News From Saratoga

I missed a week at Saratoga, 1/24/10, and an important result happened. Gordon Magat defeated Steve Taylor! If my information is correct, and it was confirmed by Alan LeCours the TD, this second loss for Taylor leaves Schenectady’s defending Champion, Phil Sells clear first at Saratoga. Phil now joins a small group of individuals that have won both Saratoga and Schenectady titles; Matt Katrien, and maybe Lee Battes and/or Peter Michelman. I am really unsure of the last two named. They have played often in both events achieving high places. No one else’s name springs to mind for these two titles.

According to the stories I heard, Steve got a late start, beginning the game down on time. His habit of using a good deal of his clock time to reach a clear understanding of the position had to be modified somewhat. Whatever change was made was not enough, and time trouble played some role in Taylor’s resignation. Second place is still not determined. Taylor has about two more games to play. If he wins both I think he gets second or a tie with Gordon.

The win at Saratoga marks a significant milestone for Mr. Sells. It, combined with the first place recently won in the Schenectady Preliminary A, signals the clear emergence of someone who has to be favored in the Schenectady Finals this year. In the 2004-05 Schenectady Championship Phil gave another outstanding performance. He finished two full points clear of a twenty-four player(!) field with Battes, Adamec, Troyan. Little, Michelman, Rotter, Lack and others in it. This was at a time when Phil’s rating was 1783! That result moved him up to a solid Class A rating. Phil broke through to Expert for a brief moment at this year’s Empire State Open only to fall back at the Liberty Bell. I suspect the results at Schenectady and Saratoga will put him into the Expert ranks on a more permanent basis. The tale of Mr. Sells’ progress should be encouraging to all adult chess players trying to improve. Too often we are left thinking that only four foot high tiny geniuses can make large strides at chess. Phil demonstrates diligent study and determination do the job regardless of age. Congratulations Phil Sells

Here is a game of some small interest from last Sunday. Two of the veterans our local chess wars meet for the “umteenth” time. Most past years their games has some bearing on the top prizes. Not so this year. It is forty-two years that Lee Battes and I have been debating over the board who knows what in this game of chess. With a bit of good fortune maybe we’ll make it to fifty.

Saratoga Championship
Saratoga Springs, NY
1/31/2010
White Little, B
Black Battes, L

1. Nf3 d5
2. d4 Nf6
3. Bf4 Bg4
These last two moves take the game out of mainstream theory. Almost no GM games in my databases, just a long draw between Kovacevic and Lobron from 1985 in Yugoslavia.

4. Ne5 Bh5
Even fewer games after these moves. Sambuev - Yevseev from Russia 1999, was a win for Black. There’s not much else in the files.

5. c3 c6
6. Qb3 Qb6
7. Nd2 e6
8. e3 Be7
9. Bd3 O-O
10. h3 Nfd7
There is little to choose between the sides so far. During the game I did not expect the text. First thought was this an error. Further thought made me believe this is not so bad an idea. Could be Lee is thinking about some kind of advance of pawns to open lines on my King; …., Nxe5;…, f7; and …, e5; after some preparation. To cross up any such try a direct threat seemed a good way to go.

11. Qc2 Bg6?!
My guess was 11..., f5; is a better move. Later, going over the game with the computer confirmed the engine thought so too. White now obtains the positional plus of the Bishop pair. That isn’t enough to say White is winning, but it is more pleasant to have than not.

12. Nxg6 hxg6
13. Nf3 ….
The only alternative I gave any thought to was 13 a4, and maybe a4-a5 at some point. I could not see any justification for the notion beyond grabbing space. The unfolding of the actual game suggests the idea might have tamped down the counter-play Black has on the Q-side.

13.… c5
White has a small edge and this break is Black’s natural and best try to obtain effective play.

14. b3 ….
The single alternative considered was 14 0-0. The computer likes 14 Qb3, something that did not cross my mind. After 14 Qb3, c4; 15 Qxb6, axb6; 16 Bc2, play favors White when the lines are ran out. I confess to not grasping the idea until the electronic monster had shown me a dozen or more moves. In this line White’s Bishop pair, slightly better pawn formation and very small development lead give an edge. After the game move Black is pretty much equal. The initiative is starting to swing to Black. That is indicative of the lack of understanding underlying my play.

14.… cxd4
15. exd4 Nc6
16. O-O Rac8
17. Qe2 …..
It was becoming clear to me defending c3 is going to dictate the course of my play. Black’s next move aims to pressure my short c3/d4 pawn chain on the diagonal while the half-open c-file is a second road towards the same target to be used when needed.

17.… Bf6
18. Bd6? …..
The natural 18 Rac1, is certainly a better choice. The text is an outright error that should lose a pawn to 18..., Nxd4! After looking at 18 Rac1, I wanted to find something to make things complicated. The move chosen does that, but only because Lee either misses the shot, or like me, wanted to “fish in troubled waters”.

18.… Ne7?
19. Bxe7 Bxe7
20. c4 Bf6
21. Rad1 Qc7
22. Qd2 dxc4
23. bxc4 Nb6
24. Qb4 Rfd8
25. c5 Nd5
26. Qb3 ….
After an exchange of mistakes on the 18th turn, the game has gone through a period of tense equality. I was happy to see some lines opening up for my Bishops. Lee must have been equally happy about owning d5 and having targets on d4 and c5.

26.… Nf4
27. Bc4 a6
Expected was 27..., b6. In answer to that move I planned 28 Ba6, Rb8; 29 Qc4, Rd4; 30 Rb1, and my position seems to be OK. I did not give careful thought to alternatives in this line. Black could have tried 28 Ba6, Rb8; 29 Qc4, bxc5; 30 dxc5, Rd5; when White should not exchange on d5. Advancing the pawn to c6 keeps the edge. The move played in the game is probably better than 27..., b6.

28. Rfe1 b5
29. Bf1! ….
This move was played quickly. As soon as the Bishop was plunked down on f1, remorse hit me. Why hadn’t 29 cxb6 e.p., been tried? The line is 29..., Qxc4; 30 b7, imagining there is an Exchange to be won. Right after the game I showed Lee the line in a hasty and inaccurate reconstruction during the postmortem. In the cold light of the next mornings’ examination uncovered a big hole in the idea in short order. The problem with the idea is; 29 cxb6 e.p.?, Qxc4; 30 b7, Nxh3+! and Black may drop the Exchange but has a very strong attack with moves such as 31 gxh3, Qxb3; 32 bxc8 (Q), Qxf3. If White tries to vary with 31 Kh2, equality can be reached but only after some exciting play; 31..., Qc7+; 32 Kxh3, Rb8; 33 Rb1, Bxd4; and so on. While I forced the regret at missing what I supposed to be a neat winning shot out of my mind to focus on what was in front of me, the lingering feeling of throwing away a win changed my attitude. Distrust of my judgment was upper most in my thoughts now. That is not a good mind set in a chess game.

29.… Rd5?!
There is no good reason I see for Black to occupy d5 with a Rook. It just my gives g2-g3 and Bf1-g2 maneuver more of a point. Better 29..., Qa5; then the Knight goes to d5 and Black certainly is doing well enough with a strong Knight outpost and a potential outside passed pawn. Discouraged about my missing my supposed winning move, I did not look objectively at the position. Had I done so, recognizing that Black had gotten himself in to a bit of trouble may have motivated harder work on my part.

30. g3 Nh5
31. Bg2 Rdd8
Admitting the mistake on move 29. One of the things I admire about Lee’s chess is he keeps the correct objective attitude. Battes makes mistakes as we all do, however he does not get married to an idea or a move, and most times repairs them when he can.

32. Qe3 b4
33. Rc1 a5
Black could have offered the Exchange to destroy the White center with 33..., Qe7; 34 Nc6, Rxc6!?; 35 Bxc6, Bxd4; 36 Qf3, when Black has one pawn in the bag for the Exchange and a second on c5 for the taking. Black is no worse than even. White’s best course is probably to forego taking the Exchange and play 34 h4, to delay freedom for the Nh5 as long as possible. White has a solid advantage in this position. To make anything of it he needs to be clear headed. I was not so at this point in the game. The fixed idea in my head was; let’s get out of this game as quickly as I can, a draw is fine.

34. Ne5 g5
Capturing on e5 is bad because the Nh5 has no escape square.

35. Nc6 Rd7
36. Ne5 …..
White has a couple of choices to try for a win; 36 a3, breaking up the Q-side duo in preparation for capturing them, or 36 Rc4, improving piece position before going to work on the Q-side pawns, or even 36 Rc2, g6; 37 Ne5, Rdd8; 38 c6, Ng7; 39 g4, trying to squeeze Black. All require a willingness to fight at a minimum. My desire to fight was gone, and so….

36.… Rdd8
37. Nc6 Agreed draw.
From a social perspective, a comfortable draw with an long time comrade. From a sporting point of view, not a very satisfactory effort. The game illustrates once more how important part emotion can be in determining the outcome of a chess game.

Tonight at Schenectady Mockler - Little is on tap. A victory for Mike will spell the end of my hopes of qualifying for the Finals. The motivation is there to provoke a good battle. This Sunday at Saratoga Ray Alquire faces off with Jeff Hrebenach for the under-1800 honors. There could be some interesting games for next weeks’ posts. We are at least two or more weeks away from the Finals and the Consolation Swiss at Schenectady being ready to start, and perhaps as long before Saratoga’s final places are settled. I haven’t heard of when the Capital District Chess matches will begin. It shouldn’t be too far out in the future. So, more local chess from the clubs to come!