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.