Alan Le Cours and I have known each other for some long time, decades in fact. Somehow we did not get to play much if at all over those many years until recently. I began attending the Saratoga Club and playing in their championship event and Alan did similarly become part of the Schenectady championship regulars in about the middle of this past decade. Now we face-off over the board a couple of times each year. Honors have been about even. Our skill and fighting spirit seem to be an level match-up, therefore, winning a game from him is gratifying and losing one no shock.
Consolation Swiss
Date: 2010
White: Le Cours, A
Black: Little, B
1. Nf3 d5
2. d4 Nf6
3. c4 dxc4
We both were members of GM Ronen Har-Zvi’s Saturday study group for the past three years. One subject explored at length was the Slav Defense. The GM covered it in depth over about six months of meetings of the group. During that trip through the intricacies of the many flavors of the Slav, Alan did some of his own research on the Dutch variation of the Slav and published to an interested group an opening survey of this line.
A year ago Alan and I played a Slav that ended drawn in just a few moves. We were both leery what trick the other might have thought up. This time, when preparing for the game, I thought about some way to vary the program from the Slav without playing some kind of KID/Benko/Benoni line. As part of the Slav study, Ronen had touched on some tricky wrinkles in the KID that has the pros moving away from it, the Benoni has never been a favorite of mine and my tries with the Benko have been unsuccessful the last few years. By that process of elimination, the QGA came to the fore.
4. e3 e6
5. Bxc4 a6
6. a4 c5
7. O-O Nc6
8. Nc3 Qc7
9. Qe2 Be7
More usual is 9.…, Bd6. GM Glenn Flear, in his book “New Ideas in the Queen’s Gambit Accepted”, Batsford, London, 1994 suggested the game move as an improvement over putting the Bishop on d6. He thinks there may be some advantage for Black in not having to recapture immediately on c5 with the Bishop if 10 dxc5. GM Flear supports his position with two and half columns of dense analysis quoting several GM games from the early 1990’s. That mass of material was certainly not in my head in any well digested fashion when playing the move. What I did have was his suggestion, and the …, Ng4; idea if White pushes e3-e4 quickly.
10. Rd1 O-O
11. e4 ….
After the game, Alan said h2-h3 was needed to prevent the Knight leaping to g4. This is where that should be tried. Flear believes that Black can find equality if, in reply to the h-pawn advancing one square, he plays
11..., Bd7; but must be very accurate subsequently.
11.… Ng4
12. Be3? ….
Le Cours spots the fundamental trick behind 11..., Ng4. If 12 h3, Nxd4; wins material because 13 Nxd4??, loses to 13..., Qh7+; and mate to follow. However, he did not come up with the best answer, 12 g3, after about 18 minutes of thought. That is not surprising. Difficult decisions abound in this position. One alternative line goes: 12 dxc5, Bxc5; 13 Be3, Nxe3; 14 fxe3, Qb6; 15 Re1, when according to theory White is in good shape. Maybe a GM could see that White is not in trouble, but we at a lower level would not be thrilled to have double e-pawns and an opponent with the Bishop pair versus a Bishop and a Knight. After the recommended move; 12 g3, straight forward play; 12..., cxd4; 13 Nxd4, Nxd4; 14 Rxd4, Bc5; leads to an edge for Black. The pressure on f2 and c4 will likely win a pawn. In this line White has to find tricky moves such as 13 Bf4!?, when the game goes spinning off into very complex play indeed.
I had the advantage in preparation here. Flear’s work had given me the idea …, Ng4; with the notion of making threats on h2, c4 and d4. It is always surprising how clear things become when a correct idea is in your mind in a chess game. Alan was not so equipped. He was working through complicated calculations and trying to evaluate unfamiliar positions. Those problems were burning time. The flaw in the text move is it does not end any of the threats.
12.… cxd4
13. Bxd4 Nxd4
14. Rxd4 Bc5
15. h3 ….
White now had 47 minutes remaining for the balance of the game and he is down the Exchange. Black had 87 minutes remaining with a clear plan for the rest of the game; force trades of material using the Queen’s natural affinity for double attacks until a Rook versus minor piece ending is reached. This idea means the Queens stay on until as much damage as possible is done to the White pawns. Every weakness in the White pawn formation inflicted will pay dividends in the ending.
15.… Bxd4
16. hxg4 Bxc3
17. bxc3 Bd7
18. a5 ….
I was more concerned about 18 e5, but analysis with the computer shows the text is a good try for White.
18.… Rac8
19. Nd2 Bb5
Simple and forcing, the text is in line with the plan mentioned above; trading and making targets. More Grandmaster-like is 19..., Rfd8; getting everything developed before making significant changes in the position. I thought White might play Ra1-b1 at some point offering the a-pawn in hopes of trading down to pawns on the K-side only. If the Bishops go off in that sequence, the Knight would have some chances of holding versus the Rook.
20. Bxb5 axb5
21. Qxb5 Qxc3
My Queen begins to make double attacks. White now has the added need to be very precise lest one of these wins more material.
22. Nb3 Qc6
23. Qb4 Rfd8
Now everything of mine is out and working. All I have to do is not to become “dizzy with success” as I did the week before against Barnes. Alan’s time stood at 32 minutes for the rest of the game. I had 77 minutes.
24. Rc1 Qd7
25. Re1 ….
What else? If 25 Rxc8, Rxc8; 26 Nc5, Qd1+; 27 Kh2, Qd6+, wins more material. The best try is 25 Nc5, then 25..., Qd2; 26 Qa3, Rd4; keeps the pressure on, but White has hope for an error by Black.
25... Qd6
I was pretty confident for no concrete reason that Alan would not agree to a trade of Queens here. This is a moment when chess and Poker come close to one another. In Poker there are intances where you get a "read" on what your opponent intends. It is similar in chess.
Trading is probably the correct choice for White, then trying to engineer the exchange of the a-pawn for the b-pawn. Such a plan shouldn’t hold the position for White, but it is a reasonable try in a bad situation. My move did not conform to my plan and could have made winning a little less simple.
26. Qb5 Qc6
27. Qg5 h6
Taking advantage of the Queen’s post to create a “luft” for my King at no cost of time. White was down to 12 minutes, I had 70 minutes remaining. The following moves were made in just four or five minutes of total time. Alan played them out just to check if I had the right idea.
28. Qf4 Qc3
29. Re3 Rd3
30. Rxd3 Qxd3
31. Nd2 e5
32. Qe3 Qxe3
33. fxe3 Rc5
Resigns.
Preparation can be memorizing long strings of moves. Such has not been very useful to me over the years. As in this game, preparation of a really good idea ou a general theme that works in a particular position, along with a sketch of the tactics that support the idea, have worked the best for me. That is what happened in this game. I caught Alan in a hole in his preparation, and managed for once, not to lose my composure in the face of success. The problem is really the next time Alan and I play. He will put his considerable talent to work finding a surprise for me, no doubt.
In the Finals Philip Sells took the lead with a win from John Phillips. The game followed a pattern becoming common when Mr. Sells is playing, lots of moves in time trouble. This time the players reached move 25 with roughly the same amount of time remaining, 20+ minutes. They made more than forty-five moves each in those remaining minutes. I was not well placed to see the clock and did not record the time per move in the last flurry when both were down to very little time.
SCC Ch Finals 09-10
Date: 4/8/2010
White: Sells, P
Black: Phillips, J
1. e4 c5
2. Nf3 g6
3. d4 cxd4
4. Nxd4 Nc6
5. c4 Nf6
6. Nc3 d6
7. Be2 Nxd4
8. Qxd4 Bg7
9. Be3 O-O
10. Qd2 Be6
11. O-O Re8
After ten and one half moves of heavy duty theory we have a move not recommended by any of the opening mavens. Up to Black’s last there are a large number of games in the databases, many by the best such as Ivanchuk, Kramnik, Adams, Psakhis, etc. as White and Anand, Alteman, Khalifman, Kovacevic, etc; as Black. The “big guys” have mostly tried 11..., Qa5; a few have taken the alternative 11..., a6. Both of these moves intend counter-play against the so-called “Maroczy Bind” formation with such thrusts as …, b7-b5; and maybe …, d6-d5. Expert opinion has swung pendulum-like from claiming a near winning edge for White to believing Black has more than adequate counter-chances.
The game move was tried just one time by Laszlo, D against Korbel, F in the 1951 Hungarian Championship. In those days before ELO ratings and FIDE titles it is hard to judge the quality of players. Laszlo finished minus 3 in the ’51 event losing to Benko and Barcza while winning from Szabo, L. and Florian, T. Clearly Laszlo is of master strength, Koberl played in several Hungarian Championships in the early 1950’s racking up an even score and was likely about IM strength. Koberl defeated Laszlo but it does not appear the opening had much to do with the outcome. The game went to a Rook endgame finishing in 54 moves.
Looking at the position with my computer found nothing in particular about the text to suggest there is some deep or hidden intention in it. My guess is the plan the GM’s like of starting action on the Q-side to breakdown White’s light squared pawn wall is a better choice.
12. Rab1 ….
More usual for White is to place his Rooks on c1 and d1. Some very good players have suggested putting a Rook on b1 to prepare the push b2-b4 grabbing space on the Q-side as a viable alternative to the standard Rook placement.
12.… a5?!
This looks wrong because it does not support the …, b7-b5; break.
13. b3 Ng4
14. Bd4 Bh6
This very small tactical interlude is apparently the reason why Sells didn’t want a Rook on c1. When I play the Maroczy Bind I prefer to put a pawn on f3 preventing the tactic. For some reason Philip rather would trade off Black’s dark squared Bishop.
15. Qd1 Ne5
16. Nd5 Nc6?
Black overlooks a standard trick for White in the Sicilian. The White dark squared Bishop and the Knight conquer b6 leading to material loss. Better is 16..., Nd7; or even 16..., Ra5; trying to defend b6. After the text, Black is losing. Black has the worse of it after 16..., Nd7; 17 f4, but material loss is avoided.
17. Bb6 Qd7
18. Nc7 Nb4
19. Nxa8 ….
White could have played 19 c5, threatening 20 Bb5. The game continuation is simpler and simpler is better. White has an Exchange in his pocket, and Black has no compensation to offset it.
19... Rxa8
20. a3 Qc6
21. Bd4 Na6
22. b4 Qc7
Black must be hoping to get some compensation by breaking up the Q-side pawns getting open lines for his lone Rook and Bishops. The problem is White has two Rooks to oppose a single Rook and his Bishops can certainly fend off the Black Bishops.
23. Qd3 Rc8
24. Be3 Bxe3
25. Qxe3 axb4
26. axb4 Bxc4
27. Rfc1 b5
28. Bxc4 bxc4
29. b5 ….
The result of Black carrying out his plan is White has, at the cost of a pawn, freed the b-pawn which will keep the Black pieces busy preventing it rushing towards the 8th rank. The rest of the game is easy to understand. Philip will keep his b-pawn on the board to tie up Black, then work towards winning back the pawn, finally using his material advantage to break the blockade of the b-pawn eventually getting more material for the demon pawn.
Time. Sells was under 20 minutes remaining for the balance of the game. Phillips had somewhere about 35 minutes.
29.… Nb8
30. Rb4 c3
31. Rb3 Qa5
32. h4 Rc5
33. Rcxc3 Nd7
34. Rxc5 Nxc5
35. Rb1 Qa2
36. Qc1 ….
White must have been down to very little time remaining, he was moving almost instantly. Quibbling about whether the absolute best move is found at each turn is useless. It is enough that White avoids serious error and doesn’t drop material.
36.… Qe2
37. Qe1 Qc4
38. b6 ….
The beast shakes loose. Black has to rush to get it back under lock and key.
38.… Qa6
39. Qb4 Qb7
40. f3 Kf8
The monarch hurries to lend a hand stopping the b-pawn. Black must have began to feel the pressure of the clock, he was now moving very quickly too.
41. Qa5 Ke8
42. Qa7 Kd7
43. Qxb7+ Nxb7
44. Rc1 Nc5
45. e5 ….
White got the Queens off and now seeks to break open lines so his Rook can roam unhindered. The Rook’s long legs will most times have no great problem out running the Knight’s short legs. Pawns will fall one way or another.
45.…. Kc6
46. exd6 exd6
47. Rb1 Nb7
48. Kf2 d5
49. Ke3 ….
Sensibly the White King approaches to take a hand in the final fight.
49.… Nc5
50. Kd4 Nb7
51. Ke5 f5
With 51..., Nd6; 52 b7, Nxb7; 53 Rc1+, Kd7; 54 Kxd5, Black would have gotten to a technically lost ending, but getting down to all pawns on one side of the board holds some hope in a time scramble. That would have been a sterner test of Philip’s technique. The text allows the scary b-pawn to remain on the board limiting Black’s choices. John was so short of time that he elected to try his luck with his own charging pawn.
52. h5 Kc5
53. hxg6 hxg6
54. f4 d4
55. Kf6 Kc4?
Abandoning the K-side is less testing than trying to keep the several White pawns from breaking loose with 55..., Kd5; 56 Kxg6, Ke4; 57 g3, d3; when White is still far ahead but time to think just how to win the won game is not available. The way the game goes permits White to create a gang of free running pawns, too many for the only Black resource, the Knight, will not be able to do much.
56. Kxg6 Kc3
57. Kxf5 d3
58. g4 Kc2
59. Rh1 d2
60. g5 1-0
The game continued for several more moves with John Queening, Philip capturing the Queen with his Rook, and then demonstrating a single Knight can not cope with three passed pawns when its King is not available to lend a hand. My guess is nearly 70 moves were played altogether.
More tomorrow. There will be a couple of games from last week and hopfully new ones from tonight in both the Consolation and the Finals.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
I would like to add a couple of comments to Bill's explanations of the game. I'll go through sequentially. Hopefully this isn't too long.
The point behind 11...Re8 is twofold: first, the forced exchange of dark-squared bishops after Bh6 is avoided, and second, the move could be viewed as preparation for ...Qa5 to follow. After 11...Qa5, there could follow the standard sequence (as sometimes seen in the normal Dragon Sicilian) of 12.Nd5 Qxd2 and now not 13.Bxd2, but first the Zwischenzug 13.Nxe7+ Kh8 and then 14.Bxd2. Of course, Black would then have 14...Nxe4 and the game goes on in somewhat murky circumstances, but with his d-pawn then isolated, Black might not be greatly thrilled about his position. So 11...Re8 protects the e7-pawn so that, after ...Qa5, White gains nothing from exchanging queens with Nd5. I do agree with Bill that this move is not really to the point, though.
The importance of Black's decision with 12...a5? is hard to overstate. I give it a full "?" mark because it immediately takes away the two main components of Black's queenside play in this variation: ...Qa5 is obviously not possible, and as Bill points out, the break on b5 is not supported by this move. I would go further and say that not only is it unsupported, it becomes nearly impossible for Black to execute in any sensible way. Basically, the b5-square has been given away cheaply, which means that if Black can't make either of those two moves happen (...Qa5 and/or ...b7-b5), White has a much freer hand on the queenside than he should be given. So the strategic consequences of that move for my opponent were indeed serious.
Regarding the ...Bh6 maneuver: I chose the Rab1 placement based on more general considerations of planning for this middlegame, not so much because of the little tactical problem (though of course, not having to worry about the skewer helps). Based on my experience with both colors in this variation (most recently playing Black vs. Richman at the Saratoga Open last February), the black bishop pair can become annoying for White. If one pair of bishops is exchanged, Black's counterplay loses some of its pep throughout the middlegame. And why not offer to trade the dark-squared one, which is one of Black's best pieces? And this way, I reserve some options with my f-pawn as well, such as pushing up to f5, ultimately, which can be very attractive if Black isn't careful. (Ironically, in my game with Richman, it was precisely the move ...Bh6 that produced the first little nagging problems in White's position, which eventually became more serious.)
The move 22.b4 is an important choice. At that moment, both of White's apparently loose pawns on c4 and e4 are indirectly protected because of tactics (22...Qxe4?? 23.Bf3 Qe5 24.Bxb7 +-; 22...Bxc4?? 23.b5 Bxe2 24.Qxe2 +-). I didn't want Black's knight coming back into the game via c5 and threatening my e-pawn that way. The push to b4 is consequential, because it does loosen the c-file; but I had to believe in my reasoning about the position.
The white e-pawn was left in the air by 36.Qc1, but 36...Nxe4 would have been risky--Black would have to find some way to avoid variations like 37.Qb2 Qd5 38.b6 Qb7 39.Ra1 Nf6 {or 39...Nc5 with the same idea} 40.Ra7 Qb8 41.b7 +-.
Instead of 39.Qb4, I should have seen 39.b7! Nxb7 40.Qc3! f6 (40...Nc5?? 41.Rb8+ mates) 41.Q-check and 42.Qxb7 winning at once.
Ugh, comment was too long, so I had to split it up. Here's the rest.
Bill's commentary on the later middlegame and the endgame was to the point. I liked his narrative there. One cute line worth mentioning, however, is 49...f6 as a try for Black to restrain the white king for a little bit (taking away the e5-square). This loosens the kingside too much, though, since then we might get something like 50.Kd4 Nd6 51.b7 Nxb7 52.Rxb7! Kxb7 53.Kxd5 Kc7 54.Ke6 f5 55.h5. Now if Black were to try for a stalemate trap with 55...Kd8 56.h6 Ke8 57.Kf6 Kf8 58.f4 Kg8, White can just go along with 59.Ke7! Kh8 60.Kf7! g5 61.fxg5 f4 before letting Black's king out with 62.Kf6 winning.
An entertaining breakthrough motif turns up if the ...f7-f6 idea is combined with an initial 49...h5. Then the game could go 50.Kd4 f6 51.g4 Kd6 52.f4! hxg4 53.f5 gxf5 54.h5 Ke6 55.h6 Kf7 56.Rc1 Nd6 57.Rc7+ Kg8 58.Kxd5 +-.
To Bill's suggestion of an improvement for Black in 51...Nd6, I think I might have been moved to try 52.Rc1+ Nc4+ 53.Kf6 instead of allowing the partial simplification to kingside pawns only that he mentioned. Then maybe the game would have gone 53...Kxb6 54.Kxf7 Kc5 55.Kg7 d4 56.Kxh7 d3 57.Kxg6 and I just shove the h-pawn and win.
Finally, on 55...Kd5 56.Kxg6 Ke4 as is suggested in the post, not 57.g3, but rather 57.g4! is lights out in view of 57...Nd6 (57...fxg4 58.f5 +-; 57...Kxf4 58.gxf5 +-) 58.gxf5 Nxf5 59.Re1+ Ne3 60.b7 +-.
Well, okay, absolutely the last academic point is that the game finished a little differently than Bill recorded: from move 58 went 58.Ke5 Kc2 59.Rh1 d2 60.f5 d1=Q 61.Rxd1 Kxd1 62.f6 Nd8 63.Kd6 Ke2 64.Kd7 Nf7 65.b7 Ne5+ 66.Kc8 1-0. It was just a question of which kingside pawn White sends on--the general idea is of course the same either way.
I was long-winded here, yes--apologies. But at the time that I saw Bill the other night, I didn't even know this post was already up; otherwise I would have posted here myself.
Post a Comment