The million dollar Brains in Bahrain match between Vladimir Kramnik and Deep Fritz takes place 2nd-22nd October 2002 (Opening Ceremony 2nd October. Playing days 4, 6, 8, 10, 13, 15, 17 & 19 October, 2002).

Report Six: Game 1 Press Conference
by Malcolm Pein in Bahrain

Rules, rules, rules ....

One of the most important things I had to do was finalise the rules of the match. These were originally worked out by Eric Schiller but after the postponement he was not hired as arbiter and when I gave the drafts to arbiter Dr Enrique Irazoqui the most thorough man I have ever met - he came up with no less than six scenarios that were not dealt with.

So we had a meeting with the Fritz team (See Report 5) and Christopher Lutz, representing Kramnik, to make sure that all possibilities were foreseen. One of the topics discussed was what to do if an incorrect move or moves were made by the Fritz operator. We decided that if the error was not discovered one minute after it was made then the move would stand. If the error was spotted before then the arbiter should be informed and Fritz’s clock restarted while the error was corrected. Kramnik would receive an extra ten minutes to compensate him for the disturbance.

"Thank heaven its not Kasparov"

Another area of discussion was draw offers which were covered in the first draft. The rule was that the Fritz operator - and in game one this was Matthias Feist - could not offer a draw at anytime. Only Kramnik could offer a draw and he could also claim a technically drawn position and give his reasons to the arbiter. Thankfully, because both sides are easy going reasonable people I did not foresee any problems even if the position was slightly complex. Many times during discussions on rules and other topics I could not help thinking ‘thank heaven its not Kasparov, he would be so incredibly difficult to deal with when Kramnik and his team are so relaxed.’

So a rather funny thing happened in game one. The position after the computer’s 25.h4? rapidly became completely drawn. The rules are designed to prevent Kramnik being disturbed but Feist did not want to waste time. He is not allowed to offer a draw and so he approached the arbiter and asked him to suggest to Kramnik that he offer a draw ! Kramnik did. As Feist put it afterwards at the press conference “ I am not allowed to offer a draw but even with my playing strength I could see that this position was an absolutely clear draw”

Even funnier, Kramnik said at the press conference he did not know the operator could not offer a draw – “I don’t mind if you offer a draw” he said to some laughter.

How bad was h4 ?

Feist said he wanted to amend Fritz after the match to avoid playing h4 – Of course one important difference between this match and the Deep Blue match is that the program cannot be changed between games – something I cannot believe Kasparov’s team neglected to negotiate in 1997. Kramnik disagreed with Feist: “ I think h4 was the best move he said, anyway it was drawn and otherwise we would have sat there for another couple of hours !”

DEEP FRITZ - Kramnik,V (2789) [C67]
04.10.2002

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 Nf6 I suppose this opening was no surprise. Kramnik wants the quiet life and Fritz has had trouble in this line before. 4.0-0 Nxe4 5.d4 Nd6 6.Bxc6 dxc6 7.dxe5 Nf5 8.Qxd8+ Kxd8 9.Nc3 h6 10.b3 Ke8 11.Bb2 All typical Berlin Defence fare. White has all his pieces out and Black does not a lot 11...Be7 Designed to take Fritz out of book which it appeared to do 12.Rad1 a5 Although this is the first novelty but again a normal move. 13.a4 h5

Nigel Short asked Vlad about this - he did not want to answer in detail. It just does not matter if you lose a tempo in this line he said 14.Ne2 Be6 15.c4 Fritz wanted to prevent ...Bd5 but this reminded me of when Vishy feasted on 'yoghurt' against Fritz in a Berlin Defence and captured all three pawns with his light squared bishop. Fritz later removes this piece 15...Rd8 16.h3 b6 17.Nfd4 Nxd4 18.Nxd4 c5 [ 18...Bd7 19.f4 ( 19.Rd3 c5 20.Nb5 Bxb5 21.Rxd8+ Kxd8 22.axb5 Kd7 23.f4 f5 Looks quite OK for Black as well) 19...Bc5 heading for opposite bishops and the Bd7 could come in handy later] 19.Nxe6 fxe6 20.Rxd8+ Kxd8 21.Bc1 Kc8 22.Rd1 Rd8 I am sure Kramnik has examined this kind of ending in detail but it still requires accuracy. Vlad said he felt it was a draw now 23.Rxd8+ Kxd8 24.g4 Another idea was to try and play g4 and recapture with the king because then the white bishop can manoeuvre to h4 and force an exchange into a won K+P ending. [ 24.f4 Ke8 25.Kf2 Kf7 26.Kf3 Bd8 27.g4 hxg4+? ( 27...g6 28.Ke4 Be7 The line I find troubling is 29.gxh5 and 30.f5, this needs more analysis but I have not found a way through so far 29.f5 ( 29.gxh5 gxh5 30.f5 Bh4 31.f6 Be1 32.Kf4 Bc3) 29...hxg4 30.hxg4 ( 30.f6? gxh3; 30.fxg6+ Kxg6 31.hxg4 Bh4=) 30...gxf5+ 31.gxf5 Bh4 and I think this is holding) 28.Kxg4 Be7 29.Be3 Bd8 30.Bf2 c6 31.Bh4 Bc7 32.Kh5 and its winning ] 24...g6 [ 24...hxg4 25.hxg4 g6 26.f4 Ke8 27.Kf2 Kf7 28.Kg3 Bd8 29.Kh3 Be7 30.Be3 Bd8 31.Bf2 Be7 ( 31...c6!? 32.Bh4 Bc7 33.Bf6+/-) 32.Bh4 Bxh4 33.Kxh4 Kg7 34.Kg5+-] 25.h4?

This takes the pressure off but Fritz thought (wrongly) it was setting a trap 25...hxg4 [ 25...Bxh4 Also draws but why complicate ? - Kramnik 26.g5 Kd7 27.Be3 Kc6 28.Kg2 Kd7 29.Kh3 Bxf2 30.Bxf2 Kc6=] 26.Bg5 Bxg5 27.hxg5 Ke8 28.Kg2

1/2-1/2