Update on the Schenectady Prelimns

The formal schedule for the Preliminaries of the Schenectady Championship ended on December 16. Delayed games yet to be played will take at least two more weeks to finish.

This past Thursday, Christmas Eve Eve you might say, two of those delayed games from the Prelim Section A were contested. John Phillips and Brij Saran fought to a draw in a French Defense in 30 moves. John tried out his favorite early 4 Qg4 variation, Brij countered well. A drawn position was reached early. At least that is how it looked to this observer. After Rybka chews on the game for awhile maybe we see a different conclusion.

In the other game Richard Chu lost to Bill Little in after missing a couple of tactics in the Exchange Slav. The game was over in 29 moves.

With the games above included the standings are:

Section A

Leading and with a lock on first place is Patrick Chi, the local scholastic star. His score is 7 ½ - ½ with one game to play versus Little.

In second is John Phillips. He has played all of his games and scored 7 - 2 winning all except draws with Saran and Mockler and a loss to Chi.

Third place is held for the moment by Richard Chu. He has completed his schedule. Losses to Phillips, Chi, Saran and Little gives him a 5 - 4 score.

Now tied for third is Brij Saran with the same score as Richard. He lost to Chi, Little and Northrup while drawing with Mockler and Phillips.

Trailing these two is Bill Little with a 4 ½ - 2 ½ score and two games to play, Chi and Stanley. These two games yet to be played are a big part of the drama left in the Section. Winning one and drawing the other will vault Little into the third qualifying spot from the section.

Behind Little is Michael Mockler. He has 3 ½ - 3 ½ score with two games to play, Yogi Kanakamedala and Mike Stanley. Based on rating Michael is likely to win both games. There is a ‘but’ in this. Mr. Mockler’s results this season have been unusual; one win, one loss (to Chu in the last regularly scheduled round) and no less than five draws. If one more draw slips into Michael’s results he will be unlikely to reach the third qualifying spot. More drama for Section A would be a playoff game between Little and Mockler for the third spot.

After Mockler the scores drop off with Zachery Calderon 4 -5, Northrup at 3 ½ - 5 ½, Kanakamedala at 1 - 7 and Stanley at 0 - 7 rounding out the field. Both Calderon and Northrup racked up good results this year and promise problems for the leaders next year.

Section B

The winner in this Section is clear. Philip Sells has won seven games with one left to play and no one can challenge mathematically for first place.

In second at the moment is Ricahrd Moody. His score is 4 ½ - 2 ½ with games to play; the redoubtable Mr. Sells. If this were a wagering situation, the odds favor Sells to win that game on rating and performance in this event. However, Moody has a “puncher’s chance”. He did defeat Alan Le Cours. On the other side of the ledger, a distracted loss to Dilip Aaron and a draw with David Connors show Richard is not always consistently strong yet. Should Mr. Moody bring his best game to the table and win there could well be a three way tie for the last two qualifying spots.

Barring an upset John Barnes (4 - 2 with two games to play; Connors and Le Cours) and Alan Le Cours (4 - 2 with two games to play; Barnes and Capitummino) may be expected to finish at 5 ½ points each - a draw with each other and winning their other game. A defeat for either Barnes or Le Cours in their head-to-head clash lets the winner through to the Finals pretty certainly. So, in sum, much remains to be resolved in Section B.

Trailing those in contention for a qualifying spot are; Dilip Aaron with 3 ½ - 3 ½ , and a game to play versus David Connors; Herman Calderon with 2 ½ - 5 ½, David Connors with 2 - 4 and two games to play, Barnes and Dilip Aaron, Jeff Capitummino on 1 ½ - 4 ½ still to play Clough and Le Cours, and in last place Matthew Clough with 1 - 6 and a game to play against Capitummino.

Overall in the Section it must be said that Philip Sells has again demonstrated a high level of chess skill. Other noteworthy results were Moody’s win over Le Cours, Matt Clough’s sound defeat of Barnes and Jeff Capitummino’s strong fight in a losing effort versus Sells. These successes signaled the lower rated participants that they have the ability to do more at chess, and are a warning to the higher rated players that next year may not be as easy as in the past.

I hope everyone had a Merry Christmas and a happy holiday. More soon.

A Recent Game from the Schenectady Prelims

An addition to the Schenectady Chess Club’s roster this year are the Calderon’s father and son. Zack, the son took my scalp a few weeks ago. His dad, Herman, has done well also. In today’s game, Herman had chances to upset John Barnes, one of the contenders for a spot in the finals.

Barnes, John - Calderon, Herman [B40]

SCC Ch Prelim B Schenectady, NY, 08.12.2010

1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 e6 3.Bd3!?,..

A quirky line that is not as bad as first impressions might lead us to believe.

3..., g6!?

Baffled by the White setup, Herman makes a move that weakens his K-side formation. If he wants to play there, more pointed is 3..., g5; threatening to dislocated the Nf3 and provoking White to make a defensive move such as 4 h3. If White plays something like 4 Nc3, ignoring the aggression, Black then can probably safely chase the White pieces with pawn advances.

4.c3 Bg7 5.Bc2 Nc6 6.d3 Nge7 7.Be3 b6 8.Nbd2 0–0 9.g4?!,..

If White really wants to get in his own aggressive actions on the K-side, it may well be better to begin with 9 h4. Putting the pawn on g4 carries with it the obligation for a follow-on move if Black reacts correctly by advancing his d-pawn.

9..., d5

The correct answer. We can see now that 10 exd5, is less than tempting because 10..., exd5; and the g-pawn is hit by the Bc8 with play continuing 11 h3 f5; threatening 12..., f4; and suddenly things are sticky for White. He has his King in the center with a couple moves to be made before the King can castle long, or he can castle short into a very airy fortress because of the early advance of the pawns. If opening the center is not a good idea, what then? Not much apparently, we see the Nd2 soon sent to b3, dismal post for a gallant horseman and the c-file open making any notion of the Q-side as a refuge for the White King doubtful, and Black has the initiative in hand.

10.Nb3 e5 11.Rg1 Be6

This move can not be labeled an error, it is however, not quite the best either. 11..., Ba6; is more active. Black should not be angling for a locking up of the center while the safety of the White King is open to question.

12.h4 d4 13.cxd4 cxd4 14.Bd2 a5?!

Move order matters more often than not. An approach that pays attention to defensive needs whilst preparing for further aggression is 14..., Qc8; threatening the pawn on g4, then 15 Nh2, a posting that is less dangerous for Black than at f3, and following with 15..., a5; planning to put the Queen on a6 and the Knight on b4 to pressure d3. Playing this way Black would have given White much to think about. Black threatens to occupy the c-file and wants to use c2 for a Knight or a Rook.

15.h5,..

Black is somewhat better and White thinks to create some counter-play with direct threats on the Black King.

15..., h6?!

This move has long term consequences. It leads to some weaknesses around the King. Better is 15..., Nb4; giving White something to be concerned about on the Q-side and retaining an advantage. Jeremy Silman, the IM and noted chess teacher, on John Watson’s ICC show “Chess Talk” recently commented more or less as follows: One of the differences between better players and more ordinary players is their attitude towards threats made by the opponent. The better players seem to react by saying to themselves “BS - that can’t be a serious threat” and set about proving the opponent wrong. More ordinary players take the threats seriously and react to them. Here Mr. Calderon reacts when he could have made his own threats. After the game move the edge goes to White.

16.g5 hxg5 17.Nxg5 Qd7 18.Nxe6?!..,

Mr. Barnes could have tried a more imaginative approach. Here the sacrificial line; 18 hxg6 fxg6? 19 Nc5! Bxc5 20 Nxe6, and if 20..., Qxe6 21 Bb3 wins. If Black can not recapture on g6 with the f-pawn, he must take with the Knight, so; 18..., Nxf6 19 Qh5, and White is making progress in building his attack.

18..., Qxe6 19.Qf3 Qf6!?

Black does not see that he needs an escape route for his King. Better 19..., Rfc8; or 19..., a4; driving the Knight followed by 20..., Rfc8.

20.Qh3,..

White is thinking about a sequence where the h-pawn is pushed to h6, then to h7 with check leading to mate on h6 by the Queen . Herman sees the same thing but he does not think about other ways to counter other than playing minor pieces to obstruct the g-file.

20..., Nb4?

This the resource Calderon has been counting on, but it is not quite right.

21.Bb1?

Much better is 21 Bxb4, then the required 21..., axb4 22 h6 Bh8 23 h7+ Kg7 24 Nd2, leads to a marked advantage for White. The problem with the text is Black can play 24..., Qc6; and if 25 h6 Bf6; removes much of the sting from the charging h-pawn. Had Herman taken advantage of this chance, John would have had to return to maneuvering and searching for an opportunity.

21..., gxh5?

One more time missing the idea of an escape square for the King. Necessary is 21..., Rfc8.

22.a3 Nbc6 23.Qxh5 Nd8

It is an unnecessary quibble to be critical of this move. Some better is 23..., Ng6 right away. In either case White has an strong attack.

24.Ba2 Rc8 25.Nxd4!,..

After a bit of uncertainty in the beginning, John Barnes got his pieces into very active play, he then took advantage of the errors his opponent made.

25..., exd4 26.Bh6 Ng6?

The better alternative is 26..., Rc5; then 27 Bxg7 Qxg7 (If 27..., Rxh5 28 Bxf6+ and 29 Bxe7 leaves White up a minor piece and a pawn.) 28 Rxg7+ Kxg7 29 Qg4+ when the Queen is more than a match for the R&N compensation, but there are certainly some technical difficulties for White to deal with. GM Har-Zvi pointed out frequently to us in his Saturday group that, when there is no choice, accepting a disadvantage that sets technical problems is the correct way to proceed.

27.Rxg6 Black resigns 1-0.

\

If now 27..., Rc5 28 Qg4 Rg5 29 Qxg5 Qxg5 30 Rxg5, and Black will be at a great material disadvantage, too great for the game to long continue.

More tomorrow.

8th Williams College Open

8th Williams College Open
Saturday, JANUARY 8th, 2011
WILLIAMS COLLEGE
Griffin Hall, Rooms 3 and 4
Williamstown, MA 01267

Here is a printable Microsoft Word flier of this event.
Here are driving directions to get to Williams College.
PARKING: Park behind Griffin in the lower lot. Access the parking lot by taking Rt. 2/main street to Southworth and taking the first left. The parking area will be on the left with Griffin Hall being at the top of the hill.
Here is the Williams College Museum of Art map. Griffin Hall is on Route 2, it has a small gold dome on top and a statue of a soldier in front. It is next to Thompson Memorial Chapel, which has a large stone tower that is easy to see from the road.

FORMAT: Three-round Swiss system, Game/90 minutes, USCF Rated (Must be a USCF member or join at the tournament).
REGISTRATION: 9:00am to 9:45am
ROUND TIMES: 10:00am, 1:30pm, and 5:00pm

$$340 based on 17 paid entries. (Yes, the prizes equal the entry fees collected.)

SECTIONS//PRIZES: OPEN// First $100, Second $80.
U1600// First $80, Second $60.
Top Williams College Student $20.

ENTRY FEE: $20. Free for Williams College students.
U.S.C.F. MEMBERSHIP REQUIRED: USCF membership can be purchased on site.

Last week in Schenectady

In a mild upset Jeff Capitummino won an interesting game from Saratoga’s David Connors. Mr. Connors made the long commute from Saratoga Springs to play in the Schenectady tournament the past two or three years. He is a player with a curious record. Versus strong opponents David is very dangerous. For example, 2010 he won games from Ed Frumkin (2000), Lee Battes (2000) and Alan LeCours (1940) and drew with Philip Sells (2000) as well as knocking off more than one player around 1700. When facing folks further down the rating list, his performance has not been consistent. Connors” rating, therefore has stayed right about 1550. Authoring no less than four upsets of more than four hundred rating points surely indicates the skill is there. One or two such results could be called luck, four is a trend that the Class A crowd should note when David is in an event.

Connors, David - Capitummino, Jeff [A07]

SCC Ch Prelim B Schenectady. NY, 08.12.2010

1.Nf3 Nf6 2.g3 g6 3.Bg2 Bg7 4.0–0 d5 5.d3 0–0 6.Nbd2 Nbd7

Although the World Champions have not used the approach White is using, nor have they had to defend the Black side, many 2500+ players are willing to take either side in this argument. Long ago this sort of setup for White was called the Reti Opening (Barcza System). It was all the rage in the middle 1950’s. The recently departed and lamented Larry Evans wrote a tournament book for the Lessing Rosenwald Tournament, NYC, 1954-55. It was called “Trophy Chess” published by Charles Scribner’s Sons, NYC, 1956. The book was one of my early purchases of chess literature. Surreptitiously going over that book in my room when I was supposed to be doing homework was when I first learned of this variation of the Reti. No less than Reshevsky used it to win his first round game against Sherwin and Evans played it twice scoring a win and a draw. Fascinated by the odd early moves so different from what the chess writers I had so far encountered recommended, the Barcza became my favorite, but only for a brief while. My chess understanding was not up to the demands the typical middle games presented, and I returned to 1 e4, after several losses. It faded from prominence in the 1960s but never disappeared entirely.

Incidentally, 6..., Nbd7; is not quite correct. Probably 6..., Nc6; 6..., c5; or 6..., b6; are better choices. The Knight on d7 slows down the development of the Black pieces.

7.e4 dxe4 8.dxe4 Nb6?!

It is unclear where this piece is going, perhaps to a4 to hit b2? That is easily countered in the game.

9.a4 a5

Now the Nb6 will have to be rerouted somewhere, or he will stand a lonely vigil without purpose.

10.Ra3 Bg4 11.Rd3!? Qc8 12.b3,..

The White Rook is a trifle exposed on d3, but Connors has the use of an extra piece down the d-file. This is not such a bad trade off. The Rook on d3 forced the Black Queen to c8 delaying the connection of the Black Rooks.

12..., Nfd7

Oddly, nothing looks better than this move. The position is about level, but finding a plan for Black that offers activity is no easy task. For White it is a somewhat different story. He is going to pile up on the d-file, the dark squared Bishop goes to a3, with the only remaining question being what to do with the Nd2.

13.Ba3 Re8!?

Jeff passes on the opportunity to play sharply. After 13..., Ne5; White must be careful. If right away 14 Bxe7, Nxd3 15 Bxf8?! Nb3 16 Qc1 Qxf8 17 e5 N2xa4; leaving Black with an extra pawn and a very nearly winning game. If White tries a more thoughtful line with 14 Re3, Black can offer the e-pawn in the following way; 14..., Bh6 15 Rc3 Rd8; when 16 Bxe7, is immediately refuted by 16..., Rxd2! White has to play 16 Qe1, then Black retires the Ne5 to c6 with a small advantage.

14.h3 Bxf3

Jeff answers the question about the future of the Nd2 unnecessarily. This trade grants the two Bishops to White and relieves the congestion on the d-file. Better for Black is 14..., Be6; and the Black pieces are a little awkwardly placed, but White has not yet resolved the issue of the exposed Rd3. After 14..., Be6; should White try 15 Ng5, Black coolly plays 15..., Ne5; then 16 Nxe6 Qxe6; maintaining a balanced position. Rather than going after the Be6 White can play 15 c4, then 15..., c5 16 Qc2 Nb8; opening the battery of the Black Queen and Bishop and contemplating putting the Nb8 on a6 where it eyes b4 and overprotects the c5-pawn.

15.Nxf3 e6 16.Qe2 Bf8

Another ill advised trade. Absent his dark squared Bishop, Black now has weak squares all around his King.

17.Bxf8 Rxf8 18.Rfd1

Somewhat better is 18 Qe3, keeping the Knight out of c5 for the moment.

18...Nc5 19.R3d2 Qe8 20.Qe3 Qe7 21.Nh4?,..

This move fails to take advantage of the weakened dark squares. Better is 21 e5, then 21..., Nd5 22 Qh6 f6 23 exf6, leaving Black with weak pawns to go along with the dark square holes. Black has the resources to defend the position, but it is a grim task that leaves little chance for a counter-attack.

21..., Ncd7

Rybka suggests 21..., Nxa4; but this line seems to peter out after 22 bxa4 Nc4 23 Qb3, to equality.

22.f4,..

Straight away 22 e5, promises more for White.

22..., Qc5 23.Qxc5 Nxc5 24.Bf3,..

Again 24 e5, is better. White for whatever reason does not want to push the e-pawn to the fifth rank. The game now simplifies by mutual agreement to a B+N versus 2Ns ending. Theoretically this imbalance favors White with pawns on both sides of the board. The computer sees the game as about even here.

24..., Rfe8 25.Ng2 Kf8 26.Ne3 h5 27.g4 hxg4 28.hxg4 Ke7 29.g5 Red8 30.f5 exf5 31.exf5 Rxd2 32.f6+ Ke8 33.Rxd2 Rd8 34.Rxd8+ Kxd8 35.Kf2 c6 36.Ng4?

A slip that hands Black a significant advantage. David misses the need to immediately guard the pawn on g5. Required is 36 Kg3, and while there is tension in the position, a draw is the likely outcome.

36..., Ne6 37.Ke3 Nxg5 38.Be2 Nh7 39.Ke4?,..

Either 39 Ke4, or even 39 Kf4, are better options. On e4 the King is exposed to a check that steals a vital tempo. If, for example, White plays 39 Kf4, and Black proceeds more or less as in the game, after 39..., Nd7 40 Bc4 Ke8 41 Nh6, and White gets the pawn on c7 when Black captures on f6. Compare this line to the game continuation and the difference is clear.

39..., Nd7 40.Bc4 Nhxf6+ 41.Nxf6 Nxf6+ 42.Ke5 Ke7 0–1

A serious disappointment for Mr. Connors and a good result for Mr. Capitummino. Both players missed chances, but they fought hard throughout.

More soon.

An Endgame Fight from AACC

Somewhere along the line in all I have written in recent months on this site I said something about a renaissance in the local chess scene in the Capital District. Here is one more indicator of how things are moving forward for chess. Peter Henner has been for some time one of the better local players. He recently began writing a chess column in The Altamont Enterprise & Albany County Post, a weekly newspaper focused on the doings in Guilderland and the Hill Towns of Albany County. In the columns I have seen so far, Peter has been exploring chess history and presenting some classic chess problems. In a brief conversation at the Albany Area Chess Club (AACC) a week or two ago, Henner said he was thinking about putting some local games in the column. That is a good idea I think.

How many medium sized metro areas such as the Capital District have two chess columns; Townsend’s in the Gazette and Henner’s in the Enterprise? Additionally, there are six active chess clubs or groups; Schenectady, AACC, Saratoga, Troy, RPI and the Friday night Guilderland Library group. Two things really have driven this resurgence: Brother John’s ongoing “Make the Right Move” scholastic program teaches kids chess and introduces them to competition, and the recent few years when we had out own local GM, Ronen Har-Zvi in residence. The “Make the Right Move” program has provided youthful new club members for the established clubs, and Har-Zvi inspired the return to more active participation a number of older players. Together these have generated more widespread chess activity than I can remember in the sixty years I have been playing the game locally, except for that brief period 1970-72, the “Fischer Boom”.

We have an interesting game today from the AACC Preliminaries. In it Jason Denham, a player new to USCF chess who has a provisional rating in the upper 1600s, battles Glen Perry, a strong Class B player poised to go over 1800 into Class A. A rating such as Denham’s is unusual. Provisional ratings, based on a few games - I think Jason has played in only one or two events - does not tell much about a player’s true strength. In this case we have an adult coming to rated chess a bit later in life, and adults typically don’t obtain this sort of rating right away. His success here against Mr. Perry hints we have new player who can make a mark for himself locally.

Denham, Jason - Perry, Glen [A20]

AACC Ch Prelim 2 Guilderland, NY, 08.12.2010

1.c4 e5 2.g3 Nf6 3.Bg2 d5 4.cxd5 Nxd5

I don’t know what this line may be called. English/Catalan/ KIA/Reversed Sicilian are all terms that come to mind.

5.Nf3 Nc6

Of course, 5.., e4 6 Qa4+, collects the e-pawn.

6.0–0 Be7

We have under consideration another game where the locals are sticking with the practice of the best players. This position has been contested by Topalov and Korchnoi as White against Karpos and Timman.

7.d4 e4 8.Ne5 Nxe5

Up to here we have been following Topalov - Timman, Wijk ann Zee, 1999, a win for White in 36 moves. That game continued 8..., f5 9 Nxc6 bxc6 10 Qa4 Qd7. Perry’s move is an error. It permits White to pocket a pawn without compensation. Timman’s 8..., f5; is superior.

9.dxe5 Bf5 10.Bxe4 Bxe4 11.Qa4+ c6 12.Qxe4,..

White has the pawn but it is not all that secure. Black sets to work to recover the material. A reasonable plan for White is; Nb1-c3, and Bc1-e3, getting his forces into play and tempting Black to trade off his well place Nd5. White has a measurable advantage, not quite winning but significant.

12..., Qc7 13.Bd2 0–0 14.Nc3 Rad8 15.Nxd5?,..

This trade helps Black even though the well placed Nd5 is no more.

15..., Rxd5 16.Bf4?

Better is 16 Bc3. The move played allows Black to recover the material for only a slight compromise on the K-side. After 16 Bc3, the extra pawn is secured, but Black has all the say on the d-file as solace for that. Deep Rybka sees the position as slightly in favor of White. This probably because an extra pawn has to mean something in its electronic brain. I see Black as having the initiative. He gets to make threats while White is on his “back foot” for a long time. Still-in-all, the onus is on Black to find moves to recover the material or improve his compensation.

15..., g5 17.Rac1 Rfd8 18.Be3 Qxe5 19.Qxe5 Rxe5 20.Rfd1 Red5 21.Rxd5 Rxd5

Material recovered and the Black pieces are somewhat more active than are their White counterparts letting Black continue to hold on to the initiative. The game now favors Black by just a little bit. Normal play would go; 22 Bxa7 Ra5 23 Bd4 Rxa2 24 Kg2 f6 25 g4 Ra4; when Black’s advantage is minimal.

22.Rc2,..

White decides to remain passive until he sees what Black has in mind. Glen has ambitions in this game to snag the full point, and he strives to achieve that end.

22..., c5?!

But this move is too optimistic. Better 22..., f4.

23.Bd2?!,..

Missing a chance to devalue the Black Q-side with 23 b4!? Of course, White would have to know a great deal of endgame theory, have a refined positional judgment and calculate very accurately to make such a move. The primary line of play is; 23 b4 cxb4 24 Bxa7 and a) 24..., Rb5 with the following possibilities: a1) 25 Rc8+ Kg7 26 Bd4, counting on piece activity to offset the weak a-pawn. a2) 25 Rc7 Bf6 26 Be3 b3 27 axb3 Rxb3 h4 h6 trying to make an attack using the time required for Black to make his remaining b-pawn dangerous. a3) 25 Bd4 f5 26 h3, a “waiting” kind of approach with underlying ideas similar to a1) above. And b) 24..., f5!? when White has to make a difficult choice among; b1) Be3, b2) Rc7, b3) h3, b4) Bb6, and b5) e3. Without pasting on a bunch of lines Rybka generated to further clutter this document, we can easily grasp the position is devilishly complex. Jason’s decision in such a situation understandable; he wants not to drastically change the position and selects a move to wait for Black to make a direct threat.

23..., f5

Black has some kind of edge now and the initiative as well.

24.e3?,..

Not fatal but this move is just too passive. Active is 24 f4, or 24 Be3, contemplating b2-b4

24..., g4

Locking down a space advantage on the K-side at a cost of losing some flexibility in the pawn formation there. Also possible is 24..., b6; securing the c-pawn before centralizing the King and shifting the Bishop to the a1-h8 diagonal.

25.Bc3,..

A sensible alternative is 25 h3, to safely eliminate the potentially weak h-pawn. If Black does not capture on h3, White takes on g4 and then moves his King towards the center.

25..., b5 26.a3 c4,..

A reasonable try is; 26...Rd1+ 27.Kg2 Kf7 28.h3 h5 29.hxg4 hxg4 30.e4, when a rather technical Rook and pawn ending that with perfect play is likely drawn. The “fly in the ointment” is the need for very accurate play. The game would resolve itself into a race by passed pawns on the opposite sides of the board where there is a premium on getting the pawns down the board most efficiently.

Black has in mind trying to win the game based on the space advantage his advanced pawn formation gives him. To win in that way he will need to find an entry point for his King in the long run. Activating the King requires that the Rooks to be exchanged.

Rd2?,..

An error that should have cost White the game. By volunteering the Rook trade, White aids Black in the realization of his plan. Better 27 e4, taking the opportunity to break up the aggressive placement of the Black K-side pawns. The text gives Black a chance obtain a near winning edge.

27..., Rd3?

But not this way. Necessary is 27..., Rxd2; then 28 Bxd2 Bf6 29 Bc1 Kf7 30 Kf1 Ke6 31 f3 Kd5 32 Ke1 Kd5 33 Ke2 a5. Black is close to winning and I do not see a viable scheme for White to oppose the creation of an outside passed pawn and the eventual penetration of the Black King via e4.

28.Kf1?,..

Failing to take advantage of Glen’s mistake. With 28 Rxd3, White will easily win the race of the Kings to the center and pick up the pawn on d3. The game is then not clearly won for White, but he would have the extra pawn and most of the winning chances. Black immediately recognizes his error and acts to size the advantage.

28..., Rxd2 29.Bxd2 Bf6 30.Bc3 Kf7 31.Ke2 Bxc3 32.bxc3 Ke6 33.f3 h5?

An unnecessary move that throws away some of Black’s advantage. The best move is 33..., Ke5; closing in on the vital entry point, e4. A second more educational point is the text move wastes a “reserve move” in a pawn ending. The second World Champion, Lasker articulated long ago that in all endings, and in particular pawn endings, preserving “reserve moves” is crucial to winning many positions. Here Black has four reserve moves: two possibilities for the h-pawn, h7-h6 & h7-h5 and two similar moves for the a-pawn, while White but one: the f-pawn captures on g4 or advances to f4. Both of the White f-pawn moves gives up control of e4. Take the simplest line; 33..., Ke5 34 fxg4 fxg4 35 Ke1 Ke5 36 Ke2, and after 36..., a6; White must give way allowing the Black King entry on d3 or f3 winning.

34.e4!?,..

This move shows excellent fighting spirit and it is the best try for White in a difficult position

34..., fxe4 35.f4 Kf5?

This move gives White the advantage. The only path to the win for Black is 35..., a5; setting the stage for pushing the Q-side pawn majority. Then, 36 Ke3 Kd5 37 f5 Ke5 36 f6 Kxf6 37 Kxe4 Ke6 38 Kd4 Kd6 39 Ke4 Kc5; and Black will win

36.Ke3 a6 37.Kd4h4 38.Ke3 hxg3 39.hxg3 a5 40.Kd4 Kf6?

The best move to keep the fight going is 40..., a4; setting up the tactic .., b5-b4 to leash the White King. After the text, the best Black can hope for is Queen ending where White has a pawn extra. Such endgames very difficult. Victory for the side with the pawn depends on great patience, good calculation and the position of the defending King. Here the c-pawn is not far advanced. I don’t know enough about such endings to judge how good or bad the Black King stands.

41.Kxe4 Ke6 42.Kd4 Kd6 43.f5 Ke7 44.Kc5 Kf6 45.Kxb5 Kxf5 46.Kxa5 Ke4 47.Kb4 Kf3 48.a4 Kxg3 49.a5 Kf2?

A final fatal slip. Necessary is 49..., Kf4; to avoid a check that forces off the Queens.

50.a6 g3 51.a7 g2 52.a8Q g1Q 53.Qa7+ 0–1

The ending was interesting and illustrated how difficult it is to play that sometimes neglected part of chess well. I am certain Glen was disappointed at not getting the win when it seemed so near at hand. Credit must be given Jason for maintaining his composure and for finding testing ideas in a difficult position. More soon.

Another Upset From Schenectady

There was a noteworthy upset last Thursday night in Schenectady. Matthew Clough (1374) won a game from John Barnes (1842). The not quite 500 point rating difference qualifies this win as one of the bigger upsets for this year, almost equaling my loss to Zack Calderon two weeks ago. The most interesting feature of this upending of a favorite is how Matt conducted the White pieces. Many times upsets result from a momentary lapse and the stronger player hangs a piece or overlooks a tactic. In this game although there is a lapse by Barnes, it occurs more because White creates a difficult position by dangling material temptation while he has his pieces more actively placed.

Clough, Matthew - Barnes, John [B33]

SCC Ch Prelim B Schenectady, NY, 02.12.2010

Clough, Matthew - Barnes, John [B33]

SCC Ch Prelim B Schenectady, NY, 02.12.2010

1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 e5 6.Ndb5 d6 7.Bg5 a6

A very much mainline of theory opening in the Pelikan Variation, B33 in ECO. This line of play for Black has been a favorite of the former World Champion V. Krmnick. He, oddly enough, used it as a reliable drawing line. I say oddly, because to this club level player the position seems to be very complex with many places to go wrong and comfortable drawing lines are not at all evident.

8.Na3 b5

Both players are staying with how the very best players handle this position. Kasparov, Anand, Svidler, Leko and Shirov as White against Kramnik more than once reached this position. All these games ended drawn except one, Leko - Kramnik, Frankfort, 2000, 1-0 in 48 moves. Kramink dropped a couple of pawns while trying an attack on the White King, and then lost after Queens and a pair of Rooks came off in the general liquidation.

9.Bxf6 gxf6 10.Nd5 f5

Still in the mainstream, but here the database shows some variations. In the loss to Leko, Kramnik tried 10..., Bg7; leading to complicated play with both sides having attacks on the opposing King. White was attacking with pieces; the Queen, Knight and light squared Bishop, and Black tried to strike back with his pawns in the center and his heavy pieces down the g-file. With both Kings on the K-side, it was an intricate melee that worked out better for White.

11.Bd3 Be6

The game is now away from GM Kramnik’s practice, but the game continues to follow current theory. There are many games by Shirov, Sax, Krasenkov and Nunn with Black and doing well from against the likes of Short, Leko and Beliavsky.

12.c3 f4

Now we are away from the Super-grandmasters ideas. There are, nevertheless, many games by 2400 - 2500 players in the databases.

13.Nc2 Rb8!?

This move may be questionable. The strong players preferred 13..., Bg7; for the most part, with one or two trying 13..., Rg8. Deep Rybka sees nothing wrong with the text; it is the machine’s second choice after 13..., Bg7. There are no games in my databases with this position.

14.0–0 Rg8 15.f3,..

The ambitious try 15 Qh5 leads to problems for White after 15.., Bg4; the White Queen will be embarrassed and maybe lost for inadequate compensation. The text move closes out any later adventures by the Queen going to h5. White may have been worried about an eventual push of the f-pawn to f3 after Black brings his Queen to g5. White however has sufficient resources to defend the King’s house with moves such as Rf1-e1, g2-g3 and Bd3-f1. The board is now effectively divided into two parts. Black has control of the K-side. White must find activity for his pieces on the Q-side.

15...h5 16.Kh1 Be7

The most direct path for Black is to continue his play on the K-side with 16..., h4. The move will make White worry more about an assault on his King. The moves 15 f3, and 16 Kh1, indicate Matt was concerned about King safety. Giving him more to worry about is not a bad thing for Black as chess psychology, further, it is technically correct to be active where you are strongest. The game move is thinking about shifting the Bishop around to the g1-a7 diagonal, quite a long winded maneuver. Since, by the rules, White gets his turn, there is much that go wrong with that idea.

7.Ncb4 Nxb4 18.Nxb4 Qc8 19.a4,..

In a timely fashion Clough begins counter-play on the Q-side.

19..., h4 20.axb5 axb5 21.Rg1 Bd8 22.Ra7,..

It is possible 22 Ra6, attacking the pawn on d6 might be better. Black could then reply with the scary looking 22..., Qc5; but after 23 Rc6 Qf2; White has some choices: a) 24 Qe2, safe and sane keeping a very slight edge, b) 24 Rxd6, fishing the tactical waters where; b1) 24..., Bb6 25 Bxb5+ Kf8 and now; b1-1) 26 Rxb6 Rxb6 27 Nd3 Qe3 28 Nxe5 Rxb5 29 Qd8+ Kg7 30 Qg5+ is drawn. The alternative, b1-2) 26 Rxe6 fxe6 27 Qd6+ Kf7 28 Qd7+ Kf6 29 Nd5+!! exd5, (Note; other tries here lead to a loss for Black.) 30 Qf5+ Ke7 31 Qxe5+, and the game is drawn again by perpetual check. These are hard lines to calculate, but they have one virtue for White, just about all the moves are forced. As GM Har-Zvi said: “It is easier to calculate forced lines where most of the moves have a direct threat, than to work your way through positional maneuvering of similar length.” For us at the club level, lines such as those cited are daunting even with the guideposts of direct threats.

22..., Rb7

My game had ended quickly, a win from Cory Northrup, and I was watching this game and the Chu - Saran game nearby looking for news for the blog. My first thought after White played 22 Ra7, was Mr. Barnes would strike with 22..., Bb6; hitting both White Rooks. It’s possible John thought that also. When the position arose after 22 Ra7, he wisely recognized 22..., Bb6; is met by 23 Bxb5+, then the next few moves are without options for Black, 23..., Kf8 24 Qxd6+ Kg7 25 Qxe5+, when White can muster so many threats that Black will not be able to take either Rook before the Black King is mated or other sufficient compensation is accumulated by White. That is not to say things are easy for White. He will have to find powerful attacking moves, four or five at least, but they are all direct tactical threats.

Black can defend the position with 22..., Qc5; making 23..., Bb6; a threat. The game would then be in a very difficult phase with long lines of murky tactical tricks the points of which are trading down to a won ending for either side. Other schemes of defense are first 22..., Kf8; with a later .., Qc5; or secondly, 22..., Rg6; preparing to guard d6 from the flank, or thirdly, 22..., Bd7?!; which after 23 Nd5, leads to exchanges that let some of the tension out of the position.

Both participants had used about one-half of their allotted time by this point in the game. Given the complications it is a surprise they did not use more time.

23.Ra6 Rb6?

A mistake that turns a defendable position into a difficult one. Either 23.., Ke7; or 23..., Qd7; would have been better tries. White would still have a solid edge, but Black could hold on. The game move meets an immediate tactical refutation.

24.Rxb6 Bxb6 25.Bxb5+ Ke7 26.Nc6+ Kf6 27.Qxd6 and Black resigned.

It is true 27..., Bxg1; is brutally refuted by 28 Qxe5+ Kg6 29 Ne7+, a true “family check”. However, Black could have made an attempt to defend with 27..., Qc7. After 28 Qxc7 Bxc7 29 h3 Ra8 30 c4 Ra2 31 Rb1 Bb6 (keeping the White King from entering the fray) 32 b4 Bf2 33 Nb8, (heading towards d5, the best possible place for the Knight) 33..., Ra8 34 Na6 Ra7; and so on. The connected passed pawns are certainly an advantage that presents Black an unenviable defensive task for the long term, but he does have resources to make White play many moves to get the pawns rolling. There is the possibility of transitioning into an ending with Bishops of opposite color and Rooks on the board that is technically difficult. All these make a good argument for continuing the game. I believe Barnes, disappointed by his own misreading of the position at move 23, had no appetite for long, dour defense that is probably hopeless, and so resigned in the interest of getting a good night’s sleep.

Mr. Clough played the game with a verve and energy not commonly seen in players of his experience level. His performance thus far in the Preliminaries, one win and several losses, did not predict this kind of result. He is a competitor who will bear careful handling in the future lest he becomes another “giant killer” in the style of Richard Chu.

Speaking of Mr. Chu, our long serving Club President; he lost his game with Brij Saran. In position with equal pawns, Bishops of opposite color and all the heavy pieces on the board and virtually no measurable imbalances, Richard tried to win what was clearly a drawn position. He met the fate that all of us have experienced when we go against chess logic, defeat. Richard uncompromising fighting spirit is admirable but it depresses his results sometimes.

Sunday evening Gary Farrell and I played our delayed game in the Saratoga Championship. I was White and the opening was the 3 Bb5, Sicilian variation he and I have discussed before over the board. On the long ride home after the game I was feeling pretty good about a win over a strong opponent where we both seemed to have avoided any outright, glaring mistakes. Alas, going over the game Monday morning Rybka point out how both of us missed opportunities. It was an interesting battle and maybe the subject of my next blog.

More soon.

Updates for Schenectady and AACC

Two important games were drawn last Wednesday evening in the second round of the AACC Preliminaries. Jonathan Lack and Glen Perry had a very even struggle in an offbeat Sicilian that ended with a split point after 42 moves. Tim Wright and Gordon Magat stayed more in the mainstream in a long fight drawing on move 63. Time was short in the end, and although Mr. Wright had the extra pawn in a Bishops of opposite color ending with chances to win, he did not find the path to victory. The last few moves were played very quickly and perhaps something was missed. Unfortunately, the game score I copied is incorrect after move 14 or 15, just when the play became really interesting. I will post what I have in hopes that one of the participants will send me a correct score and we can have the whole game for consideration.

The game Lack - Perry had two of the contenders for first place with the potential for one or the other to break to the front early in the tournament. Such was not to be; the opponents were too evenly matched.

Jonathan, Lack - Glen, Perry [B23]

AACC Prelim 2 Guilderland, NY, 01.12.2010

1.e4 c5 2.Nc3,..

Jonathan abhors the open Sicilian lines. Why give up a center pawn with 2 d4 for a wing pawn? The recently departed chess hero, Bent Larsen, was the most famous practitioner of that philosophy at a high level.

2..., a6

Taking the game into some kind of O’Kelly Variation. Database searches identify not many Grandmasters playing this way.

3.a4,..

And fewer still making this move. There some games between IM’s in this line with results about evenly split.

3..., Nc6 4.Nge2 Nf6 5.g3 d5!?

Lack, as is his habit, avoided opening the center against the Sicilian. I guess, Perry has a contrarian notion here; if White wants a closed center forcing an opening there will make him less comfortable. Either a) preparing the move .., d6-d5; with 5.., e6; or trying to force some weakening around the White King by playing 5..., h5; and even the usual theme when White rushes a pawn to a4, 5.., Nb4; occupying a not so well guarded square and maintaining some say over d5, all are alternatives that are less committal.

6.exd5 Nxd5 7.Bg2 Be6?!

Black is lagging in development. Strangely enough, another move with the Nd5 would work out better for Black: 7.., Nb4; and either 8 0-0, or 8 d3, can be answered by 8..., e5. Black then has set the stage for a fairly normal development with a minimum of tactical drama.

8.d4?!..,

An attempt to be active that is misses a chance to make something out of the momentary lack of coordination in the Black camp. The pawn on c5 is not defended and the Be6 is awkward there. To get at these small, niggling problems White should play 8 Ne4, hitting the c-pawn. If Black casually defends c5 with 8..., Qb6?! 9 Ng5, and game is entering a tactical maelstrom. White has a strong initiative that Black can only meet with very accurate play. Black probably would defend c5 with 8.., b6; then 9 0-0, and if Black continues 9..., g6? White obtains the advantage after 10 d4. Black, of course has options, but picking through the choices would require hard work; 9..., Bg4; 9..., Rc8; 9..., c4; and 9..., Bf5; none of which have clear tactical guideposts and need careful positional evaluation before choosing. The text passes by the opportunity to test Black’s positional judgment and enters a forcing sequence.

8..., Nxc3 9.bxc3 Bd5 10.0–0 e6 11.Be3 b6?

A small but telling mistake by Mr. Perry. Better is 11..., Bxg2 12 Kxg2 cxd4 13 cxd4 Qd5+ 14 f3 Qc4; when the game is equal. White has a bit more say in the center - the pawn on d4, while Black has pressure on the light squares on the Q-side - if ever the natural c2-c3, .., Nc6-a5.

12.Nf4!?..,

A normal way to continue is 12 Bxd5 Qxd5 13 Rb1, to be followed by 14 Nf4, leaving White with a lead in development and the makings of a strong initiative.

12...,Bxg2 13.Kxg2 g5?

This a more significant error by Glen. White now can have a marked advantage with the sacrificial line; 14 Nxe6! fxe6 15 Qh5+ Kd7 16 cxd5 Qe8 17 Rfd1+ Kc7 18 cxb6+ Kb7 19 Qxg5, netting four pawns for the piece and keeping the initiative.

14.Qf3!?,..

Not an altogether bad move. It is however, not as forcing as 14 Nxe6.

14..., Nxd4 15.Bxd4 cxd4 16.Qc6+?..,

Impatience. The calm and dangerous move is 16 Nh5 It just about forces 16..., Rc8; then 17 Rfe1!, and Black is in serious trouble. For example one possible continuation is: 17..., Be7 18 Ng7+ Kd7 19 Rad1, and White is better. Black can maybe defend this position, but it will require great accuracy. After the text, if Black is clear sighted enough, and brave, he can hold and maybe his own winning chances.

16..., Ke7 17.Qb7+ Kf6 18.Nh5+ Kg6

The White attack has run out of steam. The reward for the brave march of the Black King from e8 to g6 is the balance begins to swing his way.

19.g4 Qd5+ 20.Qxd5 exd5 21.cxd4 Bd6 22.Rab1 Rab8 23.f4?!..,

Maybe Lack still has faith in his attacking chances, but this way does not do the trick. Better 23 Rb3, apparently increasing pressure on the b-pawn, but really the Rook is to go to f3 - threat Rf6#. One line in this idea is 23..., Rhc8 24 Rf3 Be7 25 Re1 Bd8 28 Re8, pointing up the vulnerability of the Black King. A way Black can deal with 23 Rb3, is 23..., Rhc8 24 Rf3 Bf4; then 25 Nxf4+ gxf4 26 Rxf4 Rxc2; with equality.

23..., gxf4 24.Nxf4+ Bxf4 25.Rxf4 Rhc8 26.Rbf1 Rxc2+ 27.Kg3,..

The scheme White has hit upon illustrates the key feature of endings where all the Rooks are on the board: A pair of Rooks working together on a rank or a file can offset the loss of a pawn or two. This is especially true when the line of the cooperating Rooks is in close proximity to the opponent’s King.

27..., Rb7 28.Rf6+ Kg7 29.R6f5 Rd7

More urgent is 29..., b5; but White can defend by making the most of his Rooks cooperation. The balance of the game shows how even a supported past pawn is not quite enough to prevail over the drawn nature of double Rook endings.

30.Rg5+ Kf8 31.Rf6 Rc4 32.Rxb6 Rxa4 33.Rh5 Rxd4 34.Rxa6 Re4 35.Rxh7 d4 36.Kf3 Re5 37.Ra2 Re1 38.Kf2 Rd1 39.Ke2 Rg1 40.Kf3 Re1 41.Rd2 Re3+ 42.Kf2 ½–½

The other game I have is Wright - Magat.

Tim , Wright - Gordon, Magat [E94]

AACC Prelim 1 Guilderland, NY, 01.12.2010

1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 d6 4.e4 Bg7 5.Nf3 0–0 6.Be2,..

One of the very common positions of modern chess. Everyone who is anyone in the elite of chess has played this position from either or both sides.

6..., Nbd7

This is not quite so popular with all of the elite players. The guys who have used this move are no slouches. John Nunn seemed quite convinced that the text was the best move for a long time, and such stars as Svidler, Movesian, Ehlvest, Tal and Hort found it to be very useful many times. World Champions Fischer and Kasparov preferred a line that has become standard beginning, 6..., e5. This move is possible because of the tactic 7 dxe5 dxe5 8 Qxd8 Rxd8 9 Nxe5 Nxe4; and 10 Nxf7? Bxc3+ wins a piece, or 10 Nxe4 Bxe5 11 Bg5 Bxb2 12 Rb1 Re8. Black may eventually have to return the pawn to get a satisfactory development. Overall, GM practice favors Black chances. For this reason White at the top level does not capture on e5 and plays instead d4-d5, then Black has the choice of piece play and a tactical defense of d6 a la Averbakh in the Zurich Inter Zonal, 1953 after .., exd4; or ..Nbd7; transposing to the game.

7.0–0 e5 8.Bg5,..

Now the game is moving away from how the elite treat this position. The aforementioned 8 d5, is the most common move used by the best players. When they don’t advance the d-pawn; 8 Qc2, 8 Re1, and sometimes 8 Be3, are tried more often than the text.

8..., h6 9.Be3 exd4 10.Nxd4 Re8 11.f3 c6 12.Qd2 Kh7

While this position looks very normal, it is uncommon in my databases. Only two examples were found in 2.5 million games. The most recent game is Foigel - Lokasto, Moscow, 1991. White won in 54 moves. The other game is Casas - Cruz, Argentine Ch, 1963. There Black won in 45 moves.

13.Rac1,..

In both games White put this Rook on d1. Either way Deep Rybka favors White by about one-half pawn. In other words, White has the expected edge that goes with the first move.

13..., Nb6 14.Rfd1 ½–½ in 63 moves.

At this point my record of the game becomes confusing. Somehow moves were transposed and I did not catch the error at the time. Help! Tim or Gordon if you see this, send me the corrected game score if possible. The ending is most interesting. After the game, Tim and I had a brief discussion. He thought the Bishops of opposite color was won at some point. I was not so certain. Putting the moves of the ending through Ryka and perhaps the endgame table bases may give a definitive answer.

Thursday evening another round of the Schenectady Championship Preliminary tourneys was played. Three games of note were; a short draw between John Phillips and Michael Mockler, a French Defense in about 15 or 16 moves, and an upset loss by John Barnes to Matt Clough. Barnes was rated about five hundred points above Matt, and Matt has not had much success in this event until the game with Barnes. Richard Chu, who was among the leaders, lost to Brij Saran after trying too hard to win what was a drawn position.

More soon.

A Big Upset at Schenectady

Here is another game from the round played November 18th at Schenectady. In it I make a mistake that costs dearly. The scholastic player Zack Calderon shows a nicely creative flair and some bravery when required.

Calderon, Zack - Little, Bill [A43]

SCC Ch Prelim A Schenectady, NY, 18.11.2010

1.e4 d6 2.d4 Nf6 3.Nc3 g6 4.f4 Bg7 5.Nf3 c5 6.d5,..

This is OK, but more critical is 6 Bb5+ Bd7 7 e5, and we enter a line where the next dozen moves are not intuitive at all. Both sides must know some very tactical lines. These result from several years of some of the best Grandmasters in the 1980’s and 90’s refining the line until Seirawan found a forced draw for Black. Lee Battes and I debated the critical line a few times over the years until he switched to the game move.

6..., 0–0 7.Be2 Qa5

Possible and maybe better is; 7...b5 8.Bxb5 Nxe4 9.Nxe4 Qa5+ 10.Ned2 Qxb5 11.c4 Qa6; and Black has some advantage. The pressure Black has on b2 is not easily balanced by action down the e-file by White because the simple e7-e6 either eliminates the target for White (.. , exd5) or opens lines useful for Black (dxe6, fxe6). If White grabs the e-pawn after Rf1-e1, Nd7 the game becomes is a tactical swamp where, as GM Har-Zvi liked to say, “both sides are lost”. Going this way would have put a considerable challenge to Zack.

The approach I elected to use is not so much worse, as it is less challenging. It is the standard scheme of creating pressure on the White center that is normal in Pirc with an early .., c7-c5.

8.Bd2 Qb6 9.0–0 Na6

Clipping the b-pawn with 9..., Qxb2; is just not good. After 10 Rb1 Qa3 11 Nb5, Black will get some play but not enough to offset the lost material after 11..., Qa4 12 Nc7 Nxe4 13 Nxa8, when it turns out picking off the White Na8 is not possible.

10.Kh1,..

This is not strictly necessary, but it demonstrates a careful positional feel for the game.

10..., e6?

My first but not my last mistake in this game.

11.Qe1?,..

Zack misses the correct answer; 11 Ng5, then 11..., Bd7; is probably best. There are several lines, all full of tactical shots, most of which do not workout well from Black. An example to illustrate is: 11..., Bd7 12 dxe6 fxe6 13 e5 Nd5 14 Nxd5 exd5 15 Ba5!? Qxa5 16 Qxd5+ Kh8 17 Qxb7 Nc7 18 exd6 h6 19 Nf3, and this is a sufficiently murky position to give both players a headache. White will likely recover the piece soon and the pawns Black dropped along the way give White the advantage. There are many places for both sides to vary along the way. Calculating all the possibilities is certainly beyond me and I suspect it was beyond Zack also.

11..., exd5?

And I miss a chance to take advantage of a mistake. Best is 11..., Nb4; threatening c2. Black then has opportunity get fully developed. The cost is his Queen is exposed to some threats. If Black is very accurate, he has chances to snag a pawn somewhere along the line.

12.e5!?,..

I had not given this move much consideration expecting only 12 exd5, when 12..., Qxb2; leaves the White Q-side in shambles.

12..., dxe5 13.fxe5 Ne4 14.Nxd5 Qd8 15.Nc3?,..

This retreat lets Black obtain the advantage. Better 15 c4, and White has a small edge.

15..., Nxd2 16.Nxd2 Nb4 17.Rd1 Nxc2 18.Qg3 Qe7 19.Rf6?!,..

Desperation, but showing a creative approach in a tough situation. My last few moves were pretty much accurate according to Deep Rybka, and gave me a solid but not quite winning advantage.

19..., Bxf6 20.exf6 Qxf6 21.Nde4 Qe7??

In one moment of inattention I manage to turn a decent advantage into a significant disadvantage. Correct is 21..., Qg7; defending the weak squares around my King and solidifying a near winning edge. After the text White is much better.

22.Nd5!,..

This obvious move I did not see when picking the text. As far as I can recall, after pocketing the Exchange and the pawn, that serious mental lapse; thinking the position plays itself, took over my mind. When Zack dropped his Knight on d5, it was very like a splash of icy cold water. A few moments thought and I knew the game was objectively lost. My thoughts then turned to how to make things difficult for my opponent.

22..., Qe6 23.Nef6+ Kg7 24.Bg4 Qxf6 25.Nxf6 Kxf6 26.Qf2+ Kg7 27. Bxc8

Zack does not become too excited to see clearly. This move simply wrings most of the tactical tricks out of the position leaving Black the unpleasant prospect of a long and ultimately unsuccessful defense.

I struggled on for more than fifty(!) more moves but without ever getting a real chance to hold the game. Zack played very well during those many moves demonstrating an understanding of solid technique not usually seen in one with just a few years of chess experience. A painful loss for me, and a victory for Zack that shows promise for the future.

More soon.

A Game From Schenectady Last Thursday

Last Thursday some interesting chess was played at the Schenectady Chess Club. One of the fascinating battles was a strong effort put in by Cory Northrup against Michael Mockler. Mr. Mockler indulged in his experimental opening play, and Mr. Northrup kept pace for awhile. After an up-and-down struggle, Mockler prevailed because he better understood the positional facets of the game.

Mockler, Michael - Northrup, Cory [A00]

SCC Ch Prelim A Schenectady, NY, 18.11.2010

1.Nc3 Nf6 2.e3 d5 3.b3 e5 4.Bb2 c5

Four moves and we have a position that is not to be found in my databases of more than two million games. Michael has an interesting way of treating the opening with the same originality as most players save for the middle game. Here Deep Rybka sees the game as near equal with a slight bias towards Black because of his space advantage in the center.

5.Nf3 d4?!

Premature. Better 5.., Nc6; getting pieces out is preferable to this center push.

6.Ne2!?,..

Passing on the opportunity to collect a positional trump with 6 Bb5+, then 6..., Bd7 7 Bxd7+, eliminating Black’s better Bishop. I can see why Mockler did not enter this line. After 7..., Nbxd7 8 Ne2 e4!? 9 Ng4 h3 10 Nh3 dxe3 Qa5+. White has cleared the long diagonal for his Bb2 while Black has an advantage in space based on his pawn on e4.

6..., Nc6 7.Ng3 a6?

This move is not a tactical mistake, rather it is a positional misunderstanding. Taking advantage of the opportunity presented is 7..., h5; sizing space, then 8 h4 Bg4 9 Qc1 Be7 10 Ng5 Nd5; gives Black a measurable edge. By no means is it a won game for Black, but he does have the advantage.

8.Bd3 Be7 9.a3 h6 10.Bf5 0–0 11.0–0 Bd6?!

Is Black worried about preserving his dark squared Bishop? This cleric really does not have much of a future. More sensible is 11..., Bxf5 12 Nxf5 Qd7 13 Nxe7 Qxe7; and Black has retained his edge. Again, it is not winning but enough to be a nagging problem for White.

12.d3 Ne7 13.Bxc8 Qxc8

Now all of Black’s advantage has disappeared, the game is level.

14.Ne4 Nxe4 15.dxe4 Qc6 16.Qd3 b5 17.exd4 cxd4 18.c3 dxc3 19.Rac1 f6 20.Rxc3 Qb6 21.b4,..

An important moment in the game. Neither Bishop is particularly promising. Both sides have pawns getting in the way of the Bishops becoming strong. However, White has the potential of using the square c5 more readily than Black can use c4. Certainly hereabouts I believe Mockler was thinking about the Bishop tour Bc1/e3 and the Knight itinerary Nd2/b3 clamping down on c5.

21..., Rfd8

This move seems the best. The main alternative is 21..., a5 22 bxa5 Rxa5; and Black wants to eliminate all the Q-side pawns heading towards a drawn position he hopes. The question is; can White make anything out of the weakness of the light squares around the Black King? Without a Bishop running on the light squares, it is unlikely White has much in the way of serious winning chances even though the light squares are weak. I suspect that Cory was not thinking of playing for a draw, and did not seriously consider 21..., a5.

22.Qc2 Rac8 23.Qb3+ Kh8 24.Rxc8 Rxc8 25.Rd1,..

White is not interested in exchanging Rooks on the c-file. He has hopes of getting to use c5 for his minor pieces and maneuvers towards that end.

25..., Rc6 26.Bc1 Qc7 27.Be3 Rc4

The position has some tactical potential, that is there are certainly shots for both sides that must be watched for, however, the key ideas are positional. Some of the positional considerations are: Black has to think about the effect any trade, particularly of the Rooks, will have on keeping White pieces from getting in behind the pawns. He also must be wary of the White Queen and Knight finding a way to the light squares near the Black King. On a positive note, Black also would like to find away to maneuver his Knight to c4.

28.g3 Qc6 29.Nd2 Rc1

Probably motivated by the idea of getting some material off will make playing the position easier, Cory forces the Rook exchange. Here is an alternative line that illustrates some of the ideas lurking in the position: 29.., Rc3 30 Qb2 Rc2 31 Qa1 Nc8 32 Qb1 Bc7 33 Bc5 Rc3 34 Qa1 Rd3 35 Nf1 Rxd1 36 Qxd1 Bd6 37 Qc2 Bxc5 38 Qxc5 Qxc5 39 bxc5, when with either 39..., Ne7; or 39..., a5; Black can hold the draw without much difficulty.

The line cited above involves a more general liquidation than is possible after the text move. Black is OK in a minor piece ending. It is far less clear that this is so with the Queens on the board - the light square weaknesses again and the possible outpost on c5 combined make it hard for Black to defend successfully.

30.Rxc1 Qxc1+ 31.Nf1 Qc6!?

A bit better is 31..., Qc7; straightaway.

32.Qe6 Qc7

Giving up the Bishop for two passed pawns with 32..., Bxb4; is wrong. The “passers” are not so far advanced and White has time to bring his King to the field to prevent them reaching the first rank.

33.Nd2 Ng6 34.Nb3 Nf8 35.Qd5,..

White has now obtained almost all he desired from the position; his Queen is centralized on d5, and the tours of both minor pieces have them pressuring c5. The game is not lost for Black. Holding the position will be difficult because White has a persistent initiative however.

35..., Nd7 36.Qa8+ Nb8 37.Nc5?!

This move is doubtful. Better 37 Bc5, and when the Bishops are exchanged, White is left with much the better Knight, and retains a substantial advantage. After the text Black has chances to hold.

Bxc5 38.Bxc5 Kh7 39.Qd5 Qd7 40.Qb3!?,..

White apparently did not like 40 Kf1 Qh3+; and rightly so. After 41 Ke1 Qxh2 42 Qb7 Qg1+ 43 Ke2 Qb1 44 Qxb8 Qxe4+ 45 Be3 Qc4+ 46 Ke1 Qc3+ 47 Kf1 Qxa3 48 Bc5 Qf3; and Black has three pawns for the piece balancing material. More importantly, the Black Queen is very active. With the further moves 49 Kg1 Qd1+ 50 Kh2 e4! 51 Qf4 Qh5+; it appears that Black is not lost at all. Michael wants to follow the principle of good technique; when you have the advantage don’t enter murky lines. Objectively better is 40 f3, trying to improve the position, but 40..., Qxd5 41 exd5, gives Black a defendable position.

40..., Nc6 41.Kg2 a5?

After holding his own against one of the best players in the section, Cory makes an outright error. From the spectator’s point of view, it seems he lost patience expecting only 41 bxa5. Better is 41..., Qd2; and if 42 Be3 Qd7; keeping the balance. White has a small theoretical edge; a Bishop versus a Knight with pawns on both sides of the board.

42.Qd5 Nb8?

And this move compounds the problem. With 42..., Qe8; Black could make a stubborn defense. He has to keeps the Queens on the board because the Bishop will be much more active than the Knight in any minor piece ending. Should the Queens go off, with pawns on both sides of the board the greater activity of the Bishop gives all the winning chances to the Bishop side. The game is now all but lost for Black.

43.bxa5 Qc7 44.Bb6!?,..

Simpler and more forceful is 44.Bd6. The game rolls on for some more moves.

44...Qc4 45.Qxc4 bxc4 46.Kf3 Kg8 47.Ke3 Kf7 48.Kd2 Ke6 49.Kc3 Kd7 50.Kxc4 Kc6 51.Bc5 g6 52.Be3 h5 53.f4 Na6 54.Bb6 exf4 55.gxf4 Nb8 56.Bd4 g5

Black tries to make the best of a bad situation, here aiming for his own out side passed pawn. That is a standard defensive tactic. Mr. Northrup has been receiving lessons from John Phillips for sometime and that education shows here. Unfortunately for Northrup, the position too far gone to save.

57.Bxf6 gxf4 58.Kd3 Nd7 59.Bd4 Kb5 60.e5 Nf8 61.Bb6

There were a few more moves before resignation. The issue is now clear and White won.

More soon.

Howard and Henner From AACC first Round

Both Peter Henner and Dean Howard responded to my request for what they have on their game from last Wednesday in the first round of the Albany Area Chess Club preliminary sections. Dean won a game in what began as a Scotch Gambit and transposed into not a very common position.

Howard, Dean - Henner, Peter [C44]

AACC Ch. Prelim B Guilderland, NY, 17.11.2010

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 exd4 4.c3,..

The more usual line for the Scotch Gambit is 4 Bc4.

4..., d5 5.exd5 Qxd5 6.cxd4 Bg4

Even one hundred years ago this line was not terribly popular. A quick survey of my databases delivered 34 games between 1897 and 2007, that is not very many games for 110 years. However the actual results were not so bad for Black: White won 16, lost 13 with 5 drawn.

7.Be2 0–0–0 8.Nc3 Qa5 9.Be3 Nf6 10.0–0 Bd6!?

The game has oddly enough transposed into a position quite like something from the Center Counter, or Scandinavian Defense. The move played seems to be wrong, or at least doubtful. Some masters tried 10..., Bb5; ambitious, others attempted 10..., Bc5; willingly entering a complicated sequence that gets off a couple pairs of minor pieces and a pawn or two leaving Black a small advantage in piece activity. The text requires Black to take some chances with the safety of his Queen.

11.h3 Bf5 12.Nd2 Be6 13.Nb3 Qf5?

The last few moves were fraught with complications most of which swirled around “Where does the Black Queen go to find a quiet life?” It turns out that moving forward to b4 is the only way for Black to keep from getting into trouble. Of course, after 13..., Qb4; the obvious 14 d5, fails because 14..., Nxd5 15 Nxd5 Bxd5 16 Qxd5 Bh2+; picks up the Queen for two minor pieces. Since direct tactics don’t work, White might try 14 Bf3, still aiming to push the d-pawn to d5. Black can answer 14..., Ne7 15 Bd2 Kb8 16 Ne4 Bxb3!?; leading to plenty of tactics that seem to favor Black. It is understandable that running the Queen towards the opposite side of the board is tempting in the face of the difficult calculations necessary after 13..., Qb4. Unfortunately for Peter, everything else gives White an advantage. If 13..., Bxb3 14 axb3 Qf5 15 Bd3 Qd7 16 d5!, and the attack White has is very dangerous.

The next couple of moves demonstrate the problem Black is facing; his Queen is exposed letting White force a favorable material imbalance; two Knights and a pawn for a Rook immediately. Typically, collecting a material plus results in a bit of “indigestion” for the side obtaining it. That was not the case in this game. This time the material imbalance translates shortly into further material gain.

14.Bd3 Qh5 15.Qxh5 Nxh5 16.d5 Nb4 17.Be2 Nc2 18.dxe6 Nxa1 19.Rxa1 Nf4 20.Bxf4 Bxf4 21.exf7 c6 22.Nc5,..

Going into this position Black may have thought recovering the pawn at f7 was possible. The game move puts paid to that idea. If 22..., Rdf8 23 Bg4+ Kb8 (any other King move also allows a fork) 24 Nd7+ leaves White up a full piece.

22..., Rd2

This move loses to the same idea.

23.Bg4+ Kb8 24.Nd7+ Rxd7 25.Bxd7 Rd8 26.Be8 Bd6 27.Rd1 1–0

Dean understood the position better that Peter did and exploited that understanding in a most commendable fashion. Mr. Henner thought he made several poor moves. He is too hard on himself. Move 10, .. Bd6 was not the most active option, and it narrowed his path very much, but it was still possible to maintain the balance. The move responsible for all of Black’s troubles was 13..., Qf5?; instead of 13..., Qb4. After that error there was no way to save the game.

More soon.

News From Schenectady and Albany Clubs

The Schenectady Championship Preliminaries are now in full swing. Bill Townsend forwarded cross tables for both sections. Summaries of the current standings are:

Preliminary A:

Richard Chu 4 - 0

Patrick Chi 3 ½ - ½

John Phillips 4 - 1

Bill Little 1 - 1

Michael Mockler 1 ½ - 1 ½

Cory Northrup 2 ½ - 2 ½

Zack Calderon 2 - 3

Brij Saran 1 ½ - 3 ½

Michael Stanley 0 - 3

Yogi Kanakamedala 0 - 4

Richard Chu’s lead is not surprising as he has been meeting the lower half of the table so far. As dangerous as he can be to the higher ups in the ratings, we will have to see if he take some scalps this year as he has done in the past.

The other interesting result is Mr. Mockler standing at 1 ½ - 1 ½. All three games he has played were drawn. It was no big surprise for Mockler to draw with Chi. The other two draws were with Brij Saran and Zack Calderon. Both have to be considered some kind of upset.

A prolonged bout of illness has made me the “tail end Charlie” of this year’s event. I hope the worst is past and I can begin to catch up on the schedule.

Preliminary B:

Philip Sells 4 - 0

Richard Moody 4 - 1

John Barnes 2 - 1

Dillip Aaron 2 ½ - 1 ½

David Connors ½ - 1 ½

Alan Le Cours 1 - 2

Jeff Capitummino ½ - 2 ½

Herman Calderon 1 ½ - 3 ½

Matthew Clough 0 - 3

The biggest surprise in this section has to be the loss by Le Cours to Moody. Moody is well placed for a good result this year. Mr. Moody has been an active player for some time in local events. This is his first year competing in the Schenectady Championship, and he is off to a good start.

For those who may not know the rules for the Schenectady tournament; the top three finishers from each section play a final round robin to decide the title. There are chances we may see a new face in the finals if Richard Moody keeps up his good work. Alan Le Cours with minus 2 at this point will need to play up to his high standard to out pace Moody.

The first round of the Albany Area Chess Club’s Championship finished last night. So far in in Section 1 Gordon Magat defeated Art Alowitz, Tim Wright won from Bill Little and Bob Kemp was successful against Tim McCarthy

In Section 2 Jonathan Lack won from Jason Denham and Glen Perry did likewise versus Chuck Eson. All the games both sections were played last Wednesday except the Howard - Henner game.

Dean Howard and Peter Henner played their scheduled game last night. Regretfully, I had to leave before this contest finished. Howard as White played the Scotch and after about 90 minutes of play they had reached a moment of some tension. The Scotch is full of tactics and I was unable to form an opinion as to who was on top. The venerable Scotch has quietly crept back into the mainstream of theory after Kasparov gave it his stamp of approval in the 1990’s. While prowling around on ICC today, I came across a game by Steve Zierk the newest US International Master. He recently won the World Under 14 Championship and the IM title, and he did it with a Scotch against a close rival. Zierk’s game is an example of just how tactical Scotch can become. There were several moves in it I never anticipated. So, I don’t feel too bad about not coming up with an opinion about Howard - Henner.

Tomorrow I will reach out to Howard and Henner and try to get the score for the blog.

Incidentally, the rules for the AACC event have the first place finishers in the two section playing a two game match for the title. This makes each game in the preliminaries critical if one has ambitions to fight for the highest place.

More soon.

Not a Very Critical Game From Saratoga

A week ago I played David Connors once again. Mr. Connors conducted his side of the game pretty well up to a point in the late middle game. There he seemed to lose the thread. When the ending approached, he jumped at a chance for a Bishops of opposite color ending. That choice was not entirely wrong if it had been followed up correctly by opting for active counter-play. Unfortunately for David he did not do so and the game ended in my favor.

Connors, David - Little, Bill [A07]

Saratoga Championship Saratoga Springs, NY, 07.11.2010

1.Nf3 d5 2.g3 Nf6 3.Bg2 c6 4.d3 Bg4 5.Nbd2 Nbd7 6.0–0,..

All mainline theory. Vaganian and Movsesian are two Grandmasters who have championed the White side in recent years. Interestingly, both played the Black side in a similar fashion to my choice in this game. I did not know that going into the position. It is comforting to this find out because my opening preparation has always been a weak point for me.

6..., e5 7.e4 dxe4 8.dxe4 Qc7 9.Qe1 Bb4

Played with the notion of luring some of the White pawns onto dark squares. This move and the earlier .., Bg3; seemed to have similar motivations; get White to push pawns in hopes of exploiting weaken squares that show up after advances such as h2-h3 and g2-g4 against a Bg4.

10.a3 Be7 11.Nc4 Bxf3?!

Better is 11..., Be6. I was dead lazy here. Rather than buckling down and calculating if there was anything in the pressure White is trying to exert on e5, I simply eliminate the Nf3. So far as simple chess goes, this is alright, but some consideration should have been given to the fact that the text gives up the Bishop pair. Best is 11..., Be6; then if 12 b3 Bxc4; with a very slight edge for Black, or 12 Qe2 b5 13 Ncd2, when Black has a small lead in development and an entirely equal game.

12.Bxf3 0–0 13.Bg2 Rfe8 14.Kh1 b5 15.Ne3 Bf8 16.Nf5 g6 17.Nh6+ Kg7 18.Bh3 Ng8 19.Nxg8 Kxg8 20.Qe2 Rad8 21.Be3 Nc5 22.Bg2 Ne6 23.c3 a6 24.Rfd1 Nc5 25.Rxd8 Rxd8 26.Rd1 Nb3 27.Rxd8 Qxd8 28.h4,..

The play for the last several moves was not very exciting. Black has posted his pawns on the light squares to offset the light squared Bishop that White has in hand. White has traded off material hoping to get some advantage. If the Queens are traded and the position opens up the two Bishops could be enough to win.

28.., h5?!

Not the best way of meeting the advance of the h-pawn. This is another example of lazy thinking. A careful examination of the position would have told me my Bf8 makes the attack created by pushing the h-pawn to h6 and putting the Queen on f3 a non-starter and the time used by White to go down that road would have doomed his Q-side pawns. The real problem with the game move is not that it passes on a better idea, rather more important is that my pawn on h5 can become a target.

29.Qc2 Nc5 30.Bf1 Qd7 31.Kg2 Ne6 32.Qd2!?,..

White pursues his policy of trading material and gets the Queens off. Somewhat better is 32 Qd3 keeping the dark squared Bishop on an active square.

32...Qxd2 33.Bxd2 c5 34.b4 c4 35.Be3 Bd6 36.f3 Kf8 37.g4,..

White is exploiting the weakness of my move 28. I am reluctant to capture on g4 for that would leave White with the potential outside passed pawn. Correct though the move played is, there is also a flaw in understanding by White.

37..., Nf4+ 38.Bxf4?,..

After the game David said he thought he had to take the Knight. Not true. There is nothing wrong with ignoring the adventurous “horse” by just moving his King to f2 leaving the game entirely even.

38..., exf4 39.Kf2,..

Here it became apparent to me that Connors had not quite understood what was happening in this position.

38..., Be5?

And I promptly make a mistake. Much better is 38..., hxg4; slowing down the light squared White Bishop from circling behind my Q-side via Bh3/Bc8 creating some counter-play. With my Bishop on the long diagonal a passed h-pawn is less of a worry. After White recaptures on g4, the Bishop goes to e5 with the same effect as in the game, but White must use one more move to make the Bishop tour to c8.

40.Ke2,..

Missing a chance to obtain activity for the Bf1 with 40 gxh5! My erroneous 38..., Be5; threatens the complete destruction of the White Q-side. The threat looms so large in David’s mind he does not find the better alternative.

40..., hxg4

Belatedly recognizing the danger to my Q-side.

41.fxg4 Bxc3 42.Kf3 Bb2 43.a4 Bc3?

The position is still won, but this is certainly the sloppiest way to go about it. Neat and thematic is 43..., c3 44 Bd3 bxa4 and either the a-pawn or the c-pawn will reach the first rank and make a Queen.

44.axb5 axb5 45.Kxf4 Bxb4 46.Ke3 Bc5+ 47.Kd2 Bd4

This was the sequence I had worked out back around move 41. My centralized Bishop covers h8 so the White h-pawn is never going to Queen successfully. When my King marches up to support the connected passed pawns there is no defense. Botvinnik and his great rival Keres long ago made the point that I forgot; even when you see a clear winning line, if possible check for ways to improve.

48.Kc2?,..

By sacrificing the e-pawn with 48 e5, White could have created technical difficulties. Black should still be able to win but it is by no means a trivial endgame exercise because of the Bishops of opposite color.

48..., Ke7 49.h5 g5 50.Bg2 Kd6

All danger is now gone for Black. The King is close enough to protect the passed pawns, and with Bishop and King in close convoy they will march to the first rank.

51.h6 b4 52.Bf1 Kc5 53.h7 b3+ 54.Kb1 Be5 55.Be2 Kd4 56.Bf1 c3 57.Bg2 c2+

And the game ended shortly With Connors resigning.

A Belated Report From the North Country

A bout of pneumonia slowed me down for the passed few weeks. It seems to be over now and I hope to get back to regular posting beginning today.

Sunday evening two weeks ago continued the pattern we have seen in Saratoga from the beginning; three games played and one recorded as a forfeit. The match between Jonathan Fineberg and Ray Alguire was a forfeit win for Fineberg. The played games, for once, turned out to end about as the ratings predicted. Gary Farrell lost with the White pieces versus Steve Taylor. This was Taylor’s fifth consecutive victory. Black again won in the game between David Connors and Alan Le Cours where the participants created a rather odd kind of position. Up to a point in the middle game Connors conducted the White pieces successfully. Something then went wrong for David, and Alan won in short order. The game Bill Little - Jeff Hrebenach, a Hungarian Defense, was won by Little.

Today’s game is an up and down affair. Farrell rolls out his favorite Bird’s Opening and takes it into an unusual line. It is not a variation often seen at the top level. One exception is Maric, a Yugoslav IM tried it against Bobby Fischer no less at Skopje in 1967. The redoubtable Fischer won in 47 moves, but he had a near winning advantage by move twenty-five notwithstanding Bishops of opposite color. Altogether, from multiple databases I found only five games total in this line. White won four of the five. Fischer was author of the lone Black victory. Three of the four wins were masters butchering non-masters. The other game was from the championship of Argentina in 1955, Pelikan - Corte. Corte blundered a pawn on move 12 and was unable to muster any kind of counter-play. What can be concluded from this research? The approach used by Mr. Farrell can not be dismissed as unsound. It puts Black on his merits to find creative answers to the problems set without any large body of theory to fall back upon.

Farrell, Gary - Taylor, Steven [A02]

Saratoga Championship Saratoga Springs, NY, 24.10.2010

1.f4 Nf6 2.Nf3 g6 3.d3 Bg7 4.e4 c5 5.Be2 d5!?

Mr. Taylor decides on immediate, dramatic action to counter the White set up. Fischer had a different approach putting his Knight on c6, advancing the d-pawn to d6 and pushing his c-pawn to c4 to loosen the center.

6.e5 Nfd7 7.c4 Nb6 8.0–0 0–0 9.Be3 Qc7 10.Nc3 d4 11.Nb5...,

The players have taken the game into a position that is certainly not routine. While watching the game my first thought was White may want to, at some point in the future, want to transfer a Knight to e4. Finding a move order to make that possible is not easy.

11..., Qd7

Why put the Queen on d7 blocking the development of the c8-Bishop along the c8-h3 diagonal?

12.Bd2 a6 13.Na3 Na4 14.Rb1 b5

So the Queen went to d7 to support this thrust. Interesting.

15.Qe1...,

White plays his own slightly mysterious Queen move. During the game I thought 15.Be1, might be tried with the idea of a Knight tour Nc2/a1/b3/d2/e4. That is a great many moves with a considerable number of alternatives. Gary has a neat, creative idea that makes use of tactical chances in the center and on the K-side and is based on a forcing idea. Such is easier to calculate than some line filled with maneuvers and few tactical threats as the Knight tour.

15...b4 16.Nc2 Bb7 17.Ng5 h6?

The game has been even to here. Mr. Taylor now missed the tricky bit that Mr. Farrell had up his sleeve. Better is 17..., f6; pushing back the adventurous Knight, but it is quite difficult to see all the ramifications. For example one line is 17..., f6 18 e6 Qc8 19 Nxh7 Kxh7 20 f5! gxf5 21 Qh4+ Kg8 22 Bh6 Qxe6 23 Bxg7 Kxg7 24 Qg3+ and a draw by perpetual check can’t be avoided. Note there is no way out for Black with 24.., Kf7; because 25 Bh5 is mate.

18.e6 fxe6 19.Bg4,..

The point of Gary’s idea. Steve tries to make the best of a bad situation by giving up the Exchange. The alternative, giving up the Exchange on a8 with 19..., 19 Qe8; seems to allow White to have tremendous activity for his pieces after 20 Ne6 Rf6 21 Nc7 Qe8 22 Be6+ Kh7 23 Nxa8 Bxa8 24 Qe2 Nd7 25 f5 with dangerous threats to the home of the Black King. Superficially, surrendering the remote Exchange at a8 is tempting, but the White light squared Bishop is very useful in the attack, and preventing the advance of the f5-pawn aids the defense, two reasons for Taylor’s decision.

19..., Rf5 20.Bxf5,..

The alternative 20 Nxe6, leads to complex play where the computer says White has a marked advantage. Playing it out to move 51 however does not demonstrate a clear winning line even if White picks up the Exchange along the way.

20...exf5 21.Qe6+ Qxe6 22.Nxe6 Bf6

Black has weathered the worst. White still has a solid edge, but he has to solve the tangle on the Q-side and get his Rb1 into the game to make the material advantage count. This is no easy task.

23.b3 Nc3

Rybka suggests 23..., Bc8; trying to make something out of the lack of squares for the Ne6. After 24 Nxd5 Nc3 25 Bxc3 bxc3 26 Ne2 Nc6 27 b4 Nd4 28 Nexd4 cxd4 29 a4, Black has not much to balance the connected passed pawns. His own protected passer at c3 is not easy to get rolling. This time playing out the computer lines to move fifty-something show White winning by advancing the Q-side pawns. He does have to be careful that Black does not obtain counter-play by advancing the center pawns.

Both players had used most of their allotted time at this point in the game and time trouble was nearing.

24.Bxc3 dxc3 25.Nxc5 Bc8 26.Rfe1 Nc6 27.Kf1 Kf7 28.Rbd1 Nd4!?

Black is reluctant to give up the Bishop pair but that might be best. Taylor offers a pawn in hopes of activating the Ra8 and breaking up the White Q-side pawn mass.

29.Nxb4 e6 30.Na4?,..

While watching the game I did not see this move as an error. The first couple of passes with the computer helping did not identify it so either. After a fairly long consideration, it seems the clear path for White to take the point is to prepare to return the Exchange to keep the his pawns intact. Play goes as follows: 30 Rc1 Be7 31 Re5! (Not a move non-Grandmasters would give much thought, but GM’s and computers are not prisoners of the conventional.) 31..., Bd6 32 Nc2 Bxe5 33 fxe5 Nc6 34 d4 a5 35 Na4 Bb7 36 Nxc3, when White has two extra pawns and a dangerous pawn roller while Black lacks the resources to create effective counter-play.

30..., Rb8 31.a3?,..

A sterner test for Black would be 31 Nxa6, then 31..., Bxa6 32 Nxc3 Nxb3 33 Na4 Nd4 34 Rc1, and while my computer says Black is better by about three-quarters of a pawn, the White passed pawns on the Q-side have to be dealt with. Both players were short of time now. The text lets Black devalue the White pawn mass.

31..., a5 32.Na2 c2 33.Rd2 Rxb3

We now see the difference; instead of facing two White passed pawns, Black has retained his a-pawn, won the b-pawn and brought his Rook to a very active post. The balance is tilting towards Black clearly.

34.Nc1 Rxa3 35.Nc5?,..

Black has worked his way to a significant advantage. The text drops material. Better 35 Nb6, preserving the Knight and maintaining tension. After the text move the complications begin to be resolved and Black’s advantage becomes manifest.

35..., Be7 36.N5b3 Nxb3 37.Rxc2 Nd4 38.Ra2 a4 1-0

Both sides were well under five minutes on the clock and the remainder of the game was played at blitz speed. I was not able to write fast enough to capture the moves. About a dozen more moves were played and the game ended with less than a minute remaining on both clocks. Taylor took the point by maintaining his composure after a tactical surprise. Both participants have to be thanked for creating quite an entertaining game full of interesting moments. Bravo!

More soon.

Connors v. LeCours Staunton Club 2010

Diagram After 12. Kd1 Diagram After 35...Nf6

This is my game from October 24, 2010 with David Connors at the Saratoga Staunton Club. David usually plays very tough in the opening, and he has beaten me in regular tournament games on a couple of occasions, including last year in the Schenectady Championships, where I had a rook and pawn ending up one pawn and refused to accept the draw, and then proceeded to lose!

(1) Connors,David (1550) - LeCours,Alan (1927)[A45]

SAR St. Club, 24.10.2010

1.d4 Nf6 2.Bf4 g6 3.h3 Bg7 4.e3 0–0 5.Nd2 d5!?

Black is playing for a Grunfeld type of set up. By playing d5!?, this weakens the e5 square. The GM recommended move is 5…d6 to prepare for an eventual pawn push to e5.

This position eventually transposes to a London System, which was a system developed in the 1920s to combat the King's Indian Defense. Normally the London System move order is 1. Nf3 2. d4 3. Bf4 4. e3. Because of the unusual move order I only have 7 games in my database with this position.

The position is dead even. White in this system does not really even try to obtain an early advantage. The "system" is based upon a slow build up.

6.Bd3 Nbd7

There is only one master level game with this position in my database, Koenig v. Duer, Austria, 2000 see below. But after 8. Ngf3 I have 120 games.

7.c3 c5

Black can consider 7…Nh5 with the idea of 8…e5

8.Ngf3 Qb6

Black is playing to pressure the b2 square to try to take advantage of the absence of the Bishop from c1. This is a similar idea to playing against some lines of the Trompowsky. Of the 120 games in my database however, the stronger player were playing 8…b6 (84) 8…c4 (19) 8…Rfe8 (18). Only 4 games have 8. Qb6

Rybka2 (One of the Computer Brutes) at 16 ply agrees with 8…Qb6 at 19 ply prefers 8…c4. Position about equal +0.08
9.Qb1 (9. Qc1) cxd4 (Nh5) 10.exd4 (cxd4) Nh5 11.Bh2

If 11. Be3 f5 12. g4 Nf4 13. Bxf4 fxg4 14. Be3 gxf3 (Rbk -0.53 17/p)

11…Qe6+ 12.Kd1
See first Diagram

I thought this move looked a little odd. But at least here the e-file can be used by a rook.

12….Qb6?!

My original idea was 12…Qf6 but I thought my pieces would get tangled up on the king-side. I thought that even with the retreat, white had lost some time because of the loss of the castling privilege. But 12…Qf6 was much better.

13.g4 Nhf6 14.Bg3 Re8 15.Re1 Qc6?!

Black should play 15….a5 I did not want to permanently weaken the b5 square to allow Bb5.

16.a4

According to Rybka white has a slight edge +0.27 but just over the equality range (-0.20--+0.20)

16….a6 17.Qa2 b6
18.Kc2
(Maybe white could try 18. c4 and play against the queen on the c-file) e6
19.Re2 Bb7 20.Rae1 b5 21.a5 (Kb1) b4 22.c4 (Qb3) dxc4 23.Bxc4 Rac8

24.b3?! (Kb1=)Nd5!

Now black has taken the advantage according to Rybka -0.91 16/p If 25. Ne4 Nc3 26. Nxc3 Qxf3 27. Re3 Qg2 28. Ne2 Qxh3 and black maintains his advantage.

25.Qb2 Nc3 26.Re3 Nd5 27.R3e2 Nc3 28.Re3

How does black maintain his advantage?

Black was starting to get seriously short of time (under 5 minutes) and white still had about 50 minutes of time). The best way to continue was Nf6 to try to sink a second knight on d5.

A possible continuation is 28….Nf6 29. Ne5 Qg2 30. h4 Nfd5

31. Rd3 Bxe5 32. dxe5 Qh3 Rbk -1.40 Black is winning.

28….Nb5?! 29.Kb1 Na3+ 30.Ka2 Nxc4 31.Nxc4

31… Qd5?!

Missing a fork. 31…Bf8 would have preserved a little advantage for black.

32.Nd6 Qxa5+ 33.Kb1
In spite of only have a pawn for the exchange, Rybka2 "thinks" black has the smallest of advantages, with either 33….Bf8 or 33…Bxf3 -0.28

Now white and black enterred into a blitz match. We were playing with the time delay. Black had 1 and one-half minutes left, but white had over 30 minutes.

33…Bd5?! (The game is equal) 34.Nxe8 Rxe8 35.Rc1 Nf6

See Second Diagram

36.Be5??

This blunder allows black to get the exchange back, and drive the white king out to the open, leading to the monarch's demise. 36 . Nd2 and the game would be about even.

36…... Be4+ 37.Rxe4 Nxe4 38.Bxg7 Kxg7 39.Ne5 Nc3+ 40.Kc2 Rc8

41.Nc4 Qd5 42.Kd3 Qf3+ 43.Ne3 Qe4+ 44.Kd2 Qxd4+ 45.Ke1 Qe4

46.Rxc3?! bxc3 47.Qc2 Qh1+ 48.Ke2 Qxh3 0–1

Game References:

(2063667) Koenig,Dietrich (2327) - Duer,Werner (2325) [D02]

AUT-chT2W 0001 Austria (6), 12.01.2001

1.d4 d5 2.Bf4 Nf6 3.e3 g6 4.Nd2 Bg7 5.h3 0–0 6.Bd3 Nbd7 7.Ngf3 c5 8.c3 b6 9.0–0 Bb7 10.Qe2 Ne4 11.Rad1 Qe8 12.Rfe1 Nxd2 13.Rxd2 e5 14.dxe5 Nxe5 15.Nxe5 Bxe5 16.Bh6 Bg7 17.Bxg7 Kxg7 18.Red1 Qe5 19.Ba6 Bc6 20.Bb5 Bb7 21.Qf3 Qe7 22.Qf4 Rfd8 23.Be2 Rd6 24.Bf3 Rad8 25.c4 g5 26.Qg3 d4 27.Bxb7 Qxb7 28.exd4 cxd4 29.Rxd4 Rxd4 30.Rxd4 Rxd4 31.Qe5+ f6 32.Qxd4 Qa6 33.a3 Qa4 34.Qd3 Qe8 35.Qe3 Qa4 36.b4 Qd1+ 37.Kh2 Qd6+ 38.g3 h5 39.c5 bxc5 40.bxc5 Qc7 41.Kg1 Qd7 42.Kh2 Qc7 43.c6 Qxc6 44.Qxa7+ Kg6 45.Qd4 Qc7 46.Qe4+ Kg7 47.Kg2 Qa7 48.a4 Qa5 49.Qb7+ Kg6 50.Qb1+ Kg7 51.Qb5 Qa8+ 52.Kh2 Qe4 53.a5 Qe1 54.Qb6 h4 55.a6 hxg3+ 56.Kxg3 Qe5+ 57.Kg2 Qe4+ 58.Kf1 Qd3+ 59.Ke1 Qc3+ 60.Kd1 Qd3+ 61.Kc1 Qc3+ 62.Kb1 Qd3+ 63.Kb2 Qd2+ 64.Kb3 Qd3+ 65.Kb4 Qd2+ 66.Kb5 Qd5+ 67.Qc5 Qb3+ 68.Kc6 Qa4+ 69.Kb7 Qe4+ 70.Qc6 Qb4+ 71.Kc8 Qf8+ 72.Kc7 Qa3 73.Kb8 Kg6 74.Qe4+ Kh6 75.Qe6 Qb4+ 76.Kc7 Qc5+ 77.Kd7 Kg6 78.Qe4+ Kh6 79.Qe6 Kg6 80.Ke8 Qb5+ 81.Kd8 Qa5+ 82.Kc8 Qc5+ 83.Kb7 Qb5+ 84.Kc7 Qc5+ 85.Qc6 Qe7+ 86.Kc8 Qf8+ 87.Kd7 1–0

(81207) Bondarevsky,Igor - Liublinsky,Victor Alexandrovic [D02]
URS-ch18 Moscow (14), 03.12.1950
1.d4 Nf6 2.Nf3 g6 3.Bf4 Bg7 4.Nbd2 0–0 5.h3 d5 6.e3 c5 7.c3 Nbd7 8.Bd3 b6 9.0–0 Bb7 10.Qe2 Ne4 11.Rfd1 Qc8 12.Rac1 Nxd2 13.Qxd2 f6 14.Bg3 e5 15.dxe5 Nxe5 16.Be2 Qe8 17.Qc2 Kh8 18.b3 Rd8 19.a4 Bc6 20.Ra1 Qe7 21.a5 b5 22.b4 Nxf3+ 23.Bxf3 c4 24.Rd2 f5 25.Rad1 Qf6 26.Rd4 Qe6 27.R4d2 d4 28.cxd4 Bxf3 29.gxf3 f4 30.Bxf4 Qxh3 31.Qe4 Rf5 32.Bg3 Rh5 33.f4 Rf8 34.d5 Bc3 35.Re2 Bxb4 36.d6 Bxa5 37.d7 Bd8 38.Red2 Kg8 39.Rd5 a6 40.Rxh5 gxh5 41.Rd5 h4 42.Rg5+ Bxg5 43.Qd5+ Kg7 44.Qxg5+ Kf7 45.Qh5+ Ke6 46.Qe8+ Rxe8 47.dxe8Q+ Kd5 48.Qh5+ Ke4 49.Bxh4 c3 50.Qxh7+ Kf3 51.Qh5+ Ke4 52.Qh7+ Kf3 53.Qh5+ Ke4 54.Qg6+ Kf3 55.Bf6 b4 56.Be5 a5 57.f5 Ke2 58.f6 Qf1+ 59.Kh2 ½–½

(3633814) Bogosavljevic,Boban (2302) - Stojanovic,Mihajlo (2549) [D00]
Serbia-chT Zlatibor (5), 30.08.2006
1.d4 d5 2.Bf4 Nf6 3.e3 c5 4.c3 Nbd7 5.Nd2 g6 6.h3 Bg7 7.Ngf3 0–0 8.Bd3 b6 9.0–0 Bb7 10.Ne5 Ne4 11.Nxe4 dxe4 12.Bb5 Nxe5 13.dxe5 Bd5 14.Qe2 Qc8 15.Rfd1 Rd8 16.c4 Be6 17.Rxd8+ Qxd8 18.Bc6 Rc8 19.Bb7 Rc7 20.Rd1 Rd7 21.Rxd7 Qxd7 22.Bxe4 Qc7 23.b3 Bxe5 24.Bxe5 Qxe5 25.Qc2 Qa1+ 26.Qb1 Qc3 27.Qd1 Kg7 28.Bd3 h6 29.Kf1 g5 30.Qc2 Qa1+ 31.Ke2 Qe5 32.Kd2 Bd7 33.Qc3 Kf6 34.Bf1 Bc6 35.Qxe5+ Kxe5 36.g3 Bf3 37.Bd3 f5 38.Bf1 f4 39.a3 Bh1 40.Bd3 fxg3 41.fxg3 Bg2 42.h4 gxh4 43.gxh4 Be4 44.Bf1 Kf6 45.Bh3 Bf3 46.Bd7 Kg6 47.Be8+ Kf5 48.Bd7+ e6 49.b4 Bh5 50.bxc5 bxc5 51.e4+ Kxe4 52.Bxe6 Kd4 53.Kc2 Be2 54.Kb3 Bd1+ 55.Kb2 a5 56.Bf7 a4 57.Be6 Bb3 58.Bf7 Bxc4 59.Be8 Bb3 60.Bg6 Bc4 61.Be8 Bb3 62.Bg6 c4 63.Be8 Kd3 64.Kc1 Kc3 65.Bb5 Kd4 66.Be8 c3 67.Bg6 Ke3 68.Be8 Kf4 69.h5 Kg5 70.Kb1 Bd1 71.Kc1 Bb3 72.Kb1 Kf4 73.Kc1 Ke5 74.Kb1 Ke6 75.Kc1 Ke7 76.Bb5 Kf7 77.Bc6 Kg8 78.Be8 Kg7 79.Kb1 Kh7 80.Bg6+ Kh8 81.Be8 Kg7 82.Kc1 Kh8 83.Kb1 Kg7 84.Kc1 Kf6 85.Kb1 Ke5 86.Kc1 Kd4 87.Kb1 Bd1 88.Kc1 Be2 89.Kc2 Bf3 90.Bf7 Bc6 91.Kc1 Bd5 92.Be8 Bb3 93.Kb1 Bd1 94.Kc1 Bf3 95.Bf7 Bc6 96.Kc2 Bd7 97.Kc1 Bg4 98.Kc2 Bf3 99.Kc1 Bd5 100.Be8 Bb3 101.Kb1 Ke4 102.Kc1 Kf5 103.Kb1 Kg4 104.Kc1 Kg5 105.Kb1 Bd1 106.Kc1 Bxh5 107.Bxa4 Bg6 108.Bd1 Kf4 109.a4 Ke5 110.Be2 h5 111.a5 h4 112.Bf1 Kd6 113.a6 Kc6 114.Kd1 Kb6 115.Kc1 Ka7 116.Kd1 Kb6 117.Kc1 Be4 118.Kd1 Bf5 119.Kc1 Ka5 120.Kd1 Bc8 121.a7 Bb7 122.Kc2 Kb4 123.Bh3 Be4+ 124.Kc1 Kc5 125.Kd1 Kd4 126.Kc1 Kc5 127.Kd1 Ba8 128.Kc1 Kb6 129.Kd1 Bc6 130.a8Q Bxa8 131.Kc2 Kc7 132.Kxc3 Bb7 133.Kd4 Bc8 134.Bxc8 Kxc8 135.Ke4 ½–½

(1811890) Loktionova,Natalia (2230) - Sofronie,Iulian (2405) [D02]

Techirghiol Techirghiol, 1998

1.d4 Nf6 2.Nf3 g6 3.Bf4 Bg7 4.Nbd2 d5 5.e3 c5 6.c3 Nbd7 7.h3 0–0 8.Bd3 b6 9.0–0 Bb7 10.Ne5 Ne4 11.Qc2 Nxd2 12.Qxd2 Nxe5 13.dxe5 Qc7 14.e6 Qc6 15.exf7+ Rxf7 16.f3 e5 17.Bg5 c4 18.Bc2 Rd7 19.Qf2 Qc5 20.Rad1 a5 21.Qh4 d4 22.b3 Ba6 23.Rfe1 d3 24.bxc4 Bxc4 25.Rd2 Qc6 26.Qe4 Qxe4 27.fxe4 Rc8 28.Bd1 Rcc7 29.Bg4 Rd6 30.Rc1 Ba6 31.Be2 Bf8 32.Bf1 Kg7 33.Kf2 Rdd7 34.Rb1 Bc5 35.Re1 Ba3 36.Rb1 Rxc3 37.Rxb6 Rc2 0–1

(741007) Tolhuizen,Ludo (2275) - Fedorov,Vladislav (2395) [D02]
Vanlose Vanlose, 1991
1.d4 Nf6 2.Nf3 d5 3.Bf4 c5 4.c3 Nbd7 5.e3 g6 6.Nbd2 Bg7 7.Bd3 0–0 8.h3 b6 9.0–0 Bb7 10.a4 a6 11.Qb1 Qc8 12.b4 Nh5 13.Bh2 c4 14.Bc2 f5 15.Ne5 Nxe5 16.Bxe5 Bxe5 17.dxe5 f4 18.Nf3 fxe3 19.fxe3 Qe6 20.Qd1 Ng3 21.Re1 d4 22.Nxd4 Qxe5 23.Qg4 Ne4 24.Bxe4 Qxe4 25.Qxe4 Bxe4 26.a5 ½–½