FIDE World Cup 2025 semifinals: Game 2 ends in deadlock as tiebreaks await
The second classical games of the semifinals followed a familiar script in Goa. Once again, deep preparation shaped both encounters, long early thinks filled the hall, and the positions that emerged were rich but balanced. And once again, neither game produced a winner. With two more draws on the board, all semifinal spots will now be decided in tomorrow’s tiebreaks. The ceremonial first moves were made by Mr. Sanjay Dhivre, IRS (Indian Revenue Service), Additional Commissioner of Income Tax, and Mrs. Bhagyahree Dhivare, IAS (Indian Administrative Service), CEO of the Election Commission Nagaland on board two. The first result arrived from the all-Uzbek clash between Javokhir Sindarov and Nodirbek Yakubboev. Their game featured subtle opening nuances before resolving into a level endgame on move 31. For two players who know each other exceptionally well and entered a line offering limited winning chances, the early handshake felt natural. The second game, between Andrey Esipenko and Wei Yi, carried more tension. The Chinese grandmaster had been outprepared and slightly outplayed in their first game. When I ran into him at dinner last night, I asked him about it, and he admitted he was “lucky” to escape with a draw. So it was concerning to see a similar storyline developing today when Esipenko, now with the white pieces, produced specific preparation and reached a slightly better position. He even had a moment where he could have pressed for more, but the chance passed. Wei stayed solid under pressure and steered the game to safety. With nearly a full month of play behind them, hours of preparation each day, and the physical and mental strain of the World Cup at its peak, fatigue is becoming a real presence for the final four. Today might have reflected exactly that. Here is how the games unfolded. Semifinals Game 2 results: Andrey Esipenko ½-½ Wei Yi Javokhir Sindarov ½-½ Nodirbek Yakubboev Andrey Esipenko (2693) vs Wei Yi (2752) Today’s game began with the Nimzowitsch Attack in the Petrov. Esipenko showed clear preparation in older theoretical paths, choosing 7.Bf4 (a line popular in the early 2000s) instead of the more modern 7.Be3. Wei Yi appeared surprised and paused for several minutes before replying. Despite having played this structure before, including a 2016 game against Wesley So, he clearly expected something different. This once again highlighted the strong preparation from Esipenko and his second, David Paravyan, who have been working effectively here in Goa (reportedly in between lobster dinners). Another notable moment arrived a few moves later when Esipenko played the rarer 10.Be2, spending around twelve minutes before committing. It raised the question of whether he had left his preparation or was digging deep to recall his lines, but in either case, it was another surprise. Later in the game, a critical moment arose, one that required calculation and understanding rather than automatic moves. In a position where White could press slightly, Esipenko chose a safer continuation instead of the line that offered the most practical chances. Here, the direct 20.f4 would have stopped Black from playing …g5 and left the h-pawn as a long-term target. It was not a winning attempt, but it was the kind of position where White makes Black solve problems under pressure. In a knockout setting, it would have been an attractive practical try. Instead, Esipenko chose 20.f3, allowing 20…g5. Both players developed naturally on the only open e-file. Wei tripled his heavy pieces lining up an “Alekhine’s gun” formation, but all rooks were eventually exchanged on the same file, easing Black’s defensive task. With the position equalised, the players began to repeat moves. Wei was low on time, and Esipenko played on briefly to push him to move forty, but no progress was possible. A second repetition confirmed the draw. Javokhir Sindarov (2721) vs Nodirbek Yakubboev (2689) The young Uzbek teammates agreed to a draw on move 31 in an objectively level endgame, but the opening phase contained several important subtleties. The game began with the Four Knights Spanish, the same opening Sindarov faced as Black in his second game against José Martínez in the quarterfinals, where the players followed a forcing drawing line. Today’s game started similarly but deviated early: 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bb5. Here, Yakubboev visibly hesitated, reaching for his knight before pausing and finally committing to the Rubinstein Variation with 4…Nd4. Perhaps he recalled Sindarov’s previous game and preferred to avoid that exact path, but he went ahead with the move nonetheless. This time, White deviated with 5.Nxd4 instead of 5.Bc4. The resulting structure is known for being solid for White but lacking major winning prospects, making it an interesting choice from Sindarov, who is usually more ambitious with the White pieces. A key moment soon appeared, demanding long calculation from both players. Here, Black’s main theoretical choice is 9…0-0, willingly giving up the pawn because after 10.Bxd7 Bxd7 11.Qxd7 Rae8, Black has threats such as …Qxf2 and ample compensation through piece activity and pressure. However, with elimination on the line, the semifinalists have generally been choosing safer continuations. This may explain Yakubboev’s decision to play 9…c6 instead, keeping the pawn. But this was not ideal, as it allowed White to build some initiative with 10.Qe2+ Qe7 11.Qh5!. The point is that capturing the bishop with 11…cxb5, is met by 12.Bg5 with a heavy pressure along the e-file – a type of dynamic position that suits Sindarov well. After thinking for nearly 30 minutes, Sindarov instead played the immediate 10.Qh5. This nuanced move-order shift gave Black slightly more room to reorganize. Yakubboev gradually solved his development issues, exchanged pieces, and steered the game into a balanced endgame that led to the eventual draw. One might label this 99%-accuracy duel as a “stale draw,” but a closer look reveals several important moments. Still, taking this match to tiebreaks by teammates and close friends is understandable, if not expected. But tomorrow, only one of them will progress, and with faster time controls, the depth of preparation and sensitivity