Once more unto the breach for the Schenectady Chess Club's representatives at
the US Amateur Team East over President's Day weekend! Of this tournament, one
could write almost the same script as last year. We, that is, the Schenectady Chess Club's 'A' team, traveled with mostly the
same team as the past couple of years--in fact, our roster was
precisely the same as it had been two years ago, just in a different board
order: this year we were Philip Sells (your scribe), Alan LeCours, Michael Mockler, and Bill
Townsend. I once again served as captain of the team, which got
the name "The Paul Morphy Re-animation Project". Schenectady's 'B' squad featured John Barnes (an alumnus of
the senior side), club president Richard Chu, and Cory Northrup and Matt Clough,
who've been putting up some promising results of late. Herein, I'm going to
concentrate on the higher-rated of the two teams, because I can give a
first-hand account and I have very little data on the other team's travails in
any case.
Round one was special for us, as we were on Board One! The opposing team was
obviously very strong, containing two 2300-level masters, but no titled players.
Bill was the first to fold, crashing out in a miniature. After some time had
passed, Mike also conceded. That left me and Alan soldiering on. My game had
actually been going fairly well, my opponent Martirosov having indulged in an
unsound pawn sacrifice. But alas, my time was running rather short (stop me if
you've heard this one before), and in a position with only major pieces on the
board and several open files, I neglected a couple of obvious chances to push a
pawn and secure myself against back-rank mates, whereas my opponent had been
much more prudent. I don't think you need me to tell you what happened next. I
will say that my opponent's particular method of, shall we say, "execution" of
the motif was indeed elegant. Alan seemed to have decent drawing chances for a
long time, but by the time I had resigned, things had begun to turn against
him--it was around that time that his opponent, Ilya Krasik, had attained a very
pleasant ending with same-colored bishops, which, after some moments of odd
hesitation and gestures toward a repetition, resolved into a textbook win for
the master. I had been a little impatient for Alan to resign so we could get
dinner, but on the other hand, there was that one moment when we thought Krasik
might miraculously fail to find the correct continuation. But in the end, the
match was lost 0-4, just like last year when we were on board ten.
Par for the course so far, I thought. Round two, on board 45, was somewhat
less demanding for us, though we made heavy going of it at times. Our opponents
in this case were a youth team whose strength on paper at least was well below
ours. I was encouraged by Bill's quickish win on the fourth board (I put it that
way only because my record shows that his game was the first to finish, but I
don't remember this match being particularly brief). After that, though, things
began to get a little wobbly. Mike had to take a draw to save what he assured me
had been a lost position, which I had no qualms about, since I had my own game
well in hand and Alan seemed to be a clean pawn up in another same-colored
bishop endgame. But then something odd happened--somehow, Alan let things slip
into draw-land (he had in fact declined a draw offer from his opponent at one
time), and then managed to lose the pawn ending! I was a little troubled by
this, but more for Alan's sake than for that of the team, since, as said, I had
been managing my game toward a win. My opponent fought it out all the way to
mate, making my game the last of the match to end. So that round we carried
2.5-1.5.
Round three saw us, accelerated pairings being now done with, on board 66,
playing a team we had actually defeated last year! Their lineup, too, had
changed a bit. My opponent from the previous match was now on board two, and
their new top-board man was a German gentleman making a reentry to tournament
chess after a long career-related break. On this occasion, we turned in a very
nice score of 3.5-0.5, Alan having to accept a draw. The other team's board
three was once again showcasing his assortment of funny hats this year; I forget
which one he was sporting for this round (he changed hats for each game). In
between rounds, we went for lunch and discovered the local Panchero's in so
doing, which was a nice experience.
For round four, we unfortunately had not made much progress up the tables,
landing on board 62. As in round two, we made things unnecessarily difficult for
ourselves, but still eked out a win. Mike shot himself in the foot by
miscalculating a rook sacrifice, for which Bill compensated by winning his game
next. My game had taken a strange turn in the opening, starting out as an
O'Kelly Sicilian and transposing to a kind of weird King's Indian arrangement.
Playing White, I found some nifty ways to make my opponent suffer on the
queenside. He tried rather despairingly to drum up something against my king,
and there was one moment when I played too quickly, forgoing the obvious crusher
in exchange for grabbing Black's g-pawn, of all things. This nearly opened the
floodgates on my own king, but fortunately I could give up my queen to reach a
won ending, which in the event resulted in a quick mate at the time control. To
close out the match, Alan agreed another draw that had arisen from an
interesting-looking endgame of two bishops (Alan) vs. bishop + knight (Alan's
opponent). So 2.5-1.5 for us that time!
Thus we reached Round Five, which for years has been the mountain stopping us
from winning top place in our rating bracket. As I said at the top of this post,
the story is almost exactly like last year. And just like last year, our
round-five encounter put paid to our ambitions. We were paired up on board 28,
against a team whose top board was only rated 2200, comparable to the 2156
rating of the team that we faced this time last year. Bill played well and
obtained a draw for us as the first of the results to come in. As the match
continued, the other team's board three offered Mike a draw. He looked to me for
a verdict, and I, considering my own totally lost position and Alan's at the
time fairly tolerable-looking one, bade Mike play on if there was any way to go
for a win. We might be able to draw the match! We might! But then Alan's
opponent detected a really nice combination that left our man in a position
suggesting images of Hieronymus Bosch and Quentin Tarantino. I had resigned in
the meantime, so suddenly it really didn't matter any more what Mike achieved on
board three. Unfortunately, his captain's orders had left him shackled to a
cruel game in which his opponent was no longer inclined to extend any draw
offers. That game went on so long that some of the rest of us felt the need to
get to dinner before it was too late, so I was spared the sight of my teammate
walking the plank. Ugly loss, 0.5-3.5, made just a little more unsavory by my
feeling of guilt which, in a chess context, I don't recall having ever felt in
quite the same way. On the bright side, we found ourselves another burrito-type
place, called Qdoba (another chain, not as widespread as Panchero's). The
quality here was good as well, though perhaps just a little bit shy of what
Panchero's had on offer.
That set the stage for the final round on board 49, which again played out
just like last year. Obviously we needed a win and got it, but the opponents
showed some tenacity and didn't let us have it all our own way. Bill and Mike
won their games relatively soon. My game was rather interesting, playing a hot
line in the mainline Caro-Kann, in which my opponent actually made a
natural-looking mistake that I didn't quite take full advantage of. Had I been
aware of a certain theoretical novelty from a game in 2003, I could have wrapped
up the game in style. But alas, I chose a way which, though not bad, resulting
as it did in the clean win of a pawn, was definitely not best. It came down to a
queen ending in which, though I had that extra pawn, my opponent's queen was so
perfectly active that my ambitions were quite frustrated, so I had to repeat
moves. Ironically, my sixth-round game last year, occurring in the very same
place in the room, almost to the inch, had also ended in a repetition. Poor Alan
had to swallow another draw, which left us with a 3-1 match win.
Four match points is not bad, but it's not good enough for an Under-2000 team
to win anything at this event, either. Well, enough of my whining about that!
One bright spot was the fact that Mike had some good games and seemed to be
enjoying himself nicely, so this tournament represented a good uptick for him.
Also, Bill Townsend was quite a presence on board four for us, being the team's
top individual scorer this year. This goes to show that ... ahh, now, if I start
talking about the great confidence that we can place in our third- and
fourth-board players, I'll only jinx the operation next year. So I'll just say
that even though this year was a bit of a rerun for us, we did still have a good
time and produced some good games along the way. Next year, though, we should
probably look into some alternative breakfast arrangements, as the diner in
Denville doesn't leave quite the favorable impression with us that it once did.
And I might suggest--only a suggestion, mind--to my teammates that we modify
that habit we've been cultivating in recent years of drinking copious amounts of
select wines on the night before round five.... I still wish we'd saved the
label from that Albanian Merlot, though! Where the heck is "New Platz",
anyway?!
A couple of final notes: Titled players were, as at the last couple of
Amateur Team East events, a little thin on the ground. I played no titled
opponent this year, for example, not even an FM. There were several grandmasters
present all the same, mostly the usual suspects, though reigning Marshall Chess
Club champion GM Mikheil Kekelidze played his first Amateur Team. He seemed not
to like it very much, commenting to me in passing that it was too noisy. But
that's the Parsippany party atmosphere for you. I don't imagine that his
impression of the tournament was much improved by Steve Doyle's having mangled
his name in the introductions--it came out as "Grandmaster Kekel-dizzy", which
Doyle tried to save by blaming his "New Jersey accent". I hope the grandmaster
isn't too put off to come back--having a couple of Georgian GMs in the
tournament does something to keep the rest of us honest. Robert Hess played, and
though he didn't score a 6-0 for himself, he did put up one of the star games of
the event in the last round against Goletiani. There were a couple of other very
good players of whose presence I was unaware until I saw the crosstable after
the fact, such as IM Marc Arnold. Because this tournament is a team event, you
can't necessarily pick out the best players in the room strictly on the basis of
geography as you might in an individual tournament, where you simply look for
the high boards at the far end of the playing hall. At these team affairs, the
good players will obviously be on board one, by and large, of their respective
teams, but they may still be scattered around one whole half of the room. So
some of them can manage to keep a low profile for the entire weekend.
Patrick Chi played on board three for a quite strong youth team that included
his fellow junior talent Kapil Chandran; I forget who their board one was. They
enjoyed a good run, spending a lot of time behind the ropes. It seems Patrick is
starting to make some connections with the young masters elsewhere in the
Northeast, which will be good for him as time goes on. One's progress in serious
chess toward, and eventually at, master level is made easier, I think, if one
can get involved in some of the social networks that exist at the major
tournaments around this part of the country. This is one way how, if you're a
promising young player, you get introduced to good coaches and people of that
sort.
Finally, let me point out that there was a young player at the tournament
named--I'm not making this up; he's number 653 on the list in the
USCF crosstable of the rated results--Jazz Hooks. To the world's everlasting
chagrin, he and the contestant known as Charlie Parker Reeder
(again, you can check me on this--#917 on the wallchart) were not paired against
each other during the course of the competition. Memo to Steve D.: come on, man,
you gotta make it happen next time! Who cares if you have to turn SwissSys
inside out?
I've said enough, I think. Thanks to the entire set of our players for
carrying the flag!
2.25.2012
Howard and Caravaty Lead at AACC
The Albany Area Chess Club began its play-off matches Wednesday evening. Peter Henner and Dean Howard met for the Championship title and Cory Northrup and Chris Caravaty battled for the Under-1800 honors.
Henner won a pawn in the early middle game, and I thought he just might continue his successful run from the preliminaries by winning the first game of this match. That was not to be. As time got short, Mr. Howard showed his formidable creativity under pressure. He found ways to keep the game from simplifying too quickly. After controlling the symmetrical position for a big piece of the game, Mr. Henner missed a tactical idea in time pressure and lost the contest.
In the Under-1800 match Mr. Caravaty won after Cory Northrup self-destructed by dropping the Exchange in the transition from the opening to the middle game. After the error, Mr. Northrup made his usual spirited and creative defense. Chris Caravaty had some hesitation in the face of Northrup’s stubborn defense, but the material and positional advantages of his game were too great for even tough defending to hold off.
Today’s game is the Henner - Howard contest:
Henner, Peter - Howard, Dean [C01]
AACC Championship Playoff Guilderland, NY, 23.02.2012
1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.exd5 exd5 4.Bd3 Bd6 5.Nf3 Nf6 6.0–0 0–0
There are many, many games in the databases of this debut. At the master and above levels it results in a draw most of the time in games between equals. I thought here these guys going to split this point early.
7.Bg5 Bg4 8.Nbd2 Nbd7 9.h3,..
Sooner or later one side or the other was going to challenge a pinning Bishop. White does so first. As natural as this seems, it is not the way the masters treat the position. Here are two of the best from the early days of last century. Both keep symmetry for as long as possible and arrive at a natural splitting of the point.
Schlechter, Carl - Maroczy, Geza [C01]
Monte Carlo (20), 1903
1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.exd5 exd5 4.Bd3 Nf6 5.Nf3 Bd6 6.0–0 0–0 7.Bg5 Bg4 8.Nbd2 Nbd7 9.c3 c6 10.Qc2 Qc7 11.Rfe1 Rfe8 12.Bh4 Bh5 13.Bg3 Bxg3 14.hxg3 Bg6 15.Nh4 Bxd3 16.Qxd3 g6 17.Nhf3 a6 18.Qc2 Kg7 19.Rad1 Rxe1+ 20.Rxe1 Re8 21.Qb1 Qb8 22.Kf1 Qd8 23.Rxe8 Qxe8 24.Qe1 Qxe1+ 25.Nxe1 Kf8 26.Ke2 Ke7 27.Nd3 Ne8 28.Nb3 Nd6 29.Nbc5 Nxc5 30.Nxc5 a5 31.Nd3 f6 32.Nc5 b6 ½–½
The text appealed to no well known masters, at least I find none in the databases. The only game in the few found was a very short pro forma draw by a couple of mid-level masters, Abramovic, Bosko (2445) - Padevsky, Nikola (2435) at Pamporovo (11), 1982, where the game was agreed a draw after the 10th move; 10 Re1. The few other games that turned up were by players under 2100 FIDE or unrated.
9..., Bh5 10.c3 c6 11.Qc2 Bg6
The game is essentially symmetrical notwithstanding the Black Bishop on g6. Looking back at the Schechter - Maroczy game, the likelihood is all the Bishops being traded off and most of, or all the heavy piece exchanging on the only open file wit a balanced endgame with Knights. Very likely a draw.
12.Nh4!?,..
White used a chunk of time to find this attempt to unbalance the position. I don’t think there was a lot of deep calculation of variations, rather it was a weighing up of the positions resulting from the several possible trades looking for a potential edge. This kind of effort can be even more trying than calculating many long variations. What is being searched for is small, easily miss-valued and fleeting. Chose an incorrect move order and the jewel you sought may be a piece of coal.
12..., Qc7 13.Nf5!?,..
It is not easy to understand why White wants to exchange on f5 rather than straight away capturing on g6 harming ever so slightly the Black pawn formation.
13..., Bxf5 14.Bxf5 h6 15.Be3 Rfe8
Black is reasonably happy. True, he did surrender the Bishop pair, but he retained the better of his Bishops. White has the two Bishops he wanted, but the dark squared Bishops is not doing much on e3.
16.Rfe1 Nh5?!
Some preparation for this adventurous move might have been in order. Logical and principled is; 16..., Re7; and then let’s suppose White tried the plan he used in the game, 17 Nf3 Rae8 18 Qc1 Ne4, and the capture 19 Bxh6? should give Black a clear advantage after; 19..., gxh6 20 Qxh6 Nf8. At this point, if White tries to strengthen the attack with the natural 21 Ng5??, the brutal blow 21..., Bh2+!; and mate the next by the Knight ends the game. The Black counter-stroke looks logical and obvious when you see it, finding it when considering 19 Bxh6, in this line is not so easy. It is that sort of trick that gets overlooked often.
17.Nf3 Ndf6 18.Qc1 Ne4?
Curious, here are two very strong local players studiously avoiding bringing their last units into the fray. Black moves the Knight yet again when 18..., Re7; prepares to double on the only open file. White for his part has put his Queen on c1 delaying by a couple of moves the active use of the Ra1. Odd to say the least. What may be at work is the real difficulty of navigating a symmetrical position; there is not much in the way of imbalances inherent in the position. Consciously, or unconsciously, imbalances guide good players. Silman’s dictum; improve the unfavorable and exploit the favorable imbalances is really how effective plans are created by good players. In symmetrical positions with few of these guideposts, even good players can lead themselves astray.
The text misses a shot.
19.Bxh6! Nf4?!
If 19..., gxh6? 20 Qxh6 Nef6 21 g4 Bf8 22 Qg5+ Ng7 23 Qxf6, recovers the piece with two extra pawns as interest and a won game for White. Black’s reply shows he was probably surprised by the blow at h6. Absent the surprise, Mr. Howard might have found; 19..., g6 20 Bxe4 dxe4 21 Nd2 f5; when White does have the pawn, but Black has compensation after; 22 Nc4 Bh2+ 23 Kh1 b5 24 Ne3 Bf4 25 Bxf4 Nxf4. The threat of the fork at d3 buys Black another tempo which may be used to speed a Rook to the h-file. Then the focus of the Black Queen, Knight and one, or both Rooks on the K-side makes the White King shiver a bit notwithstanding the comfort of an extra pawn.
20.Bxf4 Bxf4 21.Qc2 Qe7?
Time was beginning to be a worry for Black, he had 10 minutes left to White’s 22 minutes. This was a hasty move in response to that imbalance in time I think. More ordinary stuff, say 21..., Nf6; does not step into a pin down the e-file. Mr. Howard may have concluded ordinary will not be sufficient here. Down a solid pawn without discernable compensation and time ticking away, risks must be taken to gin up something.
22.g3 Qf6 23.Bxe4 dxe4 24.Rxe4!?,..
White had taken his time to get to here; he now had just 11 minutes remaining, while Black had 5 ½ minutes. This move aims at holding the material plus at whatever positional cost. Converting the game to a heavy piece ending by 24 Nh4 Qe7 25 Re2 Bg5 26 Rae1 Bxh4 27 Rxe4, returns the pawn to obtain a much superior piece position after; 27..., Qd7 28 gxh4 Rxe4 29 Qxe4 Qxh3 30 Re3 Qd7 31 Qe7 Rd8 32 a2. White wants now to run Black out of moves counting on eventually making something out of the 7th rank when Black has to trade on e7. One has to feel sympathy for Mr. Henner. Time is shortening and here is a choice between giving back the pawn and making a heroic effort to hang on to it. Surrendering material, even so little as a pawn, for the less concrete advantage of better piece placement is an unpleasant task in any kind of time bind. Doing so here is probably the better choice.
24..., Bxg3 25.Kg2 Bc7 26.Rh4 g6 27.Re4?,..
By now White had caught up (down?) with Black on the time front. Both players had about 5 minutes remaining. With 27 Qd2 Re7 28 Re1 Rae8 29 Rxe7 Rxe7 30 Qd3, White simplifies the game a bit and holds onto his edge.
27..., Kg7 28.Rae1 Rh8 29.Qd2,..
White began to fall behind on the clock now. He took some time over this move and had 1:53 on the clock after making it. Howard was better off by a little bit. The game is in full blitz mode now. It is easier to play blitz if you have a clear tactical point in mind. It is much more difficult to do so if you are on the defensive. Black has the clear tactical point; a sacrificial attack down the h-file, not very sophisticated but sharp. Defending this position White has to rely on alertness and the fundamentals of the position he discovered while working up to this position. With little time for double checking the defense seems to fail more often than the attack in blitz.
The game move loses. White needed to guard against intrusions on the h-file with 29 h4, or defend f3 with 29 R4e3, or even raise the ante with 29 Re7 Rxh3 30 Qd3 Rah8 31 R1e6 Qxe6 (Not 31..., Qf4?? 32 Qxg6+!, with mate to follow.) 32 Rxe6 fxe6; and there is a really difficult fight to be made with not time to think much. White obviously just did not quite see Black’s threat.
29..., Rxh3 30.Ne5?,..
An instant move. The motivation must be to obstruct one line bearing on the White King. Better is 30 Ng1, avoiding the worst. After 30..., Rh2+ 31 Kf1 Bg3; White is in trouble but not yet totally lost. If 30 Kxh3? Qxf3+ 31 Kh4, the only move, and Black mates with the Queen or the Rook on the h-file.
30..., Bxe5
Threatening 31..., Qf3+; and mate on the back rank. If 31 R4e3 Qg5+ 32 Kf1 Bf4; and Black will be a whole Rook ahead soon. After the text mate can not be avoided.
31.dxe5 Qf3+ 0–1
There are players dangerous in regular play, and then there are some even more troublesome in time pressure. Philip Sells and Dean Howard, who both regularly pull off rescues of less promising positions when the flags are close to falling are two such players. These guys, I believe, use the work they put into the position, getting into the time trouble by the way, to find a tactical idea, (point, scheme, or stratagem), to use in the time crunch. They also make every effort to get the initiative. With an idea and the initiative, playing in time trouble is easier. Of course, it helps to have the nerves of a riverboat gambler also.
Thursday evening the Schenectady Club held another round in the Consolation Tourney and make up games from the Finals. Unfortunately, illness, foreign travel and logistics conspired to prevent more games being played. Three games took place: in the Finals Philip Sells won from Carlos Varela in a thoroughly fascinating contest where Varela had real chances to win it. Mr. Varela came up with a sparkling attack that came up short. In the Consolation Matt Clough dropped a point to Cory Northrup, and Isaiah Glessner defeated the tournament leader Dilip Aaron in an upset.
Sells' victory gives him clear second place in the Finals with a 4 - 1 score behind John Phillips at 4 ½ - ½ . No one else in the Finals can reach 4 points.
Glessner, with his win from Aaron, certainly made what had appeared to be a runaway for Aaron, into a wide open contest. At the top of heap; Dilip Aaron 4-1, Herman Calderone 2-1, Isaiah Glessner 2-1, and Chris Caravaty 2 ½ -½ all have chances to win the event.
More soon.
Henner won a pawn in the early middle game, and I thought he just might continue his successful run from the preliminaries by winning the first game of this match. That was not to be. As time got short, Mr. Howard showed his formidable creativity under pressure. He found ways to keep the game from simplifying too quickly. After controlling the symmetrical position for a big piece of the game, Mr. Henner missed a tactical idea in time pressure and lost the contest.
In the Under-1800 match Mr. Caravaty won after Cory Northrup self-destructed by dropping the Exchange in the transition from the opening to the middle game. After the error, Mr. Northrup made his usual spirited and creative defense. Chris Caravaty had some hesitation in the face of Northrup’s stubborn defense, but the material and positional advantages of his game were too great for even tough defending to hold off.
Today’s game is the Henner - Howard contest:
Henner, Peter - Howard, Dean [C01]
AACC Championship Playoff Guilderland, NY, 23.02.2012
1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.exd5 exd5 4.Bd3 Bd6 5.Nf3 Nf6 6.0–0 0–0
There are many, many games in the databases of this debut. At the master and above levels it results in a draw most of the time in games between equals. I thought here these guys going to split this point early.
7.Bg5 Bg4 8.Nbd2 Nbd7 9.h3,..
Sooner or later one side or the other was going to challenge a pinning Bishop. White does so first. As natural as this seems, it is not the way the masters treat the position. Here are two of the best from the early days of last century. Both keep symmetry for as long as possible and arrive at a natural splitting of the point.
Schlechter, Carl - Maroczy, Geza [C01]
Monte Carlo (20), 1903
1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.exd5 exd5 4.Bd3 Nf6 5.Nf3 Bd6 6.0–0 0–0 7.Bg5 Bg4 8.Nbd2 Nbd7 9.c3 c6 10.Qc2 Qc7 11.Rfe1 Rfe8 12.Bh4 Bh5 13.Bg3 Bxg3 14.hxg3 Bg6 15.Nh4 Bxd3 16.Qxd3 g6 17.Nhf3 a6 18.Qc2 Kg7 19.Rad1 Rxe1+ 20.Rxe1 Re8 21.Qb1 Qb8 22.Kf1 Qd8 23.Rxe8 Qxe8 24.Qe1 Qxe1+ 25.Nxe1 Kf8 26.Ke2 Ke7 27.Nd3 Ne8 28.Nb3 Nd6 29.Nbc5 Nxc5 30.Nxc5 a5 31.Nd3 f6 32.Nc5 b6 ½–½
The text appealed to no well known masters, at least I find none in the databases. The only game in the few found was a very short pro forma draw by a couple of mid-level masters, Abramovic, Bosko (2445) - Padevsky, Nikola (2435) at Pamporovo (11), 1982, where the game was agreed a draw after the 10th move; 10 Re1. The few other games that turned up were by players under 2100 FIDE or unrated.
9..., Bh5 10.c3 c6 11.Qc2 Bg6
The game is essentially symmetrical notwithstanding the Black Bishop on g6. Looking back at the Schechter - Maroczy game, the likelihood is all the Bishops being traded off and most of, or all the heavy piece exchanging on the only open file wit a balanced endgame with Knights. Very likely a draw.
12.Nh4!?,..
White used a chunk of time to find this attempt to unbalance the position. I don’t think there was a lot of deep calculation of variations, rather it was a weighing up of the positions resulting from the several possible trades looking for a potential edge. This kind of effort can be even more trying than calculating many long variations. What is being searched for is small, easily miss-valued and fleeting. Chose an incorrect move order and the jewel you sought may be a piece of coal.
12..., Qc7 13.Nf5!?,..
It is not easy to understand why White wants to exchange on f5 rather than straight away capturing on g6 harming ever so slightly the Black pawn formation.
13..., Bxf5 14.Bxf5 h6 15.Be3 Rfe8
Black is reasonably happy. True, he did surrender the Bishop pair, but he retained the better of his Bishops. White has the two Bishops he wanted, but the dark squared Bishops is not doing much on e3.
16.Rfe1 Nh5?!
Some preparation for this adventurous move might have been in order. Logical and principled is; 16..., Re7; and then let’s suppose White tried the plan he used in the game, 17 Nf3 Rae8 18 Qc1 Ne4, and the capture 19 Bxh6? should give Black a clear advantage after; 19..., gxh6 20 Qxh6 Nf8. At this point, if White tries to strengthen the attack with the natural 21 Ng5??, the brutal blow 21..., Bh2+!; and mate the next by the Knight ends the game. The Black counter-stroke looks logical and obvious when you see it, finding it when considering 19 Bxh6, in this line is not so easy. It is that sort of trick that gets overlooked often.
17.Nf3 Ndf6 18.Qc1 Ne4?
Curious, here are two very strong local players studiously avoiding bringing their last units into the fray. Black moves the Knight yet again when 18..., Re7; prepares to double on the only open file. White for his part has put his Queen on c1 delaying by a couple of moves the active use of the Ra1. Odd to say the least. What may be at work is the real difficulty of navigating a symmetrical position; there is not much in the way of imbalances inherent in the position. Consciously, or unconsciously, imbalances guide good players. Silman’s dictum; improve the unfavorable and exploit the favorable imbalances is really how effective plans are created by good players. In symmetrical positions with few of these guideposts, even good players can lead themselves astray.
The text misses a shot.
19.Bxh6! Nf4?!
If 19..., gxh6? 20 Qxh6 Nef6 21 g4 Bf8 22 Qg5+ Ng7 23 Qxf6, recovers the piece with two extra pawns as interest and a won game for White. Black’s reply shows he was probably surprised by the blow at h6. Absent the surprise, Mr. Howard might have found; 19..., g6 20 Bxe4 dxe4 21 Nd2 f5; when White does have the pawn, but Black has compensation after; 22 Nc4 Bh2+ 23 Kh1 b5 24 Ne3 Bf4 25 Bxf4 Nxf4. The threat of the fork at d3 buys Black another tempo which may be used to speed a Rook to the h-file. Then the focus of the Black Queen, Knight and one, or both Rooks on the K-side makes the White King shiver a bit notwithstanding the comfort of an extra pawn.
20.Bxf4 Bxf4 21.Qc2 Qe7?
Time was beginning to be a worry for Black, he had 10 minutes left to White’s 22 minutes. This was a hasty move in response to that imbalance in time I think. More ordinary stuff, say 21..., Nf6; does not step into a pin down the e-file. Mr. Howard may have concluded ordinary will not be sufficient here. Down a solid pawn without discernable compensation and time ticking away, risks must be taken to gin up something.
22.g3 Qf6 23.Bxe4 dxe4 24.Rxe4!?,..
White had taken his time to get to here; he now had just 11 minutes remaining, while Black had 5 ½ minutes. This move aims at holding the material plus at whatever positional cost. Converting the game to a heavy piece ending by 24 Nh4 Qe7 25 Re2 Bg5 26 Rae1 Bxh4 27 Rxe4, returns the pawn to obtain a much superior piece position after; 27..., Qd7 28 gxh4 Rxe4 29 Qxe4 Qxh3 30 Re3 Qd7 31 Qe7 Rd8 32 a2. White wants now to run Black out of moves counting on eventually making something out of the 7th rank when Black has to trade on e7. One has to feel sympathy for Mr. Henner. Time is shortening and here is a choice between giving back the pawn and making a heroic effort to hang on to it. Surrendering material, even so little as a pawn, for the less concrete advantage of better piece placement is an unpleasant task in any kind of time bind. Doing so here is probably the better choice.
24..., Bxg3 25.Kg2 Bc7 26.Rh4 g6 27.Re4?,..
By now White had caught up (down?) with Black on the time front. Both players had about 5 minutes remaining. With 27 Qd2 Re7 28 Re1 Rae8 29 Rxe7 Rxe7 30 Qd3, White simplifies the game a bit and holds onto his edge.
27..., Kg7 28.Rae1 Rh8 29.Qd2,..
White began to fall behind on the clock now. He took some time over this move and had 1:53 on the clock after making it. Howard was better off by a little bit. The game is in full blitz mode now. It is easier to play blitz if you have a clear tactical point in mind. It is much more difficult to do so if you are on the defensive. Black has the clear tactical point; a sacrificial attack down the h-file, not very sophisticated but sharp. Defending this position White has to rely on alertness and the fundamentals of the position he discovered while working up to this position. With little time for double checking the defense seems to fail more often than the attack in blitz.
The game move loses. White needed to guard against intrusions on the h-file with 29 h4, or defend f3 with 29 R4e3, or even raise the ante with 29 Re7 Rxh3 30 Qd3 Rah8 31 R1e6 Qxe6 (Not 31..., Qf4?? 32 Qxg6+!, with mate to follow.) 32 Rxe6 fxe6; and there is a really difficult fight to be made with not time to think much. White obviously just did not quite see Black’s threat.
29..., Rxh3 30.Ne5?,..
An instant move. The motivation must be to obstruct one line bearing on the White King. Better is 30 Ng1, avoiding the worst. After 30..., Rh2+ 31 Kf1 Bg3; White is in trouble but not yet totally lost. If 30 Kxh3? Qxf3+ 31 Kh4, the only move, and Black mates with the Queen or the Rook on the h-file.
30..., Bxe5
Threatening 31..., Qf3+; and mate on the back rank. If 31 R4e3 Qg5+ 32 Kf1 Bf4; and Black will be a whole Rook ahead soon. After the text mate can not be avoided.
31.dxe5 Qf3+ 0–1
There are players dangerous in regular play, and then there are some even more troublesome in time pressure. Philip Sells and Dean Howard, who both regularly pull off rescues of less promising positions when the flags are close to falling are two such players. These guys, I believe, use the work they put into the position, getting into the time trouble by the way, to find a tactical idea, (point, scheme, or stratagem), to use in the time crunch. They also make every effort to get the initiative. With an idea and the initiative, playing in time trouble is easier. Of course, it helps to have the nerves of a riverboat gambler also.
Thursday evening the Schenectady Club held another round in the Consolation Tourney and make up games from the Finals. Unfortunately, illness, foreign travel and logistics conspired to prevent more games being played. Three games took place: in the Finals Philip Sells won from Carlos Varela in a thoroughly fascinating contest where Varela had real chances to win it. Mr. Varela came up with a sparkling attack that came up short. In the Consolation Matt Clough dropped a point to Cory Northrup, and Isaiah Glessner defeated the tournament leader Dilip Aaron in an upset.
Sells' victory gives him clear second place in the Finals with a 4 - 1 score behind John Phillips at 4 ½ - ½ . No one else in the Finals can reach 4 points.
Glessner, with his win from Aaron, certainly made what had appeared to be a runaway for Aaron, into a wide open contest. At the top of heap; Dilip Aaron 4-1, Herman Calderone 2-1, Isaiah Glessner 2-1, and Chris Caravaty 2 ½ -½ all have chances to win the event.
More soon.
2.24.2012
A Typical Game from the Consolation Tourney
It is not always possible to publish here local games in strict chronological order. The desire to tell the stories of title competitions and upsets push the tales of games with ratings outcomes predicted by the ratings back down the queue. Today’s game is one such.
Matt Clough and Dilip Aaron both came on the scene not too long ago. Dilip is much the younger man and a rising scholastic star. Matt, an adult, who came later in his life to competitive chess. Matt broke into chess in 2008. Dilip, from a family of chess players, began his competitive career a few years earlier in 2003 as a grade school student. Dilip has climbed the ladder of competition to be one of the stronger scholastic players locally with a high Class B rating. Matt made good progress also. He has reached a high Class C rating. I am sure Mr. Clough looked at this game as an opportunity to make a step forward if he could win this contest. Mr. Aaron probably expected to win, but a single rating class difference is no lock for the higher rated player. On to the game:
Clough, Matthew - Aaron, Dilip [D47]
SCC Consolation Tourney Schenectady, NY, 10.02.2012
1.d4 d5 2.Nf3 e6 3.c4 Nf6 4.Nc3 c6 5.e3 Nbd7 6.Bd3,..
Very much mainstream theory.
6..., Be7
Still theory, but Dilip takes a less popular path. Capturing on c4 is by far the most frequently chosen move. Other Bf8 deployments to d6 or b4 are also more popular than the text. The move played in the game isn’t bad, it is just less active and quieter. A hundred years ago Cohn defeated one of the strongest Russian players of the day when Bernstein tried the move:
(6824) Cohn, Erich - Bernstein, Ossip [D47]
St Petersburg, 1909
1.d4 d5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.c4 e6 4.Nc3 c6 5.e3 Nbd7 6.Bd3 Be7 7.0–0 dxc4 8.Bxc4 b5 9.Bd3 a6 10.e4 Bb7 11.Qe2 c5 12.Rd1 c4 13.Bc2 0–0 14.Bg5 Re8 15.e5 Nd5 16.Ne4 Nf8 17.Nd6 Bxg5 18.Nxb7 Qe7 19.Nd6 Reb8 20.Be4 Ra7 21.Bxd5 exd5 22.Nxg5 Qxg5 23.Qf3 b4 24.Qxd5 c3 25.bxc3 bxc3 26.Qc5 Rd7 27.Qxc3 Ne6 28.Qg3 Qh5 29.f4 h6 30.Rab1 Rb2 31.Qc3 Rxg2+ 32.Kxg2 Nxf4+ 33.Kh1 Rxd6 34.Rf1 Rxd4 35.Qxd4 1–0
The move 6..., Be7; showed up infrequently in the games of the elite in the next decades. White had success against it when it did appear. Here is one of the few Black victories:
(15151) Johner, Hans - Bogoljubow, Efim [D46]
Bern (6), 1932
1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 c6 3.Nf3 d5 4.Nc3 e6 5.e3 Nbd7 6.Bd3 Be7 7.0–0 0–0 8.Qe2 dxc4 9.Bxc4 b5 10.Bb3 b4 11.Nb1 c5 12.Rd1 Bb7 13.Nbd2 Qc7 14.Bc4 a5 15.a4 Nb6 16.Bd3 Rfd8 17.Nc4 Nxc4 18.Bxc4 cxd4 19.Rxd4 Ne4 20.Bd3 Nc5 21.Qc2 e5 22.Rxd8+ Rxd8 23.Bc4 Be4 24.Qe2 Bd3 25.Bxd3 Nxd3 26.Qd2 Nxb2 0–1
Of course Bogoljubow was one of the strongest players in the world at the time and a recent challenger for the world title, so a win with a doubtful line of play against a more ordinary master should not surprise.
In more recent times this development of the Black Bishop has been seen less and less done by the top players. One of the few examples is:
(344226) Gelfand, Boris (2690) - Ljubojevic, Ljubomir (2605) [D46]
11th Linares (10), 1993
1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.Nf3 Nf6 4.Nc3 e6 5.e3 Nbd7 6.Bd3 Be7 7.0–0 0–0 8.Qe2 b6 9.e4 dxe4 10.Nxe4 c5 11.Nxf6+ Nxf6 12.Rd1 cxd4 13.Bf4 Bc5 14.Be5 Bb7 15.Nxd4 Nd7 16.Nb3 Qg5 17.Bg3 Rad8 18.Nxc5 Nxc5 19.Bc2 f5 20.f3 f4 21.Bf2 e5 22.b4 Nd7 23.c5 bxc5 24.bxc5 Kh8 25.h4 Qh5 26.Qb5 Bxf3 27.gxf3 Qxf3 28.Qd3 Qg4+ 29.Kh2 e4 30.Qxe4 Nf6 31.Qg2 Qe2 32.Rxd8 Rxd8 33.Rg1 g6 34.Be1 Qc4 35.Rf1 Re8 36.Bb3 Qxc5 37.Qb2 Kg7 38.Bc3 f3 39.Bxf6+ Kh6 40.Qd2+ Kh5 41.Qd5+ Qxd5 42.Bxd5 Re2+ 43.Kg3 1–0
Gelfand, one the leading lights of those days twenty years ago when Kasparov still roamed the chess world, and is the current challenger for the world title(!), had worked out the approach, the central counter-attack, demonstrated in the above game several years before. As Gelfand’s idea became widely known, the move, 6..., Be7; declined even more in popularity with the Grandmasters.
7.0–0 dxc4 8.Bxc4 b5 9.Bd3 Bb7
When we look at some of the games cited above, and other examples in the databases, we see Black more often chooses to push the b-pawn to b4 displacing the Nc3. Taking up the Meran triangle; a6, b5, c6, is not a common occurrence. Why? It seems grabbing space on the Q-side is more useful for Black.
10.Qe2!?,..
A bit questionable. The standard answer here is 10 e4, immediately reacting to the Q-wing maneuvering with action in the center a la Gelfand. Given time Black will get in .., c3-c5;
10..., a6 11.a3?!,..
White’s eye is attracted to potential problems arising from an eventual .., b5-b4. What’s better? The main requirement is to recognize the position for what it is and what can be done. Stopping .., c6-c5; is not possible, White has no lead in development and the Black Bishops are just a bit better placed than are White’s - where can the Bc1 go? The facts on the board tell White to head for a line that trades off minor pieces and lets him complete development.
A logical try for the Bc1 is b2-b4, and Bc1-b2. That scheme has to be calculated carefully because the advance of the b-pawn may leave a minor piece on the c-file under defended to a Black heavy piece appearing there. If White has to delay the b4 push, the Bc1 stays home and underfoot. So this is the moment to deal with the transition to a playable middle game. Two paths emerge; 11 a4 b4 12 Ne4 Nxe4 13 Bxe4 Nf6 14 Bc2 c5 15 dxc5 Bxc5 16 b3, with further trades of minor pieces to come, and White aims for equality, or 11 e4 c5 12 e5 Nd5 13 Rd1 cxd4 14 Nxd5 Bxd5 15 Nxd4, and White can find employment for the Bc1. Either way the game is equal, or close to it. Instead, the text should result in Black obtaining a positional plus.
11..., c5 12.dxc5 Nxc5 13.Rd1!?,..
A little better is 13 Bc2, preserving the Bishop pair.
13..., Qc7?!?
There is no good reason to pass on playing 13..., Nxd3; reaching a position where the two Bishops will give Black the long term initiative. White can try 14 Rxd3 Qc7 15 e4, but further advance of the e-pawn will likely give space behind the White lines that the Bishops can use.
14.Bc2 0–0 15.e4 Rfd8 16.Bg5,..
Black has had a very slight edge for the last few moves. White is counting this Bishop being driven to h4 and then g3 to oppose the Black Queen. Then either Black interposes his dark squared Bishop and there is a trade, or the Queen is pushed away.
16..., h6 17.Bh4 Qc6?
With a single move we can sometimes wreck our chances. Better choices are available. Either 17..., Ncd7; preparing to send the Knight to f8 anticipating the Nf6 being forced away from defense of the Black King by e4-e5 soon, or 17..., Rac8; getting the last piece into action. The text misses the powerful shot, 18 e5!, and then 18..., Nd5 19 Nxd5 Bxh4 20 Nb4!, collects a piece.
This short sequence is somewhat hidden, but it should be discoverable because one of the priorities for examination has to be forcing lines. Remember Har-Zvi’s wisdom about how and what to calculate: “Calculate forcing lines first.” When looking at those kind of lines one feature to always check are loose pieces. As GM Short famously says; “LPDO, loose pieces drop off.” Loose pieces are those that are not defended by some other unit. The Queen move leaves the Be7 loose for sure. Both players either weren’t aware of, or just forgot about forcing lines and Short’s saying.
18.Ne5?!,..
In light of the foregoing, this is second best. Black meanders a bit here
18..., Qc7 19.Bg3 Qb6 20.Kh1,..
And I am not so certain this is needful. Perhaps 20 h3, securing the future of the Bg3 is more useful.
20..., Re8?!
Another move that has to be questioned. Its intent is good; to make a place for the Ra8 to come into play on the d-file. There is in a chess game a “beat”, a rhythm of pieces and pawns moving to do something. This move feels as if it is a break in the beat for Black. The move grants White time to get in the advance b2-b4 which could lead to very complicated play such as; 21 b4 Red8!? 22 bxc5 Qxc5 23 Na2 Rxd1+ 24 Rxd1 Qxa3 25 Bb1, when the connected passed pawns Black has almost compensates for the piece surrendered. The most natural move for Black is 20..., Rac8; making the immediate push to b4 not appetizing for White.
21.f4!?,..
White has the prejudice of the less experienced player for direct attacks on the opposing King. Is a direct attack justified here? That is a delicate piece of chess judgment. What White is contemplating is not strictly a flank attack at first sight. It is more a forcing maneuver aimed at maybe creating a situation where a real direct flank attack can be tried. The difficulty with the idea is there are Rooks opposing each other on the open d-file raising the possibility of some, or many exchanges of material taking place. Another bit of old time wisdom; trading pieces can often take the poison out of an attack. All this adds difficulty to calculating all the lines if an all out attack is to be tried.
21..., Rad8 22.Rf1 Nfd7 23.f5 Nxe5 24.Bxe5 Bg5!
A move Mr. Clough may not have appreciated fully when considering this way of playing. The threat 25..., Rd2; has to be addressed.
25.Bf4 Bf6
The primary alternative here is; 25..., Bxf4; leading to Black retaining the initiative after; 26 Rxf4 exf5 27 Rxf5 b4 28 axb4 Qxb4; when White will have to, with 29 Raf1, offer up the e or b-pawn in exchange for action on the f-file to make a fight of it. Trades involving the capture of the e-pawn seem to favor Black in the double Rook endgame that can come about. I understand why Dilip hesitates to take that path having mind one more bit of chess wisdom; all Rook ends are draw, and double Rook doubly so. Black’s advantage in the contemplated ending would be razor thin; just a matter of a tempo ahead getting his Rooks into action.
26.b4?,..
What was a good idea is played too late to work well. The move drops a pawn. We have here an example of a saying from military science; order, counter-order, disorder, as it applies to chess. The organizing idea behind the recent White moves has been to attack the Black King. This shift to other action is inconsistent. More to the point is; 26 e5, and a period of sharp tactical play opens. It is difficult for both sides after 26..., exf5 27 Bxf5 g6 28 Bg4, when White maybe is beginning to have chances for a piece attack on the Black King. The very open character of the position and Black’s actively placed pieces offer excellent counter-play. Black would remain slight better, but the game is far from decided.
26..., Bxc3 27.bxc5 Qxc5 28.Rad1?,..
White loses faith. After beginning his attacking idea on move 21 with f2-f4, Matt hesitated and let his focus wander. This is another move off the point. To have a chance, such an attack must maintain its focus, and material concerns often have to be ignored. Here Black can’t afford to snatch the Exchange in the line; 28 fxe6 Bxa8 29 exf7+ Kxf7; because the discovered check picks off the Black Queen. Black will have recapture on e6 With his Rook, 28..., Rxe6; and after 29 Rad1 Rxd1 30 Rxd1, Black is much better, but White does have some threats.
28..., Rxd1 29.Qxd1 exf5 30.Bd6 Qc6
The battery down the h1-a8 diagonal freezes some of the White units because of mate at g2.
31.Rxf5 Rd8
The pin on the Bishop freezes more of the White forces.
32.Rd5 Qe8 0–1
The game move works well enough, but 32..., Qc4; is even better. It puts continuing pressure on e4 as does the game move, and it also taps ever so lightly on f1 with a mate threat. All then left for White is; 33 Be7 Rxd5 34 exd5 Bxd5; securing a second pawn and a dominating position for the Black pieces. After the text, 33 Rc5 Bxe4 34 Rxc3 Bxc2 35 Rxc2 Rxd6 36 Rd2 Rxd2 37 Qxd2 Qe5; a Queen ending two pawns up is not too difficult of a technical problem for the stronger side. However, Queen endings can be nerve testing; ticking clocks and perpetual checks can make even youthful player’s nerves feel the “yips”.
To sum up my impression of the game: Both players were not far off their standard of play. Dilip made an oversight on move 17 that could have cost him dearly. His play right after words was a little shaky. It could be he saw the problem right after the fact and that had an effect. He got back on track to finish the game in decent fashion. Matt Clough brought his chess imagination to the board. It is one of his strong points. With it he has carried the day against redoubtable players such as Phil Thomas of Troy and John Barnes of Schenectady. In this outing he did not follow through with his attacking idea with sufficient consistency. It is not clear that had he done so there was a win to be had, but doing so would have given him a “puncher’s chance.” Failing to do that led to defeat. An entertaining contest, it was.
More soon.
Matt Clough and Dilip Aaron both came on the scene not too long ago. Dilip is much the younger man and a rising scholastic star. Matt, an adult, who came later in his life to competitive chess. Matt broke into chess in 2008. Dilip, from a family of chess players, began his competitive career a few years earlier in 2003 as a grade school student. Dilip has climbed the ladder of competition to be one of the stronger scholastic players locally with a high Class B rating. Matt made good progress also. He has reached a high Class C rating. I am sure Mr. Clough looked at this game as an opportunity to make a step forward if he could win this contest. Mr. Aaron probably expected to win, but a single rating class difference is no lock for the higher rated player. On to the game:
Clough, Matthew - Aaron, Dilip [D47]
SCC Consolation Tourney Schenectady, NY, 10.02.2012
1.d4 d5 2.Nf3 e6 3.c4 Nf6 4.Nc3 c6 5.e3 Nbd7 6.Bd3,..
Very much mainstream theory.
6..., Be7
Still theory, but Dilip takes a less popular path. Capturing on c4 is by far the most frequently chosen move. Other Bf8 deployments to d6 or b4 are also more popular than the text. The move played in the game isn’t bad, it is just less active and quieter. A hundred years ago Cohn defeated one of the strongest Russian players of the day when Bernstein tried the move:
(6824) Cohn, Erich - Bernstein, Ossip [D47]
St Petersburg, 1909
1.d4 d5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.c4 e6 4.Nc3 c6 5.e3 Nbd7 6.Bd3 Be7 7.0–0 dxc4 8.Bxc4 b5 9.Bd3 a6 10.e4 Bb7 11.Qe2 c5 12.Rd1 c4 13.Bc2 0–0 14.Bg5 Re8 15.e5 Nd5 16.Ne4 Nf8 17.Nd6 Bxg5 18.Nxb7 Qe7 19.Nd6 Reb8 20.Be4 Ra7 21.Bxd5 exd5 22.Nxg5 Qxg5 23.Qf3 b4 24.Qxd5 c3 25.bxc3 bxc3 26.Qc5 Rd7 27.Qxc3 Ne6 28.Qg3 Qh5 29.f4 h6 30.Rab1 Rb2 31.Qc3 Rxg2+ 32.Kxg2 Nxf4+ 33.Kh1 Rxd6 34.Rf1 Rxd4 35.Qxd4 1–0
The move 6..., Be7; showed up infrequently in the games of the elite in the next decades. White had success against it when it did appear. Here is one of the few Black victories:
(15151) Johner, Hans - Bogoljubow, Efim [D46]
Bern (6), 1932
1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 c6 3.Nf3 d5 4.Nc3 e6 5.e3 Nbd7 6.Bd3 Be7 7.0–0 0–0 8.Qe2 dxc4 9.Bxc4 b5 10.Bb3 b4 11.Nb1 c5 12.Rd1 Bb7 13.Nbd2 Qc7 14.Bc4 a5 15.a4 Nb6 16.Bd3 Rfd8 17.Nc4 Nxc4 18.Bxc4 cxd4 19.Rxd4 Ne4 20.Bd3 Nc5 21.Qc2 e5 22.Rxd8+ Rxd8 23.Bc4 Be4 24.Qe2 Bd3 25.Bxd3 Nxd3 26.Qd2 Nxb2 0–1
Of course Bogoljubow was one of the strongest players in the world at the time and a recent challenger for the world title, so a win with a doubtful line of play against a more ordinary master should not surprise.
In more recent times this development of the Black Bishop has been seen less and less done by the top players. One of the few examples is:
(344226) Gelfand, Boris (2690) - Ljubojevic, Ljubomir (2605) [D46]
11th Linares (10), 1993
1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.Nf3 Nf6 4.Nc3 e6 5.e3 Nbd7 6.Bd3 Be7 7.0–0 0–0 8.Qe2 b6 9.e4 dxe4 10.Nxe4 c5 11.Nxf6+ Nxf6 12.Rd1 cxd4 13.Bf4 Bc5 14.Be5 Bb7 15.Nxd4 Nd7 16.Nb3 Qg5 17.Bg3 Rad8 18.Nxc5 Nxc5 19.Bc2 f5 20.f3 f4 21.Bf2 e5 22.b4 Nd7 23.c5 bxc5 24.bxc5 Kh8 25.h4 Qh5 26.Qb5 Bxf3 27.gxf3 Qxf3 28.Qd3 Qg4+ 29.Kh2 e4 30.Qxe4 Nf6 31.Qg2 Qe2 32.Rxd8 Rxd8 33.Rg1 g6 34.Be1 Qc4 35.Rf1 Re8 36.Bb3 Qxc5 37.Qb2 Kg7 38.Bc3 f3 39.Bxf6+ Kh6 40.Qd2+ Kh5 41.Qd5+ Qxd5 42.Bxd5 Re2+ 43.Kg3 1–0
Gelfand, one the leading lights of those days twenty years ago when Kasparov still roamed the chess world, and is the current challenger for the world title(!), had worked out the approach, the central counter-attack, demonstrated in the above game several years before. As Gelfand’s idea became widely known, the move, 6..., Be7; declined even more in popularity with the Grandmasters.
7.0–0 dxc4 8.Bxc4 b5 9.Bd3 Bb7
When we look at some of the games cited above, and other examples in the databases, we see Black more often chooses to push the b-pawn to b4 displacing the Nc3. Taking up the Meran triangle; a6, b5, c6, is not a common occurrence. Why? It seems grabbing space on the Q-side is more useful for Black.
10.Qe2!?,..
A bit questionable. The standard answer here is 10 e4, immediately reacting to the Q-wing maneuvering with action in the center a la Gelfand. Given time Black will get in .., c3-c5;
10..., a6 11.a3?!,..
White’s eye is attracted to potential problems arising from an eventual .., b5-b4. What’s better? The main requirement is to recognize the position for what it is and what can be done. Stopping .., c6-c5; is not possible, White has no lead in development and the Black Bishops are just a bit better placed than are White’s - where can the Bc1 go? The facts on the board tell White to head for a line that trades off minor pieces and lets him complete development.
A logical try for the Bc1 is b2-b4, and Bc1-b2. That scheme has to be calculated carefully because the advance of the b-pawn may leave a minor piece on the c-file under defended to a Black heavy piece appearing there. If White has to delay the b4 push, the Bc1 stays home and underfoot. So this is the moment to deal with the transition to a playable middle game. Two paths emerge; 11 a4 b4 12 Ne4 Nxe4 13 Bxe4 Nf6 14 Bc2 c5 15 dxc5 Bxc5 16 b3, with further trades of minor pieces to come, and White aims for equality, or 11 e4 c5 12 e5 Nd5 13 Rd1 cxd4 14 Nxd5 Bxd5 15 Nxd4, and White can find employment for the Bc1. Either way the game is equal, or close to it. Instead, the text should result in Black obtaining a positional plus.
11..., c5 12.dxc5 Nxc5 13.Rd1!?,..
A little better is 13 Bc2, preserving the Bishop pair.
13..., Qc7?!?
There is no good reason to pass on playing 13..., Nxd3; reaching a position where the two Bishops will give Black the long term initiative. White can try 14 Rxd3 Qc7 15 e4, but further advance of the e-pawn will likely give space behind the White lines that the Bishops can use.
14.Bc2 0–0 15.e4 Rfd8 16.Bg5,..
Black has had a very slight edge for the last few moves. White is counting this Bishop being driven to h4 and then g3 to oppose the Black Queen. Then either Black interposes his dark squared Bishop and there is a trade, or the Queen is pushed away.
16..., h6 17.Bh4 Qc6?
With a single move we can sometimes wreck our chances. Better choices are available. Either 17..., Ncd7; preparing to send the Knight to f8 anticipating the Nf6 being forced away from defense of the Black King by e4-e5 soon, or 17..., Rac8; getting the last piece into action. The text misses the powerful shot, 18 e5!, and then 18..., Nd5 19 Nxd5 Bxh4 20 Nb4!, collects a piece.
This short sequence is somewhat hidden, but it should be discoverable because one of the priorities for examination has to be forcing lines. Remember Har-Zvi’s wisdom about how and what to calculate: “Calculate forcing lines first.” When looking at those kind of lines one feature to always check are loose pieces. As GM Short famously says; “LPDO, loose pieces drop off.” Loose pieces are those that are not defended by some other unit. The Queen move leaves the Be7 loose for sure. Both players either weren’t aware of, or just forgot about forcing lines and Short’s saying.
18.Ne5?!,..
In light of the foregoing, this is second best. Black meanders a bit here
18..., Qc7 19.Bg3 Qb6 20.Kh1,..
And I am not so certain this is needful. Perhaps 20 h3, securing the future of the Bg3 is more useful.
20..., Re8?!
Another move that has to be questioned. Its intent is good; to make a place for the Ra8 to come into play on the d-file. There is in a chess game a “beat”, a rhythm of pieces and pawns moving to do something. This move feels as if it is a break in the beat for Black. The move grants White time to get in the advance b2-b4 which could lead to very complicated play such as; 21 b4 Red8!? 22 bxc5 Qxc5 23 Na2 Rxd1+ 24 Rxd1 Qxa3 25 Bb1, when the connected passed pawns Black has almost compensates for the piece surrendered. The most natural move for Black is 20..., Rac8; making the immediate push to b4 not appetizing for White.
21.f4!?,..
White has the prejudice of the less experienced player for direct attacks on the opposing King. Is a direct attack justified here? That is a delicate piece of chess judgment. What White is contemplating is not strictly a flank attack at first sight. It is more a forcing maneuver aimed at maybe creating a situation where a real direct flank attack can be tried. The difficulty with the idea is there are Rooks opposing each other on the open d-file raising the possibility of some, or many exchanges of material taking place. Another bit of old time wisdom; trading pieces can often take the poison out of an attack. All this adds difficulty to calculating all the lines if an all out attack is to be tried.
21..., Rad8 22.Rf1 Nfd7 23.f5 Nxe5 24.Bxe5 Bg5!
A move Mr. Clough may not have appreciated fully when considering this way of playing. The threat 25..., Rd2; has to be addressed.
25.Bf4 Bf6
The primary alternative here is; 25..., Bxf4; leading to Black retaining the initiative after; 26 Rxf4 exf5 27 Rxf5 b4 28 axb4 Qxb4; when White will have to, with 29 Raf1, offer up the e or b-pawn in exchange for action on the f-file to make a fight of it. Trades involving the capture of the e-pawn seem to favor Black in the double Rook endgame that can come about. I understand why Dilip hesitates to take that path having mind one more bit of chess wisdom; all Rook ends are draw, and double Rook doubly so. Black’s advantage in the contemplated ending would be razor thin; just a matter of a tempo ahead getting his Rooks into action.
26.b4?,..
What was a good idea is played too late to work well. The move drops a pawn. We have here an example of a saying from military science; order, counter-order, disorder, as it applies to chess. The organizing idea behind the recent White moves has been to attack the Black King. This shift to other action is inconsistent. More to the point is; 26 e5, and a period of sharp tactical play opens. It is difficult for both sides after 26..., exf5 27 Bxf5 g6 28 Bg4, when White maybe is beginning to have chances for a piece attack on the Black King. The very open character of the position and Black’s actively placed pieces offer excellent counter-play. Black would remain slight better, but the game is far from decided.
26..., Bxc3 27.bxc5 Qxc5 28.Rad1?,..
White loses faith. After beginning his attacking idea on move 21 with f2-f4, Matt hesitated and let his focus wander. This is another move off the point. To have a chance, such an attack must maintain its focus, and material concerns often have to be ignored. Here Black can’t afford to snatch the Exchange in the line; 28 fxe6 Bxa8 29 exf7+ Kxf7; because the discovered check picks off the Black Queen. Black will have recapture on e6 With his Rook, 28..., Rxe6; and after 29 Rad1 Rxd1 30 Rxd1, Black is much better, but White does have some threats.
28..., Rxd1 29.Qxd1 exf5 30.Bd6 Qc6
The battery down the h1-a8 diagonal freezes some of the White units because of mate at g2.
31.Rxf5 Rd8
The pin on the Bishop freezes more of the White forces.
32.Rd5 Qe8 0–1
The game move works well enough, but 32..., Qc4; is even better. It puts continuing pressure on e4 as does the game move, and it also taps ever so lightly on f1 with a mate threat. All then left for White is; 33 Be7 Rxd5 34 exd5 Bxd5; securing a second pawn and a dominating position for the Black pieces. After the text, 33 Rc5 Bxe4 34 Rxc3 Bxc2 35 Rxc2 Rxd6 36 Rd2 Rxd2 37 Qxd2 Qe5; a Queen ending two pawns up is not too difficult of a technical problem for the stronger side. However, Queen endings can be nerve testing; ticking clocks and perpetual checks can make even youthful player’s nerves feel the “yips”.
To sum up my impression of the game: Both players were not far off their standard of play. Dilip made an oversight on move 17 that could have cost him dearly. His play right after words was a little shaky. It could be he saw the problem right after the fact and that had an effect. He got back on track to finish the game in decent fashion. Matt Clough brought his chess imagination to the board. It is one of his strong points. With it he has carried the day against redoubtable players such as Phil Thomas of Troy and John Barnes of Schenectady. In this outing he did not follow through with his attacking idea with sufficient consistency. It is not clear that had he done so there was a win to be had, but doing so would have given him a “puncher’s chance.” Failing to do that led to defeat. An entertaining contest, it was.
More soon.
2.22.2012
A Game From Which to Learn
This is a long article where I wax philosophical a bit and have a lot to say about a game that is not too important from a sporting point of view.
I have not published many games by Michael Stanley. Mostly it is because he has not won many over the few years he has been playing tournament chess. Today’s game is not a win or a draw either, but Michael played a difficult opening well. He sacrificed a pawn to get a comfortable lead in development. Then, after obtaining all Black could ask for in this difficult line, he let the advantage slip away, and shortly thereafter the game. Two things were made apparent in this game; Michael plays stronger than his rating, and Dilip can be too casual in his treatment of the opening.
Aaron, Dilip - Stanley, Michael [C58]
SCC Consolation Schenectady, NY, 16.02.2012
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Ng5 d5 5.exd5 Na5 6.Bb5+ c6 7.dxc6 bxc6 8.Ba4?!
Way back when the Two Knights Defense was very much mainstream at the top level of chess. James Mortimer, a strong English master of those days defeated Chigorin, grandfather of Russian chess according to the Russians, when he tried it out in in one of those hugely long tourneys of long ago.
(263) Mortimer, James - Chigorin, Mikhail [C59]
London (26), 1883
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Ng5 d5 5.exd5 Na5 6.Bb5+ c6 7.dxc6 bxc6 8.Be2 h6 9.Nf3 e4 10.Ne5 Qc7 11.d4 exd3 12.Nxd3 Bd6 13.h3 0–0 14.0–0 Bf5 15.Nc3 Rad8 16.Bd2 Nc4 17.Qc1 Rfe8 18.Bf3 Bh2+ 19.Kh1 Bxd3 20.cxd3 Rxd3 21.Be3 Nxe3 22.fxe3 Rdxe3 23.Bxc6 Qxc6 24.Kxh2 Qd6+ 25.Kh1 Nh5 26.Qd1 Ng3+ 27.Kg1 Rd3 28.Qa4 Qc5+ 29.Rf2 Re6 30.Rd1 Rxd1+ 31.Qxd1 Nh1 32.Qd8+ Kh7 33.Qd3+ f5 34.Qxf5+ Qxf5 35.Rxf5 Ng3 36.Ra5 Rf6 37.Rxa7 h5 38.h4 Rf1+ 39.Kh2 Nf5 40.Ra4 Rf2 41.Ne4 Rxb2 42.Ng5+ Kg6 43.Ra6+ Nd6 44.Rxd6+ Kf5 45.Rd5+ Kg6 46.a3 Rb3 47.Ra5 Kh6 48.Ra6+ g6 49.Ra8 Kg7 50.Ra7+ Kf6 51.Rf7+ Ke5 52.Rf3 Rb2 53.Kg3 Rd2 54.Re3+ Kf5 55.Re5+ 1–0
The strong master Pruess was not so lucky in more recent times against one of my favorite commentators on ICC, “Yermo“. If you haven’t got on ICC yet, try it. His weekly video talks; “Every Russian Schoolboy Knows” is worth the price of admission alone. In this game Yermolinski shows there are many ways to skin the Two Knights cat.
(1201551) Pruess, David (2424) - Yermolinsky, Alex (2517) [C58]
2nd Imre Konig Memorial, San Francisco, 26.07.2007
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Ng5 d5 5.exd5 Na5 6.Bb5+ c6 7.dxc6 bxc6 8.Qf3 Qc7 9.Bd3 h6 10.Ne4 Nxe4 11.Bxe4 g6 12.g4 Bg7 13.b4 f5 14.gxf5 gxf5 15.Qh5+ Qf7 16.Qxf7+ Kxf7 17.Bf3 e4 18.Bh5+ Ke7 19.Nc3 Nc4 20.Rb1 Be6 21.b5 cxb5 22.Rxb5 Rab8 23.Rb3 Rhc8 24.Rg1 Be5 25.Rg6 Rxb3 26.axb3 Nxd2 27.Bxd2 Bxc3 28.Rxh6 a5 29.Bxc3 Rxc3 30.Kd2 Rh3 31.Rh7+ Kf6 32.Rh6+ Ke5 33.Rh7 Rxh2 34.Ke2 a4 35.bxa4 Bg8 36.Rh6 Bf7 37.Bxf7 Rxh6 38.c3 Rb6 39.Ke1 Rb1+ 40.Kd2 Rb2+ 0–1
The move played in our game is not very good. If you want to test a less experienced player, “Yermo’s” try is a better way to vary from the standard 8 Be2. By the way, there are tons of games in the databases with strange quirks in the Two Knights, most begin with the usual 8 Be2. It is later the fun begins. The most notable and puzzling example is Steinitz’ favorite early development of the KN to h3. The first World Champion lost many in this line, and won some too.
In the game under discussion Black has invested a pawn intending to obtain a lead in development as compensation. Success in such transactions is not always some ringing mating combination, although such is possible. The mature and perceptive player recognizes recovering the invested pawn and emerging with superior development and a playable game is also success.
8..., h6
Black now gives a demonstration how to play against the retreat of the Bishop to a4.
9.Nf3 e4 10.Qe2 Bc5
It may be that 10..., Bd6; is a little better because it prevents the White Knight jumping to e5.
11.d3 Ba6 12.Bb3?,..
This move makes no sense. The key problems for White are his King and Queen residing on e-file and the pinned pawn at d3. Clearing up those flaws should be taking priority. Instead White begins to engineer a threat to f7. That is result of either over-confidence, or the utter ignoring of the opponent’s threats. It is this move that convinced me Dilip is too casual about the opening play. The reasonable move is 12 0-0.
12..., Qc7?!
After excellent conduct of the opening phase of the game, here’s a slip. The previously mentioned problems of the monarch and his consort on the e-file and the pinned e-pawn are central to understanding the position.
It is on those factors on which the choice of Black’s next move must be based. When the opponent is in some difficulties, directly increasing those difficulties is best. To that end 12..., 0-0; is clearly an excellent way to continue. This sample line shows what can happen; 13 0-0 Nxb3 14 axb3 exd3 15 Qd1 dxc2 16 Qxc2 Bxf1 17 Kxf1 Re8; and the back rank mate threat defends the Bc5.
Maybe the calculation of this line is a bit daunting, but searching for a move that that increases White’s difficulties is not so hard. Compare the move played, 12..., Qc7; and the move suggested, 12..., 0-0. Moving the Queen to c7 makes no direct threat, although it does advance the Black development. By castling Black immediately raises the specter of a capture on d3 and a decisive pin on the e-file. The first move does something good but not threatening, and alternative does something equally good, castling is development, and makes a serious threat. Active play, dynamic play, whatever terminology you choose, means, at least in part, making threats to advance your cause. Black elected the less dynamic option and gave up a big piece of his advantage here.
13.0–0 0–0 14.Nfd2?,..
Dilip has played Mike before and won. He probably thought most any move will do here. This casual choice of a place for the Knight returns the big edge to Black. With castling done for both sides, the pinned pawn on d3 is the immediately important feature in the position. It would be better to play 14 Ne1, shoring up the threatened point than to agree to the probable recovery of the pawn Black invested..
14..., exd3 15.cxd3 Rfe8 16.Qf3 Rad8 17.Bc2 Nb7?
What? After an opening and transition to the middle game creditably if not flawlessly conducted, Black fails to remember one of the first principles; a lead in development is a fragile and transient thing. Give your opponent respite and he will catch up. When your compensation for a material deficit is development, every move you make has a high value. Use as much clock time as required to find the move that keeps the pressure on. It is the only way to not have the position gradually swing in the favor of the other side.
Rather than the retrograde 17..., Nb7; which has no greater purpose than some redeployment of the of the Knight to a more useful place, Black needs to press on with dynamic play. Better is 17..., Rd4. In this case Black should be thinking in terms of switching to a direct attack on the King with 18 Nc3? Rf4 19 Qd1 Ng4; laying siege to f2 and making slightly hidden threats to h7.
Again a comparison; the text and the idea just sketched out. Both have reasonable purposes. The text move; getting the least well placed piece back into the game, and the alternative suggested; dynamic play forcing more concession from the opponent. The chess wisdom about finding your least well placed piece and improving its position is well and widely known. It is a good piece of advice from the great masters. What is forgotten too often is the caveat; if you can find no other useful idea. Computers calculate everything, score the choices and pick the highest value. Human beings reason from generalities to specifics as a rule. At this point in the game the general observation the material deficit, a pawn down, and a lead in development means activity is the priority, not positional maneuvering. That is the cue that should guide us towards a search for moves like 17..., Rd4; and 18..., Rf4.
18.Nc3 Bd6 19.h3 Nc5 20.Nc4 Bxc4?
Black had somewhere in his mind the switch to a direct attack on the King idea. His methods were slow letting White off the hook. This move unnecessarily repairs the damage to the White pawn formation. Such should only be done if there were no other choice. Black should have tried to take the game to a reasonable ending here with 20..., Nd5; if then 21 Nxd6 Qxd6 22 Nxd5 Qxd5 23 Qxd5 Rxd5 24 Be3 Nxd3 25 Bxd3 Rxd3 26 Bxa7?, gives Black the edge after 26..., Rd7. If White more carefully plays 26 Rfc1, then 26..., Bb2 27 Bxa7? Rd2; is not entirely hopeless for Black. White is clearly better; he has the extra pawn, is not too far behind in development, and his Bishops are leering hungrily at the Black King. On the opposite side of the board, Black has to contend with the material deficit and weakened pawns on the Q-side, unpleasant facts they are if an endgame comes about. All of that is unpleasant to contemplate.
Perhaps the best way forward is; 21..., Be5 22 Be3 Nd3; attacking the supports of the Nc3. White then might be persuaded he has to play 23 Bxd3 Rxd3; which superficially looks good for Black. There is a but however. The line continues; 24 Rad1 Red8 25 Bb6!, picking up the Exchange for White. An improvement for Black with 24..., Rxd1 25 Rxd1 Bxc3 26 bxc3, does not quite get him to equality. White’s extra pawn is somewhat devalued, but White’s development is superior. He threatens c4-c5 and Be3-f4 with an eventual Bf4-d6 as an active possibility although that gives Black some access to d5 for his Knight. Alternatively White can not advance his lead c-pawn tempting Black to play .., c6-c5; and White then can try to work against the Black c-pawn. White’s pawns have been injured, but it is Black’s pawn that appear vulnerable.
All the foregoing is rendered moot by Black suddenly running out of ideas, or he misunderstood the position.
21.dxc4 Ne6 22.Be3,..
The Bishop sacrifice is simmering in the background. It is not quite ready to be served, yet. If 22 Bxh6? Nd4!; swings the advantage to Black in a big way.
22..., Nc5?
Black found nothing else to do other than to send this Knight back to c5. It is my guess, Mike summed up the position as balanced in someway. That conclusion overlooks there is a real threat on the board. Probably 22..., Rb8; making his own threat is the best try for Black. White will still be better, but no winning line is immediately apparent.
I had similar experiences playing against Mike Stanley. He conducted the games in a very competent fashion up to a point, and then a blunder. Jacob Aagaard, the Danish-Scottish Grandmaster, wrote about this problem in his book Excelling at Chess Calculation, Everyman, London, 2004. Much of what Aagaard has to say applies to this moment in the game.
Aagaard comes at the blundering problem several different ways in the book. The first is; look, don’t think. He means examine the position as that, a position, not a way station in the process we call a game of chess. What went before doesn’t really exist if we are looking at the position in isolation, and all the hopes, fears and assumptions we had getting here are out of the way of your thinking. Aagaard’s says often our own brain gets in the way of our understanding what is right there if front of you. That may be an idealistic notion, but it is worthwhile trying to divorce yourself from what went before for a moment at least and see what is there.
His second prescription is; calculate more slowly. Take your time and fix in your mind the position after each step of calculation. The clock may force you to move before you are entirely satisfied, and you have to make a decision on an incomplete or truncated calculation. That is just the way it is in chess with clocks. If you have taken your time and fixed the positions however much of the way you have gone, there is the chance intuitively you will pick a good, or best move.
The third prescription is; look wide not deep. If Mr. Stanley had done so at this move he would have not lost so soon, or maybe not at all. There is a story I have heard more than once about World Champion Petrosian. It was said he never calculated more than one move deep, but he saw everything there was to see there. GM Aagaard is saying having a clear idea of what the position will look like all across the board is at least as important, and probably more so, as is drilling down many moves deep on a specific line. Calculating the far future is often defeated by missing the mate in one, or as in this instance, a material lost.
The fourth prescription is; cultivate unforced thinking. The GM believes blunders can be traced to us players forcing our thinking based on assumptions made as the positions develop. The assumptions may well have been valid when first made in the process, but as the relationships between the chess pieces change as the position develops the assumptions may no longer hold; the pawn defended is no longer is, or a pinned piece can be attacked more than it can be defended. Unforced thinking in Aagaard’s parlance is a systematic re-examination of assumptions made as the position develops. Here it is the defense of the Nf6 and the workload of the pawn on g7.
Mr. Stanley needs to work on his play in the middle game. He has shown here a nice feel for the opening and the initial transition to the middle game. All of Aagaard that I quoted, and more in his book on calculation, is a good starting point from which Mike should work for improvement. If there was no talent evident in his game, all this writing is pointless. That is not the case. Stanley can obtain better results. I, for one, hope he does so.
23.Bxh6! 1–0
The loss of a second pawn results in resignation. This is not an unreasonable decision. The winner has a +700 point rating advantage. With that large a difference in past performance, two pawns is a huge deficit to overcome and resignation the correct decision.
Mr. Aaron can take a lesson also. It is much harder to learn from your victories than from your defeats. “Hey, I won. So what if there were errors along the way?” Such is the all too human feeling that I and others have experienced in our careers. One difference noted between OK players like myself, and those who excel: Deepak Aaron, Philip Sells, etc., is they seem to learn as much from victory as from defeat. These excellent chess players have at least one universal trait in common; a critical attitude towards their own play. Winning the game is not quite enough. They are looking for perfection, that most difficult of all goals.
Specifically for Dilip; and here I quote from GM Har-Zvi’s comments on a game I won from his brother Deepak back in the days when Deepak was much less accomplished than he is now: “Trickery such as this is not correct. Playing stuff you know is unsound is just not good chess. If you know better, play better, don’t resort to swindles. It is lazy thinking”. When we estimate our opponent is far behind us in experience, the temptation is to scatter traps and tricks like bait in their path hoping for some easy win. There are two problems with this approach: First, one can never tell when the worm may turn, and the undervalued opponent will exploit your gamble to take an embarrassing point from you. Second, and this may be the more important, the approach fosters an attitude of casualness in your play that holds back future development. Ask the questions; I may have won, but how could it have been smoother and cleaner? Where did I give him chances, and why did I do that? Just as there should be an internal dialogue by the player about the game in progress to develop his thoughts, a similar dialogue needs to take place about the game when it is over to fit it in to your effort towards improvement. One of the great philosophers said; an unexamined life is not worth living. My twist on that thought for the chess player is; unexamined games lead to stagnation. Your performance plateaus and frustration sets in.
More soon.
I have not published many games by Michael Stanley. Mostly it is because he has not won many over the few years he has been playing tournament chess. Today’s game is not a win or a draw either, but Michael played a difficult opening well. He sacrificed a pawn to get a comfortable lead in development. Then, after obtaining all Black could ask for in this difficult line, he let the advantage slip away, and shortly thereafter the game. Two things were made apparent in this game; Michael plays stronger than his rating, and Dilip can be too casual in his treatment of the opening.
Aaron, Dilip - Stanley, Michael [C58]
SCC Consolation Schenectady, NY, 16.02.2012
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Ng5 d5 5.exd5 Na5 6.Bb5+ c6 7.dxc6 bxc6 8.Ba4?!
Way back when the Two Knights Defense was very much mainstream at the top level of chess. James Mortimer, a strong English master of those days defeated Chigorin, grandfather of Russian chess according to the Russians, when he tried it out in in one of those hugely long tourneys of long ago.
(263) Mortimer, James - Chigorin, Mikhail [C59]
London (26), 1883
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Ng5 d5 5.exd5 Na5 6.Bb5+ c6 7.dxc6 bxc6 8.Be2 h6 9.Nf3 e4 10.Ne5 Qc7 11.d4 exd3 12.Nxd3 Bd6 13.h3 0–0 14.0–0 Bf5 15.Nc3 Rad8 16.Bd2 Nc4 17.Qc1 Rfe8 18.Bf3 Bh2+ 19.Kh1 Bxd3 20.cxd3 Rxd3 21.Be3 Nxe3 22.fxe3 Rdxe3 23.Bxc6 Qxc6 24.Kxh2 Qd6+ 25.Kh1 Nh5 26.Qd1 Ng3+ 27.Kg1 Rd3 28.Qa4 Qc5+ 29.Rf2 Re6 30.Rd1 Rxd1+ 31.Qxd1 Nh1 32.Qd8+ Kh7 33.Qd3+ f5 34.Qxf5+ Qxf5 35.Rxf5 Ng3 36.Ra5 Rf6 37.Rxa7 h5 38.h4 Rf1+ 39.Kh2 Nf5 40.Ra4 Rf2 41.Ne4 Rxb2 42.Ng5+ Kg6 43.Ra6+ Nd6 44.Rxd6+ Kf5 45.Rd5+ Kg6 46.a3 Rb3 47.Ra5 Kh6 48.Ra6+ g6 49.Ra8 Kg7 50.Ra7+ Kf6 51.Rf7+ Ke5 52.Rf3 Rb2 53.Kg3 Rd2 54.Re3+ Kf5 55.Re5+ 1–0
The strong master Pruess was not so lucky in more recent times against one of my favorite commentators on ICC, “Yermo“. If you haven’t got on ICC yet, try it. His weekly video talks; “Every Russian Schoolboy Knows” is worth the price of admission alone. In this game Yermolinski shows there are many ways to skin the Two Knights cat.
(1201551) Pruess, David (2424) - Yermolinsky, Alex (2517) [C58]
2nd Imre Konig Memorial, San Francisco, 26.07.2007
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Ng5 d5 5.exd5 Na5 6.Bb5+ c6 7.dxc6 bxc6 8.Qf3 Qc7 9.Bd3 h6 10.Ne4 Nxe4 11.Bxe4 g6 12.g4 Bg7 13.b4 f5 14.gxf5 gxf5 15.Qh5+ Qf7 16.Qxf7+ Kxf7 17.Bf3 e4 18.Bh5+ Ke7 19.Nc3 Nc4 20.Rb1 Be6 21.b5 cxb5 22.Rxb5 Rab8 23.Rb3 Rhc8 24.Rg1 Be5 25.Rg6 Rxb3 26.axb3 Nxd2 27.Bxd2 Bxc3 28.Rxh6 a5 29.Bxc3 Rxc3 30.Kd2 Rh3 31.Rh7+ Kf6 32.Rh6+ Ke5 33.Rh7 Rxh2 34.Ke2 a4 35.bxa4 Bg8 36.Rh6 Bf7 37.Bxf7 Rxh6 38.c3 Rb6 39.Ke1 Rb1+ 40.Kd2 Rb2+ 0–1
The move played in our game is not very good. If you want to test a less experienced player, “Yermo’s” try is a better way to vary from the standard 8 Be2. By the way, there are tons of games in the databases with strange quirks in the Two Knights, most begin with the usual 8 Be2. It is later the fun begins. The most notable and puzzling example is Steinitz’ favorite early development of the KN to h3. The first World Champion lost many in this line, and won some too.
In the game under discussion Black has invested a pawn intending to obtain a lead in development as compensation. Success in such transactions is not always some ringing mating combination, although such is possible. The mature and perceptive player recognizes recovering the invested pawn and emerging with superior development and a playable game is also success.
8..., h6
Black now gives a demonstration how to play against the retreat of the Bishop to a4.
9.Nf3 e4 10.Qe2 Bc5
It may be that 10..., Bd6; is a little better because it prevents the White Knight jumping to e5.
11.d3 Ba6 12.Bb3?,..
This move makes no sense. The key problems for White are his King and Queen residing on e-file and the pinned pawn at d3. Clearing up those flaws should be taking priority. Instead White begins to engineer a threat to f7. That is result of either over-confidence, or the utter ignoring of the opponent’s threats. It is this move that convinced me Dilip is too casual about the opening play. The reasonable move is 12 0-0.
12..., Qc7?!
After excellent conduct of the opening phase of the game, here’s a slip. The previously mentioned problems of the monarch and his consort on the e-file and the pinned e-pawn are central to understanding the position.
It is on those factors on which the choice of Black’s next move must be based. When the opponent is in some difficulties, directly increasing those difficulties is best. To that end 12..., 0-0; is clearly an excellent way to continue. This sample line shows what can happen; 13 0-0 Nxb3 14 axb3 exd3 15 Qd1 dxc2 16 Qxc2 Bxf1 17 Kxf1 Re8; and the back rank mate threat defends the Bc5.
Maybe the calculation of this line is a bit daunting, but searching for a move that that increases White’s difficulties is not so hard. Compare the move played, 12..., Qc7; and the move suggested, 12..., 0-0. Moving the Queen to c7 makes no direct threat, although it does advance the Black development. By castling Black immediately raises the specter of a capture on d3 and a decisive pin on the e-file. The first move does something good but not threatening, and alternative does something equally good, castling is development, and makes a serious threat. Active play, dynamic play, whatever terminology you choose, means, at least in part, making threats to advance your cause. Black elected the less dynamic option and gave up a big piece of his advantage here.
13.0–0 0–0 14.Nfd2?,..
Dilip has played Mike before and won. He probably thought most any move will do here. This casual choice of a place for the Knight returns the big edge to Black. With castling done for both sides, the pinned pawn on d3 is the immediately important feature in the position. It would be better to play 14 Ne1, shoring up the threatened point than to agree to the probable recovery of the pawn Black invested..
14..., exd3 15.cxd3 Rfe8 16.Qf3 Rad8 17.Bc2 Nb7?
What? After an opening and transition to the middle game creditably if not flawlessly conducted, Black fails to remember one of the first principles; a lead in development is a fragile and transient thing. Give your opponent respite and he will catch up. When your compensation for a material deficit is development, every move you make has a high value. Use as much clock time as required to find the move that keeps the pressure on. It is the only way to not have the position gradually swing in the favor of the other side.
Rather than the retrograde 17..., Nb7; which has no greater purpose than some redeployment of the of the Knight to a more useful place, Black needs to press on with dynamic play. Better is 17..., Rd4. In this case Black should be thinking in terms of switching to a direct attack on the King with 18 Nc3? Rf4 19 Qd1 Ng4; laying siege to f2 and making slightly hidden threats to h7.
Again a comparison; the text and the idea just sketched out. Both have reasonable purposes. The text move; getting the least well placed piece back into the game, and the alternative suggested; dynamic play forcing more concession from the opponent. The chess wisdom about finding your least well placed piece and improving its position is well and widely known. It is a good piece of advice from the great masters. What is forgotten too often is the caveat; if you can find no other useful idea. Computers calculate everything, score the choices and pick the highest value. Human beings reason from generalities to specifics as a rule. At this point in the game the general observation the material deficit, a pawn down, and a lead in development means activity is the priority, not positional maneuvering. That is the cue that should guide us towards a search for moves like 17..., Rd4; and 18..., Rf4.
18.Nc3 Bd6 19.h3 Nc5 20.Nc4 Bxc4?
Black had somewhere in his mind the switch to a direct attack on the King idea. His methods were slow letting White off the hook. This move unnecessarily repairs the damage to the White pawn formation. Such should only be done if there were no other choice. Black should have tried to take the game to a reasonable ending here with 20..., Nd5; if then 21 Nxd6 Qxd6 22 Nxd5 Qxd5 23 Qxd5 Rxd5 24 Be3 Nxd3 25 Bxd3 Rxd3 26 Bxa7?, gives Black the edge after 26..., Rd7. If White more carefully plays 26 Rfc1, then 26..., Bb2 27 Bxa7? Rd2; is not entirely hopeless for Black. White is clearly better; he has the extra pawn, is not too far behind in development, and his Bishops are leering hungrily at the Black King. On the opposite side of the board, Black has to contend with the material deficit and weakened pawns on the Q-side, unpleasant facts they are if an endgame comes about. All of that is unpleasant to contemplate.
Perhaps the best way forward is; 21..., Be5 22 Be3 Nd3; attacking the supports of the Nc3. White then might be persuaded he has to play 23 Bxd3 Rxd3; which superficially looks good for Black. There is a but however. The line continues; 24 Rad1 Red8 25 Bb6!, picking up the Exchange for White. An improvement for Black with 24..., Rxd1 25 Rxd1 Bxc3 26 bxc3, does not quite get him to equality. White’s extra pawn is somewhat devalued, but White’s development is superior. He threatens c4-c5 and Be3-f4 with an eventual Bf4-d6 as an active possibility although that gives Black some access to d5 for his Knight. Alternatively White can not advance his lead c-pawn tempting Black to play .., c6-c5; and White then can try to work against the Black c-pawn. White’s pawns have been injured, but it is Black’s pawn that appear vulnerable.
All the foregoing is rendered moot by Black suddenly running out of ideas, or he misunderstood the position.
21.dxc4 Ne6 22.Be3,..
The Bishop sacrifice is simmering in the background. It is not quite ready to be served, yet. If 22 Bxh6? Nd4!; swings the advantage to Black in a big way.
22..., Nc5?
Black found nothing else to do other than to send this Knight back to c5. It is my guess, Mike summed up the position as balanced in someway. That conclusion overlooks there is a real threat on the board. Probably 22..., Rb8; making his own threat is the best try for Black. White will still be better, but no winning line is immediately apparent.
I had similar experiences playing against Mike Stanley. He conducted the games in a very competent fashion up to a point, and then a blunder. Jacob Aagaard, the Danish-Scottish Grandmaster, wrote about this problem in his book Excelling at Chess Calculation, Everyman, London, 2004. Much of what Aagaard has to say applies to this moment in the game.
Aagaard comes at the blundering problem several different ways in the book. The first is; look, don’t think. He means examine the position as that, a position, not a way station in the process we call a game of chess. What went before doesn’t really exist if we are looking at the position in isolation, and all the hopes, fears and assumptions we had getting here are out of the way of your thinking. Aagaard’s says often our own brain gets in the way of our understanding what is right there if front of you. That may be an idealistic notion, but it is worthwhile trying to divorce yourself from what went before for a moment at least and see what is there.
His second prescription is; calculate more slowly. Take your time and fix in your mind the position after each step of calculation. The clock may force you to move before you are entirely satisfied, and you have to make a decision on an incomplete or truncated calculation. That is just the way it is in chess with clocks. If you have taken your time and fixed the positions however much of the way you have gone, there is the chance intuitively you will pick a good, or best move.
The third prescription is; look wide not deep. If Mr. Stanley had done so at this move he would have not lost so soon, or maybe not at all. There is a story I have heard more than once about World Champion Petrosian. It was said he never calculated more than one move deep, but he saw everything there was to see there. GM Aagaard is saying having a clear idea of what the position will look like all across the board is at least as important, and probably more so, as is drilling down many moves deep on a specific line. Calculating the far future is often defeated by missing the mate in one, or as in this instance, a material lost.
The fourth prescription is; cultivate unforced thinking. The GM believes blunders can be traced to us players forcing our thinking based on assumptions made as the positions develop. The assumptions may well have been valid when first made in the process, but as the relationships between the chess pieces change as the position develops the assumptions may no longer hold; the pawn defended is no longer is, or a pinned piece can be attacked more than it can be defended. Unforced thinking in Aagaard’s parlance is a systematic re-examination of assumptions made as the position develops. Here it is the defense of the Nf6 and the workload of the pawn on g7.
Mr. Stanley needs to work on his play in the middle game. He has shown here a nice feel for the opening and the initial transition to the middle game. All of Aagaard that I quoted, and more in his book on calculation, is a good starting point from which Mike should work for improvement. If there was no talent evident in his game, all this writing is pointless. That is not the case. Stanley can obtain better results. I, for one, hope he does so.
23.Bxh6! 1–0
The loss of a second pawn results in resignation. This is not an unreasonable decision. The winner has a +700 point rating advantage. With that large a difference in past performance, two pawns is a huge deficit to overcome and resignation the correct decision.
Mr. Aaron can take a lesson also. It is much harder to learn from your victories than from your defeats. “Hey, I won. So what if there were errors along the way?” Such is the all too human feeling that I and others have experienced in our careers. One difference noted between OK players like myself, and those who excel: Deepak Aaron, Philip Sells, etc., is they seem to learn as much from victory as from defeat. These excellent chess players have at least one universal trait in common; a critical attitude towards their own play. Winning the game is not quite enough. They are looking for perfection, that most difficult of all goals.
Specifically for Dilip; and here I quote from GM Har-Zvi’s comments on a game I won from his brother Deepak back in the days when Deepak was much less accomplished than he is now: “Trickery such as this is not correct. Playing stuff you know is unsound is just not good chess. If you know better, play better, don’t resort to swindles. It is lazy thinking”. When we estimate our opponent is far behind us in experience, the temptation is to scatter traps and tricks like bait in their path hoping for some easy win. There are two problems with this approach: First, one can never tell when the worm may turn, and the undervalued opponent will exploit your gamble to take an embarrassing point from you. Second, and this may be the more important, the approach fosters an attitude of casualness in your play that holds back future development. Ask the questions; I may have won, but how could it have been smoother and cleaner? Where did I give him chances, and why did I do that? Just as there should be an internal dialogue by the player about the game in progress to develop his thoughts, a similar dialogue needs to take place about the game when it is over to fit it in to your effort towards improvement. One of the great philosophers said; an unexamined life is not worth living. My twist on that thought for the chess player is; unexamined games lead to stagnation. Your performance plateaus and frustration sets in.
More soon.
2.19.2012
Some Action From the SCC Consolation Tourney
Thursday activity at the Schenectady Club was less than expected. Three games were played in the Consolation Tournament and none of the make-up games from the Championship. Illness and other scheduling problems are stretching out both events.
Dilip Aaron continued his undefeated run for the Consolation title by winning from Mike Stanley. Another new face, Isaiah Glessner played a tense draw with Herman Calderone. And, two aspiring players; Chris Caravaty and Cory Northrup, made an interesting fight. That is the game for today.
Caravaty, Chris - Northrup, Cory [A53]
SCC Consolation, Schenectady, NY, 16.02.2012
1.Nf3 d6 2.d4 Bg4 3.c4 e6 4.e4 Nf6 5.Nc3 c6 6.Be2 Be7 7.0–0 d5
Those of us watching games played by Cory have seen formations like this before. Very Hyper-modern and difficult for both sides since it is out of the mainstream. Such an approach tries to make a profit from the fact that local club level players treat the opening in a routine fashion most often and can be bamboozled by a non-standard position. Mr. Northrup has won some games with his approach, and lost some. If he is going to complete his march towards Class A status, Cory may have to add another level of sophistication to his opening arsenal.
8.e5?!,..
Turing the game into a kind of French Defense. Theory says Black is OK because he has gotten his light squared Bishop outside his pawn chain. So, maybe Cory’s scheme worked?
8..., Nfd7 9.c5 b6 10.b4 a5 11.Qa4 b5
Black has reached equality with chances to get more as the tension will be released pretty soon. Black has to be watchful in these French Defense type formations for a sudden attack on his K-side. That is so because of the large space advantage White has there. Mr. Caravaty ignores the ancient wisdom; you attack where your pawns point; in this case the pawns on d4 and e5 point at the Black K-side. With White distracted by nebulous adventures on the Q-side, Black can look to the future with confidence. The downside in this situation for Black is he has to be very accurate in his calculation.
12.Bxb5?!,..
An inspired and flawed attempt to wrest control of the game. The mighty Rybka says White should be satisfied with 12 Qb3 axb4 13 Qxb4 Na6 14 Qb3, keeping the Q-side damage to a bare minimum, and then turn his attention to the K-side where there are opportunities to attack.
12..., cxb5 13.Nxb5 0–0 14.Nd6 Bxd6 15.exd6 Bxf3 16.gxf3 Qc8?
The provocative methods used by Mr. Northrup carries with it the need for a complete understanding of the resulting positions. At this point, Black must be prepared to risk all with 16..., Qf6! He hits the several tender points in the White position; f3, d4 and the general situation around the White King. The intention should be to find compensation for the problematic Q-side position by active operations elsewhere. Going over to the defensive gives up any hope for victory.
Provocative methods bring about critical situations. Critical situations require dynamic ideas and moves. When you are in such situations, the moment you shift to routine, positional maneuvering often signals the end for you. Here is a sample line illustrating active play; 16..., Qf6! 17 Be3 Qxf6 18 Rfc1 Qg4+ 19 Kf1 f4; 20 b5 f4 21 Bd2 f3 22 Be3 Nxc5 23 Rxc5 Qg2+ 24 Ke1 Qg1+ 25 Kd2 Qx1 26 Rc1 Qb2+ 27 Rc2 Qb4+; forces off the Queens leaving Black up a Rook with very doubtful compensation for White in shape of pair of isolated passed pawns.
17.Be3 Qb7 18.b5 Rc8?
Continuing routinely is costly. Black is going to have to return the piece. A good way to do so is; 18..., Nb6. If 19 cxb6 Nd7; with a later jump to c5. The pawn on b6 falls and the pawn on d6 will hard to defend. White will have a protected passed pawn on b5, but the nearly unassailable Knight posted on c5 will make it hard to exploit. Compare also the situation that comes about after the Knight captures the pawn on c5; White’s not too useful Bishop suddenly has opportunities spreading out before it.
19.Rfc1 Nxc5?
The culmination of the mistaken defensive notion. The White pawns have been constraining Black’s choices for awhile. Now they change into monsters.
20.dxc5 Qd7 21.Qb3 Qd8 22.a4 Nd7 23.c6 Ne5 24.Bc5 Qg5+
Too late to the party. Only after making terrible concessions on the Q-side does Cory see the K-side chances. The pawns are too, too dangerous now for this forlorn hope to succeed.
25.Kf1 Nc4 26.Rxc4!,..
I watched with some concern while Chris mulled this move. If he did not capture the Knight, the game would have been less interesting for publication I thought. White would still be winning but the finish might be less pleasing to the reader.
26..., dxc4 27.Qxc4 Qe5 28.Rd1 Rd8 29.d7 Qf6 30.c7 Rxd7
Resignation is also possible.
31.Rxd7 Qa1+ 32.Kg2 Qf6 33.Be7 1–0
Neither side played the position as theory tells us it must be played. That being said they treated us to a tense battle. Chris went off on a Q-side adventure as White in a French Defense kind of position. I can attest from many sorrowful experiences that ends in tears for White most of the time. Cory provoked great tension and at the crucial moment went on the defensive just when great activity was demanded. Many times I have failed to grasp the need to pursue activity under tension letting slip the some well earned advantage. The failings in this game are typical of our play in the clubs, the struggle however was very interesting and maybe a little educational.
More soon.
Dilip Aaron continued his undefeated run for the Consolation title by winning from Mike Stanley. Another new face, Isaiah Glessner played a tense draw with Herman Calderone. And, two aspiring players; Chris Caravaty and Cory Northrup, made an interesting fight. That is the game for today.
Caravaty, Chris - Northrup, Cory [A53]
SCC Consolation, Schenectady, NY, 16.02.2012
1.Nf3 d6 2.d4 Bg4 3.c4 e6 4.e4 Nf6 5.Nc3 c6 6.Be2 Be7 7.0–0 d5
Those of us watching games played by Cory have seen formations like this before. Very Hyper-modern and difficult for both sides since it is out of the mainstream. Such an approach tries to make a profit from the fact that local club level players treat the opening in a routine fashion most often and can be bamboozled by a non-standard position. Mr. Northrup has won some games with his approach, and lost some. If he is going to complete his march towards Class A status, Cory may have to add another level of sophistication to his opening arsenal.
8.e5?!,..
Turing the game into a kind of French Defense. Theory says Black is OK because he has gotten his light squared Bishop outside his pawn chain. So, maybe Cory’s scheme worked?
8..., Nfd7 9.c5 b6 10.b4 a5 11.Qa4 b5
Black has reached equality with chances to get more as the tension will be released pretty soon. Black has to be watchful in these French Defense type formations for a sudden attack on his K-side. That is so because of the large space advantage White has there. Mr. Caravaty ignores the ancient wisdom; you attack where your pawns point; in this case the pawns on d4 and e5 point at the Black K-side. With White distracted by nebulous adventures on the Q-side, Black can look to the future with confidence. The downside in this situation for Black is he has to be very accurate in his calculation.
12.Bxb5?!,..
An inspired and flawed attempt to wrest control of the game. The mighty Rybka says White should be satisfied with 12 Qb3 axb4 13 Qxb4 Na6 14 Qb3, keeping the Q-side damage to a bare minimum, and then turn his attention to the K-side where there are opportunities to attack.
12..., cxb5 13.Nxb5 0–0 14.Nd6 Bxd6 15.exd6 Bxf3 16.gxf3 Qc8?
The provocative methods used by Mr. Northrup carries with it the need for a complete understanding of the resulting positions. At this point, Black must be prepared to risk all with 16..., Qf6! He hits the several tender points in the White position; f3, d4 and the general situation around the White King. The intention should be to find compensation for the problematic Q-side position by active operations elsewhere. Going over to the defensive gives up any hope for victory.
Provocative methods bring about critical situations. Critical situations require dynamic ideas and moves. When you are in such situations, the moment you shift to routine, positional maneuvering often signals the end for you. Here is a sample line illustrating active play; 16..., Qf6! 17 Be3 Qxf6 18 Rfc1 Qg4+ 19 Kf1 f4; 20 b5 f4 21 Bd2 f3 22 Be3 Nxc5 23 Rxc5 Qg2+ 24 Ke1 Qg1+ 25 Kd2 Qx1 26 Rc1 Qb2+ 27 Rc2 Qb4+; forces off the Queens leaving Black up a Rook with very doubtful compensation for White in shape of pair of isolated passed pawns.
17.Be3 Qb7 18.b5 Rc8?
Continuing routinely is costly. Black is going to have to return the piece. A good way to do so is; 18..., Nb6. If 19 cxb6 Nd7; with a later jump to c5. The pawn on b6 falls and the pawn on d6 will hard to defend. White will have a protected passed pawn on b5, but the nearly unassailable Knight posted on c5 will make it hard to exploit. Compare also the situation that comes about after the Knight captures the pawn on c5; White’s not too useful Bishop suddenly has opportunities spreading out before it.
19.Rfc1 Nxc5?
The culmination of the mistaken defensive notion. The White pawns have been constraining Black’s choices for awhile. Now they change into monsters.
20.dxc5 Qd7 21.Qb3 Qd8 22.a4 Nd7 23.c6 Ne5 24.Bc5 Qg5+
Too late to the party. Only after making terrible concessions on the Q-side does Cory see the K-side chances. The pawns are too, too dangerous now for this forlorn hope to succeed.
25.Kf1 Nc4 26.Rxc4!,..
I watched with some concern while Chris mulled this move. If he did not capture the Knight, the game would have been less interesting for publication I thought. White would still be winning but the finish might be less pleasing to the reader.
26..., dxc4 27.Qxc4 Qe5 28.Rd1 Rd8 29.d7 Qf6 30.c7 Rxd7
Resignation is also possible.
31.Rxd7 Qa1+ 32.Kg2 Qf6 33.Be7 1–0
Neither side played the position as theory tells us it must be played. That being said they treated us to a tense battle. Chris went off on a Q-side adventure as White in a French Defense kind of position. I can attest from many sorrowful experiences that ends in tears for White most of the time. Cory provoked great tension and at the crucial moment went on the defensive just when great activity was demanded. Many times I have failed to grasp the need to pursue activity under tension letting slip the some well earned advantage. The failings in this game are typical of our play in the clubs, the struggle however was very interesting and maybe a little educational.
More soon.
2.17.2012
Catching Up on Some Games
Wednesday evening the Albany Club held a thematic tourney, unrated, game/15. The theme was the Benko Gambit Accepted. Jonathan Lack won the event scoring 3 ½ - ½. Dean Howard was 2nd at 3 - 1, and Cory Northrup proved his growing strength by finishing 3rd with 2 ½ - 1 ½. Behind these top fishers were; Tim Wright, Peter Henner and Chris Caravaty all with 2 - 2. Trailing the field was Bill Little at 1 - 3 and Charles Eson at 0 - 4. There are more fun events planned for this year. Stay tuned and I will announce them as they come up.
Here is a game from last month that I didn’t get to publish in the rush of news of the Schenectady and Albany Championships closing on their finishes. Every so often Mr. Chu rises up and defeats an Expert. This was not one of those occasions. Alan Le Cours does a workmanlike job of keeping control of the game, doesn’t overreach and brings home the full point.
Chu, Richard - Le Cours, Alan [A24]
SCC Finals Schenectady, NY, 19.01.2012
1.Nf3 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 Bg7 4.g3 0–0 5.Bg2 d6 6.0–0 e5 7.d3 Nbd7
The books and the Grandmasters have a preference for this Knight going to c6. Deep Rybka likes the Knight on c6 as well. I understand the explanations given by the GM’s, the words that is. The chess concepts are far less clear to me. To me, and I guess to Alan, going through d7 with this Knight is OK, at least. The game move keeps c6 clear for a possible .., c7-c6.
8.Rb1 a5 9.a3?!,..
Doubtful because development is almost always more important than pawn moves. This is particularly true when development is not complete. In the present case; White has not deployed his Bc1. It has three likely stopping places; d2, e3 and g5. Stopping early on d2 looks too quiet. The adventurous jump to g5 is met by .., h7-h6; and White has to chose a retreat or surrendering the Bishop pair. The move really worth thought is 9 Be3. Then if 9..., Ng4 10 Bg5, causing Black some slight inconvenience. The Knight hanging out on g4 will get pushed back by the h-pawn, so no matter what, White will not be losing a tempo. White seemingly could not decide about a Bishop move, and made an unnecessary pawn move in its place. I suspect this pawn move leads White to make more harmful to his cause pawn moves later on.
9..., c6
Black has set the stage for the push of the d-pawn
10.Bd2 d5
Black could also play 10..., Nc5. White should not try 11 d4 exd4; and Black will play to double the c-pawns and recover the lead c-pawn if White goes forward to capture the d-pawn. The complications favor Black. Mr. Le Cours opts for central control. The problem with that idea is, if White is careful, he can put a great deal of pressure on the pawn duo e5 and d5 with a move that is not immediately obvious.
11.cxd5 cxd5 12.b4?,..
The better move is 12 Bg5! The danger to Black’s center pawns is real, for example; 12..., Qe8 13 Nb5, or 12..., Qb6 13 Bxf6, and a pawn falls. If 12..., d4 13 Nb5 a4 14 Nd6 Qe7 15 Nxc8, and White is doing OK. The text leaves White not so well off as he might have been. The resulting position, with the b-pawn advanced, requires care not to see it lost. The next several moves do not really shift the balance too much one way or the other.
12..., axb4 13.axb4 Re8 14.Qc2 Nb6 15.Nb5 Re7 16.Ra1
A creative idea was put forward by Michael Mockler. The idea shows how Michael’s chess imagination works. He proposed 16 Nxe4?! Rxe5 17 Bf4, Re7 18 Nc7 Ra3 19 Nb5 Ra6; and probably White can’t run the Rook out of moves. If I am correct, the piece for a pawn sacrifice is difficult to justify. In a game Mr. Mockler likely would have not played the suggested move. A calm look at the situation would have rejected it as a choice.
16...Rxa1 17.Rxa1 Bf5 18.Rc1,..
I am uncertain this is a good try.
18..., h6 19.Nh4?!,..
Mr. Chu has nothing more in mind than chasing the Bf5 which leads to only equality. That is not so bad, is it? Disturbing is the absence of a more constructive purpose. It sends a message to your opponent that you have run out of ideas.
19...,Be6 20.Nf3 Ne8 21.Qb1?,..
Better 21 Qc5, keeping Black constrained. The text allows Black to begin to take over the initiative. The old, old adage about if you don’t use your advantages they will go away is true. It is very hard to just sit on the position.
21..., Nd6 22.Nxd6 Qxd6 23.b5 Rc7 24.Rxc7 Qxc7 25.Ba5 Qc5
It is now clear the White b-pawn is very hard to defend. Mr. Le Cours showed patience in the run up to this point. He did not try to force the issue allowing his opponent to do what he wanted and then exploiting the result.
26.e4?,..
After this White is in trouble. Better 26 Qb4, then if 26..., Qc1+ 27 Qe1 Qxe1+ 28 Nxe1 Na4; the siege of the b-pawn is more difficult for Black to carry out, but it is still possible. In such situations, the more time White can buy, the greater are the chances of finding some trick or stratagem to balance the potential lost pawn. The conversion to a Bishop pair ending down a pawn does not help the White cause.
26..., dxe4 27.dxe4 Nc4 28.Qb4 Qc8 29.Qc3 Qd7 30.Nd2 Qxb5 31.Nxc4 Qxc4 32.Qxc4 Bxc4
33.Bb6 Kf8 34.Bf1 Be6 35.Bb5 f5 36.f3 Kf7 37.Kf2 Bf8 38.Ke2 Bd6 39.Kd3 Ke7
I guess White hoped he could excluded the Black King from the neighborhood of the b-pawn and in someway delay, or prevent, its advance. The difficulty is Black can open a second front on the other side of the board making the defensive task harder yet.
40.Ke3 Bd7 41.Bxd7,..
If 41 Bc4 Ba3; opens the route for the King. All Black must do is not rush things.
41..., Kxd7 42.Kd3 Kc6 43.Be3 Bf8 44.f4 exf4 45.Bxf4 fxe4+ 46.Kxe4 Bg7!
A nice touch. The Bg7 forces the White King to give ground.
47.Kd3 Kd5 48.h4,..
The game is lost, but this move makes the technical task easier. The pawn on g3 is terribly weak.
48..., h5 49.Kc2 Be5 50.Bg5 Bxg3 0–1
With the b-pawn as a distant bait, the White King will not have enough speed or range to cover all the problems. The Black King Bishop will combine to win the last remaining White pawn. Three pawns supported by a Bishop will win soon enough. A nice win over an opponent who can be a problem for higher rated players.
More soon.
Here is a game from last month that I didn’t get to publish in the rush of news of the Schenectady and Albany Championships closing on their finishes. Every so often Mr. Chu rises up and defeats an Expert. This was not one of those occasions. Alan Le Cours does a workmanlike job of keeping control of the game, doesn’t overreach and brings home the full point.
Chu, Richard - Le Cours, Alan [A24]
SCC Finals Schenectady, NY, 19.01.2012
1.Nf3 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 Bg7 4.g3 0–0 5.Bg2 d6 6.0–0 e5 7.d3 Nbd7
The books and the Grandmasters have a preference for this Knight going to c6. Deep Rybka likes the Knight on c6 as well. I understand the explanations given by the GM’s, the words that is. The chess concepts are far less clear to me. To me, and I guess to Alan, going through d7 with this Knight is OK, at least. The game move keeps c6 clear for a possible .., c7-c6.
8.Rb1 a5 9.a3?!,..
Doubtful because development is almost always more important than pawn moves. This is particularly true when development is not complete. In the present case; White has not deployed his Bc1. It has three likely stopping places; d2, e3 and g5. Stopping early on d2 looks too quiet. The adventurous jump to g5 is met by .., h7-h6; and White has to chose a retreat or surrendering the Bishop pair. The move really worth thought is 9 Be3. Then if 9..., Ng4 10 Bg5, causing Black some slight inconvenience. The Knight hanging out on g4 will get pushed back by the h-pawn, so no matter what, White will not be losing a tempo. White seemingly could not decide about a Bishop move, and made an unnecessary pawn move in its place. I suspect this pawn move leads White to make more harmful to his cause pawn moves later on.
9..., c6
Black has set the stage for the push of the d-pawn
10.Bd2 d5
Black could also play 10..., Nc5. White should not try 11 d4 exd4; and Black will play to double the c-pawns and recover the lead c-pawn if White goes forward to capture the d-pawn. The complications favor Black. Mr. Le Cours opts for central control. The problem with that idea is, if White is careful, he can put a great deal of pressure on the pawn duo e5 and d5 with a move that is not immediately obvious.
11.cxd5 cxd5 12.b4?,..
The better move is 12 Bg5! The danger to Black’s center pawns is real, for example; 12..., Qe8 13 Nb5, or 12..., Qb6 13 Bxf6, and a pawn falls. If 12..., d4 13 Nb5 a4 14 Nd6 Qe7 15 Nxc8, and White is doing OK. The text leaves White not so well off as he might have been. The resulting position, with the b-pawn advanced, requires care not to see it lost. The next several moves do not really shift the balance too much one way or the other.
12..., axb4 13.axb4 Re8 14.Qc2 Nb6 15.Nb5 Re7 16.Ra1
A creative idea was put forward by Michael Mockler. The idea shows how Michael’s chess imagination works. He proposed 16 Nxe4?! Rxe5 17 Bf4, Re7 18 Nc7 Ra3 19 Nb5 Ra6; and probably White can’t run the Rook out of moves. If I am correct, the piece for a pawn sacrifice is difficult to justify. In a game Mr. Mockler likely would have not played the suggested move. A calm look at the situation would have rejected it as a choice.
16...Rxa1 17.Rxa1 Bf5 18.Rc1,..
I am uncertain this is a good try.
18..., h6 19.Nh4?!,..
Mr. Chu has nothing more in mind than chasing the Bf5 which leads to only equality. That is not so bad, is it? Disturbing is the absence of a more constructive purpose. It sends a message to your opponent that you have run out of ideas.
19...,Be6 20.Nf3 Ne8 21.Qb1?,..
Better 21 Qc5, keeping Black constrained. The text allows Black to begin to take over the initiative. The old, old adage about if you don’t use your advantages they will go away is true. It is very hard to just sit on the position.
21..., Nd6 22.Nxd6 Qxd6 23.b5 Rc7 24.Rxc7 Qxc7 25.Ba5 Qc5
It is now clear the White b-pawn is very hard to defend. Mr. Le Cours showed patience in the run up to this point. He did not try to force the issue allowing his opponent to do what he wanted and then exploiting the result.
26.e4?,..
After this White is in trouble. Better 26 Qb4, then if 26..., Qc1+ 27 Qe1 Qxe1+ 28 Nxe1 Na4; the siege of the b-pawn is more difficult for Black to carry out, but it is still possible. In such situations, the more time White can buy, the greater are the chances of finding some trick or stratagem to balance the potential lost pawn. The conversion to a Bishop pair ending down a pawn does not help the White cause.
26..., dxe4 27.dxe4 Nc4 28.Qb4 Qc8 29.Qc3 Qd7 30.Nd2 Qxb5 31.Nxc4 Qxc4 32.Qxc4 Bxc4
33.Bb6 Kf8 34.Bf1 Be6 35.Bb5 f5 36.f3 Kf7 37.Kf2 Bf8 38.Ke2 Bd6 39.Kd3 Ke7
I guess White hoped he could excluded the Black King from the neighborhood of the b-pawn and in someway delay, or prevent, its advance. The difficulty is Black can open a second front on the other side of the board making the defensive task harder yet.
40.Ke3 Bd7 41.Bxd7,..
If 41 Bc4 Ba3; opens the route for the King. All Black must do is not rush things.
41..., Kxd7 42.Kd3 Kc6 43.Be3 Bf8 44.f4 exf4 45.Bxf4 fxe4+ 46.Kxe4 Bg7!
A nice touch. The Bg7 forces the White King to give ground.
47.Kd3 Kd5 48.h4,..
The game is lost, but this move makes the technical task easier. The pawn on g3 is terribly weak.
48..., h5 49.Kc2 Be5 50.Bg5 Bxg3 0–1
With the b-pawn as a distant bait, the White King will not have enough speed or range to cover all the problems. The Black King Bishop will combine to win the last remaining White pawn. Three pawns supported by a Bishop will win soon enough. A nice win over an opponent who can be a problem for higher rated players.
More soon.
2.12.2012
Phillips Wins the SCC Title!
Well, Schenectady ended its Championship in one sense last night. John Phillips won his game from Alan Le Cours. The victory gave Mr. Phillips a 4 ½ - ½ score that no one in the event can match and his first Schenectady title. The event is not entirely over. Several players have games to make up to settle the lower order of finish. The pace of play in this event, even with some rescheduling, was quick; Mr. Phillips played every week for five weeks, and behold; the event is done, mostly that is.
How John Phillips got this year’s title was by playing well. In most of his games he sought the dynamic solution to the problems a position presented. That was his preference, mostly. In his game against the youthful Zack Calderone Phillips took a less dynamic path and thereby gave up his only draw in the tournament.
Calderone, Zack - Phillips, John [E14]
SCC Finals 2012 Schenectady, NY, 02.02.2012
1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 c5 3.e3 e6 4.Nc3 b6 5.Nf3 Bb7 6.Be2 Be7 7.0–0 0–0
This opening has a long history in the upper levels of Grandmasters. Back before WWII it was a leading edge and topical debut. Here is how it was treated by two not well known but very strong Soviet players;
(20629) Panov, Vasily N - Yudovich, Mikhail M [A30]
11th USSR Championship, Leningrad (10), 1939
1.Nf3 d5 2.c4 e6 3.b3 Nf6 4.Bb2 Be7 5.e3 0–0 6.Be2 c5 7.0–0 Nc6 8.d3 b6 9.Nbd2 Bb7 10.a3 Nd7 11.cxd5 exd5 12.Re1 Bf6 13.d4 Rc8 14.Nf1 Re8 15.Rb1 Qe7 16.Ng3 g6 17.Qd2 Red8 18.Bd3 Qf8 19.h4 Qh6 20.dxc5 Bxb2 21.Qxb2 Nxc5 22.Red1 Qg7 23.Qxg7+ Kxg7 24.Bb5 Ne6 25.Rbc1 Na5 26.Rb1 Rc3 27.Rd3 Rxd3 28.Bxd3 d4 29.Nxd4 Nxd4 30.exd4 Rxd4 31.b4 Nc4 32.Bxc4 Rxc4 33.h5 Rc3 34.hxg6 hxg6 35.Ra1 Bd5 36.Ne2 Rc2 37.Nd4 Rd2 38.Nb5 a5 39.bxa5 bxa5 40.Rc1 Be6 41.Rc7 ½–½
Almost fifty years later it was still a useful tool in the hands of a Grandmaster, but by this time it had become a reliable way to get to a draw without undue risk.
(171987) Ivkov, Borislav (2525) - Kortschnoj, Viktor (2635) [A13]
Cannes (7), 1986
1.Nf3 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.b3 c5 4.Bb2 Nc6 5.e3 Be7 6.Be2 0–0 7.0–0 d5 8.cxd5 Nxd5 9.Nc3 Bf6 10.Qc1 b6 11.Nxd5 Bxb2 12.Qxb2 Qxd5 13.a3 a5 14.Rfd1 Bb7 15.Ne1 Rfd8 16.Bf3 Qd6 17.Nc2 Qd3 18.Rac1 e5 19.Ne1 Qf5 20.d3 Qe6 21.b4 axb4 22.axb4 cxb4 23.Bxc6 Bxc6 24.Qxb4 b5 25.Rc5 Rd5 26.Rdc1 Rxc5 27.Qxc5 Bd7 28.Nf3 Rc8 29.Qa3 Rxc1+ 30.Qxc1 Bc6 31.e4 Qd6 32.h4 f6 33.Qc3 h6 34.Ne1 Bd7 35.Nc2 Kh7 36.Nb4 Be6 37.Kh2 Kg6 38.Nc2 Kf7 39.Nb4 Ke8 40.Kg1 Kd7 41.Kf1 Qc7 42.Qxc7+ Kxc7 43.Ke2 Kb6 44.Kd2 Ka5 45.Kc3 ½–½
For those of us not Grandmasters, the Queen’s Indian Defense is a way to make a fight without entering the sharpness of the King’s Indian Defense or the subtle complexity of the Queen’s Gambit Declined.
8.Bd2 d6
Black is reluctant to play this pawn to the 5th rank. If he does there is usually a general clearance is the center and exchanges that can wring a lot of tension out of the game. Mr. Phillips, higher rated, leading the event and wanting to get the most out of the game, is not interested in steering towards a draw. For his part, Mr. Calderone, a first time participant in the Finals with a rapidly improving rating, is happy to keep things tense.
9.Rb1,..
Information for the new players out there; this move has a long tradition of being a reasonable try. It prepares a space grab on the Q-side by advancing the pawn to the 4th rank. That is not a bad idea if you have no other burning issue to address.
9..., Ne4
Black delays deciding what to do with his Nb8 in the interest of making a stand in the center. If Black is too lackadaisical, White may get a bind in the center.
10.Bd3!?,..
A tempo is not critical in closed games, but this is not quite as closed as it appears. Until the center is fixed by the advance of the White d-pawn to d5, an opening of lines in the middle of the board may change this from a closed type position to an open battle rife with tactics. Instead of moving this piece a second time, White could play the standard 10 d5, setting up the typical QID argument about can White hold the blocking pawn on d5 or not.
10..., f5 11.Qc2,..
Black staked his claim to some say in the center, and with this move White agrees to let his dark squared Bishop go for the Knight and a tempo. Rybka suggests; 11 Be1 Qe8 12 Nd2 Nxc3 13 bxc3 Nc6 14 f3, when the game takes on similarities to the Dutch and the Nimzo-Indian Defenses. The game probably is more like a Dutch because the Black dark squared Bishop is on the board. White’s dark squared Bishop appears to be a supernumerary where it is deployed. If it stays where it is, the communications between the White Rooks will be a problem long term, and the selection of alternate posts; f2, g3 and h4, look suspicious or are foreclosed. Tarrasch’s dictum: If one piece is badly placed, then your whole position is bad, is illustrated in this line. Black is slightly better according to the computer. What would worry me playing the White side is; if a way to improve the White position quickly can’t be found, then there is every chance his situation will get worse.
11..., Nxd2 12.Nxd2?,..
Much better is 12 Qxd2.
12..., Nc6
The point; Black hit’s the d-pawn. Responding to that threat leaves no time to avoid the move 13..., Nb4; attacking both the Qc2 and the Bd3 setting the stage for two Bishops versus two Knights.
13.Ne2 Nb4 14.Qb3 e5 15.d5 Qd7 16.Bc2 Nxc2 17.Qxc2 a5
We now arrive at an interesting point. Michael Mockler had dropped in this evening to deal with some arrangements for the upcoming Eastern Amateur Team Championships in New Jersey and to watch a few games. Just before he had to leave the club rooms, he pointed out the move 17..., b5; to me. The question; is this not a better try to make some open lines on which the Bishops can work? The line of play; 17..., b5 18 cxb5? Bxd5; is clearly very favorable for Black. However White is under no obligation to make that doubtful capture. If White just plays 18 b3, the mighty Deep Rybka says Black has a slight edge after 18..., b4; or the game is completely even after 18..., bxc4 19 bxc4 Rab8 20 e4, when the solid block in the center seems to damp down the Bishop’s activity.
Rybka, unfortunately, does not give us a narrative about why things are good, bad or ambiguous. It just reports the order of choice the algorithm delivers and numeric scores for the choices. The users have to find the words to describe the story the scores capture. At this point the story is typical of the QID; there is not much on which to make a case for either side having some big advantage. The game will confined to the K-side with the possibility of some central squares being involved. Very specific tactical shots can have a significant influence on results, and both parties have to stay alert tactically.
18.a4!?,..
Mr. Phillips must have looked at the above and been unimpressed with Black’s chances. Instead of opening lines he throws up a barrier on the Q-side narrowing the board to play on the K-side for the most part.
18..., Rae8 19.f4 e4 20.Rbe1 Kh8 21.Nb1 Bc8 22.Nbc3 Bf6
Black has gone about organizing his forces logically. If there is to be a try for victory, then getting the Black Rooks into play against the White King via f6 and h6 with g6 as a possible intermediate post seems to be one possible plan. The position does not favor the Bishops because of the pawn obstructions. Whatever way Black decides to go, he must keep a weather eye out for changes in the pawn structure that will give the White Knights strong posts on which to stand. Tarrasch and Lasker taught chess players that the way to fight against Knights is to deny them outposts to fight from. No strong points and the Knights cut a sorry figure on the board. It seems to me, John Phillips had the Traasch/Lasker wisdom in mind as he thought about his moves.
23.b3,..
There is absolutely nothing wrong with this move, but my own chess philosophy rails against doing something like this in a closed position. There is no reason to foreclose the use of the b3 square by the White Queen. If Black takes on “tunnel vision” and continues the slow motion migration of his heavy pieces towards the K-side, there may come a moment when the Queen steps on b3 to attack b6 and threaten to invade via b5, or the Knight may be sent on a foray through b5 and c7 to land on e6 putting a crimp in the Black attack. A good principle to use in closed position is the retention of options. The more options available to you the more your opponent must think about them. If nothing else you can cost him clock time by keeping your options many.
23..., Qe7 24.g3 g5
Mr. Phillips throughout this year’s Championship did not quietly agree to draws without trying active play. He apparently did not care for maneuvering clumsy Rooks in front of his pawn in the restricted quarters on the K-side. The alternate then is to make a pawn break. The problem is then squares are freed for Knights, remember Lasker and Tarrasch!
25.fxg5 Bxg5 26.Nf4 Bxf4
The better of Black’s none too great Bishops has had to go off otherwise a Knight on f4 is a problem for Black.
27.Rxf4 Rg8 28.Ref1 h5 29.Nb5 Rg4 30.Rxg4
Understandably after holding the tournament leader and strong Class A player even for a good part of the game, Mr. Calderone is happy to head for a draw.
30..., hxg4 31.Qf2 Rf8 32.Qb2+ Kh7 33.Rf4 Kg6 ½–½
White has occupied the several key points. There are no maneuvers left for Black to undertake that can shift the balance. The draw was offered and accepted. A reasonable outcome from the QID. This concession of a draw by Mr. Phillips in his dominating run through the Preliminaries and the Finals of Schenectady Championship hardly slowed him down.
We now come to Phillips’ last round game against Mr. Le Cours. This was clearly the crucial game of this year’s event. A draw and Philip Sells would have good chances to tie for first and a playoff for the title. A win by Mr. Le Cours and all kinds of possible ties and playoffs are possible. And finally, a win by Mr. Phillips secures the title going away from the field.
Phillips, John - Le Cours, Alan [D20]
SCC Championship Finals, Schenectady, NY, 10.02.2012
1.d4 d5 2.c4 dxc4 3.e4 e5
For a long time 3 e4, was thought to be no problem for Black. He was supposed to equalize easily with 3..., e5. Nowadays 3 e4, is played with some success. Here is an example between a couple of elite players.
(1191849) Onischuk, Alexander (2663) - Nisipeanu, Liviu Dieter (2693) [D20]
Foros Aerosvit (11), 29.06.2007
1.d4 d5 2.c4 dxc4 3.e4 e5 4.Nf3 exd4 5.Bxc4 Nc6 6.0–0 Be6 7.Bb5 Bc5 8.b4 Bb6 9.a4 a6 10.Bxc6+ bxc6 11.a5 Ba7 12.Bb2 Nf6 13.Nxd4 Bxd4 14.Bxd4 Nxe4 15.Re1 Qd5 16.Qd3 c5 17.Rxe4 cxd4 18.Nc3 Qb3 19.Rxd4 0–0 20.Qd2 c5 21.bxc5 Rab8 22.h3 Qb7 23.Nd5 Rbc8 24.Rc1 Bxd5 25.Rxd5 Rc6 26.Rd6 Qc7 27.Qd5 Rxd6 28.Qxd6 Qxa5 29.Rb1 g6 30.c6 Kg7 31.c7 Rc8 32.Rc1 Qg5 33.Rc6 h5 34.f4 Qa5 35.Kh2 h4 36.Qf6+ Kg8 37.Qxh4 Qd5 38.Qf6 Qd7 39.h4 a5 40.h5 Qf5 41.Qd8+ Kg7 42.Qd4+ f6 43.g4 Qxg4 44.Qxf6+ Kh6 45.Qxg6+ Qxg6 46.hxg6 a4 47.f5 a3 48.Rc2 a2 49.Rxa2 Rxc7 50.Kh3 Kg5 51.Rg2+ Kf6 52.Kg4 Rc1 53.Rh2 Rf1 54.Rh8 Rg1+ 55.Kf4 Rf1+ 56.Ke4 Re1+ 57.Kd3 Re7 58.Rh7 1–0
4.Nf3 exd4 5.Bxc4 Bb4+ 6.Bd2 Bxd2+ 7.Nbxd2 Ne7?
A early mistake. I, like Alan, did not recognize this move as an error when it was played. The book gives 7..., Nc6; as the mainline. The alternatives; 7..., c5; is sharp but probably favors White after; 8 Ne5, and 7..., Qf6 8 0-0 Nc6; leading to complicated play where Black has found some resources. For the Grandmasters the Accepted Queen’s Gambit is considered a sound way to get to a draw. For us lesser lights, there is a considerable body of theoretical knowledge to master.
From my own experience, some of it sad, I learned Mr. Le Cours knows well the Grunfeld Defense/ KID complex. Why he went for the QGA here is a mystery. Maybe it was a try to defeat an opponent’s preparation. The problem presented by trying something you are not so familiar with is things can wrong early.
8.0–0?,..
A slip in return. With 8 Ng5, White obtains big lead in development and the makings of a ferocious attack on the Black King.
8..., 0–0 9.Nb3 Nbc6 10.Nbxd4 Bg4
Black has survived the opening with White having no more than his usual first move plus.
11.Nb5?!,..
Steady is 11 h3. Then after 11..., Nxd4 12 hxg4 Nxf3+ 13 Qxf3, White has a Bishop versus Knight ending for only a slight disturbance of his pawn formation. The small advantage White has in this line is nothing to write home about true enough, but he will be just a little bit ahead of Black in getting the White Rooks into action. A Bishop versus a Knight and a step ahead in development; victory has come from less.
12..., Qc8?!
Black thinks routinely. It is enormously difficult to discover when you should let your imagination run and when routine methods should be used. Black is concerned about White trading Queens on d8 leaving his c-pawn undefended. Except for the potential looseness of c-pawn, Black would have naturally played 12..., Ng6. It threatens jumping the Knight to e5 building pressure on the pinned Knight at f3. So the question is; what happens should White win(?) the pawn on c7? Consider this line; 12..., Ng6 13 Qxd8 Raxd8 14 Nxc7 Nce5. Black strikes at f3, and if 15 Be2 Rd2; will recover the pawn easily. Black’s game is superior. His Knights have e5 and f4 as nice outposts and a Rook on the 2nd rank. If the Bishop does not retreat to e2 on the 15th turn, the Bishop and the Knight are dangerously placed on the c-file ripe for a skewer by a Rook on c8. Tactics around the delicate position of these pieces will allow Black recovery of the pawn. White of course can improve by not grabbing the c-pawn with 12..., Ng6 13 Bb3, but after 13..., Qe7; Black is better, not winning by any means, but better. He is going to put a Rook on the d-file before White can, and that is annoying. The Knight hanging out on b5 will cost White some time to bring back home. Those two factors together provide Black with the initiative and superior piece coordination.
12.Be2?!,..
White in his turn thinks safety first. He plays a series of moves gathering his pieces together and organizing a defense. The move played passes on the chance to fight for equality immediately with 12 h3, or 12 Qd3, and it grants Black the initiative for the next phase of the game.
12..., a6 13.Nc3 Rd8 14.Qc1 Bxf3 15.Bxf3 Nd4 16.Bd1 c6!?
Black was controlling the pace of play for the last several moves, while White reorganized his forces. After the game, the participants both thought 16..., c6; was probably wrong for Black. I wasn’t quite so sure. The pawn on c6 does contribute to taking away potential squares from the White Bishop. Working over the position with Rybka confirmed the players were right and kibitzer probably wrong. Grabbing space with either 16..., c5; or 16..., b5; leading to a possible passed pawn for Black on the Q-side is a more forceful way to go. A case of very active play offering more than somewhat passive play.
17.Qg5,..
An interesting and illuminating moment. Mr. Phillips takes an opportunity to undertake active operations. Both players treated the game so far with a certain extra care. They knew the game’s importance for the sporting results of the contest. One reason for Phillips’ success this year was his willingness to take reasonable risk when the chance to do so appears. The move presents Black with the sudden possibility of tactics aimed at his King.
17..., f6?!
Keeping some small advantage with 17..., Qc7; is best. The text weakens the diagonal a2-g8 which plays a role in the final outcome of the game.
18.Qc5 Qc7 19.Ne2!?,..
Once more the sporting importance of the contest causes a cautious approach by one or the other participants. A more active option is 19 Bg4!?, at least it looks active. Making sense of how the move is followed up is not easy. There is quite a mess of tactical possibilities in the struggle for central squares in this line.
19..., Nxe2+ 20.Bxe2 Kh8?
This time caution goes too far. Black had fallen behind on the clock when he completed this move with 26 minutes remaining to John’s 58 minutes. Concerned about some check coming on a2-g8 diagonal, Alan moves his King away. Useful prophylactic thinking has an important role to play in modern chess. Just see the considerable work Mark Dvoretsky has published on the subject. It is, however, a delicate piece of judgment to decided if the preventative move is more important than getting on with something active. Here, since the diagonal check does not have any specific tactical point yet, Black can do some useful work with 20..., g5 21 Rfd1 Ng6 22 b3 Kg7; giving him quite a bit to say about the control of e5; it is a potential post for the Knight. Remember the comments of Lasker and Tarrasch about Knights needing secure posts from the proceeding game? Played this way keeps the game balanced. Handing over the tempo as the text does begins to allow White take greater control of the board.
21.Rad1 Ng6?!
This move would have a real point if it were proceeded by .., g7-g5; as mentioned in the note above.
22.g3 Re8!
As things get tough in the position, Mr. Le Cours finds his “mojo”. He apparently shifts his attention to the e-file and the White pawn there. The really important thing this move does is make way for the Ra8 to get into the game. The move does not change the balance in the favor of Black, but it does set problems for White to solve, and that is why the exclamation mark. Before the situation gets out of hand, Black takes praiseworthy steps to make the best resistance possible.
23.Rd4 Re5?
Did Alan change his mind at the last moment? I don’t believe he did not consider 23..., Rad8; it is too logical. By bringing the last piece onto the field, Black has good chances to hold everything together. The path taken leaves Black very much on the defensive. The back rank weakness will work to make some sort of capture by the lead Rook on e4 problematical. If something along those lines can’t be done, the doubled White Rooks on the d-file are monsters.
24.Qc2 Qb6 25.Rfd1 Rae8 26.Rd7!?,..
Sensibly cautious is 26 Kg2, getting off a potentially dangerous diagonal while preparing the principled strategic advance in the center. It is prophylactic thinking again, only this time the King move has a point beyond avoiding an awkward check; it prepares the push f2-f4 routing the Black Rook from e5. Compare the two situations; Black’s 20th and White’s 26th . In the first, a general, unspecific worry was addressed; in the second, a very specific follow-up is available. That is certainly one way to evaluate the merits of a prophylactic move. The game move has more immediate evil intentions with some attendant risks.
26..., Nf8 27.Rf7!?,..
Bravely sending the Rook into tight quarters. Black should have met this ambitious attempt straight forwardly with 27..., R5e7; getting rid of one of the active White Rooks. Time trouble was really beginning to bite now for Le Cours. He was down to just 7 minutes. Phillips had about 26 minutes left. The move 26..., Nf8; cost Mr. Le Cours 5 minuets, it took away another 2 ½ minutes to find 27..., c5. And, I thought the Queen on b6 was there to hold back f2-f4? Time pressure often erodes the notions and concepts we have used to get to some point in a game.
27..., c5 28.Qd3 Qc6 29.f4 R5e6?
Black used 3 ½ of his remaining 4 ½ minutes to find this second best move. Required is 29..., R5e7; and if 30 Rxe7 Rxe7 31 Qd8 Re8; and Black is worse, but he can fight on. Now there was a desperate flurry of moves that quickly ran the Black clock down to seven seconds.
30.Bg4 c4 31.Qd5 Qb6+ 32.Kg2 Rc6 33.Rd2 Rc5 34.Qd6 1–0
We will draw the curtain over the final moves leading to the Black flag falling. This tense battle, with all its ups and downs, was worthy of deciding this year’s Schenectady Championship. The opponents gave their all. To the end they strove to win the game. More can not be asked of tournament players.
This is the first title John Phillips has won at Schenectady. My congratulations on a fine performance; 6 - 0 in the Preliminaries and 4 ½ - ½ in the Finals. I will not be surprised to see John’s rating go just over 2000 with this result.
More soon.
How John Phillips got this year’s title was by playing well. In most of his games he sought the dynamic solution to the problems a position presented. That was his preference, mostly. In his game against the youthful Zack Calderone Phillips took a less dynamic path and thereby gave up his only draw in the tournament.
Calderone, Zack - Phillips, John [E14]
SCC Finals 2012 Schenectady, NY, 02.02.2012
1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 c5 3.e3 e6 4.Nc3 b6 5.Nf3 Bb7 6.Be2 Be7 7.0–0 0–0
This opening has a long history in the upper levels of Grandmasters. Back before WWII it was a leading edge and topical debut. Here is how it was treated by two not well known but very strong Soviet players;
(20629) Panov, Vasily N - Yudovich, Mikhail M [A30]
11th USSR Championship, Leningrad (10), 1939
1.Nf3 d5 2.c4 e6 3.b3 Nf6 4.Bb2 Be7 5.e3 0–0 6.Be2 c5 7.0–0 Nc6 8.d3 b6 9.Nbd2 Bb7 10.a3 Nd7 11.cxd5 exd5 12.Re1 Bf6 13.d4 Rc8 14.Nf1 Re8 15.Rb1 Qe7 16.Ng3 g6 17.Qd2 Red8 18.Bd3 Qf8 19.h4 Qh6 20.dxc5 Bxb2 21.Qxb2 Nxc5 22.Red1 Qg7 23.Qxg7+ Kxg7 24.Bb5 Ne6 25.Rbc1 Na5 26.Rb1 Rc3 27.Rd3 Rxd3 28.Bxd3 d4 29.Nxd4 Nxd4 30.exd4 Rxd4 31.b4 Nc4 32.Bxc4 Rxc4 33.h5 Rc3 34.hxg6 hxg6 35.Ra1 Bd5 36.Ne2 Rc2 37.Nd4 Rd2 38.Nb5 a5 39.bxa5 bxa5 40.Rc1 Be6 41.Rc7 ½–½
Almost fifty years later it was still a useful tool in the hands of a Grandmaster, but by this time it had become a reliable way to get to a draw without undue risk.
(171987) Ivkov, Borislav (2525) - Kortschnoj, Viktor (2635) [A13]
Cannes (7), 1986
1.Nf3 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.b3 c5 4.Bb2 Nc6 5.e3 Be7 6.Be2 0–0 7.0–0 d5 8.cxd5 Nxd5 9.Nc3 Bf6 10.Qc1 b6 11.Nxd5 Bxb2 12.Qxb2 Qxd5 13.a3 a5 14.Rfd1 Bb7 15.Ne1 Rfd8 16.Bf3 Qd6 17.Nc2 Qd3 18.Rac1 e5 19.Ne1 Qf5 20.d3 Qe6 21.b4 axb4 22.axb4 cxb4 23.Bxc6 Bxc6 24.Qxb4 b5 25.Rc5 Rd5 26.Rdc1 Rxc5 27.Qxc5 Bd7 28.Nf3 Rc8 29.Qa3 Rxc1+ 30.Qxc1 Bc6 31.e4 Qd6 32.h4 f6 33.Qc3 h6 34.Ne1 Bd7 35.Nc2 Kh7 36.Nb4 Be6 37.Kh2 Kg6 38.Nc2 Kf7 39.Nb4 Ke8 40.Kg1 Kd7 41.Kf1 Qc7 42.Qxc7+ Kxc7 43.Ke2 Kb6 44.Kd2 Ka5 45.Kc3 ½–½
For those of us not Grandmasters, the Queen’s Indian Defense is a way to make a fight without entering the sharpness of the King’s Indian Defense or the subtle complexity of the Queen’s Gambit Declined.
8.Bd2 d6
Black is reluctant to play this pawn to the 5th rank. If he does there is usually a general clearance is the center and exchanges that can wring a lot of tension out of the game. Mr. Phillips, higher rated, leading the event and wanting to get the most out of the game, is not interested in steering towards a draw. For his part, Mr. Calderone, a first time participant in the Finals with a rapidly improving rating, is happy to keep things tense.
9.Rb1,..
Information for the new players out there; this move has a long tradition of being a reasonable try. It prepares a space grab on the Q-side by advancing the pawn to the 4th rank. That is not a bad idea if you have no other burning issue to address.
9..., Ne4
Black delays deciding what to do with his Nb8 in the interest of making a stand in the center. If Black is too lackadaisical, White may get a bind in the center.
10.Bd3!?,..
A tempo is not critical in closed games, but this is not quite as closed as it appears. Until the center is fixed by the advance of the White d-pawn to d5, an opening of lines in the middle of the board may change this from a closed type position to an open battle rife with tactics. Instead of moving this piece a second time, White could play the standard 10 d5, setting up the typical QID argument about can White hold the blocking pawn on d5 or not.
10..., f5 11.Qc2,..
Black staked his claim to some say in the center, and with this move White agrees to let his dark squared Bishop go for the Knight and a tempo. Rybka suggests; 11 Be1 Qe8 12 Nd2 Nxc3 13 bxc3 Nc6 14 f3, when the game takes on similarities to the Dutch and the Nimzo-Indian Defenses. The game probably is more like a Dutch because the Black dark squared Bishop is on the board. White’s dark squared Bishop appears to be a supernumerary where it is deployed. If it stays where it is, the communications between the White Rooks will be a problem long term, and the selection of alternate posts; f2, g3 and h4, look suspicious or are foreclosed. Tarrasch’s dictum: If one piece is badly placed, then your whole position is bad, is illustrated in this line. Black is slightly better according to the computer. What would worry me playing the White side is; if a way to improve the White position quickly can’t be found, then there is every chance his situation will get worse.
11..., Nxd2 12.Nxd2?,..
Much better is 12 Qxd2.
12..., Nc6
The point; Black hit’s the d-pawn. Responding to that threat leaves no time to avoid the move 13..., Nb4; attacking both the Qc2 and the Bd3 setting the stage for two Bishops versus two Knights.
13.Ne2 Nb4 14.Qb3 e5 15.d5 Qd7 16.Bc2 Nxc2 17.Qxc2 a5
We now arrive at an interesting point. Michael Mockler had dropped in this evening to deal with some arrangements for the upcoming Eastern Amateur Team Championships in New Jersey and to watch a few games. Just before he had to leave the club rooms, he pointed out the move 17..., b5; to me. The question; is this not a better try to make some open lines on which the Bishops can work? The line of play; 17..., b5 18 cxb5? Bxd5; is clearly very favorable for Black. However White is under no obligation to make that doubtful capture. If White just plays 18 b3, the mighty Deep Rybka says Black has a slight edge after 18..., b4; or the game is completely even after 18..., bxc4 19 bxc4 Rab8 20 e4, when the solid block in the center seems to damp down the Bishop’s activity.
Rybka, unfortunately, does not give us a narrative about why things are good, bad or ambiguous. It just reports the order of choice the algorithm delivers and numeric scores for the choices. The users have to find the words to describe the story the scores capture. At this point the story is typical of the QID; there is not much on which to make a case for either side having some big advantage. The game will confined to the K-side with the possibility of some central squares being involved. Very specific tactical shots can have a significant influence on results, and both parties have to stay alert tactically.
18.a4!?,..
Mr. Phillips must have looked at the above and been unimpressed with Black’s chances. Instead of opening lines he throws up a barrier on the Q-side narrowing the board to play on the K-side for the most part.
18..., Rae8 19.f4 e4 20.Rbe1 Kh8 21.Nb1 Bc8 22.Nbc3 Bf6
Black has gone about organizing his forces logically. If there is to be a try for victory, then getting the Black Rooks into play against the White King via f6 and h6 with g6 as a possible intermediate post seems to be one possible plan. The position does not favor the Bishops because of the pawn obstructions. Whatever way Black decides to go, he must keep a weather eye out for changes in the pawn structure that will give the White Knights strong posts on which to stand. Tarrasch and Lasker taught chess players that the way to fight against Knights is to deny them outposts to fight from. No strong points and the Knights cut a sorry figure on the board. It seems to me, John Phillips had the Traasch/Lasker wisdom in mind as he thought about his moves.
23.b3,..
There is absolutely nothing wrong with this move, but my own chess philosophy rails against doing something like this in a closed position. There is no reason to foreclose the use of the b3 square by the White Queen. If Black takes on “tunnel vision” and continues the slow motion migration of his heavy pieces towards the K-side, there may come a moment when the Queen steps on b3 to attack b6 and threaten to invade via b5, or the Knight may be sent on a foray through b5 and c7 to land on e6 putting a crimp in the Black attack. A good principle to use in closed position is the retention of options. The more options available to you the more your opponent must think about them. If nothing else you can cost him clock time by keeping your options many.
23..., Qe7 24.g3 g5
Mr. Phillips throughout this year’s Championship did not quietly agree to draws without trying active play. He apparently did not care for maneuvering clumsy Rooks in front of his pawn in the restricted quarters on the K-side. The alternate then is to make a pawn break. The problem is then squares are freed for Knights, remember Lasker and Tarrasch!
25.fxg5 Bxg5 26.Nf4 Bxf4
The better of Black’s none too great Bishops has had to go off otherwise a Knight on f4 is a problem for Black.
27.Rxf4 Rg8 28.Ref1 h5 29.Nb5 Rg4 30.Rxg4
Understandably after holding the tournament leader and strong Class A player even for a good part of the game, Mr. Calderone is happy to head for a draw.
30..., hxg4 31.Qf2 Rf8 32.Qb2+ Kh7 33.Rf4 Kg6 ½–½
White has occupied the several key points. There are no maneuvers left for Black to undertake that can shift the balance. The draw was offered and accepted. A reasonable outcome from the QID. This concession of a draw by Mr. Phillips in his dominating run through the Preliminaries and the Finals of Schenectady Championship hardly slowed him down.
We now come to Phillips’ last round game against Mr. Le Cours. This was clearly the crucial game of this year’s event. A draw and Philip Sells would have good chances to tie for first and a playoff for the title. A win by Mr. Le Cours and all kinds of possible ties and playoffs are possible. And finally, a win by Mr. Phillips secures the title going away from the field.
Phillips, John - Le Cours, Alan [D20]
SCC Championship Finals, Schenectady, NY, 10.02.2012
1.d4 d5 2.c4 dxc4 3.e4 e5
For a long time 3 e4, was thought to be no problem for Black. He was supposed to equalize easily with 3..., e5. Nowadays 3 e4, is played with some success. Here is an example between a couple of elite players.
(1191849) Onischuk, Alexander (2663) - Nisipeanu, Liviu Dieter (2693) [D20]
Foros Aerosvit (11), 29.06.2007
1.d4 d5 2.c4 dxc4 3.e4 e5 4.Nf3 exd4 5.Bxc4 Nc6 6.0–0 Be6 7.Bb5 Bc5 8.b4 Bb6 9.a4 a6 10.Bxc6+ bxc6 11.a5 Ba7 12.Bb2 Nf6 13.Nxd4 Bxd4 14.Bxd4 Nxe4 15.Re1 Qd5 16.Qd3 c5 17.Rxe4 cxd4 18.Nc3 Qb3 19.Rxd4 0–0 20.Qd2 c5 21.bxc5 Rab8 22.h3 Qb7 23.Nd5 Rbc8 24.Rc1 Bxd5 25.Rxd5 Rc6 26.Rd6 Qc7 27.Qd5 Rxd6 28.Qxd6 Qxa5 29.Rb1 g6 30.c6 Kg7 31.c7 Rc8 32.Rc1 Qg5 33.Rc6 h5 34.f4 Qa5 35.Kh2 h4 36.Qf6+ Kg8 37.Qxh4 Qd5 38.Qf6 Qd7 39.h4 a5 40.h5 Qf5 41.Qd8+ Kg7 42.Qd4+ f6 43.g4 Qxg4 44.Qxf6+ Kh6 45.Qxg6+ Qxg6 46.hxg6 a4 47.f5 a3 48.Rc2 a2 49.Rxa2 Rxc7 50.Kh3 Kg5 51.Rg2+ Kf6 52.Kg4 Rc1 53.Rh2 Rf1 54.Rh8 Rg1+ 55.Kf4 Rf1+ 56.Ke4 Re1+ 57.Kd3 Re7 58.Rh7 1–0
4.Nf3 exd4 5.Bxc4 Bb4+ 6.Bd2 Bxd2+ 7.Nbxd2 Ne7?
A early mistake. I, like Alan, did not recognize this move as an error when it was played. The book gives 7..., Nc6; as the mainline. The alternatives; 7..., c5; is sharp but probably favors White after; 8 Ne5, and 7..., Qf6 8 0-0 Nc6; leading to complicated play where Black has found some resources. For the Grandmasters the Accepted Queen’s Gambit is considered a sound way to get to a draw. For us lesser lights, there is a considerable body of theoretical knowledge to master.
From my own experience, some of it sad, I learned Mr. Le Cours knows well the Grunfeld Defense/ KID complex. Why he went for the QGA here is a mystery. Maybe it was a try to defeat an opponent’s preparation. The problem presented by trying something you are not so familiar with is things can wrong early.
8.0–0?,..
A slip in return. With 8 Ng5, White obtains big lead in development and the makings of a ferocious attack on the Black King.
8..., 0–0 9.Nb3 Nbc6 10.Nbxd4 Bg4
Black has survived the opening with White having no more than his usual first move plus.
11.Nb5?!,..
Steady is 11 h3. Then after 11..., Nxd4 12 hxg4 Nxf3+ 13 Qxf3, White has a Bishop versus Knight ending for only a slight disturbance of his pawn formation. The small advantage White has in this line is nothing to write home about true enough, but he will be just a little bit ahead of Black in getting the White Rooks into action. A Bishop versus a Knight and a step ahead in development; victory has come from less.
12..., Qc8?!
Black thinks routinely. It is enormously difficult to discover when you should let your imagination run and when routine methods should be used. Black is concerned about White trading Queens on d8 leaving his c-pawn undefended. Except for the potential looseness of c-pawn, Black would have naturally played 12..., Ng6. It threatens jumping the Knight to e5 building pressure on the pinned Knight at f3. So the question is; what happens should White win(?) the pawn on c7? Consider this line; 12..., Ng6 13 Qxd8 Raxd8 14 Nxc7 Nce5. Black strikes at f3, and if 15 Be2 Rd2; will recover the pawn easily. Black’s game is superior. His Knights have e5 and f4 as nice outposts and a Rook on the 2nd rank. If the Bishop does not retreat to e2 on the 15th turn, the Bishop and the Knight are dangerously placed on the c-file ripe for a skewer by a Rook on c8. Tactics around the delicate position of these pieces will allow Black recovery of the pawn. White of course can improve by not grabbing the c-pawn with 12..., Ng6 13 Bb3, but after 13..., Qe7; Black is better, not winning by any means, but better. He is going to put a Rook on the d-file before White can, and that is annoying. The Knight hanging out on b5 will cost White some time to bring back home. Those two factors together provide Black with the initiative and superior piece coordination.
12.Be2?!,..
White in his turn thinks safety first. He plays a series of moves gathering his pieces together and organizing a defense. The move played passes on the chance to fight for equality immediately with 12 h3, or 12 Qd3, and it grants Black the initiative for the next phase of the game.
12..., a6 13.Nc3 Rd8 14.Qc1 Bxf3 15.Bxf3 Nd4 16.Bd1 c6!?
Black was controlling the pace of play for the last several moves, while White reorganized his forces. After the game, the participants both thought 16..., c6; was probably wrong for Black. I wasn’t quite so sure. The pawn on c6 does contribute to taking away potential squares from the White Bishop. Working over the position with Rybka confirmed the players were right and kibitzer probably wrong. Grabbing space with either 16..., c5; or 16..., b5; leading to a possible passed pawn for Black on the Q-side is a more forceful way to go. A case of very active play offering more than somewhat passive play.
17.Qg5,..
An interesting and illuminating moment. Mr. Phillips takes an opportunity to undertake active operations. Both players treated the game so far with a certain extra care. They knew the game’s importance for the sporting results of the contest. One reason for Phillips’ success this year was his willingness to take reasonable risk when the chance to do so appears. The move presents Black with the sudden possibility of tactics aimed at his King.
17..., f6?!
Keeping some small advantage with 17..., Qc7; is best. The text weakens the diagonal a2-g8 which plays a role in the final outcome of the game.
18.Qc5 Qc7 19.Ne2!?,..
Once more the sporting importance of the contest causes a cautious approach by one or the other participants. A more active option is 19 Bg4!?, at least it looks active. Making sense of how the move is followed up is not easy. There is quite a mess of tactical possibilities in the struggle for central squares in this line.
19..., Nxe2+ 20.Bxe2 Kh8?
This time caution goes too far. Black had fallen behind on the clock when he completed this move with 26 minutes remaining to John’s 58 minutes. Concerned about some check coming on a2-g8 diagonal, Alan moves his King away. Useful prophylactic thinking has an important role to play in modern chess. Just see the considerable work Mark Dvoretsky has published on the subject. It is, however, a delicate piece of judgment to decided if the preventative move is more important than getting on with something active. Here, since the diagonal check does not have any specific tactical point yet, Black can do some useful work with 20..., g5 21 Rfd1 Ng6 22 b3 Kg7; giving him quite a bit to say about the control of e5; it is a potential post for the Knight. Remember the comments of Lasker and Tarrasch about Knights needing secure posts from the proceeding game? Played this way keeps the game balanced. Handing over the tempo as the text does begins to allow White take greater control of the board.
21.Rad1 Ng6?!
This move would have a real point if it were proceeded by .., g7-g5; as mentioned in the note above.
22.g3 Re8!
As things get tough in the position, Mr. Le Cours finds his “mojo”. He apparently shifts his attention to the e-file and the White pawn there. The really important thing this move does is make way for the Ra8 to get into the game. The move does not change the balance in the favor of Black, but it does set problems for White to solve, and that is why the exclamation mark. Before the situation gets out of hand, Black takes praiseworthy steps to make the best resistance possible.
23.Rd4 Re5?
Did Alan change his mind at the last moment? I don’t believe he did not consider 23..., Rad8; it is too logical. By bringing the last piece onto the field, Black has good chances to hold everything together. The path taken leaves Black very much on the defensive. The back rank weakness will work to make some sort of capture by the lead Rook on e4 problematical. If something along those lines can’t be done, the doubled White Rooks on the d-file are monsters.
24.Qc2 Qb6 25.Rfd1 Rae8 26.Rd7!?,..
Sensibly cautious is 26 Kg2, getting off a potentially dangerous diagonal while preparing the principled strategic advance in the center. It is prophylactic thinking again, only this time the King move has a point beyond avoiding an awkward check; it prepares the push f2-f4 routing the Black Rook from e5. Compare the two situations; Black’s 20th and White’s 26th . In the first, a general, unspecific worry was addressed; in the second, a very specific follow-up is available. That is certainly one way to evaluate the merits of a prophylactic move. The game move has more immediate evil intentions with some attendant risks.
26..., Nf8 27.Rf7!?,..
Bravely sending the Rook into tight quarters. Black should have met this ambitious attempt straight forwardly with 27..., R5e7; getting rid of one of the active White Rooks. Time trouble was really beginning to bite now for Le Cours. He was down to just 7 minutes. Phillips had about 26 minutes left. The move 26..., Nf8; cost Mr. Le Cours 5 minuets, it took away another 2 ½ minutes to find 27..., c5. And, I thought the Queen on b6 was there to hold back f2-f4? Time pressure often erodes the notions and concepts we have used to get to some point in a game.
27..., c5 28.Qd3 Qc6 29.f4 R5e6?
Black used 3 ½ of his remaining 4 ½ minutes to find this second best move. Required is 29..., R5e7; and if 30 Rxe7 Rxe7 31 Qd8 Re8; and Black is worse, but he can fight on. Now there was a desperate flurry of moves that quickly ran the Black clock down to seven seconds.
30.Bg4 c4 31.Qd5 Qb6+ 32.Kg2 Rc6 33.Rd2 Rc5 34.Qd6 1–0
We will draw the curtain over the final moves leading to the Black flag falling. This tense battle, with all its ups and downs, was worthy of deciding this year’s Schenectady Championship. The opponents gave their all. To the end they strove to win the game. More can not be asked of tournament players.
This is the first title John Phillips has won at Schenectady. My congratulations on a fine performance; 6 - 0 in the Preliminaries and 4 ½ - ½ in the Finals. I will not be surprised to see John’s rating go just over 2000 with this result.
More soon.
2.09.2012
AACC Thematic Benko Tournament
Wednesday evening the Albany Area Chess Club did not have any tournament games scheduled. We instead had a lecture by Peter Henner on the Benko Gambit Accepted. And next week an unrated game/15 thematic event will take place exploring the various plans for Black and White in the Benko. If you are free next Wednesday, come on over to the Union Presbyterian Church on Route 20 in Guilderland. The doors open at 7:00pm. If the turnout is large enough it will be a four round Swiss, otherwise some kind of round robin. The festivities should be done by 10:00pm. It will be an enjoyable evening I am sure.
Unfortunate news was shared with the club before the lecture. Arthur Alowitz will be unable to take up his place in the under 1800 playoff match.
He will not play in the match and will not be available for duty in the upcoming CDCL season. Arthur has some repair work scheduled for an ankle that been bothering him and won’t be getting out to play until recovery is complete. He will be missed. We all wish him a speedy recovery. Replacing Arthur in the under 1800 match will be Cory Northrup, the next placed finisher.
Just to stimulate the thinking of anyone participating in next week’s Benko thematic event, here are a couple of local games in that opening.
Two years ago the AACC was without a home. The Albany B Team played the Geezers at the home of Arthur Alowitz, and this very long game was played by our good host and I. It went on so long I had only seconds left at the finish. The only reason I won was years ago one of my chess teachers required me to learn how to carry out the B+N+K versus K mate. Much I learned about chess over the years has been forgotten because of rare usefulness. The B+N mate certainly did not come up often for me; this was only the second time in more than sixty years of play that the ending occurred in my serious games. Some quirk of memory worked in my favor that Spring evening two years ago, and I was able to bang out the moves in the ending with Sells-like speed and accuracy.
Little, Bill - Alowitz, Arthur [A57]
CDCL Match, Geezers v Albany B, Defreetsville, NY, 14.05.2010
1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 c5 3.d5 b5 4.cxb5 a6 5.Nc3 axb5 6.Nxb5 Qa5+ 7.Nc3 d6
This is not a main line, but it is known theory. Probably better here is 7..., e6; with play against the White center.
8.g3 g6 9.Bg2 Bg7 10.Nh3 0–0 11.0–0 Na6 12.Bd2 Qb6 13.b3 Bg4?!
A sensible approach is 13..., Nb4; tempting the White a-pawn forward while keeping an eye on chances for tactics on the a1-h8 diagonal. In the 1980s I played the Benko as Black in several tough all-Expert events at the Studio of Bridge and Games. Based on that experience the play so far seemed to indicate Arthur was not 100% certain of exactly what to do in the Benko.
14.Nf4 Nb4 15.a3 Na6 16.h3 Bd7 17.Rb1 Bf5 18.e4 Bd7 19.Re1 Nc7 20.Qc1 Nb5 21.Nxb5 Bxb5 22.a4,..
White has a measurable advantage now; the extra pawn is secure for the moment and the Rook is no longer on a1 as a target for the Bg7.
23..., Bd7 23.a5 Qb7 24.b4 cxb4 25.Bxb4 Rfc8 26.Qd2 Rab8 27.Rec1 Rxc1+ 28.Qxc1 Rc8 29.Qe1 Bb5 30.Bc3 Qa6 31.Rc1 Rc5 32.e5?!,..
The e4-e5 break is often the point of White’s play in the Benko. Here it is not called for. Better is preparing to maneuver with 32 Bf3, reinforcing e2 to permit the safe retreat of the Nf4 through e2. Black now gets chances to level up the game.
32..., dxe5 33.Bxe5 Rxc1 34.Qxc1 Qxa5 35.d6,..
I had a vision that a sudden decent by my Queen on Black’s back rank would yield an advantage. What really was accomplished is my extra pawn is gone for no advantage.
35..., Qd8?
Luckily for me, my opponent mistakenly believed my threats are real. Just capturing on d6 would have given him equality.
36.Qc7 Qxc7 37.dxc7 Ba6
My far advanced passed pawn is a serious matter for Black. If he is not very precise, it could well cost material.
38.Bc6 Bc8 39.Bxf6 Bxf6 40.Nd5 Bxh3 41.Bb7!?,..
Here I was very worried. Winning a piece for the c-pawn is easy enough, but Black has four pawns. If he can engineer a trade of my two pawns for his four, the lone Bishop only draws.
41..., Kf8 42.c8Q+ Bxc8 43.Bxc8 Bd4 44.Kg2 Bc5 45.Bd7 Ba3 46.f4 f6 47.Be6 Bc5 48.Kf3 Bd6 49.g4 Ba3 50.Nb6 Kg7 51.Nc4 Bb4 52.Nb6 Bd6 53.Nc4 Bb4 54.f5 Bc5 55.Ne3 Ba3 56.Ng2 Bd6 57.Nh4 Ba3 58.Bd5 Bd6 59.Ng2 Ba3 60.Nf4 Bd6 61.Be4 gxf5 62.gxf5 Bb4 63.Kg4,..
After wasting time I will shortly need, I begin to get an idea of how to make something out of my extra piece.
63..., Bd6 64.Ne6+ Kh6
My notion is freeze all Black’s forces except his Bishop. My King will then be free to go on a “long march” all around the board to get after the Black e&f-pawns. It will take a lot of moves, but it is easy to see all the way through.
65.Bf3 Ba3 66.Kg3 Bd6+ 67.Kf2 Ba3 68.Ke2 Bb4 69.Kd3 Ba3 70.Ke4 Bb4 71.Kd5 Bd6 72.Kc6 Ba3 73.Kd7 Bd6 74.Ke8 Ba3 75.Kf8 Bd6 76.Kg8 Bb4 77.Be4 Bd6 78.Nf8,..
All that to get the h-pawn.
78..., Kg5 79.Nxh7+ Kf4 80.Bc2 Ke5 81.Kf7 Bb4 82.Nf8 Kd6
The next time consuming phase is the winning of the remaining Black pawns. To do so requires forcing the Black King away from helping the Black Bishop defend them.
83.Ng6 Kd7 84.Ba4+ Kd8 85.Nf4 Ba3 86.Ne6+ Kc8 87.Ke8 Bd6 88.Bd7+ Kb7 89.Kd8 Ba3 90.Nf4 Bb4 91.Nd5 Ba3 92.Nxe7 Bc5 93.Nd5 Bd4 94.Ke7 Bb2 95.Nxf6 Kc7 96.Nd5+ Kb7 97.f6 Bxf6+ 98.Kxf6,..
As this position was developing, memories of the mechanics of mating with the Bishop and Knight came bubbling back to the forefront of my mind. There are several key positions to know if you are to carry off such a mate. One of the important positions showing up towards the end of the mating process is; a White Bishop on d7 and a White Knight on d5 confining the Black King to the a8 corner as they are here. Note how the two minor pieces lock in the Black King, there is no way out. The finish is easy to play once you see the fencing in of the Black King. That was fortunate for me as I was under two minutes on the clock.
98..., Ka6 99.Ke6 Ka5 100.Kd6 Ka6 101.Kc5 Ka7 102.Kb5 Kb8 103.Kb6 Ka8 104.Nc7+ Kb8 105.Na6+ Ka8 106.Bc6# 1–0
With no doubt this was the longest calculation I ever made in chess. From the surrounding the Black h-pawn to the end pretty much everything was calculated. Long though it was, the task was not difficult because of the lack of alternatives for Black.
In the Preliminary B Section in the 2010 Championship Patrick Chi defeated John Phillips in a Benko. Some of the simple tactical dangers for Black show up in this game.
Chi, Patrick - Phillips, John [A58]
SCC Prelim B Schenectady, NY, 09.11.2010
1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 c5 3.d5 b5 4.cxb5 a6 5.bxa6 g6 6.Nc3 Bxa6 7.e4 d6!?
I don’t know why John did not play 7..., Bxf1; the most common move. The text is known to theory but hasn’t had much success. Here is a game from a recent US Championship illustrating the problems for Black;
(1178700) Shulman, Yuri (2600) - Sevillano, Enrico (2493) [A57]
US championship, Stillwater (5), 19.05.2007
1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 c5 3.d5 b5 4.cxb5 d6 5.Nc3 a6 6.e4 g6 7.bxa6 Bxa6 8.Bxa6 Nxa6 9.Nge2 Bg7 10.0–0 0–0 11.Rb1 Qc7 12.h3 Rfb8 13.Be3 Rb4 14.Qc2 Rb7 15.Qd2 Rb4 16.f3 Ne8 17.b3 Qb7 18.Nc1 Nac7 19.Nd3 Rb6 20.Rbc1 Rba6 21.Na4 Rxa4 22.bxa4 Rxa4 23.Rb1 Qa8 24.Rf2 f5 25.exf5 Nxd5 26.fxg6 hxg6 27.Nf4 Nxf4 28.Bxf4 Nc7 29.Bh6 Bd4 30.Be3 Bg7 31.Qc2 Kh7 32.Rd2 Ne6 33.Re1 Bf6 34.Bf2 Ng7 35.Re4 Ra3 36.Rg4 Nf5 37.Qc4 Nh6 38.Re4 Rc3 39.Qe6 Kg7 40.Bh4 Rc1+ 41.Kh2 g5 42.Bg3 Kg6 43.h4 Qh8 44.Rd5 Nf7 45.Rg4 Kg7 46.f4 Nd8 47.Rdxg5+ Bxg5 48.Qxe7+ 1–0
Mr. Phillips usually prepares his opening carefully. I wonder what his idea was in this line?
8.Bxa6 Rxa6
Taking with the Knight as in Shulman - Sevillano is better.
9.Nf3 Nbd7 10.0–0 Bg7 11.Qe2 Qa8 12.Nb5,..
And this is why. The fork threat should stop the Black King from castling at the least. Black either blunders, or he decides giving up an Exchange to keep the right to castle is his best chance.
12..., Qb7 13.Nc7+ Qxc7 14.Qxa6 0–0?!
Black is now down the Exchange and a passed pawn. The only try for some compensation is 14..., Nxe4; but after 15 Re1 f5 16 Qc6 Qb6 17 Re2, White has all the makings for a win also.
15.Qc4 Rb8 16.Qc2 Ng4 17.Rb1 Nge5 18.Nxe5 Nxe5 19.b4 Qb6 20.b5,..
White has established his connected passed pawns on the Q-side as real threats. There is little left for Black to do except to wait for the axe to fall.
20..., Qa5 21.a4 Ra8 22.Bd2 Qxa4 23.Qxa4 Rxa4 24.b6 Nd7 25.b7 Nb8 26.Rb6 Ra2 27.Be3 Bc3 28.Rc6!,..
Connected passed pawns on the 6th and 7th ranks are impossible for a Rook to stop. A neat performance by Mr. Chi.
28..., Kg7 29.Rc8 Na6 30.b8Q 1–0
The Benko leads to interesting play. I gave it up in the 1990s. My usual opponents had begun to learn many of the alternative choices White has, and I got tired of always being a pawn down. Careful play by White seemed to me to give him an advantage. I switched to the King’s Indian where I might be crushed on the Q-side, but there were sparkling attacks to be had against the White King to compensate.
I hope these games from the archives spur some readers to come out to play in the Benko thematic next Wednesday. It may well be fun!
More soon.
Unfortunate news was shared with the club before the lecture. Arthur Alowitz will be unable to take up his place in the under 1800 playoff match.
He will not play in the match and will not be available for duty in the upcoming CDCL season. Arthur has some repair work scheduled for an ankle that been bothering him and won’t be getting out to play until recovery is complete. He will be missed. We all wish him a speedy recovery. Replacing Arthur in the under 1800 match will be Cory Northrup, the next placed finisher.
Just to stimulate the thinking of anyone participating in next week’s Benko thematic event, here are a couple of local games in that opening.
Two years ago the AACC was without a home. The Albany B Team played the Geezers at the home of Arthur Alowitz, and this very long game was played by our good host and I. It went on so long I had only seconds left at the finish. The only reason I won was years ago one of my chess teachers required me to learn how to carry out the B+N+K versus K mate. Much I learned about chess over the years has been forgotten because of rare usefulness. The B+N mate certainly did not come up often for me; this was only the second time in more than sixty years of play that the ending occurred in my serious games. Some quirk of memory worked in my favor that Spring evening two years ago, and I was able to bang out the moves in the ending with Sells-like speed and accuracy.
Little, Bill - Alowitz, Arthur [A57]
CDCL Match, Geezers v Albany B, Defreetsville, NY, 14.05.2010
1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 c5 3.d5 b5 4.cxb5 a6 5.Nc3 axb5 6.Nxb5 Qa5+ 7.Nc3 d6
This is not a main line, but it is known theory. Probably better here is 7..., e6; with play against the White center.
8.g3 g6 9.Bg2 Bg7 10.Nh3 0–0 11.0–0 Na6 12.Bd2 Qb6 13.b3 Bg4?!
A sensible approach is 13..., Nb4; tempting the White a-pawn forward while keeping an eye on chances for tactics on the a1-h8 diagonal. In the 1980s I played the Benko as Black in several tough all-Expert events at the Studio of Bridge and Games. Based on that experience the play so far seemed to indicate Arthur was not 100% certain of exactly what to do in the Benko.
14.Nf4 Nb4 15.a3 Na6 16.h3 Bd7 17.Rb1 Bf5 18.e4 Bd7 19.Re1 Nc7 20.Qc1 Nb5 21.Nxb5 Bxb5 22.a4,..
White has a measurable advantage now; the extra pawn is secure for the moment and the Rook is no longer on a1 as a target for the Bg7.
23..., Bd7 23.a5 Qb7 24.b4 cxb4 25.Bxb4 Rfc8 26.Qd2 Rab8 27.Rec1 Rxc1+ 28.Qxc1 Rc8 29.Qe1 Bb5 30.Bc3 Qa6 31.Rc1 Rc5 32.e5?!,..
The e4-e5 break is often the point of White’s play in the Benko. Here it is not called for. Better is preparing to maneuver with 32 Bf3, reinforcing e2 to permit the safe retreat of the Nf4 through e2. Black now gets chances to level up the game.
32..., dxe5 33.Bxe5 Rxc1 34.Qxc1 Qxa5 35.d6,..
I had a vision that a sudden decent by my Queen on Black’s back rank would yield an advantage. What really was accomplished is my extra pawn is gone for no advantage.
35..., Qd8?
Luckily for me, my opponent mistakenly believed my threats are real. Just capturing on d6 would have given him equality.
36.Qc7 Qxc7 37.dxc7 Ba6
My far advanced passed pawn is a serious matter for Black. If he is not very precise, it could well cost material.
38.Bc6 Bc8 39.Bxf6 Bxf6 40.Nd5 Bxh3 41.Bb7!?,..
Here I was very worried. Winning a piece for the c-pawn is easy enough, but Black has four pawns. If he can engineer a trade of my two pawns for his four, the lone Bishop only draws.
41..., Kf8 42.c8Q+ Bxc8 43.Bxc8 Bd4 44.Kg2 Bc5 45.Bd7 Ba3 46.f4 f6 47.Be6 Bc5 48.Kf3 Bd6 49.g4 Ba3 50.Nb6 Kg7 51.Nc4 Bb4 52.Nb6 Bd6 53.Nc4 Bb4 54.f5 Bc5 55.Ne3 Ba3 56.Ng2 Bd6 57.Nh4 Ba3 58.Bd5 Bd6 59.Ng2 Ba3 60.Nf4 Bd6 61.Be4 gxf5 62.gxf5 Bb4 63.Kg4,..
After wasting time I will shortly need, I begin to get an idea of how to make something out of my extra piece.
63..., Bd6 64.Ne6+ Kh6
My notion is freeze all Black’s forces except his Bishop. My King will then be free to go on a “long march” all around the board to get after the Black e&f-pawns. It will take a lot of moves, but it is easy to see all the way through.
65.Bf3 Ba3 66.Kg3 Bd6+ 67.Kf2 Ba3 68.Ke2 Bb4 69.Kd3 Ba3 70.Ke4 Bb4 71.Kd5 Bd6 72.Kc6 Ba3 73.Kd7 Bd6 74.Ke8 Ba3 75.Kf8 Bd6 76.Kg8 Bb4 77.Be4 Bd6 78.Nf8,..
All that to get the h-pawn.
78..., Kg5 79.Nxh7+ Kf4 80.Bc2 Ke5 81.Kf7 Bb4 82.Nf8 Kd6
The next time consuming phase is the winning of the remaining Black pawns. To do so requires forcing the Black King away from helping the Black Bishop defend them.
83.Ng6 Kd7 84.Ba4+ Kd8 85.Nf4 Ba3 86.Ne6+ Kc8 87.Ke8 Bd6 88.Bd7+ Kb7 89.Kd8 Ba3 90.Nf4 Bb4 91.Nd5 Ba3 92.Nxe7 Bc5 93.Nd5 Bd4 94.Ke7 Bb2 95.Nxf6 Kc7 96.Nd5+ Kb7 97.f6 Bxf6+ 98.Kxf6,..
As this position was developing, memories of the mechanics of mating with the Bishop and Knight came bubbling back to the forefront of my mind. There are several key positions to know if you are to carry off such a mate. One of the important positions showing up towards the end of the mating process is; a White Bishop on d7 and a White Knight on d5 confining the Black King to the a8 corner as they are here. Note how the two minor pieces lock in the Black King, there is no way out. The finish is easy to play once you see the fencing in of the Black King. That was fortunate for me as I was under two minutes on the clock.
98..., Ka6 99.Ke6 Ka5 100.Kd6 Ka6 101.Kc5 Ka7 102.Kb5 Kb8 103.Kb6 Ka8 104.Nc7+ Kb8 105.Na6+ Ka8 106.Bc6# 1–0
With no doubt this was the longest calculation I ever made in chess. From the surrounding the Black h-pawn to the end pretty much everything was calculated. Long though it was, the task was not difficult because of the lack of alternatives for Black.
In the Preliminary B Section in the 2010 Championship Patrick Chi defeated John Phillips in a Benko. Some of the simple tactical dangers for Black show up in this game.
Chi, Patrick - Phillips, John [A58]
SCC Prelim B Schenectady, NY, 09.11.2010
1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 c5 3.d5 b5 4.cxb5 a6 5.bxa6 g6 6.Nc3 Bxa6 7.e4 d6!?
I don’t know why John did not play 7..., Bxf1; the most common move. The text is known to theory but hasn’t had much success. Here is a game from a recent US Championship illustrating the problems for Black;
(1178700) Shulman, Yuri (2600) - Sevillano, Enrico (2493) [A57]
US championship, Stillwater (5), 19.05.2007
1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 c5 3.d5 b5 4.cxb5 d6 5.Nc3 a6 6.e4 g6 7.bxa6 Bxa6 8.Bxa6 Nxa6 9.Nge2 Bg7 10.0–0 0–0 11.Rb1 Qc7 12.h3 Rfb8 13.Be3 Rb4 14.Qc2 Rb7 15.Qd2 Rb4 16.f3 Ne8 17.b3 Qb7 18.Nc1 Nac7 19.Nd3 Rb6 20.Rbc1 Rba6 21.Na4 Rxa4 22.bxa4 Rxa4 23.Rb1 Qa8 24.Rf2 f5 25.exf5 Nxd5 26.fxg6 hxg6 27.Nf4 Nxf4 28.Bxf4 Nc7 29.Bh6 Bd4 30.Be3 Bg7 31.Qc2 Kh7 32.Rd2 Ne6 33.Re1 Bf6 34.Bf2 Ng7 35.Re4 Ra3 36.Rg4 Nf5 37.Qc4 Nh6 38.Re4 Rc3 39.Qe6 Kg7 40.Bh4 Rc1+ 41.Kh2 g5 42.Bg3 Kg6 43.h4 Qh8 44.Rd5 Nf7 45.Rg4 Kg7 46.f4 Nd8 47.Rdxg5+ Bxg5 48.Qxe7+ 1–0
Mr. Phillips usually prepares his opening carefully. I wonder what his idea was in this line?
8.Bxa6 Rxa6
Taking with the Knight as in Shulman - Sevillano is better.
9.Nf3 Nbd7 10.0–0 Bg7 11.Qe2 Qa8 12.Nb5,..
And this is why. The fork threat should stop the Black King from castling at the least. Black either blunders, or he decides giving up an Exchange to keep the right to castle is his best chance.
12..., Qb7 13.Nc7+ Qxc7 14.Qxa6 0–0?!
Black is now down the Exchange and a passed pawn. The only try for some compensation is 14..., Nxe4; but after 15 Re1 f5 16 Qc6 Qb6 17 Re2, White has all the makings for a win also.
15.Qc4 Rb8 16.Qc2 Ng4 17.Rb1 Nge5 18.Nxe5 Nxe5 19.b4 Qb6 20.b5,..
White has established his connected passed pawns on the Q-side as real threats. There is little left for Black to do except to wait for the axe to fall.
20..., Qa5 21.a4 Ra8 22.Bd2 Qxa4 23.Qxa4 Rxa4 24.b6 Nd7 25.b7 Nb8 26.Rb6 Ra2 27.Be3 Bc3 28.Rc6!,..
Connected passed pawns on the 6th and 7th ranks are impossible for a Rook to stop. A neat performance by Mr. Chi.
28..., Kg7 29.Rc8 Na6 30.b8Q 1–0
The Benko leads to interesting play. I gave it up in the 1990s. My usual opponents had begun to learn many of the alternative choices White has, and I got tired of always being a pawn down. Careful play by White seemed to me to give him an advantage. I switched to the King’s Indian where I might be crushed on the Q-side, but there were sparkling attacks to be had against the White King to compensate.
I hope these games from the archives spur some readers to come out to play in the Benko thematic next Wednesday. It may well be fun!
More soon.
2.07.2012
To Play On, or Not
The Schenectady Consolation Tournament is a round robin this year as opposed to the typical Swiss System used for this contest. With only eight participants there is enough time in the season to have an all-play-all event. The round robin is obviously a fairer test to determine a winner than is the Swiss System winner-play-winner format. In today’s game the very active Cory Northrup makes a determined effort against the event’s highest rated player.
This game brings up an issue: When is it appropriate to resign the game? That can be a touchy issue not often openly discussed in the chess community. Some players are notorious for playing on until the last pawn has fallen or mate is delivered. Others seem to give up too early. What is correct? Harking back to my earliest days and lessons Frank Valvo, the dominant champion of the Schenectady club in the 1940s and 1950s, tried to teach the kids playing there then, commons sense and courtesy should govern the decision. Frank believed we are not playing professional chess locally, and he saw social relationships within the local chess community as important as the scores achieved. In his view when you are convinced your opponent knows how to win the position, and you can no longer see a way to carry on the fight, then resignation is appropriate. Deliberately playing on to annoy the opponent, was in Frank Valvo’s opinion was bad form.
The Aaron - Northrup game illustrates someone making a stern fight in a bad position and coming very near to rescuing a result. As bad as his game became, Cory was able to find ideas around which he could hope to keep the game going. That is to me the key to answering the resignation question. If you can conceive of a possible defense, then you have to try it out. To do otherwise, resigning prematurely, is just not the way to play chess and enjoy the game.
Aaron, Dilip - Northrup, Cory [B28]
SCC Consolation RR Schenectady, NY, 03.02.2012
1.e4 e6 2.d4 a6 3.Nf3 b5
This is not an opening that gets much recommendation from the top flight players. Whatever they might say or write about it, finding examples of them actually taking the Black side is a rare occurrence. When faced with this line here is how a 2610 player dealt with it;
(531627) Lutz, Christopher (2610) - Laveryd, Peter (2420) [B28]
Katrineholm (5), 15.05.1999
1.e4 e6 2.d4 a6 3.Nf3 b5 4.Bd3 c5 5.c3 Bb7 6.0–0 Nf6 7.Re1 Qb6 8.Bg5 cxd4 9.cxd4 Nc6 10.Bf1 Na5 11.Nc3 Bb4 12.d5 0–0 13.Ne5 Qc7 14.Bxf6 gxf6 15.Ng4 Qf4 16.e5 f5 17.Nf6+ Kh8 18.Qh5 h6 19.Re3 Qg5 20.Qh3 f4 21.Nce4 Qg6 22.Rf3 Bxd5 23.Rxf4 Bxe4 24.Rxe4 Bd2 25.Rg4 Qf5 26.Qg3 Nc4 27.Bd3 1–0
In the cited game, White did not quite manage to keep the promising edge he had from the first few moves, but a slightly better development turned into some concessions in the Black King’s field. The weak Black King soon had to call on his Queen to shore up defenses, and the Lady was not long later surrounded and doomed.
Finding a game by a player as Black in this line with a respectable rating is not easy. One of the few is;
(455784) Koscielski, Janusch (2185) - Straeter, Timo (2330) [B28]
BL2-W 9697 Germany, 1996
1.e4 e6 2.d4 a6 3.Nf3 b5 4.Bd3 Bb7 5.0–0 Nf6 6.Re1 c5 7.c3 cxd4 8.cxd4 Be7 9.Nbd2 Nc6 10.d5 exd5 11.e5 Nh5 12.Nb3 g6 13.Bh6 Bf8 14.Bg5 Be7 15.Bh6 Bf8 16.Bd2 Ng7 17.Ng5 Ne6 18.Qg4 Bg7 19.Qg3 0–0 20.Rad1 f5 21.exf6 Qxf6 22.Nxe6 dxe6 23.Nc5 Bc8 24.Bc3 d4 25.Be4 dxc3 26.Bxc6 Ra7 27.bxc3 Qxc3 28.Qd6 Qf6 29.Bf3 e5 30.Qd5+ Kh8 31.Ne4 Qf7 32.Qc5 Rc7 33.Qe3 Qxa2 34.Nd6 Qe6 35.h3 Bd7 36.Ne4 Bc6 37.Rd6 Qe8 38.Red1 Bb7 39.Ng5 Bxf3 40.Nxf3 e4 41.Ng5 Rc3 42.Qe2 Rd3 43.R6xd3 exd3 44.Qxd3 Qe5 45.h4 a5 46.Qb3 Qf5 47.Qa2 b4 48.Nf3 Qb5 49.Rd5 b3 50.Qd2 Qb6 51.Qxa5 Qxa5 52.Rxa5 Rb8 53.Nd2 b2 54.Nb1 Rc8 55.Kh2 Bf6 56.Rb5 Rc1 57.Na3 Ra1 58.Rb3 Rxa3 0–1
Black’s opening play was not very successful. White obtained the solid advantage by move 15. He then was unable to find the handle on the position, swam a bit and was out played by a stronger opponent.
To sum up; Mr. Northrup’s opening choice is at best doubtful. It requires a high level of tactical and positional alertness to take advantage of any slip be White.
4.c3 c5 5.Be3 d6?
Either this is an oversight or a mistaken idea. White now can just about force the Queen trade leaving the Black King misplaced. Capturing on d4 as in the quoted games is better. Black then is not too badly off.
6.dxc5 dxc5 7.Qxd8+ Kxd8 8.Be2 Bb7 9.e5!?,..
More solid is 9 Nbd2. White may have been worried about his e-pawn. Advancing it to e5 crowds Black, but also gives Black some opportunities to work in the space vacated. A logical way forward is; 9 Nbd2 Nf6 10 a4 Nxe4 11 Nxe4 Bxe4 12 axb5 axb5 13 Rxa8 Bxa8 14 Ne5!, demonstrating that the Black pawns at b5, c5 and f7 are very weak. Played this way White is close to winning.
9..., Nd7 10.0–0 Ne7 11.Rd1 Kc7 12.Ng5 Nxe5 13.Bxc5 N7g6 14.Bd4 h6 15.Nh3 Rd8?
When you play tricky risky lines, trying to switch to safe and sane methods is very often the wrong choice. Creating a tense and dangerous position carries with it the need to see things through to the end. Here worrying about the possible loss of the g-pawn does not let Black get the maximum out of the gamble taken. Here is a suggestion; 15..., Bd6!?; and if White goes directly for the g-pawn, 16 f4?! Nd7 17 Bxg7 Rhg8 18 Bxh6 Bxg2! 19 Kcg2 Nxf4+; the piece is recovered and Black is nicely ahead in development. White can play more carefully with 15..., Bd6 16 Nd2, but then 16..., Nh4 17 f3 Nf5; looks fine for Black. Making the delicate judgment of when to switch from building tension and taking risks to positional play and normal methods requires the honing of that judgment skill. That is best done in serious games; the experience argument.
16.Nf4!?,..
A tempting move that foregoes a possible material advantage. Maybe better 16 Bb6+, collecting the Exchange. Could it be that Dilip was not certain winning the Exchange was best? Some general criteria about winning or giving up the Exchange are; pawn structure damages, are there a Bishop pair involved and the total number of minor pieces left on the board. In this case; the pawns are undamaged on both sides, Black has the two Bishops and all the Black minor pieces remain. Under these circumstances the Exchange looms not so large as it might first appear. Theory tells us the side giving a Rook for a minor piece needs one and a fraction pawns to balance the books. Here there are no pawns falling, but by Black having all his minors still alive and kicking makes for plenty of complications. Dilip may have thought trying another approach could improve his chances.
16..., Rd7?
Continuing to think normal methods are called for, Black passes on a chance to get the edge with 16..., Nxf4 17 Bxe5+ Bd6! 18 Bxf4 Bxf4. If White tries for complications with 18 Rxd6, simply 18..., Nxe2+ 19 Kf1 Rxd6 20 Kxe2 Bxg2; secures a pawn plus.
17.Nxg6 Nxg6 18.a4 e5?
A routine move again not quite grasping the dangers in the position. The text opens the h3-c8 diagonal for use by the White Bishop and the trade on g6 has removed the guard of the Rd7. These are ingredients for a stew that costs the Exchange.
19.Bb6+!,..
Winning the Exchange here seems better than earlier; one pair of minor pieces is off, and White seems to be able to keep some initiative while gaining material. That is another of the criteria cited about winning, or sacrificing, the Exchange; retaining the initiative is important for success.
19..., Kxb6 20.Rxd7 f6 21.axb5 axb5 22.Na3 Bc6 23.Rd2,..
If 23 Rd8 Kc7; the game gets to some esoteric jockeying about can White build pressure on the Black b-pawn. White wants to proceed in a standard positional manner; control the open files and tamp down counter-play.
23..., Be7 24.Nc2 Nh4 25.Ne3 Bc5 26.Nd5+ Kb7 27.b4 Ba7?
Black’s game has been poor for some time. This move makes it a bit worse. Worth consideration is; 27..., Rd8. It is true the line; 28 bxc5 Rxd5 29 Rxd5 Bxd5 30 Bxb5 Bxg2; is none too palatable, but after 31 Ra4 e4; Black is making some threats; .., Bg2-h6; and .., Nf3+; etc. White has the resources to counter these and the Rook and Bishop supporting the c-pawns will win. To do so will require White to put out some effort however.
28.g3?!,..
Winning the won game is a fine art. It takes a certain level of skill and, importantly, the ability to enjoy the process. This evening Carl Adamec and Michael Mockler were at the club to watch the games and to play skittles. While discussing Richard Chu’s win from Carlos Varela with my friends, Matt Katrine’s name was raised. After Frank Valvo’s reign as the best around here, Matt rook over the mantle. One of his memorable characteristics was the joy he took in winning won games. We recalled he’d encourage opponents to play on in desperate straits because he enjoyed in the winning process so much. If you enjoy the process, you will take the time to find the right ideas to finish the contest. If the process is a burden to you or you become casual about the finish, slippage can occur.
Dilip Aaron has not quite found the knack yet of closing out a game efficiently. Here he chases the Knight from a remote posting rather than to test his opponent with 28 Ne7! Black dare not capture on g2, 28..., Bxg2 29 Rd7+, picking off the Ba7. And, if 28..., Bb6 29 Nxc6, eliminating the Bishop pair leaving White in complete control. I suspect Mr. Aaron didn’t calculate much. He just took a cursory look and decided to fix a problem. So Cory gets a glimmer of a chance.
28..., Nf5 29.Bg4 g6 30.Bxf5 gxf5 31.Ne7 Be8 32.Nxf5 Bc6
Black’s hopes are pinned on keeping the Bishops around. Maybe, just maybe a combination of the h1-h8 diagonal control and potential back rank weakness will work to his advantage.
33.Nd6+ Kb8 34.Rda2 Bb6 35.Nxb5 Rd8
It is not so much that the Bishop pair can not make some kind of defense after 35..., Bxb5 36 Ra8+ Kb7 37 Rxh8, it is that the loss of two pawns on the K-side is unavoidable making the win for White easy to see.
36.c4 Rd3 37.Na7?!,..
Slippage. The steady workmanlike sequence; 37 Ra6 Kb7 38 c5 Bd8 39 Nd6+ Kc7 40 Ra7+ Kb8 41 b5 Bf3 42 c6, winds up resistance quickly.
37..., Be4 38.c5 Bd8 39.b5 Bd5 40.Ra3 Rd2 41.Rc3 f5 42.c6 Bc7 43.Kf1,..
Another housekeeping kind of move when a forcing finish is available. His opponent has been holding on in a bad position. That may have lulled Dilip into believing any road will get him home and dry. With 43 b6 Bb6 44 c7+ Bxc7 45 Rb1+, the technical difficulties will be gone and the victory assured. For example; 45..., Kxa7? 46 Ra3+, is mate in one, and 45..., Ka8 46 Rxc7 Ra2 47 Rd1 Kb8 48 Nb5, means Black must concede more material or be mated.
43..., Bb6
Black is still lost, but his efforts combined with the less than sharp play by White have resulted in not quite clear situation.
44.c7+ Bxc7 45.Nc6+ Kb7 46.Ke1 Rb2 47.Rc5 Bf3 48.Rc3 e4 49.Nd4 Be5 50.Ra4?,..
A move that might rate the double query. This Rook had to stay on the first rank to prevent the coming tactics. Good enough is 50 Rc4, and then 50..., Bxd4 51 Rxd4 Rxb5; is in White’s favor, but the Black Bishop is securely anchored on f3 where it can guard the Black pawns. White will have to look into endgames where a Rook captures on f3 and the King gets to take the pawn that ends up there and so on. With pawns all on one side, and if a Rook must be surrendered for even a Bishop and a pawn, draws are always possible. These then are the wages of not bearing down and calculating in a won position. The game is now even.
50..., Rb1+ 51.Kd2 Rd1+ 52.Ke3 Re1+ 53.Kd2 Rd1+ 54.Kc2?,..
Dilip just couldn’t believe the win he had in hand for so long was gone I guess. Agreeing to the draw with 54 Ke3, is best.
54..., Bxd4?
Another candidate for the double query. There is nothing wrong with 54..., Rxd4 55 Rxd4 Bxd4; and the two Bishops have decent chances to win the game. They certainly should not lose it. Cory may have miscalculated something here thinking he wins enough pawns on the K-side to make a difference.
55.Rxf3 exf3 56.Kxd1 Bxf2 57.Rf4 Bg1 58.Rxf5 Bxh2 59.Rxf3 1–0
The game went on for a move or two more, but the win is now trivial. The Rook defends both pawns freeing the White King to go where he will. Soon or late White will sacrifice the Rook for the Bishop and a pawn and then Queen his last “button”.
The lesson; do not be casual about winning a won game. General principles are fine posts by which to guide thinking, but calculation has to be done to win the won game. Mr. Aaron was lucky a valuable half point, or more, was not lost. Mr. Northrup made a good and reasonable effort to make the best out of a bad situation. There were points where many would have resigned. He, however, found ideas to make his opponent work for the win and was rewarded with a chance for a draw and more. The Russian saying about dizziness coming with success can be applied to Cory’s play. A momentary lapse and all that hard work was for naught. It was an entertaining battle.
More soon.
This game brings up an issue: When is it appropriate to resign the game? That can be a touchy issue not often openly discussed in the chess community. Some players are notorious for playing on until the last pawn has fallen or mate is delivered. Others seem to give up too early. What is correct? Harking back to my earliest days and lessons Frank Valvo, the dominant champion of the Schenectady club in the 1940s and 1950s, tried to teach the kids playing there then, commons sense and courtesy should govern the decision. Frank believed we are not playing professional chess locally, and he saw social relationships within the local chess community as important as the scores achieved. In his view when you are convinced your opponent knows how to win the position, and you can no longer see a way to carry on the fight, then resignation is appropriate. Deliberately playing on to annoy the opponent, was in Frank Valvo’s opinion was bad form.
The Aaron - Northrup game illustrates someone making a stern fight in a bad position and coming very near to rescuing a result. As bad as his game became, Cory was able to find ideas around which he could hope to keep the game going. That is to me the key to answering the resignation question. If you can conceive of a possible defense, then you have to try it out. To do otherwise, resigning prematurely, is just not the way to play chess and enjoy the game.
Aaron, Dilip - Northrup, Cory [B28]
SCC Consolation RR Schenectady, NY, 03.02.2012
1.e4 e6 2.d4 a6 3.Nf3 b5
This is not an opening that gets much recommendation from the top flight players. Whatever they might say or write about it, finding examples of them actually taking the Black side is a rare occurrence. When faced with this line here is how a 2610 player dealt with it;
(531627) Lutz, Christopher (2610) - Laveryd, Peter (2420) [B28]
Katrineholm (5), 15.05.1999
1.e4 e6 2.d4 a6 3.Nf3 b5 4.Bd3 c5 5.c3 Bb7 6.0–0 Nf6 7.Re1 Qb6 8.Bg5 cxd4 9.cxd4 Nc6 10.Bf1 Na5 11.Nc3 Bb4 12.d5 0–0 13.Ne5 Qc7 14.Bxf6 gxf6 15.Ng4 Qf4 16.e5 f5 17.Nf6+ Kh8 18.Qh5 h6 19.Re3 Qg5 20.Qh3 f4 21.Nce4 Qg6 22.Rf3 Bxd5 23.Rxf4 Bxe4 24.Rxe4 Bd2 25.Rg4 Qf5 26.Qg3 Nc4 27.Bd3 1–0
In the cited game, White did not quite manage to keep the promising edge he had from the first few moves, but a slightly better development turned into some concessions in the Black King’s field. The weak Black King soon had to call on his Queen to shore up defenses, and the Lady was not long later surrounded and doomed.
Finding a game by a player as Black in this line with a respectable rating is not easy. One of the few is;
(455784) Koscielski, Janusch (2185) - Straeter, Timo (2330) [B28]
BL2-W 9697 Germany, 1996
1.e4 e6 2.d4 a6 3.Nf3 b5 4.Bd3 Bb7 5.0–0 Nf6 6.Re1 c5 7.c3 cxd4 8.cxd4 Be7 9.Nbd2 Nc6 10.d5 exd5 11.e5 Nh5 12.Nb3 g6 13.Bh6 Bf8 14.Bg5 Be7 15.Bh6 Bf8 16.Bd2 Ng7 17.Ng5 Ne6 18.Qg4 Bg7 19.Qg3 0–0 20.Rad1 f5 21.exf6 Qxf6 22.Nxe6 dxe6 23.Nc5 Bc8 24.Bc3 d4 25.Be4 dxc3 26.Bxc6 Ra7 27.bxc3 Qxc3 28.Qd6 Qf6 29.Bf3 e5 30.Qd5+ Kh8 31.Ne4 Qf7 32.Qc5 Rc7 33.Qe3 Qxa2 34.Nd6 Qe6 35.h3 Bd7 36.Ne4 Bc6 37.Rd6 Qe8 38.Red1 Bb7 39.Ng5 Bxf3 40.Nxf3 e4 41.Ng5 Rc3 42.Qe2 Rd3 43.R6xd3 exd3 44.Qxd3 Qe5 45.h4 a5 46.Qb3 Qf5 47.Qa2 b4 48.Nf3 Qb5 49.Rd5 b3 50.Qd2 Qb6 51.Qxa5 Qxa5 52.Rxa5 Rb8 53.Nd2 b2 54.Nb1 Rc8 55.Kh2 Bf6 56.Rb5 Rc1 57.Na3 Ra1 58.Rb3 Rxa3 0–1
Black’s opening play was not very successful. White obtained the solid advantage by move 15. He then was unable to find the handle on the position, swam a bit and was out played by a stronger opponent.
To sum up; Mr. Northrup’s opening choice is at best doubtful. It requires a high level of tactical and positional alertness to take advantage of any slip be White.
4.c3 c5 5.Be3 d6?
Either this is an oversight or a mistaken idea. White now can just about force the Queen trade leaving the Black King misplaced. Capturing on d4 as in the quoted games is better. Black then is not too badly off.
6.dxc5 dxc5 7.Qxd8+ Kxd8 8.Be2 Bb7 9.e5!?,..
More solid is 9 Nbd2. White may have been worried about his e-pawn. Advancing it to e5 crowds Black, but also gives Black some opportunities to work in the space vacated. A logical way forward is; 9 Nbd2 Nf6 10 a4 Nxe4 11 Nxe4 Bxe4 12 axb5 axb5 13 Rxa8 Bxa8 14 Ne5!, demonstrating that the Black pawns at b5, c5 and f7 are very weak. Played this way White is close to winning.
9..., Nd7 10.0–0 Ne7 11.Rd1 Kc7 12.Ng5 Nxe5 13.Bxc5 N7g6 14.Bd4 h6 15.Nh3 Rd8?
When you play tricky risky lines, trying to switch to safe and sane methods is very often the wrong choice. Creating a tense and dangerous position carries with it the need to see things through to the end. Here worrying about the possible loss of the g-pawn does not let Black get the maximum out of the gamble taken. Here is a suggestion; 15..., Bd6!?; and if White goes directly for the g-pawn, 16 f4?! Nd7 17 Bxg7 Rhg8 18 Bxh6 Bxg2! 19 Kcg2 Nxf4+; the piece is recovered and Black is nicely ahead in development. White can play more carefully with 15..., Bd6 16 Nd2, but then 16..., Nh4 17 f3 Nf5; looks fine for Black. Making the delicate judgment of when to switch from building tension and taking risks to positional play and normal methods requires the honing of that judgment skill. That is best done in serious games; the experience argument.
16.Nf4!?,..
A tempting move that foregoes a possible material advantage. Maybe better 16 Bb6+, collecting the Exchange. Could it be that Dilip was not certain winning the Exchange was best? Some general criteria about winning or giving up the Exchange are; pawn structure damages, are there a Bishop pair involved and the total number of minor pieces left on the board. In this case; the pawns are undamaged on both sides, Black has the two Bishops and all the Black minor pieces remain. Under these circumstances the Exchange looms not so large as it might first appear. Theory tells us the side giving a Rook for a minor piece needs one and a fraction pawns to balance the books. Here there are no pawns falling, but by Black having all his minors still alive and kicking makes for plenty of complications. Dilip may have thought trying another approach could improve his chances.
16..., Rd7?
Continuing to think normal methods are called for, Black passes on a chance to get the edge with 16..., Nxf4 17 Bxe5+ Bd6! 18 Bxf4 Bxf4. If White tries for complications with 18 Rxd6, simply 18..., Nxe2+ 19 Kf1 Rxd6 20 Kxe2 Bxg2; secures a pawn plus.
17.Nxg6 Nxg6 18.a4 e5?
A routine move again not quite grasping the dangers in the position. The text opens the h3-c8 diagonal for use by the White Bishop and the trade on g6 has removed the guard of the Rd7. These are ingredients for a stew that costs the Exchange.
19.Bb6+!,..
Winning the Exchange here seems better than earlier; one pair of minor pieces is off, and White seems to be able to keep some initiative while gaining material. That is another of the criteria cited about winning, or sacrificing, the Exchange; retaining the initiative is important for success.
19..., Kxb6 20.Rxd7 f6 21.axb5 axb5 22.Na3 Bc6 23.Rd2,..
If 23 Rd8 Kc7; the game gets to some esoteric jockeying about can White build pressure on the Black b-pawn. White wants to proceed in a standard positional manner; control the open files and tamp down counter-play.
23..., Be7 24.Nc2 Nh4 25.Ne3 Bc5 26.Nd5+ Kb7 27.b4 Ba7?
Black’s game has been poor for some time. This move makes it a bit worse. Worth consideration is; 27..., Rd8. It is true the line; 28 bxc5 Rxd5 29 Rxd5 Bxd5 30 Bxb5 Bxg2; is none too palatable, but after 31 Ra4 e4; Black is making some threats; .., Bg2-h6; and .., Nf3+; etc. White has the resources to counter these and the Rook and Bishop supporting the c-pawns will win. To do so will require White to put out some effort however.
28.g3?!,..
Winning the won game is a fine art. It takes a certain level of skill and, importantly, the ability to enjoy the process. This evening Carl Adamec and Michael Mockler were at the club to watch the games and to play skittles. While discussing Richard Chu’s win from Carlos Varela with my friends, Matt Katrine’s name was raised. After Frank Valvo’s reign as the best around here, Matt rook over the mantle. One of his memorable characteristics was the joy he took in winning won games. We recalled he’d encourage opponents to play on in desperate straits because he enjoyed in the winning process so much. If you enjoy the process, you will take the time to find the right ideas to finish the contest. If the process is a burden to you or you become casual about the finish, slippage can occur.
Dilip Aaron has not quite found the knack yet of closing out a game efficiently. Here he chases the Knight from a remote posting rather than to test his opponent with 28 Ne7! Black dare not capture on g2, 28..., Bxg2 29 Rd7+, picking off the Ba7. And, if 28..., Bb6 29 Nxc6, eliminating the Bishop pair leaving White in complete control. I suspect Mr. Aaron didn’t calculate much. He just took a cursory look and decided to fix a problem. So Cory gets a glimmer of a chance.
28..., Nf5 29.Bg4 g6 30.Bxf5 gxf5 31.Ne7 Be8 32.Nxf5 Bc6
Black’s hopes are pinned on keeping the Bishops around. Maybe, just maybe a combination of the h1-h8 diagonal control and potential back rank weakness will work to his advantage.
33.Nd6+ Kb8 34.Rda2 Bb6 35.Nxb5 Rd8
It is not so much that the Bishop pair can not make some kind of defense after 35..., Bxb5 36 Ra8+ Kb7 37 Rxh8, it is that the loss of two pawns on the K-side is unavoidable making the win for White easy to see.
36.c4 Rd3 37.Na7?!,..
Slippage. The steady workmanlike sequence; 37 Ra6 Kb7 38 c5 Bd8 39 Nd6+ Kc7 40 Ra7+ Kb8 41 b5 Bf3 42 c6, winds up resistance quickly.
37..., Be4 38.c5 Bd8 39.b5 Bd5 40.Ra3 Rd2 41.Rc3 f5 42.c6 Bc7 43.Kf1,..
Another housekeeping kind of move when a forcing finish is available. His opponent has been holding on in a bad position. That may have lulled Dilip into believing any road will get him home and dry. With 43 b6 Bb6 44 c7+ Bxc7 45 Rb1+, the technical difficulties will be gone and the victory assured. For example; 45..., Kxa7? 46 Ra3+, is mate in one, and 45..., Ka8 46 Rxc7 Ra2 47 Rd1 Kb8 48 Nb5, means Black must concede more material or be mated.
43..., Bb6
Black is still lost, but his efforts combined with the less than sharp play by White have resulted in not quite clear situation.
44.c7+ Bxc7 45.Nc6+ Kb7 46.Ke1 Rb2 47.Rc5 Bf3 48.Rc3 e4 49.Nd4 Be5 50.Ra4?,..
A move that might rate the double query. This Rook had to stay on the first rank to prevent the coming tactics. Good enough is 50 Rc4, and then 50..., Bxd4 51 Rxd4 Rxb5; is in White’s favor, but the Black Bishop is securely anchored on f3 where it can guard the Black pawns. White will have to look into endgames where a Rook captures on f3 and the King gets to take the pawn that ends up there and so on. With pawns all on one side, and if a Rook must be surrendered for even a Bishop and a pawn, draws are always possible. These then are the wages of not bearing down and calculating in a won position. The game is now even.
50..., Rb1+ 51.Kd2 Rd1+ 52.Ke3 Re1+ 53.Kd2 Rd1+ 54.Kc2?,..
Dilip just couldn’t believe the win he had in hand for so long was gone I guess. Agreeing to the draw with 54 Ke3, is best.
54..., Bxd4?
Another candidate for the double query. There is nothing wrong with 54..., Rxd4 55 Rxd4 Bxd4; and the two Bishops have decent chances to win the game. They certainly should not lose it. Cory may have miscalculated something here thinking he wins enough pawns on the K-side to make a difference.
55.Rxf3 exf3 56.Kxd1 Bxf2 57.Rf4 Bg1 58.Rxf5 Bxh2 59.Rxf3 1–0
The game went on for a move or two more, but the win is now trivial. The Rook defends both pawns freeing the White King to go where he will. Soon or late White will sacrifice the Rook for the Bishop and a pawn and then Queen his last “button”.
The lesson; do not be casual about winning a won game. General principles are fine posts by which to guide thinking, but calculation has to be done to win the won game. Mr. Aaron was lucky a valuable half point, or more, was not lost. Mr. Northrup made a good and reasonable effort to make the best out of a bad situation. There were points where many would have resigned. He, however, found ideas to make his opponent work for the win and was rewarded with a chance for a draw and more. The Russian saying about dizziness coming with success can be applied to Cory’s play. A momentary lapse and all that hard work was for naught. It was an entertaining battle.
More soon.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
