An AACC Game From Two Weeks Ago

A couple of weeks ago this short sharp game was played at the AACC. In it Tim Wright anxious to get back on the winning path faced the strong unrated Chris Caravaty. There were some big swings in the advantage highlighting the drama of the occasion; a contender for the title fighting to get back into the battle for the title, and a newcomer trying to establish a reputation.

Wright, Tim - Caravaty, Chris [E11]

AACC Championship, Guilderland, NY, 16.11.2011

1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nf3 Bb4+ 4.Bd2 Bxd2+ 5.Nbxd2 d5 6.e3 0–0 7.Bd3,..

White usually plays 7 Qc2, not wanting to move the Bf1 before Black captures on c4. The position is known to theory, but is not particularly popular. There virtually no games between strong players in the databases in this line.

7..., dxc4?!

White obtains an edge after this move. Better for Black is 7..., c5; then 8 dxc5 Na6 9 Nb3 Nxc5 10 Nxc5 dxc4 11 Bxc4 Qa5+; equalizes. Alternatively, 8 0-0 cxd4 9 exd4 Nc6; looks OK for Black.

8.Nxc4 Nbd7 9.0–0 c5 10.Re1!?,..

According to Rybka this move is not quite right. The computer suggests 10 Nfe5!? b5 11 Nd6 Qb6 12 dxc5 Qxc5 13 Nexf7 Rxf7 14 Rc1 Qe5 15 Bxh7+ Kxh7 16 Nxf7 Qxb2 17 Ng5+ Kg8 18 Qd6 Qe5 19 Qxe6+ Qxe6 20 Nxe6, a rather long and complicated sequence creating the material imbalance of a Rook and two versus B+N. GM Andrew Soltis addresses many important issues of theory in his book Rethinking the Chess Pieces, Batsford,2004 including the Rook versus minor pieces. He makes the points; Queens off favor the Rook, pawns on both sides favor the Rook, and maintaining the initiative is critical. In the analysis line White does not have a strong hold on the initiative, but the other two factors favor him. With the alternative long and not so clear, it is understandable that White takes a conservative path.

10..., b5 11.Ncd2 c4 12.Bc2 Bb7

The game is approximately even. Black has space on the Q-side and the possibility of making a passed pawn there. The White pieces are ready to flood onto the K-side and directly attack the Black King. Which nascent plan is best? It is hard to say. Probably the plan most efficiently carried out will prevail.

13.e4 Rc8 14.e5 Nd5 15.Ne4 b4?

A critical moment in the game. Black here has to decide how to execute his plan of Q-side pressure. I don’t know if he also considered defensive measures necessary to blunt the coming assault on his King. The choice evident from his move emphasizes Q-side activity. Rybka suggests; 15..., Nb4; and a later capture of the Ne4 by the Bb7 to reduce the attacking force.

16.Nfg5 h6 17.Qh5?,..

Ambitious and aggressive but it shouldn’t work. Much more likely to lead to an advantage is 17 Nh7!?, then Black will have to make a decision; take the Nh7, or try for complications on the Q-side that look questionable with 17..., b3. Capturing the Nh7 gives; 17..., Kxh7 18 Nd6+ Kg8 19 Nxb7 Qb6 20 Nd6 Rc6 21 b3 c3; and the tense and difficult battle rages on. If 17..., b3 18 axb3 cxb3 19 Bd3, Black is left with nothing better than 19..., Kxh7; giving White the better game.

17..., Nf4 18.Qh4?,..

White did not see what was about to happen, otherwise he would have played 18 Qg4, avoiding putting the Queen in a costly pin.

18..., Ng6?

Missing the shot 18..., Bxe4!, winning a piece because of the Knight pinned on g5. Black may have been a victim of Aagaard’s forced thinking idea. Chris assumed somewhere along the line that capturing on e4 with the Bishop was bad, and kept that assumption as part of his calculations right through to this point thereby forcing a decision without reexamination of the assumptions underlying the decision. Aagaard makes the point that unforced thinking, that is challenging all assumptions made earlier in the game, is the way avoid oversights in calculation.

19.Qh5 hxg5?

In chess as in life troubles often come not singly but in bunches. Black missed a chance to win material. He now overlooks a mating combination. With 19..., Qe7; Black would certainly be no worse than White and maybe a bit better.

20.Nxg5 Re8 21.Bxg6 fxg6?

Either Black didn’t see what was happening yet, or he gave up after the shock of the sacrifice. True enough Black is in deep trouble after 21..., Qxg5 22 Bxf7+ Kf8 23 Qxg5 Kxf7; with only two minor pieces for a Queen and two pawns, but there is no immediate mate. The text permits mate in three.

22.Qh7+ Kf8 23.Qh8+ 1–0

A game decided in the heat of a tactical battle. After White pushed his pawn to e5, the game began to look like some variations of the Slav where White attacks with the Queen and Knight as in the game. My guess is Mr. Caravaty was not familiar with that aspect of the Slav. Mr. Wright misconstrued the idea also. There is, however, in chess prejudice towards activity over caution. Wright’s not quite correct attack carried the day with a nice combination leading to mate.

More soon.

A Game From the Last Round in Schenectady

Today’s game is from the Schenectady Chess Club’s Preliminaries, the B section. It features the Colle System, an opening I have been working on with Charles Eson.

Connors, David - Chu, Richard [D04]

SCC Prelim B Schenectady, NY, 17.11.2011

1.Nf3 Nf6 2.d4 d5 3.e3 g6 4.Nbd2 Bg7 5.Bd3 0–0 6.0–0 Nc6

Both sides have been “waiting to break”, that is assembling their forces to push forward a central pawn to open lines. The last move for Black prepares .., e7-e5; and the White pieces are poised for e3-e4. Neither side pulls the trigger. Why? Were the extra moves made by each side useful or not?

7.c3,..

One of the dynamic aspects of the Colle is White has several choices here including 7 c4. That move tries to shift the game towards a kind of Tchigorin Defense where Black does not advance of his c-pawn early. White probably did not care for 7 c4 Nb4 8 Bb1 dxc4 9 a3 Nd3 10 Nxc4 Nxc1 11 Qxc1, which Rybka calls equal but Black has the Bishop pair, a potential long term advantage. An alternative way to play the position is; 7 c4 Nb4 8 Bb1 dxc4 9 Nxc4 Be6 10 Ncd2 c5; and the position favors Black slightly

7..., Bd7!?

This does not advance the Black cause. It is by no means clear that this is a good post for this Bishop. Making a break first lets the breaking side call the tune for awhile. Black was ready on the move to play 7..., e5; then 8 dxe5 Ng4 9 e4 Ncxe5 10 Be2 Re8 11 h3 dxe4 12 Nxe4 Nxf3+ 13 Bxf3 Ne5 14 Be2 Bf5; and Black is slightly better.

8.Re1?!,..

This is an over refinement. 8 e4, immediately secures some advantage in the center for White.

8..., Re8 9.Ne5 Nxe5

White has played to forestall the Black break ..,e7-e5; but at a cost. He could have executed his own planned break with 9 e4.

10.dxe5 Ng4 11.f4 f6

Here it is somewhat more sensible to stabilize the center and apply some pressure to the White position with 11..., c6 and 12..., Qb6; before beginning to attack the head of the White pawn chain.

12.exf6?!,..

This trade is doubtful. It readily opens the e-file permitting pressure on e3 and e4. More reasonable is 12 h3 Nh6 13 Nf3, with e3-e4 coming soon. After the text Black has completely equalized and is slightly ahead in development. He still has to figure out what to eventually do with the Bd7 and that makes his development lead more optical than real.

12..., exf6 13.Nf3 c6 14.h3 Nh6 15.g4?,..

White was at a crossroads here. The text is misplaced aggression. Black supported his center with .., c7-c6. White would be well advised to do something to shake this strong central point. The natural c3-c4 suggests itself. After the text, Black has good chances to make the airy home of the white King very drafty indeed.

15..., Qb6

Diagonally pinning the e-pawn and touching b2, the Black Queen is nicely active from b6. The natural follow-on is .., f6-f5; taking control of e4 more or less permanently and leaving e3 as a long term problem for White.

16.Kg2 Nf7 17.Qc2 Nd6 18.b3 Re7?

Black had repeated opportunities to play .., f6-f5; and did not do so. He has part of the right idea; pressure on e3, but White also has a good idea; make tactical use of the momentarily awkward positioning of the Black Rook and Knight. Black’s failure to recognize the strength of the Bishop move to a3 leads to a lost position.

19.Ba3 c5 20.c4 d4 21.exd4 Rxe1 22.Rxe1 cxd4 23.c5 Qa5

No better is 23..., Qd8 24 cxd6, winning a piece.

24.Bb2?,..

After seeing and playing a pretty sequence that gave him a won game, White loses the thread of the game. With 24 cxd6 Qxa3 25 Qc7, and the follow-up moves Bc4+ and Re7, the White attack is crushing.

24..., Nb5?!

Better defensive chances are to be had with 24..., Nf7; or 24..., Rc8.

25.Bxb5 Bxb5 26.Bxd4 Bc6

The dust has settled a bit. White is up a sound pawn and his pieces are about to become even more active. Black faces a difficult task in defending his position.

27.Qc4+ Kf8 28.b4 Qd8 29.Qc3,..

Freeing the Nf3 of the pin with 29 Kg3, is better I think.

29...Bxf3+ 30.Kxf3 Qd5+ 31.Kg3 Kf7

GM Yermolinsky in his new series What Every Russian School Boy Knows on ICC has just finished covering the principles of Bishops of the same color endgames. His examples featured positions where the Queens were off or soon disappeared. The pawn structures then play an important role in the eventual outcome. In our game the Queens are traded and both sides play reasonably; Black making his pieces maximally active, and White holding on to his pawn while working towards creating a distant passed pawn. All this conforms to the principles Yermolinsky has set out. One of the less emphasized points in his presentations is the role of tactical alertness plays. Several of the examples used were possible variations that could have taken place if one of the players had not misunderstood the position and crashed on the rocks of tactical error. This happens in our game today.

32.Qe3 Bf8 33.Qe4 Rd8 34.Qxd5+ Rxd5 35.Bf2 Rd2 36.a3 a6 37.Re3 a5 38.Rc3 axb4 39.axb4 Rb2 40.Rc4 Rb3+ 41.Kh4?,..

White walks into a death trap! He had to play 41 Kg2, retaining some advantage. The text should result in the pretty finish; 41..., g5+! 42 fxg5 Kg6 43 gxf6 Bh6 44 g5 Bxg5+ 45 Kg5 h4; mate!

41..., h6?!

Missing the correct move but motivated by a similar notion.

42.Rd4?,..

White did not see the problem his King faces. Better 42 g5, then 42..., Ke6; leaves Black with the edge, but the game has some fight left.

42..., g5+!

Black has seen what White did not see. It is a two move mate.

43.fxg5 fxg5+ 0–1

How to sum up this game? Both players missed some very nice chances and found some pretty sequences and combinations. Spotty play is probably the right caption for this contest. The lesson to be learned from it is take an extra moment when there is a glaring feature on the board; a break to be made, a King in a dangerous position, etc. It is then GM Aagaard’s wisdom about forced and unforced thinking should be applied. Forced thinking is assuming that what you decided about a position earlier in the game still hold true. Unforced thinking means to look at each new position putting aside conclusions and assumptions made earlier in the creation of the current position and asking yourself what can be done now.

More soon.

Another Game From Saratoga

Another game last Sunday in Saratoga featured Joshua Kuperman against Alan Le Cours. Joshua is the son of Max Kuperman, a long time fixture on the local chess scene. Max’s career goes back to sometime in the 1970s, but oddly I can find no record of he and I ever playing a serious game. After hanging around chess for a very long time, usually I have played a local chess player somewhere along the line. In Max’a case no such luck. Joshua’s career was short and successful in the late 1990s according to USCF records. Those were the days when I played very little in general and almost not at all locally. That is the reason why Sunday evening, first I knew his name but had to introduce myself to Joshua, and second, realized I never had laid eyes on him before.

Alan provides the first surprise, he played the French! I expected a 1..., e5; answer to Joshua’s 1 e4. Mr. Le Cours has a number of pet lines in the Two Knights and the Ruy Lopez, Schliemann variation that he knows very well and has used with success. This time Alan tries the French. Mr. Kuperman took a not usual tack for White and a short sharp interesting game came about.

Kuperman, Joshua - Le Cours, Alan [C17]

Saratoga Championship Saratoga Springs, NY, 20.11.2011

1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.Bd2,..

Much more common is 4 e5, when the game enters the mainlines of the Winawer variation of the French. Even so great an exponent of 1 e4, as Bobby Fischer had a hard time finding wins in the Winawer for White. On that basis alone this was my choice for thirty-five years until I converted to the Pirc.

The text is a sideline that comes up occasionally. Alexander Alekhine, the 4th World Champion, defeated one of his toughest rivals in the 4 Bd2 line many years ago:

(17662) Alekhine, Alexander - Flohr, Salo [C15]

Nottingham 1936

1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.Bd2 dxe4 5.Nxe4 Qxd4 6.Bd3 Bxd2+ 7.Qxd2 Qd8 8.0–0–0 Qe7 9.Nf3 Nf6 10.Rhe1 Nxe4 11.Rxe4 Nd7 12.Rg4 f5 13.Rf4 Nf6 14.Re1 Bd7 15.Rxf5 0–0–0 16.Ra5 Kb8 17.Ne5 Be8 18.g3 Nd5 19.Re4 Nb6 20.Qe3 Rd5 21.Ra3 Qc5 22.Qxc5 Rxc5 23.f4 Rd5 24.Nf3 Bd7 25.Ng5 Re8 26.c4 Rf5 27.Rd4 Rff8 28.c5 Nd5 29.Bxh7 Bc6 30.Bg6 Re7 31.Nf3 Nf6 32.Ne5 Bd5 33.Re3 Rh8 34.h4 c6 35.Bc2 Rd8 36.Bb3 Rc7 37.Nf3 Re8 38.Ne5 Rec8 39.Bc4 Ka8 40.b4 Rb8 41.g4 b6 42.g5 bxc5 43.bxc5 Nd7 44.Nxd7 Rxd7 45.h5 Rf7 46.Rxe6 Bxe6 47.Bxe6 Rfb7 48.Bb3 Rh8 49.h6 gxh6 50.g6 Rg8 51.f5 Rf8 52.Bc2 h5 53.Rd6 Re7 54.f6 Re1+ 55.Kd2 Rf1 56.f7 h4 57.Rd7 1–0

4..., Ne7 5.e5,..

Alekhine again, this time showing that the alternative idea;5 exd5, does not lead to an easy life for White.:

(7094) Speijer, Abraham - Alekhine, Alexander [C15]

DSB–17.Kongress Hamburg (3), 1910

1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.Bd2 Ne7 5.exd5 exd5 6.Qf3 Nbc6 7.Bb5 0–0 8.Nge2 Bf5 9.0–0–0 a6 10.Bd3 Bxd3 11.Qxd3 Na5 12.a3 Bxc3 13.Bxc3 Nc4 14.Rde1 Nc6 15.Nf4 Qd6 16.Qf3 Rad8 17.Nd3 a5 18.Qf4 Qxf4+ 19.Nxf4 b5 20.Nd3 Rb8 21.Ne5 N6xe5 22.dxe5 c5 23.b3 d4 24.bxc4 dxc3 25.Re3 b4 26.a4 Rbd8 27.Rhe1 Rd4 28.Re4 Rxe4 29.Rxe4 Rd8 30.e6 fxe6 31.Rxe6 Rd2 32.Re5 Rxf2 33.Kb1 Rf1+ 34.Ka2 Rc1 35.Rxc5 Rxc2+ 36.Kb1 Rb2+ 37.Kc1 Rxg2 38.Rb5 Kf7 39.c5 Ke6 40.c6 Kd6 41.c7 Kxc7 42.Rxa5 Rxh2 0–1

4..., c5 6.Nb5 Bxd2+ 7.Qxd2 0–0 8.dxc5 Nd7 9.b4,..

I played the French pretty frequently and the Winawer was a favorite line, but this stuff never came up in my games. While watching this contest I thought these guys are well out of the book. Wrong again! Turns out all this is really mainstream theory. Karpov played similarly up to this move in;

(222300) Karpov, Anatoly (2750) - Nogueiras, Jesus (2575) [C17]

World Cup Rotterdam, 1989

1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.e5 Ne7 5.Bd2 c5 6.Nb5 Bxd2+ 7.Qxd2 0–0 8.dxc5 Nd7 9.f4 Nxc5 10.Nd4 Qb6 11.0–0–0 Bd7 12.Ngf3 Rfc8 13.Qe3 Rc7 14.Kb1 Rac8 15.Rc1 a6 16.g4 Nc6 17.h4 Ne4 18.Rh2 Na5 19.Bd3 Nc5 20.c3 Na4 21.Ka1 Bb5 22.Bb1 Nc4 23.Qe1 Ncxb2 24.Rxb2 Nxb2 25.Kxb2 Be2+ 26.Ka1 Bxf3 27.Nxf3 Qa5 28.Nd4 Qa3 29.Nb3 b5 30.f5 b4 31.Rc2 Rxc3 32.Rb2 a5 33.Qd2 a4 34.Nd4 R3c4 35.fxe6 fxe6 36.Nxe6 Qc3 37.Qxd5 Kh8 38.Ng5 Rf4 39.Ne4 Qc1 40.Rxb4 a3 41.Rb3 1–0

When a former World Champion plays a line against a strong GM, it is by definition theory. During the postmortem of today’s game there was a discussion about whether or not 9 f4, was an improvement over 9 b4. Karpov played the f-pawn forward and castled long, but he by no means got an easy game out of that plan. Nogueiras built a very dangerous looking attack on the White King, and it took all of Karpov’s considerable skill to hold it off. It wasn’t until move 34, after suffering for several moves under serious pressure, did Karpov finally see Nogueiras slip. With the preternatural alertness that the very top players have, Karpov found the right moves and won the game. Given the difficulties Anatoly Karpov experienced, 9 f4, is not markedly superior to the game move.

9..., Nxe5 10.f4 N5c6 11.Nf3 b6!?

During the game I thought this to be the right move. Rybka disagrees. The computer prefers 11..., a5; and then 12 c3 axb5 13 cxb5 Ng6 14 Bd3 Qf6; wins a pawn. White can improve in this line with 14 Rd1, but then 14..., Qf6 15 g6 e5; promises much trouble for the White King. Black is a bit better than equal after the game move, but he could have had more.

12.Nd6 bxc5 13.bxc5 Rb8!?

Another move that I thought well of during play. Once again Rybka sees things differently preferring the counter-intuitive 13..., Nb8. The computer line continues; 14 Qc3 Qc7 15 Bb5 Na6!? 16 Ne8!? (Winning the Exchange because of the mate threat at g7.) 16..., Rxe8 17 Bxe8 Nxc5; and even though White can extract the Bishop from deep behind enemy lines, Black has a considerable initiative. One example of how things go is; 18 Bb5 Qb3 19 Nd4 Ne4 20 Qe3 Qa5+ 21 c3 Ba6. It seems the exposed White King gives Black enough to eventually collect the c-pawn. With two pawns for the Exchange Black has good winning chances.

All that is very complicated, and I am not sure human beings would think that way. It does illustrate what computers can show us about chess positions and expands our view of what is possible on the board.

14.Bd3 Qa5?!

This natural looking move is a mistake. If White plays 15 Qxa5, he obtains a playable game with an edge perhaps after 15..., Nxa5 16 0-0, when Black’s slightly less developed forces need a move or two to get rolling. That is enough time for White to prepare to fight for the b-file. Notice also how difficult it is for Black to line up forces to harvest the isolated pawn at c5. Rybka suggests 14..., Na5; as a better choice for Black at this point. That suggestion by the computer leads to unclear play where White has a decent game.

15.Ng5?!,..

So, instead of a transition to a balanced ending, White creates complications. Why do we chess players go off into the high weeds like this sometimes? Occasionally it is forced upon us by the sporting circumstances; a win is the only useful result. More often it is because we don’t quite grasp all that is going on in a position. I suspect Mr. Kuperman judged the pawn at c5 doomed and went searching for counter-play. The viable alternative mentioned above would have given him an entirely playable game, but he may have undervalued the possibilities available.

15..., h6?

There was a near winning advantage to be had by indulging White in his quest for complications. Correct is 15..., Qxc5; then 16 Bh7+ Kh8 17 Nxc8 Rfxc8 18 Bd3 Kg8 19 c3 Na5; and the awkward White King gives Black a near winning advantage; or, 18 Qd3, threatening 19 Bg8, when 18..., Qb4+ 19 c3 Qxf4; and the Queen trade is forced on White ending the complications to Black’s advantage.

16.Qxa5 Nxa5

White changed his mind after expending a valuable tempo. Black now has a slight edge.

17.Nf3 Bd7 18.Ne5 Ba4 19.a3?,..

The balance has been teetering since the exchange of Queens. White could have continued the delicate struggle with 19 Kd2, solving many problems including connecting his Rooks. The square b4 from which the Black Rook can attack the pawn at f4 superficially looks worrisome, but danger around f7 keeps the doubling of the Black Rooks on the b-file at bay. Also, if Black tries to prepare for doubling of the Rooks with .., f7-f6; the Knight jumps to g6 hitting the Rf8 and the Ne7. The Knight trade brings the White Bishop to g6 ready with its compatriot Nd6 to do damage on e6. In other words playing 19..., Rb4; leads to quite a complicated battle where White has chances. Preventing that possibility while neglecting fixing a big problem in the White position was an incorrect choice.

19..., Nb7

The gift of a tempo gives Black several choices here; 19..., Nc8; 19..., f6; and 19..., Rb2; as well as the text. Long term Black wants the dangling c-pawn. All the options aim at exploiting the Nd6 to make gathering in the pawn on c5 as easy as possible.

20.Bb5?,..

Seemingly letting the c-pawn go to gain time to correct defects with 20 Nxb7 Rxb7 21 Kd2 Rc7 22 Rhb1 f6 23 Nf3, and there is an indirect defense of c5 because of the possible answer Rb1-b7, and if .., Rfc8; the shot Bd3-a6 is a reserve move. Eventually Black will probably find away to collect the pawn, but in the meantime White mobilizes his pieces to obtain counter-play. The game move pins hope on keeping the material balanced by capturing the a-pawn. This hope is flawed because White never connected his Rooks.

20..., Bxb5 21.Nxb5 Nxc5 22.Nxa7?,..

The Grandmasters tell us often in their works it takes more than one mistake to lose a chess game. This is the final error for White. Here 22 Nd4, keeps the fight going even though Black has a winning advantage. After the text extracting the Knight can not be done.

22..., Rb6 23.a4 Ra8

Since the Ra1 is undefended 24 Nb5, meets 24..., Rxb5.

24.Nd3 Nxd3+ 25.cxd3 Rxa7 26.Kd2 Rba6 0–1

An interesting game with positions not commonly met in our local arena. It was particularly satisfying to find some new ideas in lines I thought I knew well. The game was entertaining as well.

More soon.

News From Saratoga

Sunday evening I drove to Saratoga to drop in on the Saratoga Staunton Chess Club. While I’ve covered the Albany and Schenectady clubs quite a bit this year, there has been little about Saratoga. They are in the middle of a double (!) round-robin tournament. Turnout was small this year. Only six players signed up, and one had to drop out after two rounds of play; Hrebenach. After Sunday’s round the standings are:

1 Le Cours 1911 4 - 1

2 Feinberg 2046 3 - 1

3 Farrell 1973 3 - 2

4 Kuperman, J 1715 2 - 5

5 Connors 1487 1 ½ - 4 ½

6 Hrebenach 1621 ½ - 1 ½ Dropped out.

The standings present a somewhat skewed picture. With the rescheduling that is common in local club events everyone has not met everyone yet. Mr. Le Cours piled up his points against just two opponents; Connors and Kuperman, winning two games from each. His lone loss came at the hands of Gary Farrell. Farrell and Jonathan Feinberg have played each other twice with honors even with one win apiece. The coming contests between and among Le Cours, Feinberg and Farrell will certainly determine the eventual Champion for this year.

Today’s game pit’s the two highest rated participants. Mr. Farrell won their first game, and Mr. Feinberg was no doubt looking for revenge.

Farrell, Gary - Feinberg, Jonathan [A02]

Saratoga Championship Saratoga Springs, NY, 20.11.2011

1.f4 g6 2.Nf3 Bg7 3.e3 c5 4.Be2 Nc6 5.0–0 e6 6.d3 Nge7

The Bird’s Opening is a specialty of Farrrell’s. It is not popular internationally and virtually none of the elite players of recent times have used it even sparingly. This leaves the databases almost useless for providing insights on this opening. That maybe the attraction for Gary. His opponents can’t come to the board equipped with reams of GM analysis. Here is one example of two German masters and the Bird’s.

(1168783) Mueller, Erich (2237) - Scherer, Max (2346) [A02]

Oberwinden op Oberwinden (11), 14.04.2007

1.f4 c5 2.Nf3 g6 3.e3 Bg7 4.Be2 e6 5.0–0 Ne7 6.d3 Nbc6 7.Nbd2 b6 8.Qe1 d5 9.e4 Qc7 10.Nh4 0–0 11.Bd1 f5 12.e5 b5 13.Nhf3 a5 14.Nb3 Nd8 15.a4 b4 16.d4 Ba6 17.Rf2 cxd4 18.Nbxd4 Nec6 19.Be3 Re8 20.Be2 Nxd4 21.Nxd4 g5 22.g3 Nb7 23.Nb5 Qd7 24.Bd4 gxf4 25.gxf4 Kh8 26.Kh1 Rg8 27.Bd3 Rac8 28.Qe3 Qf7 29.Rg1 Qh5 30.Be2 Qf7 31.Nd6 Nxd6 32.exd6 Bxe2 33.Rxe2 Rce8 34.Be5 h6 35.Rxg7 Rxg7 36.Rg2 Reg8 37.Rxg7 Rxg7 38.Qg3 Kg8 39.Qxg7+ Qxg7 40.Bxg7 Kf7 41.Bxh6 Ke8 42.Bf8 Kxf8 43.h4 d4 44.b3 Ke8 45.h5 Kd7 46.h6 1–0

And here is an earlier one from the Russians.

(3270738) Chuprov, Dmitry (2465) - Gajsin, Evgenij (2400) [A02]

RUS Cup Qualifier 4 chessassistantclub.com INT, 25.11.2004

1.f4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.e3 g6 4.Be2 Bg7 5.0–0 e6 6.d3 Nge7 7.Nc3 d5 8.e4 0–0 9.Kh1 Rb8 10.Qe1 b5 11.e5 Nd4 12.Bd1 Nef5 13.Ne2 Nxf3 14.Rxf3 h5 15.Ng3 Nxg3+ 16.Rxg3 d4 17.Bxh5 gxh5 18.f5 f6 19.Bh6 Rb7 20.Qe4 exf5 21.Qxb7 Bxb7 22.Rxg7+ Kh8 23.Rxb7 Rg8 24.exf6 Qxf6 25.Bf4 Rg7 26.Re1 Qc6 27.Rxg7 Kxg7 28.h4 c4 29.Be5+ Kf7 30.Bxd4 cxd3 31.cxd3 Qd5 32.Bg1 a6 33.Re3 Qxa2 34.Re5 Kg6 35.Bd4 Qb1+ 36.Kh2 Qxd3 37.Bg1 f4 38.Rg5+ Kf6 39.Rxh5 Qg3+ 40.Kh1 f3 41.Rh6+ Kg7 42.Bd4+ Kxh6 43.Be3+ Kg6 44.gxf3 Qxf3+ 45.Kh2 Qxe3 46.Kg2 Kf5 47.h5 Qd2+ 48.Kf3 Qxb2 49.h6 Qh8 0–1

These two games exhaust useful examples, that is games between strong players, from databases with over five million games. Theory exemplified by master practice is very thin.

It is worth looking at Farrell’s own practice. Here is a game of his with Jim Troyan from a few years ago.

Farrell, Gary - Troyan, James [A03]

CDCL Match Saratoga v Schenectady A, Saratoga Springs, NY, 11.06.2006

1.f4 e6 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.d3 d5 4.e3 Be7 5.Be2 Nbd7 6.0–0 b6 7.Qe1 Nf8 8.Ne5 Bb7 9.Bf3 Ng6 10.c4 0–0 11.Nc3 c5 12.Qf2 a6 13.Bd2 Qc7 14.d4 cxd4 15.exd4 dxc4 16.Bxb7 Qxb7 17.Nxc4 Rac8 18.Ne3 Rfd8 19.f5 Nf8 20.fxe6 Nxe6 21.Nf5 Nxd4 22.Nxe7+ Qxe7 23.Bg5 Rc6 24.Qh4 Ne2+ 25.Nxe2 Qxe2 26.Rae1 Qxb2 27.Rf2 Qd4 28.Bxf6 gxf6 29.Re8+ Kg7 30.Qg3+ Kh6 31.Qh3+ ½–½

I should add that Gary does not play the Bird’s exclusively by any means. He’s been known to try 1 e4, 1 c4, and 1 Nf3, a man with a wide taste for first moves. For those who will face him in the future, be aware that in each opening choice Mr. Farrell comes to the board with some well researched scheme.

7.c3,..

This is outside of my opening book, although it may be mentioned in some specialist work on the Bird’s. Deep Rybka likes it as well as the other choices here; 7 e4, and 7 Na3. What we have are two savvy players delicately maneuvering about the control of key squares; d4 and e5. The move c2-c3 fits into that scheme.

One general idea, I say can’y plan, for White in the Bird’s is a push to f5 and/or the opening of the f-file. The Black set-up, pawns on g6 and e6 and the Knight e7, make that push difficult to achieve. This similar to the recommended layout of forces Black uses against the Gran Prix Attack in the Sicilian for much the same reasons. Another is pushing the e-pawn to e4, the reason underlying the occasional Qd1-e1 that is sometimes seen.

7..., Rb8

Although the position does not show up in theory, it is enough similar to various other lines and other openings that the idea of putting the Rook on b8 to support .., b7-b5; grabbing space looks normal.

8.a4!?,..

White wants to restrain the space grab. Unfortunately, that is not possible. Natural is 8 e4, and the game is tending towards equality. After the text maintaining the balance becomes more difficult for White.

8..., a6 9.Na3 d5

Maybe White was counting on if Black pushes the pawn to b5 too soon, after some trades there, he can gain some time for a central push with d3-d4 uncovering an attack on whatever Black piece is standing on b5. The text supports a .., c5-c4; answer to d3-d4.

10.Bd2 0–0 11.Rb1,..

White goes about his business and clears his Rook from a1-h8 diagonal.

11..., b5

It can’t be stopped.

12.axb5 axb5 13.b4 cxb4!?

Is 13..., c4; a better move? Rybka thinks so. I am not so sure; after 13..., c4 14 d4, the Black pieces are a little freer and White’s a bit tangled, and Black has a possible break with .., f7-f6; .., e6-e5; but the very closed nature of the position gives White good chances to hold.

14.cxb4 d4!?

Black decides to take control of d4 by occupation. It is true the pawn on d4 obstructs the Bg7, but the well supported d-pawn exerts control over c3 and e3. Black may have also calculated that dangling the d-pawn might tempt White into maneuvers to attempt surround it. Mr. Feinberg may have concluded those maneuvers will get the White pieces less effectively placed while the d-pawn can be defended successfully.

15.e4 Qb6 16.Be1,..

White is beginning to think about putting this Bishop on f2, the Na3 on c2 and maybe Qd1/b3/b2 for maximum pressure on d4.

16..., Ra8

Black counts on threats to create dynamic potential for his pieces and indirectly defending d4.

17.Ra1,..

If 17 Nc2 e5 18 fxe5 Nxe5 19 Nfxd4? Nc6; and loses a piece. This indirect defense lets Black claim some advantage.

17..., Bd7 18.Nc2 e5 19.fxe5?,..

White stays focused on his attack on d4. Here he could have kept the game balanced with 19 Bg3, turning his attention to e5. One likely continuation is 19..., f5 20 Rxa8 Rxa8 21 Kh1, with complicated play.

19..., Nxe5 20.Bf2 Nxf3+ 21.Bxf3 Nc6 22.Kh1?,..

Black has had the initiative since the exchange on e5. His last move takes control of e5 and begins to build pressure on b4. General chess wisdom says often in closed positions you can make certain “housekeeping” moves without penalty. The current position at first sight appears to be closed, but there really are tactical threats in it. This time such housekeeping hands over a tempo that Black uses ruthlessly.

22..., Be6 23.Qe2 Rfc8 24.Rfb1,..

Trying a stubborn defense. More risky is 24 Rxa8 Rxa8 25 Bg4?! Bxg4 26 Qxg4, hoping for 26..., Ra2?!; for then 27 Qd7, threatens if 27..., Rxc2? 28 Bxd4!, winning. Black certainly does not have to go along with White on this line. Instead of 26..., Ra2; he can play; 26..., Qc7; preventing the entry of the White Queen and retaining a solid edge.

24..., Be5 25.Rxa8?,..

After prolonged tension, White opts for clearing off the Rooks in the hopes of easing it. Mr. Farrell’s usual good chess judgment fails him here. White could have tried 25 Bg4 Bxg4 26 Qxg4 Qd8; when Black still is some better according to Rybka, but nothing decisive is evident yet.

25..., Rxa8 26.Ra1?,..

Fatal. Still possible is 26 Bg4, etc., when the control of the a-file by Black increases his advantage, but a defense is still possible by White. The problem with the text is the weak White b-pawn falls.

26..., Rxa1+ 27.Nxa1 Qa6!?

Capturing on b4 straight away is better I think, but either way a pawn is gone.

28.Qb2 Nxb4 29.Bxd4,..

White gave this move a lot of thought, or let us say he worked through all the alternatives and rejected them then hit on this move as a chance to test his opponent’s nerves.

28..., Nxd3 0–1

White resigned here because 29 Qc3 b4; collects a full piece. Worse yet is the tactics after 30 Qd2 Bxd4 31 Nb3 Nf7+; when the coming discovered check will kill all counter-play. Black won the battle for d4 and e5. He used those squares to stifle the White Bishops and then surrounded and won the b-pawn. It then turned out his bottled up pieces could not prevent further losses. It would be interesting to see the earlier game between these guys.

More soon.

The Other Upset From AACC This Week

The big upset from last week’s games at AACC was the win by Northrup over Howard. It was remarkable not only for the outcome as well as being the second week running that Dean Howard got himself into a tough clock situation.

Northrup showed a rather high level of skill in this game marred by overlooking tactical opportunities. Howard did not display his usual keen alertness to danger and gave his opponent too many chances. That tendency combined with time trouble led to a situation where even the resourcefulness of last year’s Champion could not prevail. It is a game with sudden shifts fortune and missed shots.

Northrup, Cory - Howard, Dean [D58]

AACC Championship Guilderland, NY, 16.11.2011

1.d4 e6 2.c4 d5 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bg5 Be7 5.Nf3 h6 6.Bh4 0–0 7.e3 b6

A position very familiar to Mr. Howard. He has defended it against John Phillips and Patrick Chi within the last year. It has been very popular internationally. Looking at just players over 2500, World Champions such as Spassky, Tal and Karpov have used the Tartakower Defense to the QGD as well as many other distinguished Grandmasters.

Here is a game from twenty+ years ago that is similar to the game we are examining;

(223097) Tisdall, Jonathan D (2465) - Olafsson, Helgi (2545) [D58]

Espoo zt Espoo, 1989

1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nf3 d5 4.Nc3 Be7 5.Bg5 h6 6.Bh4 0–0 7.e3 b6 8.Qc2 Bb7 9.Bxf6 Bxf6 10.cxd5 exd5 11.0–0–0 c5 12.h4 Nc6 13.g4 cxd4 14.exd4 g6 15.g5 hxg5 16.hxg5 Bxg5+ 17.Kb1 Kg7 18.a3 Bf6 19.Rg1 Rh8 20.Bd3 Rh6 21.Ne2 Qd6 22.Qd2 Re8 23.Nf4 Re4 24.Bxe4 dxe4 25.Ng5 Na5 26.Ne2 Rh5 27.Nc3 Qe7 28.Nxf7 Qxf7 29.Qe2 Rf5 30.Nxe4 Bxe4+ 31.Qxe4 Rxf2 32.Rd3 Nc4 33.Ka1 Rxb2 34.Rdg3 Ra2+ 0–1

For those not familiar with Tisdall; he now is a Norwegian citizen, chess writer and Grandmaster, but “Tis” started out playing in this area as a youngster. He is from Syracuse, and in the 60s and early 70s he showed up a few times in some weekend events John Dragonetti and I ran. Jon was rated about 1800 in 1969 when he thumped me convincingly in the Schenectady Winter Rating Tournament.

8.Qc2,..

While watching the game, this move struck me as questionable. Looking it up in the databases showed the move, together with subsequent long castling, has been tried by many strong players; Lputian, Portisch and Vanganian are examples. Borisenko and Ilivitzki were two middle-of-the- field participants in several of the USSR Championships of the middle 1950s when these events were clearly the strongest tournaments in the world. Here is how they played the position:

(43934) Borisenko, Georgy K - Ilivitzki, Georgi A [D58]

URS-ch sf Sverdlovsk (10), 1957

1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 d5 4.Bg5 Be7 5.Nf3 h6 6.Bh4 0–0 7.e3 b6 8.Qc2 Bb7 9.Bxf6 Bxf6 10.cxd5 exd5 11.0–0–0 Nc6 12.h4 Nb4 13.Qd2 c5 14.g4 cxd4 15.Nxd4 Qc8 16.Kb1 Qxg4 17.Bh3 Qh5 18.Rdg1 Bc8 19.a3 Bxh3 20.Rxh3 Nc6 21.Nxc6 Qf5+ 22.e4 Qxh3 23.Qxh6 Qf1+ 24.Rxf1 gxh6 25.Nxd5 Bxh4 26.Rh1 Bxf2 27.Nce7+ Kh7 28.Nf5 f6 29.Rxh6+ Kg8 30.Rg6+ Kh8 31.Nxf6 Rxf6 32.Rxf6 Bc5 33.e5 a5 34.Kc2 Kg8 35.Kd3 Rd8+ 36.Kc4 Rd1 37.e6 Kh7 38.e7 Re1 39.Kd5 Re2 40.Re6 Rd2+ 41.Kc6 Bxe7 42.Rxe7+ Kg6 43.Nd6 Rxb2 44.Nb5 1–0

It is of interest to see the logic of the opposite side castled position dictates similar tactics as in our game. Interest is extended further because the distribution of attacking forces in the appended game is a R+2Ns as in the Northrup - Howard game.

8...Bb7 9.Bxf6 Bxf6 10.cxd5 exd5 11.0–0–0 a5

The book move is 11..., c5; with 11..., Nd7; and 11..., Nc6; being mentioned as alternatives. The text takes the game out of theory. It is logical however. Black easily foresees the pawn change coming on the other side of the board and wants to get his own pawn assault going.

12.h4 c6?

This move is not so logical. The natural 12..., c5; is better. The text concedes a tempo. That is always dangerous in opposite side attacking situations when an extra tempo is precious. It could be Mr. Howard just didn’t accurately assess the position after 12..., c5 13 dxc5 Bxc3; when Black creates open lines on the Q-side more quickly than White does on the other side of the board.

13.g4!,..

Exactly correct. White has the advantage now.

13..., g6?

Potentially making things worse than they have to be. Either 13..., Qd6; clearing d8 for the Bishop, or 13..., Be7; and 14..., Qd6; fighting to keep lines partially closed leading to the Black King are better alternatives.

14.Bd3!?,..

Slow when speed is call for. Better 14 g5, to open the h-file after 14..., hxg5 15 h5, with troubles multiplying for the Black King. Perhaps I am being too critical of White’s play. The text builds pressure on g6 and prepares to bring the Rd1 to the g-file. Those ideas conform to the principle of getting all your pieces in on an attack. What we have here is an apparent conflict between two pieces of chess wisdom; mass your forces before taking action and opening lines for an attack. Making such a choice is at the heart of chess skill. The so-called Russian School of Chess emphasizes “concrete and dynamic” aspects of play. Concrete means calculating exact lines of play far enough ahead to reach a conclusion about a specific line then comparing it to all other options, and dynamic means, in this instance, a prejudice towards choices that give you more options for your pieces. Following the guidance of the Russian School it seems opening lines is superior to massing force here.

14..., Kg7?

Played to shore up g6 but incorrect. Black for some reason not apparent does not believe White will make the Black King very uncomfortable soon. Better 14..., Na6; threatening .., Nb4; and keeping g7 open for a retreat of the Bf6 to g7, if required. After the game move, White has a dangerous attack beginning 15 g5!, then 15..., hxg5 16 hxg5 Bcg5? 17 Rdg1, with a sacrifice coming at g6. Or, 16..., Be7 17 Ne5 Qe8 18 f4, and with the second rank clear there are several sequences where White quickly makes use of the h-file to finish off the Black King.

15.Ne2!?,..

Again slower rather than faster. Mr. Northrup prefers a slow build up of force when there is a good driving move to hand - 15 g5!

15..., Ba6?

Black senses things are not going well for him and seeks solace by trading White’s light squared Bishop. Retreating the Bf6 to e7 holds some hope of avoiding an immediate break through on the K-side.

16.Nf4 Bxd3 17.Qxd3 Na6?

Black has consistently undervalued the possibility of g4-g5. Strangely White has done so also. The text presents White one more opportunity to play the forcing move 18 g5.

18.a3!?,..

He instead prefers caution.

18..., b5?!

With 18..., Kg8; Black could have prepared a better defense to a possible g4-g5.

19.Rdg1!?,..

Once again 19 g5, is the right move.

19..., Rh8?

Black has resisted getting the Bishop off f6 to reduce the impact of an advance of the g-pawn. 19..., Be7, was a last chance to avoid some of the coming problems.

20.g5!,..

Finally. White now has a winning advantage.

20..., hxg5 21.hxg5 Be7 22.Rxh8?,..

Throwing away a big chuck of the advantage that had fallen to White as a result of the g-pawn push. The right move is 22 Nxg6! Rxh1 23 Rxh1 fxg6 24 Ne5 Qe8 25 Rh6, taking decisive control of g6, and the White Queen, Rook and Knight are closing on the Black King. As generous as White has been so far in the game, he has never given Black the chance to take control of the game.

22..., Qxh8 23.Qf1?!,..

This move comes close to allowing Black a real chance to make a fight for the initiative. Correct is 23 Ne5, reinforcing threats on g6.

23..., Qc8 24.Rh1 c5!?

Black had a choice here; it is possible 24..., b4 25 a4 Qf5; might have offered better chances. Suddenly danger looms around the White King. The text has the same intention, but White gets his own chances because of the vulnerable situation of the Black King.

25.Kd1 cxd4 26.exd4?,..

White could have kept some slight edge with 26 Nxd4, but after 26..., Bxg5 27 Nxd5 Qc5 28 Qxb5 Qxb5 29 Nxb5 Rd8 30 Nbc3 Nc7 31 e4 Nxd5 32 exd5 Bf6; White can not hold the extra pawn. The ensuing Rook and pawns ending has the pawns unevenly distributed making for fight with chances on both sides. A drawn outcome is the logical result, but there is much play left in the position. The game move should have cost White dearly.

26..., b4 27.axb4 Nxb4 28.Qe2 Qd7?

Time was getting short for Black but not real time trouble. Dean had about ten minutes remaining on his clock when he made this move. He misses a shot. With 28..., Bd6; Black is firmly in control of the game because the Queen check on e5 is prevented with the subsequent roaring attack on the Black King.

29.Qe5+!,..

Black is utterly lost objectively. He now has no choice but to throw some material away to try and string out the game. It should not work.

29..., f6 30.gxf6+ Bxf6 31.Ne6+ Kg8

Necessary because 31..., Kf7 32 Rh7+ Ke8 33 Nc7+, wins decisive material.

32.Qxf6 Qa4+ 33.Ke2 Qb5+ 34.Ke3?!,..

White is still winning after this move, however, 34 Ke1 Nc2+ 35 Kd2, costs Black the Knight without offering any relief for the beleaguered Black King.

34..., Qd3+ 35.Kf4 Qf5+ 36.Qxf5 gxf5 37.Kxf5,..

White is a solid piece ahead, and he has mating possibilities in hand also.

37..., Nd3 38.Rg1+ Kh8 39.Rg7?,..

But not this way. Better 39 Nfg5, threatening 40 Nf7+, and 41 Rh1 mate and Black will have to consider losing more material The text lets Black fight on.

39..., Ra6?

Black misses his best chance to make things a bit murky with 39..., Rg8. White still wins with 40 Ra7, but the board situation is murky enough for mistakes to creep in.

40.Re7,..

Also good is 40 Nfg5.

40..., Nxb2 41.Nfg5 Ra8

Taking at e6 with the Rook breaks up the immediate mate but going down a whole Rook is too obviously lost, so Black tries anything else. The move presents White with a mate.

42.Rf7?,..

And White misses his chance. It is mate in three with 42 Rh7+ Kg8 43 Rg7+ Kh8 44 Nf7 mate.

42..., Nc4 43.Rf8+?,..

Miss-firing on the mate a second time. Peter Henner and I were watching the game side-by-side at this point. We stepped outside of the playing room to confirm the missed mate, and to ponder if it was possible that Mr. Howard just might find away out of his troubles. Black’s clock was looking pretty thin by now.

43..., Rxf8+ 44.Nxf8 a4 45.Nf3,..

This Knight will be in time to stop the a-pawn from making a Queen or will take off the Lady when she appears .

45..., a3 46.Ne1 Nb2 47.Nc2 a2 48.Ke5?,..

White does not take enough care that his Expert opponent is ever resourceful. With 48 Ng6+, he can safely take the d-pawn with his Knight keeping a winning edge. After the text there is play in the position for Black. White keeps some edge after 48 Kf6, but after Black captures the pawn at f2 there are chances for Black to give the Knight for the last White pawn. Since two Knights versus a single pawn can not mate without the side with the pawn having several moves. With a pawn standing one move from making a Queen, I doubt there is any winning chances for the Knights.

48..., Nd3+ 49.Kxd5 Nb4+ 50.Nxb4 a1(Q)

At this point in the game I had to leave the playing site. Dean’s clock was down to about one minute, nevertheless I thought the worse he could achieve was a draw with endless checks. I was wrong. The next evening at the Schenectady Club Cory generously gave me a copy of the complete game score.

51.Nc6 Qa2+ 52.Kd6?,..

The change in fortunes costs White his concentration and one of his Knights. That loss presents Black the opportunity to maybe win the game. Better for White is 52 Ke5. Black can easily force a just about guaranteed draw with 53..., Qxf2; and later giving the Queen for the d-pawn. Regardless of his time smash, Howard must have felt morally obligated to try for the full point. I don’t think he gave a moment’s thought to the drawing possibility.

52..., Qa3+ 53.Ke6 Qxf8 54.d5 Qc8+ 55.Ke7 Qc7+ 56.Ke6 Kg7 57.Ne5 Kf8

Checking with the Queen does not let the d-pawn go to the 6th rank and is a little better.

58.d6 Qc8+ 59.Kd5 Qa8+ 60.Ke6 Qa2+

Cory noted on his score sheet that Black’s clock had one second remaining at this move. Dean has to play the rest of the game with only the five second delay for thinking.

61.Kd7 Qa4+ 62.Nc6 Qb5?

Letting the game become drawn with best play. Maintaining winning chances with 62..., Qf4 63 Nd8 Qf5+ 64 Kc7 Ke8; is preferable. The text makes a threat, 63 Qb7+, collecting the last White Knight. Unfortunately for Black a natural move meets the threat and clears the path of the d-pawn

63.Kc7 Qh5?!

More certain is 63..., Qf5; and if 64 d7 Qf4+ 65 Kc8 Qf5.

64.d7 Qh7 65.f4,..

Suddenly a new actor is on the field

65..., Qf7 66.Ne5 Qg7?

There was obviously no time for Black to calculate. If there was he could have tried 66..., Qxf4!?; then it does not appear the extra Knight is enough to win for White say after 67 d8(Q)+ Kg7 68 Qe7+ Kh6. Figuring out such complications requires a calm mind, something that is in short supply when your clock is hanging.

67.Kc8 Qg1 68.d8Q+ Kg7 69.Qg5+,..

The final trick in tricky endgame. Black is lost. The game rolls on only because there not sufficient time to resign.

69..., Qxg5 70.fxg5 Kf8 71.Kd7 Kg7 72.Ke7 Kh7 73.Kf6 (73.Kf7 Kh8) 73...Kh8 74.Kf7 Kh7 75.g6+ Kh8 76.g7 1–0

The two move mate; 77 g8 (Q)+ and 78 Qg3, is too clear to be missed. This game was epic in its swings of fortune and its length. Very infrequently do we see games go so far in this era of sudden-death time controls. Both sides made serious mistakes. There is nonetheless educational value in these errors. I admire the fighting spirit both players demonstrated from beginning to the end of the contest. In this kind of good fighting game it is a shame someone has to lose.

More soon.

Results From SCC and AACC

Wednesday night saw the third round of the AACC Championship played in Guilderland. The results were: Tim Wright won from Chris Caravaty, and Arthur Alowitz upset tournament leader Gordon Magat. Jon Lack and Peter Henner drew. Dean Howard lost to Cory Northrup, and the game between Jason Denham and Akhil Kamma was postponed by mutual agreement.

The standings after the third round are:

1&2 Magat 2 - 1

1&2 Alowitz 2 - 1

3&4 Kamma 1 ½ - ½

3&4 Lack 1 ½ - ½

5&6 Howard 1 ½ - 1 ½

5&6 Wright 1 ½ - 1 ½

7 Henner 1 - 1

8 Northrup 1 - 2

9 Denham ½ - 1 ½

10 Caravaty ½ - 2 ½

The two upsets; Alowitz over Magat and Northrup over Howard marked the round results as surprising. Arthur has been playing well this year so maybe this was less than a full blown upset. Still the rating difference was greater than two hundred points and approaching three hundred, and that is upset territory. While there is still a long way to go in the event, clearly no one has broken to the front except perhaps Mr. Alowitz with two draws and a win. He made all his points against contenders for the title; Magat, Henner and Wright.

Northrup over Howard was an big upset no matter how you cut it. A nearly five hundred rating point spread between the players is a big gap. Cory missed some chances to put away the point as time pressure built for Dean. Mr. Howard showed great resourcefulness as his clock ticked down and with a trick he made a Queen. I had to leave the playing site at this point in the game and expected a Queen versus two Knights could be no worse than a draw for Howard. Mr. Northrup hung in and managed to take the whole point. He has been playing frequently of late. That steady practice paid dividends Wednesday. A good result for Cory and a disappointment for Dean.

Today’s game brought Arthur Alowitz into a tie for first place.

Alowitz, Arthur - Magat, Gordon [B20]

AACC Championship Guilderland, NY, 16.11.2011

1.e4 c5 2.d3 e6 3.g3 d5 4.exd5 exd5 5.Bg2 Nc6

What began as a closed treatment of the Sicilian has morphed into something else. It is not a terribly popular position in any event. Very few examples are found in the databases and none from the elite players. Below is one game between titled players. White takes a different tack than does Arthur in today’s game. It does not work very well.

(260660) Zayac, Elena (2325) - Ivanov, Oleg (2390) [B24]

URS-sf Voronezh, 1991

1.e4 e6 2.d3 c5 3.g3 Nc6 4.Bg2 d5 5.exd5 exd5 6.Nc3 Nf6 7.Nge2 Be7 8.0–0 0–0 9.d4 cxd4 10.Nb5 Qb6 11.Nbxd4 Bg4 12.f3 Nxd4 13.Nxd4 Bc5 14.c3 Bd7 15.Kh1 Rfe8 16.Bg5 Bxd4 17.Qxd4 Qxd4 18.cxd4 Re2 19.Bxf6 gxf6 20.f4 Rc8 21.Bxd5 Rcc2 22.Rfc1 Rxb2 23.Rab1 Rbd2 24.Rd1 b6 25.h4 Be6 26.Bxe6 Rh2+ 27.Kg1 Rdg2+ 28.Kf1 fxe6 29.f5 Rxa2 30.Kg1 Rag2+ 31.Kf1 Kf7 0–1

6.Nf3!?,..

The usual practice according to the databases is 6 Ne2, or 6 Nc3 and then 7 Ne2.

6..., Bg4

Deep Rybka suggests 6..., Qe7+; pretty much forcing the Queens off and Black is entirely equal if not slightly better. This is another case where the higher rated player, Magat, probably feels the obligation to win the game because of a near three hundred point rating edge. One path towards that goal is to keep material on as he does here.

7.0–0 Nf6 8.Re1+ Be7 9.Nbd2?!,..

Slow. 9 Nc3, leaves the path clear for the Bc1 to go to g5 without further ado.

9..., 0–0 10.Nf1 d4 11.N1d2 Re8 12.Nc4 b5 13.Nce5 Nxe5 14.Rxe5 Qd7

The fight has resolved itself into a positional struggle about control of the e-file and whether the space Black seized in the center did or did not leave serous weaknesses in its trail. White spent some tempi to lure the d-pawn forward to d4, and Black, as a result, is ahead in development.

15.Bg5 Rac8 16.Qe2?,..

Presenting Black with the chance to clear off the Rooks and transition to a Queen and minor piece endgame with extra space and the Bishop pair.

16..., Bd6?

This is more complicated but not better than 16..., h6. Then White either saves the Bishop with 17 Bd2 Bd6 18 Rxe8+ Rxe8; when the White Queen goes to f1 to try to fight on the e-file or to d1 leaving the e-file in Black’s hands for some while; or he trades the Bishop on f6 and Black has comfortable game anyway after 17 Bxf6 Bxf6 18 Rxe8+ Rxe8 19 Qf1 c4. White then pretty much has to trade Rooks on the e-file, and the game is opening up which will favor the Bishop pair.

17.Rxe8+ Rxe8 18.Qd2 Nh5 19.Qa5?!,..

Active and ambitious and dangerous. If Black elects to take the game into a tactical phase, White seems to come out the worse. The positional treatment beginning with 19 Qc1 Bc7 20 Bd2 h6 21 a3, did not appeal to Mr. Alowitz. I can see why, his pieces are crowded and tangled. Black has lots of space. White will be struggling to find useful moves while Black searches for the killing break through.

19..., h6?!

Here Black takes a little bit rather than a lot. The forceful and tactical 19..., Qf5; attacking the Bg5 and the Nf3 leads to a an advantage for Black after; 20 Qxb5 Re6 21 Nd2 Qxg5 22 Ne4 Qe7 23 h3 Be2 24 Re1 Nxg3 25 Nxg3 Bxd3 26 Rxe6 Bxb5 27 Rxe7 Bxe7; and Black has a sound extra pawn and has kept the Bishop pair intact. Calculating all that, especially with potential back rank mate problems included, make most of us concerned about errors. Often we will accept a smaller advantage than is possible in the interest of clarity. This may be the case here.

20.Bd2 Nf6

While watching the game, I thought for a moment there might be something for Black in the idea 20..., Qb7; thinking of .., Bc7; the White Queen goes to a3 then .., b4; and attack the Queen again with .., Be6. Fantasy of course; the Queen still has a4 as a haven. After mulling it for thirty seconds, I realized 21 Nxe4, just spoils the concept entirely. The text move is best.

21.Re1 Be6?

Black has had some advantage up to here. This move lets it slip away. It was likely in the interest again of keeping more material on rather than trading Rooks. Trading would have left Black slightly better after 21..., Rxe1+ 22 Nxe2 Be6. The way this sequence is played Black has to give up the Bishop pair and the edge passes to White.

22.Ne5 Bxe5

Takes the game to equality. The alternative 22..., Qc7 23 Qxc7 Bxc7 24 Bc6 Rb8; sees the White minor pieces getting very active.

23.Rxe5 Nd5 24.Qa3?!,..

This move is a bit of a mystery. More active is 24 a4, and if 24..., bxa4 25 Qxc5, but then 25..., Rc8; entering complications that according to Rybka work out to equality. The game move has the advantage of not initiating those complications even though I can’t see any greater purpose than that and a real deficit in the Queen’s awkward position.

24..., Qd6 25.Re1 Ra8?!

Better is the straight forward 25..., a6; guarding the b-pawn and leaving the White Queen to ponder how she can return to active service. By this point in the game, Gordon had used up seventy of his ninety minutes, and Arthur had used only about thirty-five minutes.

26.b3 b4

Black is justifiably worried about c2-c3 coming to break down his central pawn mass, so he puts in a stopper.

27.Qc1 Rd8 28.a4 Qd7 29.Re5 f6 30.Re1 Bg4 31.Be4 Bh3

Now time trouble begins to effect Black’s play. Likely better is 31..., Rf8; shoring up the K-side and threatening something with .., f5-f4; to worry White. Black was down to under ten minutes remaining. White can now win a pawn easily with 32 Bxh6! If 32..., gxh6 33 Qxh6 Bf5 34 Bxd5+! Qxd5 35 Re7, will cost Black his Queen for a Rook and Bishop. In that position the Queen is ideally placed to make something out of her facility to make double attacks giving White the win.

32.Bg2?,..

Passing on the win of a pawn. White had plenty of time on the clock. He may have been led astray by his opponent’s coming time problem and the wish to make him move quickly. I know I have done the same against Gordon more than once in the past. The game now tilts back towards equality.

The next operations take the game to an ending that is nearly balanced. White with the time advantage puts no obstacles in Black’s path to simplification. That is probably not the best way to proceed. Avoiding exchanges of material keep more things on the board for the time challenged opponent to think about.

32..., Bxg2 33.Kxg2 Qg4 34.h3 Qh5 35.Qd1 Qxd1 36.Rxd1 Re8 37.Re1 Rxe1 38.Bxe1 Kf7

Black has a small advantage. He just has to worry about the Bishop trying to attack the pawn at c5, and his King is hurrying up to keep that from happening.

39.Kf3 Ke6 40.Ke4 f5+ 41.Kf3 g5 42.Bd2 Nf6 43.Kg2 Nd5 44.h4 f4 45.gxf4 gxf4 46.Kf3 Kf5 47.Bc1,..

Mr. Magat is always resourceful. He has created some glimmer of winning chances about the White h-pawn and kept the Bishop stifled. His next move is a shocker.

47..., Ne3!?

A piece sacrifice to what end? Any other reasonable move holds the game, 47..., h5; for instance. I believe once more rating difference influences a decision; White gambles in hopes of defeating a lower rated opponent.

48.fxe3 dxe3?

Losing the game without any hope. The only try is 48..., fxd3; and even then White has a win after 49 a5, it is important to get this pawn forward, 49..., a6 50 Bxe6 dxe6 51 Kxe6, and if Black goes for the h-pawn with 51..., Kg5 52 d4 cxd4+ 53 Kxd4 Kxh4 54 c3 bxc3 55 Kxc3 Kg3 56 b4 h5 57 b5; and one way or another a White a-pawn Queens far enough ahead of Black to win. If Black does not go for the h-pawn and plays 51..., Ke5; 52 h5 Kd5 53 d4! cxd4+ 54 Kd3, with a tricky pawn ending where White eventually recovers the d-pawn and then makes a timely run to the K-side to win the h-pawn while Black always has to be concerned about White’s a and b-pawns forcing a Queen. The text allows White to use the Bishop, via b2, to pick off the Black pawns on the dark squares.

49.Bb2 a6 50.Bg7 Kg6 51.Bf8 Kh5 52.Be7 Kg6 53.Bxc5 Kh5 54.Be7 a5 55.Bd8 e2 56.Kxe2 Kg4 57.Kf2 h5 58.d4 1–0

If the Black King moves away from h5, the rest of his Q-side pawns fall. This was a significant upset. Congratulations to Mr. Alowitz for a fine result.

Thursday evening saw not quite a full schedule of play in the 6th round of the Schenectady Championship Preliminaries. In Section A David Connors lost to Richard Chu as did Ahkil Kamma to Alan Le Cours. The game Matt Clough - Herman Calderone was not finished when I left the site. Matt was up a piece in a B&N versus N ending with pawns across the board. There was enough of an imbalance in the distribution of material to make the decision not quite clear. I will try to have the result of this game for my next post.

In Section B only one game was played; Northrup - Capitummino. Cory was not able to build on his success from Wednesday, he went down material and Jeff found a ruthless finishing line that simplified the game leaving him up the Exchange and many pawns. Resignation followed immediately.

More soon.

More Games From AACC

Thursday last saw nearly a full schedule played at the Schenectady Chess Club. One game from Section A, Jeff Capitummino - Mike Stanley, was postponed. The other games were; Carlos Varela won from Zack Calderone and Dilip Aaron won from Cory Northrup. All scheduled games were played in Section B. Richard Chu lost to Ahkil Kamma, Herman Calderone and David Connors played to a draw and John Phillips won his game against Matt Clough.

The only mathematically certain qualifier in Section B is Ahkil Kamma with a 4 - 1 score and only one game to play. John Phillips with a score of 4 - 0 and two games to play looks to be pretty sure of making the Finals also. With delayed and postponed games it is hard to say who will be the third qualifier there. My bet is on Alan Le Cours but he has a number of games to make up.

In Section A things are somewhat more clear. Zack Calderone, Philip Sells and Carlos Varela are all at 3 - 1 with Dilip Aaron just behind at 2 - 2. It appears the three qualifiers from this Section will come from these four barring some shocking break down in form.

Returning to the Albany Area Chess Club event, here are two more games;

Howard, Dean - Denham, Jason [C10]

AACC Championship Guilderland, NY, 09.11.2011

Jason Denham can play some pretty good chess when the mood takes him. In this game he sets some problems for last year’s title holder, and those problems use up a lot of time leaving Mr. Howard with just seconds on his clock at the end.

1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nd2 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Bd7 5.Nf3 Bc6

Long ago Capablanca as Black used these moves to win a casual game in 1902 from Corzo y Prinzipe, the father of Juan Corzo, the Champion of Cuba that Capablance defeated in 1900 to burst on the world stage at just twelve years old. At the still chronologically youthful age of fourteen, the future World Champion might have been still experimenting, but in later years we see a number of distinguished Grandmasters play the Rubinstein variation of the French against equally well known opponents. True enough most of the time it seems their intention is to obtain a safe and sane draw when needed. A short and incomplete list of these Grandmasters is; Pelikan, Matulovic, Kholmov, Suba, Kirov, Luputian, Hodgson, Epishin, Khalifman, Korchnoi, Kamnick, Karpov on more than one occasion, Speelman, Dreev, and so on. We can conclude it is not a particularly fighting defense but is considered a solid drawing possibility by the some of the best players.

6.Bd3 Nd7 7.c4 Ngf6 8.Nc3 Bxf3 9.Qxf3 c6

Bringing the game to an interesting theoretical position. In some lines of the Slav and the Scandinavian as well as the Rubinstein French, Black sets up a “pawn fence” on the light squares b7, c6, e6 and f7, to blunt the action of White’s light squared Bishop. Black often wants to trade off his own light squared Bishop along the way typically for a Knight. The set up does not have a lot of bite. It has however proven to be a solid way to hold the draw.

10.0–0 Bd6 11.Bg5,..

Ambitious but it gives Black a chance for activity. The game has reached the far border of theory. In databases with abut five million games in them I found only one example of this position. We see White taking a different tack at this point and winning. In our game White used a chunk of time hereabouts looking for a way to obtain the advantage no doubt.

Van Riemsdijk, Herman C (2392) - Carbonell, Marcelo [C10]

Sao Paulo Interclubes Paulista Sao Paulo (2), 25.02.2007

1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Bd7 5.Nf3 Bc6 6.Bd3 Nd7 7.c4 Ngf6 8.Nc3 Bxf3 9.Qxf3 c6 10.0–0 Bd6 11.Rb1 0–0 12.b4 e5 13.d5 cxd5 14.Nxd5 Nxd5 15.Qxd5 Qc7 16.c5 Be7 17.Bb2 Bf6 18.Rfd1 Rad8 19.Be4 b5 20.Qc6 Qxc6 21.Bxc6 Nb8 22.Bxb5 e4 23.Bxf6 gxf6 24.Kf1 Rc8 25.Rd6 Kg7 26.Rc1 Rfd8 27.Rxd8 Rxd8 28.c6 1–0

So it seems White can play a little more slowly and still create dangers for Black. That points up a characteristic of these very technical and refined lines we come across in chess where a GM plays confidently heading towards a drawn position; to use them there is required a comprehensive understanding of the position, or the memorization of an large number of variations. Absent these the chances to go wrong are many.

11..., Qc7 12.Qh3,..

Another long think for White. This time probably was used on the line 12 c5 Bxh2+ 13 Kh1 h6 14 Bd2 h5 15 g3 Ng4; when Rybka says White is comfortably ahead. It is one thing for a computer program to cold-bloodedly reach such a conclusion and entirely another for a human player

to do likewise. Dean was likely weighing up the pluses and minuses of having the Black minor pieces so close to his King. He avoids that with the text.

12..., Bf4!

Fitting in with the general concept of the variation, Black ruthlessly forces simplification.

13.Qh4,..

White again used a good deal of time on this move. Dean likely looked at 13 Bxf4 Qxf4 14 Qe3 Qxe3 15 fxe3, and White has some advantage. He has a bit more control in the center and the half open f-file on which to work. The position has no glaring weaknesses for Black and he has every chance to hold. And that maybe the motivation for Mr. Howard using a lot of time thinking. Mr. Denham is rated 1446 and Howard over 2000. The six hundred rating point difference suggests strongly that Howard should win the game. The position resulting from the above line is fine for White but by no means winning, so he looks for more with some maneuvering.

13..., Bxg5 14.Qxg5 0–0

Also playable are 14..., Qb6; and 14..., Qd6.

15.Rfd1 Rad8 16.Qh4 Rfe8 17.Rac1 Qa5 18.a3 Qh5

White is preparing to expand on the Q-side, and Black pursues his plan of working towards trading down. Both are logical operations.

19.Qg3 Nb6 20.b4 Qg4 21.Qe3 Kf8!?

The King edges closer to the center anticipating the endgame. Not a bad idea but there things that have to be calculated. Moving the King away from a square where the Bd3 can check by capturing on h7 increases the tension around the center squares, but Black is not immediately ready to break with .., e6-e5.

22.Be2 Qh4 23.a4 Re7?

This is an error. A timely repositioning of forces is called for with 23..., Nc8 24 b5 Ne7 25 bxc6 bxc6 26 Qe5, when the Black Q-side pawns are beginning to look frail.

24.a5 Nc8 25.g3 Qh3 26.Bf1 Qg4 27.h3 Qh5 28.Kg2?,..

Time was getting short for both players. Dean had about seven minutes and Jason a much more comfortable twenty-four minutes remaining. Here the logical continuation of White’s plan is 28 a6, then Black has unpalatable choices; a) 28..., bxa6 29 Ra1, increasing pressure on the Black Q-side with good chances to collect a pawn soon, b) 28..., b6 29 b5 cxb5 30 Nxb5, with a slightly different pressure on the Black Q-side, or seeking salvation in tactics with 28..., Nd6?!; which leads to 29 g4, when Black can sacrifice a Knight on g4 for very limited compensation, or keep the material balance with 29..., Qh4 30 c5 Nde8 31 b5, increasing the tension while the Black pieces are not well situated to deal with it. Time trouble looms for White and he hits upon an operation threatening the Black Queen as a way to get some moves played quickly.

28..., Red7 29.Ne2 Qg6 30.Nf4 Qe4+

Pointing up the problem for White; d4 is not well defended forcing the exchange of Queens.

31.Qxe4 Nxe4 32.Bd3?,..

Giving up the pawn without a fight. I suspect that Dean relied on his many years of experience telling him the d-pawn can not be successfully defended by 32 Ne2 Ne7 33 f3 Nf6 34 g4 e5. He therefore goes for the opening of the d-file and simplification.

32..., Rxd4 33.Bc2 ½–½

Jason was down to four minutes here while Dean had just about a minute left. The draw was offered and accepted. Black is of course better, maybe even winning here, but the clock is part of the game. Denham was obviously not completely certain he could execute the moves needed to win the game in the time remaining, and Howard had to be happy to escape with only dropping a half-point. A nice result for Mr. Denham.

Magat, Gordon - Northrup, Cory [A29]

AACC Championship Guilderland, NY, 09.11.2011

The English Four Knights is a positional debut that can turn tactical in a flash.

1.c4 e5 2.Nc3 Nf6 3.Nf3 Nc6 4.g3 d5 5.cxd5 Nxd5 6.Bg2 Be6 7.a3,..

A normal looking move but not mainstream theory. Normal here is 7 0-0. The text is probably a good alternative. Here is a game where Black tries to exploit his chances against 7 a3, but things don’t work out in the long run.

(592176) Hoffman,Alejandro (2491) - Bertona,Fernando (2405) [A20]

ARG-ch Buenos Aires (10), 20.10.2000

1.c4 e5 2.g3 Nf6 3.Bg2 Nc6 4.a3 d5 5.cxd5 Nxd5 6.Nc3 Be6 7.Nf3 Nxc3 8.bxc3 e4 9.Ng1 Bd5 10.f3 f5 11.Qa4 Bc5 12.fxe4 fxe4 13.Bxe4 Bxg1 14.Rxg1 0–0 15.Bb2 Re8 16.Bc2 Qe7 17.e3 Ne5 18.0–0–0 Bc4 19.Bb3 Qe6

With 19..., b5; Black could have extended his advantage.

20.Bxc4 Nxc4 21.Rgf1 Rad8

Again the advance of the b-pawn to b5 offers Black chances to win.

22.Rf4 Ne5 23.d4 b5

Too late to make a difference.

24.Qc2 Nc4 25.Re1 c5 26.Qf5 cxd4 27.Qxe6+ Rxe6 28.cxd4 Rxe3 29.Rxe3 Nxe3 30.Re4 Nd5 31.Re5 Kf7 32.Kd2 a6 33.Kd3 Rd7 34.Bc1 h6 35.Bd2 Rd8 36.g4 Nf6 37.h3 Rd5 38.Re1 Ng8 39.Bf4 Ne7 40.Rc1 h5?

Black never quite gets his head around the ending and shortly allows White a favorable opportunity to trade the Rooks. After that the passed d-pawn and the active Bishop are too much for the Knight and King.

41.Ke4 Ke6 42.Rc7 Rd7 43.Rxd7 Kxd7 44.gxh5 Ke6 45.Be5 Kf7 46.d5 Nc8 47.Bc7 Ke7 48.Kf5 Nd6+ 49.Kg6 Ne8 50.Ba5 Kd6 51.Kf7 1–0

7..., Be7 8.0–0 0–0 9.Qc2 Qd7 10.Rd1 f5

Black harbors serious intentions on the K-side; pieces and pawns against a sturdy looking King’s field. White seems to be counting on obtaining something from getting to play d2-d4, instead of the more restrained d2-d3. The game is about equal now.

11.d4 Nxc3?!

More in line with the layout of the Black pieces is 11..., e4 12 Ne5 Nxe5 13 dxe5 Qc6. Then Black still can think about .., f5-f4; at some point in the future. He may have been worried about 14 f6, but then tactics break out with 14..., Rad8 15 fxe4 Qc5+ 16 Kh1 fxe4 17 Bxe4 Nxc3 18 bxc3 Rxd1+ 19 Qxd1 Qxe5; and if 20 Bxb7? c6! 21 Bxc6 Qxc3 22 Bd5 Rf1+; wins for Black. As Philip Sells mentioned a week or two ago, there are times when local club players just don’t calculate lines out far enough to see the real outcome. I guess that is the case here for Cory. After the text White obtains free play for his pieces and some advantage. Black, on the other hand gives up most of his designs on the K-side.

12.bxc3 exd4 13.Nxd4 Nxd4 14.Rxd4 Qc8 15.Rb1 c6 16.a4 a5 17.Qb2 Bc5 18.Rd1 Rf7 19.Bg5 h6?

Losing material with a too casual move. Black must have assumed the back rank is well guarded so pushing back the adventurous Bishop is no big deal. It cost him his Queen for a Bishop and a Rook. Not quite enough to call the game won for White. Although Mr. Northrup did manage to gin up some counter-play, eventually the power of the Queen to do double attacks carried the day.

20.Rd8+ Qxd8 21.Bxd8 Rxd8 1–0

More soon.

A Game From the AACC Championship

I have been slothful in getting out the results and games from the Albany Area Chess Club title event. Today is to make up for that neglect.

Wednesday evening saw a full round, the second, played, and there were a couple of surprises; Dean Howard, the defending Champion was held to a draw by Jason Denham as was Peter Henner by Art Alowitz. The latter is not so big a surprise as the former. Alowitz is always a difficult opponent. His results against the Class A/Experts locally has been improving the last few years.

One game from the first round was not played and rescheduled to a later date; Lack - Henner. The standings after Wednesday’s play are:

Gordon Magat leads with 2 - 0. He is followed by Dean Howard and Akhil Kamma at 1 ½ - ½. Next is Jonathan Lack at 1 - 0, then Art Alowitz at 1 - 1. Peter Henner stands at ½ - ½, followed by Tim Wright, Jason Denham. and Chris Caravaty with ½ - 1 ½. Trailing the field is Cory Northrup at 0 - 2.

It is way too early to draw any conclusions about what the ultimate outcome will be. Gordon has yet to meet any of the top rated players; Howard, Wright , Henner and Lack. Dean was not able to generate any real play against Denheam’s Petronsian style Rubinstein variation of the French even after using a great deal of time in the middle game. He had to concede a draw in this second round game. Tim Wright spoiled his start to the event with an error early on against Lack. That coupled with the draw he had with Alowitz in round one makes a high finish for Mr. Wright a matter of doing well against the contenders from here on out; possible but difficult. Art Alowitz won the trophy for best under 1800 in last year’s AACC tournament, and he is off to an excellent start to repeat with draws against Wright and Henner. To really understand who’s leading we will need a couple of more rounds of play.

To obtain scores of the games herein published, I record the games underway for the most part. My experience has been that three games are about all I can handle at once. Trying for more works pretty well enough through the middle game, but once time trouble shows up, or a bunch of moves are made in a rush, making an accurate record suffers. In that light, choosing which games to record is a challenge. My rule has been to always try to record games where contenders play contenders, then games where emerging talents are playing, and finally, games with openings that in which I am interested. Today’s game is one between new talents and it is a Slav Defense. Ever since GM Har-Zvi’s Saturday lectures of a while back on the Slav, it has been a favorite of mine, and so today’s choice.

Caravaty, Chris - Kamma, Akhil [D11]

AACC Championship Guilderland, NY, 09.11.2011

1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.Nf3 Nf6 4.e3,.

Most common here is 4 Nc3. The text is the second choice among the GMs.

4...,Bg4

Much more frequently played is 4..., Bf5; we are still well within known theory.

5.Nc3 e6 6.Qb3 Qc7 7.Ne5 Bh5?!

Now the game is out in the high weeds of the non-theoretical. Normal is 7..., Bf4. There is not a lot of material in the databases on this position, but there are some games by high level players. Here are two:

(627747) Burmakin, Vladimir (2522) - Gurevich, Mikhail (2688) [D11]

EU-ch 2nd Ohrid (7), 07.06.2001

1.d4 d5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.c4 c6 4.e3 Bg4 5.Nc3 e6 6.Qb3 Qc7 7.Ne5 Bf5 8.Bd2 Nbd7 9.f4 Be7 10.Be2 0–0 11.0–0 Ne4 12.Nxe4 Bxe4 13.Nxd7 Qxd7 14.Bb4 b6 15.Bxe7 Qxe7 16.Rac1 c5 17.cxd5 exd5 18.Qa3 Rac8 19.Rc3 Rc6 20.Bf3 Bxf3 21.Rxf3 Qc7 22.dxc5 bxc5 23.Rf1 h6 24.Rd1 Rd8 25.Rcd3 d4 26.Qa4 Rcd6 27.Qa3 Qb6 28.g3 Re8 29.exd4 cxd4 30.Qb3 Qc5 31.Qa3 Qd5 32.Qb3 Qc5 33.Qa3 Qc6 34.R3d2 d3 35.Rf2 Re3 36.Qc3 Qd5 37.Qb3 Qd4 38.Qc3 Qa4 39.Qc8+ Kh7 40.Qf5+ Kg8 41.Qc8+ Re8 42.b3 Qe4 43.Qc3 Red8 44.Qe5 Qc6 45.Qe3 d2 46.Qxa7 Ra8 47.Qe3 Re8 48.Qxd2 Rxd2 49.Rfxd2 Kh7 50.Kf2 Qb6+ 51.Kg2 Re3 52.Rf2 Qc6+ 53.Kg1 g6 54.Rdf1 Qe4 55.Rd1 Kg7 56.Rdf1 h5 57.Rd1 Kh6 58.Rdf1 Qd5 59.Rc1 Rd3 60.Rcf1 Kg7 61.Re1 Kf6 62.Rfe2 Rd2 63.Kf2 Qd4+ 64.Kf3 Qd5+ 65.Kf2 Qc5+ 66.Kf3 Qc6+ 67.Kf2 Qb6+ 68.Kf3 Qb7+ 69.Ke3 Rd6 70.Kf2 Ra6 71.Ra1 Qb6+ 72.Kg2 Qc6+ 73.Kf2 Qc5+ 74.Kg2 Qd5+ 75.Kh3 Re6 76.Rf2 Re3 77.Raf1 Qe4 78.Rd1 Kg7 79.Rdd2 Re1 0–1

(1192478) Rukavina, Josip (2382) - Rogic, Davor (2512) [D11]

Pula op Pula (4), 26.06.2007

1.Nf3 d5 2.c4 c6 3.e3 Nf6 4.d4 Bg4 5.Nc3 e6 6.Qb3 Qc7 7.Ne5 Bf5 8.Be2 Nbd7 9.f4 h5 10.0–0 Be7 11.Bd2 g5 12.cxd5 gxf4 13.Nxd7 Qxd7 14.dxc6 bxc6 15.Bf3 fxe3 16.Bxe3 Bd6 17.Ne2 Rb8 18.Qc3 Nd5 19.Bxd5 cxd5 20.Bf4 Rg8 21.Rac1 h4 22.b3 Rg4 23.Qf3 e5 24.h3 Rg6 25.dxe5 Be4 26.exd6 Bxf3 27.Rxf3 Rxd6 28.Nd4 Rb4 29.Re1+ Kf8 30.Be5 Rg6 31.Ref1 Qe7 32.Rf5 Ke8 33.Rc1 Qd7 34.Rh5 f6 0–1

Both of these games see White converting the situation to something resembling a Bird’s formation with 9 f4. In both cases Black won. Overall, the databases show White at plus 1 over eight games. The player’s ratings in this selection of games are rather mixed from unrated to GM. For players above 2350 the results are even, +2 and -2. Drawing a conclusion re: the goodness of 9 f4, has to wait for more GM games and/or some serious analysis. Our game proceeds differently.

8.Bd3 dxc4 9.Bxc4 Bd6 10.Bxe6?!,..

White launches a highly speculative attack. It should not work. The complications are sufficient that the temptation is obvious. I’ve lost a casual game or two to Mr. Caravaty and can testify to his ambitious aggression at the board. This time I think he may have been carried away with the chance for a sprightly win.

10..., fxe6

At first glance declining the offer gives up a pawn for nothing. After 10..., 0-0 11 Bh3 Bxe5 12 dxe5 Qxe5 13 Qxb7, White seems to have the pawn safely in hand, but if the analysis is carried forward Black just might get compensation with 13..., Nbd7 14 0-0 Bg4; and White’s tardy development is a worry. Trying to improve the line by interjecting 14 Bxd7, seems to lead to a material imbalance favoring White after 14..., Nxd7 15 Qxc6 Rac8 16 Qd5 Rxc3 17 Qxe5 Rxc1+ 18 Rxc1 Nxe5; giving him a Rook and two pawns for the Bishop and Knight. It is true White will have to work hard to turn the material plus into a victory, but it should be possible.

I was watching the game and this passage closely. Akhil gave some serious thought to this move debating declining the offer no doubt.

11.Qxe6+ Be7?

Either 11..., Kf8; or 11..., Kd8; would be better. The text seems to be played with the hope of eventually castling. Until the White Queen can be shifted from her post whisking the Black King away is impossible. White has some more aggression in mind that keeps Black busy for a few moves. These moves alter the terrain significantly.

12.g4!,..

A nice as well as necessary move. Now Black is at a crossroads; giving some material to ease the heat of the attack is reasonable, but how to do so? Worth a thought is; 12..., Nxg4 13 Nxg4 Qd7 14 Qxd7 Nxd7; returning the piece and emerging down a pawn but with the Bishop pair as compensation and a more compact pawn structure; two versus three islands. There was no chance to interrogate the participants after the game to discover if either took under consideration the old wisdom that one of many things can be done is to return sacrificed material to ease the pressure against your position.

12..., Bg6 13.g5 Nfd7?

Of the three possible moves; 13..., Nd5; 13..., Nh5; and the text, it is the worst of the three. The other two alternatives lead to interesting play where Black has real chances to hold up the pawns, and slowly work towards winning back some of them.

14.Nxg6 hxg6 15.Qxg6+ Kf8 16.Qf5+ Ke8 17.Qg6+ Kf8 18.h4,..

Maybe Black was hinting at a draw offer. White declines. This is the best way to try for more according to Rybka.

18..., Qd6 19.Qxd6?!,..

This move is puzzling. White made a sacrifice to reach a position where the Black King is awkwardly placed, and now he agrees to a trade of Queens that relives a good deal of the awkwardness. Additionally, his Bc1 and Ra1 are not close to participating in the game and White exchanges his most active piece. The only reason the move does not get a straight out query is there is a possible and interesting line of play that allows White to solve many of his problems; 19 Qxd6 Bxd6 20 h5!? Na6 21 Ne4 Bc7 22 Ke2, and White is on his way to getting all his pieces out; the Bishop goes to d2 and then the Ra1 may be used on the c, f or g-files as required.

A better choice for White is 19 Qf5+, and after 19..., Ke8; the main alternatives are; a) 20 Bd2, with long castling mobilizing all forces to support the extra pawns. b) 20 h5, when 20..., g6; introduces a complex fight. c) 20 e4, offering a pawn to get his pieces out after 20..., Qxd4 21 Be3 and eventually Ra1-d1. Instead of these options, White chooses to take the game to an ending where Black’s pieces have every chance to blockade the advancing pawns.

19..., Bxd6 20.f4 Na6 21.a3 Kf7 22.h5,..

White has purposefully advanced this h-pawn; it was a key part of his ambitious play to this point in the game. That makes it curious how he forgets about it later in the game.

22..., Ke7 23.b4,..

It was around this point in the game another of the spectators asked me why Chris wasn’t developing his pieces. The only answer I can think of is he was more worried about the Black pieces infiltrating his position than making the maximum use of his own forces.

23..., Nc7 24.e4,..

This looks risky but it is probably the best move in the situation. The Ra8 is ready to come in to the fight, White therefore wants to crowd the Black minor pieces as much as possible. The next operation continues this idea.

24..., Ne6 25.e5 Bc7 26.d5 cxd5?

This move concedes the advantage to White. Black could play 26..., Nxe5; seeking counter-play in complications by returning material, or 26..., Nd4 27 d6+ Ke6 28 Rb1 Bb6; when Black is close to blockading the pawns completely.

27.Nxd5+ Kd8

A little more stubborn defense might be 27..., Kf7; keeping the Rooks connected.

28.Nxc7?,..

This natural looking move lets slip most of the advantage White obtained so recently due to the Black errors. It is better to complete mustering all the White forces with 28 Be3, and if 28..., Nb6 29 0-0-0, than it is to trade this active Knight

28..., Kxc7 29.Be3 Raf8 30.Rc1+ Kb8 31.Rc4 Nb6 32.Bxb6 axb6 33.Rh4,..

The Rooks defending pawns in this way are a bit awkward.

33...,b5 34.Re4 Rd8?

This is the moment to bring the Black King closer to the scene of the action with 34..., Kc7. The Black pieces are well place to fight against the advance of the White pawn hoard. Why go adventuring?

35.Ke2 Nd4+ 36.Kf2 Nf5 37.Rh3 Rd2+ 38.Re2 Rd4 39.Kf3 Rd3+ 40.Kg4 Rxh3 41.Kxh3?,..

We now see why; Black must have had this general operation in mind all along. White probably did not see it clearly otherwise he could have defended better with 38 Kf3 Rd3+ 39 Kg4 Rxa3 40 Kxf5, and although White is down a Rook, his pawns are becoming mobile, the Black g-pawn is very weak while the Black King is about one move short of being able to help effectively.

Of course here White should have played for the win with 41 Kxf5!, and after 41..., Kc7 42 Kg6 Rxa3 43 e6 Raa8 44 e7 Kd7 45 Kf7 Rhe8 46 Kxg7 Rxe7+ 47 Rxe7+ Kxe7 48 h6, this pawn will cost Black his Rook. White has then an easily won ending.

41..., Rc8??

The dreaded double query is given because 41..., Rxh5+; wins for Black after 42 Kg4 g6; and if 43 e6? Rh4+; and 44..., Nd4+; is a final blow. The better alternative for White 43 Ra2, leaving Black just about winning after 43..., Kc7. What is just as bad as missing the immediate tactical point is the text begins an operation that gives White a winning possibility.

42.Kg4 Nd4 43.Re4 Rc4?

Self pinning the Nd4 making the potential push h5-h6 very strong indeed.

44.e6?!,..

A strong move but not clearly winning as is 44 h6! . How then does Black stop the coming Queen on the h-file? The most reasonable try; 44..., gxh6 45 gxh6 Rc6 46 Rxd4 Rxh6 47 f5, is obviously won for White with little counter-play for Black.

44..., Nc6 45.Kf5??,..

White fails to count. Now simply 45 Rxc4 bxc4 46 h6. White will Queen with check gaining enough time to bring the new Queen to h1 stopping or delaying the c-pawn from reaching the first rank, and there is always the White e-pawn waiting in the wings to Queen with or without the help of the f6-pawn.

45..., Ne7+ 46.Ke5 Nc6+ 47.Kd5 Ne7+ 48.Ke5,..

The clocks were becoming a problem for both sides now. White did not have the leisure to calculate a last winning try with 48 Kd6, which looks won for him. He here decides on a split of the point.

48..., Nc6+ 49.Kf5 Ne7+ 50.Ke5 ½–½

The draw was offered and accepted. The game has it flaws, but both sides had ideas and were making every effort to win the game. The participants demonstrated ambition and imagination, they both also have some problems in calculation. Some more outings in the crucible of tournament chess will, if they seriously analyze their games, will certainly see improvement in calculation. It will be interesting to see how high they climb in the local pecking order.

More soon.

A Game From A Week Ago

My last post mentioned an upset win by Jeff Capitummino over Philip Sells. Here is that game.

Capitummino, Jeff - Sells, Philip [E15]

SCC Prelim A Schenectady, NY, 27.10.2011

1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nf3 b6 4.g3 Ba6

Not the most common way to proceed in the QID. It has been quite popular with elite players over the years; Nimzovitsch used it in the 1930s, Taimanov and Bronstein in the 1950s, Keres and Smyslov in the 1960s and 70s, Karpov versus Kasparov in their 1984 match and on down to the likes of Karlakin, Ivanchuk and Adams in rapid games at Wilk aan Zee in recent years. Conclusion; it is a perfectly good way to introduce some variety into the QID formations.

5.e3?,..

But this is a not so good answer. It weakens the light squares in the White camp. More common answers used by the Grandmasters here are; 5 b3, and 5 Qc2.

5..., c6

Black plays to pressure the pawn at c4. That is reasonable, but the method selected seems slow. 5..., d5; is possible right away, or Black can try 5..., Nc6; with the Knight going to a5 soon and .., d7-d5; planned. White has the resources to support c4. Black’s intention with such operations is to reach some middle game position where he is comfortable while maintaining central tension.

6.Qc2 d5 7.b3 Nbd7 8.Bb2 Rc8 9.Nbd2 Be7

A bit more aggressive is 9..., Bd6; but Black does not want to have to worry about e3-e4 at some point and the subsequent exchange of some minor pieces. Mr. Sells, taking into account the difference in rating and experience with his opponent, prefers to avoid reducing material if he can’t see the chance for advantage.

10.Rc1 0–0 11.a3!?,..

A trifle slow. Either 11 Be2, 11 Bd3, with castling to follow is sensible.

11..., c5!

Not a hard move to find but certainly on point. White has lagged his development and Black has gotten all his pieces out. Threatening to open up the game in the middle of the board is a natural operation to begin now.

12.Qb1 Re8

Black still does not see any big opportunity coming by releasing tension in the center. He undertakes an small operation to improve the position of his pieces anticipating a later trade-off of central pawns.

13.Bd3 Bf8

Potentially more useful is 13..., h6; recognizing that White has pieces lining up to attack h7.

14.0–0 Rc7 15.Rc2 Qb8

The game is closely balanced. Neither side has nailed down the initiative and positional maneuvering is the order of the day.

16.Qa1 b5!?

Activity with some risk attached. Deep Rybka suggests 16..., h6; but I am not clear as to why that move is best.

17.Rfc1?!,..

The right idea and the wrong move order. If White wants to fight for the c-file, it is better to first play 17 cxd5, opening the file. Black can now keep the c-pawn as a target.

17..., bxc4 18.bxc4 cxd4 19.Bxd4 Rb7

Black may have been concerned about a White Rook occupying the b-file, and then, if he blocks with his own Rook on b7, a pair of Rooks will be traded making the position less complex.

20.Bf1 dxc4 21.Bxc4 Bxc4 22.Rxc4 Qd6 23.a4 Qa6 24.Kg2,..

After the game Jeff made an interesting comment. He said the purpose behind this move was to not let Black capture on the back rank with check. Implied was getting the Rook on the 8th and the Bishop going to c5 operation was somewhere in his thoughts. A pretty sophisticated approach from a young man without a great deal of chess experience.

24..., Nd5

Black logically takes aim at the exposed White a-pawn.

25.Rc8,..

White responds by forcing off some Rooks.

25..., Rxc8 26.Rxc8 N7b6!?

Eliminating the annoying pin on the Bf8 with 26..., Rb8; is the safest path.

27.Rd8 Qxa4?

White has won the a-pawn per the program. The cost is high; all the White pieces now can get into the fray while the Black pieces are tied up. Mixing things up with 27..., Rd7; may be the best way to go. White would have to try the sacrificial line 28 Rxf8 Kxf8 29 Bxg7+ if he wants to go for the win. The line is however a long calculation and tricky. The task of deciding on such an adventure might have caused the opponent bail out with 28 Rxd7, leaving Black with his threats on the a-pawn and not a bad game at all.

I had the game score and it was correct, but making sense of Philip’s resignation was difficult. Last Thursday, a week after the game was played, Sells and I had the opportunity to look at the game together. It was then the full story became clear to me. After White’s 28th , Mr. Sells grabbed his Queen to take off the hanging Black Lady on a1, only picking up his Queen did he see that it was mate on the move for him. Mr. Sells of course resigned immediately.

Interestingly, Philip was not in time trouble at this juncture, in fact his clock was looking better than his opponent’s. This momentary, acute attack of chess blindness is unusual for Sells. We have many examples of him fending off tricks with only seconds on the clock for several moves. Such happens to all chess players occasionally, The surprise is it happening to someone who rarely slips.

The game could have continued if Black had played 28..., Ne7; but White has the better game. It might have gone; 29 Qxa4 Nxa4 30 Bd6 h6 31 Nc4 Nb6 32 Nxb6 axb6 33 Ne5, heading towards d7 to win a piece. Alternatively, 28..., Ne7 29 Qxa4 Nxa4 30 Bd6 f6 31 Nd4 Kf7 32 Ne4, and if 32..., e5 33 Bxe5, and if 33..., fxe5? 34 Nd6+ Kg6 35 Nxb7 exd4 36 Rxf8 is won for White. On move 33 Black could try 33..., Ng6; but 34 Bd6 Rb6 35 Bxf8 Nxf8 36 Nf5 Re6 37 Ned6+ Kg8 38 Ne8 g6 39 Nh6+ Kh8 40 Nc7, and Black loses material.

28.Bc5 1–0 More soon.

This Week's Doings at SCC and AACC

There is a flurry of local news today. Wednesday the Albany Area Chess Club began its annual championship event. Playing are; Dean Howard, Gordon Magat, Peter Henner, Tim Wright, Jonathan Lack, Art Alowitz, Cory Northrup, Jason Denham, Akhil Kamma and Chris Caravaty. This is a slightly smaller turnout than last year and follows a trend. The big local clubs, Schenectady, Albany and Saratoga have seen a slightly reduced participation in their title events. This maybe just a blip of no great significance, or the effect of some older players scaling back their chess activity. Several new faces showing up, Kamma, Caravaty, Varela and others, indicate the chess community has vitality.

Thursday the 4th round of the Schenectady Prelims was played amid nicer weather than last week. Only two games were delayed; Le Cours - Chu and Connors - Phillips both from Section B. The results of the games played were:

Zack Calderone - Capitummino 1-0, Sells - Varela 1-0, Stanley - Aaron 0-1, Kamma - Herman Calderone 1-0.

Today’s game is the clash between two newer participants in the Schenectady Championship wars. In an off-beat line they do pretty well until a moment’s in attention causes an early end to the festivities.

Calderone, Zack - Capitummino, Jeff [B01]

SCC Preliminary Section A, Schenectady, NY, 03.11.2011

1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Qxd5 3.Nc3 Qa5 4.b4!?,..

After the game Zack asked if I had any information on this line. He said there wasn’t much to be found in ECO. I told him John Emms, the British GM had written The Scandinavian, Everyman Chess, London, 2004 and had done some analysis of the line. Boiling down Emms’ comments; this is the Mieses Gambit. A speculative try that is not particularly worrying for Black if he keeps his head. Black should just grab the pawn and say ’thank you’ with 4..., Qxb4 5 Rb1 Qd6 6 d4 Nf6 7 Nf3 a6; preventing any White piece from going to b5. Then Emms recommends as the best try for White; 8 g3!? (there is no great joy for the Bishop at d3 or c4, why not g2?) 8..., b6 9 Bg2 Bb7 10 0-0 0-0 11 Ne5!, with pressure on the Q-side.

There are not many games in my databases on this line. Here are some:

This game was crucial to Naka beating out our own GM Har-Zvi for the title that year. It is a blitz game but the participants are very, very good at blitz.

(1161166) Nakamura, Hikaru (2651) - Har Zvi, Ronen (2515) [B01]

Dos Hermanas Internet f 8th Internet ICC (2.4), 23.03.2007

1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Qxd5 3.Nc3 Qa5 4.b4 Qxb4 5.Rb1 Qd6 6.Bc4 Nf6 7.Nf3 a6 8.d4 b5 9.Bb3 Bb7 10.0–0 e6 11.Re1 Be7 12.Ng5 Nd5 13.Nce4 Qd7 14.Qh5 Bxg5 15.Nc5 Nf6 16.Qxg5 Qc6 17.Bxe6 0–0 18.Bb3 Nbd7 19.Nxb7 Qxb7 20.Qg3 Qc6 21.Bb2 Nd5 22.Qf3 N7b6 23.Ba3 Rfd8 24.Bc5 Nc4 25.Bxc4 bxc4 26.Re5 Qd7 27.h3 h6 28.Rbe1 c6 29.Qe2 c3 30.Qh5 Rab8 31.Ba3 Nf4 32.Qf3 Nd5 33.Qh5 Nf4 34.Qf3 Nd5 35.g3 Qxh3 36.Qd3 Qd7 37.Kg2 Re8 38.Qxa6 Rxe5 39.Rxe5 Qg4 40.Bc1 Qxd4 41.Re2 Qg4 42.Qd3 Ra8 43.a3 h5 44.Re4 Qg6 45.Qd4 h4 46.Rg4 Qf6 47.Qxf6 Nxf6 48.Rxh4 Nd5 49.Rc4 Ra6 50.Kf3 f6 51.Ke4 Kf7 52.Kd4 Ke6 53.Kc5 Kd7 54.Kd4 Kd6 55.Kd3 Ra8 56.Rg4 g5 57.a4 c5 58.Ba3 Kc6 59.Rc4 Ra5 60.g4 Nb6 61.Rxc3 Nxa4 62.Rb3 Nb6 63.c4 Ra4 64.Bb2 Rxc4 65.Rxb6+ 1–0

One hundred years ago Mieses authored his Gambit to no great success against the very strong international player Leonhardt.

(6196) Leonhardt, Paul Saladin - Mieses, Jacques [B01]

Prague (1), 1908

1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Qxd5 3.Nc3 Qa5 4.b4 Qxb4 5.Rb1 Qd6 6.Nf3 Nf6 7.d4 c6 ,8.Bd3 b6 9.0–0 e6 10.Qe2 Be7 11.Ne4 Nxe4 12.Qxe4 Qd5 13.Qg4 Bf6 14.c4 Qd8 15.Ba3 Nd7 16.Rfe1 Nf8 17.Rbd1 Qc7 18.Bc1 Ng6 19.h4 0–0 20.h5 Ne7 21.Qe4 g6 22.Bf4 Qd7 23.Be5 Bxe5 24.dxe5 Bb7 25.Qf4 Qe8 26.Qf6 h6 27.hxg6 Nxg6 28.Nh4 Qd8 29.Bxg6 Qxf6 30.exf6 fxg6 31.Rxe6 Bc8 32.Rxc6 Bf5 33.Nxf5 gxf5 34.Rd7 Rf7 35.Rd5 Re8 36.Rxf5 Re1+ 37.Kh2 Ra1 38.Re5 Rxa2 39.f4 Rd2 40.f5 Rdd7 41.Re8+ Kh7 42.Rce6 h5 43.R6e7 Kh6 44.Rxd7 Rxd7 45.Re7 Rd4 46.Re8 Rd7 47.Kg3 Kg5 48.Re7 Rd3+ 49.Kf2 Kxf6 50.Rxa7 ½–½

The future World Champion tried out the move in an exhibition and was not overly pleased with the result.

(8397) Capablanca, Jose Raul - Portela, R [B01]

Havana simul, 06.09.1913

1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Qxd5 3.Nc3 Qa5 4.b4 Qxb4 5.Rb1 Qd6 6.d4 Nf6 7.Nf3 e6 8.Bd3 c5 9.0–0 Be7 10.Nb5 Qd8 11.Bf4 Na6 12.dxc5 Bxc5 13.Qe2 0–0 14.Rfd1 Qe7 15.Nd6 Nb4 16.Be5 Rd8 17.Ne4 Nxd3 18.Bxf6 gxf6 19.Rxd3 Rxd3 20.Qxd3 b6 21.Qc3 e5 22.Nh4 Be6 23.Qf3 Rd8 24.Nf5 Bxf5 25.Qxf5 Kg7 26.Qg4+ Kh8 27.Qf3 Kg7 28.Ng3 Kh8 29.Rd1 Rxd1+ 30.Qxd1 ½–½

Not taking the pawn is not really a better choice.

(41734) Milner Barry, Philip Stuart - Mahishkar, B [B01]

Moscow ol (Men) qual-C Moscow (9), 1956

1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Qxd5 3.Nc3 Qa5 4.b4 Qe5+ 5.Be2 c6 6.Nf3 Qc7 7.0–0 Bg4 8.Rb1 e6 9.b5 Bd6 10.Ne4 Ne7 11.Nxd6+ Qxd6 12.Rb3 c5 13.d4 Nd7 14.Ba3 Rc8 15.Rd3 Bf5 16.dxc5 Qc7 17.Rc3 Nd5 18.Rc4 Qa5 19.Bb2 0–0 20.Qd4 N7f6 21.a4 Rfd8 22.Qh4 Nd7 23.Qg3 f6 24.Nd4 Nxc5 25.Nxf5 exf5 26.Rd1 Ne4 27.Rxc8 Rxc8 28.Qb3 Rc5 29.Bc4 1–0

These two well known British internationalists had many good fights between them in their careers. This game was not one of them. Sir George Thomas got the drop on Winter with his own special treatment of the Black side and Winter cracked early.

(25895) Winter, William - Thomas, George Alan [B01]

London-B London (11), 1946

1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Qxd5 3.Nc3 Qa5 4.b4 Qxb4 5.Rb1 Qd6 6.Qf3 c6 7.Bc4 Nf6 8.Nge2 Nbd7 9.d4 Nb6 10.Bf4 Bg4 11.Qd3 Qd7 12.Bb3 e6 13.0–0 Bd6 14.Bg5 Nbd5 15.Nxd5 Nxd5 16.c4 Bxe2 17.Qxe2 Nc3 18.Qg4 Nxb1 19.Rxb1 Be7 20.Bxe7 Qxe7 21.Qxg7 0–0–0 22.d5 exd5 23.cxd5 c5 24.d6 Qe4 25.Qb2 Rhg8 26.f3 Qe3+ 27.Kh1 Rxd6 28.Be6+ Rxe6 29.Qxb7+ Kd8 30.h3 Qd3 31.Qb8+ Ke7 32.Rb7+ Kf6 33.Qf4+ Kg7 0–1

In this game Black demonstrates a few of the tricks available to him in this line.

(400806) Lendwai Reinhard (2385) - Sommerbauer, Norbert (2385) [B01]

AUT-ch Voitsberg (9), 1995

1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Qxd5 3.Nc3 Qa5 4.b4 Qxb4 5.Rb1 Qd6 6.Nf3 Nf6 7.d4 e6 8.Bd3 a6 9.0–0 Nbd7 10.Re1 Be7 11.Qe2 c5 12.d5 Nxd5 13.Nxd5 Qxd5 14.Be4 Qd6 15.Bxb7 Bxb7 16.Rxb7 Qc6 17.Qe4 Qxe4 18.Rxe4 Nf6 19.Ra4 0–0–0 0–1

To sum up; the Mieses Gambit may surprise an unprepared opponent, but if he has a little bit of knowledge, White has to prove the pawn was invested and not just lost.

4..., Qxb4 5.Rb1 Qd6 6.Nf3 Nf6 7.d4 a6 8.Bd3,..

If the Bishop goes to c4, Black gains time with 8..., b5.

8..., e6

A couple of alternatives may well be better; a) 8..., g6; with .., Nc6 coming soon, and 8..., Nc6; right away. White seems to be planning to pressure the Black Q-side, the obvious point to the pawn sacrifice. In the game the pressure retards Black’s development there. This is the moment for Black to recognize and avoid the problem.

9.Bg5 Be7 10.Bxf6 Bxf6?!

I like White’s idea. He wants to increase the Q-side pressure by creating a home for his light squared Bishop on e4, and the Bishop and Rook working together might just tie up the Black pieces for some good while. That is not to say the plan is water tight. It is however creative and is appealing. Black should not fall in with it. Here 10..., gxf6; keeps the Bishop from long occupying e4, problematically opens the g-file and retains the pair of Bishops. The usefulness of the g-file to Black is debatable; the other two factors are pluses for Black.

11.Ne4 Qe7 12.Nxf6+ Qxf6 13.Rb3,..

White has carried out his idea, but this move is questionable. There is nothing immediately tactically wrong with it, but its only active intention must be to act along the 3d rank. Will that be enough to tip the balance? More direct is 13 Be4, then Black has to play the un-handsome move 13..., Ra7; however there are sufficient resources for Black to make a defense in this line also.

13..., c6?!

As several Grandmasters have said from time to time; a pawn is worth some trouble. In this case, Black is making things much too difficult for himself by playing to just keep the pawn. Perhaps he was worried about 13..., 0-0 14 Be4?, but then 14..., Qf4; and 15 Bxb7?, loses to 15..., Bxb7 16 Rxb7 Qe4+.

14.Ne5!?,..

An adventure with some risks attached. The logical 14 0-0, is reasonable with whether or not White has compensation for the pawn still to be determined. White has some scheme in mind involving an attack with pieces if Black castles I guess. Black apparently believes this is possible and plays to avoid the imagined attack. Is there really the makings of such an assault? A quick test seems to say no; 14..., 0-0 15 Be4 Qf4 16 Qe2? f5; and Black is fine. Or, 14..., 0-0 15 0-0 g6 16 c3, giving up the idea of using the Rook along the third rank. It seems if Black castles there is no immediate assault about to break over his position.

A number of chess writers have made a point about trusting your opponent too much. GM Jacob Aagaard does so in his book; Excelling at Chess Calculation. Everyman Chess, London 2004. Aagaard says when your opponent undertakes an operation you must test it and not blindly accept the scheme is valid. Otherwise you can be chasing ghosts. Aagaard has another piece of wisdom regards ‘unforced thinking‘, his terminology. He believes we chess players all too often make assumptions about positions - in today’s game Jeff accepts there is really a dangerous piece attack possible on his King - and thereafter we force our thought process with that perhaps erroneous assumption in mind. Aagaard recommends developing the habit of unforced thinking to open up all the possibilities available.

14..., Nd7

The natural move, Black wants to get his Q-side pieces out and about.

15.Nxd7 Kxd7?!

Playable but why put yourself through the difficulties? Black grabbed the pawn offered in the opening and has held on to it grimly. The text continues this idea. Here may be the point where abandoning that plan is the better course. Concrete calculation shows Black wins after 15..., Bxd7 16 Rxb7 Qxd4 17 Bxa6? Qxd1+ 18 Kxd1 Bc8; so capturing on d7 with the Bishop is at least possible. Of course White could improve his play in this line with 17 0-0, vice 17 Bxa6? A reasonable line of play is 15..., Bxd7 16 Rxb7 Qxd4 17 0-0 Rd8 18 Bxa6 Bc8 19 Qxd4 Rxd4 20 Rb8 Kd7; when a position is reached where Black has cashed in his pawn plus for a slightly better pawn structure, a more active King, freedom for his pieces and most importantly, the opportunity to contest the initiative.

Transformations of advantages is an essential part of chess playing skill. In this game Black loses because he refuses to transform his material advantage into something else. There times when you get a pawn up and can hold it until later to win in a King and pawn ending. Judging when this is possible and when something other has to be tried takes experience and study. From this point to the end White retains the initiative. Lacking any chance to fight for the initiative Black is reduced to reacting to the threats White makes. It is possible to do this but accuracy is required. Any slip can be fatal, and it is a very uncomfortable kind of a game to play for the player without the initiative.

16.Be4 Ke7 17.Rf3 Qg5 18.0–0 g6 19.Rd3!?,..

White decides that the winning operation will be some sort of central advance. It turns out not to be quite enough to win. Probably better to go a little slower with 19 Re1, mustering more force before deciding a specific plan.

19..., Rd8 20.Re1 Kf8 21.c4!?,..

Energetic and motivated by the belief there is something positive to be gained by breaking open the center quickly. More measured is 21 Bf3, and 22 h3, improving the position before hurling thunderbolts.

21..., Rb8?

Here 21..., Qa5; gives Black the chance to take the initiative at the cost of the extra pawn after 22 Qc1 e5 23 dxe5 Rxd3 24 Bxd3 Be6; when the Black pieces are about to become very active and the White pieces are becoming less so. Black has forced his thinking into the narrow path of keeping the extra pawn ignoring the dynamic alternatives.

22.d5 cxd5 23.cxd5 exd5 24.Rxd5 Rxd5 25.Bxd5 Qf6 26.Qa4?!,..

Still believing there is an win to be found with active play, White makes an ambitious move. Organizing his position for more maneuvering with 26 h3, making a luft for his King, and denying full freedom for the Black Bc8, is a better try to use the fleeting advantage in piece activity he has.

26..., Qd8?

Missing the chance to balance the game with 26..., Bf5; then 27 g4 Rd8 28 Bxb7 Bd3 29 Rd1 Kg7; or 29..., Be2 30 Bxa6!? Bxa6 31 Qxa6 Qd1+; both take the game to a drawn outcome. The text leaves unsolved the development of the Black Q-side pieces and worse presents White with real tactical opportunities.

27.Qd4?,..

Seemingly strong and it does keep some advantage. Far more forceful is 27 Qf4, winning immediately by attacking the Rb8 and threatening mate at f7. Then 27..., Bf5 28 g4, wins the Bf5, or allows mate after 28..., Rc8 29 gxf5 Qxd5 30 Qh6+ Kg8 31 f6, and there is no defense.

27..., Kg8??

The relentless pressure that Zack kept on Jeff finally causes a blunder and the Black Queen is lost. Black should have played 27..., Be6; then 28 Qe5 Kg8 29 Bxe6 fxe6 30 Rc1 b5 31 Qxe6+ Kg7 31 Qxa6, favors White by quite a lot, but there are moves to be made and the outcome is not yet clear.

28.Bxf7+ 1–0

Educational this game was, to use the Yoda phraseology. The Mieses Gambit has value as a surprise weapon but shouldn’t strike fear in the hearts of Scandinavian players, forced thinking limits our understanding of what is available to us in a given position, and judging when to cash in a material advantage is no easy task. The Grandmasters writing about chess tell us when a material advantage is so small as a pawn, giving it up for piece activity and one or more other positional pluses is usually a good idea.

I was impressed with Zack Calderone’s energetic planning and focused play. His plans were not without holes, but they had purpose behind them. Experience will soon make him formidable to all our local talent. Jeff Capitummino played a stubborn defense and had chances right down to the end. This effort, albeit a losing one, coupled with Jeff’s fortuitous win last week from Philip Sells, show he is making serious progress. A loss thus is painful but useful for correcting thinking habits that need improvement.

More soon.