The SCC Finals End With An Upset

This game settled the standings for the Finals event at Schenectady. Here a rising talent upsets an established contender. After the game Alan lamented a patch of bad form he has been living through. In two games at the Saratoga Club with Feinberg and Farrell where he had some advantage ended in losses after Alan found incorrect continuations. In today’s game the pattern repeats. At a critical juncture, Alan goes astray.

There is not much in chess in which I claim to be an expert; maybe a couple of opening lines and the ability to find just the wrong move at a crucial moment in a game. I have a long list of those kind of errors over the years made by me. A couple of them versus were Alan no less. I think all chess players except the elite World Championship Candidates probably hit streaks like this.

My self-prescription for getting out of the trend is three-fold: Take a step back from serious play and skip a regular event or two. Sometimes we need to recharge our competitive energy. Don’t put chess aside entirely, study. For me the key activity was the playing over master games. Sometimes it would be intensive examination of one or more games of some particular variation or theme. Other times it would be running through a large number of games quickly to get a feel for piece placement and thematic tactics. A third step was to rework my opening tools. A number of poor results in the 1980s led me to put aside the French Defense as my main answer to 1 e4, and take up the Pirc Defense. With a new opening came a renewed interest in competition.

There is no basis to say this prescription works every time for everyone. It is a positive plan however. My chess career spanned sixty years during which there were many breaks from competition. Some were forced by the demands of work, but not a few came about because of a sudden loss of form. Loss of form is defined not just by lost games. It really is when your play, the moves you find and the ideas you have, just do not come up to your self-defined standards. If you are going to play chess for some long time, these form problems will likely occur. Working out a process to deal with them is a requirement for longevity at chess.

Le Cours, Alan - Calderone, Zack [A30]
SCC Finals Schenectady, NY, 24.03.2012

1.Nf3 Nf6 2.c4 c5 3.Nc3 b6 4.g3 e6 5.Bg2 Bb7 6.0–0 Be7 7.Re1 d6

Equally popular is 7..., d5. The opening is classified as the Symmetrical English.

Here are a couple of GM games with the move 7..., d6:

(132724) Tal, Mihail (2560) - Tseshkovsky, Vitaly (2575) [A30]
Riga (12), 1981
1.Nf3 Nf6 2.c4 c5 3.Nc3 e6 4.g3 b6 5.Bg2 Bb7 6.0–0 Be7 7.Re1 d6 8.d4 cxd4 9.Nxd4 Bxg2 10.Kxg2 Qc8 11.Qd3 Nbd7 12.b3 Ne5 13.Qd2 d5 14.cxd5 Bb4 15.Bb2 Nxd5 16.Qg5 Bxc3 17.Bxc3 Qxc3 18.Qxe5 0–0 19.Rac1 Qd2 20.Red1 Qh6 21.Nc6 Rfe8 22.e4 Nf6 23.h3 Nd7 24.Qc7 Nc5 25.Rc4 e5 26.Rd5 f6 27.Rd6 Qh5 28.Nd8 Qg6 29.Qc6 Raxd8 30.Qd5+ Ne6 31.Rxd8 Rxd8 32.Qxe6+ Kf8 33.Rc7 Re8 34.Qd6+ Kg8 35.Qd5+ Kh8 36.Rxa7 h5 37.h4 Kh7 38.Ra8 Rxa8 39.Qxa8 Qg4 40.f3 Qd7 41.Qd5 Qc7 42.Qd2 b5 43.a3 Qc5 44.Qa2 Qc1 45.a4 b4 ½–½

The next is a very interesting game in which White offers pawns for tactical and positional chances. Black refuses these “Greek” gifts but falls to a violent attack on the K-side.

(248803) Cvitan, Ognjen (2515) - Lautier, Joel (2570) [A30]
Novi Sad Olympics (Men) (10), 1990
1.Nf3 Nf6 2.c4 c5 3.g3 b6 4.Bg2 Bb7 5.0–0 e6 6.Nc3 d6 7.Re1 Be7 8.e4 a6 9.d4 cxd4 10.Nxd4 Qc7 11.Be3 Nbd7 12.f4 0–0 13.Rc1 Rfe8 14.g4 h6 15.h4 Nc5 16.Bf2 e5 17.fxe5 dxe5 18.Nf5 Bf8 19.g5 hxg5 20.hxg5 Nh7 21.Nd5 Qd8 22.Rc3 Re6 23.b4 Nd7 24.Rd3 Bxd5 25.exd5 Rg6 26.d6 e4 27.Rxe4 Qxg5 28.Nh4 Rf6 29.Rg4 1–0

And here are a couple of games featuring 7..., d5:

(118023) Larsen, Bent (2620) - Gligoric, Svetozar (2560) [A30]
Bled, 1979
1.c4 Nf6 2.Nf3 c5 3.Nc3 e6 4.g3 b6 5.Bg2 Bb7 6.0–0 Be7 7.Re1 d5 8.cxd5 Nxd5 9.e4 Nb4 10.d4 cxd4 11.Nxd4 N8c6 12.Nxc6 Nxc6 13.e5 Qxd1 14.Rxd1 Rb8 15.Nb5 0–0 16.Bf4 g5 17.Rac1 gxf4 18.Bxc6 fxg3 19.hxg3 Bc5 20.Bxb7 Rxb7 21.Kg2 f6 22.exf6 Rxf6 23.f3 Rbf7 24.Rd3 h5 25.Rc4 Rg6 26.Nc3 e5 27.Ne4 Bd4 28.b3 b5 29.Rc2 Kg7 30.Kh3 Kh6 31.b4 Ra6 32.Kg2 Kg6 33.Nd2 Rff6 34.Nb3 Ra3 35.Rdd2 Rd6 36.Nxd4 exd4 37.Rc5 a6 38.f4 Kh6 39.Rg5 Rg6 40.Rxg6+ Kxg6 41.Rxd4 Rxa2+ 42.Kh3 Ra1 43.Rd6+ Kg7 44.Kh4 Rh1+ 45.Kg5 Rh3 46.Rg6+ Kf7 47.Kf5 h4 48.g4 a5 49.bxa5 Ra3 50.Ra6 b4 51.g5 h3 52.g6+ Ke7 53.g7 Rg3 54.Rg6 Rxg6 55.Kxg6 h2 56.g8Q h1Q 57.Qf7+ Kd6 58.Qf8+ Ke6 59.f5+ Kd7 60.Qxb4 Qg2+ 61.Kf6 Qc6+ 62.Kg5 Qg2+ 63.Qg4 Qd5 64.Qa4+ Ke7 65.Qb4+ Kf7 66.Kf4 Qc6 67.Qb3+ Kf8 68.Qa3+ Kg7 1–0

(592675) Gurevich, Mikhail (2667) - Van Wely, Loek (2643) [E17]
Bundesliga 0001 Germany (5.2), 07.01.2001
1.c4 Nf6 2.Nc3 c5 3.g3 e6 4.Nf3 b6 5.Bg2 Bb7 6.0–0 Be7 7.Re1 d5 8.cxd5 exd5 9.d4 0–0 10.Bf4 Nbd7 11.Qc2 Ne4 12.dxc5 Bxc5 13.Nxe4 dxe4 14.Ng5 Rc8 15.Qb1 Nf6 16.Nxe4 Bxe4 17.Bxe4 Qd4 18.Bf3 Qxf2+ 19.Kh1 Rfe8 20.Rf1 Qd4 21.Rd1 Qc4 22.Qf5 Be3 23.b3 Qc2 24.Qxc2 Rxc2 25.Rd3 Bxf4 26.gxf4 g6 27.Kg2 Nh5 28.Rd4 Ng7 29.Rd7 a5 30.Rad1 Ne6 31.Kg3 Rxa2 32.Rb7 Rb2 33.Rxb6 a4 34.b4 a3 35.Ra6 Rxb4 36.f5 Nd4 37.fxg6 hxg6 38.Rxa3 Nxe2+ 39.Bxe2 Rxe2 40.h3 Rbb2 41.Rdd3 Kg7 42.Rab3 Rbc2 43.Rbc3 Rg2+ 44.Kf4 Rcf2+ 45.Rf3 Re2 46.Rce3 f5 47.Rxe2 Rxe2 48.Kg3 Kh6 49.Ra3 Kg5 50.Ra8 Re3+ 51.Kg2 Kf4 52.Ra4+ Re4 53.Ra2 Rd4 54.Re2 Rd3 55.Rf2+ Ke3 56.Rf3+ Ke4 57.Rf2 f4 58.Re2+ Re3 59.Ra2 Rg3+ 60.Kh2 Rd3 61.Kg2 Ke3 62.Rb2 Ra3 63.Rf2 Ra5 64.Rf3+ Ke4 65.Rf2 Rg5+ 66.Kh2 Ke3 67.Ra2 Rd5 68.Ra3+ Rd3 69.Ra6 g5 70.Re6+ Kf3 71.Rg6 Rd5 72.Rg8 Re5 73.Rg7 Re2+ 74.Kg1 Rg2+ 75.Kh1 g4 76.Rxg4 Rxg4 77.hxg4 Ke2 0–1

The cited games show that at the highest level opening the game in this fashion satisfies these outstanding players from both sides of the board. Returning to our game:
8.e4 Nbd7 9.d4 cxd4 10.Nxd4 a6 11.b3 Qc7 12.Bb2 Rd8!?

Up to this move it has been all book from lines where the Symmetrical English and the Hedgehog Defense come close to each other. Theory gives 12..., 0-0; as the best here.

A couple of famous Soviet Grandmasters played this line to a draw in 1975:

(104106) Petrosian, Tigran V (2645) - Balashov, Yuri S (2540) [A30]
43rd USSR Championship, Yerevan, 1975
1.c4 Nf6 2.Nc3 e6 3.Nf3 c5 4.g3 b6 5.Bg2 Bb7 6.0–0 a6 7.Re1 d6 8.e4 Nbd7 9.b3 Be7 10.d4 cxd4 11.Nxd4 Qc7 12.Bb2 0–0 13.h3 Rfe8 14.Rc1 Bf8 15.Kh2 Rad8 16.Rc2 Qb8 17.Rce2 Nc5 18.Kg1 Qa8 19.Ba1 Qb8 20.Re3 Qc7 21.Qb1 Ncd7 22.Bb2 Ne5 23.Qc2 Ned7 24.Qe2 Rc8 25.Kh1 Rcd8 26.Nc2 Rc8 27.f4 Nb8 28.Rc1 Red8 29.Ne1 h6 30.Nd3 Nbd7 31.Kh2 Be7 32.h4 Nh7 33.Nd1 Bf6 34.Nc3 Bd4 35.Nd5 exd5 36.Bxd4 dxe4 37.Nf2 Nhf6 38.Nxe4 Bxe4 39.Bxe4 Re8 40.Bf3 Rxe3 41.Qxe3 Re8 42.Qc3 Ne4 43.Qb2 f5 44.Re1 Ndc5 45.Qc2 Qe7 46.Qd1 Qe6 47.Re3 a5 48.Kg2 Re7 49.Bb2 Kh7 50.Be2 Qf7 51.a3 Nf6 52.Rxe7 Qxe7 53.Bf3 Ng4 54.Bd4 Ne3+ 55.Bxe3 Qxe3 56.Qd5 Qe6 57.Qxe6 Nxe6 58.h5 Nd4 59.Bd1 g5 60.hxg6+ Kxg6 61.Kf2 Kf6 62.Ke3 Ne6 63.Bc2 Ng7 64.Bd1 Ne6 65.b4 axb4 66.axb4 Nc7 67.Kd4 Ke6 68.Bb3 Kf6 69.Ba4 Ke6 70.Bc6 Ke7 71.Bb7 Kd7 72.Kd3 Ne6 73.Ke3 Kd8 74.Bg2 Ke7 75.Bd5 Nc7 76.Bb7 Kd7 77.Kf3 Ne6 78.Kg2 ½–½

Somewhat more recently two Grandmasters, in a slightly different move order, explored the line and White prevailed:

(236886) Azmaiparashvili, Zurab (2610) - Lerner, Konstantin Z (2560) [A30]
Lvov, Zonal Tournament, 1990
1.c4 Nf6 2.Nc3 e6 3.Nf3 b6 4.g3 Bb7 5.Bg2 c5 6.0–0 a6 7.Re1 Be7 8.e4 d6 9.d4 cxd4 10.Nxd4 Qc7 11.b3 0–0 12.Bb2 Nbd7 13.Rc1 Rac8 14.Rc2 Rfe8 15.Rd2 Qb8 16.f4 Bf8 17.Bf3 Nc5 18.e5 dxe5 19.fxe5 Nfd7 20.Bxb7 Nxb7 21.Nxe6 Nxe5 22.Nxf8 Kxf8 23.Kg2 Nc5 24.Nd5 Ng6 25.Rf1 Rcd8 26.Rdf2 Rd7 27.Nxb6 Qb7+ 28.Nd5 Ne6 29.Qf3 Kg8 30.h4 h6 31.Kh2 Qb8 32.Qg4 h5 33.Qxh5 Nc7 34.Qg4 1–0

And to show that the Black game can pose some dangers to White, here is
A game from a USA event:

(443905) Dzindzichashvili, Roman (2545) - Sunye Neto, Jaime (2505) [A30]
New York CITS (9), 1996
1.c4 Nf6 2.Nf3 c5 3.g3 b6 4.Bg2 Bb7 5.0–0 d6 6.Nc3 Nbd7 7.Re1 e6 8.e4 a6 9.d4 cxd4 10.Nxd4 Qc7 11.b3 Be7 12.Bb2 0–0 13.Rc1 Rac8 14.f4 Rfd8 15.f5 e5 16.Nd5 Nxd5 17.cxd5 Nc5 18.Nf3 Qb8 19.g4 Nd7 20.g5 f6 21.h4 b5 22.Qe2 Rc7 23.Rxc7 Qxc7 24.Rc1 Qb6+ 25.Qf2 Qxf2+ 26.Kxf2 Rc8 27.Rxc8+ Bxc8 28.Bc1 Bd8 29.h5 Nc5 30.Ne1 fxg5 31.Be3 Bb6 32.b4 Na4 33.Bxb6 Nxb6 34.Nf3 h6 35.Nd2 Nd7 36.Nf1 Nf6 37.Ng3 Bd7 38.Bf3 Be8 39.Be2 Kf8 40.Kg2 g4 41.Kf2 Ke7 42.a3 Kd8 43.Kg2 Bxh5 44.Nxh5 Nxh5 45.Bxg4 Nf4+ 46.Kg3 Ke7 47.f6+ Kxf6 48.Kf3 Nd3 49.Bc8 Ne1+ 0–1

I found no games with the text in my databases. Rhetorically, why is that? Rybka answers: 13 Nd5!? exd5 14 exd5, and if Black is careless playing; 14..., Ne5 15 Nf5 0-0 16 Nxe7+ Qxe7 17 f4, recovers the piece with an excellent position for White. However, if Black is cautious and varies with 14..., Kf8 15 Qe2 Ng8!; it is questionable if White has enough compensation for the material. Black may have to suffer for a while, but a piece is a piece. The sacrifice on d5 may not be entirely sound, but it introduces a degree of irrationality to the game that the very good players avoid usually.

13.Qe2 0–0 14.Kh1!?,..

I don’t quite get this move. White seems to be worried about some check by the Black Queen or his dark squared Bishop on the g1-a7 diagonal after f2-f4 is played. Neither I nor Rybka found a specific line where that check was important. Absent a specific need, it is sensible to complete development with 14 Rad1.

14..., Ne8?!

This retrograde maneuver is not understandable in view of the needs of the position. So far the players have been debating control of various squares in around the center and jockeying for favorable line opening tricks. If Black intended here to shift his Queen to a8, it makes more sense to leave the Knight on f6 attacking e4. He may have intended to prepare a break with .., d6-d5; after .., Nc7; and maybe .., Nd7-f6; and had a change of heart. Or, most likely, Black had the vague outlines of a plan including playing .., f7-f5; trying to begin a K-side action. Then if White plays Bg2-h3 as in the game, to prevent .., f7-f5, Black imagined there might be tricks down the long diagonal.

15.Rad1 Qb8 16.f4 Qa8 17.Bh3?!,..

Both sides have disposed their forces as they desired. The flaw in the Black position is advancing any of his center pawns at the moment is not realistically possible. The flaw in the White position is the potentially fragile situation of the White King requiring White to pay close attention to his pieces guarding vital points. Thus both sides have to resort to some maneuvering looking for a chance for advantage.

White decides attacking e6 is his way to do this. The text reduces the defenses of e4 and the long diagonal. He might be better served by playing 17 Kg1, getting his King out of the line of fire but that move would be tantamount to admitting the move to h1 was unnecessary.

17..., Nc7 18.f5?!,..

If the King were on g1, this move would have more bite. As it is, Black has a chance to get to near equality with 18..., e5 19 Nf3 Nf6 20 Ba3 Rfe8 21 Bf1 b5!; because if White goes for the b-pawn, Black eliminates the e-pawn opening the long diagonal to his advantage.

18..., Nc5?

A mistake that should allow White to obtain a near winning edge.

19.b4 e5

Short of going in for some sacrificial continuation, this is the best practical chance. One alternate served up by my computer is 19... Bf6?! 20 bxc5 dxc5 21 Nb3 exf5 22 Bxf5 Rxd1 23 Rxd1 Re8; but 24 Rd7, cements the White advantage.

20.Nc2?,..

It is now White’s bad form begins to surface. Here White can obtain a significant advantage with; 20 bxc5! exd4 21 Nd5 Nxd5 22 exd5, when the follow-on threat of c5-c6 leaves Black in a bad way.

20..., Nd7 21.Bc1?!,..

Not a bad move in that there is no tactical oversight, rather it misses the opportunity to carryout a thematic idea; controlling d5. White can play 21 Ne3, dangling the “bright and shiny” e-pawn. If Black grabs it he is lost after; 21 Ne3 Bxe4+? 22 Nxe4 Qxe4? 23 Bg2, trapping the Queen. Assuming Black is not so tempted, he will probably play; 21..., b5; which is a much stronger move. Then, after 22 a4, the game is very complex and White has only a modest plus.

21..., b5!

This counter-stroke is strong.

22.Nd5 Nxd5 23.cxd5,..

White has eliminated the most direct threat to his King by stifling the battery aimed down the long diagonal. It was done at a cost. Black will have the first say on the c-file, and the square c4 beckons the Nd7. Getting up some opposition on the c-file is slow going because of the two minor pieces on c2 and c1. Clearing them out of the way takes time that Black can use to bring the power of his Rooks into play.

22..., f6?!

Too cautious. The natural 22..., Rc8; is better. Black has two minor pieces and a pawn guarding f6 right now. This prevents the idea of f5-f6 and the Exchange sacrifice at f6 from working immediately. Precautions can wait for a turn or two until Black needs to move one of the minor pieces. Black with this move grants White time to not be over run on the c-file, but White has to be creative. The best try may be; 23 a4, then if 23..., bxa4 24 Na3, a5 25 b5, keeping a tight rein on the Black Bishops

24.Be3,..

A fundamental problem for White is his Bc1 and Nc2 both need the e3 square. Since two pieces can’t occupy the same point at the same time, White will have trouble coordinating his pieces.

24..., Rc8 25.Rd2 Rc4 26.Qg4?,..

White has not liked how the game developed. Here I think Mr. Le Cours lost patience with the situation and faith in the resources of his position. It is not easy to find 26 a4!, which appears to keep the position under control after; 26..., Rfc8 27 axb5 axb5 28 Ra1, the game is balanced. If 28..., Qb8 29 Bf1, and a mistake is; 29..., Rxe4? 30 Qxb5 Rxc2 31 Rxc2 Rxe3 32 Qxd7, with a big advantage. When you lose faith in a position any active try becomes tempting. White stakes everything on a not so subtle direct attack on the Black King.

26..., Rfc8 27.Bh6 Bf8 28.Ne3 Rxb4 29.Bg2 Kh8 30.Nc2 Rbc4 0–1

Mr. Calderone calmly fended off the assault. White now must lose material. He correctly ends the contest with resignation. This game definitely moved Zack into the ranks of potential contenders for next year’s title. He finished clear third with a 50% score and played up in every game. It was an outstanding result for the young man.

More soon.

A Tense Game with Errors

Sometimes in chess, as in life, things don’t make sense. This game is an example of that observation. The participants got to the Finals through some luck and some good play. Neither are challenging for a high place, but they are very interested in establishing a higher place in the “pecking order” within the club and in gaining rating points. These concerns made the game important to them, and the importance made the contest quite tense.

Chu, Richard - Calderone, Zack [B50]
SCC Finals, Schenectady, NY, 08.03.2012

1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.g3,..

This move is by no means as popular as the common 3 d4, or 3 Bb5+, and the other options; 3 Nc3, 3 Bc4 and 3 c3. Although infrequently played, the results are no worse than the alternatives.

Here’s how a couple of great players treated this line:

(49095) Keres, Paul - Spassky, Boris V [B50]
26th USSR Championship, Tbilisi (14), 1959
1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.g3 Nc6 4.Bg2 g6 5.0–0 Bg7 6.c3 e5 7.Na3 Nge7 8.Nc2 0–0 9.d4 exd4 10.cxd4 Bg4 11.Be3 Qb6 12.dxc5 dxc5 13.b4 Rfd8 14.bxc5 Rxd1 15.cxb6 Rxa1 16.Nxa1 axb6 17.Nb3 Rxa2 18.Rb1 b5 19.Nfd4 b4 20.h3 Bd7 21.Bf1 Nxd4 22.Nxd4 Ra4 23.Nb3 Be6 24.Nc5 Ba2 25.Rd1 Ra8 26.Rd7 Nc6 27.Rxb7 Bc3 28.Rc7 Nd4 29.Nd3 Ne6 30.Rb7 Bc4 31.Nc1 Rc8 32.Bxc4 Rxc4 33.Na2 Kg7 34.Rb6 h5 35.Kg2 ½–½

3..., g6 4.Bg2 Bg7 5.0–0 Nc6 6.c3 Bg4 7.Qb3!?,..

This move breaks the pin immediately. Seeking an advantage with 7 h3, questioning the Bishop right away, is likely the best here. After the game move, Black can claim to have equalized.

8..., Qd7 8.Re1 Bxf3 9.Bxf3 e5?!

Why block the Bg7? By doing so Black gives up the claim to equality. Much more to the point are; 9..., h5; thinking about some sort of K-side attack down the h-file, or getting on with development with 9..., Nf6.

10.d3 Nge7 11.Nd2 a6 12.Qd1 0–0 13.Nc4 Qc7 14.Ne3?!,..

The last several moves have not been particularly germane, nor did they advance a coherent plan for either side. White holds the usual advantage of the first move, and Black made no real attempt change the direction of the game. White’s last move spends another tempo trying to find a place for the Knight. Better is 14 Bd2, moving development forward. Vacating c4 without making Black use a move to force it wastes time.

14..., f5!?

Black accepts the gift. There are two space grabbing choices here; the text and 14..., b5. I like the move played in the game, and Rybka says 14..., b5; is best.

15.Nd5?!,..

With guidance from Rybka, the better answer seems to be 15 exf5, securing the use of the h1-a8 diagonal should Black reply; 15..., Nxf5; and if 15..., gxf5 16 Qb3+ Kh8 17 Nd5 Nxd5 18 Qxd5, obtaining good control of the light center squares. And so my electronic friend educates me on even positional matters. A few years back, I recall a conversation with GM Har-Zvi when Rybka was the new wunderkind on the scene. I expressed the opinion that computers were amazing at tactics but not so good at positional play. The Grandmaster cautioned me that the new generation of engines had come a long way on the positional side of the game. I think the foregoing illustrates that point.

15..., Nxd5 16.exd5 Ne7

This last sequence puts paid to White’s advantage. Black has equalized.

17.c4?,..

An educational moment. White is thinking routinely and he secures the d5 pawn, but in doing so weakens the dark squares. Aside from the immediate tactical question; does Black have some threat, there is the positional query; what is Black planning long term? Some thought tells us he’d like to play .., e5-e4. Doing so, if things don’t change on the board, hits the Bf3 and attacks b2 while clearing e5 for the Knight. Now those activities are easily enough met, but White has to aware of the potential dangers. For example, here moving the Bc1 to say d2 loses material and Black gets a nice position after 18 Bd2 bxc4 19 dxc4 e4 20 Bg2 Bxb2.

Best for White is 17 Bg2, getting a potential target out of the path of danger. Black can not easily get two pieces lined up to attack the pawn on d5, and if he maneuvers to do so with; .., b7-b4; and .., Qb7; counter attacks on d6 (Bc1-f4) can blunt the effectiveness of the scheme, to say nothing of the risks associated with getting a Knight pinned on d5 over his Queen in the middle of a board that may open up quickly.

17..., b5 18.Rb1 bxc4 19.dxc4 e4 20.Bg2 Rab8!?

I have doubts about this rush to the b-file. A more subtle approach is 20..., Nc8; intending travel through b6 and d7 to eventually end up on e5. Steinitz taught us long ago to fight Knights you deny them central outposts. The other side of that coin is to combat Bishops when you have a Knight a central outpost is needed to keep the Bishops from over running the board. The square e5 supported by the Bg7 fills the bill nicely for that purpose.

21.b3 Rb7 22.Bb2 Rfb8 23.Bxg7 Kxg7 24.f3,..

White had the more correct idea over this last sequence than did Black. The point of Black’s aggressive K-side pawn chain is attacked, while the doubled Rooks on the b-file are not going to be immediately active. Several moves would have to be played to make the Rooks dangerous; the advance of the a-pawn to cause a breach at b3 takes three move at least. The danger at e4 is now.

24..., exf3 25.Qxf3 f4?

The Black pieces are in no way disposed to support this break. Trying to reposition the Knight with 25..., Ng8; is more sensible. After the text White has a significant advantage.

26.Qxf4?!,..

A second best choice motivated by the desire to pocket a pawn. Better is; 26 Qc3+ Kg8 27 Bh3, when Black likely has to play 27..., Nf5; and then 28 Bxf5 gxf5 29 Re6, with a nearly winning advantage for White. The game move keeps some edge.

26..., Nf5 27.Re6 Ra7?

More than any other point in the game, this move signals play that justifies my opening comments about this contest. While I do not have notes on the elapsed times for this game, my recollection is neither side had used up a great deal of clock time to get here. These are two reasonably good players; one with decades of experience and the other with lots of talent demonstrated by qualifying for the Finals. Somehow, from this point forward, their combined efforts defy common sense.

28.Rbe1?!,..

The White pieces are aimed at d6. The natural move here is 28 Bh3, attacking the key defender of d6. If then, 28..., Nd4 29 Qf6+ Kg8 30 Rxd6 Rf8 31 Be6+, wins for White.

28..., Rf8 29.Qg5?!,..
Frittering away some more of his advantage. Better 29 Rf1, maintaining the pressure on Black’s weak points.

29..., Qd8?

Exchanging Queens would leave White very much in the driver’s seat in the ending: 30 Qxd8 Rxd8 31 Bh3 Nd4 32 Re7+ Rxe7 33 Rxe7+, and the active White Rook will harvest one pawn at least. The ensuing Rook + Bishop versus Rook + Knight ending with an extra pawn will be won for White. It is better for Black to hunt complications with 29..., Qa5.

30.Qd2?,..

Avoiding the trade unnecessarily.

30..., Rb7

A move that is OK, but 30..., Raf7; is more forceful.

31.Qg5??,..

A gross oversight that has no explanation in chess terms. With 31 R6e4, White would have retained some advantage. Given the distribution of material, he could have certainly hoped to work towards winning the game, although the strongly posted Nd4 could be enough for Black to hold. The explanation seems to lie in the realm of physiology.

A theme I have touched on before in this blog is the way in which tension brings about odd play by club level players. Tension works its evil effects at higher levels of play in much more subtle fashion. For us locally, in our club contests, prolonged tension produces irrational moves and this is one such move. Both players saw the game as critically important. The more experienced Chu was not ready to step aside and concede a higher place to the up-and-comer Calderone. Zack for his part anxious to prove he deserved a place in the Finals. The result is the rash of questionable moves that closed out the game.

I have no prescription for dealing with tension. What I’ve observed over the years is it effects some more than others. Matt Katrein, a Life Master and for a long time the best local player, experienced physical problems dealing with tension during play. Several of his contemporaries; Nelson Egbert, Lee Battes, etc., outwardly seemed to handle tension better. The difference appeared to be Matt saw the game as a struggle between two individuals, while the others viewed as a problem or puzzle to be solved. I am very much from the Matt Katrein school regarding tension. The struggle, the battle is most important to me and not so much the problem on the board. This personalization of the chess contest spurs those such as Katrein on to greater effort, and it leads to really silly mistakes sometimes. The calmer puzzle solvers have fewer mistakes as a rule. I wonder if they have as much fun?

31..., Qxg5 32.Bh3 Nd4 0–1

Chess is in some ways quite like life, what we do is not always logical and rational. The human talent for the illogical adds spice to our play at chess. Occasionally this characteristic discovers some wonderful innovation. Most of the time it leads to play defying explanation.

This past Thursday evening, Zack confirmed his right to a place in the Finals with a nice win from Alan Le Cours. This victory gave Zack clear third place in the Finals ahead of Le Cours. A notable achievement on his first try for the title.

The final standings in the SCC event are:

1 John Phillips 4 ½ - ½
2 Philip Sells 4 - 1
3 Zack Calderone 2 ½ - 2 ½
4 Alan Le Cours 2 - 3
5&6 Carlos Varela 1 - 4
5&6 Richard Chu 1 - 4

Also Thursday one game from the SCC Consolation tourney was played. David Connors defeated Matt Clough. While there are still some games un-played, Dilip Aaron has clinched first place with a 6 - 1 score. His wins in recent weeks from Herman Calderone and Chris Caravaty sealed his victory. Fighting for the second spot are; Herman Calderone with 3 ½ - 1 ½ and two games to play, Cory Northrup 3 - 3 with one game to play, and Chris Caravaty 2 ½ - 1½ with 3 games to play.

More soon.

Dean Howard Wins the AACC Title!

The battle for the Albany Championship ended this past Wednesday evening. Dean Howard won a tightly contested game from Peter Henner. The victory allowed Mr. Howard his second Albany title, an excellent accomplishment demonstrating solid consistency.

The game itself took a winding path through the opening flirting with the Modern Defense and the Pirc before arriving at the Schmid Benoni. The Schmid is an problematical debut. Lothar Schmid, a German GM, made it his trademark in the 1950s. The then World Champion Botvinnik, and others of that ilk, found ways to foil Black’s plans inflicting a number of heavy defeats on Schmid and his opening in the 1960s. The Schmid version of the Benoni fell out of fashion and does not often appear in GM practice now. It does show up with some frequency in the games of Candidate Masters where the knowledge of deep theory is not so wide spread as it is at the top.

Howard, Dean - Henner, Peter [A43]
AACC Championship Finals Match Guilderland, NY, 14.03.2012

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

What started out as a Modern Defense (no Knight on f6) has in the last turns became a Pirc. With his last White decides not to transpose into some sort of KID with 5 c4. It seems the opening might just morph into the Classical variation of the Pirc.

5..., 0–0

Following Smyslov - Schmid, Helsinki, 1952 where Smyslov obtained the advantage out of the opening. Later Schmid improved with 5..., Na6; reasoning it to be important to speed up Q-side mobilization.

6.0–0 c5 7.d5 Nbd7!?

The game has reached a line in the Schmid Benoni. This move is a departure from theory. I don’t know if Mr. Henner had an improvement in mind, or if this was something that looked good to him at the board. Schmid’s notion here was anything but this move. He tried 7..., Na6; and 7..., e6. Others, those who favor the Pirc way of doing things, play 7..., Bg4; intending to trade the Bishop for the Nf3, thereby answering the question of what to do with Bc8 and reducing the White influence in the center. Neither Deep Rybka nor I can find anything immediately wrong with the text.

GM Schmid had many ideas for his favorite opening. Here is an example of another way to play:

Hayes,(n) - Schmid, Lothar [A43]
Correspondence Germany, 01.01.1954
1.d4 c5 2.d5 d6 3.Nc3 g6 4.e4 Bg7 5.Nf3 Nf6 6.Be2 Na6 7.0–0 Nc7 8.Nd2 a6 9.a4 Bd7 10.Nc4 b5 11.Nb6 b4 12.Nxa8 Qxa8 13.Nb1 Nxe4 14.Bf3 f5 15.Nd2 Ng5 16.Re1 Nxf3+ 17.Nxf3 Nxd5 18.Nd2 0–0 19.Nc4 Bc6 20.h4 e5 21.h5 Rf6 22.Na5 Bd7 23.Nc4 gxh5 24.Qxh5 Rg6 25.Qf3 e4 26.Qd1 f4 27.a5 Bg4 0–1

The offer of the Exchange is a stratagem that is grounded in chess dynamics. Black gives up material counting on recovering some, or all, of the material offered in the shape of extra pawns. More than balancing material, his goal was to create an environment where his Bishops can operate effectively. In the end, the Black center pawns dominate the board, and the light squared Black Bishop adds devastating fire power to the K-side attack by Black.

8.h3 Ne8 9.Be3 Ne5 10.Nxe5 Bxe5 11.Qd2 f5 12.Bh6 Ng7 13.exf5 Bxf5

Play since 7..., Nbd7; has been logical and fairly obvious. This seems to be the position that tells the tale about putting a Knight on d7. A first glance the Black Bishops look very active. A second of thought and the question comes up about maintaining them in the center. It is not so easy. The pinned Knight on g7 obstructs the natural retreat of the Be5 to g7 or h8, and the pawn on e7 contributes to the unease of this Bishop. The Bf5 can be hit quickly by g2-g4.

Putting the situations of the two Bishops together and a real threat emerges; if the dark squared Bishop is denied d4, the pawn advances f2-f5 and f5-g5 may win material, maybe. There are a lot of caveats to be considered when studying the position. Is there some sudden counter-stroke for Black? How to time an attack on Bf5? What is the best way to deny d4 to the Bishop? The options are many and the order of moves important.

This early into the game and Dean had used nearly 60 of the 90 minutes allotted. Peter was not too far behind him on time usage. With considerable tension in the position that did not appear to be on the verge of resolving suddenly, the game was headed towards a time scrabble in the ending.

White could play directly 14 Nd1, intending 15 c3, bringing life to the threat outlined above. In that case Back counters with; 14..., Bd7 15 c3 Rf7 16 g4 Qa5 17 g5 Nf5; and Black is better, not winning but more than equal.

The situation described relates directly to the Howard - Henner game. I like to look at what the Grandmasters do in openings when looking at local games. Doing so can lead to understanding why a GM structures his game in another fashion, and sometimes it enlighten me about what the local talent may be missing. First here is one from the 50s where Simagin, the not so well known GM, fends off the World Champion Botvinnik.

(39799) Botvinnik, Mikhail - Simagin, Vladimir [B08]
USSR 22nd Championship Moscow, 1955
1.Nf3 d6 2.d4 Nf6 3.Nc3 g6 4.e4 Bg7 5.Be2 0–0 6.0–0 Nbd7 7.e5 Ne8 8.Bf4 Nb6 9.h3 c6 10.Qc1 f6 11.exd6 exd6 12.Bd3 d5 13.Ne2 Nd6 14.Ng3 Be6 15.a4 a5 16.b3 Qd7 17.Qd2 Rfe8 18.Rfe1 Nf7 19.h4 Nc8 20.c4 dxc4 21.bxc4 Ncd6 22.Qc2 Bh6 23.Bxg6 Bxf4 24.Nh5 Kh8 25.Nxf4 Bxc4 26.Bd3 Bxd3 27.Qxd3 Qg4 28.g3 Rad8 29.Rad1 Rg8 30.Kf1 Rde8 31.Rxe8 Rxe8 32.Re1 Rxe1+ 33.Nxe1 Qf5 34.Nc2 Qxd3+ 35.Nxd3 b5 36.Nc5 Nc4 37.Ke2 Nfd6 38.Ne3 Nb6 39.Kd3 bxa4 40.Kc2 Kg8 41.Ne6 Ne4 42.Nf5 Kf7 43.Nd8+ Kg6 44.g4 Nxf2 45.Ne7+ Kg7 46.Nf5+ Kf8 47.g5 fxg5 48.hxg5 Nc4 49.Nxc6 a3 50.Kb1 Ne4 51.Ka1 Nc3 52.d5 a4 53.Nfd4 Nd2 54.Na5 Ke8 55.Nc2 a2 56.Nc6 Nde4 57.Ne5 Nxg5 58.d6 Ne6 59.Kb2 Ne4 60.Nb4 Nxd6 61.Nd5 Ne4 62.Kxa2 Kf8 63.Ka3 N6c5 64.Nf4 Ke7 65.Ng4 Nc3 66.Kb4 N5e4 67.Nh5 Ke6 68.Ne3 Ke5 69.Ng2 Kf5 70.Ne3+ Ke5 71.Ng7 Kd4 72.Nc2+ Kd3 73.Ne1+ Kd2 74.Nf3+ Kc2 75.Ne1+ Kb1 76.Nd3 Ka2 77.Nc1+ Kb2 78.Nd3+ Kc2 79.Ne1+ Kd2 80.Nf3+ Ke3 81.Ne5 Kf4 82.Nd7 Kg5 83.Nf8 h6 84.Nge6+ Kf5 85.Ng7+ Kf6 86.Nh5+ Kf7 87.Nd7 Kg6 88.Nf4+ Kf5 89.Ng2 h5 90.Nh4+ Kg5 91.Nf3+ Kf4 92.Nh4 Kg4 93.Ng6 Nd5+ 94.Kxa4 Nf4 95.Nde5+ Kf5 96.Nxf4 Kxf4 97.Ng6+ Kg5 98.Ne5 Nd2 99.Kb4 Kf5 100.Kc3 Ne4+ 101.Kd4 Ng5 102.Nd3 Kg4 103.Ne5+ Kf5 104.Nd3 Kg4 105.Ne5+ Kg3 106.Ng6 Ne6+ 107.Ke3 Nf8 108.Nxf8 h4 109.Ne6 h3 110.Ng5 h2 111.Ne4+ Kg2 112.Nf2 Kf1 113.Kf3 Kg1 114.Kg3 Kf1 115.Kxh2 ½–½

By the 35th move the Botvinnik game evolved into an ending with two Knights on either side, and it demonstrates just how hard it is to win with Knights when equals face each other.

The next game is shorter, it would be hard to be longer than the previous game. Once more we see White choosing to push e4-e5 as opposed to the d4-d5 advance. This time Black achieves much in the center and the better game early on. It is a good argument against e4-e5.

(55134) Littlewood, John Eric - Robatsch, Karl [B08]
Hastings (6), 1961
1.e4 g6 2.d4 Bg7 3.Nc3 d6 4.Nf3 Nf6 5.Be2 0–0 6.0–0 Nbd7 7.e5 Ne8 8.Re1 c5 9.e6 fxe6 10.Ng5 Nc7 11.Be3 cxd4 12.Bxd4 e5 13.Be3 Nf6 14.Bc4+ d5 15.Bb3 Qd6 16.Qd2 Kh8 17.f4 Ng4 18.Nxd5 Nxe3 19.Rxe3 exf4 20.Rxe7 Nxd5 21.Rxg7 Kxg7 22.Bxd5 Qc5+ 23.Kh1 Rf5 24.Ne6+ Bxe6 25.Bxe6 Re5 26.Bg4 Rae8 27.h3 Qe3 28.Rd1 Qg3 29.Qc3 Qxc3 30.bxc3 Re1+ 31.Kh2 Rxd1 32.Bxd1 Re3 0–1

In the next game a great favorite of mine, Bronstein, shows some ideas for Black. One of the key arguments in the Schmid Benoni is about how weak is the Black pawn on e7. The incomparable David demonstrates, while it may be weak, Black can play dynamically defending e7 and creating his own threats.

(75349) Sakharov, Yuri N - Bronstein, David I [B08]
USSR Team Championship, Riga, 1967
1.e4 g6 2.d4 Bg7 3.Nf3 d6 4.Be2 Nf6 5.Nc3 0–0 6.0–0 Bg4 7.Be3 Nc6 8.d5 Bxf3 9.Bxf3 Ne5 10.Be2 c6 11.f4 Ned7 12.Bd4 Qa5 13.Kh1 cxd5 14.exd5 Nb6 15.Bf3 Rac8 16.a3 Nc4 17.b4 Qd8 18.Re1 a6 19.Qd3 Qd7 20.h3 Rc7 21.Ne2 Qf5 22.Rad1 Qxd3 23.Rxd3 Nd7 24.Bxg7 Kxg7 25.Nd4 Ndb6 26.g4 Rfc8 27.g5 Nb2 28.Rd2 Kf8 29.Rb1 N2a4 30.Ra1 Nc3 31.Bg4 Re8 32.f5 Ne4 33.Rg2 Nxd5 34.Bf3 Ndc3 35.Rf1 Kg7 36.Kh2 Rc4 37.f6+ exf6 38.gxf6+ Nxf6 39.Nf5+ Kf8 40.Nxd6 0–1

The next encounter is closer to today’s game. If you wondered what might happens if White captures on c5, this game offers one answer.

(1165581) Roiz, Michael (2605) - Narciso Dublan, Marc (2539) [B08]
8th EU Championship, Dresden (7), 09.04.2007
1.Nf3 g6 2.e4 Bg7 3.d4 d6 4.Be2 Nf6 5.Nc3 0–0 6.0–0 c5 7.dxc5 dxc5 8.h3 Nc6 9.Be3 Qb6 10.Qc1 Nd4 11.e5 Nd7 12.Bd1 Nxe5 13.Nxe5 Bxe5 14.Na4 Qb5 15.Nxc5 Qxc5 16.c3 Qc4 17.cxd4 Bh2+ 18.Kxh2 Qxf1 19.Qc7 Qa6 20.Qxe7 Qe6 21.Qc7 Qc6 22.Qf4 Rd8 23.Bf3 Qd6 24.Rd1 a5 25.d5 Bf5 26.Qxd6 Rxd6 27.Bc5 Rd7 28.d6 Rc8 29.Bb6 Rc2 30.Bxa5 Rxb2 31.Bc7 Rxa2 32.Bxb7 Rc2 33.Bc8 Rdxc7 34.dxc7 Rxc7 35.Bxf5 gxf5 36.Rd5 f4 37.Rd4 f3 38.g4 Rc5 39.h4 Kg7 40.Kg3 Rc3 41.Rf4 h6 42.Rxf3 Rc1 43.Rf5 Rg1+ 44.Kf4 Rh1 45.h5 Rf1 46.f3 Ra1 47.Re5 Kf6 48.Rf5+ Kg7 49.Rb5 Ra4+ 50.Kf5 Ra3 51.f4 Rh3 52.Rd5 Rh1 53.Rd3 Rh4 54.Re3 Rh1 55.Re2 Rh4 56.Re1 Rh2 57.Ke4 Rh4 58.Rg1 Rh3 59.Ke5 Rh4 60.f5 f6+ 61.Kf4 Rh2 62.Ra1 Re2 63.Ra7+ Kg8 64.Ra3 Kf7 65.Re3 Ra2 66.Re4 Ra7 67.Ke3 Rd7 68.Rc4 Kg7 69.Ke4 Kf7 70.Rd4 Ra7 71.Kd5 Ra1 72.Kc6 Rc1+ 73.Kd7 Ra1 74.Kc8 Ra8+ 75.Kb7 Ra1 76.Rd7+ Kg8 77.Kc7 Ra4 78.Kd6 Rxg4 79.Ke6 Rg5 80.Kxf6 Rxh5 81.Ke6 Rh1 82.Rd8+ Kh7 83.f6 Re1+ 84.Kf7 Ra1 85.Kf8 Rf1 86.f7 Kg6 87.Rd6+ Kg5 88.Kg7 h5 89.Rg6+ Kh4 90.Rf6 Rxf6 91.Kxf6 1–0

Black does not really want to get a pawn on e5 where it obstructs the Bg7. Sometimes White can decoy a Black pawn to e5 as in this game. He then plays to keep it there blocking the action of the important Bishop.
.
(592523) Hansen, Lars Bo (2562) - Pachow, Joerg (2297) [A43]
Bundesliga, Germany (2.7), 15.10.2000
1.Nf3 d6 2.d4 Nd7 3.e4 c5 4.d5 Ngf6 5.Nc3 g6 6.Be2 Bg7 7.0–0 0–0 8.Bf4 Qa5 9.Nd2 Ne5 10.h3 e6 11.Bxe5 dxe5 12.Nc4 Qd8 13.Ne3 exd5 14.Nexd5 Nxd5 15.Nxd5 Be6 16.Bc4 Qh4 17.Qe2 Rad8 18.Rad1 Kh8 19.c3 f5 20.Nc7 Bc8 21.Nb5 f4 22.Rxd8 Qxd8 23.Rd1 Qe7 24.Rd3 a6 25.Nd6 b5 26.Nxc8 Rxc8 27.Qg4 Rd8 28.Qe6 Bf6 29.Rxd8+ Qxd8 30.Bd5 b4 31.Qxa6 bxc3 32.bxc3 Kg7 33.Qb5 Qc7 34.a4 c4 35.a5 Be7 36.a6 Bc5 37.Qe8 Qb6 38.Qxe5+ Qf6 1–0

Rolling through the games above we see some of ideas in today’s game pop up in various positions, some similar and some quite different from the Howard - Henner contest. Now to return to the Howard - Henner game:

14.g4 Bd7 15.Ne4 e6

Hereabouts I thought Mr. Howard intended to play against the Be5, and Mr. Henner was counting on this action in the center to oppose that plan. With e7 now open, some of the danger surrounding Black’s dark squared Bishop lifts, or so Henner thought.

I am sure Peter looked at 15..., Bxb2; 16 Rab1 Bd5; and decided White gets too much activity for the pawn on offer. Rybka says the decision is correct.

16.dxe6,..

At this point in the game, Dean had used up much of his allotted time. He had only 16 minutes remaining on his clock. That is not much time for the rest of a game that could go another 20 or more moves. Peter Henner had a more reasonable 38 minutes on the clock.

With the shadows of time pressure beginning to creep up on him, Howard had to make a critical decision here; raise the tension, or release it in the center. I thought 16 c3, was the best choice. Rybka sees the text and 16 c3, as equally good alternatives listing them first and second on its array of choices. After 16 c3, a logical line is; 16..., exd5 17 Qxd5+ Be6 18 Qd2 Qb6 19 f4, when Black has to choose between; 19..., c4+; and 19..., d5. Either way my electronic friend says White is better.

16..., Bxe6 17.Bg5?!,..

When this move was played I thought it a pretty good choice. It is supposed to renew the threat to the Be5, except it really does no such thing.

17..., Qc7

Black is not worried about a threat that isn’t. If 18 c3 d5!; works out well for Black.

18.Be3,..

Maybe this is what White had in mind all along. The idea seems to be creating complications in the center if 18..., Bxb2 19 Rad1 Be5 20 f4 d5 21 Ng5, reaching a position where both sides have to calculate many lines. Alternatively, Black may vary with 18..., Qc6 19 Ng5 d5 20 f4 Bxb2 21 Rab1 Bf6 22 Bb5 Qc8 23 Nxe6, and White will recover the pawn, again with tough calculations for both sides of the board.

18..., Qc6 19.Ng5 Bxb2 20.Rab1 Bd4 21.Bxd4 cxd4 22.Qxd4?,..

At this point in the game, Mr. Howard had slipped below 10 minutes remaining on his clock. Things are far from clear in the game. A moment’s study reveals if Black has to careful of the White capturing on e6 then bringing the White Bishop to c4 pinning whatever recaptures on e6. Further looking finds Black has a way out; taking the loose pawn on a2.

22...,. Bxa2 23.Rb2 Ne6 24.Nxe6 Bxe6

A neat piece of work defusing a stratagem that may have motivated Howard to go this way. Black has the extra pawn, and it is passed but not yet on the move. It is enough to give Black some advantage according to Deep Rybka, about -.47 in computer speak.

25.f4,..

The other choice is; 25 Rd1, scheming to put pressure on the Black pawns by getting all of the White pieces working while Black has yet do so. The tempo or two White has is not quite full compensation for the pawn, however, the complications Dean introduced did have an effect. At this point the time imbalance was much reduced; Howard had 6:18 remaining and Henner come down to 8:27. As Mr. Henner’s time ran down, I began to value Mr. Howard’s chances higher regardless of the material imbalance. Dean plays very well in time scrambles. He has rescued some very difficult positions when time has been tight.

25..., b6 26.f5?!,..

A move that should lose. If there was a bit more time on the clocks, Black would doubtless find the winning path. That was not the situation. Both players were now under 5 minutes on the clock. In this blitz circumstance, the move has merit; it is hard to be certain you have seen all the tricks when there is no time to double check calculations.

26..., gxf5 27.gxf5 Qd5 28.Qg4+?,..

In the flurry of time pressure, even so good a blitz player as Dean Howard can err. This move gives Black a real chance for victory. The unpleasant position of the Queen and King means White will have few choices on the next move because of the threat of .., Rg8. Fewer choices for White allows Black to look deeper into the position because he can predict what White will do. Black is now clearly better.

28..., Kh8 29.Bf3 Qc5+ 30.Kh2 Rg8!?

Not bad, but 30..., Rxf5; is certainly a better choice; and 31 Qe4 Re8; offers little solace for White. The game is closing on some kind of liquidation where some or most of the heavy pieces get traded. It is a typical occurrence in time pressure. If you can’t find something to do, trade pieces; it is a easy calculation, and worry about what happens later. After the text Black remains with the better game.

31.Qf4 Raf8?!

Another not quite the best move by Black reduces his advantage some more. Probably best here is; 31..., Bc4; then 32 Bxa8 Bxf1 33 Qxf1 Qe5+ 34 Kh1 Qxb2; when Black has the Exchange and an extra pawn. Offsetting the big material plus is the apparently dangerous advanced f-pawn for White. With a bit more time I am sure Mr. Henner would have seen that 35 Bd5, is met by 35..., Rg5! 36 f6 Qe5; and Black will get a heavy piece behind the f-pawn nullifying much of the danger. Howard was under 2 minutes now and Henner just a tad better at 2:24. There is no time to think or calculate, all is reaction time, alertness and avoiding putting or leaving pieces en prise.

32.Bg4 Bc4 33.Rd1 Qe5 34.Qxe5+ dxe5 35.Rd7 Rg7 36.Rxg7 Kxg7 1–0

Time had dwindled more for both sides. Black still has the advantage, enough to win if our modern infatuation with sudden-death time controls were not governing play. But, the rules are what they are and the same for all. From very fast play, the game now became a blur of clock slapping and piece moving, faster than my old eyes could follow or fingers record. At the end, Mr. Howard had 27 seconds on his clock and an overwhelming advantage, and Mr. Henner resigned the game and match.

From the beginning of the Preliminaries, Mr. Henner seemed destined to make the Finals. He won or drew without ever getting into danger. It was not so for Mr. Howard. His qualification to the Finals had some doubts about it down to the late rounds of play.

The Final match had both games following a similar path; Henner obtained an advantage, time became short for both sides, and Howard navigated the rocks and shoals of an ending played at blitz speed better than his opponent. Testing Dean Howard at speed chess seems nearly as bad an idea as testing Philip Sells of Schenectady in time pressure. They both handle it very well indeed.

I think fighting spirit epitomized Mr. Howard’s play this year. He made a determined effort to win every game. Upset losses or draws did nothing more than spur him on to the next contest. When he arrived at a less than good position, Dean did not take council in fear, rather he went for the best try that could be found trusting to his own alertness to see him through. The approach certainly worked in the Final match. Kudos to Mr. Howard on a second AACC tile in a row!

More soon.

A Little Bit of News and a Game

The Wednesday session at the AACC saw nice turnout. Better than a half dozen players played skittles while Dean Howard and Peter Henner contended for the Club Championship title. After reaching the late middle game a pawn down and in danger of losing the game, Dean Howard once more demonstrated his prowess at speed chess. He found a tactical resource in the time scramble and won the game with just over 20 seconds on his clock. This victory won the Albany Area Chess Club title for Mr. Howard for the second year in a row. It was a decisive victory in the match over Mr. Henner 2 - 0. The game will be the subject of my next post.

This result ends this year’s round of local club title events. Jonathan Feinberg took the Saratoga title, John Phillips won going away in Schenectady, and Dean Howard is the Albany Champion. Kudos and congratulations to these very worthy Champions!

From last week: In the Consolation Tourney at the SCC Dilip Aaron started off with a series wins. As the highest rated entrant this was not surprising. His loss to Isaiah Glessner a round or two ago changed a runaway victory into a possibly closer contest. I anticipated this game with Caravaty being a test for Dilip. Today’s game with its errors indicates both players saw it as critical contest also.

(384) Aaron, Dilip - Caravaty, Chris [C02]
SCC Consolation Tourney Schenectady, NY, 08.03.2012

1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 c5 4.c3 Nc6 5.Nf3 Bd7 6.Bb5?,..

Too casual! This is a fundamental oversight. If Black is attentive, he will find 6..., Nxe5!; winning a vital center pawn. White then faces a long and thankless task trying to create counter-play when there few opportunities available.

6..., Qb6?

And, Black returns the favor. Puzzling, it is.

7.Bxc6 bxc6

In the typical French Black usually thinks carefully about weakening his pawn formation. This game has become an unusual French. Here the open b-file and having two pawns on the c-file with which to challenge the d4-pawn is no bad thing.

Finding master games for this way of treating the French Advanced variation is difficult. Here is the only one that turned up in the Rybka database:

(761213) Urban, Andrey (2347) - Boricsev, Oleg (2330) [C02]
Alushta, 05.2003
1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 c5 4.c3 Nc6 5.Bb5 e6 6.Nf3 Bd7 7.Be2 cxd4 8.cxd4 Nge7 9.Na3 Nf5 10.Nc2 Nb4 11.0–0 Nxc2 12.Qxc2 Qb6 13.Qd1 Bb5 14.Bxb5+ Qxb5 15.b3 Rc8 16.g4 Ne7 17.Ba3 h5 18.h3 Ng6 19.Bxf8 Kxf8 20.Qd2 hxg4 21.hxg4 Ke7 22.Rfc1 Qb6 23.Kg2 Kd7 24.Kg3 f6 25.Rxc8 Rxc8 26.Rc1 Rh8 27.Qc2 Ne7 28.Qd3 f5 29.g5 Nc6 30.Rc5 a6 31.Rc1 Qd8 32.Qc3 Qf8 33.Kg2 f4 34.Rh1 Rxh1 35.Kxh1 Qf5 36.Kg2 Ne7 37.b4 Qe4 38.Kh3 Qe2 39.Kg2 Nf5 40.Kg1 Qxa2 41.Qc5 Qb1+ 42.Kh2 Qe4 43.Qb6 Qxf3 44.Qxb7+ Ke8 45.Qc8+ Kf7 46.Qd7+ Kg6 47.Qxe6+ Kxg5 48.Qxa6 Qxf2+ 49.Kh3 Qg3# 0–1

Every once in a while a place name for a tournament is obscure. This is once such, so I investigated. Alusta is a port on the Black Sea coast on the Crimea Peninsula not far from the city of Sevastopol, the sight of the Charge of the Light Brigade. This is just a note for the geographically curious out there.

From a chess point of view, in the cited game notice the retreat on move 7 by White to avoid the potential loss of a pawn. The move order used by Dilip would have been superior to Urban’s if he had just stopped the Bishop on e2 instead of going all the way to b5.

8.0–0 Ne7 9.dxc5 Qxc5

The game now has taken on an interesting form. White has his usual K-side space advantage in the French. Absent the light squared Bishop, creating a serious attack is not easy for White. On the other side of the issue; Black can carry out the standard idea of using his c-pawn against d4. As is frequent in the French, the position says Black plays on the Q-side and White on the K-side. Finding attacking moves for White on the K-side defeated both me and Rybka. Given there is no good way forward on the K-side for White, one has to conclude Black has the better game.

10.b4 Qb5 11.Be3 Nf5 12.Nd4 Nxe3?!

As natural as this move appears to be, it is not quite right. Better 12..., Nxd4 13 Qxd4 a5 14 a3 Be7; giving Black frontal pressure on the White Q-side pawns and equality. The game move heralds a plan of diagonal pressure on the White King by the Black Bishop pair and the Queen. This is an interesting concept with a flaw; the transactions used to implement the idea allow White to attack just where the position says he must; the K-side.

13.fxe3 Qb7 14.Qf3 Bc8

Black has been forced to undeveloped this Bishop. That is not a good sign for his plan. White now has the f-file on which to operate against the Black King. In the likely event of the short castling by Black, the f-file is also a pathway for a White Rook to the g-file increasing pressure on the Black King’s abode. The time used to contemplate the position and his body language suggested to me Mr. Caravaty had not fully appreciated the dangers coming after the capture on e3.

15.Nd2?!,..

More prudent is 15 Nb3. It effectively prevents the c5 break because the threat to f7 is strong. The Black Queen has a full time job guarding f7 and she will not be able to work with the Bf8 to enforce .., c6-c5. When you fully understand that piece of information, the problems for Black become clearer. The Bf8 lacks squares on the a3-f8 diagonal. Black will have to make a couple more moves before he castles. His Queen, Bc8 and the Ra8 have trouble untangling. In sum; while he has just enough resources to prevent and immediate breakthrough, Black is not well placed for routine development.

White has his own difficulties, but he does seem to have some initiative. For White; this small initiative does not yield immediate opportunities. To get the most from his position White has to play very well mixing patience with guile. The most likely path for Black is giving up the idea of castling at all and developing the K-side with 15..., g6. Then play might continue; 16 Qf6 Rg8 17 Qf4 Qc7 18 N1d2 g5 19 Qd4 Bg7 20 Nf3 Bh8 21 Qg4 Bxe5 22 Qh5 Rg7 23 Nbd4, and for the pawn lost White has made a position full of tension. For example; if Black plays the natural 23..., c5?; White obtains the advantage with 24 Nb5 Qb8 25 bxc5, and the complex tactical operations that ensue all favor White. Playing through the lines unfolds a series of positions that are more like studies and problems than normal chess positions; the oddly broken White center pawns, the un-castled Black King, etc. After 15 Nb3, both sides would have a tough time finding the best moves.

15..., c5 16.bxc5?!,..

This move allows Black to get the position he wants with diagonal pressure on the White King’s home. Better I think is 16 Nc2, continuing to deny the Black dark squared Bishop access to the a3-f8 diagonal. Note Black really can’t capture on b4 with the pawn and then the Bishop because of the weakness of f7.

16..., Bxc5 17.N4b3 Bb6 18.c4 dxc4?

Reasonable is 18..., 0-0; ending much of the danger to f7 and any opening of the center has to favor the Bishop pair. After the text, White has chances to get his Knights to active posts.

19.Nxc4 0–0 20.Qf4 Qc6 21.Rf3 Bb7 22.Nd6 Qd7 23.Rg3 f6?

Strategically the Bishops look dangerous. Tactically the White heavy pieces and Knight on the sixth are dangerous. The text must result from not fully appreciating how well Knights and Queens work together. The move converts a tension filled but even game into a lost cause immediately.

24.exf6 Rxf6?

Even the somewhat better move, 24..., Rad8; is no more than a marginal improvement. At the end of any transaction where Black captures the Nd6, the White Rook on g3 captures on g7 with check and then takes off the Bb7.

25.Qxf6 Bxe3+ 26.Kh1 Rf8 27.Qc3,..

While watching the game I thought this an error. My preferred line was 27 Rxg7+ Qxg7 28 Qxg7+ Kxg7 29 Nxb7, leaving White up a piece for a pawn. Since the Bishop pair is gone in this line of play my judgment was it is the simplest way to take the point. Actually the game move is superior properly followed up.

27..., Bf4

This is the resource upon which Black is counting. There is nothing much better.

28.Rd3?,..

White in his turn fails to find the correct rejoinder. The right move is; 28 Nc5!, and then 28..., Qc7 29 Ncxb7 the Black Queen moves and White saves the Rg3 staying a full Rook ahead. After the game move Black alertly sees there is a way out of the pin on the d-file. Not only does he keep the material deficit to the minimum of an Exchange for a pawn, the pair of Bishops combined with the great activity of the Black Queen and Rook working together give better than decent winning chances. That is a quite a swing in fortunes in a single move.

28..., Bxd6 29.Rad1 Qf7

Mate on the back rank and threats to mate at g2 restrict White’s choices over the next few moves.

30.Qe1 Qg6 31.Qg1 Bc7 32.R3d2 Bb6 33.Qe1 Ba6 34.Qe5 Qf7 35.Qe1 Qg6 36.Qh4 Qf5 37.h3!?,..

White, disappointed in the outcome of the complications, still wants to win. Possibly safer is 37 Qe1, but such passive defense allows Black to continue improving placement of the Bishops and who knows where that would end. The text ends the mate threat. Black now has to find the best way forward. That seems to be 37..., Bc7; renewing the mate threat. Then 38 Qe1 Bb7; with a very tense situation on the board and any outcome possible.

37..., Qf1+?

Impatience I guess, or a miscalculation.

38.Rxf1 Rxf1+ 39.Kh2 Bc7+ 40.g3 Bb7

Black may have thought this was a winner when he sacrificed the Queen. Chris made that decision in time trouble. He was down to just six minutes to finish the game. It took him a minute to find the “sac” and without a reserve of time he did not check the details as thoroughly as such a decision required. Again, 40..., Bc7; is much better. The mate threat would have made White pull in his horns.

41.Rd8+,..

Either this move, or 41 Rg2, ends any realistic chance for Black to hold the game.

41..., Kf7 42.Qh5+ Ke7 43.Qe8+ Kf6 44.Qf8+ 1-0

As active as two Bishops can be, holding out against a Queen and Knight is not possible unless circumstances are exceptional. Here for example; 44..., Kg6 45 Qxf1 Bxd8 46 Qd3+, ends the life of the Bishop pair. There is nothing exceptional in the position, and Black correctly resigns.

Both sides made forthright efforts to win, and both failed in their calculations and assessments at various points in the game. That is not to condemn their efforts. Lessons are there to be learned particularly about digging to understand the position. Mr. Caravaty spent a great deal of time on his moves and got to a time problem. My observation is he calculated a lot but did not search for the truth of the position enough. Mr. Aaron played quickly, a trait I admire, but did not calculate widely enough. He’d find a move that looked OK, calculate some to avoid immediate loss and play the move. The game ended as the pre-game ratings predicted, and these two improving players did well to come up with interesting and challenging ideas. Improvement for both guys lies in greater attention to details of the each position as it comes up.

More soon.

An Update on Last Week's Activity

At the Albany Area Chess Club last Wednesday evening there was a nice turnout although nothing more than casual games were on the docket. The Under 1800 title was decided last week during an evening of bad whether. Chris Cacaraty winning from Cory Northrup. The last game of the Championship title match between Dean Howard and Peter Henner is to be played next Wednesday. Most of the usual suspects showed up and a great many skittles games took place.

Thursday evening at the Schenectady Chess Club saw the continuation of the Consolation Tourney and some make-up games from the Finals of the Schenectady championship.

In the Consolation event; Dilip Aaron defeated Chris Caravaty, a potential challenger to Dilip’s run for first place in an up and down game. Mike Stanley lost to Matt Clough in what was looked to be an interesting contest.

In the Finals; Richard Chu lost to Zack Calderon on a blunder just when it seemed Richard was about to obtain an advantage. The game completed Mr. Chu’s schedule. He scored 2-4. The win raised Mr. Calderon’s score to 1 ½ points with one game to play. Alan Le Cours stood off a spirited assault by Carlos Varela to take the full point. The game completed Mr. Varela’s schedule and gave him a final score of 1-4. The closeness of this contest makes it today’s game. Herman Calderon won a tough fight from David Connors to complete the list of results.

Varela, Carlos - Le Cours, Alan [A48]
SCC Finals 2012 Schenectady, NY, 08.03.2012

1.d4 Nf6 2.Nf3 g6 3.Bf4 Bg7 4.e3 d6 5.h3 0–0 6.Bd3 c5

Until this move to played the game was in the realm of known theory. There are not tons of games between elite players in the databases. From the few found it seems that Black does pretty well if he undertakes a plan focused on striking back with .., e7-e5. Here are a couple of examples:

(58671) Morosova, Tatiana V - Ergle, A [A48]
Ussr Team Championship, Leningrad, 1962
1.d4 Nf6 2.Nf3 g6 3.Bf4 Bg7 4.e3 d6 5.h3 0–0 6.Bd3 Nc6 7.c3 Re8 8.Bc4 Na5 9.Bb5 Bd7 10.Bxd7 Qxd7 11.0–0 Nc4 12.Qb3 Nb6 13.Na3 Nh5 14.Bh2 e5 15.dxe5 dxe5 16.Rad1 Qe7 17.Rd2 Rad8 18.Rfd1 Rxd2 19.Rxd2 c6 20.Nc4 Nxc4 21.Qxc4 e4 22.Nd4 Be5 23.Bxe5 Qxe5 24.Nb3 Nf6 25.Qc5 Qxc5 26.Nxc5 b6 27.Nd7 Kg7 28.Rd6 Nxd7 29.Rxd7 a5 30.Kf1 Kf6 31.Rb7 b5 32.b3 Rd8 33.Ra7 Rd3 34.c4 bxc4 35.bxc4 Ra3 36.Ra6 Rxa2 37.Rxc6+ Ke7 38.Rc7+ Ke8 39.Ra7 Rc2 40.Rxa5 Rxc4 41.Kg1 Ke7 42.Kh2 Kf6 43.Kg3 h6 44.Ra6+ Kg7 45.h4 h5 46.Kf4 Rb4 47.Ra2 Rc4 48.Rd2 Rb4 49.Ke5 Ra4 ½–½

(745084) Galinsky, Timofey (2375) - Shishkin, Vadim (2404) [A48]
Kiev Championship (4), 20.01.2003
1.d4 Nf6 2.Nf3 g6 3.Bf4 Bg7 4.h3 0–0 5.e3 d6 6.Bd3 b6 7.0–0 Bb7 8.a4 Nbd7 9.Qe2 e5 10.dxe5 dxe5 11.Nxe5 Nxe5 12.Bxe5 Bxg2 13.Kxg2 Qd5+ 14.Qf3 Qxe5 15.c3 Rad8 16.Rd1 Qg5+ 17.Qg3 Qd5+ 18.Qf3 Qb3 19.Qe2 Qe6 20.Nd2 Rd5 21.Nf3 Rh5 22.Rh1 Nd7 23.Nd4 Qd5+ 24.Qf3 c5 25.Nc6 Rg5+ 0–1

I can find no particular reason that makes the push to e5 better than the c5 break. Deep Rybka says Black is doing fine after 6..., c5.

7.c3 Qb6

I wondered during the game if this move was correct. My friend Rybka says yes it is.

8.Qc2 Nc6 9.Nbd2 cxd4 10.exd4 Be6 11.0–0 Rac8 12.a3 Nd5 13.Nc4 Qc7!?

The computer agreed with these moves as being best until this last one. Here it thought 13..., Qd8; is slightly better, and the game is about equal. Reaching equality by move 13 is a success for Black. Nevertheless, White has more space at the moment. That is not an unusual outcome in the KID type positions. Notwithstanding the computer calculation of equality, White should have an easier time playing the position having extra space with which to work. Black has to find a workable scheme to balance the White space advantage.

14.Bg5!?,..

Retreating the Bishop to g3 gives a dead even game. Black would then have time to try 14..., b4!?; looking for his own space on the Q-side. Play could continue; 15 Ne3 b4 16 c4 Nxe3 17 fxe3 bxa3 18 bxa3 Na5 19 c5 Qb6; with plenty of pressure for the pawn invested. All this supposes both sides are playing with only logical technical chess in mind. What must be added to our understanding of decisions made is the sporting aspect of the contest. Alan likely sees this a must win game for rating reasons at least. Giving up a draw to an opponent 300 rating points behind him will negate what has been decent performances in the Saratoga and SCC title events so far. For Carlos, with nothing intrinsically wrong with his position, there is an opportunity to upset a highly rated player and cap qualification to the Finals with a notable victory. Perhaps these thoughts inspired Mr. Varela to take some risks on the K-side.

14..., h6 15.Bh4!?,..

The question put to the Bg5 is answered again with provocation. Safe and sane is 15 Bd2, aiming to complete development and to maneuver for a bit.

15..., Nf4

Black is beginning to see some compensation for the space he gave up. The Bd3 can be taken off acquiring the long term plus of the Bishop pair for Black, although rushing to do that may not be the best choice. A possible line of play is; 16 Ne3 Qb6 17 Bg3 Nxd3 18 Qxd3 Na5; when Black is well placed to control the light squares on the Q-side. At that point, an advantage for Black is beginning to emerge. It may well be this, and similar other possibilities motivated Varela to stake everything on an attack on the Black King.

16.Ne3 Nxd3 17.Qxd3 d5 18.Rfe1 a6 19.Re2 Qd7!?

If Black was worried about an eventual Bh4-g3, he could have played 19..., f5; to prevent it. A subject that the Correspondence World Champion Hans Berliner, and before him Weaver Adams, wrote about often is board control. Here 19..., f5; would have given Black near absolute control of e4, an important square in the White camp. Both Weaver and Berliner said if your play as White yields e4 or d4, then something is wrong. They held White needs to have some say over those two squares above all others, otherwise there was an error in the opening. I don’t know if they are right. In this case however, 19..., f5; does present obstacles to the attack White gins up shortly.

20.Rae1 Rcd8 21.Ng4 g5?

This is an interesting error at a critical moment. It seems the natural 21..., Bf5; will give Black good play and maybe even an advantage after; 22 Qe3 g5 23 Bg3 Bxg4 24 hxg4 Qxg4. Black has a pawn, and after the further continuation; 25 Ne5 Bxe5 26 Bxe5 Rd7 27 Qd3 e6; White has some, but not full compensation for it. The game move presents White with the opportunity to go for victory with a sacrificial attack. It is a similar situation to his game against Philip Sells two weeks ago. There Mr. Varela launched a sacrificial assault because it was the best practical chance though not completely sound. This time the ambitious aggression is both the best practical chance and sound.

22.Rxe6!,..

This move and 22 Nxh6+, lead to similar play favoring White. This is an inspired idea. The sacrifice effectively splits the Black forces in two with the Rd8 shut out of quick participation in the defense of the Black King.

22..., fxe6 23.Bxg5?,..

And, this move lets Black off the hook. Continuing with; 23 Nxh6+ Bxh6 24 Nxg5 Rf5 (Just about the only move that offers hope of survival.), 25 Nxe6 Rdf8 26 g4 R5f7 27 Qg6+ Rg7 28 Nxf8 Kxf8 29 Qxh6, and White is winning. This is a fairly long line to calculate. It is however more or less forced making the calculation task somewhat easier. Mr. Varela had about 30 minutes remaining on his clock. Perhaps the recollection of how time trouble in the game with Sells caused Carlos to make a hasty decision here.

23..., Rxf3!

A neat counter-sacrifice reducing the attacking forces is the best move for Black now.

24.Nxh6+ Bxh6 25.Qg6+?,..

Mr. Varela played the last few moves reasonably quickly leading me to believe the game was going as he planned. This move is an error however. Better 25 Qxf3, preserving his pawn structure. With 25..., Bxg5 26 Qg4, White will have two pawns for the piece and chances to hold the game because of Black’s less than inspiring pawn formation. I believe White decided when capturing on e6 with the Rook to go for a win at all costs. He was determined to carry the attack forward, and switching to another plan was no option in his thinking, and so, the text.

25..., Bg7 26.gxf3 Rf8 27.Bh6 Rf7 28.Rxe6 Kf8!?

This move is not quite as good as 28..., Nd8; forcing back the Rook from e6, to be followed by 29..., Qc6; forcing an exchange of Queens. Without his Queen to give weight to threats against the Black King, White has small compensation for the piece minus.

29.Qg4?!,..

White has made a determined, if slightly inaccurate effort to drive home his attack to this point in the game. Now his determination wavers. Keeping some hope of cashing in on the attack with 29 Qh7, is better. The threat is 30 Qh8#, and 29..., Ke8 30 Qg8+ Bf8 31 Qg4 Bxh6 32 Rxh6 Qxg4+ 33 fxg4, repairs the White pawn formation. Black still has the piece, but the White K-side pawns have the potential to become dangerous. There is much play left in the position notwithstanding Black’s advantage.

29..., Bxh6 30.Rxh6 Rg7 31.Rg6 Rxg6 32.Qxg6 Qxh3 33.Qg4 Qxg4+

The dust of battle has cleared and Black has a won game. Arguing that White might have tried something other than 33 Qg4, is fruitless a few moments of reflection shows.

34.fxg4 Na5 35.f4 Nc4 36.Kf2 Nxb2 37.Kf3 b5 38.f5 Nc4

White’s only idea, and the only practical one, is to trying to create some passed pawns to distract Black from Queening one or another of his Q-side pawns. The text move covers e5 the readily available route for the White King to travel to win another pawn. The Black Knight prevents the King’s entry until Black has all things ready on the Q-side. Once the stage is set, calculating the dozen or so moves required to finish the game is not difficult for a player of Mr. Le Cours’ experience.

39.Kf4 a5 40.Kg5 Kg7 41.Kf4 a4 42.g5 Nxa3 43.Ke5 Nb1 44.Kxd5 a3 45.Ke6 a2 46.Kxe7 a1Q 47.f6+ Kg6 48.d5 Qa7+ 0–1

With the Queen to help out, there is no feasible way for the White pawns to advance further without loss.

Carlos Varela has been a part of some of the most interesting games of this year’s Finals. Twice he took highly rated opponents, Sells and Le Cours, under attack that was only frustrated with difficulty. His one win in this event over the talented Zack Calderon was a neat miniature where he turned unwarranted aggression into victory in a sharp fight. Mr. Varela’s performance has to be called very good with promise of future improvement. I hope to see him in next year’s tournament.

More soon.

Missed Shots and Good Play

The week before this game was played Mr. Glessner won very handily from the tournament leader Dilip Aaron. This week is quite different. David Connors had not been doing well this event up to this game. This time out he plays nearer to his true strength and wins. Glessner missed a shot that would have given him a second victory in a row.

Connors, David - Glessner, Isaiah [A08]
SCC Consolation Tourney Schenectady, NY, 01.03.2012

1.Nf3 Nf6 2.g3 d5 3.Bg2 c5 4.0–0 Bf5 5.d3 Nc6 6.Nbd2 e6

The King’s Indian Attack was known sometimes in my youth as the Reti Opening, Barcza System. It became popular in the decade after the end of WWII. It faded as Soviet players showed their wares from the long war years; new lines in the Sicilian and the double edged play of the King’s Indian Defense. Larsen gave this way of playing a late resurgence in the 1970s as an occasional weapon, and then it went out of style once more. There is nothing fundamentally wrong with it other than granting Black more space than he deserves.

Black does something similar in the KID is because he doesn’t want to defend the very slightly inferior positions that come about from the QGD. The KID is a risky attempt to get White into a difficult game where Black has chances to win. The KID player knows he is playing for one of three results; win lose or draw. All the Queen’s Gambit positions offer decent chances for White where he does not have to give up space, and he is playing for just two results; a win or a draw, and so the KID tries to drag White into something complicated.

So why the King’s Indian Attack? The thought process for White I imagine is; if the KID can be played by Black, playing the same moves for White must be as good because of the extra tempo and maybe even better. Two specific reasons for choosing the KIA are; 1), White thinks the first few moves are easy to remember and easy to play. Because he does not engage closely with his opponent’s pieces he can get to the latter part of the opening or the early middle game without much drama. 2) The long range plan is clear; attack the Black center from the flanks and perhaps keep opportunities open to push the f-pawn through to f5 in preparation for a direct attack on the Black King.

The problem with all this is space. Black obtains more room in which to maneuver, and White accepts being somewhat crowded. Taking up such a restrained position when there are the rich fields of the Queen’s Gambit lines are available is not logical. I quote GM Har-Zvi; modern Grandmasters value space highly. With more space winning or drawing are easier. Cramped and lacking space makes defending difficult and losing more likely. I don’t always understand everything Grandmasters write in their notes or say in their lectures. The comments about space however make a lot of sense to me.

7.Re1?!,..

Sometimes a necessary preparation for the advance of the e-pawn but not so here. White can play 7 e4, right away, then; 7..., dxe4 8 dxe4 Nxe4 9 Nh4 Nd6 10 Nxf5 Nxf5 11 c6, and for the pawn White has the Bishop pair, a clear diagonal for the Bg2, with easy development of his pieces; the Queen goes to a4, the Knight goes to c4 then on to e3 to eliminate the Nf5, and eventually the Bishop goes to e3, and finally bringing the Rooks come to the center. It is not at all clear that the e-file is the best place for the Rook at this moment.

W.W. Adams, a strong but variable American player from the 40s and 50s, and Hans Berliner, the fifth Correspondence World Champion wrote and said much about the Options principle in chess. Shortened they defined the principle as; choose moves that leave as many options for your next move as possible. This will make things as hard as possible for your opponent. Remember f2-f4, f5, is a possibility White may want to use. Once the Rf1 is placed on e1 that possibility is unlikely to be available. The text move violates the Option principle for no great benefit.

If White does not care to give up a pawn, he can continue in the reversed KID mode and play; 7 c4, then if 7..., dcxc4 8 Nxc4, and begin to think about trading a Knight for the Bf5 obtaining the two Bishops advantage.

7..., Bd6?!

An interesting slip. In positions where a Bishop is on f5, putting minor pieces on f6 and d6 invites e2-e4 because the continuing threat of e4-e5 makes the pawn charge dangerous to Black. When the White e-pawn advances, Black will have to give up one of his Bishops at the least to avoid worse.

8.a3?!,..

When played in the game, this move struck me as off the mark. My thought was 8 e4 Bg4 9 h3 Bxf3 10 Nxf3, when Black must either submit to the ugly 10..., e5; or the Bishop retreat to e7. In either case White has a pleasant game and the advantage of the two Bishops. My objection to this move is it grants Black a tempo he may use to correct the problematical disposition of minor pieces in the center making the pawn push to e4 less effective.

8..., 0–0?!

And Black ignores the opportunity.

9.e4 dxe4 10.dxe4 Bg4 11.c3?,..

Anxious about a Black Knight coming to d4, White takes time out to prevent that possibility. A good intention poorly timed. White either is unable to calculate the complications in the lines; 11 h3, and a) 11..., Bxf3 12 Nxf3, or b) 11..., Bh5 12 g4 Nxg4; or he did not reach a correct conclusion about them. Both alternatives lead to a significant advantage for White. It is true the alternative b) has to carried out for a number of moves to reach a conclusion, but in the long run, the piece sacrificed is too large a weight for the initiative Black gains to offset. Once more White hands over a tempo letting Black off the hook.

11..., Qc7 12.Nc4 Be7 13.Qc2?!,..

Slow playing when activity is required. Here 13 Bf4, would force Black to make an unpleasant choice: Agree to simplification with 13..., Bxf3 14 Bxc7 Bxd1 15 Raxd1 Rac8 16 Bd6 Bxd6 17 Nxd6 Rc7 18 e5, with threats. Or, accept a retarded development with 13..., Qc8; and after 14 Qe2 b5 15 Nd6, the Black game looks shaky. Either way Whites has the better position.

13..., e5

Getting closer to equality with 13..., Bxf3; is better. Two things seemed to get in the way of making that choice; Black wants to win the game, and too great of a reliance on the sometimes overstated principle that Bishops are always better than Knights. It is generally true, but tactics can always modify that truth. Black can obtain a favorable position with 13..., Bxf3 14 Bxf3 b5 15 Ne3 c4; when Black’s pawns well placed to cover a great many light squares, White is crowded in by the Black pawns, something still needs to be done with the Bc1, and the Black dark square Bishop has reasonable prospects. Many times we see players sacrificing a pawn for a tempo or two and increased activity. It is much rarer to find these same players giving up the Bishop pair to obtain the better game. Such is the effect of the drumbeat about the power of two Bishops by chess authors. Remember the admonition of the Russian School; concrete calculation should trump reliance on general principles.

14.Ne3 Be6 15.c4?,..

After using a valuable tempo on move 11 to keep a Black Knight out of d4, White now changes his mind. A litany of moves are better; 15 b4, 15 Ng5 15 Bd2, 15 Rd1, and even 15 b3. They all have some point. The point of the text move text move is far less clear. After the Black Knight lands on d4, White will have to trade creating a protected passed pawn or risk having his Queen awkwardly placed.

15..., Nd4 16.Nxd4 cxd4 17.Nd5 Bxd5 18.exd5 Rac8

All logical and good for Black. He is concentrating pressure on the c4-pawn. The lagging White development makes defending this point not easy. It is however defensible by indirect means reminiscent of the famous game from Zurich, 1953; Averbakh - Gligoric, in a King’s Indian where the Yugoslav was burdened with a backward d-pawn on an open file, and White concentrated his fire there. In a lovely series of tactical operations Black made taking the d-pawn so risky that survived a long time.
When it was finally liquidated, Black got full value for it, and additionally, White was forced to weaken several points in his position. Black capped this performance by winning the game. If you have not seen this game, here it is:

(36584) Averbakh, Yuri L - Gligoric, Svetozar [E68]
Candidates Tournament Zurich (5), 06.09.1953
1.c4 Nf6 2.Nc3 g6 3.g3 Bg7 4.Bg2 0–0 5.d4 d6 6.Nf3 Nbd7 7.0–0 e5 8.e4 exd4 9.Nxd4 Nc5 10.f3 a5 11.Be3 a4 12.Rf2 c6 13.Nc2 Qe7 14.Rd2 Nfd7 15.Rc1 Be5 16.Bf2 Re8 17.Ne3 Nf8 18.Ne2 Qc7 19.Rb1 a3 20.b3 h5 21.Qc2 Be6 22.Nc3 Nh7 23.b4 Na6 24.f4 Bg7 25.f5 Bd7 26.Qb3 Nf6 27.fxg6 fxg6 28.c5+ Be6 29.cxd6 Bxb3 30.dxc7 Bf7 31.b5 Nxc7 32.bxc6 bxc6 33.Rb7 Rac8 34.Rc2 Na6 35.Bf1 Nc5 36.Rxf7 Kxf7 37.Bc4+ Kf8 38.Nf5 Ncxe4 39.Nxg7 Kxg7 40.Nxe4 Rxe4 41.Ba6 Rd8 42.h3 Rb4 43.Rxc6 Ne4 44.Rc7+ Kh8 45.Be3 Rb2 0–1

While this GM game does not speak directly to the positions we see in today’s game, Mr. Connors undertakes a similar kind of defense of the c-pawn.

19.f4 Bd6 20.fxe5 Bxe5 21.Bh3?!,..

Getting it exactly right in such play is hard. Here White could play 21 Qd3, slipping out of the nasty pin on the c-file. As long as the Be5 has no other defender other than the Qc7, White can make repairs to his position.

21..., Rce8 22.Qd3?,..

White fails to appreciate what is going on. Now the Be5 is defended twice and the Re1 is loose on an open file. This is a prescription for tactics.

22..., Re7?

And Black does not see the possibility. Now is the moment for; 22..., Bxg3!; and then White is lost after 23 Rxe8 Bxh2+ 24 Kg2 Rxe8 25 Bg5 Re3! 26 Bxe3 Qg3+ 27 Kh1 Qxh3; and if 28 Qxd4 Bf4+; wins, or 28 Qf1 Qh5 29 Bf2 Bd6+ 30 Kg2 Ne4 31 Qh1 Qg4+ 32 Kf1 d3; and so on leading to a win for Black. The lines are on the longish side and maybe Isaiah just did not carry out his calculations quite far enough. It would not so bad just missing a tactical shot, but Black more or less writes off his d-pawn in subsequent play. White then has a large mass of Q-side pawns, some protected and passed. They are inadequately opposed by only two Black foot soldiers.

23.Bd2 Rfe8 24.Bb4 Bd6 25.Rxe7 Qxe7 26.Bxd6 Qxd6 27.Qxd4 Re4 28.Qxa7 Qe5?!

In this last segment, up this move, play was pretty much as Rybka recommends. The most obvious move, and the recommended move is 28..., Rxc4. This line of play did not appeal to Mr. Glessner, I think. It could go; 28..., Rxc4 29 Qa8+ Qf8 (forced) 30 Qxf8 Kxf8 31 Rd1 Rc2 32 d6 Ke8 33 b4 Rc3 34 Re1+ Kd8 35 Re7, and while all is not completely clear, White has a big edge. Black must have judged that positions without the Queens on the board offered him few chances to hold the game. He therefore pins his hopes on direct action against the White King.

29.Qa8+ Ne8

This is the only way to keep the Queens on. With Knight stuck and the back rank, Black has just his Rook and Queen with which to engineer threats. White has his Rook and Bishop immediately available for defense. They seem sufficient for the task.

30.Qxb7 Re1+?

Black gives up on making mating threats with this move. He must have hoped a perpetual checking opportunity would present itself, for without a piece to support the Queen, mate will be impossible. I’d prefer 30..., Qd4+ 31 Kh1 Re2 32 d6 Nxd6 33 Qb8+ Ne8 34 Bg2 Qf2 35 Rg1 Re1 36 Bf1 Qf3+; and the game is drawn by repetition. White can try to improve with 34 Rf1, in this line. Then play continues; 34..., Qe4+ 35 Kg1 Qe3+; with a perpetual.
White would have to be willing to offer one of his many Q-side pawns to make headway with; 30..., Qd4+ 31 Kh1 Re2 32 d6 Nxd6 33 Qa8+ (The Queen will be useful on the long diagonal.) 33,.. Ne8 34 Bf1 Re7 35 Rb1, consolidates White’s advantage

31.Rxe1 Qxe1+ 32.Bf1 Qe3+

Black’s problem is unless he can keep checking the White King, the opportunities for picking off more than a single White pawn are nonexistent. Making things even tougher is the nascent back rank mating threats White has in hand. To deal with those Black must take a tempo to move the King or make a luft. It is a classic predicament from studies and problems; the need to keep checking and at the same time defend against a potential mate.

33.Kg2 Qe4+ 34.Kf2 Qd4+ 35.Kf3 Qf6+ 36.Kg2,..

White had worked out this maneuver while evaluating the position somewhere around move 30. He played the subsequent moves with no hesitation and confidently. There are no more checks and White has time to consolidate.

36..., Qe5 37.Qb3 1–0

With the White Queen back home to shore up defenses, the four passed pawns are too big a problem for Black to solve. Resignation is reasonable and appropriate.

Both sides slipped as the game transitioned from the opening to the middle game, and both sides also showed creative flair in the complications. They both brought ideas to the fight making the game interesting.

More soon.

My last post featured Mr. Varela narrowing losing to Philip Sells. Continuing the saga of Carlos Varela’s play for the first time in the Schenectady Finals, here is a neat win from the rising scholastic player, Zack Calderone.

If you missed the two recent posts to this blog by Philip Sells on the NYS Scholastic Championship and the Eastern Team Tourney, page back and give them a read. They are timely and excellent reports of important chess events.

Zack loves the tactical side of chess. It is not often he gets caught misunderstanding the tactical tricks that come up when playing on the ragged edge of safety. This time he does. Carlos Varela has had three losses in a row going into this game in the Championship Finals. He did not allow previous results to dampen his ardor, and he maintain his calm demeanor, met aggression with active play and took the full point. Short though it is, today’s game is interesting.

Varela, Carlos - Calderone, Zack [A80]
SCC Finals, Schenectady, NY, 01.03.2012

1.d4 e6 2.Nf3 f5 3.Bf4 Nf6 4.e3,..

Here are three games from the databases showing the ideas the masters have about how to play this line of the Dutch. In the first Franz, against Tal no less, tries the natural idea of finachettoing his light squared Bishop. That’s not such a bad notion, but Tal is Tal and finds a way to win.

(49812) Tal, Mihail - Franz, Joachim [A80]
Riga (4), 08.12.1959
1.d4 e6 2.Nf3 f5 3.Bf4 Nf6 4.e3 b6 5.Nbd2 Bb7 6.c3 Be7 7.Bd3 c5 8.h3 cxd4 9.exd4 Nc6 10.0–0 0–0 11.Re1 Rc8 12.Nc4 Ne4 13.Nfd2 b5 14.Ne3 Nxd2 15.Qxd2 Bg5 16.Nc2 Bxf4 17.Qxf4 Ne7 18.Bxb5 Ng6 19.Qd6 Qg5 20.Qg3 Qd2 21.Rac1 Rf6 22.Bxd7 Rd8 23.Qc7 Rxd7 24.Qxd7 Bxg2 25.Kxg2 Nf4+ 26.Kh1 Qxf2 27.Qe8+ Rf8 28.Qc6 g5 29.Rf1 Qh4 30.Rxf4 Qxh3+ 31.Kg1 Qg3+ 32.Qg2 Qxf4 33.Rf1 Qh4 34.d5 exd5 35.Nd4 1–0

In the second two strong Grandmasters do a careful dance keeping things in balance and trading off material until a draw was certain. Vladimir Kramnik, the former World Champion, in an article he contributed to book by Dvoretsky and Yusupov; Positional Play, Henry Holt, NYC, 1996; said in exchange for weakening his dark squares, Black obtains a space advantage in the Dutch. Kramnik went on to say Black has an easier time playing the positions of the Stonewall Dutch than does White mostly because of the difficulty White has in choosing a plan. His ultimate conclusion was the Stonewall is an entirely useful defense at even the top levels of chess.

(295629) Piket, Jeroen (2615) - Nikolic, Predrag (2635) [A80]
Hoogovens Wijk aan Zee (1), 01.1992
1.Nf3 e6 2.d4 f5 3.Bf4 Nf6 4.e3 Be7 5.h3 0–0 6.c4 d6 7.Nc3 Ne4 8.Nxe4 fxe4 9.Nd2 d5 10.Be2 Nc6 11.Bh2 Bd6 12.Bxd6 Qxd6 13.Rc1 Ne7 14.Qb3 c6 15.0–0 Nf5 16.cxd5 cxd5 17.Rc3 Bd7 18.Rfc1 Bc6 19.Bb5 Bxb5 20.Qxb5 Qe7 21.Rc7 Qg5 22.Qe2 Nd6 23.Qg4 Qxg4 24.hxg4 Rac8 25.Nb3 Rxc7 26.Rxc7 Rf7 27.Rc2 Kf8 28.Kh2 b6 29.Kg3 Ke8 30.Nd2 h6 ½–½

In the third we see some of the ideas from the Varela - Calderone game with the addition of the Q-side fianchetto for Black. Once again that natural idea does not help the Black cause.

(808115) Miltner, Arndt (2380) - Gschwendtner, Michael (2245) [A80]
BL2-Sued 0304 Germany, 2003
1.d4 f5 2.Nf3 e6 3.Bf4 Nf6 4.e3 b6 5.Bd3 Bb7 6.Nbd2 Be7 7.h3 Ne4 8.Qe2 Nxd2 9.Nxd2 c5 10.0–0–0 0–0 11.Rhg1 Nc6 12.c3 cxd4 13.exd4 Bg5 14.Bxg5 Qxg5 15.g4 fxg4 16.Rxg4 Qh6 17.Rdg1 Rf7 18.Rg5 Kh8 19.Rh5 Nxd4 20.cxd4 Bf3 21.Qxf3 Rxf3 22.Rxh6 Rxd3 23.Rh4 Rc8+ 24.Kd1 Rc4 25.Rgg4 g5 26.Rxg5 Rcxd4 27.Rxd4 Rxd4 28.Ke2 Rb4 29.b3 Rh4 30.Rg3 b5 31.Nf3 Re4+ 32.Kd3 Rf4 33.Ke3 Rf6 34.Ne5 1–0

Kramnik’s Stonewall article sets out the conditions where Black is justified in breaking open the K-side with an advance of his g-pawn. One of the key elements is a Bishop trade occurring on f4 with the resulting recapture there by a White pawn. Without that sort of slight weakening of the White formation, the advance of the g-pawn not to work well for Black. It is always interesting to see, or hear Grandmasters explain specific ideas underlying their planning. This is particularly true when the ideas are not widely known.

Another point Kramnik makes is rote play is not the order of the day in the Dutch for either side. First generally, the opening is quite strategic where both sides have to adjust plans in response to the opponent’s disposition of forces. Second and more specifically, White usually thinks about trading off the Black Nb8 when it develops. That is so even if he has to do it with a Knight he took time to get to e5, or giving up his dark squared Bishop. Kramnik believes giving Black the Bishop pair is not a bad idea if Black’s pawns are kept on the light squares.

Most of Kramnik’s remarks were made about lines where White developed his light squares Bishop to g2. He did mention that much of what he said applies to other Dutch lines as well.

All the foregoing is a tremendous amount of palaver to get us to move 4 for Black! However this game goes wrong for Zack pretty quickly. If we are to understand why, some serious thought has to be given to the fundamental schemes for each side.

4..., d5 5.Bd3 c6 6.c3!?,..

I have a liking for this move also and play it frequently against the Dutch. Igor Khenkin, another Russian GM also contributed comments on the Dutch for the Dvoretsky book. His story began with his infatuation with the c2-c3 move combined with the Knight tour g1/h3/f4/d3 in conjunction with Bc1-f4-e5, and the Nb1 traveling to f3 via d2. Khenkin recounts games that led him to concluded c2-c3 can be adequately met by Black’s Stonewall. Khenkin remains devoted to the Knight tour idea. Kramnik takes issue with that in an editorial aside. Kramink believes the Ng1 should go to f3 directly and submit’s a variation or two to back his claim.

Good alternatives here for Varela are; 6 h3, securing the Bf4 from harassment, 6 c4, to create pressure on the Black center, castling now, or 6 Nbd2, keeping open the option of where the c-pawn will go.

6..., Bd6 7.Ne5,..

Superficially the development of the Black Bishop to d6 looks odd. To offer to trade a good Bishop for one that is theoretically not so good runs counter to the general principles set out by Tarrasch and his successors over the last one hundred plus years. The Stonewall Dutch is something of a special case. There are a number of factors to consider: The White Bf4 can go to e5 if unopposed and give itself up for a valuable Black Knight As good as the light squared White Bishop may appear to be, the “stonewall” of pawns; b7, c6, d5, e6, f2, makes problematical its chances for great activity. And, mechanisms exist to improve the usefulness of the ..,Bc8; ..,b7-b6 & ..,Bc8-a6; or the known maneuver; ..,Bc8-d7;..,Bd7-e8; .., Be8-h5. Taken all together, these factors must have motivated White’s 7th move.

Carlos Varela has played rated chess since 1999, but until the last year or two not very frequently. Once he got to play regularly in early 2010, his rating began a steady climb from 1300 to the present 1740 high. I have watched several of his games and played him a time or two in that span. It seemed to me he was under rated. The published numbers did not accurately reflect the skill shown in his over the board performance. Today’s game fits that observation.

7..., 0–0 8.Nd2 Ne4?!

One more of the oddities of the Dutch. Obviously both sides have designs on planting a Knight on an advanced post on the e-file. However timing that move is important. Although both sides want to put a Knight in an advanced e-file outpost, they must consider, and calculate carefully, the advanced Knight being captured by the nearby Bishop. Taking the Knight with the adjacent Bishop turns the dynamic outpost into a static point. Play then can turn to file opening schemes, primarily the f-file, and positional maneuvering becomes a tactical clash.

The most pointed criticism of the text is there’s no immediate reason to rush this occupation. Black can do other useful things; 8..., Qc7; so that the eventual .., Nbd7; will result in pressure against the Bf4, or 8..., c5; obtaining space on the Q-side. The text move is a harbinger of an attack before all the Black pieces are developed. Something that is usually not a good idea.

9.Ndf3 g5?!

And so it comes. There is no immediate tactical refutation, but all of the Black Q-side forces are still in their tents. Even if Black obtains some concession from White with this violent action, he must lose momentum completing his development. The useful moves noted in the previous note are still valid alternatives.

10.Bxe4 gxf4 11.Bd3 Bxe5?!

Somewhat better is 11..., fxe3; damaging the White pawn formation a little.

12.Nxe5 Qg5?

The point that Black must have believed justified the risky play leading to this position.

13.Qf3!?,..

Possible is 13 h4!, and 13..., Qxg2? 14 Ke2 Kh8 15 Rg1 Qh2 16 Nf3 Qh3 17 exf4, gives White a large, almost winning advantage. If Black does not take the g-pawn, then 13..., Qh6 14 exf4 Qxf4? 15 Qh5, is very promising for White. And finally, 14..., Nd7 15 Qf3, with an excellent game for White. The game move allows White to claim some advantage but not as significant as after 13 h4.

13..., fxe3 14.fxe3 Nd7 15.h4 Qg7 16.Nxd7 Bxd7 17.Rh3 Kh8 18.0–0–0?!,..

Black has really not done so badly after White did not go for the best line on move 13. Logical, and conforming to those general principles we have all heard repeatedly, as this move appears, it is not quite as good as the forcing 18 Rg3.

18..., e5 19.Rg3 Qh6?

A puzzling choice. By playing 19..., Qf6; defending the pawn on e5, Black keeps his chances alive after; 20 dxe5 Qxe5 21 Rg5 h6; and the slight advantage White enjoys is not very threatening. The text give up a pawn for complications that turn out to favor White. The affection Mr. Calderone has for tactical play led him astray here. He should have been satisfied with the equality available.

20.dxe5 f4?

This was the point of the Black scheme. It unfortunately is flawed.

21.Rg5 fxe3 22.Qxe3 Qxh4 23.e6! 1–0

This move must have been the one overlooked by Black. After some thought Zack resigned here. The decision was forced by the lines; 23..., Be8 24 Qe5+, with mate the next move, and 23..., Qf4 24 Qxf4 Rxf4 25 Rh1, will require Black to give up a Rook to avoid mate.

It is true that tactics are some huge part of chess, however, the thing Morphy taught the chess world 150 years ago; getting all your pieces involved in the game is the requirement for successful tactical solutions. In this game Zack Calderone forgot the lesson.

More soon.

Quick News: Deepak Aaron 2012 New York State Scholastic Champion!

Good morning, world! I happened to be at the state Scholastic Championships in Saratoga Springs over the weekend of March 3rd & 4th just past, and even though I wasn't there as a reporter in any real sense, it occurred to me just now that I could spread some news of interest to the Eastern New York area. It was a tough tournament all around. It seemed as if every section had at least a couple of unexpectedly strong players, given the ages involved. In the Primary Section, for example, the top seed was rated in the 1600s [I incorrectly said this was in the Elementary Reserve in the first version of this post], and in the Elementary Championship section, there were two 1800-rated boys! That's not beyond sixth grade, mind you!

The High School Championship was loaded up with no less than seven masters, a couple of whom were unfamiliar to me. But it's interesting to note that, of those seven, the top two seeds, James Black Jr. and Justus Williams, could have played in the Junior High section--eighth grade and seeded top in the entire tournament! My goodness. Also among the masters present were our well-known local favorite Deepak Aaron and the reigning overall state champion, Michael Chiang. The top three boards from each of the High School and Junior High Championships were given a separate small, quiet room, far from the scrum found everywhere else.

It was a large tournament, with 450 or so pre-registrants and a considerable number of youths who registered at the site. As a matter of fact, because of the number of the latter sort, the first round was delayed by nearly an hour. I don't know the final attendance figures, but suffice it to say that the entire building seemed to have been taken over by young chessplayers and their associates. (There were at least a few of those associates that I never even saw until the awards ceremony--Grandmasters Giorgi Kacheishvili and Joel Benjamin appeared to watch their charges receive trophies!)

Well, not to make a big dissertation of this, because I have to get to work, but the news flash is this: Deepak Aaron is this year's New York State Scholastic (High School) Champion! I watched him dispatch Williams, the defending titleholder, in the final round with a nice game. Mr. Aaron scored six wins from six games! I believe James Black finished second a point back, having himself faced the tournament winner in round four. [Update 3/6/12: Now that I've seen the official crosstable, I find that Mr. Black's actual score was 4 1/2 points.] This means that our friend Mr. Aaron has won the state scholastic title at the high-school level in three years out of four! He'll no longer be eligible to compete for it, since this is his senior year. But what a great run! And this year especially, to notch a perfect score from such a strong field! Deepak will probably get tired of being congratulated by us, but do it anyway the next time you see him. It's well earned!

A Second Exciting Game From the SCC Finals

As I mentioned earlier, a close contender for the first game published from the latest round in the Schenectady contests was this exciting battle between a new finalist and a past Champion. Carlos Varela, a teacher from RPI and a stalwart of the RPI team, makes a determined effort to take the full point from Philip Sells. Bill Townsend and I were watching the game and both of us were silently hoping Carlos would play 25 Bxh6. We just wanted to see what would happen. He did and we did. It was an interesting game before and after the 25th move and worth the late night it took to see it to a finish. Enjoy!

Varela, Carlos - Sells, Philip [A46]
SCC Championship Finals Schenectady, NY, 23.02.2012

1.d4 Nf6 2.Nf3 e6 3.Bf4 c5 4.e3 cxd4

A not uncommon position from the Torre/London/Colle Systems. Opportunities to transpose into positions from other lines are many. There few games in the databases with strong players on both sides, however here is one with Topalov handling Black against Gata Kamsky from not too long ago. Kamsky had to call on his very considerable skill on the defense hold off Topalov who was challenging then for the number one spot on the FIDE rating list.

(1177976) Kamsky,Gata (2705) - Topalov,Veselin (2772) [A46]
3rd MTel Masters, Sofia (9), 19.05.2007
1.d4 Nf6 2.Nf3 e6 3.Bf4 c5 4.e3 cxd4 5.exd4 b6 6.Nbd2 Be7 7.h3 0–0 8.Bd3 Ba6 9.Bxa6 Nxa6 10.0–0 b5 11.c3 Nc7 12.a4 Ncd5 13.Bh2 a6 14.Qb3 Qb6 15.Ra2 d6 16.Rfa1 Rab8 17.axb5 axb5 18.Ra6 Qd8 19.Ra7 Nc7 20.Ne1 Nfd5 21.Nd3 Qd7 22.Nb4 Nxb4 23.Qxb4 Qc6 24.c4 Rfc8 25.cxb5 Qc2 26.Nf1 Nd5 27.Qd2 Qb3 28.Ne3 Bf8 29.Bg3 Nxe3 30.Qxe3 Qxb5 31.Qf3 f6 32.R1a6 Rb6 33.Ra1 Qxb2 34.Bf4 d5 35.Be3 Qc2 36.Kh2 Qg6 37.g3 h5 38.Ra8 Rbc6 39.R1a6 Qf7 40.Bf4 Rc3 41.Qe2 Rc2 42.Qe1 Rxa8 43.Rxa8 Qd7 44.Qb1 Rc8 45.Rxc8 Qxc8 46.Qg6 Qc4 47.Be3 e5 48.dxe5 d4 49.e6 dxe3 50.Qf7+ Kh7 51.Qxh5+ ½–½

5.exd4 Nc6

Mr. Sells takes a different road from Topalov. Also possible is 5..., Qb6; a natural sort move often played when White develops the Bishop to f4. Black has a number of choices here; 5..., h6; 5..., Be7; and others. Which way he goes depends on taste and his future intentions.

6.c3 Be7 7.Bd3 0–0 8.Nbd2 d6 9.Qc2 h6 10.0–0 b6

A feature of the London System is the dark squared White Bishop on f4 outside of his pawn s on dark squares. An idea that is often used by Black is gain time by threatening this actively placed piece. In that vein, Black could have played; 10..., Nh5 11 Be3 f5; when White would almost have to toss a pawn into the pot with 12 d5 exd5 13 Qb6, giving rise to the question; was the harassment of the Bf4 worth the damage to the Black pawn structure? Fischer, who always thought a pawn was worth some trouble, might have said yes, but Mr. Sells wanted to win this game to take clear second in the Championship. He decides to keep any transformation of the position for the future wanting to be fully prepared before opening uo the position.

11.Rfe1 Bb7 12.h3 Rc8 13.a3 Re8 14.Rad1 Bf8

Both sides have bided their time mustering forces to logical squares without really tipping their hands about future intentions. Assessing the position using Silman’s imbalances idea gives the following:

White has a bit more space due to the d-pawn on the 4th rank, but Black has two center pawns to White’s one offsetting that advantage to some extent.

Both sides are pretty much developed. The only difference here is the White Queen has more active possibilities than the Black Queen whose future prospects will be determined by how the game opens up. Initiative is undecided. White has available Nd2-e4, an energetic move that does not seem to lead anywhere right away. The White pieces and pawns point towards an attack on the K-side. This is something Black will have take into consideration when choosing a plan. If a call has to be made regard initiative, White may have greater chances to obtain it.

The pawn formation has taken on the approximate outlines of the Hedgehog formation. In such, Black counts on quietly forming up his forces to make a later break in the center or flank to open the game to his advantage. White has a barrier of pawns which he hopes will fend off the Q-side machinations Black has in mind while White attacks the King

On minor piece placement and the worst piece; the White Bishops are aimed at the Black King. Black will have to detail some units to meet any sudden sacrificial assault. They naturally are the Nf6 and the Bf8. So what is the worst piece? White’s is the Nd2, where can it go to contribute more? Black’s is s toss up between the Re8 and the Bishop and Knight guardians of the K-side. I don’t see a clear path the break up the White attacking formation, so the guardians will have stay on the defensive. This judgment leaves the Re8 as the piece needing improvement.

A look at lines and files reveals both sides have a Rook appropriately on the half-open file in their positions. White has clear diagonals for his Bishops pointing towards the Black King. The Black Bb7 is not too much a factor regards the K-side It has no supporting unit to make threats to g2 real in the face of White’s superiority there. The placement of the White Queen and the Black Rook do offer Black a great deal of control over d5. It is conceivable Black can make something interesting out of the light central squares to distract White from his obvious K-side attack. The center is not clearly defined as yet leaving the possibility open that the character of the game could change dramatically.

In sum: White must attack on the K-side. Black is somewhat constrained the need to hold back reserves to meet the attack. Black has play on the Q-side and the light central squares. This is no great revelation and very common in the Torre/London/Colle Systems complex.

15.Nf1?!,..

Mr. Varela himself was critical of this move. He thought why not go right away to e4. It is more direct but seems to lead to nothing after 15 Ne4 Nxe4 16 Bxe4 Na5; and the likely trade of Bishops has eliminated a good deals of White’s attacking potential. An idea that was not looked at in the post mortem was; 15 Nc4, intending to post the Knight at e3 fighting against the scheme Black carried out in the game of putting a Bishop on d5 and bringing the Knight to c4 via a5. White can get away with it as long as the Black Queen is on the d-file because the counter-stroke .., e6-e5; could leave her exposed to a discovered attack by Bd3-h7+ after a pawn exchange on e5. A downside to the idea is the Knight on e3 obstructs the action of the Rook on the e-file. Carlos may have been too critical of his own choice in the game. Nothing remarkably better is available.

15..., Rc7!?,..

A strange kind of move. The course of the game shows Black intends pressure on the c-file and playing on the light squares c4 and d5, but it looks awkward. White has in hand the counter 16 Ne3, fighting back over the central light squares.

16.Ng3 Kh8

Philip Sells methodically eliminates the h7 checking possibility. That told me he was thinking of the e-pawn advance making any later discovery by a move of the Bd3 far less worrisome.

17.Re2 Qc8 18.Rde1 Ba6

A change of direction. It appears now Black may want to instigate some trades to defang the potential K-side attack.

19.Ne4 Nxe4 20.Rxe4 Bb7

Black changes his mind. The line of play; 20..., Bxd3 21 Qxd3 d5 22 R4e3 Rd7; certainly reduces the chances of a successful K-side attack, but the Black Rooks look very much worse the doubled White Rooks on the e-file. Black can hold, however, winning from that position is doubtful.

White has a choice to make here; with 21 Qa4, he can offer Black a transition to the ending after 21..., Nc4; and a bunch of trades on and near c4 which result in White having a passed a-pawn with a problematical future because of the activity of the Black Rooks, or as in the game, direct K-side attack.

21.R4e3 Na5 22.Nd2 Bd5 23.Rg3,..

Everyone can see now Mr. Varela intends an assault on the Black King. One of the designated defends, the Nf6, is gone, and another attacking unit, the Rg3, has appeared on the scene. White has done a good job of bringing units to the field of battle. The only problem is the coordination of these units

23..., Nc4 24.Ne4!?,..

Superficially, one more piece to participate in the assault, but where does the Knight go from here? While watching the game, I thought something like 24 Bxc4 Bxc4 25 Qd1, or 24 Qd1?, which is unfortunately immediately countered by 24..., Nxb2; might have bettered coordinated the White units for the attack and gotten the Queen into the action.

24..., e5

Just so. Quite like how things happen from the Hedgehop formation. This time it is a center break just as White is in the midst of kicking off the direct assault.

25.Bxh6?!,..

Rybka recommends 25 dxe5, but concludes Black is better after; 25..., dxe5 26 Bxh6 f5 27 Nf6 gxh6 28 Nxd5 Rf7 29 Qb3 b5! This is a line only a computer could love. For a human being to plunge into this morass of tactics would take great confidence in his calculating ability and board sight.

I think White had played up to this point in the game intending such a sacrifice to begin the attack Playing the sacrifice is probably his best chance from a practical point of view . Other Bishop moves give Black a significant edge according to my trusty computer. Bill Townsend and I both were very interested in seeing this move played. Mr. Varela came through for us, although I’m sure not to just to please us.
The advantage now swings back and forth wildly over the next moves. When White’s 25th move was played both players had under twenty minutes remaining on their clocks with the situation on the board becoming more, not less, complicated. That is not much time for either party to calculate in the complications that follow.

25..., exd4?

Ambitious, but it should lead to trouble for Black. Better 25..., f5; and after 26 Nf6 gxf6 27 Bxf8 Rxf8 28 Bxf5 Bd6 29 Bg6 Bf7; and notwithstanding the extra piece, Black probably has to agree to a draw by repeating the dance of the Bishops. If he tries to vary creatively with 29..., Nb2? 30 Re4 Nd3 31 Rh4+ Kg8 32 Qxd3 f5 33 Be8+ Rg7 34 Rxg7+ Kxg7 35 Qg3+ Kf6 36 Qg6+ Ke7 37 Rh7+, and regardless of the material Black will have to offer up the mate is not far distant. I leave it to the readers to work along with several other variations for the alternatives to 32..., f5.

26.Qd1,..

The Queen prepares to add her heavy weight to the assault. Now point counts of material are less meaningful. What is important is the full throated attack and the devil take the straggler.

26..., Bxe4?

Bringing his game very close to dead lost. Black had to try the here the unlikely looking 26..., Qf5; The text allows; 27 Bxg7+ Bxg7 28 Qh5 Kg8 29 Bxe4 Rxe4 30 Rxe4 Ne5 31 Rh4 Ng6 32 Qh7+ Kf8 33 Rf4!, and so on with a winning attack for White. If there were plenty of time finding one’s way through that difficult line is a challenge. Mr. Varela had but fifteen minutes remaining for the entire game and Mr. Sells less. The better move; 26..., Qf5; leads to nothing easy for Black after; 27 Bxc4 Rxe4 28 Bxd5 Qxd5 29 Rxe4 Qxe4 30 Rg4 Qe6; when Black is looking at a pawn down end game with a ragged pawn formation. There is a but here. With 31 Qxd4 Qe1+ 32 Kh2 Qe5; and White probably has to play 33 Qxe5 dxe5; repairing the Black pawns and giving him hopes of holding the game. Of course time is shortening, and these rather involved lines have plenty of scope for errors.

27.Qh5,..

Pretty near winning is 27 Bxg7!+. Then 27..., Bxg7 28 Qh5+ Kg8 29 Bxe4, and White dominates the light squares around the Black King. To play this line White had to be prepared to ignore being down a piece and correctly evaluate the tactics arising out of the powerful position he created on the K-side, Amazingly the text swings the advantage to Black even though on its face the move looks very strong.

27..., gxh6

Also good is 27..., g6. Having two really good replies to the Queen’s jump to h5 indicates just how difficult the game has become. The players gave it their best shot running the clocks down to right around five minutes or less each calculating the ramifications.

28.Rxe4 Rxe4 29.Bxe4 Bg7 30.Bf5 Qe8

During the game I thought it would be better to play 30..., Qf8; right away. Rybka differs and says the text is to be preferred on the slender grounds that at e8 the Black Queen prevents the White Queen from retreating to e2. Mighty Rybka is likely correct. Under circumstances with no time pressure I am not sure a human being would make that judgment unless he was of a very high standard of play. In time pressure, my guess is Philips Sells’ intuition guided him correctly.

The players were now down to two minutes each on the clocks. The final moves were played, perforce, quickly.

31.Qg4 Qf8 32.Be4 Ne5

Critical comments about moves made in great time pressure are not useful. Blitz and time pressure play is about ideas and nerve. If you have some idea that keeps you in the game, play it. Looking for the better move easily can cost the point on time. Sells sees a way to strengthen his King’s house and takes it. Here 32..., Nd2; renders harmless 33 Qf5, by taking off the Bishop. But what if 32..., Nd2 33 Bc2? Black then has to calculate; 33..., Re7 34 Qf5 Re1+ 35 Kh2 Nf1+ 36 Kg1 Ng3+; winning. Not so hard with lots of time, and nearly impossible with seconds left. Side lines and in-between moves would have to be checked. It all takes time that is not available. I know from the conversation after the game the Rook check on e8 and the Knight check on f8 was a piece of the ideas Mr. Sells was pursuing. It’s my guess he went for what he could see clearly with out much calculation.

33.Qf5 Ng6 34.h4,..

There is not much to be done to save the game. Mr. Varela continues his direct assault by threatening 35 h5. Unfortunately for Carlos, Sells has a straight forward finish in mind.

34..., Rc5 35.Qg4 h5 36.Qd7 Qe7 37.Qh3 Qxe4 38.f3 Qe1+ 39.Kh2 Be5 0–1

A near thing for the former Champion, and by no means a bad effort for the new finalist. Carlos Varela had the right idea with the piece sacrifice. It may not have been precisely correct. It was, however, the best practical chance. While I subscribe to Har-Zv1’s rule; play the best moves you can find, don’t go in for swindles. To that rule I’ll add Little’s corollary; if all your choices are bad, take the most active option. Mr. Varela did so here giving us an entertaining game to look at, and he came very close to winning.