A Typical Game from the Consolation Tourney

It is not always possible to publish here local games in strict chronological order. The desire to tell the stories of title competitions and upsets push the tales of games with ratings outcomes predicted by the ratings back down the queue. Today’s game is one such.

Matt Clough and Dilip Aaron both came on the scene not too long ago. Dilip is much the younger man and a rising scholastic star. Matt, an adult, who came later in his life to competitive chess. Matt broke into chess in 2008. Dilip, from a family of chess players, began his competitive career a few years earlier in 2003 as a grade school student. Dilip has climbed the ladder of competition to be one of the stronger scholastic players locally with a high Class B rating. Matt made good progress also. He has reached a high Class C rating. I am sure Mr. Clough looked at this game as an opportunity to make a step forward if he could win this contest. Mr. Aaron probably expected to win, but a single rating class difference is no lock for the higher rated player. On to the game:

Clough, Matthew - Aaron, Dilip [D47]
SCC Consolation Tourney Schenectady, NY, 10.02.2012

1.d4 d5 2.Nf3 e6 3.c4 Nf6 4.Nc3 c6 5.e3 Nbd7 6.Bd3,..

Very much mainstream theory.

6..., Be7

Still theory, but Dilip takes a less popular path. Capturing on c4 is by far the most frequently chosen move. Other Bf8 deployments to d6 or b4 are also more popular than the text. The move played in the game isn’t bad, it is just less active and quieter. A hundred years ago Cohn defeated one of the strongest Russian players of the day when Bernstein tried the move:

(6824) Cohn, Erich - Bernstein, Ossip [D47]
St Petersburg, 1909
1.d4 d5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.c4 e6 4.Nc3 c6 5.e3 Nbd7 6.Bd3 Be7 7.0–0 dxc4 8.Bxc4 b5 9.Bd3 a6 10.e4 Bb7 11.Qe2 c5 12.Rd1 c4 13.Bc2 0–0 14.Bg5 Re8 15.e5 Nd5 16.Ne4 Nf8 17.Nd6 Bxg5 18.Nxb7 Qe7 19.Nd6 Reb8 20.Be4 Ra7 21.Bxd5 exd5 22.Nxg5 Qxg5 23.Qf3 b4 24.Qxd5 c3 25.bxc3 bxc3 26.Qc5 Rd7 27.Qxc3 Ne6 28.Qg3 Qh5 29.f4 h6 30.Rab1 Rb2 31.Qc3 Rxg2+ 32.Kxg2 Nxf4+ 33.Kh1 Rxd6 34.Rf1 Rxd4 35.Qxd4 1–0

The move 6..., Be7; showed up infrequently in the games of the elite in the next decades. White had success against it when it did appear. Here is one of the few Black victories:

(15151) Johner, Hans - Bogoljubow, Efim [D46]
Bern (6), 1932

1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 c6 3.Nf3 d5 4.Nc3 e6 5.e3 Nbd7 6.Bd3 Be7 7.0–0 0–0 8.Qe2 dxc4 9.Bxc4 b5 10.Bb3 b4 11.Nb1 c5 12.Rd1 Bb7 13.Nbd2 Qc7 14.Bc4 a5 15.a4 Nb6 16.Bd3 Rfd8 17.Nc4 Nxc4 18.Bxc4 cxd4 19.Rxd4 Ne4 20.Bd3 Nc5 21.Qc2 e5 22.Rxd8+ Rxd8 23.Bc4 Be4 24.Qe2 Bd3 25.Bxd3 Nxd3 26.Qd2 Nxb2 0–1

Of course Bogoljubow was one of the strongest players in the world at the time and a recent challenger for the world title, so a win with a doubtful line of play against a more ordinary master should not surprise.

In more recent times this development of the Black Bishop has been seen less and less done by the top players. One of the few examples is:

(344226) Gelfand, Boris (2690) - Ljubojevic, Ljubomir (2605) [D46]
11th Linares (10), 1993

1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.Nf3 Nf6 4.Nc3 e6 5.e3 Nbd7 6.Bd3 Be7 7.0–0 0–0 8.Qe2 b6 9.e4 dxe4 10.Nxe4 c5 11.Nxf6+ Nxf6 12.Rd1 cxd4 13.Bf4 Bc5 14.Be5 Bb7 15.Nxd4 Nd7 16.Nb3 Qg5 17.Bg3 Rad8 18.Nxc5 Nxc5 19.Bc2 f5 20.f3 f4 21.Bf2 e5 22.b4 Nd7 23.c5 bxc5 24.bxc5 Kh8 25.h4 Qh5 26.Qb5 Bxf3 27.gxf3 Qxf3 28.Qd3 Qg4+ 29.Kh2 e4 30.Qxe4 Nf6 31.Qg2 Qe2 32.Rxd8 Rxd8 33.Rg1 g6 34.Be1 Qc4 35.Rf1 Re8 36.Bb3 Qxc5 37.Qb2 Kg7 38.Bc3 f3 39.Bxf6+ Kh6 40.Qd2+ Kh5 41.Qd5+ Qxd5 42.Bxd5 Re2+ 43.Kg3 1–0

Gelfand, one the leading lights of those days twenty years ago when Kasparov still roamed the chess world, and is the current challenger for the world title(!), had worked out the approach, the central counter-attack, demonstrated in the above game several years before. As Gelfand’s idea became widely known, the move, 6..., Be7; declined even more in popularity with the Grandmasters.

7.0–0 dxc4 8.Bxc4 b5 9.Bd3 Bb7

When we look at some of the games cited above, and other examples in the databases, we see Black more often chooses to push the b-pawn to b4 displacing the Nc3. Taking up the Meran triangle; a6, b5, c6, is not a common occurrence. Why? It seems grabbing space on the Q-side is more useful for Black.

10.Qe2!?,..

A bit questionable. The standard answer here is 10 e4, immediately reacting to the Q-wing maneuvering with action in the center a la Gelfand. Given time Black will get in .., c3-c5;

10..., a6 11.a3?!,..

White’s eye is attracted to potential problems arising from an eventual .., b5-b4. What’s better? The main requirement is to recognize the position for what it is and what can be done. Stopping .., c6-c5; is not possible, White has no lead in development and the Black Bishops are just a bit better placed than are White’s - where can the Bc1 go? The facts on the board tell White to head for a line that trades off minor pieces and lets him complete development.

A logical try for the Bc1 is b2-b4, and Bc1-b2. That scheme has to be calculated carefully because the advance of the b-pawn may leave a minor piece on the c-file under defended to a Black heavy piece appearing there. If White has to delay the b4 push, the Bc1 stays home and underfoot. So this is the moment to deal with the transition to a playable middle game. Two paths emerge; 11 a4 b4 12 Ne4 Nxe4 13 Bxe4 Nf6 14 Bc2 c5 15 dxc5 Bxc5 16 b3, with further trades of minor pieces to come, and White aims for equality, or 11 e4 c5 12 e5 Nd5 13 Rd1 cxd4 14 Nxd5 Bxd5 15 Nxd4, and White can find employment for the Bc1. Either way the game is equal, or close to it. Instead, the text should result in Black obtaining a positional plus.

11..., c5 12.dxc5 Nxc5 13.Rd1!?,..

A little better is 13 Bc2, preserving the Bishop pair.

13..., Qc7?!?

There is no good reason to pass on playing 13..., Nxd3; reaching a position where the two Bishops will give Black the long term initiative. White can try 14 Rxd3 Qc7 15 e4, but further advance of the e-pawn will likely give space behind the White lines that the Bishops can use.

14.Bc2 0–0 15.e4 Rfd8 16.Bg5,..

Black has had a very slight edge for the last few moves. White is counting this Bishop being driven to h4 and then g3 to oppose the Black Queen. Then either Black interposes his dark squared Bishop and there is a trade, or the Queen is pushed away.

16..., h6 17.Bh4 Qc6?

With a single move we can sometimes wreck our chances. Better choices are available. Either 17..., Ncd7; preparing to send the Knight to f8 anticipating the Nf6 being forced away from defense of the Black King by e4-e5 soon, or 17..., Rac8; getting the last piece into action. The text misses the powerful shot, 18 e5!, and then 18..., Nd5 19 Nxd5 Bxh4 20 Nb4!, collects a piece.

This short sequence is somewhat hidden, but it should be discoverable because one of the priorities for examination has to be forcing lines. Remember Har-Zvi’s wisdom about how and what to calculate: “Calculate forcing lines first.” When looking at those kind of lines one feature to always check are loose pieces. As GM Short famously says; “LPDO, loose pieces drop off.” Loose pieces are those that are not defended by some other unit. The Queen move leaves the Be7 loose for sure. Both players either weren’t aware of, or just forgot about forcing lines and Short’s saying.

18.Ne5?!,..

In light of the foregoing, this is second best. Black meanders a bit here

18..., Qc7 19.Bg3 Qb6 20.Kh1,..

And I am not so certain this is needful. Perhaps 20 h3, securing the future of the Bg3 is more useful.

20..., Re8?!

Another move that has to be questioned. Its intent is good; to make a place for the Ra8 to come into play on the d-file. There is in a chess game a “beat”, a rhythm of pieces and pawns moving to do something. This move feels as if it is a break in the beat for Black. The move grants White time to get in the advance b2-b4 which could lead to very complicated play such as; 21 b4 Red8!? 22 bxc5 Qxc5 23 Na2 Rxd1+ 24 Rxd1 Qxa3 25 Bb1, when the connected passed pawns Black has almost compensates for the piece surrendered. The most natural move for Black is 20..., Rac8; making the immediate push to b4 not appetizing for White.

21.f4!?,..

White has the prejudice of the less experienced player for direct attacks on the opposing King. Is a direct attack justified here? That is a delicate piece of chess judgment. What White is contemplating is not strictly a flank attack at first sight. It is more a forcing maneuver aimed at maybe creating a situation where a real direct flank attack can be tried. The difficulty with the idea is there are Rooks opposing each other on the open d-file raising the possibility of some, or many exchanges of material taking place. Another bit of old time wisdom; trading pieces can often take the poison out of an attack. All this adds difficulty to calculating all the lines if an all out attack is to be tried.

21..., Rad8 22.Rf1 Nfd7 23.f5 Nxe5 24.Bxe5 Bg5!

A move Mr. Clough may not have appreciated fully when considering this way of playing. The threat 25..., Rd2; has to be addressed.

25.Bf4 Bf6

The primary alternative here is; 25..., Bxf4; leading to Black retaining the initiative after; 26 Rxf4 exf5 27 Rxf5 b4 28 axb4 Qxb4; when White will have to, with 29 Raf1, offer up the e or b-pawn in exchange for action on the f-file to make a fight of it. Trades involving the capture of the e-pawn seem to favor Black in the double Rook endgame that can come about. I understand why Dilip hesitates to take that path having mind one more bit of chess wisdom; all Rook ends are draw, and double Rook doubly so. Black’s advantage in the contemplated ending would be razor thin; just a matter of a tempo ahead getting his Rooks into action.

26.b4?,..

What was a good idea is played too late to work well. The move drops a pawn. We have here an example of a saying from military science; order, counter-order, disorder, as it applies to chess. The organizing idea behind the recent White moves has been to attack the Black King. This shift to other action is inconsistent. More to the point is; 26 e5, and a period of sharp tactical play opens. It is difficult for both sides after 26..., exf5 27 Bxf5 g6 28 Bg4, when White maybe is beginning to have chances for a piece attack on the Black King. The very open character of the position and Black’s actively placed pieces offer excellent counter-play. Black would remain slight better, but the game is far from decided.

26..., Bxc3 27.bxc5 Qxc5 28.Rad1?,..

White loses faith. After beginning his attacking idea on move 21 with f2-f4, Matt hesitated and let his focus wander. This is another move off the point. To have a chance, such an attack must maintain its focus, and material concerns often have to be ignored. Here Black can’t afford to snatch the Exchange in the line; 28 fxe6 Bxa8 29 exf7+ Kxf7; because the discovered check picks off the Black Queen. Black will have recapture on e6 With his Rook, 28..., Rxe6; and after 29 Rad1 Rxd1 30 Rxd1, Black is much better, but White does have some threats.

28..., Rxd1 29.Qxd1 exf5 30.Bd6 Qc6

The battery down the h1-a8 diagonal freezes some of the White units because of mate at g2.

31.Rxf5 Rd8

The pin on the Bishop freezes more of the White forces.

32.Rd5 Qe8 0–1

The game move works well enough, but 32..., Qc4; is even better. It puts continuing pressure on e4 as does the game move, and it also taps ever so lightly on f1 with a mate threat. All then left for White is; 33 Be7 Rxd5 34 exd5 Bxd5; securing a second pawn and a dominating position for the Black pieces. After the text, 33 Rc5 Bxe4 34 Rxc3 Bxc2 35 Rxc2 Rxd6 36 Rd2 Rxd2 37 Qxd2 Qe5; a Queen ending two pawns up is not too difficult of a technical problem for the stronger side. However, Queen endings can be nerve testing; ticking clocks and perpetual checks can make even youthful player’s nerves feel the “yips”.

To sum up my impression of the game: Both players were not far off their standard of play. Dilip made an oversight on move 17 that could have cost him dearly. His play right after words was a little shaky. It could be he saw the problem right after the fact and that had an effect. He got back on track to finish the game in decent fashion. Matt Clough brought his chess imagination to the board. It is one of his strong points. With it he has carried the day against redoubtable players such as Phil Thomas of Troy and John Barnes of Schenectady. In this outing he did not follow through with his attacking idea with sufficient consistency. It is not clear that had he done so there was a win to be had, but doing so would have given him a “puncher’s chance.” Failing to do that led to defeat. An entertaining contest, it was.

More soon.