The AACC Thematic Event

It has been over a week since the Albany Area Club held its King’s Gambit Accepted Thematic Tourney. Other news delayed my getting to the promised complete report on the event. Here it is now:

1st Place: Phil Thomas 4-0 1st Prize

2d Place: Jon Leisner 3 ½ - ½ 2d Prize

3d to 7th Place Dean Howard 2 ½ - ½

Peter Henner 2 ½ - 1 ½

Bill Little 2 ½ - 1 ½

Tim Wright 2 ½ - 1 ½

Arthur Alowitz 2 ½ - 1 ½ 1st Prize Lower Half

8th Place Glen Perry 2 -2 2d Prize Lower Half

9th Place Jason Denham 1 ½ -2 ½

10th to 13th Gordon Magat 1 -3

Jonathan Lack 1 -3

Elihue Hill 1 -3

Bob Kemp 1 -3

14th Place Charles Eson 0 - 4

The event was not rated. Book prizes were awarded to the top three finishers overall and to the top two in the lower half of the rating array.

Mr. Thomas visiting from the Troy Club demonstrated once more his excellent form in fast chess. The tournament was stronger than we anticipated with Expert Howard and Class A players; Thomas, Leisner, Henner, Little, Wright, Magat and Lack participating. The event was both interesting and fun. Discussion after play suggests the club will try this again in another opening.

One of the Schenectady Teams at the 2011 US Amateur Team East

Hello out there!

It's time for a report on things that happened at the US Amateur Team East (or, if you insist, the 'World Amateur Team' as organizer Steve Doyle now styles it--as you'll see from the story below, it wasn't a total exaggeration this year). The Schenectady Chess Club fielded two squads, one being 'Favre Snaps A Pawn,' of which I was captain, and the other being 'Chess Club Bailout', led by club member John Phillips. A third team, made up of scholastic standouts from the Albany area, had an indirect connection with the club, as two of its players are or have been club members. I regret that I can only cover here in detail the doings of the team of which I was part; hopefully, someone with greater knowledge of the other teams' play-by-play progress in Parsippany will put up a blog entry here. I, for one, would love to hear about their experiences.

The roster of 'Favre Snaps A Pawn' was a little different from the past couple of years. I played board one, followed by Alan LeCours, Bill Townsend and Phil Ferguson as options on board three, and club president Richard Chu on board four. Phil had things that could need his attention back home at any moment, so we lined up Bill as an alternate.

Our first round was on table ten, just outside the ropes. Unlike in the past couple of years in our first-round match, we were clean shut out. This was a bit of a disappointment since, though we're always paired well up in the first round, we usually come away with at least something from these first-round matchups. I played Black against FM Oliver Kniest from Solingen, who's at school in Boston. It was an interesting back-and-forth game. At one point, I played 26...Rxe3, which came as a rather unpleasant surprise to my opponent. I mention this only because it dawned on me much later that I had carried out the action suggested in our team name--I'd snapped a pawn! The game was very complicated, though, and I was behind on the clock (I know, what a surprise); eventually I turned a winning position into a dead loss due to the time pressure. I thought we carried some decent chances in some of our other games, but in the end we had all succumbed. This was the toughest team we were to face all weekend.

The round after that was easier. We were paired well down this time, and scored 3.5/4, with Alan taking the only draw of the match. Ferguson was the first of us to win; his opponent was for some reason wearing a funny moose hat, which I thought at first was serving as a team 'costume'. None of this gentleman's teammates saw fit to follow his lead, either on this point or in terms of his opening play, which was apparently careless enough to land him in serious trouble with Phil as early as move seven, to judge from the self-deprecatory chuckling that I was hearing from that area. Richard also won quickly, playing a young boy. My opponent lasted rather longer, but that was because I was taking a considerable amount of time trying to refute his strange system against the Yugoslav Attack. He explained to me in postmortem that he and his brother had worked up this setup between themselves, and apparently the brother in particular has done well with it. But he also noted that my treatment of the line was the most pressure to which their setup had ever been subjected, and that because of this, he admitted that it would need some more work.

Round three saw us all the way down on table 70, which was our lowest location for the weekend. We were still in the grand ballroom, but because accelerated pairings were now done with, we were well and truly in the middle of the pack. Again, being paired down helped our cause, and we scored another 3.5/4. I got the draw this time, after Richard and Bill Townsend won their games (I had put Bill in on board three so he could get warmed up in view of Phil's inevitable departure). My opponent, Jonathan Pagan, played fairly well; I tried out the Sveshnikov, which I sometimes do these days against lower-rated players, and this time it didn't give me very much, as Pagan was fairly familiar with the ideas. I thought I had a bit of a bite, but in the end couldn't get any real play and settled for a repetition. But that won us the match, at least. The other games were pretty routine for our side, as far as I could tell from a distance.

Round four was made interesting by the fact that we were paired against a team of unrated youth players from China--Harbin, specifically. Here was a great advertisement for the tournament's alternate name of World Amateur Team Championship! Two of these squads from China, with players ranging in age from perhaps eight to maybe fourteen or so (according to FIDE, my opponent's birth year is 1999, so he's about twelve years old at this writing), had traveled to the US specifically to play in this tournament! None of their players had USCF ratings, of course, and I don't believe any were FIDE-rated, though my opponent, Tong Xiao, is listed currently on FIDE's website as unrated, but with some experience against rated players. In any case, it seemed to me on the basis of what happened in our game that the boy is going to have a respectable FIDE rating before too long. This time, I got to play another Sveshnikov... with White! Knowing what I do about the rigorous Chinese approach to training in just about everything, I assumed that my opponent would be well prepared in the Bxf6 main lines, so I went for the branch with 9.Nd5. Here again, he knew the book line pretty well, and I actually couldn't remember the theory beyond move 18 for some reason. As we approached the endgame, I learned that Phil had gotten a lost position on board three. I wasn't too worried yet. Perhaps if I had seen how Richard's game was going, I might have been more concerned, because Richard told me afterward that he was basically losing, but his young opponent just happened to drop material at a crucial moment, which turned things around for us and evened the match. I eventually won a rather interesting double-rook ending. Alan fought on for a long time trying to use his slight material advantage, but eventually took a draw in order to secure the match for us, 2.5-1.5, rather than risk making a mistake. This gave our team a 3-1 score going into the final day of the weekend--not a bad place to be. For the remainder of the tournament, though, we no longer had Phil available on board three for us.

On the last morning of the event, we were paired up on table 30. Again the round-five blues struck, as has happened to us before, and we lost 1-3. I found myself playing a Hedgehog setup against a strong Expert, which I haven't tried in some time; I had a decent game going, but time pressure again caused me to err, losing a piece, then more material later. Once more the clock had caused me to turn a pretty good position into a dead loss! Richard also lost. Bill had taken a draw on board three, which was actually not a bad result, considering that he was pretty rusty and playing an Expert. My game finished third in line, and that left Alan soldiering on, trying to save our honor. It seemed that he was about to do so when, in a minor-piece ending, his opponent made a blunder, but Alan got his move order wrong and found himself in a dead draw instead.

In the final round, we were on table 49, which happened to be in the exact middle of the room, where the lighting was rather poor due to the arrangement of the fixtures. It was an odd match. Richard's game finished first--in fact, while the rest of us were still in the opening, he and his opponent were already well into the endgame, which ended up drawn soon. My game featured what I felt was slightly passive play from my opponent, but I wasn't sure what to do with the position. Suddenly I found myself losing a pawn, which I tried to pass off with an air of confidence. As I played on, about the only thing I had going for me was my bishop pair. After a long time, this became influential enough to induce a repetition from my opponent, which I accepted rather gratefully--I knew that this 'executive decision' would put a certain amount of pressure on my teammates, but there was no way I could squeeze a win from the position I had. Much to my relief, Bill won his game when his opponent walked into a lost pawn ending. That left Alan with our last game, which seemed to involve a lot of subtle maneuvering from both sides. The sporting situation suggested that Alan's opponent would buckle down and at least make some serious effort to win, but instead, perhaps not being up for a long fight into the wee hours, he extended a draw offer, which Alan accepted. So a very close win for us, 2.5-1.5! (Curiously, the Albany-area scholastic team was playing our opponents from round three at this time.)

That put us on four points, which turned out once again to be "close, but no cigar," as a rival team with a relatively low rating average, but still in our rating class, had performed very well to reach 4.5 points. I don't remember how our other team did in the end, sadly; nor do I know for certain what the final result for the scholastic team was, though I believe they reached 3.5 points, which strikes me as commendable.

Our team's individual scores were:

    Philip Sells          3/6
    Alan LeCours     3/6
    Phil Ferguson      1/3
    Bill Townsend     2.5/3
    Richard Chu       3.5/6

So Richard was our top individual scorer! Congratulations! I also want to point out Bill Townsend's undefeated record, which was not due only to his abbreviated playing schedule--he showed considerable focus on the last day, fighting through fatigue to keep us in the race. Alan was also playing a good anchor role on board two. Phil Ferguson, of course, was the pirate of the bunch! Again, I thank the team for allowing me to serve as captain, and I'm grateful to the Schenectady Chess Club for all of its support.

[Edit: changed the title to make the number of teams more clear]

Surprises Mild and Otherwise at SCC Finals

Thursday last, the 24th of February was a night of surprises. Dilip Aaron at 1518 defeated John Phillips at 1852. The 300+ point rating difference does not rule out such an outcome, rather it was how the upset win was achieved that carried the surprise. An error on move 8 (!) by Phillips was spotted by the youthful Aaron, seized upon, turned into a pawn plus and the material advantage was exploited relentlessly through move 43 when Mr. Phillips had to haul down his flag. There has been a question in my mind since Dilip defeated me; is this the year he becomes dangerous, or is he still some ways from becoming dangerous to all-comers? His draw with Alan Le Cours was fortuitous, Dilip was lost right at the end, but neither competitor noticed the winning move. This win from John Phillips answers my question in the affirmative, the boy is dangerous.

Aaron, Dilip - Phillips, John [B34]

SCC Finals 2010–11 Schenectady, NY, 24.02.2011

1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 g6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nc6 5.Nc3 Bg7 6.Be3 Nf6 7.Qd2 0–0 8.0–0–0 d5 [9.Nxc6 bxc6 10.exd5 cxd5 11.Nxd5 Be6 12.Nxf6+ Bxf6 13.Qxd8 Rfxd8 14.Rxd8+ Rxd8 15.b3 Bc3 16.Bd3 a5 17.Bd2 Bxd2+ 18.Kxd2 Bf5 19.Re1 Bxd3 20.cxd3 e6 21.Re5 a4 22.bxa4 Rd4 23.Re4 Rd5 24.Kc3 Kf8 25.g3 Ke7 26.Kc4 Rd8 27.Kc3 f5 28.Rd4 Ra8 29.Rb4 h6 30.Kb3 g5 31.Rb5 Rc8 32.a5 Rd8 33.Kc4 Kd6 34.d4 Rc8+ 35.Rc5 Re8 36.a6 Ra8 37.Kb5 Rb8+ 38.Ka5 f4 39.gxf4 gxf4 40.a7 Rg8 41.Ka6 f3 42.Rb5 Kc7 43.Rb7+ 1–0

The surprise in the next game is not the outcome. Patrick is about 100 rating points higher than Alan, and if the rating system has any validity he should win more often than he loses with this opponent. The surprise is the line played, the Slav Defense, 5 a4 Bf5 lines with 6 Nh4. This is something I know Alan has studied. A couple of years ago he published a survey of this line for a training session at the Saratoga Club, and he and I have played one or two serious games in it, Alan with White. How it all came apart for him will very interesting to uncover in analysis.

Le Cours, Alan - Chi, Patrick [D17]

SCC Finals Schenectady, NY, 24.02.2011

1.Nf3 d5 2.d4 Nf6 3.c4 c6 4.Nc3 dxc4 5.a4 Bf5 6.Nh4 Bg4

Very much mainstream theory, and it has been since the 1940s. Smyslov lost with the White pieces in the 14th USSR Championship in 1945 in this line, as did Magnus Carlsen did in the European U14 championship in 2003. It is tricky to play and often leads to a material imbalance; pawns for a piece, or sometimes a quick draw if Black just plays 6..., Bc8. When Black shifts the Bishop to g4 is when things start becoming very complicated.

7.f3 Bh5 8.e4,..

This line shares with the Botvinnik Variation of the Slav the feature of having complicated tactics springing up on the K-side that can have implications across the board. I think that the existence of lines such as the Botvinnik and the line in this game is the reason the elite players have an affinity for the Slav. In the Slav Black can, if he doesn’t mind getting into a hand-to-hand brawl, fight effectively for initiative.

The position after 7..., Bh5; was found in only four games out of a couple of million in my databases. All were won by White after some strange looking middle game maneuvers. The games follow generally the same pattern White advances his g-pawn, usually to g4 and then the e-pawn e4. The g-pawn has to move to open an escape square for the Nh4 and to crowd the Black Bh5. A couple of the games featured Black giving up the Bishop for three pawns. All the games were fairly short but nevertheless interesting. For the students out there the games I found are: Paskis - Kuprechik, USSR Ch 1981, Thorvaldsen - Gunnarsson, Iceland Ch 1997, Bellon Lopez - Fenollar, Malaga 2005, and Vaznois - Tvarijonas, Kaunas 2007.

8..., e6 9.g3 Bb4 10.Bg5!?,..

The game has followed Bellon Lopez - Fenollar so far. The only one of my finds that did not see g2-g4 before e2-e4. Here Mr. Le Cours part ways with the Spanish GM who played 10 Be2. For anyone interested the score of the Bellon Lopez game is:

Bellon Lopez, Juan Manuel (2428) - Fenollar Jorda, Manuel (2226) [D17]

Malaga op (5), 22.02.2005

1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.Nf3 Nf6 4.Nc3 dxc4 5.a4 Bf5 6.Nh4 Bg4 7.f3 Bh5 8.e4 e6 9.g3 Bb4 10.Be2 c5 11.Be3 Nc6 12.dxc5 Qa5 13.g4 Bxg4 14.fxg4 Bxc3+ 15.bxc3 Qxc3+ 16.Bd2 Qh3 17.Nf3 Nxe4 18.Rg1 0–0–0 19.Bf1 Qxf3 20.Qxf3 Nxd2 21.Qc3 1–0

Bellon Lopez’ method seems to me to be more restrained than Alan’s approach. Either way Rybka says Black is somewhat better apparently because White may not be able to recapture the pawn on c4. The interesting “chunk” ,to use a term I learned from GM Berliner, is: the Nc3 is pinned, the pawn on f3 is pinned and the pawn on e4 is threatened by the Nf6. Something must be done and Alan elects to pin then capture the Nf6. Alternatives are; 10 Qd2, getting out of one pin; 10 Be2, foregoing getting the pawn back for some time; 10 g3-g4, marking 9 g3 as a mistake, or 10 Kf2, getting out of the other pin. The alternatives other than 10 Be2, and 10 Bg5, have problems worse than the cures. For example; 10 g3-g4??, loses to 10..., Nxe4; and the Nh4 is hanging as well as the Nc3 being attacked twice.

10..., h6 11.Bxf6 Qxf6 12.Be2,..

Inserting the transaction; 10 Bg5/11Bxf6, has not been particularly helpful for White. The Black Queen on f6 is usefully employed, and net result is the advantage is increased for Black. As Bellon Lopez concluded in his game, putting the Bishop on e2 first keeps more options for White.

12..., c5 13.e5?,..

In this extraordinarily difficult position where there is no easily seen organizing theme, White makes an error. In defense of Alan’s choice, the transaction that takes place in the game does look to be an entirely viable option. White would have had to see ahead to the position after move 18 to clearly evaluate that relative King safety will be the key to the game. The Black King will have a home warm and secure while the White King wanders in a wilderness buffeted by tempest and storm.

12..., Qg5 14.f4 Bxe2 15.Qxe2 Qd8 16.dxc5 Qd4 17.Rc1 Qxc5 18.Nf3 Nc6

The extra pawn is icing on the cake, the real advantage for Black is White will never find a comfortable place for his King as long as the Queens are on the board.

19.Nd2,..

With the intention of recovering the pawn. A logical alternative is 19 Kf1, heading for g2 to get the Rooks connected. Play could go; 19 Kf1 Na5 20 Ne4 Qb6 21 Kg2 0-0; advantage to Black. The game is then settling back into a less tactical mode and the extra pawn is secure. Possibly Alan did not care for less turmoil and more logic in the position. The prospect of a dour fight down a pawn against so strong an opponent was unpleasant, so he elects to try to keep things murky and go for the pawn.

19..., Nd4!?

Ah, the adventurous spirit of youth! The easy but prosaic path is 19..., Na5 20 Nde4 Qb6 21 Rd1 0-0; and White just may get a toe hold on d6 ease the pain of being down a pawn. Patrick is not materialistic. He returns the pawn for greater piece activity and to give his opponent some difficult problems to face.

20.Qxc4 Nf3+ 21.Ke2 Nd4+ 22.Ke1 Qb6

Objectively White is better off than he would have been had the pawn not been returned. The big “but” in this is there are several small tactical turns in the position all of which require White to be very alert and accurate in his judgments; his King remains vulnerable. With a King away from danger, Black is not under the same kind of pressure. Over the next several moves White had to use up considerable clock time to navigate the tactical rocks and shoals. At this point in the game time was about even.

23.Rf1?,..

And first fruit of the pressure drops for Black. Alan gave several minutes of thought to this move, and it is wrong. From a slight disadvantage he, in just a half-move goes to very nearly lost. Necessary is 23 Nb5. It could be Mr. Le Cours could not find certainty in the line; 23 Nb5 Nf3+ 24 Ke2 Bxd2 25 Kxf3 Rac8; and White is OK. If Black finds the somewhat better 25..., Rad8; 26 Rc2 Qe3+ 27 Kg2 h5 28 Qc5+, it leads to an endgame where Black has some advantage, but it is by no means winning.

After the move played in the game Black has a near winning positional edge. The White King is an embarrassment that makes Alan’s task of reaching a stable position difficult.

23..., 0–0 24.Rf2?,..

Another twenty minutes were used to settle on this error. Either 24 Nf3, or 24 Nce4, offer prospects of some counter-play in a bad situation. The game move is aimed a shoring up various weaknesses; b2, the second rank, etc. The problem is Black can now make a couple of very natural moves; Rooks to the open center files, c&d, obtaining a huge lead in effective development.

24..., Rac8 25.Qd3 Rfd8 26.Qe4 Bc5

Good enough. The immediate threat is a check with the Knight on c7 winning the Exchange on f7. Also worth consideration is 26..., Nf5. The White pieces are in a mess, while the Black pieces are logically deployed for the attack in the middle of the board.

27.Nc4 Qb4 28.Ne3 a5 29.Kf1?,..

White’s position is lost after this move, but it is hard to be critical here. The only realistic chance for White is; 29 Rd2, then 29..., Nf3+ 30 Qxf3 Rxd2 31 Kxd2 Qxb2+ 32 Rc2 Bxe3+ 33 Qxe3 Rd8+ 34 Qd3 Rxd3+ 35 Kxd3, and Black has an extra pawn to go with the Queen versus Rook and Knight material imbalance. After calculating the six or seven moves cited, White would have faced the task of judging whether the pieces or the Queen have the better chances.

Time trouble was not an issue, yet, but Alan was down to about 30 minutes remaining. Patrick had efficiently used his time and worked hard on Alan’s time also. He had one hour and nine minutes left. The imbalance of clock time was probably a worry for Alan and played a part in his choice.

Theory, as explained by GM Soltis in his book “Rethinking the Chess Pieces”, Batsford, London, 2004, is this is a battle between double attacks by the Lady and the coordination of the Rook and Knight. I think the two targets in the White position; the pawns at a4 and h2 are not easy to defend with the pieces White has on the board. Making such a judgment in critical game is very difficult.

29..., Nb3!

Natural and very strong. White only has small choice about what material will be given up.

30.Re1?,..

The best of the bad choices is 30 Rd1, then 30..., Rxd1+ 31 Nexd1 Bxf2 32 Kxf2, and Black can go the endgame with 32..., Qxe4; if he wants simplicity in a technically won position, or play more sharply with 32..., Rd8; improving the position of the Rook to increase the pressure on White.

30..., Nd2+ 31.Rxd2 Rxd2 32.Ned1 Rcd8 33.Qxb4 Bxb4 0–1

White erred again on the next move dropping a Knight and resigned immediately. If you play the Slav as Black, or meet it often as a 1.d4, player, this is a game worth some study.

With these two games in the mix, the standings in the Finals are:

Chi 2-1 w/ one game to play v Aaron

Sells 2-1 w/ one game to play v Le Cours

Phillips 2-2, schedule complete

Aaron 1 ½ - 1 ½ w/ one game to play v Chi

Le Cours ½ - 2 ½ w/ one game to play v Sells

Little, Withdrawn (0-2) the games do not count towards the tourney score.

There are excellent chances for a playoff for the title again this year.

A make-up game was played in the consolation Swiss also Thursday. Cory Northruo defeated Michael Stanley. The standings for the Swiss updated are:

Finnerman and Kline 2-0

Chu, Northrup, Clough and Capitummino 1-1

Connors and Stanley 0-2

The next round for the Swiss will be played March 3.

If there are any readers who are fairly new to chess, there is scheduled a class for new players at the Albany Area chess Club next Wednesday, March 2 at 7:00pm. It will be held at the Union Presbyterian Church on Western Ave. (Route 20), Guilderland, the usual meeting place for the club. Not too much lecturing, more exercises and practical application. Come on down, or over as the case may be. Members and visitors welcome.

More soon.

A Game From the Consolation Swiss

While David Finnerman and Michael Kline are clearly in contention for first place in the Schenectady Consolation Swiss, just behind them are some players with visions of moving up in the race. Two with ambitions are David Connors and Matthew Clough. They met last week in a short, sharp fight that could have gone either way.

Clough, Matthew - Connors, David [B00]

Consolation Swiss Schenectady, NY, 17.02.2011

1.e4 b6 2.d4 Bb7 3.Bd3 Nf6

Shades of my computer! An old “Chessmaster” program I had some years back played this way as Black against 1.e4, every time. I don’t think there is some colorful name for the line, but it can work well enough. Objectively, White is better already, but there are many ways for Black to press the big center White is building and obtain counter-play.

4.Nc3 e6 5.Nge2 Bb4 6.0–0 0–0 7.Bg5?!,..

What I learned from playing the CM program is White must take his chances when presented. If he does not do so, Black can often get away with his restrained and provocative treatment of the opening. Here it is logical for White to take the space offered with 7 e5, then a) 7..., Nd5 8 Nxd5 Bxd5 9 Nf4, and the White pieces gathering on the K-side are a problem for Black, or b) 7..., Ne8 8 a3 Be7 9 Be3, and White is ahead in development while the Black forces cut a sorry picture notwithstanding the excellent sweep of the Bb7. The problem for Black is none of his other pieces are placed to support the Bb7. After the text White has no more than the edge expected from the first move.

7..., Be7 8.f3?!,..

Mr. Clough is being very cautious by building a pawn barricade along the long diagonal to blunt the action of the Bb7.

8..., d5 9.e5 Nfd7 10.Bxe7 Qxe7

The result of 7 Bg5, and the blocking of the long diagonal by pawns is the latent K-side attacking possibilities in the White position are much reduced. The game is dead level.

11.Nb5 Rc8

Black could have made White worry some by trying 11..., a6!? If then 12 Nxc7 Ra7; and White will have to surrender the Knight for two pawns. I think the game move is just as good as my suggestion and maybe a bit safer. If Black offers with 11..., a6; and White agrees with 12 Nxc7, to the material imbalance, White has a very nice layout of his forces while Black still has to untangle his pieces on the Q-side. There are then certainly opportunities for White to gain space in the center preparing an onslaught on the Black King.

12.f4 a6 13.Na3 c5 14.c3 Nc6 15.Rc1 cxd4 16.cxd4 Nb4 17.Rxc8+ Rxc8 18.Bb1 f6

Here Black should consider also 18..., f5; making White decide whether to capture on f6, or to allow the K-side to be blockaded. Black would not be upset at all by White taking in passing on f6. He could recapture with the pawn an d be ready to play ..,e6-e5; trying to free the Bb7.

An aspect of the struggle in chess is putting such decisions on your opponent’s plate. Some players can fight effectively against direct threats but are not so good if they are repeatedly faced with longer term kinds of choices.

19.Rf3 fxe5?

Handing some small immediate advantage to White. Opening lines on the K-side is not recommended by the opposing layouts of forces: White has his pieces aimed at the Black King. Black should be thinking of ways to do something positive with the Bb7 all the while maintaining a watchful eye on what sort of activity White has in mind on the K-side. A natural plan is; 19..., f5 20 Nc2 Nc6 21 Rc3 a5 22 Ne1 Ba6 23 Bd3 Ndb8 24 Bxa6 Nxa6; and White has some advantage because of his edge in space, but with careful play Black can hold the game. After the text, Black must be ever watchful about some sudden assault on his King.

20.fxe5 Nxe5?

This apparently a miscalculation by Mr. Connors. One has to admire David’s bold imagination in seeking a combinative solution here. The conception is flawed but it can cause White real problems. Much more prosaic and correct is something like 20..., Rf8 21 Nf4 g5 22 Nh5 Rxf3 23 Qxf3 Nc6; and if 24 Nf6+? Nxf6 25 exf6 Qf8. Then if White gets too ambitious with 26 Qh5?, Black has balancing counter-play in the tactical interlude; 26..., Qxf6 27 Qxh7+ Kf8 28 Qxb7 Qxd4+, and White will find it very difficult not to avoid some kind of draw by repeating some position. In this line a too adventurous march of the White King will end in mate on some unlikely square.

The last few moves of the game have a couple of largish oversights.

21.dxe5 Qc5+ 22.Kf1?..,

With 22 Qd4, white would have refuted Black’s idea decisively. Even 22 Kh1, is superior to the text.

22..., d4 23.Rh3 g6?

Escaping from danger and taking control of the game with 23..., Rf8+!; is best. It seems to win in all variations. After 24 Ke1 Bxb2!, devalues the move 25 Bxh7+, because any discovered check is answered by capturing the checking Rook on h3. If White plays alertly 25 Qb3, then Black continues his aggression with 25..., Rf1+ 26 Kd2 Nd5 27 Bxh7+ Kf8; and the looming threat of the Black Queen checking from a5 leaves White in great trouble. White now sees things clearly.

24.Qxd4 Qc6 25.Qg4 1–0

Black is down a full piece, and so the resignation is not without justification, but worth a try is 25..., Rf8+ 26 Ke1 Qxg2; hoping for 27 Qxg2

Bxg2; and Black can fight on a little while longer. Of course, if White finds the superior 27 Qh4!, then Black has less reason to carry on with 27..., Qf1+ 28 Kd2 Rf7 29 Bxg6 Rd7+ 30 Bd3 Rxd3 31 Rxd3 Nxd3 32 Qd8+ Kg7 33 Qxd3, and the White King is relatively secure from harassment by the Black Queen.

An International Master recently gave a video lecture on ICC. In it he commented on the phenomenon of mistakes in chess games coming pairs; first on side errs and the other responds with his own mistake. Neither the IM in the lecture, nor me here and now, have any firm idea of the why behind such happening, but this was one more example.

This was quite an entertaining game. Matthew Clough has only one other win in this year’s tournaments at SCC, a rather pretty win from John Barnes, a Class A player in the Preliminaries. He shown well in that contest as he did here, both against higher rated, more experienced opponents. The mystery is why hasn’t Matt won more games? Maybe next year he’ll gain consistency and advance his rating to his actual strength.

More soon.

Dilip Aaron's Adventure Continues

Dilip Aaron played quite an interesting game with Alan Le Cours last Thursday. It happened to be in a line Alan has been spending some time upon. The youngster demonstrated mature judgment by avoiding the morass of complications Alan invited him to visit, obtained the better game and came close to winning. The suspicion grows that we may see the name Aaron on the Weininger Trophy again in the not far distant future.

Aaron, Dilip - Le Cours, Alan [C57]

SCC Finals 2010–11 Schenectady, NY, 17.02.2011

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Ng5 Bc5!?

The Two Knights, Wilks-Barre/Traxler Variation. Alan showed me several lines one evening he has examined in this opening one evening earlier this season. All highly complex with tactics spilling over the board from every direction. Just the sort of thing one might try to bowl over a less experienced opponent.

5.Bxf7+?!,..

Perhaps Alan was hoping for 5 Nxf7, then 5..., Bxf2+!?; and we have as Ronen Har-Zvi is fond of calling “a big mess” on the board. The line is unsound for Black, but White either has to have a terrific positional sense and excellent tactical sight, or a lot of book knowledge, to wander around this difficult position.

Older opening books say 5 d4, is the best way forward for White. Faced with what must have been a surprise in the opening, Dilip maintains composure, takes a little bit of an advantage in hopes of avoiding something nasty and plans to trade off material to reduce the attacking forces.

5..., Ke7 6.Bd5

Thinking no doubt that trading the Bishop for the Knight gets rid of one of the possible attacking units. Very likely either 6 Bc4, or 6 Bb3, is better.

6..., Qe8

Worth consideration is 6..., Rf8; but likely it is nothing more than a transposition of moves.

7.d3?!,..

Better is 7 c3, preparing d2-d4, controlling d4 and making a haven for the light squared Bishop if Black does not trade it off on d5. Even after the text White retains a solid advantage.

7..., Rf8 8.Nf3?,..

This move hands Black a sorely needed tempo. Better to first castle waiting for Black to use a move to kick the Ng5 with .., h7-h6.

8..., d6?

Too routine. Black has invested a pawn and gotten his King to an awkward post so to create a difficult position for both sides. He should not shy away from ratcheting up the tension. Doing so with 8..., Nd4; when after 9 Nxd4 Bxd4 10 0-0 Qg6; Black has his pieces posted for a well for an assault on the K-side is reasonable.

9.Bg5?,..

The transaction contemplated just helps Black along with his K-side activities. Getting rid of a potential attacking piece, the Nf6, is not worth the loss of his better Bishop, and it clears the way for the Black Rook to take part in operations quickly.

9..., h6 10.Bxf6+ Rxf6 11.h3 Nd4 12.Nbd2 c6 13.Bb3 Qf8 14.c3,..

The results of the misguided trade on f6 are Black has pressure down the f-file and White is reluctant to castle short for fear of a trade of Knights on f3 may be followed by the capture of the pawn on h3 when the recapture by the g-pawn leaves the remaining Nf3 is under defended.

14..., Ne6!?

Le Cours wants apparently to keep stirring the pot. The pawn given has not come back yet with any significant return. Here he threatens 15..., Nf4; working on weakening the White K-side. If 15 g3 Ng5; begins hand-to-hand fighting that is dangerous for White. The alternative 14..., Nxb3; is answered by 15 Nxb3, hitting the Bc5, or 15 axb3, opening a line for the Ra1, and White is prepared to advance the d-pawn relieving some pressure on the f-file. White now concedes the two Bishop versus two Knights imbalance. From here on the game revolves around whether Black can break open the position for the Bishops, or let us say it should.

15.Bxe6 Bxe6 16.Nb3 Bb6 17.d4 Bc4 18.Qd2? Rxf3!

Much safer was 18 Nbd2, reinforcing f3. In the spirit of the Wilks-Barre, Le Cours sacrifices the Exchange. It is the best way forward. Everything else lets White off the hook.

19.gxf3 Qxf3 20.Rg1 Qxe4+ 21.Qe3 Qxe3+ 22.fxe3 g5 23.0–0–0?,..

Another example of routine thinking. Castling is good, right? Not always, especially after the Queens are gone. Both 23 Rg3, and 23 Nd2, are probably better options.

23..., Rf8

It is hard to be critical of this natural move, but better may be is 23..., Be6; hitting h3, then if 24 h4 g4; establishing the passed g-pawn as a strong positional counter. And if, 24 Rg3 Rf8 25 Rh1 Bc7; lining up the Bishops to support the g-pawn and attack the h-pawn over the long term. Black has some advantage but how to increase it is uncertain.

Dilip had played quickly to this point and had left one hour and eleven minutes of one hour and forty minutes with which he began. Alan had fifty minutes. Time trouble did not appear to be going to play a role in this game.

24.Nd2 Be2

Of course not 24..., Bxa2? 25 b3, wins material.

25.Rde1 Bd3?!

Less good than 25..., Rf2. Black needs to clear away the pawn chains blocking the center of the board, and he wants to hang on to the g-pawn. Further, he probably really does not desire to see a trade of pawns on the K-side anytime soon. If he can establish pawns on g4 and h5 with the White h-pawn on h4, White would have negligible chances of winning. By removing the Bishop from the d1-h5 diagonal Black allows clarification on the K-side that does not help his cause.

26.h4 Rg8 27.hxg5 hxg5 28.Rg3 e4?

The antithesis of the correct goal for Black. Diagonals are blocked devaluing the Bishops. In most cases of two Bishops fighting against a Knight and a Bishop, opening the center favors the Bishops.

29.Rh1 Rg7 30.Rg4 d5 31.Rh6 Be2 32.Rg1 Bc7 33.Nf1 Bxf1?

Aaron still had one hour on his clock. Le Cours had run his time down to just about one half-hour searching for a workable plan with which to take the full point. The capture on f1 spells the end of striving for victory by Black I think. Keeping the struggle going with 33..., Bf3; and later .., g5-g4; maintains chances for a win. With best play by both sides the game is likely drawn, but there is much fight left in the position. Worse than giving up the fight for the point is there exists a tactical flaw in the idea motivating Black; advance the g-pawn. What Alan did not consider deeply enough are the circumstances in which White can force the Rook exchange and then get his King over to relieve the other Rook of blockading the g-pawn. Once the Rook is free the game swings in White’s favor strongly.

34.Rxf1 g4 35.Rff6?,..

Much better is 35 Kd1 beginning to bring the King into the fight to block the g-pawn. If when Alan captured on f1 he gave up trying for a win, this leap forward of the Rook that is needed to cover g1 does much the same for Dilip. A win is possible after 35 Kd1 g3 36 Rfh1 Kf8 37 Ke2 a6 38 Rh8+ Kf7 39 R8h7 Kg8 40 Rxg7+ Kxg7; and White will prepare with b2-b3 and c3-c4 to weaken the Black pawn barrier enough so the Rook can swing over and claim a pawn or two. After that it is a matter of technique, as the chess writers are fond of saying. With an extra pawn in the bag, White brings the Rook back to attack the g-pawn and captures it even at cost of retuning the Exchange. Then it is a straight forward pawn ending with an extra pawn when a modicum of care will give White the full point. If Black drives the g-pawn forward to g2 on say move 36, White will first block the pawn with the Rook going to g1, and then find the idea of bringing the forward Rook back to h3 preventing any entry of a Black piece on g6 that does not lose the g-pawn, or more. Finally, the White King comes to f2 and the pawn falls.

35...g3 36.Rhg6 Rh7 37.Rh6?,..

Good play up to these last few moves tells us Dilip needs a bit more seasoning. He has fixed in his mind that all was well and repeating a couple of moves would split the point. Sadly wrong. White had to play 37 Rf1. He is now lost.

37..., Rg7?

Alan must have reached the same conclusion as did Dilip. Disappointing for him is he did not find the not so obvious 37..., g2!; when 38 Rxh7+ Kxf6; and the pawn will Queen. Playing on with 38 Re6+ Kd8 39 Reg6 Rxh6; is hopeless, as is 39 Rhg6 Rh1+ and the pawn Queens the next move gaining a Rook.

38.Rhg6 Rh7 ½–½

Neither player spotted the little trick at the end so I suppose the drawn result is a fair outcome. Aaron had 57 minutes on his clock at the end, and Le Cours had just over eighteen minutes. Time trouble was not the villain this time. I think the tension in the situation was the root cause. This is Dilip’s first chance in the SCC Finals, and he was anxious to do well. Mr. Le Cours had undertaken the burden of the Wilks-Barre/Traxler Variation and had used a lot of energy early on. Those things combined led to the mutual errors at the finish.

More soon.

An Update of the SCC Finals and Swiss

Thursday evening and the Schenectady Finals and Consolation Swiss round of play got off to a slow start with some games beginning later than the scheduled 7:45 pm start time. Nevertheless, there was quite a bit of action.

In the Swiss these were the results:

Chu - Kline, Mike, 0-1. An upset. Kline, unrated and a new member, defeats the #2 rated.

Capitummino - Finnerman, 0-1

Clough - Connors, 1-0

Neither Chu nor Kline wanted to see their game in the blog saying errors in the early middle game took away too much of the interest in the game. The other games are below.

Mike Stanley was unable to play, the game Stanley - Northrup will be played next week. The next full round in the Swiss will be the week following.

Capitummino, Jeff - Finnerman, David [A40]

Consolation Swiss Schenectady, NY, 17.02.2011

1.d4 d6 2.Nf3 g6 3.e3 Bg7 4.b3 c5 5.Bb2 Nf6 6.dxc5 Qa5+ 7.Qd2 Qxc5 8.Qc3 Nbd7 9.Nbd2 0–0 10.Qxc5 Nxc5 11.0–0–0 Nfe4 12.Nxe4 Nxe4 13.Rd3 Nxf2 14.Rg1 Nxd3+ 15.Bxd3 Bh6 16.Kd2 e5 17.g3 Be6 18.Ba3 Rfd8 0–1

The game went on for a move or two more but Black’s advantage was too much for protracted resistance.

Clough, Matthew - Connors, David [B00]

1.e4 b6 2.d4 Bb7 3.Bd3 Nf6 4.Nc3 e6 5.Nge2 Bb4 6.0–0 0–0 7.Bg5 Be7 8.f3 d5 9.e5 Nfd7 10.Bxe7 Qxe7 11.Nb5 Rc8 12.f4 a6 13.Na3 c5 14.c3 Nc6 15.Rc1 cxd4 16.cxd4 Nb4 17.Rxc8+ Rxc8 18.Bb1 f6 19.Rf3 fxe5 20.fxe5 Nxe5 21.dxe5 Qc5+ 22.Kf1 d4 23.Rh3 g6 24.Qxd4 Qc6 25.Qg4 1–0

The standings in the Consolation Swiss are:

Finnerman, David 2-0, wins from Northrup and Capitummino

Kline, Michael 2-0, wins from Connors and Chu

Chu, Richard 1-1, won from Clough, lost to Kline

Clough, Matthew 1-1, lost to Chu, won from Connors

Capitummino, Jeff 1-1, won from Stanley, lost to Finnerman

Connors, David 0-2, lost to Klein and Clough

Northrup, Cory 0-1, lost to Finnerman, game to be played with Stanley

Stanley, Michael 0-0, lost to Capitummino, game to be played with Northrup

These early returns show a contest for first between Finnerman, an experienced tournament player and Klein a newcomer to the arena. Klein, with wins over a pair of veterans, Chu and Connors looks to be a worthy opponent for the top rated Finnerman. They will likely meet in the next round and we may get some indication of the eventual winner the consolation Swiss.

Two games were played in the Finals Thursday: Phillips - Sells, ending in a mild upset, and a draw between Dilip Aaron and Alan Le Cours that has to be considered a significant upset.

The younger Aaron, Dilip, is beginning to make a mark on the local scene. Last week he won his game against me. This week he holds Alan Le Cours to a draw. Another Aaron to take into account when handicapping the Schenectady Club title competition? I think so. Two years ago GM Har-Zvi and I debated at a Simul he was giving about how far Dilip might go in chess. Ronen was uncertain, and I held Dilip could be as strong as his brother Deepak. His results so far in the SCC Finals argues my opinion just may be justified.

Aaron, Dilip - Le Cours, Alan [C57]

SCC Finals 2010–11 Schenectady, NY, 17.02.2011

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Ng5 Bc5 5.Bxf7+ Ke7 6.Bd5 Qe8 7.d3 Rf8 8.Nf3 d6 9.Bg5 h6 10.Bxf6+ Rxf6 11.h3 Nd4 12.Nbd2 c6 13.Bb3 Qf8 14.c3 Ne6 15.Bxe6 Bxe6 16.Nb3 Bb6 17.d4 Bc4 18.Qd2 Rxf3 19.gxf3 Qxf3 20.Rg1 Qxe4+ 21.Qe3 Qxe3+ 22.fxe3 g5 23.0–0–0 Rf8 24.Nd2 Be2 25.Rde1 Bd3 26.h4 Rg8 27.hxg5 hxg5 28.Rg3 e4 29.Rh1 Rg7 30.Rg4 d5 31.Rh6 Be2 32.Rg1 Bc7 33.Nf1 Bxf1 34.Rxf1 g4 35.Rff6 g3 36.Rhg6 Rh7 37.Rh6 Rg7 38.Rhg6 Rh7 ½–½

A rare example of Philip Sells not winning in difficult time trouble.

Phillips, John - Sells, Philip [E27]

SCC Finals 210–11 Schenectady, NY, 17.02.2011

1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.f3,..

A well known, if not so popular, line, most writers call it the Samisch Variation.. Much more usual are 4 e3, 4 Qc2, and 4 a3. Back in the 1950s(!) Viktor Korchnoi used it as his main weapon against the Nimzo-Indian in some international events and the 21st USSR Championship in Kiev. It made appearances regularly for such lights as Spassky, Ragozin, Polugaevsky and Taimanov through the 1950s. Gheorghis and Portisch were the main supporters in the 60s, and in the 70s and 80s Moskalenko and Flear took it up as a primary method of combating the Nimzo. In later years it has made only occasional appearances in Grandmaster practice, but fashions in openings change and it may be due for a revival.

The positional idea underlying the move 4 f3, to build a broad center, is entirely sound. White usually does not get to play the e-pawn forward to e4 in one bold jump. However, with patience, he can make good use of the threat to do so, and obtain chances for advantage.

Here are two games from sixty years apart that illustrate play typical in this variation:

(26611) Szabo,Laszlo - Kottnauer,Cenek [E49]

Staunton mem Groningen (12), 1946

1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.a3 Bxc3+ 5.bxc3 0–0 6.f3 d5 7.e3 c5 8.cxd5 exd5 9.Bd3 b6 10.Ne2 Ba6 11.Bxa6 Nxa6 12.0–0 Re8 13.Qd3 c4 14.Qc2 Nb8 15.Ng3 Nc6 16.Bd2 Na5 17.e4 Nb3 18.Rae1 Nxd2 19.Qxd2 Qe7 20.Nf5 Qe6 21.Qg5 g6 22.g4 dxe4 23.fxe4 Nxe4 24.Nh6+ Kg7 25.Rxe4 f6 [25...Qxe4 26.Rxf7+] 26.Rxe6 fxg5 27.Rxe8 Rxe8 28.Nf7 Re3 29.Nxg5 Rxc3 30.Ne6+ Kh6 31.d5 Rc2 32.d6 Rd2 33.Rf3 1–0

(1136291) Krush,Irina (2443) - Hess,Robert L (2394) [E27]

Marshall CC-ch 90th New York (5), 03.12.2006

1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.f3 d5 5.a3 Bxc3+ 6.bxc3 0–0 7.e3 Re8 8.cxd5 exd5 9.Bd3 b6 10.Ne2 Ba6 11.Bxa6 Nxa6 12.Qd3 Qc8 13.0–0 c5 14.Ng3 cxd4 15.cxd4 Qc4 16.Qxc4 dxc4 17.e4 Red8 18.Nf5 Rd7 19.Bb2 Rc8 20.Bc3 Ne8 21.a4 Nac7 22.Rfb1 h5 23.d5 f6 24.Kf2 Nd6 25.Nxd6 Rxd6 26.Ke3 Kf7 27.Ra2 Re8 28.Kd4 Rc8 29.Bb4 Rd7 30.Rc2 Ne6+ 31.Ke3 Nc7 32.Rbc1 Rxd5 33.Rxc4 Rd7 34.Rc6 Ke8 35.Kf2 Kd8 36.Bd6 Rf7 37.Kg3 a6 38.f4 1–0

Take note of the idea of trading off the light squared Bishops used in both of these games.

4..., d5 5.a3 Bxc3+ 6.bxc3 0–0 7.e3 b6 8.cxd5 Nxd5?!

I can find no tactical problem with this move, and it has some positional justification - using the long diagonal to pressure the center. However, the game move is not found in the databases I have available. That is something over 2 million games with a large percentage played by GMs. That amount of data and no examples found coupled with the common treatment by strong players of trading off the light squared Bishops, leads me to suspect the text may be not correct.

9.c4 Ne7 10.Bd3 Nd7

This move looks to be slower to bring pressure against the center than is required. Rybka suggests 10..., c5; and so does a quick review of the GM games in this variation.

11.Ne2 c5 12.Qc2 f5!?

Black makes the first concession; loosening his King’s protection. More solid are 12..., g6; or 12..., Nf5. White has some advantage. Black needs to find a plan to obtain effective counter-play.

13.0–0 cxd4 14.exd4 e5!?

True to his style, Mr. Sells seeks space in the center. The alternative is not significantly better: 14..., Nf6 15 Re1 Ba6 16 Bb2 Qd6 17 Qb3, with White retaining an edge.

15.d5!?,..

Mr. Phillips is also unafraid of taking risks. More cautious is first 15 Bb2. White will not be able to exclude the Black Knight from c5 in the long run. It therefore is sensible to get on with development. My guess is John had in mind the making the passed d-pawn a “bone in the throat” for Black. He could have converted the potential passed center pawn into a lead in development and favorable piece placement after 15 Bb2 exd4 16 Nxd4 Nc5 17 Rad1, and the next White move will be 18 Rfe1, almost no matter what Black may do. The threat to the pawn on f5 restricts the choices for Black. White then has his whole army actively deployed and the search can begin for a plan to make use of the advantages. After the text, Black is at least equal, and maybe better than White.

15..., Nc5 16.Bb2 Ba6 17.Nc3 Nxd3 18.Qxd3 Rc8 19.Nb5 Bxb5 20.cxb5 Rc5?

Curious. I am certain that Philip saw 15..., Qxd5 16 Qxd5 Nxd5 17 Bxe5, as leading to a reasonably balanced ending, but he likely thought that having his Q-side pawns stuck on the same color as White’s Bishop meant playing for a win to be a doubtful enterprise. Sells likes to keep winning possibilities in the position. Doing so this time seems to be a mistake.

21.d6 Ng6

This move is just as good as 21..., Qd7 22 a4 Ng6 23 Rac1, because then White has cleared a3 to help support the pawn on d6.

22.Rac1 Kh8?!

The cautious removal of the Black King from the possible checks along the a2-g8 diagonal makes sense, but it also self-creates back rank problems for Black. White also is granted a tempo which increases his initiative. The balance is tilting towards White significantly.

23.Rxc5 bxc5 24.Qd5 Qb6 25.Qc6!?,..

More forceful and in line with the theme Mr. Phillips picked for the middle game, driving the passed d-pawn forward, is 25 d7. The threat to Queen the pawn becomes the pivot for both sides. After 25 d7 Rd8 26 Rd1 Qxb5 27 Bxe5 Nxe5 28 Qxe5 h6 29 Rd6, there are many ways for White to win decisive material. The attraction of this line is clarity brought on by the forcing nature of the moves by White.

It should be noted the inklings of time trouble were beginning to become apparent. Phillips had 26 and Sells had 7 minutes remaining. Both guys are quite competent dealing with time shortages. Philip Sells can said to be famous locally for his ability to survive, and thrive, with almost nothing on his clock. When I first observed him running into time trouble there were doubts he could win titles with that habit. His success over the last few years dispelled the doubts. Philip Sells does not begrudge those precious minutes even near the end of the game spent to find out all that is possible about a position. Very often the understanding gained allows Sells to play even a poor position so much better than his opponent a full point or a draw is salvaged.

25..., Rd8 26.Rd1 Qa5

This time the almost five minutes Mr. Sells used to get here were not enough to overcome the serious deficits in his position.

27.Qxc5 a6

Sells is now down to 48 seconds and Phillips has 14+ minutes.

28.Bxe5 Nxe5 29.Qxe5 Qxb5 30.Qe6?!,..

Better is 30 f4, securing the dominating post for the White Queen.

30..., Qd7

I did not get the remaining moves of the game. In general what happened is White gave up the d-pawn for the f-pawn and forced a pawn through to Queen bringing about a QvRP ending. Mr. Phillps’ time ran down to less than two minutes and Sells was in his usual situation, only a bare handful of seconds left.

It was then the twin devils of tension and a lack of thinking time got to play their tricks. First in the position: WQ on a8, WK on b6 and BK on g3, BP on h3, Phillips missed what I call “a technique fragment”; Qa8-h1. That is not something much discussed in the literature of endings, but anyone who plays their home computer at fast time limits will recognize it; the simplest way to eliminate all possibilities of a slipup by letting Black Queen his pawn or fall into a stalemate. Some moves later the position arose: WK on b3, WQ on g4 and BK on h2, BP on h3. Mr. Phillips repeated the position a couple of time and then found the solution; any move by his King forces Black to play .., Kh1; dropping the pawn, and then it is just a matter of bringing up the White King to mate.

I bring up these fumbles at the end of a most interesting and well fought game by two successful local players not be overly critical, rather to make the point I have mentioned before; in this era of sudden-death time controls, knowing cold the basic endgames is more important than it ever was back in the day of 50 moves in two hours and 25 moves per hour afterwards. Then the only worry was not to fall into a draw by repetition. Avoid that and there was plenty of time to think through how to take the full point or slip out to a stalemate. In today’s chess in the US, as my friends here did, often you arrive at a dead won position with not much more than the five-second delay available to consider the problem before you. With hours of effort on the line, the inherent tension can blind even the good player to obvious moves. Armed with endgame knowledge you are less likely have regrets when in time trouble.

1–0

More soon.

Some News and a Goodbye

Another busy week of chess. Wednesday evening the AACC held a King’s Gambit Accepted thematic event, a four round Game in 15 with a five second delay tourney. Fourteen (!) players entered. That is quite a good turnout. Playing were; Peter Henner, Gordon Magat, Bill Little, Jonathan Lack, Bob Kemp, Art Alowitz, Charles Eson, Tim Wright, Glen Perry, Jason Denham, Dean Howard, and the TD Jon Leisner. To this group were added the visitors from the Troy Chess Club; Phil Thomas and E. Hill. Phil Thomas won the event cleanly with a perfect 4-0 score. The tournament was unrated. I hope to have a complete cross table for the next post. Mr. Leisner has plans for a couple of more thematic events this season. The encouraging attendance shows there is support for such. One of the founding notions underlying the reconstituted Albany Club was to have great variety of activities. Thematic tournaments are a step in that direction.

A personally sad note for today’s post. After about sixty years of playing chess seriously, I have come to the end of that activity. Yesterday Bill Townsend and I talked about some difficulties I have experienced in games over the last few months. It was my conclusion that trying to compete was more than could be done. Therefore, I have withdrawn from the Schenectady Finals. The root cause is a medical problem that prevents extended periods sitting at the board and maintaining concentration.

I intend to continue writing this Blog and to attend the clubs regularly. A complete withdrawal from the game is not the plan. Skittles and maybe some quick-play games can slake my addiction for the Royal Game, so I can hope to cross swords with all my usual opponents, and maybe some new ones in the future.

Over these months I have lost games to Wright, Magat, Phillips and others that were not too surprising for I had lost to these fellows before. There were other losses to Zack Calderone, Dilip Aaron, and they were surprising. In many of these games the loss came about after I had played reasonably well, and then seemed to lose the thread of the game, make a blunder and then lose the game. Here are a couple of examples to illustrate:

Little, Bill - Magat, Gordon [B22]

AACC Prelim 1 Guilderland, NY, 10.12.2010

Prior to this game I had lost to Tim Wright by just leaving a piece adrift and walking into a Knight fork. The game with Gordon was very nearly a “must win” situation for me if there was to be any hope of fighting for a place in the final match.

1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 e6 3.c3 Nf6 4.e5 Nd5 5.d4 Nc6 6.Bc4 d6 7.0–0 dxe5 8.dxe5 Be7 9.Nbd2 0–0 10.Qe2 Qc7 11.Qe4 Rd8 12.Bd3 f5!?

Natural is 12..., g6. The move played loosens up the Black K-side giving White some advantage and gains Black only control over the d-file. That does not appear to be a critical line immediately.

13.exf6 Nxf6 14.Qe2 Qd6 15.Bc2 Na5 16.Ne4 Qb6 17.Bg5!?,..

More to the point is 17 Re1, planning to move the Ne4 to g5 and building pressure on the e-pawn. The text offers a very poisoned b-pawn; if 17..., Qxb2 18 Nxf6+, and 19 Bxh7+, wins material.

17..., Nd5 18.Bxe7 Nxe7 19.Neg5?!,..

Here I miss the correct move 19 Nfg5, to a strong attack on the Black King. Truthfully, moving the Nf3 just did not come into consideration. Had this better move been played the position could have developed so; 19 Nfg5 h6? 20 Qh5 hxg5 21 Nxg5 Nf5 22 Bxf5 exf5 23 Rfe1 Be6 24 Qh7+ Kf8 25 Rxe6, wins. The alternative try 19..., e5; does somewhat better but is pretty close to lost after 20 Qh5 Bf5 21 Qf7+ Kh8 22 Qxe7 Re8 23 Qd6 Qxb2 24 Qd5, and the threat of the classic smothered mate beginning 25 Nf7+, leaves White in great shape.

The game move gives White a marked advantage but nearly as much as could have been obtained.

17..., h6 20.Qe4?!,..

Misfiring again. This move is too routine. Crashing through with 20 Bh7+! and after a) 20..., Kh8 21 Ne5 Rf8 22 Qd3 g6 23 Bxg6 Nxg6 24 Nxg6+ Kg7 25 Nxf8 hxg5 26 Nd7, winning, and b) 20..., Kf8 21 Ne5 hxg5 22 Qh5, and White’s attack is very strong. The text move does keep an edge for White, just not a winning one. I was being overly cautious not having enough confidence in my calculations.

20...Nf5 21.b4 cxb4 22.cxb4 hxg5 23.bxa5 Qc6 24.Qxc6?!,..

Another second best move. More forceful is 24 Nxg5. Again the move played retains some advantage, but it gives Black chances to keep the fight going.

24..., bxc6 25.Rfd1 Bd7

Black might have tried 25..., Rxd1+; but I am not as certain as Rybka is that it is a better choice.

26.Ne5 Be8 27.Be4 Ne7

Rybka suggests 27..., Nd4 28 f3 Rab8 as better for Black. I agree. Odd how some of the Rybka suggestions are easier to see and understand than are others.

28.Rdc1?!,..

Once again not the best choice. A more useful alternative is 28 h3, making a luft and preventing the front most Black g-pawn from advancing.

28...Rac8?

I have focused my attention on c6, and Black is reacting to that. Here Mr. Magat could have equalized the game, or nearly so with 28..., Rab8; then if White wins his target c-pawn whatever advantage White could have claimed is gone after 29 Nxc6 Bxc6 30 Bxc6 Nxc6 31 Rxc6 Rb2 32 a4 Ra2!; when the Black Rooks have gained the second rank. Then there are a few tricks left but none that should win for either side if attention is paid. The next several moves I had to reconstruct. One aspect of my medical problem is hand tremors that make my handwriting illegible.

29.Rc5 Rd4 30.f3 Rcd8 31.Nxc6 Bxc6 32.Bxc6 Rd1+ 33.Rxd1 Rxd1+ 34.Kf2 Rd2+ 35.Kg3 Nf5+ 36.Kh3 Kh7 37.Be4 g6 38.Rc7+ Kh6 39.Rxa7 Rxa2 40.a6 Ne3 41.f4 gxf4 42.Ra8,..

Up to this point I am reasonably certain these are the moves played. The balance of the game was unreadable, and I have reconstructed the remaining moves as best as possible. The fork that caused me to resign is clear in my memory, and so, I an fairly sure the game ended as follows.

42..., g5 43.Rh8+ Kg7 44.Rh7+ Kf6 45.a7 Nd5?

Gordon misses a chance to fight back effectively with 45..., Nd1!; after which White must be very careful. The threat is 46..., Nf2 mate. Play could have gone; 46 Kg4 Nf2+ 47 Kf3 Ke5 48 Bc2! Rxc2 49 Rh5 Ra2 50 Rg8 Rxa7 51 Kxf2, when White has weathered the worst. Black has some small advantage with the more aggressive position for his King, but should be able to hold by quickly advancing his K-side pawns.

46.Rd7 Ke5 47.Bf3 Ra3 48 Kg4 Nf6+ 49 Resigns??

The last several moves were played with Gordon in some time pressure. I did not have bunches of time on my clock but more than did Magat. Through the game I had been seeing a great deal. The occasions where less than the best move was selected were nothing out of the ordinary for me, but the alternatives, except where noted - chiefly move 19, were considered. At this point I just did not see the fork and resigned thinking the Rook was lost without compensation . Had I my wits about me the correct finish is; 49 Kxg5 Nxd7 50 a8 (Q) Rxa8 51 Bxa8 Nf6 52 h4, and the h-pawn will cost Black the Knight and the game. The shock of the unseen fork combined with a growing lack of confidence in my ability to withstand tension led to my foolish early surrender.

The next game is from the SCC Finals played last Thursday

Little, Bill - Le Cours, Alan [D87]

SCC Ch Finals Schenectady, NY, 10.02.2011

1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 d5 4.cxd5 Nxd5 5.e4 Nxc3 6.bxc3 Bg7 7.Bc4 c5 8.Ne2 0–0 9.Be3 Nc6 10.Rc1 Qa5!?

Alan and I have battled over the Grunfeld Defense, Exchange Variation a number of times. As he noted just before the game began, I have reached the better position often in this line but seldom been able to convert the advantage into a win. True, too true.

The text move is not favored by the GMs and IMs. Those guys most often play 10..., Qc7; followed shortly by .., b7-b6. It has to be thought of as a side line, but that is its attraction. The move is just enough off the beaten track to force the opponent into independent thinking while it continues the logical plan for Black; pressure on White’s big center.

11.0–0 Qa3?!

This maybe too much of a good thing. Rybka likes 11..., b6.

12.dxc5,..

Natural is 12 Qb3, but then 12..., Qxb3 13 Bxb3, and the game is headed towards equality. Without the Queens on there isn’t much hope for an advantage for either side. The game move aims to make things as difficult as possible for both sides.

Ne5 13.Bb3 a5!?

Normal is 13..., Ng4 14 Qd3 Nxe3 15 Qxe3 a5; when Black has more than enough counter-play to balance the pawn minus. The game move offers White a chance to make things dicey for the Black Queen.

14.Nd4!?,..

And I promptly go for it.

14..., Ng4 15.Nb5?

Here the thread of the game begins to slip away from me. The only pathway to some advantage for White is 15 Nb2, then 15..., Nxe3 16 fxe3 Qxc5 17 Rxc7!, and if 17..., Rxc7? 18 Qd8+ wins. Better for Black is 17..., e6 18 Rxf8+ Qxf8 19 Bc4, and White answers 19..., Bxc3; with 20 Nd4, giving White some advantage. If Black tries 19..., Qe7 20 Nd4 Bh6 21 Qd3 Kh8 22 Rb1, and White has pieces very well placed, again with some advantage. After the game move White must be very careful not to fall into a worse position.

15...Nxe3 16.Nxa3 Nxd1 17.Rfxd1 a4 18.Bc4 Ra5 19.Bb5,..

The game now slips away from me completely. The only way for White to keep the fight going is to play 19 Nb5, then 19..., Bh6 20 Rb1 Bg4 21 Rd3 Be2?1 22 Rd4 Bg7? 23 Bxe2 Bxd4 24 exd4, seems to be won for White. Black can avoid the questionable 21..., Be2; and 22..., Bg7; and try such as 21..., Rc8 22 h3 Rxc5 23 hxg4 Rxc4 24 Rd4 Rc5 25 Rd5 b6; and either 26 Kf1, or 26 Rxc5, leaving the game about even. After the game move Black is better.

19..., Be6 20.Rc2 Rc8 21 c4 Raa1 22 Kf1 Rxc5 23 Ke2 f5 24 exf5 Bxf5 25 Rcd2 Re5+ 26 Kf1 Kf7

Possibly better is 26..., Bh6; making the coordination of the White Rooks as difficult.

27 f3 Bh6 28 Re2 Re3 29 Rxe3 Bxe3 30 g4?,..

Offering better chances are a) 30 Ke2 Bf4 31 g3, or b) 30 Bd7, when best for Black is 30..., Rd8 31 Be6+ Kxe6 32 Rxd8 Bc5 33 Rd3 Bf5 34 Rc3 Bd4 35 Rc2 Bxc2; with the game just about equal. Of course Black does have the Bishop versus Knight imbalance and White will have to prove he can hold the ending with pawns on both sides of the board.

30..., Be6 31 Ke2 Bf4 32 h3 Rc8 33 Bxa4??,..

Once more just a goofy mistake dropping a piece. After doing these things repeatedly, it is clear that serious chess is not possible for me. Over a year ago, Grandmaster Har-Zvi, in the nicest way, tried to tell me playing chess in rated tournaments may not be a happy pursuit for me any more. Stubbornly I struggled on. Now, the series of really bad moves in tense positions drove home the correctness of Ronen’s judgment.

33..., Ra8 34 Resigns.

And so, Goodbye to serious chess in rated tournaments. It has been fun, and a good long run with few regrets. As said above, the posting will continue and I hope to see my chess friends at the board for skittles often.

More soon on the latest round from Schenectady with some upsets mild and otherwise.

More on the First Round at SCC

Another game from the first round of the SCC Finals. In this one the participants investigate topical lines, and it must be added, very sharp topical lines at that.

Le Cours, Alan - Phillips, John [D44]

SCC Ch Finals 2011 Schenectady, NY, 03.02.2011

1.Nf3 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 d5 4.d4 c6 5.Bg5,..

Mr. Phillips likes these positions coming out of the Semi-Slav move order. His favorite line is the Meran Variation. I think he has prepared a bevy of lines in the Meran/Semi-Slav in which he feels comfortable. Mr. Le Cours decides to meet the preparation with the ultra sharp Botvinnik System which features lots of tactics.

5..., dxc4 6.e4 b5 7.e5 h6 8.Bh4 g5 9.Nxg5 hxg5 10.Bxg5 Nbd7 11.g3 Rg8 12.h4 Rxg5

When I first played over this game, and while watching it as it actually happened, there were doubts in my mind about this last series of moves. Even though GM Har-Zvi had given us members of his Saturday group a comprehensive overview of the Slav, Semi-Slav and the Botvinnik Variation I could not recall much time spent on 12 h4 Rxg5; or what is to be done by White subsequently. This game sent me back to the databases to find out how the best players handle the position.

In its earliest manifestations, players such as Jussapow, Knaak, Shirov and Beliavsky played this line as White and had good results. Some, Shirov primarily, were satisfied with either side in this variation. In a fashion this reminds me of certain variations in the Winawer French where the White Queen goes to g4; terrific imbalances and attacks on the opposite sides of the board almost without regard to what the opponent is doing. The tactical themes here are not quite the same as in the French, but the general ideas are very similar. The question is, to paraphrase the Confederate General Nathan B. Forrest: “Who gets there firstest with the mostest”? My review of the database information suggests the Exchange sacrifice is not entirely sound, but White is put under great pressure to find a very precise pathway through dangerous ground to prove the point.

13.hxg5 Nd5 14.g6 fxg6 15.Qg4 Qe7 16.Qxg6+ Qf7 17.Qg4!?,..

Most of the great players preferred here to exchange Queens on f7. Yannick Pelletier (2603) tried 17 Qe4, against Habu, Y. (2341) at Zurich 2005 and went on to win a very tactical ending with Bishops of the same color. That was the only example I found of avoiding the Queen exchange.

The usual line is 17 Qxf7+ Kxf7 18 Bg2, and soon the Nc3 goes to e4. White then plays to use his two Rooks down the h-file with the support of the Ne4 to attack the Black King. He will also seriously consider f2-f4 and f4-f5 to bolster the assault. Black will try for counter-play with his very dangerous Q-side pawns. In that kind of play White should not begrudge surrendering another pawn on the Q-side to make his attack more potent.

17...Bb7 18.Nxd5?,..

This is the key error. Better 18 Bg2, and if he wants to eliminate the Nd5, Bg2xd5 was preferred by the Grandmasters. The Knight has a role to play from e4. Absent the Knight there White has difficulties in finding enough activity to slow down the coming rush of pawns on the Q-side. Black now has a some advantage.

18..., cxd5 19.Bh3 Bb4+ 20.Ke2 Nf8 21.a3 Be7

Rybka suggests 21..., Ba5; is a little better.

22.Rhf1?,..

Missing the very dangerous reply John has in mind. Necessary is 22 f4, to meet 22..., Qh7; with 23 f5, and the battle is still far from decided. After the text White is in trouble because the Black Queen threatens entry in support of the Q-side pawns.

22..., Qh7 23.Rad1 b4 24.f4 c3 25.Rf3?,..

Somewhat better is 25 bxc3, keeping the fight going for just a bit longer after 25..., Ba6+ 26 Kf2 bxc3 27 Rh1 Qc2+ 28 Ke3 Qe4+ 29 Kf2 Rb8; seems to be winning for Black.

25..., Ba6+ 26 Resigns 0-1

Ruinous loss occurs after 26 Rfd3 Bxd3+ 27 Rxd3 cxb2. This game is an excellent example of how the mechanical toting up of relative piece values, a Knight equals three pawns, a Rook equals five pawns, etc., is less than useful in extra sharp positions. The tactical melee sought by Phillips and agreed to by Le Cours is a place where board-wide piece activity and specific threats are more important than who has the theoretical advantage in force. A most entertaining game.

More soon.

Progress A AACC

Last Wednesday the Albany Area Chess Club saw the final games of the Preliminaries completed. Arthur Alowitz won a closed Sicilian from Robert Kemp, and Peter Henner defeated Jonathan Lack to force a playoff for the last spot in the final match. Henner and Dean Howard will battle it out for the privilege of facing Gordon Magat for the title.

The Lack - Henner game shows once more all that is old is new again. Gary Kasparov sparked renewed interest in the Scotch in the later years of his reign. After almost a century of languishing as a tool for players of offbeat lines, it has become, a respectable debut for even the top flight players; see the games from this year’s Tata Steel Tournament.

Jon and Peter explored the interesting complications of the Scotch Game in today’s contest not with perfect accuracy. Although their hearts were in the right place, the necessary dash was not always there.

Lack, Jonathan - Henner, Peter [C45]

AACC Ch., Guilderland, NY, 11.02.2011

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 exd4 4.Nxd4 d5?

Normal here are 4..., Bc5; 4..., Nf6; and 4..., Qh4. The text leads to some advantage for White after 4..., d5 5 Nxc6 bxc6 6 exd5, and if 6..., Qxd5 7 Qe2+ and 8 Nc3. If 6..., cxd5 7 Bb5+, wins a pawn. Another way for White to play is 5 exd5 Qxd5 6 Qe2+ Be7 7 Nb5, with complicated play favoring White. The move played seems to be an improvisation at the board in reaction to a surprise in the opening.

5.Bb5?!,..

Not a particularly strong continuation. In its own way the text is a surprise. After uncorking the Scotch, Lack indicates he may not have “booked up” on his innovation enough and misses the best continuation.

5..., Nge7?!

Better 5...dxe4 6.Nxc6 Qxd1+ 7.Kxd1 a6 8.Ba4 Bd7; and Black is doing well.

6.Qf3 Bd7 7.Nxc6 Bxc6 8.Bxc6+ Nxc6 9.exd5 Nb4 10.0–0 Qxd5 11.Re1+ Be7 12.Qe2?,..

The Scotch and related openings from the romantic era require an adventurous approach to solving problems. Here the spirit of swashbuckling chess calls out for 12 Rxe7+, Kxe7 13 Bd2! Qxf3 14 Bxb4+ Ke6 15 gxf3, when White is for choice in complicated and very tactical position. The move played leaves White with a small advantage and the Queens still on the board. A situation where anything can happen.

12..., 0–0 13.a3,..

Adventurous is 13 Qxe7, but after 13..., Nxc2 14 Nc3 Qd8 15 Qe2 Nxa1 16 Be3 Nb3 17 axb3, Rybka says White is better. I am not so certain this is so. Playing out Rybka’s recommendations move by move leads to a balanced struggle. Maybe in some distant situation the B&N will triumph over the Rook and pawn, but it is not clear to me after fifteen or twenty computer suggested moves. In light of this, the text is no worse than the alternative.

13..., Nc6 14.Nc3 Qf5 15.Nb5?,..

Almost the right idea. Much better is 15 Qb5. Then 15..., Qxb5 16 Nxb5 Rfd8 17 Nxc7 Rac8 18 Nb5 a6 19 Nc3 Nd4 20 Rxe7 Nxc2 21 Rb1 Rxc3 22 Bf4 Rb3; and Black has some initiative while White has the B v N imbalance to ease the pain. The battle appears even to me and to Rybka. There are still plenty of typical open game tactics on the board. For example: the threat of.., Nxa3; would be met with Rb1-e1 and the mate counter-threat wins material. After the game move White is worse.

15...,a6 16.Nxc7?!?,..

As distasteful as it is 16 Nc3, has to be played admitting the jump to b5 was incorrect.

15..., Rac8 17.Nxa6 bxa6 18.Qxa6 Qxc2

I believe Mr. Lack saw the c-pawn was going to be taken, but he just didn’t recognize how hard it is to get the Q-side pawns going.

19.b4?,..

Losing more material right away. The only try is 19 Qe2, but then 19..., Qb3 20 Qd1 Rb8; keeps the pawns from becoming active and nails b2 as a weakness that will be hard to defend.

19..., Bf6 20.Be3 Bxa1 21.Rxa1 Rfd8 22.h3,..

White has to take a moment to eliminate back rank mate possibilities. That is all that is required for Black to grab the initiative to go along with the extra Rook.

22..., Qd3

This is sufficient, but more trenchant is 22..., Nd4; but that is quibbling. The game is won for Black several ways.

23.b5 Nd4 24.a4 Ra8 25.Qb6 Nxb5 26.a5 Rdb8 27.Qc5 Qc3 0–1

The Scotch Game begins with tactics in a position that on the surface seems not too complicated, and somehow the tactics carry on through the game as it did here. If you haven’t tried out the Scotch, and you have a taste for new/old fashion cut-and-thrust, it may be worth the time to add it to your repertoire. Gary Lane has a book, Winning with the Scotch, Henry Holt, NYC, 1993, on it that gives a good overview in less than 150 pages. As popular as the opening has been with the elite players, there are probably other books available. GM Har-Zvi has a seven-part and growing video presentation on ICC on the Scotch also. So, there is much material for study.

More soon.

Chi - Sells from the Schenectady Finals

The most important game from last Thursday’s first round of the Schenectady Finals was the battle between Patrick Chi and Philip Sells.

It had drama; a not quite mainstream opening variation, a middle game miscalculation by Mr. Sells - unusual, and at the end, a blunder by Mr. Chi in his opponent’s time pressure.

Chi, Patrick - Sells, Philip [E24]

SCC Ch Finals 2011 Schenectady, NY, 03.02.2011

1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.f3,..

Szabo, L., the Hungarian GM from the post-WWII period was the first notable player I can find who championed 4. f3. Both Botvinnik and Bronstein tried it out in the 60’s with out any great success. In later years GM Victor Moskalenko has taken up the move and won several games with it. Not exactly theoretically approved, but with a logical intention - building a broad center, the move has surprise value without taking great risks.

4..., d5 5.a3 Bxc3+ 6.bxc3 0–0 7.e3,..

As much as White might want to play 7 e2-e4, right away, it is too dangerous after 7..., dxe4; for then the White King will be in a cold draft. White has to bide his time preparing an eventual e3-e4 push after he has developed his forces and made a comfortable home for his King.

7..., c5

While the game is not in the mainstream of the Nimzo-Indian, Black’s methods are typical of the Nimzo; pressure against the center with an eye to weakening it in the long run.

8.Bd3 Nc6 9.Ne2 b6 10.cxd5 exd5 11.0–0 Bb7 12.Rb1 Qe7 13.Ng3 Rac8 14.Qe1!?,..

I am uncertain about this move. It is possible 14 Nf5, first might be better. It follows Ficher’s standard prescription; get your Knights close to the enemy King, if nothing else, such may provoke a weakening pawn move. There is however, another idea here for White; granting Black’s wish and giving up the center. In this case, White’s motivation is to transform his presence in the center into a more favorable and active piece placement. This comes about after 14 Nf5 Qd7 15 dxc5! Bxc5 16 e4 dxe4 17 Bxe4 Qxd1 18 Rxd1 Nxe4 19 fxe4, when the White pieces are more aggressively placed, the pawn on c5 will take some looking after and Black will have to be on guard for there are a number of threats; Nd6 attacking c8 and b7, Be3 attacking c5 and a7, Bf4 keeping the Black Rooks from opposing on the b-file, as well as Rd1-d5 preparing to double Rooks on the d-file.

14...,Qc7 15.Bd2 Rfe8 16.Qf2 Na5 17.Nf5,..

Playing over the Szabo, Botvinnik, Bronstein and Moslalenko games this Knight landing on f5 is seen often. That frequency indicates this is one of the natural moves in the position.

Nc4?! 18.Bc1?!,..

A decision that is difficult to take is 18 Bxc4, but it is a way to make use of the Nf5. Play could go; 18 Bxc4 dxc4 19 e4 cxd4 20 cxd4 c3 21 Bg5, when according to Rybka, Black may have to return the piece by sacrificing the Bishop on e4 to keep the fight going.

18..., Nd6 19.e4 Nxf5?

With plenty of time on the clock, the complications get the better of Philip. Here 19..., dxe4; promises more for Black. Play continues 20 Bf4 exd3 21 dxc5 Nxf5 22 Bxc7 Re2!; and the Queen has no moves permitting Black to bring the material imbalance closer to even. More importantly, after 23 cxb6 Rxf2 24 Rxf2 axb6 25 Bxb6 Ba6; Black has two Knights for the Rook and a well supported passed pawn on d3 with which to bedevil White. According to some observations by Soltis in Rethinking the Chess Pieces, Batsford, London, 2004, the pawn on d3 that will make the difference. It keeps the Rooks from behaving as Rooks should. Also, the Knights have several squares in the center through which they can maneuver to harass any blockader on d2. That will make serious problems for White. In all truthfulness, going into this complicated line is a challenge for any of us playing locally. To do so requires a very accurate calculation of complicated positions and considerable self-confidence.

20.e5!?,..

This leads to even more complications. They seem to favor White, but Black certainly obtains some practical chances. Simpler is 20 exf5, leaving Black to chose between 20..., c4; taking up a stubborn and more passive defensive stance, or 20..., cxd4; opting for a more open kind of struggle. Either way Black’s minor pieces are not quite as good as the White Bishop pair. The text elects to mix things up tactically.

20..., Ne4!?

One has to admire these two warriors. Neither shrinks from raising the level of tension in the position, both are willing to risk material loss if they can get activity for their pieces. The main alternative for Black is 20..., Nxd4; then a standard continuation is; 21 cxd4 Nd7 22 Bf4 Qd8 23 Rfd1 cxd4 24 Qxd4 Nc5 25 Bb5 Re6; when the immediate middle game may be slightly in favor of Black. White can try for better with 21 exf6 Ne6 22 fxg7, and in exchange for the pawn he has broken up the shield of the Black King with the potential to bring the Bishop pair into action on the K-side.

The game move risks material for piece activity.

21.fxe4 dxe4 22.Bb5 g6 23.Bxe8 Rxe8

An Exchange is gone, but in return Black has a pawn and his unpromising Bb7 is much stronger than it has been for several moves. A lesson here for the less experienced players; chess is not a mechanical toting up of relative piece values. In fact, as Botvinnik appreciated long ago, a good deal of the beauty of the game is when imagination turns upside down the value of one piece to another.

24.Be3 cxd4

I rather like 24..., Ba6 25 Rfd1 Bd3; securing the pawn on e4 and making the Bishop a player in the center of the board. My guess is Philip wanted to maintain the Bishop on b7 as the basis for threats along the long diagonal, another worthy goal.

25.cxd4 Qc3 26.Rfe1 Bd5 27.g4 Nxe3 28.Qxe3 Rc8 29.Qxc3 Rxc3 30.Ra1?,..

White misses, or passes on the opportunity to steer to a safe have with 30 a4, then 30..., Rc4 31 a5 bxa5 32 Rb5 Rxd4 33 Rxa5, and the active try 33..., Rd2 is met by 34 Re3. The last Q-side pawn will fall, and the White King has just enough breathing room to avoid any tactics. As important is that one of the White Rooks will have activity to offset the extra Black pawns. I say “misses or passes” because there was no time to discuss with Patrick what he was thinking when taking this decision. It could very well be Mr. Chi harbored the wish to take the full point and looked for a way to do so.

30..., Rd3 31.Red1 Bb3!

The game was now about to become a “time pressure cooker” as is often the case with Mr. Sells. White had about 35 minutes at this point, pretty comfortable, and Black about 12 minutes. That would be tough for many players but is only mild time pressure for Sells.

The move played may have been overlooked by Patrick, or he did not value it highly. Rybka, saya White is fine after the forced line 32 Rxd3 exd3 33 Kf2 d2 34 Ke2 d8 (Q) 35 Rxd8 Bxd8+ 36 Kxd8. However, after 36..., f5; 37 gxf5 gxf5; Rybka says Black is winning! That seemed to me to be a very sudden change by the machine. What is going on? My error was not looking hard enough at each and every move. After 36..., f5; White has to play the unnatural looking 37 exf6 e.p., then he brings his King up to b5. Black has to make a couple of moves; ..,h7-h6; to prevent g4-g5; and .., Kf7; to prepare to capture the pawn on f6. That is just enough time for the White King to get to b5. Then if Black tries to make a race out of it, the White King will get the pawns on a7 and b6 while the Black King wins the pawns on d4 and a3. The White King is then just enough closer to the K-side than is the Black King to win the game in the final race back across the board. What a huge piece of calculation to be done in the fast fleeing minutes left. Patrick used many of his remaining minutes and did not find en passant capture on move 37, or at least he could not see the picture clearly enough to decide to go that way. In defense of Patrick’s decision, things become murky when there is a very long line to calculate. In this case there are several points where more than one option has to be considered making the task even more perplexing. The move played is a nicely creative way to keep the game going.

32 Rdb1?!,..

As creative as it is, White’s move gives Black one more pawn shifting the balance clearly in favor of Black.

32..., Be6 33.Rb4,..

It is not to late to repeat moves with 33 Rd1, to test Philip’s resolve about winning. If 33 Rd1 Bxg4 34 Rxd3 exd3 35 Ra2, leaves White with an edge, not clearly winning but with greater chances than Black. Of course, Black can repeat the position with 33..., Bb3. I believe Patrick was unwilling to agree the draw as long as there is fight left in the position because that is his nature.

32..., Bxg4 34.d5 Rxd5 35.Rxe4 Bf5 36.Re3 Kf8 37.Rc1 Ke7 38.Kf2 Bd7 39.Rc7 a5 40.Kg3 Ke6 41.Rb7 b5 42.Rb6+ Ke7

Now things have become clear; White has one Rook well and truly activated, the other, with his King, guards the scattered pawns and the game is entirely level. Sells’ time dropped below five minutes remaining about here. This was the likely moment for Patrick to offer a draw. Instead he wagers on time pressure to help his cause.

43.Ra6 b4 44.axb4 axb4 45.Rb6 Rd4 46.Rb3 Re4 47.Rd3,..

A little tactical interlude threatening to pin and win the Bd7. Black is as alert as always when he is in time pressure and avoids the mistake.

47..., Be6 48.Kf3 Rxe5 49.Rxb4 h5

White has eliminated the Q-side pawns and has his King well placed for defense. The game is about even, nevertheless, the side with the extra pawns has the winning chances, even if they are not huge.

50.Rc3 g5 51.Rb8 Bd5+ 52.Kf2 Be6 53.Rg8 Kf6 54.Rd8 g4 55.Kg3 Kg5 56.Rg8+ Kf6 57.Rd8 Kg5 58.Rh8?,..

More sensible is checking on g8 once again just to see if Sells is willing to draw. Mr. sells was under 11 seconds by now, and Mr. Chi had something over ten minutes. Mr. Chi falls into an error I have watched Steve Taylor and others make with Mr. Sells; underestimating just how well he can play quickly. Philip Sells uses much time in his games, but he seems to use it effectively to understand the ins and outs of the position. It is not often Sells will slip up even when he is down to not much more than the five second delay for his moves.

58..., Rf5 59.Re3 Ra5 60.Re1 Rb5 61.Re3 Ra5 62.Rg8+ Kf6 63.Re4 Ra3+ 64.Kg2??,..

This costs a piece and the game. The only move is 64 Kf2, then 64..., h4; and Black is making progress

64..., Bd5 65.Rge8 Ra4 0–1

The game rolled on for some more moves. Sells had just a few seconds on the clock and Chi was under five minutes. There was no doubt, with the piece soon to be picked up and the advance of the extra pawns, Black was going to win.

More soon.

The Schenectady Finals and Swiss

Thursday saw the kick-off of the next stage of the Schenectady chess season with the beginning of the round-robin Finals and the Consolation Swiss. Participating in the Swiss are: Dave Finnerman at 1658 the highest rated contestant, and with the following, in rating order; Richard Chu, David Connors, Cory Northrup, Matt Clough, Jeff Capitummino, Mike Stanley and Michael Kline. It is not quite as strong as last year’s lineup, but the event is much more closely matched and promises a serious struggle for first place. I was way too busy against the younger Mr. Aaron, Dilip, to obtain an accurate report of the results in the Swiss, other than that Richard Chu managed somehow to win the following game from Matt Clough:

Clough, Matthew - Chu, Richard [B30]

Consolation Swiss 2011 Schenectady, NY, 03.02.2011

1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 g6

The early fianchetto is given a closed treatment by White in this game. John Donaldson and Jeremy Silman wrote a book, Accelerated Dragons, Gloucester Publishers, plc, London 1998, and in it they named this line the Hyper-Accelerated Dragon. It is a favorite of Donaldson. The line is tricky and quite playable.

3.Bc4 Bg7 4.0–0 Nc6 5.Nc3,..

Donaldson and Silman only consider 5 c3, here. From what Rybka tells me the move played is OK also with the added virtue of getting the game out of the well know theory.

5..., e6 6.Re1 Ne5

It is better to develop with 6..., Nge7.

7.Bf1,..

The straight forward 7 Nxe5, is correct. White has some advantage because Black has used extra time to trade off a developed piece. Black shortly maneuvers to win a pawn or to do some damage to the White pawn structure.

7..., Ne7 8.Nb5 Qb6 9.d4 Nxf3+ 10.Qxf3 cxd4 11.e5!?,..

White has the laudable intention of stamping the dark squares as weaknesses around the Black King. He has given up a center pawn and is very focused on pressing ahead towards the Black King. However, more promising is 11 Bg5 f6 12 Bf4 e5 13 Bd2, and White has compensation for the pawn. One example is when Black takes aim at the Nb5; 13..., a6?! 14 Qa3! 0-0?! 15 Bb4 Nc6 16 Bc4+!, and Black will lose material and the game soon. After the text the game is about equal.

11..., 0–0 12.Bg5 Nc6 13.Bf6 a6 14.Na3?!,..

I wandered by as Matt was considering his move. A few minutes of thought and it seemed to me that 14 Nd6, was the likely try. All of the details were by no means clear, but the line 14 Nd6 Nxe5 15 Bxe5 Bxe5 16 Nc4, appeared promising. After 16..., Bxh2+ 17 Kxh2 Qc5 18 Qa3 b6 19 Qxc5 bxc5; White has the extra piece and Black three pawns of compensation. The problem for White is he has an extra Knight. In the long run it is not as good as the Bishop against three pawns according to statistics. Further complicating the evaluation is the existence of Rook pairs and same color Bishops on the board along with the danger of the pawns concentrated in the center. All things considered, there were the makings of quite an interesting battle to come.

After the move played, the balance shifts to Black. An observation worth noting; against Barnes in the Preliminaries, Matt worked his way successfully through similar complications. This time he does not do so. A useful exercise for Matt would be to do go over both games thinking about what his thoughts were during both games. Why, for example did he go forward versus Barnes and here decide to go backward?

14..., Qc5?

Richard is too routine hereabouts. Better is 14..., Bxf6 15 exf6 d5; and while Black must keep his eye on the White Queen ending up on h6, he is for choice. The move played gives White a chance to equalize.

15.Qf4?!,..

Mr. Clough does not realize he is passing on a chance to make things difficult for Black. Here 15 Bxg7 Kxg7 16 Qf6+ Kg8 17 Nc4, is not entirely sound, but it does make things difficult to calculate to the end. Play could go 17..., b5 18 Nd6 Qxc2 19 Qh4 d3 20 Ne4 f5; and Black is for choice, but White does has active play and there is a chance of error. The White plan seems to be an attack with his Queen and Rooks. As GM Har-Zvi is fond of saying: “Rooks are not good attackers. There are too many ways to frustrate them”. The White minor pieces are singularly absent from the contemplated assault.

15..., b5 16.Rad1 Ra7 17.Rd3 d6 18.Bxg7 Kxg7 19.Qf6+ Kg8 20.Re4 dxe5 21.Rg4 Qe7

This move puts paid to any realistic idea of an attack on the Black King. The remainder of the game is mopping up. The Black pawn dominance of the center in itself is as important as the extra pawns. White can’t find safe ground upon which to make a last stand.

22.Qh4 Qxh4 23.Rxh4 f5 24.c4 b4 25.Nc2 a5 26.Ne1 Raf7 27.Rd1 e4 28.f3 e5 29.fxe4 fxe4 30.Nc2 e3 31.Bd3 Bf5 0–1

As John Phillips pointed out after the evenings festivities were over, all the games in the Finals could be considered upsets. Firstly, all the higher rated players lost, and secondly, Black won all the games. The outcomes in the Finals were unusual no doubt.

For the record here are the games from the first round:

Le Cours, Alan - Phillips, John [D44]

SCC Ch Finals 2011 Schenectady, NY, 03.02.2011

This is a party in the theory of the Slav, Botvinnik variation.

1.Nf3 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 d5 4.d4 c6 5.Bg5 dxc4 6.e4 b5 7.e5 h6 8.Bh4 g5 9.Nxg5 hxg5 10.Bxg5 Nbd7 11.g3 Rg8 12.h4 Rxg5 13.hxg5 Nd5 14.g6 fxg6 15.Qg4 Qe7 16.Qxg6+ Qf7 17.Qg4 Bb7 18.Nxd5 cxd5 19.Bh3 Bb4+ 20.Ke2 Nf8 21.a3 Be7 22.Rhf1 Qh7 23.Rad1 b4 24.f4 c3 25.Rf3 Ba6+ 26 Resigns 0-1

The encounter between Chi and Sells carried the potential of deciding the tournament winner. Patrick, at 2048, out rated Philip by 84 points. Both players have had good to excellent results the last couple of years. The game unfolded in some sense about as expected; a hard fight leading to an ending with serious time trouble for Mr. Sells. Once more in a dangerous ending Sells kept his alertness at a high level and Chi was able to quite match that. Sells played about fifteen moves with only one second(!) on his clock, and Mr. Chi overlooked a killing pin that cost him the game.

Chi, Patrick - Sells, Philip [E24]

SCC Ch Finals 2011 Schenectady, NY, 03.02.2011

1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.f3 d5 5.a3 Bxc3+ 6.bxc3 0–0 7.e3 c5 8.Bd3 Nc6 9.Ne2 b6 10.cxd5 exd5 11.0–0 Bb7 12.Rb1 Qe7 13.Ng3 Rac8 14.Qe1 Qc7 15.Bd2 Rfe8 16.Qf2 Na5 17.Nf5 Nc4 18.Bc1 Nd6 19.e4 Nxf5 20.e5 Ne4 21.fxe4 dxe4 22.Bb5 g6 23.Bxe8 Rxe8 24.Be3 cxd4 25.cxd4 Qc3 26.Rfe1 Bd5 27.g4 Nxe3 28.Qxe3 Rc8 29.Qxc3 Rxc3 30.Ra1 Rd3 31.Red1 Bb3 32.Rdb1 Be6 33.Rb4 Bxg4 34.d5 Rxd5 35.Rxe4 Bf5 36.Re3 Kf8 37.Rc1 Ke7 38.Kf2 Bd7 39.Rc7 a5 40.Kg3 Ke6 41.Rb7 b5 42.Rb6+ Ke7 43.Ra6 b4 44.axb4 axb4 45.Rb6 Rd4 46.Rb3 Re4 47.Rd3 Be6 48.Kf3 Rxe5 49.Rxb4 h5 50.Rc3 g5 51.Rb8 Bd5+ 52.Kf2 Be6 53.Rg8 Kf6 54.Rd8 g4 55.Kg3 Kg5 56.Rg8+ Kf6 57.Rd8 Kg5 58.Rh8 Rf5 59.Re3 Ra5 60.Re1 Rb5 61.Re3 Ra5 62.Rg8+ Kf6 63.Re4 Ra3+ 64.Kg2 Bd5 65.Rge8 Ra4 0–1

The game went on a few more moves but there was no doubt of the outcome.

The game Little - Dilip Aaron was real upset, there were 350 rating points difference between the players. After getting a nice, though small, advantage my concentration “went south” and young Dilip was alert to his chances. After dropping the Exchange my situation was bad but not quite hopeless. After a few more moves only worthy of a five minute game, I turned the bad into utterly lost, and Dilip won convincingly.

Little, Bill - Aaron, Dilip [B01]

SCC Ch Finals 2011 Schenectady, NY, 06.02.2011

1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Qxd5 3.Nc3 Qa5 4.Bc4 Nf6 5.d3 c6 6.Bd2 Bf5 7.Nf3 Nbd7 8.Qe2 e6 9.Nd4 Qe5 10.Qxe5 Nxe5 11.Nxf5 Nxc4 12.Nxg7+ Bxg7 13.dxc4 0–0–0 14.0–0–0 Ng4 15.Rdf1 Rd4 16.h3 Ne5 17.b3 Ng6 18.Be3 Rd7 19.Ne4 b6 20.Rd1 Rhd8 21.Bg5 Bb2+ 22.Kxb2 Rxd1 23.Rxd1 Rxd1 24.Nf6 Rf1 25.f4 Nxf4 26.Nxh7 Nxg2 0–1

The weather forecasters promise us more snow for the coming week. If true I will have plenty of time to work on these games. My intention is to analyze these for the blog.

More soon.