rook b4 is a really nice move. So now, yeah. And you just lose, basically. You won't, I mean, yeah, you're losing. I think you're gonna lose the pawns, probably. But, so that's why I remember this. First, I think I thought rook c4, and then it's like, rook where? Rook c2 in which move? Right here? But I think he's too fast. I think he's too fast. I think he's too fast, though. He goes e3, e2. And e2? I mean, a7, rook b1. Yeah, yeah, it's. It probably doesn't have rook b1, this idea would work, huh? Yeah, yeah. At the end, you need rook b1. Yeah, so it's still tricky. But I remember seeing, like, the point is, I saw this, and I think I calculated, like, I think I calculated rook c1 was winning, maybe, or rook a3. Maybe it was, I think it was rook c1, and like, e3, king e4. I just, I remember there was some line that was winning here. Can he go e2 there? In that position? Yeah, no, no, you're right, actually. Can we see that? Which one? The last one, rook c1. Oh, you mean, rook c1, e3? King e4. Yeah, king e4, he can go e2. And the point is king, yeah, rook d2. No, I thought rook d2, rook d1. No, then king e3. Oh, then you just take it, and then you push it up on. So this doesn't work. King e3, and rook d1. Yeah, this doesn't work. King e3, rook d1, king e2. King e2. Rook c1, and b7. A6 a7, yeah. So this is obviously winning for white. But I saw something, what did I see here? Was it rook c8 maybe? I think it was rook c8, actually. It was the line that I saw. e3, and rook e8. I think this was the line that I remember. And I think this is just winning because the idea is you go a6, a7, and make a queen. So like if black plays rook b5, you just go a6 anyway. Cause takes, you have a7, rook a6, you make a queen. No, but then I take, and then you go rook a1. I went too fast. You go rook a1. No, then d3? And king a3. I mean, rook a1 also wins. Rook a1, rook a8. Because the king is so close to the pawn, it's winning. So I saw this, and finally at this point, like he played knight a5, I spent 10 minutes calculating this long end game. So does he have nothing after rook c8? Everything's good, everything's good. Oh, and he took on b5. Yeah, that's the point. So I spent all this time for the second or even third time in the game. I'm like, okay, finally it's over. Finally it's over, finally I'm gonna win the game. Finally, after messing it up so many times, and then Pavel instantly plays rook a5 and it's like, okay. Did you have another 20 minutes on your clock? I mean, we were headed towards the third control, so yeah, but again, and now the problem is with this one is this one is not even simple. It's either it's winning or it's just a draw. Because in the other one, you can always say, you've got two pawns, you can always push the pawns up the board, there always are gonna be chances. But then when you spent all this time, and of course since it was such a long game, you start to lose your mind, because he plays rook a5 and it's like, oh no. And I'm very lucky that in the game I was able to still play on for the win because if I were to play something normal like king takes- And he played rook b5 instantly. Yeah, yeah, he did, yeah. Yeah, so that was the other thing. It's like, wait, why did I spend all this time? And so yeah, so like, and I was very lucky because after rook a5, normally you'd play king e4, which is a normal move. After f5, king f4, king f6, I think this is actually already pretty close to a draw because eventually blacks can go e5 and f4 and try to exchange the pawns. So if I play, let's just say I play a move like king f3, black can play e5, rook c6, king g5, rook c8, and f4 maybe isn't quite right. I think rook a3 first is correct here. I think f4 might run into rook g8. Oh, maybe knight c4. Oh no, you can go king f6 actually. Yeah, maybe knight c4, knight c4 here, yeah. Because you wanna play g4, so. Right, right. I mean, it's still, I'm not sure if you can get it, but the point is that here, if black gets these pawns, like on e5 and f5 with an active king, I'm really gonna have difficulties keeping the one pawn. And the key point is just to remember that basically if you reach this end game, this is always gonna be a draw. This rook and knight versus rook is, well, Magnus has won it. So I mean, obviously you can win it from time to time, but I mean, with correct play, it's a draw. So yeah, I saw this and then I was very lucky because I realized I can still play rook and knight versus rook, or the rook and bishop versus rook. Oh, rook and bishop, for sure. For sure. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Yeah, many people have lost rook and bishop. Yeah. Not many have lost rook and knight. I mean, Judith lost it to Gary, I think. Magnus beat Irwin, or I mean Irwin lost, I should say. And I can't really think of other top level events where rook and knight has been winning recently, but yeah, rook and bishop. It's almost like a longer mate in two or something. Yeah, you have to get it where the king gets cut off and the knight can sort of shield the king so you can bring the king close, but normally rook and bishop is a lot harder. Yeah, it's actually harder. Yeah, but rook and knight, there's no set formula, so sometimes people also have more issues with it because of that. So here I played rook c7, Pavel played king g6. Basically the point behind rook c7 is try to prevent f5 here, and try to, if I can't get upon a g5 so in a perfect world, I would like something like this, probably, rook f8 and g5, and then I can always put a knight on f6, like a king g8, knight g4, and I can go to f6, win the pawn, put the knight back on e5, and eventually it should be winning, but it's important because here in this pawn, black can never try to trade it with f6, so that's why Pavel played king g6 here, and now I've played, again, another only move to try and win, which is knight c4. Because again, if I take, it's the same thing with f5 and e5 coming, and then an eventual f4. Yeah, actually in many ways the e4 pawn is sort of shielding your own king, and stopping this idea of f5 and e5. Right, and I mean it's- Because after f5 you can always go, I mean, after king g6. Yeah. Knights, okay. Although here black has to play rook f5 because if black doesn't play rook f5 check, if you play like rook a1, there's knight e5 check, and then this is always losing. Then he's never getting f5. This is always losing because now black has no pawns on the f5 to try and trade off this g3 pawn. So that's why Pavel played rook f5, king e4, and now here he blundered, he played f6, which maybe it still holds, but it makes it a lot more difficult. But again, when you reach these sorts of end games, pretty much the way at least top players do it is we look at the position and try to come up with a setup where we think it's holding, or most likely that there's some way that you can create a fortress. And like in this position really, so there are a few things. When you reach the starting position, you realize if you can get that e5 f5, it's you're probably gonna draw. That's the first thing. But then once we reach this position, it's trying to figure out, so if you go rook f1, knight e5, king g7, after g4, is this a draw or not? So black can probably check. King f4, rook f1, knight f3. And it's hard to play this because after king g6, king g3, you still don't wanna go f5 because then I can play g5. If you play f6, then you weaken the e6 pawn potentially, like rook c6 or even rook e7 here, hitting the pawn on e6. And so you sort of have to wait with king g7 and then after something like g5, king g6, king g4, it's very hard to tell if this is drawing or not drawing. Right, because. Now I think this is a draw, still because- But you're still threatening knight e5 check. Well, it works on f1 though. So like king g7, if I play knight e5, black can still, I think, to start checking. Give you checks, right. Like king f4, check, king here, and then I think I just go back. And now if you try knight g4, I can just go king g7. Because if knight f6, I go king g6. And I think this is probably a draw with correct play. But it's very hard because when you've been playing for so long and both players are tired, you're sort of trying to figure out what makes the most sense. And it's very hard to play this because if you're wrong, you're just gonna lose. Like if you're wrong, you're just gonna lose. Like I'm gonna get like knight e5 and g6 and there's gonna be no hope of anything. Which is why I think Pavel played f6. That's a very interesting point you made, Hikaru, about that when you're trying to defend such positions, it's very important to not go into deep calculations, but sort of just conceptualize a structure or a fortress that you're trying to get and then work towards that instead of looking for moves. Right, exactly. I mean, at this point that's, it's very important to do that because you can't calculate everything. It's just not possible. So that's why, yeah, Pavel played f6 here. And again, it's still, I think Pavel, see what he was thinking when he played f6 was, okay, if I can get f6 e5, so for example, let's just waste a couple of moves. If he can get e5 here, I can never really, this pawn at e5 will never be a weakness. f6 is maybe slightly weak, but not really. And there always are gonna be ideas for the same f5, f4 again. So that was his thought process, was he wasn't sure about the other one. Well, I assume this was his thought process. I don't actually know. But I assume he thought, well, the other one is very passive and if I lose, I just lose. Here at least, there always are gonna be tricks. Like if I ever play like a wrong move, there's gonna be some f5 e5 or king g5, king g4. And so for that reason, I think that's why he played this. However, it's very tricky because after rook c6, black has to play rook g5, only move. Because if you go king f7, there's knight d6 check, winning the rook. King f3, now king f7. It's worth noting rook f5 here is a blunder because I can go king g2. And again, you have the same problem. You can't go king f7, so knight d6. And now if you play e5, I think knight d6 is winning here. Knight d6, rook h5, and knight e4. Rook f5. Rook f5, and this is winning. Okay, what is the technique? I know this one is winning. I remember, I think it's... Yeah, it's rook a6. It's rook a6, and you're in zig-zwang because you can't lose the rook. Because you lose the pawn. You can't go to f7 because of knight d6. King g7? King g7, there's knight d6. Followed by knight e8, knight takes f6. Oh, nice. I mean, actually with rook a6, it doesn't quite work. I realized because like, rook g5, knight e8, king f7, takes rook g6. But I can just... So you need your b6. Yeah, I just put the rook on b6 here. Nice. So then in the end, your knight can jump and defend it from d5 or d7. Yeah, takes rook g6, and just knight d5, and just win material, and it's just a winning end game. So king f3, king f7, knight d6, king g6, knight e4. Trying to put the knight on the best square as well, because I can never get e5, g4, it's a lock on f5. And I figure here, it's gonna be hard for blacks to play f5 and e5 to the pin, and the rook is a little bit clumsy here on g5. So rook f5, king g4, and now he wasted a couple of moves. Played knight d3, trying to get the knight to f4 here. He played f5. I think maybe he could have played, or no, rook e3, actually, I think there's knight f4, king h6, rook c6 again, and you lose, if you lose one of the pawns, it's always just losing. So now he played f5, and it's slowly getting worse and worse, because at the start, if you think about it, he had the pawns in f7, e6. So f7 was a slight weakness, but it wasn't that big of a deal. Now the pawns are getting to a situation where if black can get e5 and f4, it's great. If you don't get e5, you're probably gonna get, you're probably gonna end up getting zugswong here, which is what happened in the game. So king f3. Yeah, so that's the trade-off of trying to play actively with f6 and trying this setup, because now your pawns- Right, it's an active setup. Yeah, it definitely is an active setup. But then your pawns are more weak than they would be. Right, but again, that's sort of the trade-off. It's like, did you rather play actively, and maybe it's technically losing? Or would you rather play passively, where if you're completely fine, it's a draw, but if you aren't, you just lose without even- A fight. Without a fight at all. Right. And so that's why, I mean, I think Pavel played this. So played a couple more random moves, knight c5, rook e1, rook a7, king f6, okay, six king f7. Right, now, I think king e7 here, I think was maybe okay for Pavel. I don't remember. I don't know, yeah, king e7 was the only move, because in the game, he played king f7, looks pretty innocuous, nothing much has changed, but now there's this very unpleasant trick, king f2. Black can't move the rook off of e1, off the e-file, because you lose the pawn on e6. So he plays rook e5, and now I play rook a7. And you can't go back to f6. And you can't go to f6, so knight d7 with the fork. So he needed it for king d6, was that the difference? Yeah, I think that was, because now after king g6, there's this very unpleasant move. Rook c7, and now you can't defend everything. Oh, there's no move. Yeah, like you can't move the rook because you lose the pawn. What about king g6? If you play king g5, there's rook c6. And king f6, knight d7, yes. King f6, knight d7 again, and f4 I just take, and there's knight d3 here winning the book. Oh, nice, yes. So that's why here Pavel played f4, and then after takes, rook d5, just king e3, he resigned in view of a e5, king e4, and he just loses, he loses the pawn here on e5. So that's why I resigned here, so I actually managed to win the game, but it was very, very stressful, for sure. But that means even if you would have gone king e7, it's not over. I think that the king e7 is not quite over. I think it still might be winning. I can probably, this is going on somehow, like rook b6 maybe? I'm not sure, because if I go rook b6, he has to go where? I mean, because in the game he played what? King f7, king f, okay, so this position is losing if it's white's move. Okay, so he has to go king e7, and then if I play rook b6, I think he can still, no, but actually maybe he can't wait, because if he goes king f7, I think it's the same problem. King f2, rook e5, and I play rook b7, and it's the same thing, just, I mean, it's the exact same thing. King f7. So can I go rook e5 at that moment? Rook e5 right here, and now if I check, maybe king d6, king b3. I have to go king d6? Yeah, I mean, it's a very long game. I mean, the game still goes on. Yeah, I mean, I suspect it's probably losing, but it's still, it's very hard too, because like, it's, there are no set ideas, it's move by move, and of course, if you make one wrong move, you just lose instantly, like, happened in the game. So, yeah, so it's a very, very difficult. Very long and a very difficult game. Yeah, I mean, I think- None of this would have happened had you just played rook c8. Yeah, I mean, that's the obvious explanation, and that makes it very difficult, because also there are a lot of twists and turns, so it's like, you know, I thought it was better than I was playing with these concepts in mind, just push the a and b pawns up the board, and then right when I thought I had it with a5, he has this rook b5, and it just starts all over again. So it was very difficult, yeah, it was a very, very long, very tiring game. Right, now tell me a little bit about this opening situation that you had here, where you were trying to look for this idea, you came up with queen b3, but there's opening preparation has just generally become such a huge thing in chess, and a lot of people, they don't really enjoy it. I mean, how do you feel about this intense opening, openings that we see where people play theory for 25 moves, especially at your level? Yeah, I mean, it's making chess very, very hard, and I think especially in the opens, because a lot of the lower rate of players, like between 24 and 25 hundred are so well prepared, but it's very hard to get an advantage, and I think that's why these days, I actually tend to prefer wrap it a little bit more, is because I feel like in the old days, classical was sort of more pure in a sense, because you came with your ideas, but you tried to prove the ideas in the middle game much more, so you needed the time to think, whereas now I feel like you already get to the middle game, or very deep into the middle game, before you even start thinking, so it's actually kind of the whole situations reversed in a way, unlike in the past. But you can't really ignore it, I mean, you still have to be very well prepared in the opening, even though it doesn't feel very healthy for chess itself. Yeah, that's definitely true. I mean, I was thinking, like I remember back in 2008, I think it was, I played the Olympiad in Dresden for the US, and I played, well, I played Hari, actually, I played Hari Krishna. What happened? Strong Indian Grandmaster, and I mean, well, actually I can even show on the board, just like. What was the result? He's not gonna be happy about me showing this. Oh no, then if you won, we're not allowed to show that game. But the point was that basically, I did not prepare before the game, that's the point. So in the game, I think I played, did I play Nf3, or did I play G? I think I played G3, I think with G3, G6, Bg2, Bg7, I think I played D3, he played Nf6, I played Bd2, he played D5, I mean, nothing special, I played Qc1, with the idea that if he castles, maybe I'll play Bh6, h4, Nc3, and h5, some kind of like fantasy attack a little bit. In the game, I think he played Qd6, and after. Is your opponent set up? Yes it is, yeah, exactly. And yeah, so like in the game, so I played C4, he took, I played Nd3, I think he might have played, he played something like Nc6, Nc4, Qe6, and after Nh, I think this is the game, after Nh3, I think he was just like, he was much worse. Like in the under 10 moves, he got a very bad position, and he was much worse. This was a classical game. Yeah, this was the Olympiad, U.S. Indian. Oh yeah, okay. Yeah, this was a classical game. I mean. But it's the kind of point. It looks like one of your chess.com, Speed Jest games. Yeah, that it does as well, yeah. So like the point though is I didn't prepare it all for that game, and I was able to just play this sort of like very basic setup, and just play the game. Whereas now, I could not do that against anyone. It doesn't matter what the level is, like they would be prepared for stuff like G3, or B3, or all these different offbeat systems. And so, like that's one way that it's changed a lot, and you really just have to prepare for everything now, because there's just, there's no way around it, at least in classical chess. So now I go, when you're playing closed events, and you have your players list with you, you kind of know who you're playing, so you can prepare the ideas against them. But a tournament like this, like the Gibraltar Masters, where you don't essentially have a player's list, what's preparation like for such an event then? It's different. I mean, I think you need a little bit of luck with the pairings early on. You kind of want the players who are more aggressive, as opposed to the players who are more solid. I've been a little bit unlucky in that sense, I feel, at least this year. Basically, you try to come up with things that they're not gonna be familiar with. So everyone, no matter what the level is, they have certain openings, a certain opening repertoire that they follow pretty much exclusively. At the top level, it's different. Everyone can play many different things, but mostly it's like 23, 24 hundreds. They play set systems. So kind of you want to try to get them outside their comfort zone, where they can't just play a lot and move quickly, because then they're gonna have to use time, and then they're more likely to get low on time and make mistakes in general. So the main thing is you just try to come up with things that will surprise them. It doesn't have to be like super hardcore theory. Sometimes you can't avoid it, but generally it's just like you try to find little ideas. So it's like in this game, it's the Queen B3 idea. I mean, it's just kind of a normal move, but like Rook D1 and I D1, it's not something that you'll see all the time. It's rather unusual. So you just try to come up with things that are objectively not bad. They don't have to be great, but as long as they're not bad and you can sort of try to play the game, that's the most critical thing. Right now, and because this is a master class, I have to ask you this question. What would be a one big tip for players across levels to improve their game? I actually would say, probably looking at middle games played by top players. So let's say you play Night Orcs, probably a bad example because it's too forcing, but like if you look at the Slavs or the Queens Gambit Clients, if you look at what the top players are playing in the middle game, try to understand what the ideas are, I think that's the easiest way to improve. And I think also, like I've been doing a lot of streaming, I think a lot of people have learned quite a bit because like the explanations, like generally it's, I do, I mean, obviously there's plenty of tactics involved, but at the same time, I also explain like what I'm trying to do in the position with my minor pieces. And of course, when you just look at games on a computer screen or with books, you don't necessarily, well, you don't have the thoughts of what the players were thinking at the time, but still, I think if you look through what they're actually doing in the middle game, that makes a big difference and that's probably the biggest way to improve. I would say that is something that everyone doesn't seem to do because everyone looks at tactics and I mean, everyone plays a million Blitz games everywhere. You talking about yourself right now? No, but I just mean everyone does it because I mean, it's the most natural way to improve because you get better pattern recognition. It's the most tactics or the simplest thing to do, but I think you're trying to improve in a more general sense, just looking at games and the opening systems you play is much more important than trying to memorize variations. And do you have a strong book recommendation? Not right off, no. But I mean, it's just, let's say you look at like Tata Steel, for example. I think there have been a lot of games being played in the Italian. If you look at those games, you just go to say Move 10, whichever system they're playing, A6 or D5 or A5, whichever system Kramnik's losing with every day. When you look at that, you just go through those games kind of, just go to like Move 10 or whichever setup you like, go to like Move 10, Move 11, and then just go through the next 10 moves, try to see what they're doing exactly. Normally, it tends to be pretty traditional. You'd like put the night on G3, play for D4 as white, or as black, you play for like D5 or K8, all this sort of stuff, or Bish B6. But basically try to understand what they're doing in the middle game. That's the most critical thing, I think, to improve in. Right, now you mentioned streaming, and you've been streaming a lot, a lot, 35 hours a day almost, it seems. Not that much, but you know, how are you balancing your professional playing life with the streaming because you're streaming like a professional? Yeah, I mean the thing is, actually before I played in London, I did a lot of streaming, and I didn't actually play well, I didn't feel in London. I know I survived the classical course. You're talking about the London chess classic? Yeah, I know that I won it, but I mean in the classical games, like I did not get good positions against Maxime, I did not get a good position against Fabiano, so obviously in Rapid and Blitz, I played better than them, but nonetheless, I felt I didn't play great, and that's sort of when I started, so I've sort of just like, basically been nonstop chess, like I stream, then I study, I've been doing it all, obviously, and the tournament hasn't gotten up to a good start, but I think there's a lot of time in the day, and if I wasn't like streaming, I'm not sure that I would necessarily be studying chess either, so it's not necessarily that thing. That or like wasting time playing games, plenty of other things. Right, now before I open up to our audience, today we had a big announcement by Emil Sotowski about Fide and Aegon's contract regarding the world championship being dominated. Aegon's only gonna be involved with the world championship cycle, only with the Grand Prix, and Fide has full control now over the rest of it. Your thoughts on it? I only saw like a Facebook post, maybe five minutes before I came down here, so I haven't really seen the details. I think it's a good thing from what I understood, the contract as far as I knew was almost unbreakable, so the fact that they were able to break the contract or cancel it is definitely a good sign. I think things are different. The Grand Prix cycle's gonna be a bunch of knockout events, there's gonna be another knockout for a spot in the candidates, so I think in general, I don't know if I agree with them changing all these things, but I think certainly trying to do things differently is a very good start. Even if it doesn't work, it's good to be doing something different in that. I think we'll see where it goes, but it's always a good sign considering the way things have been for the last like 10 years. Right, well we're gonna open the floor for audience questions, anybody? And if you've got something online as well? Streaming, apart from chess and streaming. Obvious, I like to read actually, I read a lot quite frequently. I think reading is probably the favorite thing that I like to do with my free time. That and also like playing sports, I really love tennis, I like swimming as well. What kind of reading? What kind of reading? Oh, well I mean I'm still reading this book, but I'm reading this very heavy book on the healthcare system in the US right now. I think it's called A Bitter Pill is the title. It's about 500 pages, about like two thirds of the way through the book. So I read a bit of everything, a lot of history as well. Some sci-fi too, so a bit of everything. All right. In the opening that you showed in the game against the piano, what about of the Queen B3? What about the Bishop A6 in different situations? How do you... Right, so. Oh, you're saying if Black plays Bishop A6 on Queen B3, yes. Yeah, or even later moment when you play the C1. Yeah, I think on Bishop A6, the reason that Bishop... And even later. Yeah, I think the reason Black didn't play Bishop A6 right away is because I think here after 95, you've lost the tempo. You've got Bishop B7, Bishop A6. To give you an example, there are many lines where normally, not from this system actually, but something like G3, Bishop A6. There are positions like this that can occur, but in these sorts of setups, Black's gone Bishop A6 in one move instead of two moves, whereas in the game you are using an extra tempo to go Bishop A6, and after Bishop A6, 95. If you castle, I think Rfd1 is still a slight issue because it's very hard to develop. You can't go 97 because then you lose the pawn, and if you play 97, I think C takes d5, Knight takes d5, there might be d6 here, but even just d takes d5 is probably quite good because I think after takes, I think White can play Knight takes d5 here. I'm not sure if I remember the line perfectly, but I think there's some tricks here with Bishop d5, knight d7, and I think it's E6 here, and I vaguely remember this being dangerous, but I know there's theory, I don't remember it right now, but normally it's because you've played Bishop B7, so committing an extra tempo is gonna hurt with the development. Right, anything else? We've got... So you're sponsored by Red Bull, do you actually drink the Red Bull can that's sat there, or does he drink it often, or drink the whole can, or two cans or three cans during the game, and do you find it helps? I mean, I've actually, I haven't been drinking Red Bull during this tournament yet. Sometimes I do, it's a mix. Sometimes I drink Red Bull, sometimes I just drink water in the can. I mean, you can do either, but for the most part, I've never found that it makes a huge difference unless I'm really tired, so if I'm really tired, I think caffeine in general does help, but if I'm just on the times and everything's good, it generally doesn't make a huge difference, so I don't feel there are many advantages. That game that you just showed us probably required a can or two. Yeah, yeah, yeah, I came here, yeah, I came here, yeah. No. No, no. They've also got Abdul Malik Zansaya now, from Kazakhstan, yeah. I wanted to ask a question about the game, because you mentioned that you had to prepare the line until the position when you were going to play E4, and you had thought variations where he would play Rc8 instead of Rc8. When you reached that position, you had played almost very rapidly. How does this affect his decision of playing such a risky move, such as Rc4 when he knows that you have been playing very quick and you might know this move and be able to refute it by home preparation? Yeah, I think it's very hard when that happens. It's happened to me many times as well. I think generally, everyone comes to a certain point where they're prepared, and so I think Pavel probably, he wasn't playing instantly, he was using a minute here or there. I think he was like a couple of minutes to play C4, a couple of minutes on Nc5, so he kind of was sort of in his preparation. But I think when you reach those moments, it's very critical sort of to just remember, as I always say, it's hard to do this, but you're always doing okay. You know there's always a solution to the problem presented in front of you. And so for me, I try to just remember that, and if I don't see anything wrong with whatever I'm calculating, I try to move relatively quickly. Now of course, if that keeps happening beyond that move, like let's just say I blitz out E5 or something, then yes, psychologically, you really don't know. You think, okay, either you're completely fine or you're just losing, because obviously it means you're playing what are the top computer suggestions. Because anytime your opponent moves instantly, it means for the most part that you're playing the best moves. So I think in general, I just, for me, I try to stay calm, try to remember everything is always okay. No matter what, there always is a solution somewhere. And that's generally my approach. So chess is very rich in resources. Any position you can find. Yeah, I think computers pretty much have taught us that, sure, if you can do anything, I think you can probably make one or two slightly dubious moves, even in the opening. As long as you don't make an outright blunder or something that's like just, you know, push the F pawn in front of your king or something, something insane, well, move on maybe, not, but if you do it like, you know, you do something that fundamentally violates the basic opening principles, then yeah, I mean, you can end up in trouble, but when you prepare stuff and you're at move 10, move 15, whatever it is, like you know you're always gonna be okay. So it's just very important to remember that. And that's, then you need to use like 15, 20 minutes. I do that quite frequently. At the same time, it can also backfire for the other opponent, because if you're using no time and you just blitz out to like move 20, move 25, then you're not really in the game at the same time. So like in Vaikon's day, there was a game between, I think it was Vita and Van Forest and Van Forest played, I think 30 moves or something, using maybe one minute for the first 30 moves and he lost the game because the thing is, he was so programmed just playing these moves instantly that he wasn't really in the game. He wasn't calculating, he was just making all these moves whereas his opponent Vita had been thinking a lot and so therefore he was calculating, he was sort of right there in the moment. So it can cut both ways as well. So we've got a message from our chat, one of your fans, Zila Begas. Mr. Naka Mural, thanks for taking my question. Why do you think the Bong Cloud has not gained too much popularity in classical chess? That's a great troll question. Yeah, it's not a good opening, let's leave it at that. As simple as that. And we've got one more, Abba or Red Hot Chili Peppers? Right now, I would say Red Hot Chili Peppers, right now. Yeah, you said that, so we had this quickfire round yesterday, it was like a rapid fire question thing we did with you where you were asked what was the song that you would sing in your American Idol audition? And you actually said Dancing Queen by the Abba. Yeah, I know, it's more upbeat, it's not a tempo song. It's easier to do that if you don't have any rhythm then to do something that's more rockish. All right, all right, any more questions? I have a quick question. Mike. I haven't asked you enough in my career. There's an old saying that history does not repeat itself but it does rhyme. I'm curious, if you ever won two chess games using the exact same trick. Talking about against masters, we're not talking about your scholastic days or anything like that. That's a good question. I'm sure it happened when I was probably around master I am but in recent years where I used some idea and it worked twice. I mean, I would say like the Kings Indian but that's not really an idea specifically. But that's the only thing. I would say the Kings Indian, this 92 line, I beat several people in it. I beat Belyovsky, I think, I beat Gelfand. I think there was someone else that I beat and basically you reach the same position by like move 14 or 15 and that's about as close as I would say that I've come to winning multiple games at a high level with the same idea. So you reach the same favorable position using different move orders but you're still getting to the same comfortable position as well? Yeah, well, I think it was literally the same position almost to move 15. And comfortable is a nice way of putting it because you can also just lose. Yeah. Any last questions? Don't be scared. All right, well, I think we're done with the audience question. Before we let you go now, you've always been somebody with a style of play that has really suited open events and you've always performed extremely well at them. Last two rounds, the first two games here have not really gone your way. How do you recover from that? What is it that you do to get back? I think just doing more of the same, just playing good moves. I think like I said before, I think there's a fair amount of luck involved in the sense that depending who you play, sometimes your opponents, like my game today specifically, where your opponent just somehow comes prepared with the opening idea. I mean, he played a novelty and there was no reason he should have ever expected me to play the line even. So sometimes that happens. But for the most part, I think if you play good moves, generally the cream will rise to the top. So, and I mean, like I think back to the Blitz and Rapid especially, like in those events there were plenty of people who were down and then towards then somehow they started creeping back towards the top. And I think, I expect here won't be much different if I play well, I'll have chances because it's such a strong event. And I mean, Levan and Maxime already drew, I think. So they're gonna be a lot of draws. So I just need to put together a streak. And also when I did win this event, and I believe it was 2007, maybe eight, whichever year it was, I did win my last five games. So after starting three and five, I won five in a row. So certainly anything can happen. But we're looking forward to your combative chess. And thank you for doing this with us, Hikaru. Thank you. Thank you.