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.