My last post featured Mr. Varela narrowing losing to Philip Sells. Continuing the saga of Carlos Varela’s play for the first time in the Schenectady Finals, here is a neat win from the rising scholastic player, Zack Calderone.

If you missed the two recent posts to this blog by Philip Sells on the NYS Scholastic Championship and the Eastern Team Tourney, page back and give them a read. They are timely and excellent reports of important chess events.

Zack loves the tactical side of chess. It is not often he gets caught misunderstanding the tactical tricks that come up when playing on the ragged edge of safety. This time he does. Carlos Varela has had three losses in a row going into this game in the Championship Finals. He did not allow previous results to dampen his ardor, and he maintain his calm demeanor, met aggression with active play and took the full point. Short though it is, today’s game is interesting.

Varela, Carlos - Calderone, Zack [A80]
SCC Finals, Schenectady, NY, 01.03.2012

1.d4 e6 2.Nf3 f5 3.Bf4 Nf6 4.e3,..

Here are three games from the databases showing the ideas the masters have about how to play this line of the Dutch. In the first Franz, against Tal no less, tries the natural idea of finachettoing his light squared Bishop. That’s not such a bad notion, but Tal is Tal and finds a way to win.

(49812) Tal, Mihail - Franz, Joachim [A80]
Riga (4), 08.12.1959
1.d4 e6 2.Nf3 f5 3.Bf4 Nf6 4.e3 b6 5.Nbd2 Bb7 6.c3 Be7 7.Bd3 c5 8.h3 cxd4 9.exd4 Nc6 10.0–0 0–0 11.Re1 Rc8 12.Nc4 Ne4 13.Nfd2 b5 14.Ne3 Nxd2 15.Qxd2 Bg5 16.Nc2 Bxf4 17.Qxf4 Ne7 18.Bxb5 Ng6 19.Qd6 Qg5 20.Qg3 Qd2 21.Rac1 Rf6 22.Bxd7 Rd8 23.Qc7 Rxd7 24.Qxd7 Bxg2 25.Kxg2 Nf4+ 26.Kh1 Qxf2 27.Qe8+ Rf8 28.Qc6 g5 29.Rf1 Qh4 30.Rxf4 Qxh3+ 31.Kg1 Qg3+ 32.Qg2 Qxf4 33.Rf1 Qh4 34.d5 exd5 35.Nd4 1–0

In the second two strong Grandmasters do a careful dance keeping things in balance and trading off material until a draw was certain. Vladimir Kramnik, the former World Champion, in an article he contributed to book by Dvoretsky and Yusupov; Positional Play, Henry Holt, NYC, 1996; said in exchange for weakening his dark squares, Black obtains a space advantage in the Dutch. Kramnik went on to say Black has an easier time playing the positions of the Stonewall Dutch than does White mostly because of the difficulty White has in choosing a plan. His ultimate conclusion was the Stonewall is an entirely useful defense at even the top levels of chess.

(295629) Piket, Jeroen (2615) - Nikolic, Predrag (2635) [A80]
Hoogovens Wijk aan Zee (1), 01.1992
1.Nf3 e6 2.d4 f5 3.Bf4 Nf6 4.e3 Be7 5.h3 0–0 6.c4 d6 7.Nc3 Ne4 8.Nxe4 fxe4 9.Nd2 d5 10.Be2 Nc6 11.Bh2 Bd6 12.Bxd6 Qxd6 13.Rc1 Ne7 14.Qb3 c6 15.0–0 Nf5 16.cxd5 cxd5 17.Rc3 Bd7 18.Rfc1 Bc6 19.Bb5 Bxb5 20.Qxb5 Qe7 21.Rc7 Qg5 22.Qe2 Nd6 23.Qg4 Qxg4 24.hxg4 Rac8 25.Nb3 Rxc7 26.Rxc7 Rf7 27.Rc2 Kf8 28.Kh2 b6 29.Kg3 Ke8 30.Nd2 h6 ½–½

In the third we see some of the ideas from the Varela - Calderone game with the addition of the Q-side fianchetto for Black. Once again that natural idea does not help the Black cause.

(808115) Miltner, Arndt (2380) - Gschwendtner, Michael (2245) [A80]
BL2-Sued 0304 Germany, 2003
1.d4 f5 2.Nf3 e6 3.Bf4 Nf6 4.e3 b6 5.Bd3 Bb7 6.Nbd2 Be7 7.h3 Ne4 8.Qe2 Nxd2 9.Nxd2 c5 10.0–0–0 0–0 11.Rhg1 Nc6 12.c3 cxd4 13.exd4 Bg5 14.Bxg5 Qxg5 15.g4 fxg4 16.Rxg4 Qh6 17.Rdg1 Rf7 18.Rg5 Kh8 19.Rh5 Nxd4 20.cxd4 Bf3 21.Qxf3 Rxf3 22.Rxh6 Rxd3 23.Rh4 Rc8+ 24.Kd1 Rc4 25.Rgg4 g5 26.Rxg5 Rcxd4 27.Rxd4 Rxd4 28.Ke2 Rb4 29.b3 Rh4 30.Rg3 b5 31.Nf3 Re4+ 32.Kd3 Rf4 33.Ke3 Rf6 34.Ne5 1–0

Kramnik’s Stonewall article sets out the conditions where Black is justified in breaking open the K-side with an advance of his g-pawn. One of the key elements is a Bishop trade occurring on f4 with the resulting recapture there by a White pawn. Without that sort of slight weakening of the White formation, the advance of the g-pawn not to work well for Black. It is always interesting to see, or hear Grandmasters explain specific ideas underlying their planning. This is particularly true when the ideas are not widely known.

Another point Kramnik makes is rote play is not the order of the day in the Dutch for either side. First generally, the opening is quite strategic where both sides have to adjust plans in response to the opponent’s disposition of forces. Second and more specifically, White usually thinks about trading off the Black Nb8 when it develops. That is so even if he has to do it with a Knight he took time to get to e5, or giving up his dark squared Bishop. Kramnik believes giving Black the Bishop pair is not a bad idea if Black’s pawns are kept on the light squares.

Most of Kramnik’s remarks were made about lines where White developed his light squares Bishop to g2. He did mention that much of what he said applies to other Dutch lines as well.

All the foregoing is a tremendous amount of palaver to get us to move 4 for Black! However this game goes wrong for Zack pretty quickly. If we are to understand why, some serious thought has to be given to the fundamental schemes for each side.

4..., d5 5.Bd3 c6 6.c3!?,..

I have a liking for this move also and play it frequently against the Dutch. Igor Khenkin, another Russian GM also contributed comments on the Dutch for the Dvoretsky book. His story began with his infatuation with the c2-c3 move combined with the Knight tour g1/h3/f4/d3 in conjunction with Bc1-f4-e5, and the Nb1 traveling to f3 via d2. Khenkin recounts games that led him to concluded c2-c3 can be adequately met by Black’s Stonewall. Khenkin remains devoted to the Knight tour idea. Kramnik takes issue with that in an editorial aside. Kramink believes the Ng1 should go to f3 directly and submit’s a variation or two to back his claim.

Good alternatives here for Varela are; 6 h3, securing the Bf4 from harassment, 6 c4, to create pressure on the Black center, castling now, or 6 Nbd2, keeping open the option of where the c-pawn will go.

6..., Bd6 7.Ne5,..

Superficially the development of the Black Bishop to d6 looks odd. To offer to trade a good Bishop for one that is theoretically not so good runs counter to the general principles set out by Tarrasch and his successors over the last one hundred plus years. The Stonewall Dutch is something of a special case. There are a number of factors to consider: The White Bf4 can go to e5 if unopposed and give itself up for a valuable Black Knight As good as the light squared White Bishop may appear to be, the “stonewall” of pawns; b7, c6, d5, e6, f2, makes problematical its chances for great activity. And, mechanisms exist to improve the usefulness of the ..,Bc8; ..,b7-b6 & ..,Bc8-a6; or the known maneuver; ..,Bc8-d7;..,Bd7-e8; .., Be8-h5. Taken all together, these factors must have motivated White’s 7th move.

Carlos Varela has played rated chess since 1999, but until the last year or two not very frequently. Once he got to play regularly in early 2010, his rating began a steady climb from 1300 to the present 1740 high. I have watched several of his games and played him a time or two in that span. It seemed to me he was under rated. The published numbers did not accurately reflect the skill shown in his over the board performance. Today’s game fits that observation.

7..., 0–0 8.Nd2 Ne4?!

One more of the oddities of the Dutch. Obviously both sides have designs on planting a Knight on an advanced post on the e-file. However timing that move is important. Although both sides want to put a Knight in an advanced e-file outpost, they must consider, and calculate carefully, the advanced Knight being captured by the nearby Bishop. Taking the Knight with the adjacent Bishop turns the dynamic outpost into a static point. Play then can turn to file opening schemes, primarily the f-file, and positional maneuvering becomes a tactical clash.

The most pointed criticism of the text is there’s no immediate reason to rush this occupation. Black can do other useful things; 8..., Qc7; so that the eventual .., Nbd7; will result in pressure against the Bf4, or 8..., c5; obtaining space on the Q-side. The text move is a harbinger of an attack before all the Black pieces are developed. Something that is usually not a good idea.

9.Ndf3 g5?!

And so it comes. There is no immediate tactical refutation, but all of the Black Q-side forces are still in their tents. Even if Black obtains some concession from White with this violent action, he must lose momentum completing his development. The useful moves noted in the previous note are still valid alternatives.

10.Bxe4 gxf4 11.Bd3 Bxe5?!

Somewhat better is 11..., fxe3; damaging the White pawn formation a little.

12.Nxe5 Qg5?

The point that Black must have believed justified the risky play leading to this position.

13.Qf3!?,..

Possible is 13 h4!, and 13..., Qxg2? 14 Ke2 Kh8 15 Rg1 Qh2 16 Nf3 Qh3 17 exf4, gives White a large, almost winning advantage. If Black does not take the g-pawn, then 13..., Qh6 14 exf4 Qxf4? 15 Qh5, is very promising for White. And finally, 14..., Nd7 15 Qf3, with an excellent game for White. The game move allows White to claim some advantage but not as significant as after 13 h4.

13..., fxe3 14.fxe3 Nd7 15.h4 Qg7 16.Nxd7 Bxd7 17.Rh3 Kh8 18.0–0–0?!,..

Black has really not done so badly after White did not go for the best line on move 13. Logical, and conforming to those general principles we have all heard repeatedly, as this move appears, it is not quite as good as the forcing 18 Rg3.

18..., e5 19.Rg3 Qh6?

A puzzling choice. By playing 19..., Qf6; defending the pawn on e5, Black keeps his chances alive after; 20 dxe5 Qxe5 21 Rg5 h6; and the slight advantage White enjoys is not very threatening. The text give up a pawn for complications that turn out to favor White. The affection Mr. Calderone has for tactical play led him astray here. He should have been satisfied with the equality available.

20.dxe5 f4?

This was the point of the Black scheme. It unfortunately is flawed.

21.Rg5 fxe3 22.Qxe3 Qxh4 23.e6! 1–0

This move must have been the one overlooked by Black. After some thought Zack resigned here. The decision was forced by the lines; 23..., Be8 24 Qe5+, with mate the next move, and 23..., Qf4 24 Qxf4 Rxf4 25 Rh1, will require Black to give up a Rook to avoid mate.

It is true that tactics are some huge part of chess, however, the thing Morphy taught the chess world 150 years ago; getting all your pieces involved in the game is the requirement for successful tactical solutions. In this game Zack Calderone forgot the lesson.

More soon.