The Taylor - Deepak Aaron Game

Early on in this CDCL season, driven by the pace of the newer teams; RPI, and Uncle Sam, League matches were taking place very frequently. Now things have slowed. The critical clashes between title contenders are not happening so quickly. The teams are maneuvering to field the strongest sides possible and delays are occurring. Based on the schedule I have so far, it will be the middle of June or later before League play is complete.

Schenectady A and Albany B teams met Thursday at Schenectady for their CDCL match. The Schenectady team won the match 3 ½ - ½. Schenectady had to win this match to keep alive any hopes for a piece of first place. Albany B had even slimmer chances for the title, and this result puts paid to that possibilty. Albany was missing their “right bower” Peter Henner who is off doing volunteer work, in Mongolia no less. The mellifluous named Kavana Mallanna filled in on second board for Albany B. Despite a strenuous effort she was not able to hold her game against Philip Sells. Incidently, both Bill Townsend and I think Kavana is the first woman to play for a team in the CDCL. John Morse, Black on first board, upheld his reputation for being a tough opponent and for finding his own unique way in the opening by drawing with Patrick Chi. The three lower boards were all victories for Schenectady: Sells - Mallanna, 1-0, Townsend - Alowitz, 1-0 and Eson - Dilip Aaron, 0-1.

The attentive reader may have noticed Schenectady had White on both boards one and two. There was a bit of a late start to the games and in the confusion board two began play with the Schenectady player on the White side. This was not discovered until after play was complete. Following the rule that once the game is complete the score stands, the result was confirmed.

The standings in the CDCL are:

The Geezers are in first place, 5-0 with two matches to play, Albany A and Saratoga A. In second place is Schenectady A, 4 ½ - 1 ½. They have one match to play with Albany A. Albany B has completed its schedule scoring 4 -3 with 13 ½ game points and they are in third place, but this may be only temporary because Schenectady, Albany and Saratoga A teams can all out score them as the later matches are played. The only certain finishes are Saratoga B in 7th and RPI in 8th places. Albany A results will have a big impact on the final standings. They have to play Schenectady A and the Geezers as well as Saratoga A. The last word I heard is the Geezers are to play Albany A at Schenectady next Thursday with Albany A being the home team. To be entirely accurate, I also heard from Tim Wright, the captain of Albany A, that the match was to be played Wednesday at Albany. The Geezers’ captain Richard Chu is going to confirm the arrangements with Mr. Wright.

The top board in the recent Saratoga A - Schenectady A match brought together two significant local talents; Steve Taylor and Deepak Aaron. About thirty years ago Taylor was the young, hard charging master with a 2350 rating poised to make a choice; pursue chess glory or take a more conventional path. Taylor elected marriage, children and a career, a choice that can not be faulted. Aaron, who is somewhat younger than was Taylor when reaching this point in his growth in chess, still has some time before facing a similar decision. He is leaving in August for a return visit to his home land for a vacation, and coincidently, the opportunity to play in the World Junior Championship tournament in India. We are hoping Deepak will find the time to send email reports on his impressions of the event and his progress. We will publish them here when received.

Today’s game is an interesting theoretical exploration of the Four Knight’s Opening - not something that is thought of as current cutting edge in the opening. A truism about chess openings is everything old can be new again if it has been forgotten long enough.

Taylor, Steve - Aaron, Deepak [C48]

SCC A v Saratoga A CDCL Match Saratoga Springs, NY, 16.05.2011

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bb5,..

A debut that was the height of fashion one hundred years ago. Almost all of the elite players of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries used it from one side or the other. After WWII, it gradually became less used by the guys at the very top. The methods that permit one side or the other create a draw became widely known

4..., Bd6

Not unknown in the early days, but it was considered doubtful then. In the closing the days of the twentieth century some adventurous players began trying out this move against good opponents. Here is an example;

Jonkman, Harmen (2520) - Sokolov, Ivan (2647) [C48]

NED-ch Leeuwarden (1), 20.06.2002

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bb5 Bd6 5.d3 a6 6.Ba4 h6 7.h3 b5 8.Bb3 Bb7 9.a3 Bc5 10.0–0 0–0 11.Nd5 Nd4 12.Nxd4 Bxd4 13.c3 Ba7 14.Nxf6+ Qxf6 15.Kh1 c5 16.f4 exf4 17.Bxf4 Qg6 18.Qd2 c4 19.dxc4 Bxe4 20.cxb5 Qf5 21.Kh2 Qxb5 22.Ba2 d5 23.Rad1 Rad8 24.b4 Rfe8 25.Rfe1 Bb6 26.Be3 Bc7+ 27.Bf4 Qc6 28.Bxc7 Qxc7+ 29.Kg1 Qg3 30.Re3 Qg6 31.Qf2 f5 32.Re2 Kh7 33.Red2 Rc8 34.Rc1 Red8 35.c4 dxc4 36.Bxc4 Bxg2 37.Qxg2 Rxd2 38.Qxg6+ Kxg6 39.Bf7+ Kxf7 40.Rxc8 Rd3 41.Rc7+ Kg8 42.a4 Rxh3 43.a5 Rb3 44.Rc4 Kh7 45.Kf2 g5 46.Ke2 f4 47.Kd2 f3 48.Rc7+ Kg6 49.Rc6+ Kh5 50.Rxa6 g4 51.Rb6 g3 52.a6 g2 53.Rb5+ Kh4 54.a7 g1Q 55.a8Q Qe3+ 0–1

5.d3 a6 6.Ba4 h6

Bruzon Bautita defeated Kevin Spaggett in Buenos Aires using this move. It can’t be said Black achieved any great advantage from the opening. The problems for White arose in the later middle game. Their game does show Black has decent play and equality entering the middle game.

Spraggett, Kevin (2592) - Bruzon Bautista, Lazaro (2662) [C48]

American Continental 3rd Buenos Aires (9), 14.08.2005

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 Nf6 4.Nc3 Bd6 5.d3 a6 6.Ba4 h6 7.Ne2 0–0 8.Ng3 Re8 9.a3 b5 10.Bb3 Bf8 11.0–0 d6 12.Bd2 Be6 13.Bxe6 Rxe6 14.c4 bxc4 15.dxc4 Nd4 16.Ba5 Nxf3+ 17.Qxf3 Qb8 18.Rab1 Qb7 19.Rfe1 c6 20.Qe2 g6 21.Red1 Rb8 22.Nf1 d5 23.exd5 cxd5 24.cxd5 Nxd5 25.Qe4 Nf4 26.Qxb7 Rxb7 27.Rd8 Kg7 28.Nd2 Rc6 29.g3 Ne6 30.Rd5 f6 31.b4 Kf7 32.Nb3 Rc2 33.h4 Ra2 34.Ra1 Rxa1+ 35.Nxa1 Nd4 36.Bd8 Rb8 37.Ba5 Rc8 38.Rd7+ Ke6 39.Rc7 Rxc7 40.Bxc7 Nb5 0–1

7.a3 0–0 8.Bb3 b5

This move seems just a bit out of place. More usual would be 8..., Bc5; getting the pieces into a more ordinary formation after 9 0-0 d6 10 Nd5. My guess the motivation behind the move is to make long castling a little less appealing to White now the Black pawns are nearer to making contact.

9.Ne2!?,..

What is wrong with 9 Be3? Nothing that I or Rybka can see, it prevents .., Bd6-c5; immediately. White likely did not care for 9..., Ng4; and the possibility of losing the minor Exchange. For the two Bishops to become a worrisome factor the game has to open up. But there are tactics: Play could go; 9 Be3 Ng4 10 0-0 Nxe3 11 fxe3 Bc5 12 d4 exd4 13 fxe4 Ba7; and White has space in the center, an open f-file and diagonal pressure on f7 to compensate for the Bishop pair.

9..., Bc5 10.Be3 Bxe3 11.fxe3 d5 12.exd5 Nxd5 13.Qd2 Nf6

This seems to be the best move. The Black Knight leaves d5 before it is pushed. The alternative, 13..., Be6; leads to equality also.

14.e4 Bg4 15.h3,..

Short castling is not possible. The Ne2 is loose after 15 0-0 Nxe4. Q-side castling is certainly an option. Black gets some counter-play if White does so here; 15 0-0-0 a5 16 h3 Be6 17 Bxe6 fxe6 18 Rhf1 a4 19 Qe3 Qd6 20 d4 exd4 21 Nfxd4 Qc5 22 Qd3 Nxd4 23 Nxd4 Qg5+ 24 Kb1 Rfd8; with lots of play in an unclear position. Mr. Taylor looks for counter-play along the soon to be open g-file.

15..., Bxf3 16.gxf3 Nd4 17.Nxd4 Qxd4 18.c3 Qb6 19.Qf2,..

Offering to exchange Queens and counting on the light squared Bishop to defend d3.

19..., c5

Black has some small advantage. The pawn on d3 is no pillar of strength, and Black means to keep it so. With the same idea is 19..., Qd6.

20.Rg1 Nh5 21.Bd5 Rad8 22.Rg4 Nf4 23.0–0–0,..

Offering the h-pawn which comes with a drop of poison. If 23..., Nxh3 24 Qg3 Nf4 25 Rxg7+ Kh8; and hair-raising complications come about after 26 Kb1!?. A sample line is; 26..., Nh5 27 Qxe5 Nxg7 28 Rg1 f6 29 Qe7 Rg8 30 Rg6 Kh7 31 Rxf6 Qb8 32 Bf7 Qh2 33 Bxg8+ Rxg8 34 Qxc5, and if the silly 34..., h5?? 35 Qg5, wins. There are several places where play can vary in this line, And every one has tricks the unwary can trip over.

23..., Nxd5

Black spurns the offer of the h-pawn and takes the game into a heavy piece ending collecting the newly minted d-pawn along the way. The pawn won turns out to be only a temporary gain. The decision may have been influenced by the situations on the other boards. Schenectady appeared to be winning on boards two and three. Board four clearly was losing with Farrell’s Queen running wild behind the enemy lines and Barnes’ Queen was out of play. A draw therefore would clinch the match win for Schenectady and obviate the need to get involved in complications.

24.exd5 Rxd5 25.Rdg1 g6 26.Qe3 Kg7 27.Rh4 Rh8 28.c4,..

Regaining the pawn and forcing off the Queens. The resulting double Rook ending is not without danger for both sides. Double Rook endings often resolve into draws because two pairs of Rooks possess both tremendous defensive and offensive strength.

28..., Rd7 29.Qxe5+ Qf6 30.Qxf6+ Kxf6 31.Rf4+ Kg7 32.Kc2 Rhd8 33.Re1 ½–½

If now 33..., Rxd3 34 Re7 Rd2+; and the game is equal albeit there are things which have to be treated with care. For example, White can’t try to hide his King from checks by running to a7. If 35 Kb3 bxc4+ 36 Kxc4 R8d4+ 37 Rxd4 cxd4 38 b4 Ra2 39 Kxd4 Rxa3; and Black is better

The best bet for Black is 33..., bxc4 34 dxc4 Rd2+ 35 Kc1 R8d4; or 35..., f5; when Black is somewhat better, but as the old adage says: all double Rook endings are drawn. In the rush to collect game scores I missed the closing few moves of this game and don’t know just how the game ended.

More soon.

Board 3 from the Saratoga A - SCC A Match

As far down as board 3 these two teams fielded players that could well be first boards for other teams. Last year Philip Sells collected both the Schenectady and the Saratoga Championship titles, and Gordon Magat has maintained an Expert rating for years in these deflationary times. The game lived up to its promise of fighting chess!

Magat, Gordon - Sells, Philip [B40]

Saratoga A v SCC A CDCL Match Saratoga Springs, NY, 16.05.2011

Board 3

1.Nf3 e6 2.e4 c5 3.Nc3 Nc6 4.g3 a6 5.Bg2 d6

While not common, this position has been played by many of the best from both sides. As far back as 1925 Levenfish tried it out as White in the USSR Championship, in the 70’s Gufeld did the same. From the 1980s right up to today players such as Benjamin, Christiansen, Thachiev, Svidler and Gavrikov have taken the White side against equally strong opponents. We can conclude that there are no egregious errors so far by either side, it is all GM practice.

6.a4!?,..

Gordon parts from the GMs. Here the most common, almost universal, move is 6 d4, or occasionally 6 0-0, followed by 7 d4. The text has only two examples in my databases, both with non-GM players and both won by White! Here is one example;

Xu, Hanbing (2328) - Ibanez Terradellas, Eduardo (2289) [B23]

Budapest FS08 IM-A Budapest (8), 12.08.2000

1.e4 c5 2.Nc3 a6 3.a4 Nc6 4.g3 e6 5.Bg2 d6 6.Nf3 Nf6 7.0–0 Be7 8.d3 0–0 9.Ng5 h6 10.Nh3 e5 11.f4 Bg4 12.Qd2 Nd4 13.Nf2 Bf3 14.Nfd1 Bxd1 15.Qxd1 b5 16.Nd5 Nxd5 17.exd5 c4 18.axb5 cxd3 19.Qxd3 Qb6 20.Rxa6 Rxa6 21.bxa6 Nxc2+ 22.Kh1 Nb4 23.Qb3 exf4 24.Rxf4 Rc8 25.Be3 Qxa6 26.Qxb4 Bg5 27.h4 Bxf4 28.Bxf4 Qe2 29.Qe4 Qxb2 30.Bxd6 Qb5 31.Bf4 Re8 32.Qf3 Re1+ 33.Kh2 Qb6 34.d6 Qg1+ 35.Kh3 Rd1 36.Qa8+ Kh7 37.Qe4+ Kg8 38.Qe8+ Kh7 39.Be4+ 1–0

6..., Nf6 7.0–0 Be7 8.Re1 0–0 9.e5,..

We see Mr. Magat has a different and more aggressive intent than did Hanbing Xu.

9..., Nd5 10.Nxd5!?,..

I’d prefer 10 exd6, avoiding giving Black a potentially powerful mass of pawns in the center. Deep Rybka suggests that too. Some time was spent on this position trying to figure out what was bothering Gordon about the position. There seems to be nothing specific that should concern White about taking on d6. It must be, by elimination, that Magat just thought the dynamic central pawn formation was not a danger. That probably was an incorrect conclusion.

10..., exd5 11.d4 dxe5 12.dxe5 Be6 13.c3 Qb6 14.Qe2 h6 15.Bf4 Rad8 16.Red1 Rd7

Black has gone about massing his forces in the center, and the push of the d-pawn is definitely in the wind. White, on the other hand, has overprotected e5, but is not clear how he means to undertake active operations.

17.Ne1?!,..

Beginning a doubtful plan. Possible is 17 Be3, threatening 18 b4. Black then would likely play 17..., Qc7. The game could continue; 18 Ne1 Nxe5 19 Bf4 f6 20 Nd3 Bd6; and so on. Black will eventually have to return the pawn because the d5 point is too hard to defend, and the game then tends towards equality

17..., Rfd8 18.g4?,..

This allows Black to claim a significant advantage. I can’t find any real improvement for White with other moves. Active but dangerous for White is 18 h4 d4 19 Qh5, making gestures of a sacrificial attack on the Black King. Philip Sells is not one to be shook by risky attacks. He would no doubt search out 19..., Bf8; shoring up his King’s field and then proceed with his operations in the middle of the board.

18..., d4

The coming push to d3 is unstoppable because of the vulnerability of b2.

19.Bg3 c4 20.Bxc6 d3 21.Qe4 bxc6 22.Rd2 Bd5 23.a5,..

Not great move, but it is very hard to be critical when all options are bleak. White is facing difficulties which ever way he goes. It does not look like more resistance can be made with 23 Qe3, for Black is on top after 23..., Qxe3 24 fxe3 Rb7 25 Kf2 Rdb8 26 Ra2. The other try, 26 b4, is effectively met by 26..., c5; when if White continues 27 bxc5 Bxc5 28 e6? Re8; and Black is ready shift his active Rooks suddenly to the K-side where they threaten the White King. Black is very close to winning in this line.

23..., Qxf2+ 24.Bxf2 Bxe4 25.h4 Rb8 26.Ng2 Rdb7 27.Ra2 Rb5 28.Ne3 Bd8 29.Nf5 Bd5

I may have erred in my score keeping and reversed the last two moves by Black. Done in reverse order they make more sense.

30.Nd6 Rxa5 31.Rxa5 Bxa5

Time was running down for both sides. The time trouble was not of an epic order for Sells, he who has made twenty-plus moves with but a second on his clock. It did, however, have an effect on the play of the game. Black has four, soon to be three extra pawns. All he has to do is keep his wits about him, and that is a skill we have seen Mr. Sells demonstrate several times in the past. The reminder of the game is not much more than mopping up.

32.g5 hxg5 33.Ba7 Ra8 34.Bd4 gxh4 35.Rh2 Bd8 36.Nf5 Rb8 37.e6 Bxe6 38.Nxg7 Bd5 39.Ne8 Bg5 40.Nf6+ Bxf6 41.Bxf6 Kh7 42.Bxh4 Kg6 0–1

The game may have gone on a little father. The flurry of all games ending close together kept me from writing down the final moves. A good fight between strong players that decided by the misapprehension of a transformation in the center.

More soon.

More on SCC A - Saratoga A Match

The board 2 game from the Saratoga A - Schenectady A CDCL match played Sunday last was a veteran versus youth confrontation. Mr. Feinberg is a long time Expert who returned to the game after a hiatus of some years about three years ago. Mr. Chi is a quickly rising scholastic player. Most recently Patrick won the Schenectady Club Championship, the youngest ever to do so.

In the past extraordinary results from young players made big news in the chess world. Morphy conquering Europe in the 1850s, Sammy Reshevsky giving simultaneous exhibitions as an eight-year old and Bobby Fischer winning the US Championship as a teenager made big headlines even outside of the closed universe of chess. These events were headline worthy because of rarity, it was exceptional for youth to triumph over experience in chess as elsewhere. That has not been so true these last ten or twenty years. Carlssen came out of the not very large chess culture of Norway to be the top rated player in the world as a teenager, Robson and many others have garnered the GM title long before they had to consider shaving regularly, and if you go to weekend Swiss tournaments it is no longer surprising to see someone just barely able to see over the edge of the chessboard taking full and half-points from Class A and Expert players.

Why this is so is a question to ponder. I believe the rise of the Internet is the root cause. There is a tidal wave of chess knowledge on the ’net, and it increases almost daily. We all have observed the way in which youth seem to understand how to effectively use the Internet in all its forms from their very earliest years. The knowledge necessary to become a strong player is far more available now than at any time in the past.

Bare knowledge is not enough to produce strong players. Practice is also needed. Local efforts, such as Brother John’s Make the Right Move events, have certainly had a profound effect. The ready availability of knowledge and a growth of opportunities for practice are giving rise resurgence in American chess. The Schenectady club has been the beneficiary of this phenomenon. Deepak Aaron, a past Club Champion and now working towards a USCF Senior Master (2400) title, Patrick Chi, this year’s Champion and Deepak’s brother Dilip, a finalist in the Club Championship this year, are all products of this. The burgeoning of youthful success in chess is all to the good. It spreads the game I love to more folks and ensures lots of chess for me to contemplate in my declining years.

All that said, it is not easy being “the old lion” defending his turf when youth comes a’ calling. Jonathan Feinberg makes a determined effort in today’s game.

Chi, Patrick - Feinberg, Jonathan [E24]

Saratoga A v SCC A CDCL Match Saratoga Springs, NY, 16.05.2011

Board 2

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!?

Mr. Feinberg, Steve Taylor and I spent a little while looking at the game after play was complete. Unfortunately Patrick had to leave, Monday is a school day. We did not pick up that this move was a mistake, or at least somewhat doubtful. Research in the databases uncovered that the masters much prefer 8..., Qc7; threatening to uncover an attack in the Bc4 by capturing on d4. With the Queen at c7, Black has a much easier time of devaluing the White center than after the text.

9.Ne2 Na5

In the postmortem I questioned this move. Why not get on with development playing 9..., Bd7? Both Taylor and Feinberg saw opportunity for the Knight at c4.

10.cxd5 exd5 11.0–0 Re8 12.Ng3 b6 13.Rb1 cxd4

Another way to play this position is 13..., c4. Carlos Varela tried that approach against Patrick in the Schenectady A - RPI match at the end of March. It did not turn out well for him because of later errors. If Black pushes to pawn to c4, he must also know that .., h7-h5; followed by .., h5-h4; if possible, has to be tried. Leave out the K-side pawn charge and White gets to effectively break in the center with e3-e4. The purpose of the h-pawn advance is to dislocate the Ng3 reducing support for the e-pawn advance. I don’t know that in the long run Black’s game all that great, but there certainly are chances: the Nc6 can go to a5 eyeing the b3 square, the Bc8 may be deployed to b7 to hold back the e3-e4 push, or it may find work to do at g4.

14.cxd4 Bb7 15.Bd2 Bc6?!

Taylor and Feinberg identified this as an error. The threat to be answered is 16 Bxa5, winning the Bb7. Mr. Taylor pointed out 15.., Nc4; is a reasonable try. After 15..., Nc4 16 Bxc4 dxc4 17 Qc1 Rc8 18 Bc3 Nd5 19 e4 Nxc3; whose pawns are better is not entirely clear. I rather like White here, but Black has chances if he maintains his composure. Other possible moves are; 15.., Qd7; and 15..., Rb8.

16.Re1 Nb7

More active is 16..., Nc4. The ensuing play would then be a tough positional battle about whether the White d&e duo can be devalued in some manner. As long as they are side by side they are strong, if one pushes forward to the 5t h Maybe Black can make use of the square released.

17.Rc1 Rc8 18.Qb3 Nd6?!

Jonathan saw this as a possible error. He thought perhaps 18..., g6; covering f5 was better here.

19.Bb4 Qd7?

Here 19..., g6; is definitely superior.

20.Bxd6 Qxd6 21.Nf5 Qd8 22.Qb4 Re6!?

Black is reacting to the lead of White. Silman makes the point repeatedly in his writings that it is a mistake to take an opponent’s threats at face value. A serious search for alternatives must be made. Here Black can play 22..., Bb7?!; but White is better after 23 Nd6 Rxc1 24 Rxc1 Re7 25 Nxb7 Rxb7 26 Qc3, thus the text may be the best choice.

23.Ng3 g6 24.e4 h5?

This definitely an error. The move loosens up the defenses of the Black King. Black must try something more adventurous here. It is always difficult to identify the right point where you shift from positional play trying to keep the balance to a tactical mode. This is the point for Black in this game. The sequence; 24..., dxe4 25 fxe4 Bb7 26 d5 Rxc1 27 Rxc1 Re5 is promising for Black. If 28 Qc3 Qe7 29 Qc7 Nxd5; and the swirl of tactics seem to favor Black. Or alternatively, 28 Qa4 Qd6 29 Qxa7 Re7 30 Qa4 Qf4; and Black is equal. Strongest for White in this line is 28 Nf1, intending to bring the Knight to f3 or c4 as the situation warrants. What is clear is the fight is still on and undecided. After the text White has the advantage.

25.e5 Nh7?

Compounding the problem. The attack with f3-f4 and f4-f5 is looming. The try 25..., h4?!; offers some hope of confusing the issue, but after 26 exf6 Rxe1+ 27 Qxe1 hxg3 28 Qe7 Be8 29 Rxc8 Qxc8 30 hxg3 Qc1+ 31 Bf1 Ba4; White is much better. Note; 31..., Bb5?; is lost against 32 Qd8+ Kh7 33 Qf8. After 31..., Ba4; White has the resource; 32 f4, breaking the diagonal c1-h6 where Black could get a perpetual check. With that option eliminated, the White Queen gains some freedom. The need to guard against a check on the back rank by the Queen followed by Qf8 with mate the next, constrains the Black Queen’s activity.

26.f4 Bd7 27.f5 Rec6 28.Rxc6 Rxc6 29.e6,..

Good also is 29 fxg6.

29...fxe6 30.fxg6 Nf6 31.Qd2 Kg7 32.Rf1 1–0

White has a winning advantage and cashed it in shortly. The games all were finishing at nearly the same moment, and I was unable to obtain the complete score of this one.

More soon.

An Update of the CDCL and a Game From the last Geezers Match

Sunday evening in Saratoga the A teams from Saratoga and Schenectady met in one of the fixtures for the League. These two teams have most often fought for first place in the CDCL. Many times their match determines the League winner. That may be true again this year but not in quite the same way as usual. Schenectady A won with a 2 ½ - 1 ½ score. That means all the top contenders; Albany, Schenectady and Saratoga A teams have dropped at least one match. Schenectady and Saratoga also conceded a draw each to the Uncle Sam Club of Troy.

Schenectady’s second team, the Geezers, is undefeated and has given up no drawn matches. The fate of the Geezers lies entirely in their own hands. If the Geezers can win one of the two remaining matches against Albany A or Saratoga A, they will no do worse than tie for the title on match points. If they draw both, a less likely outcome, the title is theirs. Plenty of drama in the next couple of weeks as the serious contenders play each other. One strong team, Albany B, is just about out of the running for first place in the League with two losses. If the Geezers lose both matches against Albany A and Saratoga A, then the A teams from Schenectady, Saratoga and Albany are still in the race with a chance for first.

Here is a summary of the results of the Saratoga A - Schenectady A match:

On board 1 Steve Taylor as White came out of the opening against Deepak Aaron somewhat worse. In a tense middle game Mr. Taylor appeared to not quite find a way to equalize. In really terrible time trouble, Taylor came up with a neat idea. Even though he had to move instantly, Steve held the draw against the young star.

On board two Patrick Chi won from Jonathan Feinberg. Jonathan and I had the opportunity to go over his game afterwards along with Steve Taylor. Some of the ideas found will be explored in the notes in my next blog.

Phil Sells defeated Gordon Magot on board 3 in a complicated struggle in a very Closed Sicilian Defense.

Board 4 saw Gray Farrell win over John Barnes in another Closed Sicilian. It was another complicated affair. Mr. Barnes got his Queen misplaced on move 15, and passed on a small combination that could have corrected that flaw in his game on move 19. Afterwards, Mr. Farrell took control of the game while the White Queen was remote from the scene of the action.

Some weeks back I announced my retirement from serious chess. Later the readers may have noted my name appearing in match results. So what’s up? The retirement still holds, but my long time captain, Richard Chu approached me to return to active play for a single match versus Saratoga A in early March. The attraction was a pairing against Gordon Magat, an old friend and an opponent to whom I foolishly resigned a perfectly good position in the recent AACC Championship. The temptation to have another try for a better result was too great to pass up. That match fell through because of scheduling conflicts. Shortening a long story, I found myself playing more Geezers matches. Then the Geezers won and kept winning. Richard prevailed on me to stay with the team. Now, down to the last few matches, returning to full retirement is too much like abandoning my team mates of these many years. So, I am calling this my “farewell tour”, in the same fashion as the Who and the Rolling Stones have done.

Arthur Alowitz and I have met often over the years. He most always gives me a hard time over the board. I recall a tough fight we had a few years ago where, in bad time trouble, I had to bang out a bunch of moves in a B+N against a bare King ending. As luck would have it, that was an ending I had studied in my youth and the theory stuck with me. I had the B+N and was able to get to the mating position before my flag fell, but it was a near thing. This time Arthur takes an unusual route in the opening. The ensuing play may be of some interest even though the game was not particularly well played by either side..

Alowitz, Arthur - Little, Bill [B06]

Albany Area Chess Club B v Geezers, CDCL Match, Guilderland, NY, 11.05.2011

Board 3

1.e4 d6 2.d4 Nf6 3.f3 g6 4.c3 Bg7 5.Be3 0–0 6.Bd3 Nbd7

Not at all a usual set up. Interestingly, I found several games with this formation but with the colors reversed.

7.Ne2 c5

Which is better 7..., c5; or 7..., e5? I could not decide. Black plays against the White center after 7..., e5; in a different manner; 7..., e5 8 0-0 Qe7 9 Nd2 exd4 10 cxd4 Nd5 11 Bf2 Nb4; getting Black close to equality.

8.0–0 Qc7 9.Nd2 a6 10.a4 b6 11.Rb1 Bb7 12.d5?!,..

This looks doubtful. The reasonable purpose behind advancing the a-pawn to the forth rank and putting the Rook on b1 must be to play b2-b4 at some point. Now seems the appropriate moment to grab more space on the Q-side by pushing the b-pawn. The text clears one obstruction from the a1-h8 diagonal making the Bg7 better.

12..., Ne5 13.Bc2 b5!?

Black is seduced by opportunities on the Q-side. This move is not quite as questionable as White’s 12th , but it is not exactly correct either. Resolving questions about what the center will look like with 13..., e6; is more to the point. Then 14 dxe6 fxe6 15 Nf4 Rae8 16 Qe2 d5; and the Black Bishops are beginning to have a say in the game. Alternatively, 14 c4 exd5 15 cxd5, and 15..., b5; then has more bite.

14.axb5?,..

This is a mistake. A key idea for White is to get access to d4 for his minor pieces. To that end 14 b4, is best.

14..., axb5 15.b3,..

While it is not so good as on the previous move, 15 b4, is the best try for White.

15..., Ra3?!

Not an outright error, but it is off-track. Discouraging a later b3-b4 with 15..., Rfc8; is sensible.

16.Ra1,..

Once more the right move is 16 b4. White too readily agrees with Black’s evaluation of the position; control of the a-file is the most important feature for the moment therefore he plays to eliminate a pair of Rooks to mitigate danger there. After 16 b4 c4 17 Ra1 Rxa1 18 Qxa1 Ra8 19 Qb1 e6; and Black is just slightly better because his Bishops promise greater activity in the future, and he has the resource ..,e6-e5; to displace the well posted Nd4. Offsetting that is the possibility for White of Qb1-b2and Rd1-a1 getting control of the a-file for himself.

16..., Rfa8 17.Rxa3 Rxa3 18.Qc1 Qa5 19.Nb1 Ra2 20.Bd2 Qa8

This is how I thought the game would continue. The Queen on a8 maintains my hold on the a-file and prepares for an eventual .., e7-e6; to pressure the center.

21.b4 Ra6?

There is no shot for White that this move allows. Its flaw is the utter wrong headedness from the positional viewpoint. Correct is 21..., Nc4; and 22..., Nxd2; obtaining the Bishop pair just as the position is opening up. That way gives Black a solid edge, not winning but substantial. After the game move Black has only the slightest of advantages.

22.bxc5 dxc5 23.Be3 Qc8?

Another positional fumble. White now can equalize or nearly so. Better was 23..., Nfd7; keeping some advantage.

24.Na3,..

At first blush, Rybka suggests 24 Nd2, as better. Playing out the line with 24..., Nfd7 25 Qb1, or 25 h3, shows Black rather quickly getting the upper hand. The text is another try that is worthwhile.

24..., Rb6?

Essentially throwing away all of the advantage gained thus far. Better 24..., Ra5; defending the pawn from the side. I fixed on the notion of pushing the b-pawn. Putting the Rook behind it made some sense only because my vision of the game narrowed down to just that one idea..

25.Bf4?,..

It is better to prepare f3-f4, with 25 h3.

25..., Ned7!?

Both sides have misplayed the middle game badly. I fully intended to put the Nf6 on d7. When the moment arrived unconsciously I plucked the wrong(?) horseman and dropped on d7. As my fingers left the piece I began kicking myself. The next few minutes were used to recognize the changed circumstances and to dig up some sort of new plan.

The truth of the matter only came to light as the game was analyzed. 25..., Nfd7; was not such a good move as I thought while playing. One line in particular is bothersome; 25.., Nfd7 26 Be3! Ba6 27 Qd2, and White is beginning to organize his forces. So, it turns out the move played was better than the move intended. Maybe my “hand” knew better than my brain.

26.Bd3 Ba6 27.Qb2?,..

White did not quite see all the possibilities in the position. Putting Queen on the b-file makes the pawn push to b4 stronger. It is better to play 27 Qe3, and after 27..., b4 28 cxb4 cxb4 29 Rc1!, White has the better position. If Black improves with 28..., Rxb4 29 Nc2 Bxd3 30 Qxd3 c4 31 Qd2 Rb2; Black has only a small advantage. The fight will be about whether the advanced c-pawn is strong or a target.

27..., b4 28.Bxa6 Qxa6 29.Nc2?,..

An oversight. Required is 29 cxb4, then the simplest line; 29...,cxb4 30 Nb1 Nxd5; wins a pawn giving Black a solid advantage, but there are many moves to play before Black could claim a win. A more challenging calculation is; 29..., Nh5 30 b5 Bxb2 31 bxa6 Nxf4 32 Nc4 Nxe2+ 33 Kf2 Rxa6 34 Kxe2 Ra2; leaving Black up a piece with a technical win.

29..., Qxe2 30.cxb4 Nxd5 31.Qc1 Nxf4 32.Qxf4 Qxc2 0–1

The shock of the oversight was such that Arthur did not find the moves that might have delayed the loss. Capturing on b4 on move 30 let loose all the Black pieces. Of course, down a piece the game was lost in any event, but we all should take a lesson from the Grandmasters; be difficult for your opponent even in a lost position. He is human and can blunder too.

More soon.

Board 1 from the AACC B v Geezers

The bright spot for the Albany B team was board 1. There John Morse notched a victory over Michael Mockler using an opening sequence on which he holds the patent.

Morse, John - Mockler, Michael [A45]

Alb B v Geezers CDCL Match Guilderland, NY, 11.05.2011

1.d4 e6 2.f4 Nf6 3.Nf3 b6 4.Be3!?,..

You will search long to find any examples of this kind of development by anyone but John Morse. Its rarity has the advantage of putting both sides on their own. They can’t rely on theory and decades of GM practice to guide them through to a playable middle game. All that is true, but the idea is suspect. Taking a couple of moves to “develop” the dark squared Bishop to the unpromising post on f2 should not give White any advantage. Nevertheless, Morse has won a number of games from strong opponents with his invention.

4..., Bb7 5.Bf2 Be7 6.e3 c5 7.Bd3 cxd4 8.exd4 Qc7 9.g3 Nc6 10.c3 Rc8

Black is equal and maybe slightly better. The Bf2 does not strike one as particularly impressive.

11.0–0 0–0 12.Nbd2 Na5 13.Qe2 d6 14.f5 exf5 15.Bxf5 Rce8 16.Rfe1 Bd8 17.Qd3 g6 18.Bh3 Bd5 19.b3 Be6

Everything has been straight forward. Both sides have gone about carrying out their plans. White has caused Black to accept the worse pawn formation. The Bf2 may have a future if White gets to play c3-c4, and d4-d5. The Bishop can then go to d4, a pretty good post and quite a resurrection for that piece.

Black has to be aware that White has a resource in the constrained situation of the Black Rf8. The possibility of Bf2/e3/h6 needs to be addressed. This suggests 19..., Rxe1+; to take care of the problem. Then Black has to concern himself about the c3-c4 and d4-d5 plan mentioned. To deal with the potential breakout by White a line of play for Black maybe: 19..., Rxe1+ 20 Rxe1 b5 21 Bf1 Bc6; and the balance is held. If White snaps up the b-pawn; 21 Qxb5 Qxc3 22 Bg2 Bb6; gives Black some advantage.

After the game move White has a solid edge. Black will have to be very accurate to avoid bigger problems. Coming pressure down the e-file threatens to win material.

20.Bxe6 fxe6 21.Re2 Ng4?

In many games where Morse uses his invention, we see the opponent spending time to trade off this effectively placed Knight for the Bf2. In a broad sense the temptation is gambit-like. Black gets a Bishop for a Knight and removes any chance of the c&d-pawn advance creating the dangerous d4 outpost for the Bishop. For White; he is happy Black uses time to remove the Bf2, and the time granted will be used to improve the position of his remaining pieces. Mr. Mockler has in mind some idea of gaining a chance to advance the e-pawn successfully dissolving the weakness. A reasonable notion that just falls short.

I believe Black should attend to the weakness at e3 with 21..., Qd7; waiting for White to move the Nf3 to g5 before uncovering his own threat with .., Ng4. Play could continue; 21..., Qd7 22 Rae1 Nc6 23 Ng5 ng4 24 Ndf3 Bxg5 25 Nxg5 Rf5; when Black is well on his way to getting in the .., e6-e5; advance that sets his game to rights.

22.Rae1 e5?

Completing the error. Here there is good chance to keep the game closer to level with 22..., Nc6! Then if 23 Rxe6 Nce5 24 Nxe5 Nxe5 25 R6xe5 dxe5 26 d5, and Black has the Exchange for a pawn. This line favors White notwithstanding the material plus for Black. The strong passed d-pawn and the very strong e4 outpost for the Knight in support suggests White has good winning possibilities. And, if White takes another path ignoring the e-pawn for the moment say with 23 Be3, a complicated mess in the center results after 23..., e5. It gives up the pawn but keeps more material on the board than in the game. More material on the board the greater are the technical problems for the side with the extra pawn. The text allows simplification along with the win of material.

23.dxe5 Nxf2 24.Kxf2 dxe5 25.Qd5+,..

This maybe the resource that Black overlooked in his calculations. Without it Black is not so bad. The loss of a whole healthy pawn in a game between these two experienced opponents usually means the loss of the game also.

25..., Kg7 26.Rxe5 Rxe5 27.Qxe5+ Qxe5 28.Rxe5 Bf6 29.Re3 Bg5 30.Rd3 1–0

White has a substantial advantage. He will make good use of his active Rook to help engineer the exchange of a pair of minor pieces or the Rooks. Either way advances the cause of the extra pawn. Faced with a long and hopeless task of defense Black resigned.

Just before the Morse - Mockler game ended, I was able to win my game with Alowitz. So early in the match the score was even. We had to wait for a bit, then surprisingly Montross won what had, at one moment, appeared to be a bad game against Eson and the Geezers led! There was another ninety minutes of anxiety, including some extreme time trouble, before John Phillips brought home the third point to win the match.

More soon.

The Geezers Take the Lead and a Game From last Week

Wednesday evening the Schenectady Geezers played the AACC B team. The Geezers emerged victorious by the score 3 - 1. The results by board are:

On board 1 John Morse, White for Albany, defeated Michael Mockler in Morse’s pet opening line; an early f2-f4 with Be3/f2 before the e-pawn moves. The game ended on move 30.

Board 2, the last game to finish, saw John Phillips of the Geezers win from Peter Henner. The opening was the Queen’s Gambit Accepted with an early e4 and e5. Henner put up a stubborn defense after going down the Exchange. He made stout resistance before resigning on move 57.

Board 3 was a short, sharp contest where Bill Little for the Geezers won from Arthur Alowitz. Arthur lost the thread of the fight in a Pirc somewhere about move 26 and the game ended on move 32.

The game on board 4 was complicated, at least as seen from the sidelines. Eventually, Bill Montross of the Geezers defeated Charles Eson. At one point I thought Eson was close to winning. The next thing heard was Montross had carried the day.

This result puts the Geezers in first place for the moment in the League with 5 - 0 match score and 14 ½ game points. They still have to face the two strong contenders; Albany A and Saratoga A. If the Geezers can draw both matches first place is within their grasp. That will be a considerable challenge for the Geezers.

Now back to recent games. When the two Albany Area Chess Club teams met in a CDCL match last week the contest promised to be a close run thing. The teams are close in strength this year. Both have rated Experts who have in the past broken through to master ratings playing on the first board. The battle on board 1 was a tense affair, and a game between Dean Howard and John Morse is always of interest.

Howard, Dean - Morse, John [C68]

AACC A v AACC B CDCL Match Guilderland, NY, 06.05.2011

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Bxc6 dxc6 5.0–0 Bd6 6.d4,..

Researching this opening in the databases found a fairly high number of draws with low move counts. The Exchange Ruy Lopez seems to be one path where White, if he is so inclined, can steer the game to a peaceful conclusion on the international circuit. If, on the other hand, White wants a fight he can aim for a battle as the examples below illustrate:

(3885) Bernstein, Ossip - Nikolaev, B [C68]

RUS-ch03 Kiev (3), 1903

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Bxc6 dxc6 5.0–0 Bd6 6.d4 exd4 7.Qxd4 f6 8.Nbd2 Be6 9.Nc4 Ne7 10.b3 Bxc4 11.Qxc4 Qd7 12.Bb2 0–0–0 13.Rad1 Ng6 14.Nd4 Be5 15.Qe2 Nf4 16.Qf3 Qf7 17.Nf5 Bxb2 18.Qxf4 g6 19.Ne3 Be5 20.Qg4+ Kb8 21.Rxd8+ Rxd8 22.Rd1 Rxd1+ 23.Qxd1 Qe7 24.g3 Bd6 25.Qd3 Bc5 26.Nc4 Ka7 27.Kg2 Qe6 28.Ne3 Be7 29.Qd4+ Kb8 30.Qc4 Qxc4 31.Nxc4 Kc8 32.Kf3 Kd7 33.e5 b5 34.exf6 Bxf6 35.Ne3 Kd6 36.Ke4 Kc5 37.Ng4 Bg7 38.Ne5 Kd6 39.Nd3 Bc3 40.f4 a5 41.g4 c5 42.h4 Bf6 43.g5 Bh8 44.c4 c6 45.f5 gxf5+ 46.Kxf5 Bd4 47.a4 bxa4 48.bxa4 Ke7 49.Nc1 Bc3 50.Nb3 Bb4 51.h5 Kf7 52.g6+ hxg6+ 53.hxg6+ Kg7 54.Kg5 Bc3 55.Nxc5 Be5 56.Kf5 Bc3 57.Ne6+ Kg8 58.Nd8 c5 59.Nb7 Bb4 60.Ke6 Kg7 61.Kd5 Kxg6 62.Nxc5 Kf6 63.Nb7 Ke7 64.Kc6 Ke6 65.Kb5 Kd7 66.Nxa5 Be1 67.Kb6 Bf2+ 68.Kb7 Kd6 69.Nb3 1–0

(104875) Adorjan, Andras (2510) - Nicevski, Risto (2395) [C68]

Skopje Skopje (1), 1976

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Bxc6 dxc6 5.0–0 Bd6 6.d4 exd4 7.Qxd4 f6 8.Re1 Ne7 9.e5 fxe5 10.Nxe5 0–0 11.Bg5 Be6 12.Nc3 Rf5 13.Nf3 Rxg5 14.Rxe6 Rg6 15.Rae1 Rxe6 16.Rxe6 Ng6 17.Qc4 Kh8 18.h4 Qg8 19.Re4 Qxc4 20.Rxc4 Ne5 21.Nxe5 Bxe5 22.Re4 Bf6 23.Kf1 Kg8 24.Nd1 h5 25.g3 Kf7 26.Ke2 b5 27.c3 a5 28.a4 Rb8 29.Kd3 Rd8+ 30.Kc2 Re8 31.Rxe8 Kxe8 32.b3 Kd7 33.Kd3 Kd6 34.Ne3 Kc5 35.Nf1 b4 36.c4 Bc3 37.g4 hxg4 38.Ne3 g3 39.fxg3 Be1 40.Nf5 g6 41.Ne7 Kd6 42.Nxg6 1–0

6..., Bg4!?

This has been known for a long time as not being anything special for Black. White has some theoretical advantage, but it is nothing out of the ordinary.

7.dxe5 Bxf3 8.Qxf3 Bxe5 9.Qb3,..

To find a game with this move between masters we have to go all the way back to the century before last. Blackburn was Grandmaster strength in those long ago storied days and something of a character. He and Steinitz had a career long feud. Blackburn was a large man and Steinitz considerably was smaller. Blackburn had large appetites to go along with his size, particularly for drink. When they played in tournaments together, Blackburn would roll into the hotel in which they were staying late in the evening and in his cups, roaring for Steinitz to come out and take his beating like a man. The World Champion wisely avoided physical confrontation. He took his revenge in the chess magazine he published in New York. If the second hand accounts I have read are to be believed, ripping criticism of Blackburn’s play was the mildest of the comments Mr. Steinitz made about his arch foe in print. Schallopp was no slouch himself. He had wins over such stars as Zukertort, Showalter, Charousek, Max Lange and Mason. I can find little about his career other than in the tournaments found show him finishing often in the middle of the huge 20+ player fields that were the norm of the day. My guess he was somewhere about IM strength in today’s parlance. He did defeat Blackburn both times they met in 1880s.

(827) Schallopp, Emil - Blackburne, Joseph Henry [C68]

DSB–05.Kongress Frankfurt (10), 1887

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Bxc6 dxc6 5.0–0 Bd6 6.d4 Bg4 7.dxe5 Bxf3 8.Qxf3 Bxe5 9.Qb3 b5 10.Nd2 Ne7 11.Nf3 Ng6 12.Nxe5 Nxe5 13.Qc3 Qf6 14.f4 Nd7 15.e5 Qe6 16.Be3 0–0 17.Rad1 f5 18.Rd3 Rf7 19.Qa5 Nf8 20.Rfd1 Qc4 21.R1d2 Ne6 22.Qc3 g5 23.fxg5 f4 24.Bf2 Nxg5 25.Qxc4 bxc4 26.Rd4 f3 27.h4 Ne6 28.Rxc4 fxg2 29.Rxc6 Nf4 30.Be3 Re8 31.Bxf4 Rxf4 32.Rxg2+ Kh8 33.Rxc7 Re4 34.Ra7 R4xe5 35.Rxa6 Re4 36.h5 Rh4 37.h6 Rd4 38.c3 Rd1+ 39.Kh2 Rd5 40.b4 Rh5+ 41.Kg1 Re1+ 42.Kf2 Rf5+ 43.Kxe1 Rf1+ 44.Ke2 Rf2+ [44...Re1+ 45.Kf3 Re3+ 46.Kf4 Re4+ 47.Kg3 Re3+ 48.Kh2 Rh3+ 49.Kg1 Rh1+ 50.Kf2 Rf1+ 51.Ke3 Rf3+ 52.Kd4 Rd3+ 53.Kc4 Rxc3+ 54.Kb5 Rc5+ 55.Ka4 Ra5+ 56.Kb3 Ra3+ 57.Kc4] ½–½

9..., b6

Most of the examples found in the databases have Black playing 9..., b5; instead of the text. Rybka says that is marginally better. I don’t quite see why that is so.

10.c3!?,..

A trifle slow and it cuts off the Queen from easy communication with the Kingside. The typical plan for White is 10 Kh1, preparing f2-f4, and Nb1-d2. The Black Bishop on e5 is just a bit awkward with f2-f4 being threatened at some point in the future.

10..., Ne7 11.Be3,..

Playing 11 f4, right away is more insistent.

11..., g6?

Strangely this normal appearing move is wrong. White obtains a definite pull after the text. Deep Rybka suggests 11..., Qd3; as correct for Black. The move seems to take advantage of the slightly out of play situation of the White Queen. Play could continue; 12 Nd2 0-0 13 Rad1 Ng6 14 Rfe1 Qb5; and if 15 Qxb5 axb5; and the odd looking cluster of Black Q-side pawns are not so bad. White likely has to play 16 a3, then 16..., c5; and Black has reached a satisfactory early endgame position.

12.Nd2 0–0 13.Nf3 Bg7 14.Bd4!?,..

More natural, and better according to Rybka, is 14 Rfe1, giving White the more comfortable game. The game move permits Black to take some say in the center.

14..., h6?!

Which for some reason he does not do. Logical is 14..., c5; then 15 Bxg7 Kxg7 16 Rad1 Qe8; with good chances for Black to instigate mass trades on the d-file getting close to equality.

15.Rad1 Qc8?!

Black has visions of getting his Queen out to make threats on the K-side. There is a little tactical trick inherent in that idea and I don’t thing Mr. Morse spotted it. Safer is 15..., Qe8.

16.Rd3 Rd8 17.Rfd1 Qg4 18.Bxg7 Rxd3 19.Rxd3 Kxg7 20.Qxf7+!,..

Whoops! Black loses a vital pawn, and worse, White has a big central space advantage. Deficits in material and space are too much of an edge for even so strong a fighter as John Morse to overcome.

20... Kxf7 21.Ne5+ Ke6 22.Nxg4 h5 23.Ne3 a5 24.f4 a4 25.a3 b5 1–0

At this point my game score becomes undecipherable. Somewhere I missed a move and then transposed something subsequently. Regretfully this is as much of the game that can be reconstructed. I recall from my observation during play; Mr. Dean exploited his advantages logically, and Mr. Morse did his utmost to make things difficult laying traps and seeking tactics. Logic and good technique triumphed, and the game ended about move 57.

More soon.

Another Game From Alb A versus Alb B Match

Today we have a game from the recent CDCL match between the two Albany Area Chess Club teams, A and B. In previous post I mentioned these are two pretty evenly matched teams. The contest on board 2 saw Peter Henner of the B team win a short sharp affair from Tim Wright.

Henner, Peter - Wright, Tim [D05]

Alb A v Alb B CDCL Match Guilderland, NY, 04.05.2011

1.d4 d5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.e3 e6 4.Nbd2 Bd6 5.Bd3 0–0

A standard position from the Colle System with .., e6. This rather symmetrical approach has found little interest from masters or Grand masters. There is a fair number of games in my databases, but mostly the players are under 2200. There are few games available with strong players on both sides. The games below were all I found.

One example from the USSR Championship in 1933 is:

(15686) Yudovich, Mikhail M - Freiman, Sergey Nikolaevich [D05]

URS-ch08 Leningrad, 1933

1.d4 d5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.e3 e6 4.Bd3 Nbd7 5.0–0 Bd6 6.c4 dxc4 7.Bxc4 0–0 8.Nc3 e5 9.e4 exd4 10.Qxd4 Bc5 11.Qd3 Qe7 12.Bf4 c6 13.e5 Ng4 14.Rae1 Nb6 15.Bb3 Qd7 16.Qe4 Qf5 17.h3 Nh6 18.Bxh6 gxh6 19.Qh4 Be6 20.Re4 Nd5 21.Rg4+ Kh8 22.Nxd5 Bxd5 23.Qxh6 Rg8 24.Bc2 1–0

A game with a similar treatment by White from recent times is:

(1127771) Cramling, Pia (2528) - Paehtz, Elisabeth (2449) [D05]

EU-Cup (Women) 11th Feugen (4), 11.10.2006

1.d4 e6 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.e3 d5 4.Bd3 Nbd7 5.0–0 Bd6 6.c4 dxc4 7.Bxc4 a6 8.Qe2 b5 9.Bd3 c5 10.a4 cxd4 11.exd4 b4 12.Nbd2 Bb7 13.a5 Nd5 14.Nc4 Be7 15.Nfe5 N7f6 16.Bg5 h6 17.Bd2 Nc7 18.Nb6 Rb8 19.Rac1 0–0 20.Nc6 Bxc6 21.Rxc6 Ncd5 22.Nc4 Ra8 23.Rc1 Re8 24.h3 Bf8 25.Qf3 Ra7 26.Qg3 Ne7 27.Rd6 Qb8 28.Ne3 Qa8 29.Ng4 Nxg4 30.hxg4 Rc8 31.Rxc8 Qxc8 32.Rb6 Nd5 33.Rb8 Qc6 34.Rxf8+ 1–0

Black can transpose the game into a QID if he wants to change the dynamics. In the example below that works well for him:

(972614) Lputian, Smbat G (2640) - Mista, Aleksander (2497) [E14]

EU-ch 6th Warsaw (8), 26.06.2005

1.d4 d5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.e3 e6 4.Bd3 Nbd7 5.0–0 Bd6 6.Nbd2 0–0 7.c4 b6 8.b3 Bb7 9.Bb2 Qe7 10.Ne5 Rfd8 11.f4 Ne4 12.cxd5 exd5 13.Bxe4 dxe4 14.Qc2 Nf6 15.Nc6 Bxc6 16.Qxc6 Qe6 17.Nc4 Nd5 18.a4 a6 19.Nxd6 Qxd6 20.Qxd6 cxd6 21.Kf2 Rac8 22.Rfc1 Nb4 23.Rxc8 Rxc8 24.Ba3 Nd3+ 25.Kg3 Rc3 26.Bxd6 Rc6 27.Bb8 Rg6+ 28.Kh4 Rxg2 29.f5 Rf2 30.Kg4 Rf3 31.Bg3 Rxe3 32.b4 Rf3 33.b5 axb5 34.axb5 h5+ 35.Kg5 Kh7 36.Be5 e3 37.f6 gxf6+ 38.Bxf6 e2 0–1

6.e4,..

As is seen the cited examples, masters prefer to break with 6 c4.

6..., dxe4 7.Nxe4 Nxe4 8.Bxe4 f5

Somewhat risky is 8..., c5. Then White can roll the dice with 9 Bxh7+!? Kxh7 10 Ng5+ Kg6; not 10..., Kg8 because 11 Qh5, creates a ferocious attack. After 10..., Kg6; theoretically Black should survive, but White gets to have a lot of fun as the Black King is driven from pillar to post for awhile.

9.Bd3 Nd7!?

This move is a trifle slow. Quicker are 9..., c5; 9..., Nc6; or 9..., Na6. Avoiding the dangerous attack by White with 8..., f5; has brought with it some positional problems. Black wants to push .., e6-e5; to trade off the remaining center pawns. After that he will, however, be left with some weaknesses around his King. The f-pawn would be more useful on f7 than it is on f5.

10.0–0 e5!?

Probably better are the alternatives; 10..., Nf6; or 10..., c5. The text could make the e-pawn into a target White may exploit to effectively develop his pieces.

11.Bc4+!?,..

This move turns out well for White. Perhaps better is 11 Bg5. It gets the last minor piece out usefully, and it presents Black with a tough choice; if 11..., Qe8 12 Bc4+ Kh8 13 dxe5 Nxe5 14 Re1 Nxf3+ 15 Qxf3, and Black has to decide what to do. If now 15..., Qg6 16 Be7, at the very least weakening the Black pawns, and if 15..., Qd7; Black’s development looks cumbersome and tardy. Here best just may be 15..., Qa4; then 16 b3 Qa3 17 Bf4 Bd7; offering the b7-pawn to solve many problems.

11..., Kh8 12.Re1?,..

This normal looking move lets Black off the hook. Either 12 Ng5, or 12 Bg5, are better tries.

12..., Nb6?

And this move hands back the initiative. Best is 12..., e4 13 Ng5 Qe8 14 Qe2 Nb6 15 Bb3 h6 16 Nh3 a5 17 a4 Be6; and Black has completely equalized.

13.dxe5 Nxc4 14.exd6 Nxd6?

Better is 14..., Qxd6; solving the problem of where the Queen can go to find a bit of quiet. Mr. Wright may have been concerned that after 14..., Qxd6 15 Qxd6 Nxd6 16 Bf4, the endgame favored White. That is true, but there were good chances for Black to make a successful defense although it would be a long struggle. Tim was no doubt looking for some route that offered an opportunity to play for a win and thought keeping the Queens on was better for that hope.

15.Bg5 Qd7 16.Re7 Qa4

Giving up a pawn does not improve the situation, but it does keep the fight going for some more moves. If 16..., Qc6 17 Qd4 Ne8 18 Rae1, and Black is snuggly tied up with almost nothing to be done to get free.

17.Rxc7 Ne4 18.Bf4 Be6 19.Qd4,..

Now the Queens must come off.

19..., Qxd4 20.Nxd4 Bd5 21.Be5 Nf6 22.Nxf5,..

Equally good is 22 c4 Be4 23 f3

22..., Rfe8 23.Bc3 Rac8

23..., Rf7; is somewhat better, but it will make small difference in the long run. Black is down two pawns, one on each wing. Even the Bishops of opposite color will not present great technical difficulties. White must refrain from too quickly trading down pieces. If he makes use of the superior activity of his pieces, another pawn or two will comes his way, then the opposite color of the Bishops will insufficient to hold the draw.

24.Rxc8 Rxc8 25.Ne7,..

Aiming to get rid of the Bishop.

25..., Re8

A piece is lost no matter what. Still, playing to maybe trap the Knight with 25..., Rc7 26 Bxf6 Bf7; keeps thing interesting for awhile; 27 Bh4 h6 28 Nf5 Rxc2 29 b3 Bg6 30 Ne3 Re2 31 Bg3, intending Bg3-e5, and Rc1/c7, attacking pawns at g7 and b7. Somewhere along the line, White has to play h2-h3 to rid himself of worries about back rank mates.

26.Bxf6 Bxa2 27.Bh4 1–0

And now it is clear; 27..., h6 28 Rxa2 g4 29 f4 kills off all reasonable counter-play. Mr. Wright resigned. Good sharp fighting in an opening not seen very often.

More soon.

A Game From the AACC B win Over AACC A Team

Thursday the Geezers played the Saratoga B team in the CDCL. Once more good luck came to the aid of the old guys and the Geezers notched a narrow win 2 ½ - ! ½.

On the first board Michael Mockler for the Geezers won from David Finnerman in a well fought game by both sides. On board two Bill Little was lucky to spot a combination that forced mate against Matthew Clough after getting a bad game. Richard Chu and Cory Northrup made a draw on board three without too much excitement. Jason Denham scored Saratoga B’s only win again on board four over William Montross.

Here is a quick update on the Capital District Chess League. Including the win by Albany B over Albany A and the Schenectady Geezers over Saratoga B, the standings are:

1 Albany B: 4 - 1 match points and 12 game points

2 The Geezers: 4 - 0 match points and 11.5 game points

3 Saratoga A: 3.5 - 0.5 match points and 11 game points

4 Uncle Sam: 3 - 4 match points and 13 game points

5 Albany A: 3 - 1 match points and 11.5 game points

6 Schenectady A: 2.5 - 1.5 match points and 11 game points

7 Saratoga B: 0.5 - 6.5 match points and 7 game points

8 RPI: 0.5 - 6.5 match points and 6.5 game points.

Saratoga B and RPI have completed their schedules and are firmly in the last two places. Teams in first through sixth place have several matches to play among themselves , and we can expect to see changes in the standings.

Lack, Jonathan - Mallanna, Kavana [C26]

Alb B v Alb A CDCL Match Guilderland, NY, 04.05.2011

Board 3

1.e4 e5 2.Nc3,..

Mr. Lack is dogmatic about his openings. In the double e-pawn debuts he consistently goes down the Vienna route.

2..., Nf6 3.g3 Nc6 4.Bg2 d6 5.Nge2 Be6

I don’t think Ms. Mallanna is particularly well-booked on the Vienna Game. This move gives White an opportunity to obtain some advantage.

6.d3?!,..

Which White does not elect to take. The push 6 d4, is called for. After that move, Black either retires the Bishop to d7 wasting a tempo, or he trades pawns on d4 giving hope to the now stifled Bg2 of finding useful work on the long h1-a8 diagonal.

6..., Be7 7.0–0 Qd7 8.f4?!,..

Mr. Lack goes his own way. Once more 8 d4, seems to be better for the same reasons cited above.

8..., Bh3 9.f5 Bxg2 10.Kxg2 0–0–0

Black has used some valuable time to trade off a pretty good Bishop for its White counterpart that was not doing much. The disordered protection around the White King seems to offer opportunities to break open attacking lines absent the dark squared Bishop. It could be that was the reason Kavana did this. However, as the game unfolds the weakened defenses of the White King does not play a role until much later.

11.Bg5 Ng4 12.Qd2 h6 13.Bxe7 Nxe7

Puzzling!? White returns the favor getting rid of a Bishop with chances for activity particularly with many of his pawns standing on light squares. Black now is entirely equal.

14.h3 Nf6 15.Qe3 Kb8 16.d4 exd4 17.Nxd4 d5?!

Losing all of the advantage built up so far. The move allows White to take control in the center. One idea for Black is to play 17..., Rhe8; trying to take absolute ownership of e5. Another way towards the same end is 17..., Nc6. If White then trades Knights; 18 Nxc6 Qxc6 19 Rad1 Rde8; focuses attention on the backward e-pawn on the open file. In either event Black has maintained some advantage.

18.e5 Ne8?

The best way to keep the struggle going is 18..., Ne4; and then White can keep the edge with a several different moves; 1) 19 Nxe4 dxe4 20 Rad1, 2) 19 Rf7!?, 3) 19 Rae1, and 19 Rad1. The game is complex with chances for Black to equalize after each of the alternatives. The text allows White to obtain a clear advantage.

19.e6 fxe6 20.fxe6 Qd6 21.Rf7!?,..

Not quite as good as 21 Ncb5 Qb6 22 Rf7, but the game move is active also.

21..., a6 22.Raf1,..

This is OK, but some trickery is worth examining. The move 22 b4!, tempts Black. If 22..., Qxb4? 23 Rb1 Qc5 24 Rxe7, picks up a piece for a pawn. Black is not obligated to capture on b4. The alternatives such as 22..., Nf6 23 b5, look very favorable for White. Also, 22..., Nc6; getting the potentially endangered piece out of the line of fire, and the continuation 23 e7 Rc8 24 b5 Ne5 25 Rf8 Nf6 26 bxa6 Nc4 27 Qe6 Rhxf8 28 exf8(Q) Rxf8 29 Rb1 Qxe6 30 Rxb7+ Kf8 31 Nxe6 Rf7 32 Nd8!, is lost mostly because of the shot on move 32. Now finding and calculating this rather convoluted variation is no simple task, and seeing the trick at the end is especially challenging.

22..., c5?

This move should lose more or less quickly. A better try is 22..., Rg8; then Black is in poor shape but immediate disaster is avoided.

23.Rxe7?,..

This was most likely a error in calculation. The straight forward 23 Nf5 Nxf5 24 R1xf5, increases the advantage for White. The move 24..., d4; is adequately answered by the sequence; 25 Qf3 Nc7 26 Ne4 Qxe6 27 Nxc5, when Black probably has to agree to the exchange of Queens. Then the Black g-pawn falls, and the White pieces are terrifically active to go along with the material advantage. The game move leads to a lost position for White.

23..., cxd4 24.Rxb7+ Kxb7 25.Rf7+ Kb8 26.Qxd4 Nc7 27.Na4 Qxe6 28.Rxg7 Qe2+?!

A mistake. The simple 28..., Qe4+; forces off the Queens leaving Black up a Rook with few technical difficulties.

29.Kg1 Rhf8?

Black can get back on the right page with 29..., Qe1+ 30 Kh2 Rd6; guarding against threats of mate. The text gifts White with the chance to turn the tables.

30.Qb4+?,..

Sadly for Mr. Lack he misses the chance. Winning is 30 Qb6+ Ka8 31 Qc6+, and mate in two can not be avoided.

30...,Nb5

Thus ending any hope for mate. The game was now over quickly.

31.Qf4+ Rxf4 0–1

A flawed game but it was the crucial contest that turned what appeared to be a drawn match into a win for the Albany B team. A win in this game was a fortunate debut for Kavana Mallanna, the only woman participating in the League this year. I haven’t been involved in the League consistently over the year’s of its existence, but for the time of my involvement I can’t recall another lady playing in the League. I am sure those with more knowledge will let us know if there was a women who played for a League team sometime earlier.

More soon.

CDCL Matches at Schenectady and Albany

Last night, Wednesday, saw a battle between the Albany Area Chess Club teams A and B in the CDCL at the club rooms. This is the year of the B teams. As in the match between the Schenectady A and B teams, the B team prevailed. The score was 3 -1 for the AACC B team.

Dean Howard won for Albany A on board 1 in a Ruy Lopez, Exchange variation from John Morse. That was the last good news for the A team. On board 2 Peter Henner for the B team won from Tim Wright in slightly strange Colle System. In a surprise that I will not call an upset, a new face locally, Kavana Mallanna defeated Jonathan Lack of the A team on board 3. The opening was one of Lack’s patented closed variations of the Vienna Game. Lack had a solid space advantage and was grinding out the win when tactics broke out as time got short for both. A misplayed mating combination left Lack with a material deficit that cost the game. On board 4 Arthur Alowitz had the worse position for awhile, but Bob Kemp of the A team made a couple of errors and Arthur won the game.

It is not quite correct to think of these teams being called A and B because one is stronger than the other. Both are led by first boards manned by Experts; Howard and Morse. The middle boards have Class A players holding them down, although Kavana Mallanna is till a provisional rated player, she has posted one result over 1800. Incidentally, Kavana is one of the very few women that have played in the CDCL. On the last board the B team had an edge with the solid veteran B player Arthur Alowitz facing the less experienced Bob Kemp.

More on this interesting match in my next post. Now to continue reporting on the recent Schenectady match. A crucial game in the SCC A - Geezers match was the contest between John Phillips and Philip Sells. It is seldom Sells does not bring home the full point when he is ahead a Rook even when he is short of time. In this game it was amazing how much activity Mr. Phillips got out of his pieces at the crucial moments. Altogether a very interesting battle.

Phillips, John - Sells, Philip [E24]

SCC A v Geezers CDCL Match Schenectady, NY, 28.04.2011

1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.f3 d5 5.a3 Bxc3+ 6.bxc3 c5 7.e3 0–0 8.cxd5 Nxd5

There is much theory associated with this position from the Nimzo-Indian, Samisch variation. It has been chewed over by the elites regularly in recent years. It is not the mainline, but a sideline popular with the sharper of the 2500+ crowd. Here are a couple of examples from recent practice:

Milov, Vadim (2652) - Pantsulaia, Levan (2578) [E25]

FIDE World Cup Khanty Mansiysk (1.1), 27.11.2005

1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.f3 d5 5.a3 Bxc3+ 6.bxc3 c5 7.cxd5 Nxd5 8.dxc5 f5 9.Qc2 0–0 10.e4 fxe4 11.fxe4 Nf4 12.Be3 Qc7 13.Qd2 Nd7 14.Qd6 Qa5 15.Rc1 e5 16.Nf3 Rf6 17.Qe7 Qa4 18.Nd2 Rf7 19.Qd8+ Rf8 20.Qc7 Kh8 21.g3 Ne6 22.Qd6 Nf6 23.Qd3 Ng4 24.Bg1 Qxa3 25.Rb1 Rd8 26.Qc4 Ng5 27.Qb3 Qa5 28.Be2 Nh3 29.Nc4 Qc7 30.Nd6 Rf8 31.Qd5 Nxg1 32.Rxg1 Be6 33.Rxb7 Qa5 34.Qd2 Qxc5 35.Rf1 Rfd8 36.Bxg4 Rxd6 37.Qg5 Qxc3+ 38.Kf2 Rf8+ 39.Kg2 Qc2+ 40.Kg1 Qc5+ 41.Kg2 Qc2+ 42.Kg1 Rxf1+ 43.Kxf1 Bc4+ 0–1

Ivanchuk, Vassily (2741) - Prusikin, Michael (2560) [E25]

EU-Cup 22nd Fuegen (6), 13.10.2006

1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.f3 d5 5.a3 Bxc3+ 6.bxc3 c5 7.cxd5 Nxd5 8.dxc5 Qa5 9.e4 Ne7 10.Be3 0–0 11.Qb3 Qc7 12.a4 Nd7 13.a5 Nc6 14.Bb5 Nxa5 15.Qa3 b6 16.Ne2 Bb7 17.0–0 Rfc8 18.cxb6 axb6 19.Qe7 Nc5 20.Qxc7 Rxc7 21.Rfd1 Rcc8 22.Ra2 Bc6 23.Bxc5 Bxb5 24.Bxb6 Bxe2 25.Rxe2 Nc4 26.Bf2 h6 27.h3 Rc6 28.Be1 g5 29.Rb1 Kg7 30.Bg3 Kg6 31.Kh2 Ra3 32.Be1 Rc8 33.Rc2 Rc6 34.Bf2 Ra8 35.Rb4 Ra1 36.Bd4 e5 37.Bf2 Rc7 38.Re2 Rc1 39.Be1 Ra1 40.Rb8 Ra3 41.h4 Ra1 42.Kh3 f6 43.Kg4 Ra6 44.Rg8+ Kf7 45.Rd8 Kg6 46.Bf2 Ra3 47.Rc2 Ra1 48.h5+ Kf7 49.Rd5 Ke6 50.Rd8 Kf7 51.Rd5 Ke6 52.Rd8 Kf7 53.Rh8 Kg7 54.Rb8 Kf7 55.Rd8 Ra6 56.Rd1 Ke6 57.Rb1 Kf7 58.Bg1 Ra4 59.Bf2 Ra6 60.Kh3 Ra4 61.Rcc1 Ra2 62.Bg1 Na3 63.Rb8 Nc4 64.Rd1 Rc2 65.Rh8 Kg7 66.Rdd8 Rc1 67.Rdg8+ Kf7 68.Rg6 Ke6 69.Kh2 Nd2 70.Rhxh6 R7xc3 71.Rxf6+ Ke7 1–0

In both games cited and a large number of other games in the database, the Grandmasters preferred 8 dxc5. I do not know exactly why they like the capture on c5. It may be a preference for complicated dynamics resulting.

9.c4!?,..

Complicated play ensues. However, there really isn’t any path that does not lead to complications. Other tries here have been 9 Bd2, 9 Qd2, 9 Bd3, and 9 Ne2 with 10 e4, following. These two guys do like complications. That is not to be critical. It is a good thing in my opinion, and they make interesting chess, which is something those of us who write about the game are always looking for.

9..., Ne7 10.Bb2 Nbc6 11.Bd3 Re8 12.Ne2 Nf5 13.Qd2 cxd4 14.exd4 e5 15.d5 Ncd4

A critical moment; White has a pair of Bishops but his King is not well secured, Black has tactical chances based on an opening of the center before the White King finds a haven. The question is; how solid is the White center?

16.Nxd4 Nxd4 17.0–0?!,..

It is not clear that White had accurately calculated the following operation. Here, with the simple 17 Rd1, White could have kept a slight edge. After 17 Rd1 Bf5; and either 18 Bxd4 exd4+ 19 Kf2, or 18 0-0 Qb6 19 Bxd4 Qxd4+ 20 Qf2 Qxf2+ 21 Kxf2, the double Rook endgame favors White a little bit because of the passed d-pawn. Some chess writers say all double Rook endgames are drawn, nevertheless, I would rather have the strong passed pawn in one than not.

17..., Nb3 18.Bxh7+ Kh8

It could be Mr. Phillips hoped for 18..., Kxh7; then 19 Qd3+, and 20 Qxb3, nets a pawn. I doubt that though. John does not often play what might be called “hopeful chess”, that is play a move and hope the opponent errs. I suspect John misread something.

19.Qc2 Nxa1 20.Rxa1?!,..

Capturing with the Bishop removes a target. With the Bishop on a1, the eventual .., Qb6+; is less of a danger. After 20 Bxa1 g6 (If 20..., f5 21 Bxf5, and White has a couple of pawns for the Exchange, and that, along with the rather open situation of the Black King gives him some advantage.) 21 Bxg6 Qb6+ 22 Qf2 Qxf2+ 23 Rxf2 fxg6 24 f4 Bf5 25 fxe5, and Black is close to a win. Black would have to use some skill to stifle counter-play from the bunch of pawns White is holding.

20..., f5

This is the position that I guess John misread. He may tentatively have thought a capture was possible on f5 and now realized the Bb2 was vulnerable to the Queen check on b6. Now John turns his considerable talent to making things difficult for Black. Instead of throwing up his hands, he bears down trying to get the maximum activity out of his pieces.

21.f4 e4?!

Somewhat better is 21..., exf4; opening the e-file for the Rook.

22.Qc3 Qb6+ 23.c5 Qh6 24.Bxf5?,..

Better 24 Re1, threatening Re3/h3 along with pushing the d-pawn, and making the immediate capture of the Bh7 problematical. None of my comments should be construed to imply the position is not won for Black. Making things difficult for the opponent from a lost position is an important skill for the practical tournament player. You make difficulties in the hope that your opponent, as humans often do, will not find the best path under pressure. The Re1/e3/h3 is now foreclosed.

Time was now becoming a problem for Mr. Sells.

24..., Bxf5 25.Re1 e3 26.Rxe3 Rxe3 27.Qxe3 Qg6 28.Qe7?,..

Very risky. Better 28 Be5, keeping the pressure on.

28..., Re8

Sells took a fairly long time to decide on this move. Now the term “long time” is relative. Philip was down to only a minute or so to figure out how to finish up the game.

29.Qxb7 Be4 30.g3 Bf3 31.Be5 Rg8 32.Qc7 Bg4?

With just seconds to go Mr. Sells misses the correct finish; 32..., Qe4 33 Bxg7+ Rxg7 34 Qc1+ Kh7 35 Qh3+ Kh6!; and Black wins.

33.Qe7 Qb1+ 34.Kg2 Qc2+ ½–½

With almost no time remaining, Philip Sells took the perpetual check. Had there been a bit more time he might have tried for a win with the sequence; 35 Kg1 Bf3 36 Qh4+ Qh7 37 Qxh7+ Kxh7 38 d6 Bc6; and Black is just be enough ahead in material to haul in the full point. The key factor is there does not appear to be any way for White to eliminate the Black a-pawn. The plan therefore is; win the White a-pawn, blockade the many White passers and use the a-pawn to win the last White piece. A plan requiring many, many moves and there just was not enough time to make the moves.

More soon.

Dilip Aaron versus Richard Chu

The decisive game of the Schenectady A - Geezers match was Dilip Aaron versus Richard Chu. They battled long and hard. Watching the game I thought Dilip was doing pretty well through much of the game. Putting the game under the microscope did not support that opinion entirely.

Aaron, Dilip - Chu, Richard [B08]

SCC A v Geezers CDCL Match Schenectady, NY, 28.04.2011

Board 4

1.e4 d6 2.d4 g6 3.Nf3 Bg7 4.Be3 Nd7 5.Nc3 Ngf6 6.Qd2 0–0 7.h3 e5

All theory, it is just not a terribly popular line in the Classical variation of the Pirc Defense. The internationalists tend to play 7..., c5; here, but there is no firm reason to say that is a better choice.

8.d5 b6

A different, simpler track is 8..., Nc5 9 Bd3 Nxd3 10 Qxd3.

9.g4 Nc5 10.Bxc5 bxc5 11.g5 Nh5

The operation undertaken by White has not given him any advantage. Black has more than enough resources on the K-side to meet a direct attack there.

12.0–0–0 a5 13.Be2 Ba6 14.Bxa6 Rxa6 15.Qe2 Rb6 16.a4 f5 17.gxf6?,..

This move loses material. Better is 17 h4, then 17..., Nf4 18 Qf1 Rb4 19 Nd2 fxe4 20 Ndxe4 Qd7; leaves Black with a solid advantage but maintains the material balance. I would not fault White’s choice if it gave him something; say piece activity for a pawn in this unpromising position. The pawn lost just simplifies the game, and the Black pieces have the activity.

17..., Qxf6 18.Nd2 Qxf2 19.Qxf2 Rxf2 20.Nc4 Ra6?

Here Black hands back the initiative. The White Knights now get free to damage the Black central pawn mass. Mr. Chu had to find the difficult to calculate line; 20..., Rb4 21 Nxa5 Bh6+ 22 Kb1 Bd2! It then is a question if White will see his best chance; 23 Rxd2 Rxd2 24 Nc8 Rb7 25 a5 Rf2! 26 a6 Rb6 27 a7 Rf8 28 Nb8 Rfxb8; returning the Exchange and remaining a sound extra pawn ahead. This is not an easy bit of chess work. There are several places where Black might abandon the pursuit saying; “Well that is just too risky to follow.” The game shows us that “playing it safe” as an alternative has its own difficulties.

21.Rdf1 Rxf1+ 22.Rxf1 Nf4 23.Nb5 c6

The penalties are coming due. It must be said however, Black is not in as much trouble as I thought while watching the game. As I wandered back and forth between the games, my encounter with John Barnes having ended early, my opinion was Richard had serious difficulties to solve.

24.dxc6 Rxc6 25.Nbxd6?!,..

When this move was played it seemed to me be the right thing to do. Looking at the position with Deep Rybka that does not appear to be true. The Knight on d6 is under attack and just is not very active. Taking on d6 ties up the Knights when they need to be making threats. Better may be 25 h4, getting the fragile h-pawn out of danger for the moment.

25..., Bh6?

A logical looking mistake. Putting both minor pieces on the h-file make the capture of the h-pawn impossible to do safely. Better 25..., Nxh3; pocketing the pawn on offer. Black has much better chances than does White; his pawns are cleared to run. This ending is a classic example of dynamics in chess. The important issues are; whose pawns can be activated most quickly, and are there tactical opportunities that can be used to improve piece positions? Here is a sample line of play; 25..., Nxh3 26 Rf7? Ng5 27 Ra7 Bf8 28 Ra8 Nf3 29 Nb7 h5 30 Nbxa5 Rf3; and it is clear the Black h-pawn is going to be a problem for White. Improving play for White helps but the Black pawns still become a concern after 25..., Nxh3 26 Kd2 h5 27 Ke3 Ra6 28 Nf7 Re6 29 Nd8 Bh6+ 30 Ke2 Ra6 31 Nxe5 Nf4+ 32 Kf2 Bg7 33 Nc4 Rf6 34 Ke1 g5 35 e5 Rf8; and position favors Black according to Rybka. The connected passed pawns Black has are certainly worrisome. After the text that possibility is foreclosed, and the balance swings towards White.

26.Kb1 Bg5 27.Rh1!?,..

It is more effective to defend h3 by playing 27 Rf3. That move allows for the possibility of bringing the White Rook into the game via Rf3-b3-b8. Even after the text White is better.

27..., Bd81!?

Another try is 27..., Ra6; guarding the pawn. White has the advantage but Black may be able to create a trick or two.

28.Nb7 Bf6 29.Nbxa5 Ra6 30.b3,..

The upshot of the last operation is White has the passed pawn and it is well secured. He needs to get his Knights better coordinated to prepare to advance the passer. This is the factor that permits Black to stay in the game.

30..., Kf7?

A natural reaction to rush the King towards an advancing passed pawn. The idea trips up on tactics. Better 30..., Ne2; looking for a chance to bring the Knight around to help hold up the a-pawn.

31.Nb7 Ne6 32.Rf1,..

Also good is 32 Rd1.

32..., Ke7 33.Nbd6 Rc6

Black has forfeited the initiative entirely and is holding on waiting for White to undertake some definitive action. That is never a good place in which to be in a chess game.

34.Nf7!?,..

Going for material gain directly can’t be faulted. More masterly may be 34 a5, increasing the tension. The idea White has is; 34 a5 Ng5 35 Rd1 h6 36 Rd3 Bg7 37 Nb6 Ke6 38 Ndc8, and the a-pawn has powerful escorts for the run to the 8th rank.

34..., Ng5 35.Nxg5 Bxg5 36.Nxe5 Re6 37.Nd3 c4

Black has small choice, he must try to mix things up. White has a solid outside passed pawn and a extra pawn to boot.

38.Nc5 Rb6 39.Rd1 cxb3 40.Nxb3 Rb4 41.Re1?,..

This is strange. Up to here, while moves can be criticized, none were glaring errors. This is. Dilip must have thought that 41 Rd4 Rxd4 42 Nxd4, did not favor White. He was very wrong in that judgment. White wins after 42..., Kd6 43 e5+! Kxe5 44 Nf3+ Kf5 45 Nxg5 Kxg5 46 a5, when the pawn can not be caught. Black can of course vary and keep the Rooks on the board, but after 41 Rd4 Rb8 42 Rd5 Be3 43 Rb5 Ra8 44 a5 Kf6 45 c4, the White pawns are well advanced. Black will be hard pressed to find effective counter-play.

After the game move, Black is nearly equal. The long range of his Bishop and the widely separated White pawns give the Black side opportunities to hold the draw.

41..., Rxa4 42.Kb2 Rc4 43.c3 Bf4 44.Re2 Be5 45.Re3 g5 46.Kc2 h5

Black is proceeding in a generally correct manner. He is preparing to make his own passer on the K-side while putting roadblocks in the way of White advancing the c-pawn.

47.Nd2 Ra4?!

Straightaway falling back to c8 with the Rook is probably better. Mr. Chu has ideas of getting his Rook behind the White pawns and grabbing one if White is not careful. This approach means the Bishop and King are tasked with delaying the White c-pawn and e-pawn.

48.Kb3 Ra1 49.Rd3 Rc1 50.Nf3 Bf4 51.Rd5 g4 52.hxg4 hxg4 53.Nh4 Ke6 54.Nf5,..

Rybka likes 54 Ng6, but as the line plays out the draw is more and more likely.

54..., Be5 55.Rd3 Rg1 56.Kc4 g3 57.Nxg3,..

Losing patience, or reacting to the overall match score White eliminates the last Black pawn. Dilip may have been worried about 57 Nd4+ Bxd4 58 cxd4? Rc1+; and the pawn Queens. He could improve with 58 Kxd4, getting the King in a better position then 58..., g2 59 Rd2, keeps some winning chances in hand for White. Playing as in the game removes all shadow of doubt from Black’s mind. The drawn outcome is clear; Black just needs to assign the Bishop the task of capturing the c-pawn when it becomes dangerous, and to maneuver his King to be in front of the e-pawn while shouldering the White away to reach the draw. By this point in the match the team’s scores were level. Surprisingly, Philip Sells had been unable to convert a sizeable material advantage with little time remaining on his clock against John Phillips. I concluded the Geezers had a decent result; a draw with the A team.

57..., Bxg3 58.Rd8 Be1 59.Rd1 Ke5 60.Rd4 Bf2 61.Rd2 Bb6 62.Re2 Rg8 63.Kb5 Rb8 64.c4 Bd4+ 65.Kc6 Ke6 66.Rd2 Rb6+

I did not ask Richard just why he decided to play in so complicated fashion. With 66..., Rc8+ and 67..., Ke5; the draw is firmly in hand. A possibility is he wanted to give his youthful opponent every chance to err.

67.Kc7 Bc5 68.Rd5 Be3 69.c5 Rb3 70.c6?,..

And he does so. Fortunately for Dilip Aaron the mistake is not quite fatal. Asok Aaron and I were watching the game, and I wagered him Richard would not catch this opportunity. Time was getting short for both parties.

70..., Bf4+!

I was wrong. Mr. Chu was at his best and alert to any chance. Now Black will win material, a lot of material, but..

71.e5,..

If 71 Kc1 Rb8; is mate.

71... Bxe5+ 72.Rxe5+ Kxe5 73.Kd8,..

Maintaining his composure, Dilip realizes the far advanced c-pawn is a trump that just may hold the draw.

73..., Rd3+ 74.Ke7 Rh3 75.c7 Rh7+ 76.Kd8 76...Kd6 77.c8N+,..

Just so! The Knight versus Rook ending is very often drawn. It is lost for the weaker side when according to Dvoretsky, Fine and others when; the Knight is separated from his King and can be trapped, or when the knight is in the corner and lost through zugzwang. There are some problematic positions when the Knight is on g2/g7/b2/b7, but they are specific to the placement of the other pieces. Otherwise, the draw is not difficult to demonstrate.

77..., Kc6 78.Ne7+ Kd6 79.Nc8+ Ke6 80.Nb6 Rb7 81.Nc4?,..

Creating a dangerous separation. Safe enough for the draw is 81 Nc8.

81..., Rb5 82.Kc7?,..

Dropping the piece right away. Black would have to execute the maneuver called Tesuji. FM Gordon Taylor coined the term in Inside Chess, 1989. It describes a sophisticated restriction maneuver executed against Knight by a King and a piece, usually a Rook. In this situation here, if White had played the better 82 Ne3, then Black proceeds 82..., Rb8+ 83 Kc7 Rb3 84 Ng2 Kf5 85 Kd7 Rd3+ 86 Kc7 Kg4 89 Kb6 Kg3 90 Ne1 Rd2; and the Knight falls. I did not note the time remaining for the players, and really can not comment if there was enough time left for Richard to search out this idea. Dilip’s own time troubles led to the error that bypassed the question.

82..., Rc5+ 0–1

And finally, the Geezers won a match from the A team! The result was delivered thanks to two rather raw errors - mistakes by Aaron and Barnes that were not typical of how they play - but such is the case often in club level League matches. The Geezers were happy to get the win and a little rueful about how it came about. Now that the ice is broken perhaps the next time we meet, the Geezers can win in a more deserving manner.

More soon.