Magnus Carlsen vs Fabiano Caruana | Game 2 - 2018 World Chess Championship

katma 11 Nov 2018
World Chess Champion Magnus Carlsen of Norway defends his title against challenger Fabiano Caruana of the United States in Game 2 of the 2018 World Chess Championship match that is being held in London. It's a best of 12 games where the first player to earn 6.5 points earns the lion's share of a $1.14 million prize pool, and the title of "World Chess Champion". Both players entered game 2 with a half-point each. Is it normal for the black side to at some point be pressing in these top level games? No, but this has thus far been the story in this championship with a revisit to a rook and pawn endgame.
PGN:
1. d4 Nf6 2. Nf3 d5 3. c4 e6 4. Nc3 Be7 5. Bf4 O-O 6. e3 c5 7. dxc5 Bxc5 { D37 Queen's Gambit Declined: Harrwitz Attack, Main Line } 8. Qc2 Nc6 9. a3 Qa5 10. Rd1 Rd8 11. Be2 Ne4 12. O-O Nxc3 13. bxc3 h6 14. a4 Ne7 15. Ne5 Bd6 16. cxd5 Nxd5 17. Bf3?! { (0.57 → -0.22) Inaccuracy. Best move was Nxf7. } (17. Nxf7 Kxf7 18. Bh5+ Kg8 19. Bxd6 Rxd6 20. c4 Bd7 21. cxd5 Bxa4 22. Qa2 Rxd5 23. Bg4 Bxd1) 17... Nxf4 18. exf4 Bxe5 19. Rxd8+ Qxd8 20. fxe5 Qc7 21. Rb1 Rb8 22. Qd3 Bd7 23. a5 Bc6 24. Qd6 Qxd6 25. exd6 Bxf3 26. gxf3 Kf8 27. c4 Ke8 28. a6 b6 29. c5 Kd7 30. cxb6 axb6 31. a7 Ra8 32. Rxb6 Rxa7 33. Kg2 e5 34. Rb4 f5 35. Rb6 Ke6 36. d7+ Kxd7 37. Rb5 Ke6 38. Rb6+ Kf7 39. Rb5 Kf6 40. Rb6+ Kg5 41. Rb5 Kf4 42. Rb4+ e4 43. fxe4 fxe4 44. h3 Ra5 45. Rb7 Rg5+ 46. Kf1 Rg6 47. Rb4 Rg5 48. Rb7 Rg6 49. Rb4
Internet Chess Club (ICC)
Software: Blitzin
bit.ly/179O93N
I'm a self-taught National Master in chess out of Pennsylvania, USA who was introduced to the game by my father in 1988 at the age of 8. The purpose of this channel is to share my knowledge of chess to help others improve their game. I enjoy continuing to improve my understanding of this great game, albeit slowly. Consider subscribing here on TR-tv for frequent content, and/or connecting via any or all of the below social medias. Your support is greatly appreciated. Take care, bye. :D
★ LIVESTREAM twitch.tv/ChessNetwork
★ FACEBOOK facebook.com/ChessNetwork
★ TWITTER twitter.com/ChessNetwork
★ GOOGLE+ google.com/+ChessNetwork
★ PATREON www.patreon.com/ChessNetwork
★ DONATE www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_s-xclick&hosted_button_id=QLV226E6FUUWG

YORUMLAR

  • 2018 World Chess Championship playlist: tr-tv.net/plid-PLQsLDm9Rq9bGybC78VlSZR8BKvbIUAiw8 Thank you for your continued support of this channel. ❤️

    • Big fan here; thanks for covering the championship, and so well. Question: what am I missing about 17. Nc4? Doesn’t that win the exchange with 17. ...Qc7 18. Bxd6 Rxc6 19. Nxc6 Qxc6? I don’t see any in-betweeners to prevent this, or a way of taking white’s threatening knight and bishop.

    • ChessNetwork thank you please cover the rest of the championship.

    • Theres a typo in the description... Cauranas name

    • Thanks for sharing,man!

    • Thanks so much for covering the championship! I really appreciate your insightful commentary and pop-quizzes.

  • Why did the time on the clocks on the side suddenly increase near the end?

  • Thank u So much Mr. jerry u have extremely out standing explanation skill about the games. thank u so much man.

  • Any chance off showing material advantage in the dead space on the left. I'm a newb, sorry.

  • 9:45 KC4?

  • Thanks for the analysis :)

  • Great Game! Nice to see this on youtube!

  • 19:00 - the hypothetical presented with the Rook moving to g6 and the King moving to e8. Jerry states that there is no way to win a pawn. But could you not play Re6+ and after the King reacts you could pick up the e Pawn. Or am I missing something?

  • What a draw again! What

  • Man that Jerry guy was painful to listen to; he was so slow! and wasted so much time on moronic sidelines. Guessing he is sub 2k because he missed half the beauty of that game. This network should stop letting him post! He's just chaff obfuscating real players that are posting intelligent commentary elsewhere on the internet. I'm going to watch the rest of the games on Agadmator's or Matojellic or Gingergm or anywhere else that doesn't tarnish the art with ignorance.

  • It's not about "how you look at it." Your life is a lot better without chess. Before you become unnecessarily upset, let me tell you this: This article is to give motivation for those who want to quit chess. With too many web pages in support of playing chess, it is time to be real. It's not even worth having it as hobby (more likely than not). You WILL become addicted. And when you do, it will be so bad that you might as well call your life miserable. You can say all you want, but chess absolutely has no other point than to fill the pointless egos of its slaves. When the anger over a loss puts its heavy weight on the clear table of your thoughts, it does so for no good reason -- you get angry over nothing. Is chess even a good waste of time? No. All you do is either tear down a person's self-esteem or you become a toxic person. Chess tears down self-esteem by the needless self-perturbation of the loser; creates toxic people by the inflating of egos. Before you think me angry, let me explain to you that I am angry for good reason. You will say: "moderation is key," "just because you're a sore lose doesn't mean you have to belittle the game," "anything can be a waste of time if you do it too much," "chess has provided me a joy in life that nothing else has," "competition is good," "to each their own," "you can't describe the meaning of life," or "it's just a game not to be taken seriously." Any and all excuses are just modified versions of the ones listed above. But as it was mentioned right from the very title: THERE IS NO EXCUSE FOR CHESS. Its sole purpose is to utterly destroy your opponent. You will say, "that's the objective of any competitive game." At least in sports you get to have physical exercise. You can have a team. And what about fighting and single-player sports? Using fighting sports as an exaggerated contrast, they only cripple their players (which the players themselves will come to hate being crippled in old age) and will make them realize that it was a waste of time to destroy rather than to create. They have wounded rather than healed. They did not help anyone at all while they inflated their own ego. And for what vain reason? Again, at least exercise is a possibility. In chess, however, you get the worst form of being crippled... and that can be no exaggeration. You get no exercise and your mind becomes a numb, distracted blob. Chess eats at your thoughts and burrows its way through your brain just as termites eat away at a healthy and limber tree. It is not a game for the rich. And when I write "rich," I mean "rich" both financial-wise and character-wise. The old saying is, “time is money.” Even still, all that the majority of chess players do is waste time. They waste it on a useless, ungracious game that they will eventually regret playing so much. It is sad that most chess defendants don’t even care for the poor examples of the likes of Paul Morphy, Emmanuel Lasker, Wilhelm Steinitz, and whoever else died a penniless/insane death. All they care about them is their chess and (sad) death. But you say, “enjoy life and do what you want.” Chess will not even allow you that. You are trapped in the burden of feeding your own ego, whether you consciously admit it or not. You still keep playing it anyway. Because addiction has set in, it is difficult to fill in the hole that was left behind by this predatory, rapacious game. But there are few things that trance attention the way chess does. Painting, playing or creating music, and creative writing are among the few. These things trance the attention so long as they are done freely by their artists. And among these, there are two common things: artistry; creation. Once you get yourself to do something creative, you’ll feel the trance. Why, then, is it not easy to do these things? Because chess nowadays is crated within the instant-gratification times of technology. It’s so easy to simply click on a site and start playing right away. Print this out and tape it somewhere near your computer. When you read it, you will lose more interest in chess and your life will start to become better... even if only by a little.

    • You clearly put a lot of effort into a comment - but no one seems to have replied yet; so here i am.... hey.. no one cares, please stop posting such long comments with such large paragraph spaces.

    • wtf

  • move 17 , why not Nc4 insted of Bf3

  • Thank you

  • Your commentaries are excellent. You really explain things properly and don't go too fast. I'll be watching more! Woody Harrelson played the first move of Game 1. Your voice reminds me of his a bit.

  • 8:04, B to d7, yeah that's definitely d7, not d6, not at all.

  • wow jerry this is probably the best chess video ever, you're getting ridiculously good at this commentary stuff

  • I'm a 1570 and I smoke weed every game.

  • You like that move a real lot?

  • why no more leela chess ?

  • Great commentary, as always!

  • you have the best analysis of every single chess channel! bravo!

  • Can someone explain for what "average centipawn loss" means? Thank you in advance

  • Im scared for Magnus. For years I always thought Caruana was better

  • at 11:10 Jerry wrote ”Tv” with arrows

  • At 19:22, I believe it’s move 44, why does white move h2-h3 instead of f2-f3?

  • At 8:40, I would've moved the white bishop to D3. Either the black King will have to move, or the bishop will have to be blocked by the F7 or G7 pawns. Bishop takes the pawn. It doesn't matter which. Pawn takes the bishop. Queen takes the pawn...but then bishop takes Queen. OR move white bishop to H5. Black now has to move the King or block the bishop with the pawn. Otherwise, it will be check the next move when the bishop takes the F7 pawn. The King could only move right or left leaving an opening for the white Queen to cross the board to H. If the King moves left. The Queen goes to H7. Checkmate in two moves. King goes to H8. White knight to G6, check. Pawn takes Knight. Queen takes pawn. The king is screwed.

  • Thanks Jerry!

  • Somebody help me, What's wrong with 17. Nc4? Forking the Queen and Bishop... it looks like you're just going to pick up the exchange?

  • This is the first championship I have really paid attention to, and im impressed in the TR-tv chess community, and how fast and well it covers the games. Both games this far have been so even, and that mistake graph really shows how good both players are.

  • Great stuff thanks Jerry

  • Terrific analysis. Thank you.

  • Wow, this is a really really good analysis! :)

  • I have very quickly started appreciating all the thought that goes into your thumbnails. Everything is there for a reason.

  • Hi Jerry Thank you for the coverage! :)

  • Two or three years back Karjakin was the challenger and it was a LOT of draws until the rapid decided the match. Wonder if Caruana gets the same "criticism" of playing boring if this turns out to develop similarly.

  • Great analysis. Thanks

  • Best analysis. good!

  • what if 17kxf7 kxf7 18qh7 ?

  • dammit Jerry! I missed you . keep up the work

  • Thanks, Jerry

  • "This is a dreamed environment for the bishops" haha

  • hey everyone, jerry the fairy here

    • A fairy so awesome that I feel proud of having been called one in high school.

  • Pretty much 2 computers playing , these two are phenomenal

  • 2 of the most accurate players in history!

  • your explanations are really great. for a noob like me, its nice to have a window into whats going on so I can begin to appreciate the skill of the players and the subtlety and drama of the games.

  • what does average centipawn loss mean?

    • +Leognarbro Davinci alright,thx

    • A centipawn is 1/100 of a pawn. Centipawns are how chess engines express advantage. If you have ever seen a computer evaluation it looks something like +1.25. The engine is saying white has an advantage equivalent to being up 1.25 pawns. If the number was negative then black has the advantage. So ACPL(average centipawn loss) is determined by comparing all of your moves to the top computer move. If you play exactly like the computer your ACPL = 0. If you blunder often it will be high, like 100+.

  • why not to play knight c4 in that pause you made? Queen has to move, you can later take bishop on d6 with either knight or bishop and still be protected by the other one. Also qeen doesn't have a good move either, if she goes up, you move knight and have discover attack with light square bishop, b6 is in knight's range, if she moves to c7, you take that bishop on d6 with your bishop and keep her on the run, if she goes b5, you take her with a pawn and if she goes c5, again you move dark bishop to d6, at which point the only place she can run to is c6. I mean whatever you put on d6 can be taken by the rook, but still you can retake it with the other pice, so effectively you change ds bishop and a knight for ds bishop and a rook.

  • Sorry but att move 17, why cannot the white knight just jump in for the queen and bishop fork?

  • Clash Royale 1.0

  • cant wait for game 3!!!!!!!!!!!!! GO MAGNUS! great video as always, ive watched EVERY video you've posted for the past year! i hope to start my own chess stream soon.

  • Great analysis, can’t wait for game 3

  • Fabiano Marijuana Played well

  • Game 2 wasn't quite as bad as the first game; again, the game was drawn at move 32, but these idiots just kept on going. Not a good start. Are these guys the best around, these days?

    • mel obrien IDIOT obviously lacked attention early on in your life or most probably now.

    • They see him trollin...

    • Why dont u go win the wc

    • its part of magnus strategy to tire out opponents.

  • analysis fine , but I would suggest first show the whole match ? then go through some options-it helps to grasp the development of the match, then possibilities

  • Nice shot. As we say in Brazilian way "Jerry's understanding is an absurd" meaning you are beast explaining. Nice game, nice comments ☺

  • Ben Finegold said you were 1400 at his stream in match 1.I don't believe that's true at all. You explain the games better than some GM's.

  • Game 1 was not a world championship game; it was studded with errors or at least bad choices, and the game was drawn around move 50. It was total nonsense and a great disappointment. I can only conclude that modern ratings are grossly inflated in comparison to former champions. I can imagine these duds playing Fischer or Spassky or Petrosian...the list goes on. Pretty mediocre stuff, about IM level at best. I hope this second game is better.

    • mel obrien what a ridiculous childish comment are you just plain stupid.?These guys are the best in the world, yes there were the occasional inaccuracies but they are also not super computers and just in case you are unaware Chess is extremely complex!

    • No way, I really hope you're joking. Even Fischer admitted that Kasparov would beat him, and Carlsen is objectively as good or better than Kasparov in his prime. You're looking at the past with rose-colored glasses, the champions of the past made numerous inaccuracies and terrible blunders as well, and if you go through their games with an engine it will reflect this fact every bit as much if not more than modern chess does.

    • They did a study using computers to rate the average "correctness" of chess moves that players made, past and present... And for the most part, modern players are better.

    • Todays players are way more accurate than the old players

    • magnus will arguably be the best chess player in history. I would pay a lot of money to see magnus vs fischer

  • Respect goes out to Fabi and Carlsen.

  • Super nice video. Thank you.

  • Jerry, make sure you sleep enough before live game broadcast. The lack of sleep affects your output immensely. You barely pulled yourself up mentally in game 2, and it was only inside the 2nd hour or so. It is important for you to be rested! Its WCC.

  • I have never played chess, and i have no idea what is going on but its a interesting video

    • +RidingOnLightning yeah, just need to find someone to play it with. But looks like a fun game, i have always been a fan of statigic games like warhammer and magic the gathering

    • You should try it out sometime, it's a really interesting game with both strategic and tactical elements that is fun at any skill level. And you don't really have to feel bad if someone is better because even at the Grand Master level there is a huge skill disparity. The top GMs would absolutely destroy the average GM, and there's only around 1500 Grand Masters in the world so it's really crazy how much of a ridiculous skill difference there is.

  • Is their playstyle noticeably affected by Alpha Zero?

  • Did white make a suboptimal move prior to blacks Qa5??

  • Jerry: The World Champion of Chess Teachers, simply awesome.

  • Of all the hundreds of youtube chess channels and dozens of analysts, there are only two people who make you enjoy chess and benefit from their brilliant and profound analysis : Jerry from ChessNetwork and Antonio Agadmator.

    • +Silvano Rasta have you a link ?

    • +Ilyas Merengui I understand. In that case have you watched games commentated by Akobian in the Saint Louis Chess channel? Highly recommended

    • +Silvano Rasta i really like Mato, he makes me laugh a lot with his style but Makes me laugh a lot with his style but he is not a deep analyst.

    • How about Matojelic

  • Nice analysis as always. But i have a question: Why is 17. Nc4 not an Option?

  • You know that a draw is the MOST COMMON outcome in a chess game? Maybe they should take that into account and play on a lower time. 100minutes each is ridiculous and only aids toward a draw. Blunders should be a part of the game IMO. Chess at this timerates are more like a word puzzle than it is a strategic game.

    • Chuck Algren People have been predicting the demise of chess for over a century, and yet it is still going strong. Do you have statistics or other evidence to show that chess is declining in popularity? Also, you may be bored by long games, but I am not.

    • +macleadg I play chess competitively myself and there is nothing more boring than a 200+ minute match. Chess is meant to be a strategic war game and without the time constraints it's a snooze fest before it's intriguing. Plus a shorter time requires more from the players and drastically lowers the rate of draws. But sure, cling to your dust and watch it go. Chess has been on a steady decline in popularity and as a chess fan I believe that they need MUCH shorter times, like 15+0 Classical or 3+2 Blitz as the highest to keep this game alive. If not, sponsors won't sponsor, competitive players will abandon it for card games $ and it'll quickly fall out of the scope from casuals as well. Becoming another shelved board game. I want chess to live and flourish but the general attitude, like yours so kindly display, is killing it with its elitist bullshit.

    • Chuck Algren Umm.. you do know there are three rating categories (blitz, rapid, and classical), right? You do know that these guys, great as they are, make mistakes even at classical time controls, right? You do know that if the 12-game match at classical time control is tied, they will play a tiebreak at rapid, and then blitz (if necessary), right? You do know that draws can be just as interesting and intense as games with a decisive result, right? You do know that every chess player already knows that draws are the most common result, so you’re bringing nothing new to the discussion, right? (Shaking my head, rolling my eyes, sighing in exasperation).

    • This is about which player understands chess at a deeper level, not which one can move the pieces faster in time trouble. There's a lot more luck and random chance involved in faster time controls because you simply cannot analyze every move at depth and sometimes you just need to cross your fingers and hope you're making the best move. These time controls show who the better player really is, obviously correspondence chess is the only thing that would show the most understanding of the game but that doesn't work anymore where the players can just cheat and use engine analysis. Also it would be insanely boring for the spectators.

    • Don't worry, if they're drawn by the 12th game, they'll have shorter time control tie breaks, just like Carlsen-Karjakin 2 years back.

  • Thank you so much for those videos.

  • You're just amazing Jerry, every day i'm waiting for your analyses although I watch many youtube chess channels. Thanks for your vidéos you're the best chess analyst ever.

  • I can't see why queen takes at 9:24 isn't a mistake because of bf3 from White. If Black took with the pawn he would maintain the double attack against a4, but maybe his king is a bit airy?

  • Very clear analysis, congratulations. Thanks to you I went much deeper in this game than I did in real time.

  • 6 average centipawn loss! dam

  • Great Coverage Jerry! Go to CN on twitch no matter what!

  • both players are monster of chess

  • This is the Caruana I hoped to see, strange how the players with black are the ones pressing for a win.

  • Thanks Jerry!

  • Great game dude

  • I learn a lot with you. Sir. From Canada.

  • Despite the draw I still think it was a great game. A lot of times draws are as instructive as wins or loses. What I find instructive here is that Carlsen must have considered the endgame right after the queen exchange perfectly holdable while I would have seen it as somewhat tricky or unpleasant for white at first. I would have probably been thrown off by the fact that 4 vs 3 pawns is less drawish than 3 vs 2 and white`s worse pawn structure.

  • Don’t give up

  • I am not watching this because it's world chess championship. I am watching this because you have uploaded it Jerry. I desperately keep waiting for your analysis of any game

  • In the position shown in 13:38 can't black play rook to b8 and if white plays bishop captures pawn b7 then rook gets a free bishop because white can't take black's bishop (back rank weakness)

    • Filippos Manolis but white would play a move like h4 and black can never move rook or bishop

  • After a long long time Carlsen isn't losing rating in games he hasn't won

  • Will be following this match through jerry. I watched jerry and then john for game one yesterday, and not to butt heads but i like jerry's level of detail more. Rewatching the game through john was just a rehash with less, it was too glazed over. Love that jerry follows a few lines and variations, makes me appreciate the game more with roughly the same video runtime.

  • Best chess channel on TR-tv. Keep up the great work.

  • Thank you for the analysis Jerry

  • I thought Bf3 wasn't good than playing Bb5

  • Thanks Jerry!!

  • i bet money on fabiano at 2 to 1 odds. bet 4 to win 8

  • caruana is already superior to one piece, unfortunately draw

  • Enjoyed the video a lot and learn a lot more :) Great stuff. From a breton viewer

  • Whenever I watch your videos, I'm now always expecting Alphazero to give a word of wisdom at the end.

    • MogMovies lol, those are truly memorable That stuck bishop on the French...poor guy

  • This one came down to a nail biter!! Love it, thank you!! Peace ✌- Zach Van Harris JR

  • This is going to be one of those tournaments where one player wins by only one or two games.

  • 8:49 would Nc4 be a good move? Love the channel. Keep up the good work :D

    • No because q:c3 q:c3 N:f3 and e2 is hanging, ithought that this is the tactical idea that he meant

    • Qxc3, exhange of queens then the knight on c3 can always take the bishop on e2 with check

  • Kings can come out and play now that the Queens are gone. Applies everywhere

  • very crisp and clear explanations. extremely prefer your easy style. Absolutely Best!

  • I follow many reviewers, but you’re the best for many reasons Jerry! Good Job

  • I don't get why Caruana was so quick with all of his moves.... What was his idea with that?!

    • I don't know, but he only had 6 average centipawn loss, it would have been difficult for him to realistically push for more.

  • I love watching chess videos. But I often lose track between real moves (what happened in the game) and proposed moves. Would it be possible to distinguish on screen (possibly through use of colors or glowing graphics?) a proposed move vs. an historic (real) move?

    • +Oblivion CST , can the viewer tell the difference between those on-screen? My apologies if this is a stupid question.

    • +TonyG Starcraft , I do agree it should be clear enough, but sometimes I get lost in scenarios that are played out 7 and 8 moves ahead, and I find myself thinking, "Wait. Is this the real game, or a proposed outcome of a possible move?" I notice that all moves on the board are outlined in blue. The originating square and the destination square are both outlined in blue when a piece moves. If that color was blue for real moves and another color like red or orange for "scenario" moves, it would achieve the idea I'm forwarding. Having said that, I do not envy the editor of these videos, and I can imagine her/him smacking their forehead and saying, "Dude. Just follow along."

    • if you are listening it should be clear enough, but i do like this idea anyway. wouldn't fancy the extra editing to do it though

    • Doug Renalds typically he moves the pieces himself when he proposes moves and the computer moves for him for the real game