Here is a short, sharp contest played on the first board of the Geezers - RPI match. Two pretty good players investigate the Bird’s Opening and demonstrate how the balance is kept.
Leisner, Jon - La Comb, Jeffery [A03]
CDCL Match Geezers v RPI Schenectady, NY, 05.04.2012
1.f4 d5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.e3 c5 4.b3 Nc6 5.Bb5 Bd7 6.Bb2 e6 7.0–0 Be7 8.Bxc6,..
Many local players would delay or avoid this trade because of a fuzzy understanding of dynamics in chess. There are multiple levels of chess wisdom; the general observation that Bishops are slightly better than Knights most of the time is one example. Along side of that bit of historically based knowledge stands a couple of other observations experienced players know; fighting for the center is important, and pieces need good posts from which to operate. Chess dynamics is getting your pieces working at their maximum output without prejudice. And, fighting for the center is equally important as such positional counters as the Bishops pair.
So, here the game comes to a place where a decision can be made; White might probe some more with 8 Qe2, or 8 d3, trying to determine just what Black plans to do, or he can proceed straight forwardly as in the game. By earlier putting the Bishop on b5, White declared he was ready to exchange the Bishop for the Nc6 - otherwise the move was senseless. The trade now reduces Black’s say over e5. That is the “good thing” White obtains for surrendering the Bishop pair. He plans to make use of the e5 square for his Knights. The wager is; a Knight on e5 will be so annoying to Black that he will trade off a Bishop to eliminate the piece on e5.
8..., Bxc6 9.Ne5 0–0 10.d3 Re8
Black could have retreated the Bc6 to e8 hanging on to the pair of Bishops. It is a playable idea, but the Black forces are then very much undeveloped. White could have been thinking along these lines; a pawn sacrifice might be justified if Black saves the Bc6. Play might continue; 10..., Be8 11 Nd2 Nd7 12 e4 d4 13 a4 Nxe5 14 fxe5 Qc7 15 Nc4 b5 16 axb5 Bxb5 17 Bc1 Bxc4 18 bxc4 Qxf5 19 Ra6!, when the a-pawn is indefensible, and White has a promising initiative. At least my experience playing against Jon Leisner makes me believe his thoughts ran in this vein.
11.Nd2 Nd7 12.Ndf3 f6 13.Nxc6 bxc6
White has achieved some things; if Black replies to e3-e4 with .., d4; his remaining Bishop looks not very useful, and a logical repositioning of the White minor pieces in that event is; Nd2/c4 with Bb2-a3 to follow. The position would then resemble a reversed Nimzo-Indian, this time with White attacking the front pawn of the doubled c-pawns. That idea works pretty well for Black in the Nimzo, maybe it would work here for White.
14.c4,..
Fixing the potential weakness at c5 is reasonable. During the game I was looking at 14 e4. In the quiet of my study, letting Rybka grind away at calculation, showed it not to be in anyway superior to the text. Black can play 14..., Qb6; avoiding putting the pawn on d4, and a even fight is to be had.
14..., Bd6 15.Qd2 e5 16.Rae1 exf4 17.exf4 Qc7 18.g3 d4!?
At last the temptation to seize space provokes this move. Black could have continued 18..., Nf8; intending .., Ne6; trying to tempt White to make some break in the center allowing Black to dissolve his doubled c-pawns. I am not a good enough judge of the positional nuances to say this plan is good or bad, and I suspect Mr. La Comb had similar questions in his mind. A little bit of looking seems to indicate there are sufficient resources in the Black camp to defend c5 for the moment. As long as c5 can be defended, then the worst thing to be said about pushing the d-pawn is Black is playing for the draw.
19.Ba3,..
This move puts some subtle pressure on the Black position. The pressure arises from the interaction of the Rooks down the e-file and a sacrificial idea on d4.
19..., Rab8!?
What should be done here? The text puts a Rook on the open b-file maybe thinking about .., a5; .., a4; breaking on the Q-side. Of course, there are many events that can intervene to render such a plan moot. An alternative for Black is; 19..., Nf8!? White might then proceed; 20 Re2 Qd7 21 Rfe1 Re6; and Black seems to be able to hold on to c5. White now executes his idea.
20.Rxe8+ Rxe8 21.Re1 Qd8 22.Nxd4!?,..
An interesting notion that doesn’t quite work.
22..., Bxf4!
Otherwise Black has problems. If 22..., Rxe1+ 23 Qxe1, and White is near a winning advantage, or 22..., cxd4 23 Bxd6, leaving White a pawn to the good with the Bishop versus Knight imbalance.
23.gxf4,..
½–½
White recognizes the reality of team match play. At this moment the Geezers had nailed down the match victory with three wins recorded. There is no great palm to be had by striving to make the score a 4 - 0 sweep with 23 Rxe8+!? Play becomes complicated after; 23..., Qxe8 24 Qxf4 cxd4 25 Qxd4 Qe1+ 26 Kg2 Qe2+ 27 Qf2 Qxd3 28 Qxa7 Qe2+ 29 Qf2 Qe4+ 30 Qf3 Qc2+ 31 Kh3 Ne5; and not withstanding the extra material White has in hand, the situation of his King is dicey.
After the text there the position is balanced. White has worries about his shattered K-side and some sudden decent by the Black Queen there. The threat constrains White’s ambitions. A draw is a reasonable outcome, and the draw was offered by Mr. Leisner and accepted.
This was a well played game by two creative players. Ideas were tried and matched. A battle between equals ended with the point split, and both sides should be satisfied it was no colorless draw. A really good game!
Last night, Thursday, saw the Schenectady A - Capital Region team match played. Schenectady won 3 ½ - ½ but the contest was closer than the score might indicate.
On the first board David Finnerman held the redoubtable young man Patrick Chi to a draw. In a long game on board two Chris Caravaty took the former Schenectady Champion Philip Sells right to the very limit before having to resign. John Barnes played Cory Northrup on board three and seemed to be in control for most of the game. Barnes won eventually. On the last board, Jason Denham made a good fight against Dilip Aaron. I thought he had an edge out of the opening. As the game transitioned into the middle game my belief in Denham’s position remained high. Rybka didn’t agree completely. It saw Dilip having fighting chances where I thought Denham was significantly ahead. Some inaccuracies crept in the play for both sides. Denham lost a pawn and then a piece as time trouble became an issue for both players.
With some luck in the Caravaty - Sells game and the Denham - Aaron game the score could have been much closer. On ratings alone, Schenectady was a heavy favorite, but the Capital Region team does not let big ratings differences intimate them. As they did against the Albany A team, they come to play and win. This makes for interesting chess and exciting matches.
More soon.
4.20.2012
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment