Chess, Bridge, Wall Street, and Huge Amounts of Money

I chanced upon this New York Times article today.  Turns out a top Bear Stearns executive, Warren Spector, was ousted due to the subprime mortgage mess and the collapse of two major Bear Stearns hedge funds.  That name was familiar to me.  When… where…?  Suddenly I remembered.

The year was 1979 and I was playing in an intramural bridge tournament.  One of my opponents was the very same Warren Spector, a former “King of Bridge” (a high school player with the most yearly “Master Points”.)   At this point we were both classmates at Princeton, but as I read in some other Internet bio article, he recently donated so much money to St John College (Annapolis MD) they built a dorm in his name.  He must have transferred there, since he graduated in 1981.

I am “declarer” in the hand and I start running my trumps in desperation.  Spector makes what seems to me to be a terrible discard, letting me take the rest of the tricks when he threw away an honor card.  He mutters, “You just executed a guard squeeze and didn’t even know it!”  He gave the impression of haughty imperiousness. But he was right.  I didn’t know a guard squeeze (a complicated bridge ‘endgame’ maneuver) from shinola; I was just running my trumps and from my perspective, he had made an elementary blunder. This is a typical injustice of strategic games; it happens in chess too. An opponent stumbles into a resource that draws or wins for him, having seen nothing.

Returning to the impression of imperiousness, that’s what they said in the Bear Stearns ouster article too!  “Mr. Spector is a cool, aloof man who has the casual confidence of one who achieved significant professional success at a young age.”   They say also, “[he is] a smooth and at times imperious man with a wide-ranging intellect.”  A leopard does not change his spots, but he acquires plenty of them!  Witness this mind-boggling Spector compensation report from the Forbes bio sheet:

Cash Compensation (FY November 2006) Salary $250,000 Bonus $16,194,430 Latest FY other long-term comp. $18,847,625 Total CASH $35,292,055 Stock Options (FY November 2006) Number of options Market value unexercised 510,607 $46,257,839 unexercisable 247,372 $9,892,364 Total OPTIONS 757,979 $56,150,203

Not a bad combined compensation package for this imperious card player.  There was a strange (or maybe not so strange, a good example of narrow-focused nepotism?) bridge link amongst all the top Bear Stearns executives:  “Ace” Greenberg, the CEO Jimmy Cayne, and Spector are all very good players.  An analogy in a game more familiar to us would be GM Patrick Wolff working for Clarium Capital, an investment fund captained by a chess player, Peter Thiel, the famous founder of PayPal.  Another one is the famous surge by Bankers Trust into chess in the early 1990s that hired Norman Weinstein and Max Dlugy as traders. Let’s hope the chess connection trumps (get it?  hahaha) the “deck of cards” which might “topple” at any time. Abusing a tired metaphor!

Conclusion?   There might be more lucrative things to do than chess or bridge.  Still doubting?  Ask Stephen Feinberg, another classmate at Princeton!  If memory serves, he was either a high expert or low master at his USCF peak. His investment fund Cerberus is always in the news, gobbling up companies left and right. 

MG Addendum 6/29/08:  Currently Cerberus LLC is running Chrysler (a car company) into the ground.  Poor Chrysler is not long for this world.

In a weird coincidence, both he and I worked at some point for the toppled titan Drexel Burnham Lambert (felled by the misdeeds of junk bond king Michael Milkin).  Stephen’s compensation is not public but estimated to be at least $50M/year.   Do you think Feinberg and perhaps the newly “disgraced” Spector might be convinced to run a chess tournament?  The “intensely private” Feinberg might cough up a few bucks (as might Spector) if we name it after them. Note: there’s something to be said for running PRIVATE companies. No embarrassing inspection of one’s net worth on public web pages.

---

So we reach the Caissic Crisis: who will approach this titanic duo to organize the first $10 million Open prize fund tournament? All the spokesperson needs to do beforehand is think of how it benefits the interests of Spector and Feinberg. There has to be an angle! Maybe play the Princeton card.  Or we could play the Harley card. Both Stephen and I enjoy riding Fat Boys, Sportsters, Dyna Glides, what have you.

The Fabulous 80s: Lugano, Switzerland

Nobody can say this site doesn’t have cool photos. Let’s go back to 1984, the Open tournament in the beautiful Swiss-Italian (Tyrolian) Alps town of Lugano, for this classic.

The hoodie guy with his back to the camera is indefatigable, indomitable IM Jay Whitehead. Of course the person he is analyzing with is the one and only GM Viktor Korchnoi. But look at the all-star kibitzers! Ex-World Champ Boris Spassky is seated next to Korchnoi. GM Florin Gheorghiu is standing next to Spassky. Sergey Kudrin is standing between Spassky and Korchnoi. I don’t know who the two fellows behind Kudrin and Gheorghiu are.  The photo is by French photographer Catherine Jaeg. Quite a nice shot, don’t you think?

Why was I playing in this pretty, exotic but rather expensive locale? Because Jay had won enough money for both of us to go with an incredible backgammon streak one evening in New York City. He had gone downtown from our crash pad in Washington Heights and he took a big win away from a Jazz Club owner (I think a famous club, such as Kenny’s Castaways or The Village Gate).  As a spiritual footnote, he had previously informed me that his Hare Krishna temple had given him permission to gamble (his other moniker was Jaya Krishna). When he got back, he woke me up to count the 50’s and 100’s bulging out of every one of his pockets. We were on a flight to Milan, Italy only two days later. So we get to Milan. We transfer to a train that will take us from Italy across Lake Como and on into Switzerland. On this train, I meet a panicky Malcolm Pein in the club car. “Mark, there is the most dreadful fellow on this train!” I asked why and he said “he is going on and on about vegetarian food options in Lugano!” I knew right away this was my patron saint, Jay. Malcolm was feeling probably a wee bit put upon but, amusingly, there were decent vegetarian options in meat-crazed Switzerland. Once we got to Lugano, there were a whole bunch of Brits. Glenn Flear, and many more. They had an economy cottage rental and bought enough groceries for the week – very clever. I was rooming with John Fedorowicz. One day we had a surprise visitor: Spassky. More on this later.

Watch this space for some good Lugano 1984 games, including a win over Dutch blabbermouth Erik Knoppert.  It’s too bad they discontinued this classic annual Open.

The Fabulous 00s: Some Interesting Modern/Pirc Games

The Modern Defense with an early a6!? is a tricky beast. I first tried it versus William Costigan (one of the Costigan brothers) in the 1970’s. I next had success versus Patrick Wolff in the 1980’s (although that game transposed into a strange Pirc, because black after some delay placed his KN on f6). It’s always had pleasant memories.

In this installment, first off we have a battle from Copenhagen, Denmark (Politiken Cup, 2000). The opening choice proves perfect against an impatient and over-aggressive handler of the white pieces.

NM Jorgen Hvenekilde – IM Mark Ginsburg

Politiken Cup 2000, Round 5 Modern Defense

1. d4 g6 2. e4 Bg7 3. Nc3 d6 4. Be3 a6!? This move is approved in GM Tiger Hillarp-Person’s “Tiger’s Modern” treatise on the Modern Defense.

Here is Tiger pictured at the Rilton Cup, January 1994 (cover of Swedish Schacknytt chess magazine). I apologize for the Photo Editor effects that I applied.

 

After this psychedelic tidbit, let’s get back to the merits of the opening. I like the snake-like pawn structure. It is challenged in modern times by a quick f2-f4 and e4-e5, but even that treatment is probably not the final word. This sytem for black, as ex-CIS chess commentators like to say, “has the right to exist”.

 

5. Qd2 b5 6. O-O-O Bb7 7. f3 The wing thrust 7. h4!? is interesting.

7…Nd7 8. g4?! The developing 8. Nh3!? comes into consideration. I don’t like these early, non-developing, pawn moves.

8…c5 9. Nge2 Rc8 10. h4 b4! Clearly white has played inaccurately because already black is more comfortable.

11. Nb1 Ngf6!? The cat and mouse maneuver 11…Qa5!? 12. a3 Qc7!? is interesting. The text prepares a speculative sacrifice.

12. h5

12…Nxe4! Having said “A”, black has to say “B”. The situation is quite unclear but in practical play black’s chances must be rated more highly.

13. fxe4 Bxe4 14. Rh2 Bxc2! 15. Re1?? A gross blunder. White must play 15. Qxc2 cxd4 16. Nxd4 Rxc2+ 17. Rxc2 with counter-chances.

15…Be4?? A blunder in reply. Black wins with the obvious 15…cxd4 16. Nxd4 Ba4+ 17. Nc3 bxc3 18. bxc3 Qa5. I must have overlooked something very simple at this stage.

16. d5! Of course. White prevents the opening of the c-file and should turn the tables.

16…Qa5 17. Ng3 Bf3 18. Bh6? 18. Bf4! is correct with a big plus.

18…Be5 19. Rxe5! dxe5 White’s counter-sacrifice clarifies the situation and it’s about equal.

20. Be2? Yet another blunder. 20. d6! is OK for white and so is 20. hxg6 hxg6 21. Bg5.

20…Bxe2 21.Rxe2 Qxa2 Now black is simply winning.

22. Ne4 Qc4+ 23. Kd1 If 23. Qc2 Qxc2+ 24. Kxc2, black has the crushing 24…Rg8! and wins.

23… f5! 24. gxf5 gxf5 25. Ng5 Rg8! A perfect square. White has no moves left.

26. Rf2 Nf6 27. Qe2 Qxd5+ 28. Nd2 c4 29. Rxf5 c3 30. bxc3 bxc3

0-1

Moving ahead a few years, here’s an exciting Modern Defense Game from the North American Open, December 2003, Las Vegas. This game was featured in the online games collection ChessGames.com as a “Game of the Week” and drew a lot of commentary.

J. Shahade- M. Ginsburg Las Vegas 2003

1. e4 g6 2. d4 Bg7 3. Nc3 d6 4. Nf3 a6!? 5. a4?! White has fallen into an opening trap with this reflexive reaction. Correct is to ignore black with 5. Be2.

5…Bg4 Now black has no problems at all.

6. Be3 Nc6 7. Be2 e5 8. d5 Ben Finegold played 8. dxe5 and got nothing vs me in Belgium, 1989, and a draw was quickly agreed. It’s really handy that the move pair …a6 and a2-a4 are in for black, because the important b5 square is denied to white’s minor pieces. This is a very important point.

8…Bxf3 9. Bxf3 Nce7 In Svidler-Manion, NY 1995, black played 8….Nce7 and on 9. h3 he played 9…Bd7?! (he could have played 9….Bxf3(!)). Svidler won that game. My 8th move gets rid of the WN immediately. Often times, when black breaks with f7-f5, he has to worry about a knight leap Nf3-g5 so there is definitely something to be said for getting rid of the horse.

10. Be2 f5 11. f3 Bh6! Positionally well motivated to get this bishop onto an active diagonal.

12. Bf2 Nf6 13. O-O O-O 14. a5 Nh5 15. Re1 Kh8 16. b4 Ng8 17. Rb1 Nf4 18. Bf1 Nf6 19. Be3 White’s play looks slow but it has purpose. The game is very double-edged.

19…fxe4 20. g3 g5!? Speculative. But otherwise the white bishop arrives unimpeded on h3 and black will be suffering.

21. fxe4 Qd7 22. gxf4! It is correct to accept this sacrifice.

22…gxf4 23. Bf2? But now white goes wrong. Correct is 23. Bc1! and the impassive computer rates black’s compensation as insufficient. I had missed this retreat during the game.

23…f3!

This is exactly the variation I expected; the pawn wedge really ties white up since 23. Qxf3? Ng4 is impossible. Black can calmly bring pieces over and the attack is too strong. So white’s 23rd was really the big turning point. This game is a good example of how a human can drastically over-rate chances.

24. Kh1 Qg4 25. Qd3 Qh5 26. Nd1 Ng4 27. h3 Rf7 28. c4 Rg8 With every piece participating, black piles on for a mating attack.

29. Rb2 Nxf2+ 30. Rxf2 Rfg7 31. Rxf3 Rg1+ 32. Kh2 Qg6 White resigned.

0-1

There is no stopping one of the dual mate threats, for example the primitive 33…Qg2+ 34. Bxg2 R8xg2 mate or the clearance 33…Rh1+ 34. Kxh1 Qg1 mate.

View PGN

The next game is along the same lines, except I don’t need a speculative piece sacrifice – instead I make a pseudo-sacrifice of the exchange in a situation where I have all the positional trumps. It shows exactly why this system is a perplexing good weapon — if white just drifts along, black can achieve his strategic aims and expand all over the board.

K. Stancil – M. Ginsburg World Open 2004

1. e4 g6 2. d4 Bg7 3. Nc3 d6 4. Be3 a6 5. Be2 b5 6. Qd2 Bb7 7. f3 Nd7!?

Preparing …c7-c5. Again, I refer readers to GM Tiger Hillarp-Persson’s interesting book “Tiger’s Modern” for more details on this provocative treatment. It’s ideal in situations where only a win will do as black.

8. Nh3 c5 9. Nd1?! Clearly, once a move like this occurs black has no problems. But it’s another thing entirely to win a chess game – further progress is needed.

9…cxd4 10. Bxd4 Ngf6 11. O-O O-O 12. a4 Bc6 13. a5 Qc7 14. Bd3 Rfe8 15. Kh1 Qb7 16. Ndf2 e5! Exactly right. Black achieves the lion’s share of the center.

17. Be3 Rad8 18. Bg5 Nc5 19. Ng4 White forces black to play a good move.

19…Nxg4! An obvious “sacrifice” to increase my advantage. White plays to give back the exchange; personally I would have tried to hold onto it just to put up some kind of fight.

20. Bxd8 Nxh2?! Stronger is 20…Rxd8 21. fxg4 d5! with initiative.

21. Bb6? Very bad. White had to play 21. Kxh2 Rxd8 22. Qe3 and hunker down.

21…Nxf1 22. Bxf1 Na4 23. Be3 Nxb2 24. Rb1 Na4 25. Qxd6 Qd7 26. Qb4 Bf8 27. Qe1 Nc5 28. Rd1 Qc7 29. Qf2 Ne6 30. Qh4? White should have kept the a5 pawn with 30. Bb6 but it was a very bad position after 30..Qb7.

30…Qxa5 White is material down with a worse position as well.

31. Nf2 h5! 32. g4 Qc3 33. Rd3 Qe1

White could have given up here. It’s horrific. Look at the f4 square beckoning to black’s knight.

34. Qh3 Nf4 35. Bxf4 exf4 36. Qg2 Bc5 With both sides in time trouble, black’s moves come very easily and he develops a crushing initiative.

37. Nh3 hxg4 38. Nxf4 gxf3 39. Qh3 Qxe4 In time trouble, black misses the mating move 39..Qf2! and finis.

40. Nxg6 Qxg6 With the time control made, white resigned.

0-1
View PGN

Finally here is a World Open 2005 game vs Felix Movilla.

Felix Movilla (2301) – IM Mark Ginsburg World Open 2005

1. d4 g6 2. e4 Bg7 3. h3?! c5 4. c3 cxd4 5. cxd4 Qb6 6. Nf3 Nc6 7. e5 d6 Possible is 7… f6 8. Nc3 (8. exf6 Nxf6 9. Nc3 d5 10. Be2 Ne4 11. O-O Be6) 8…fxe5 9. dxe5 Nxe5 10. Be2 e6 11. O-O Ne7 and black stands well. Also possible is 7… Nh6!? 8. Na3 O-O 9. Nc4 Qc7 10. Bf4 d5 11. exd6 exd6 12. Bxd6 Re8+ 13. Be2 Qd8 with interesting play.

8. Nc3 dxe5 9. dxe5 Nxe5 10. Nxe5 White can also play 10. Bb5+ Bd7 11. Bxd7+ Nxd7 12. O-O Bxc3 13. bxc3 Ngf6 14. Ba3 Ne4 15. Rb1 Qc6 16. Re1 Nec5 and black is holding.

10… Bxe5 11. Bb5+ Kf8 12. Qe2 Bxc3+ Black can try to keep this bishop with 12… Qc7 13. O-O Kg7 14. Be3 (14. Nd5 Qd6 15. Rd1 Nf6 leads nowhere for white) 14… Nf6 and black is OK.

13. bxc3 Be6 14. Be3 Qc7 15. O-O h5 16. Bd4 Nf6 17. Bd3 h4 18. f4? More sensible is 18. Qe3 Nd5 (18… Rh5 19. Bxg6 Nd5 20.Qe4 Rh6 21. Bf5 Bxf5 22. Qxf5 Qc6 23. Rfe1) 19. Qf3 Rh5 20. Bxg6 Rg5 21. Be4 Rd8 with a sharp game.

18… Rd8 19. Rab1?! 19. Rad1 looks more to the point.

19… b6 20. Rb5 Rxd4! A very nice positional exchange sacrifice. Black can also play 20… Rh5 21. Re5 Bc8 22. a4 but the text poses a lot of problems.

21. cxd4 Qc3

22. f5 It’s already hard to give advice. 22. Rd1 Qxd4+ 23. Qf2 Qxf2+ 24. Kxf2 Kg7 25. Bb1 Rc8 26. Re5 Rc4 is very good for black.

22… gxf5 23. Re5 Qxd4+ 24. Rf2?? Losing – the proverbial ‘sacrificial shock’. However 24. Qe3 Qxe3+ 25. Rxe3 Rh5 26. Ref3 Rg5 27. Bxf5 Bxa2 28. Ra1 Bd5 29. Rf2 a5 30. Rb1 a4 31. Rxb6 a3 32. Ra6 a2 is complete torture as well and black should convert this position.

24… Ne4! 25. Rxe4 fxe4 26. Bxe4 Rg8 27. Kh1 Rg5 28. Bd3 Re5 29. Qf1 Re3 30. Bg6 f6 31. Qc1 Qe5 32. Rf1 Bxh3?! It’s not often that there is the luxury of two winning captures. Here Black had 32… Rxh3+! 33. gxh3 Bd5+ mating , but the more prosaic and weaker text wins as well.

0-1

 

If you are wondering about my enjoyment of Modern structures, it all harkens back to the “Pawn Diamond” game I had against future GM Patrick Wolff way back in 1983. It bears a quick look:

 

Patrick Wolff – IM Mark Ginsburg NY Open 1983

1. e4 g6 2. d4 Bg7 3. Nc3 d6 4. f4 Nc6 5. Be3 Nf6

Well, with the black knight committed to f6, it’s really a Pirc now. Still, the game gets really crazy.

6. Be2 O-O 7. Nf3 a6 8. Qd2 b5 9. a3 Bb7 10. f5 b4 11. axb4 Nxb4 12. fxg6
hxg6 13. Ng5 e5! It’s always correct to act in the center when the opponent is acting on the wings.  White’s structure is very loose now.

14. d5 c6 15. Na4 a5 16. c3 cxd5 17. Bb6 Qe7
18. cxb4 Bh6!  White gets into a very nasty pin and it turns out black gets overwhelming compensation for the lost piece.  The problem in the opening basically is that white played too much on the wings and black stayed central.

19. h4 Nxe4 20. Qd3 axb4 21. Nxe4 dxe4 22. Qh3
Kg7 23. O-O f5 The very rare ‘pawn diamond’ starts to be formed.  There is very little to do constructively that white can undertake, especially in practical play where advancing pawn phalanxes take on a life of their own.

24. h5 Rac8 25. hxg6 Qg5 26. Qh5 Qxg6 27. Rad1
Rf6 28. Qxg6+ Kxg6 29. Bb5 e3 30. Rfe1 f4 31. b3 Bg5!  Every piece gains maximum activity This is reminiscent of the J. Shahade game, above.

32. Bc4 Bh4 33. Re2 d5!  The d-pawn is immune because white has a back-rank problem.

34. Bb5 d4  And there it is.  The stuff of legends.  The pawn diamond.  Does anyone have access to a structural search; in how many other games has this occurred?  White, of course, is dead – the diamond is worth at least 2 minor pieces.

35. Bc5 f3  It’s craven to break up the diamond and cash in, but at some point the game does have to be won.

36. gxf3 Bxf3 37. Rf1 Kh5!  It’s pleasing to have the king help out too.

38. Ra2 Rg8+ 39. Kh2 Bg3+ 40. Kh3 Bf2 0-1

PGN 

 

2 Strange Pictures and a Chess Openings Tidbit

It’s almost Halloween.

Here are the eerie Sky Eyes of Bryce Canyon, Utah.  I took this shocking photograph on October 12, 2004.  There are absolutely no chess events at or near Bryce Canyon and there haven’t been since the beginning of time.

And here is what happens when the author ignores the warning “Do Not Put Face in Push-Pin Exhibit.”  But the exhibit is crying out for a face mold!  A bunch of push pins, what does the curator expect?  Thus the author’s face mold as of October 19, 2007.  What’s the technical term, a bas-relief?  Or an intaglio?  There has to be some technical term here.

Readers are probably weary of these photos already and what we do to break up the photo monotony is to present a small Openings tidbit.

French Defense Tidbit

Here it is.   As Black, if you like the French, and someone plays like this in the Exchange French:

1. e4 e6 2. d4 d5 3. exd5 exd5 4. c4

The correct move isn’t so easy to spot.  It is (drum roll) the counter-intuitive 4…Nc6! and white cannot easily defend the center.   Black gains easy equality, and sometimes even an edge, in all lines.  So remember this move and don’t play the weaker 4….Bb4+?! or 4…c6?!. I know what you are thinking: this variation hardly ever happens. But it does! French defense aficionado Simone Sobel didn’t know 4…Nc6 and played the inferior 4…Bb4+ and lost a game in a Florida Swiss. I had to tell her after the game in the midst of her angst and woe about this 4…Nc6! trick and I can only hope she remembers it for “the next time.”  By the way, I have a suspicion (but cannot prove) that this trick originated from IM Michael Brooks. At the very least, he communicated it to others. But where did it originate? That is a question for chess openings paleontology.

Sweet Validation

Living Chess History Lives!

I am very pleased that people are starting to chip in with their own memories, recollections, anecdotes, games, what have you – to fill out my “near-term” historical outlines.  The process is working and almost snowballing and I must say the wordpress blog format is ideal for this fill-in-the-blanks exercise that spans time and space.  The nice thing about chess history is that it includes gamescores, good and bad moves, memorable situations, as well as personalities, photos, interesting places, …. all very historical!  We are at an interesting cusp here – the pre-Chessbase (computer? what the heck is that?) and the post-Chessbase (computer-heavy) days.  Many of the games you’ll see here are pre-Chessbase (but by all means, add them to your database!).  Since there are some big names, such as GM Larsen, GM Dzindzihashvili, etc., no doubt many game hunters will indeed want to increase their electronic storehouse.

The Notion of Game Replay

I received a request from Mr. Friedel at ChessBase to have all the games at this site replayable via a Javascript widget, the type you might see in a generic ChessBase output file or US Chess Online.  I am working on it, but wordpress has certain constraints (it strips out 3rd party iFrames).  For now, I will just use a mixture of text and well-placed diagrams as you might see in a book.

Special thanks to early respondents

Ian Findlay, Jeremy Barth, Jon Jacobs, Bruce Leverett, Lonnie Kwartler, John Fedorowicz, Barry Popik, Joe Lux, Ben Finegold, Elizabeth Vicary, Gregory Kaidanov, Ken Regan, and a few anonymous New Englanders.

All I can say is, keep the memories coming.

-MG 10/18/07

The Fabulous 80s: Washington Heights, NYC and Belgium and a tiny little bit of WO

For most of the 1980s, I lived on W 170th St. and Fort Washington Avenue in Washington Heights, Upper Manhattan. Senior Master Jeremy Barth was one of my roommates. At one time or another, John Fedorowicz, Michael Rohde, and others also stayed there. This heavily Dominican neighborhood saw many the odd chess player stay in our sprawling 3-bedroom: for example, Vince McCambridge, Pia Cramling, Ralf Lau, and Eric Lobron. The historical reason for this neighborhood choice was that at one time, I attended Columbia University’s College of Physicians and Surgeons (to be distinguished from Columbia’s main campus at 116th and Broadway).

Here are some action pictures from the era.

This happens to be Hanna Moishezon (daughter of the famous Columbia U. mathematics professor Boris Moishezon), me with Petey Pie the cat, and Jeremy. That Radcliffe sweatshirt is too small! Boris had his own geometric space(!), and was a specialist in the abstruse field of Algebraic Geometry. I would estimate this photo as somewhere in the 1985-8 range.

Moving back to August 1983 (fortunately some photos are labeled!), we have me battling Natasha Christiansen in a blitz game (back then she was Natasha Us) with a really old-fashioned Garde chess clock. In fact, the tint of the photo suggests the 19th century. I like my moustache. Is that wrong??

I don’t remember how the actual game went.

Belgium

Here’s a good one. We have Vreele Goethals, British future-GM David Norwood, me, and seated we have IM Roman Tomaszewski from Poland. On the right is Vreele’s mother, Mia Goethals. I think this was taken in August 1985 in the ECI Youth open tournament at Eeklo, Belgium (not far from Sas van Gent, Holland, site of the tournament in alternating years). It also had a parallel IM round robin tournament. Roman and I were in that – I beat him in a crazy Nimzo 4. Qc2 game where I was one of the early experimenters with a strange gambit as black; namely 1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 Bb4 4. Qc2 c5 5. dxc5 Na6 6. a3 Bxc3+ 7. Qxc3 Nxc5 8. b4 Na4!? 9. Qb3 b5!?; I will dig that game score up and post it.  Future GM Mr. Norwood had an unfortunate encounter with a soccer ball in the off-day whilst attempting a header.

World Open, Philadelphia

Things always come back to the World Open. Here is the July 1986 incarnation at the now-defunct Adam Mark Hotel Players Bar with IM Leonid Bass (left), Linda Carrubba, Michael Wilder (standing) and Joel Benjamin. Good old Leonid moved to Spain (I think, or maybe it was France) at some point in the 1990s. Never saw him again!

We culminate with a 1981 antique – just a photo edit experiment.

I include it mostly for the historical hairstyle.

The Short Life of Billy Adam

William (Billy) Adam was a Syracuse, NY (the same neck of the woods as now-Norwegian GM Jon Tisdall) master whose life only lasted from 1963 to 1982. He came from a large family – many sisters (not sure if any brothers). It was shocking when I saw his obituary at such a young age (only 19). When I heard about his death from Joel Benjamin’s dad, Alan, I thought it was a practical joke – too implausible to be true. To demonstrate the power of the Internet World Wide Web on modern society, (the ‘converse’ power to forget older news), Bill’s life (which ended pre-Web, 1982) is not to be found in any source I was able to uncover via Google. Readers?

Apparently according to the following letter Jon Schroer and I were planning a Chess Life eulogy but nothing came of that (click to enlarge).

Billy was a big natural talent. We had some adventures – for example he convinced me to save money and sleep under the chess tables in the Philadelphia World Open – a plan foiled by security guard flashlights at about 3:30 am (we were flushed into the bus terminal).   Billy rushed onto a bus that was idling with a sign in the front that said “Pittsburgh”.  I got him off that bus! And, in New York City, we even convinced IM John Watson to party with us one time. No small feat. Billy was a friendly kid with lots of energy.

The last few years of his life he spent as a student at SUNY Stony Brook, NY and he had mostly withdrawn from competitive chess, which was actually a big loss for chess.

Parallels with Peter Winston

One thing he had in common with Peter Winston:

Charlie Hertan writes in Chess Life magazine, “in November, 1977, when Peter had a miserable 0-9 result. He seemed a little off-kilter and baffled, as we all were, but I guess we chalked it up to his rustiness and terrible form at the time”. A strange coincidence, Billy Adam too had a baffling 0-and-something result in a US Junior. This included a dump where Billy played into Fool’s mate (the TD forfeited him, wisely). We can safely say that 0-and-something results from strong juniors are a clear signal for mental health intervention. If we had such intervention in either the Winston or the Adam case, they would probably be with us today.

I would like readers to chip in here with Billy Adam memories. I will hunt a game I played with him (he won in a Keres Attack, Philadelphia 1979) and post it here.

For now, I will simply relate that 1. e4 c5 2. d3 Nc6 3. f4 with the idea of g3, Bg2, Nb1-d2, Ng1-e2, was named by Billy as the “Billiam Attack.” Note the strange position of the white knights. He would keep flipping the knights with Nd2-f3, and, after a f4-f5, also get in the fearsome Ne2-f4.

Here’s a National HS Blog I found (‘A History of the National High School Chess Championship’, by Steve Immitt) that mentions a notable performance by 14-year-old Billy Adam.

Cleveland, OH 1977: The Ninth National High School returned to Cleveland, with 494 players. In the past 8 years, only once did either the top-rated player or a Master finish first (Larry Christiansen did both in 1973). The winner has usually been an Expert, as no one under 2000 has ever won (1976 was the only time it was won by a player ranked lower than 7th at the start). There is, however, an old National High School tradition of the “Cinderella A-Player,” an unknown player who has the tournament of his life only to fade at the end. This curious custom started at the first National High School in 1969, when Paul Jacklyn needed a last-round draw to win on tiebreak, but lost to John Watson. Nick Ocipoff was 6-0 when he blundered a winning position to jettison the title the following year. Peter Radomskyj had defeated the top-rated player to go 6-0 before losing to Christiansen in 1971. In 1976, Jake Meskin was 6-0 before he lost to Rich Kaner. Every time, the player who defeated the “Cinderella A-Player” went on the win the tournament himself. This year, 14-year old Bill Adam of Syracuse, NY was cast as Cinderella. Top-rated Yasser Seirawan (2364) was upset in round 3 by Chris Richmond (1809) of Burlington, VT, throwing open the path to the championship to Adam. After upsetting 2nd-rated Steve Odendahl (2217) he needed but a last-round draw on Board One with 6th-ranked Jim Thibault (2134) of Salem, MA. Jim sacrificed a piece for a crushing attack. Adam defended doggedly, only to be outplayed in the endgame. Thibault’s victory gave him 7 points and the best tiebreaks to capture the championship. Once again, the clock had struck twelve for Cinderella.

Some players that may be able to chip in with Billy memories: Jon Tisdall, Charlie Hertan, Jon Schroer, … (others?).

Breaking Billy Adam News

Breaking news from the ICC cyber universe, Oct 11, 2007: Firebug tells you: Billy Adams actually played in several tournaments in Rochester NY around that time. I may have a few games but definately Ron Lohrman may have some he played against Dr Marchand Stay Tuned!!!

Fabulous 90s: More Photos

Let’s start off with young Jorge Zamora (now Sammour-Hasbun). I believe this was Needham, MA 1992 – I am in the foreground playing Jorge a skittles game – photograph by Chris Bernstein.

Moving right along, here are two Ivanovs. Alexander Ivanov and the dearly departed Igor Ivanov – I would guess it’s the World Open in some year in the 1990s. Of course it might be the 1980s. 🙂

And now we have GM Jaan Ehlvest with a sharp plaid jacket! Photo by Bill Hook. The site and year are unknown as of this writing.

And now we have a photo with an official caption (bestowed by the photographer, Chris Bernstein): “The Mystical Hertan.” Photo year: 1992.

I believe this photo was probably taken at the Needham, MA tournament. Yes, it’s FM Charlie Hertan! He recently wrote an article in Chess Life magazine about the mysteriously disappeared and presumed dead junior talent Peter Winston. I might “retaliate” someday with a memorial to the known deceased Billy Adam (a junior talent from Syracuse, NY). Billy’s incredibly short, meteoric life was from 1963 to only 1982. He spent his last years in Stony Brook, NY. As a sidenote, I must confess for many years I thought Charlie was an IM. I was *shocked* to see his title as FM in Chess Life.

Boxing News

News update: John Fedorowicz boxed Billy Adam on W 74th Street without training helmets in 1981. John Fedorowicz boxed me a few years later on W 170th Street (with red training helmets).

News postscript: apparently in 1981, Billy Adam’s practice boxing with John Fedorowicz almost turned into a fistfight because I forgot to say “ding” (the end of the round). According to John on Oct 5, 2007, “it became a fistfight when Bill punched me in the month.” He continues, “I ended the fight with a brutal uppercut… you (this author) were laughing.” Good times. 🙂 He adds, “One of your girlfriends uppercut me as well.” I asked who, and he said “Sue”. Ah yes, my Princeton buddy! Sue Kazmaier!!! John adds, “she snapped my head back into a brick wall.” I remember our apartment on W 74 Street and we did have a brick wall, so it’s all coming back!

More Photos

OK moving on. we have the dearly departed IM Victor Frias, photographed March 1994 eating breakfast. Photographer and site unknown as of this writing.

Victor Frias was the referee in the aforementioned Fed-MG boxing match, Washington Heights, Mid 1980s. I will dig up a photo of that classic event.

For something completely different now I present an award I got in 1991 (during my graduation from NYU with an MBA in Stat/Operation Research) from Dr. W. Edwards Deming – considered a Very Important Person in quality control and, as I understand it, revered by the Japanese.  To wit: “The Deming prize was instituted by the Union of Japanese Scientists and Engineers and is awarded each year in Japan to a statistician for contributions to statistical theory.  The Deming prize for application is awarded to a company for improved use of statistical theory in organization, consumer research, design of product and production. “

Dr. Deming was 90 years old when I got the award in May of 1991!   The typo in my handwritten last name did not bother me. 

Dr. Deming passed away a few years after (20 December 1993) I received this accolate. 

An award from Dr. W. Edwards Deming, NYU, 1991.

The Fabulous 00s: The 2007 Miami International Open

When my good Word Press blog buddy FM Marcel Martinez (we cross-link, you see [wink wink]) told me about the First International Miami Chess Open, how could I resist? This event, organized by IM Blas Lugo, drew a host of good players: Mikhalevski, Becerra, Izoria, Shabalov, Nakamura, G. Hernandez, A. Zapata, and more.

The actual venue was a convention center next to the Sheraton hotel, itself close to the Miami airport. The venue had some quirks. First of all, cell phones went off all the time, and the people answering (usually kibitizers or players strolling around from lower sections) chose to answer in normal voices, not whispers! Secondly, sometimes the occasional mambo or Star Spangled Banner would erupt from an adjacent ballroom, and this happened in one amusing instance when Becerra and I had under 30 seconds in the not-for-the-faint-of-heart time control of G/90 + 30 second increment per move.

The games themselves were very interesting, and some were of high quality despite the constant rushing brought by the “gambling” time control. I gather this is a ‘normal’ time control now in FIDE events. It’s nuts! It ruins all complicated endings. And for what, to save a little time to go to Starbucks or the hotel bar?

Here are some of my efforts and I will also add some special games that I witnessed. By the way, you can find most of the games online at the Monroi site (but not the quicker schedule early games; only after the merge).

Snubbed by the Monroi Lady

The Monroi lady was busy running around taking pictures, but when I visited that weird site (replete with world clocks and electronic license tickets) I was surprised to see my games piloted by a faceless (photoless) individual whereas my opponent always had an actual, real, photo. I feel so left out and so anonymous, Monroi lady! I’m sorry I didn’t use your little box to record my games! Can we start again? Take my picture, Monroi lady (sniffle). Don’t leave me faceless, Monroi lady!

Let’s start with two smooth victories as White. In the first, I defuse a sharp junior by taking him out of his comfort zone – I steer the game into a Kramnikian bishop-pair torture structure.

IM M. Ginsburg – NM Corey Acor

G/90 + 30 sec increment per move

1. d4 Nf6 2. Nf3 d5 3. c4 e6 4. g3(!) My opponent astounded me after the game by relating that he was already improvising now. So the exclamation point for this fortuitous turn of events. Apparently he was most ready for 1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e5!? – I’m usually a 1. c4 player and I wouldn’t enjoy seeing a Budapest on the board. Someone like IM Finegold, booked to gills versus the Budapest, would enjoy it very much.

4….c5 5. cxd5 Nxd5?! 5…..exd5, reaching a Tarrasch, is more reliable.

6. Bg2 Nc6 7. O-O Nf6 It is already difficult to suggest solid black continuations.

8. dxc5! White has no objection at all to reach a superior queenless middelgame.

8…Qxd1 9. Rxd1 Bxc5 10. a3 e5? Much too loose. White will be able to snipe at the center pawns effectively with the bishops. Black has to stay compact and hunker down.

11. Nc3 (0:18) Be6 (0:59) 12. b4 Bb6 13. e3! Extremely strong. White takes away key squares and resumes the harrassment of black’s center next.

13…Rc8 This optically good mechanical move (rook to semi open file) turns out to not help black at all so he might have wanted to castle here instead.

14. Bb2 O-O 15. Na4! (0:44) As simple as that, the position is now winning for white. A black ….Be6-b3 turns out to be a pseudo-threat. Black’s center is under intolerable pressure.

15…Bb3 Nothing else to do, but the text is insufficient. 15…Bc7 16. Nc5 is crushing – see a similar knight maneuver motif in my Glenn Bady game that immediately follows this one.

16. Nxb6 axb6 16…Bxd1 17. Nxc8 simply results in black losing a center pawn after the mass exchanges 17…Bxf3 18. Bxf3 Rxc8 19. Bxc6 – white wins easily.

17. Rdc1 (0:51) Nd7 (1:28) 18. Nd2! This maneuver is exceedingly strong. The knight travels to d6 via e4 and black is totally paralyzed. To make matters worse, he has virtually no time left. Not a pleasant situation.

18….Be6 19. Ne4 Rb8 (1:29) 20. Nd6 Nd8 21. Rc7 f6 As black, I might have given up here. In fact, yeah, I would have given up. It’s just no fun.

22. Rd1 f5 23. Bd5 Nf6 The rest is just black blitzing and white scooping up material as it is left en prise.

24. Bxe6 Nxe6 25. Re7 Ng5 26. Nxf5 Rf7 27. h4 Black had no time to think anymore.

27…Nh3+ 28. Kg2 Ng4 An amusing blitz tactic, but white has time left to figure out that 29. Kxh3?? is met by 29…Nxf2+. The knights get into an incredible tangle now, but the situation was mucho hopeless (do you like my Spanish?) of course.

29. Rxf7 Kxf7 30. f3 Ngf2 31. Rd2 g6 32. Nd6+ Ke6 33. Ne4 Once one pair of knights goes off, the other black knight is lost. Black recognized his plight and immediately resigned although he had built up a small bank of reserve time due to the 30 second per move increment.

1-0

Here’s a related effort versus Expert Glenn Bady (2137) from an earlier round. Readers will notice some common motifs.

IM Mark Ginsburg – Glenn Bady Miami Open 2007

1.c4 e5 2.Nc3 Nf6 3.Nf3 Nc6 4.g3 Bc5 5.d3 d5? Highly suspect in conjunction with black’s previous move. 5…d6 is stronger, but the bishop is still exposed out on c5.
6.cxd5 Nxd5 7.Bg2 Nde7 White will be able to take advantage of this passive placement.

8.O-O O-O 9.Bd2 a6 10.Rc1 Ba7 11.a3 h6 12.b4 Bg4 13.Na4 The strange-looking 13. Be3!? is a try here and is a bit of a positional trap. If black takes on e3 (the wrong choice, strengthening white’s center), 13…Bxe3?! 14. fxe3 Nf5 15. Qd2 white can hope for some edge. Better is not taking and playing 13…Qd7 14. Bxa7 Rxa7 15. Na4 b6! keeping the knight out of c5. Play could continue 16. Re1 Bxf3! 17. Bxf3 a5! with excellent chances for full equality. Since most players would play to double white’s pawns with 13. Be3 Bxe3?!, this move is well worth considering.

13…Re8 14.Nc5 Qc8 15.a4 (?!) Things are looking very good, at least optically, for white. He is making progress on his agenda. However at this exact moment black has an interesting and hidden defense; therefore the careful 15. Re1 should have been considered nullifying the positional threat of Bg4-h3.

15…Rb8? A human move and a natural instinct to defend b7 without giving up the “lurking” bishop so carefully nestled away on a7. The computer finds an ingenious and dispassionate resource 15…Bxc5! 16. Rxc5 b6! 17. Rc4 Be6! driving the rook back. Then, after 18. Rc1 Bh3! 19. Qc2 Bxg2 20. Kxg2 b5! black can use the b7-g2 diagonal and he is close to equality. A really fantastic, anti-positional, counter-intuitive, and amazing computer variation to give black positional advantages of his own starting from a point where it looked like white was calling all the shots.

16.Re1! Getting back on the right course. This avoids the simplification threat ….Bg4-h3 and waits.

16…Ng6? I didn’t have long to wait. The text blunders a pawn. However, a move like 16…Qf5 leaves white on top as well. There simply isn’t anything meaningful to organize on the kingside and white is too active.

17.Nxa6! bxa6 18.Rxc6 Re6 19.Rc4 Rf6 20.Qc2 c6 21.Rc1 Bd7 Black’s position is a structural ruin.

22.Be1! I thought for a while and found this excellent regrouping which really winds the game up efficiently. This is important in crazy time controls like the one in Miami. White prepares Nf3-d2-e4 and black is helpless due to his numerous structural weaknesses. This unstoppable and very strong knight maneuver is very similar to the Acor game above (white moves 18 through 20). I only found this move after some cogitation; my original plan was 22. Be3?! but rushing to simplify, at the cost of some pawn structure disfigurement (although the pawns can be straightened, maybe, with a later d3-d4) is definitely second-best.

22… Qe8 23.Nd2 Ne7 24.Ne4 Rg6 25.Nc5 Bxc5 Once this bishop goes off the board, it’s smooth sailing for white.

26.Rxc5 Nd5? Makes it easier but of course black was losing anyway.

27.b5! axb5 28.axb5 Nf4 29.bxc6 Bg4 30.c7! Rc8 Forced. There’s no time to take a pawn: 30…Nxe2+ 31. Qxe2! Bxe2 32. cxb8=Q Qxb8 33. Rc8+ and white is up a piece.

31.f3 Bd7 32.gxf4 Bh3 33.Bg3! Bxg2 34.Rxe5! An effective zwischenzug. White remains a piece up.

1-0

Now here’s an interesting draw vs NM Marc Esserman – he was White in a topical Smith-Morra gambit.

NM Marc Esserman – IM Mark Ginsburg

Smith-Morra Gambit, Sicilian Defense

1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 e6 3.d4 cxd4 4.c3 dxc3 5.Nxc3 Nc6 6.Bc4 d6 7.O-O Nf6 8.Qe2 Be7 9.Rd1 e5

I don’t normally play this defense but it suddenly occurred to me to maybe use the d4 square later for my N on c6. I usually get the variation 1. e4 c5 2. d4 cxd4 3. c3 dxc3 4. Nxc3 Nc6 5. Bc4 d6 6. Nf3 a6!? and play that way. This is something new for me.  Philosophically, black has just handed over the d5 square but the f-rook is not ideally placed for white on d1. Black should be OK on the theory he hasn’t done anything really stupid yet.  “Book” lines bear this out.

10.Be3 O-O 11.Rac1  I am unable to determine how stupid or conversely playable 11. Bc5 is. In some minor games 11. Bc5 a6(!) occurred.

11…a6  Maybe this move is not so great. The immediate 11…Be6 looks sound.

12.b4!? An interesting space gaining move. Black is getting squeezed a little.  The obvious try 12. Nd5 can be met by 12…Nxd5 13. Bxd5 Bg4 or 13…Nb4 in both cases with a reasonable game.  Historical note: GM Nemet played the blunder 12. Nd5 Nxd5 13. Bxd5 Be6?? here which loses to 14. Bxc6 bxc6 15. Nxe5!; however his amateur opponent played 14. Rd2?? instead and lost, Caldelari-Nemet, Baden 1997. Again the odd move 12. Bc5 is possible; 12. Bc5 b6!? 13. Ba3 Rc8 with approximate equality.

A entirely different line is 12. a3!? – in a historical footnote, 12. a3 Bd7 13. b4 Rc8 14. Rd2 Ng4 15. Nd5 Nxe3 16. Qxe3 b5 17. Bb3 Bg4?? 18. Rdc2 and white won, Robert Shean-Peter Winston, US Open 1972.  Black missed the ingenious zwischenzug 17….Nd4!! 18. Rxc8 Nxf3 CHECK 19. Qxf3 Bxc8 with full equality. A rare early Peter Winston game score that I found by blind chance in ChessBase. 

12…Bg4  Consistent; reducing the defenders on d4.  12…Be6 is oddly playable though: 13. Bxe6 fxe6 14. Ng5 Qd7 15. Na4 looks scary aiming for the hole on b6, but black has 15…Nd4! 16. Bxd4 Qxa4 17. Bc3 Rfc8! (stopping Qc4) 18. Nxe6 a5! with the point that 19. bxa5 is met by 19….Qxe4 and black is OK.  A good example of strange “long-distance” piece coordination. 

13.a3 Rc8 14.Bb3 h6 Playable is 14…Qe8 getting out of the way.  I was already planning my strange and not very good concept introduced by my 16th move.

15.h3

 

An important moment.

15…Bxf3?!  Not the best.   For no particularly good reason, I shied away from 15…Be6!? 16. Bxe6 fxe6 17. Qa2! because this move looked fearsome during the game. However, after the simple 17…Kf7! (not 17…Qd7? 18. Na4!) the try 18. Nh4 is met by the surprising 18…Ng4! – for example 19. Nf5 Nxe3 20. fxe3 Qd7 and black is somewhat better. Or, 19. Ng6!? Kxg6 20. hxg4 Kf7! and again black has some edge.  Another white move, 18. Na4, is met by the simple 18…Qe8 19. Nb6 Rd8 and nothing is apparent for white. Since black did not see this, he opts for the safer but weaker surrender of the two bishops and keeps working to try to gain control of d4. An interesting but flawed “secondary” defensive concept.  Another possibility, 15…Bh5!?, looked risky to me (in fact, it is risky to put the bishop offside after 16. g4 but let’s see….) After 16. g4 Bg6 the situation is murky. For example, the tactical white trick 17. Nh4 Bxe4 18. Nxe4 Nxe4 19. Ng6 gives black a chance to sacrifice: 19…Ng5! 20. Nxf8 Qxf8 (or 20…Bxf8) 21. Kg2 (21. Bxg5? Bxg5 with Nd4 coming; black edge) 21…Ne6 with a complex game where white might be a little better but there’s still a whole game ahead. 

16.Qxf3 Nh7?! With some ideas of Bg5, trading off a key piece.  However it “ignores the obvious.”

17.Rc2!? Logical; preventing the trade.  However white had the primitive 17. Nd5! Bg5 18. Bb6! Qd7 19. Rc3! with huge pressure. It’s not losing after 19…Nf6 20. Rcd3 Nxd5 21. Rxd5 Be7 22. a4!, but it’s no fun at all. (22….Nxb4 23. Rxe5 with a big edge).

17…Kh8?  Here I had the stronger 17…Bg5! and if 18. Bc5 dxc5! 19. Rxd8 Rcxd8 and white has to go through contortions to deal with Nd4. Black has good compensation for the queen.  An example variation is 20. Ne2 (20. Qg3 might be better; 20. Qg3 Nd4 21. Rb2 cxb4 22. axb4 Bf4 23. Qh4 Nxb3 24. Rxb3 Nf6 with approximate equality) 20…cxb4 21. Bd5? (21. axb4! Nf6! with a solid game; not 21…Nxb4? 22. Rc7 Nf6 23. Bxf7+! with an edge) 21…a5 22. Qb3 Nf6 23. Bxc6 bxc6 24. Rxc6 bxa3 and black is completely OK.  More importantly, I have good chances of getting the initiative in that position (25. Qxa3? Rd1+ 26. Kh2 Nxe4 is just bad; 25. Rc4 Rd2! is not that great either). It is very important when defending against a speculative gambit to seek an opportunity to counter-sacrifice and get aggressive.

18.Ne2 Qd7 19.Ng3 Nd4 Now this is the “panic” button, because white is amassing a fearsome attack. But it’s already bad for black; I missed a big chance on move 17.

20.Bxd4 Rxc2?  This is a blunder but 20…exd4 21. Qf5! is also horrible for black. For example, 21…Nf6 22. Rxc8 Qxc8 23. Qxc8 Rxc8 24. Bxf7 and white wins easily. I noticed the text move was a gross tactical oversight the moment I took the rook – a common phenomenon.

21.Bxc2?  White thinks for a little bit and then plays this lemon. Both sides miss the obvious tactic 21. Bxe5! and white has a big edge. The variations are clear: 21…Rc6 22. Nf5 f6 (disgusting) 23.Qg3 Ng5 24. Bd4! and black,  a rook up, does not have the faintest hope of surviving. Moves like Bd5 and h4 are coming up.  Or, 21. Bxe5 f6 22. Bxd6! (the simple 22. Bc3 Rxc3 23. Qxc3 also wins for white) Bxd6 23. Bxc2 Ng5 24. Qd3 Rd8 25. Nf5 Nf7 26. e5! and white wins.  Or the tragicomic 21. Bxe5 Rc7 22. Nh5 f6 23. Nf4! Qe8 24. Bd4 Ng5 25. Qg4 and black has no hope of surviving.

21..exd4 22.Rxd4 Bf6 23.Rd3  Be5  White still has uncomfortable pressure (as would be the case with 23…Ng5).  

24.Qe3 Qc7  The disgusting 24…Bxg3, going into total passivity, was relatively speaking one of the better moves.

25.Bb3 Rc8 I thought that this held up f2-f4, believing that 26. f4 Qc1+ won the pawn on f4.  Once again I make an elementary tactical oversight – maybe too much mambo in the next room over?

26.Ne2?  My thinking was flawed but once again white believes me.  26. f4! is very strong: 26…Qc1+ 27. Qxc1 Rxc1+ 28. Kf2! and since 28…Bxf4? 29. Ne2! wins for white, black has a terrible game.  For example, 28…Bb2 29. Rxd6 and wins. Another losing line is 26. f4! Bb2 27. Nf5! Qc1+ 28. Qxc1 Rxc1+ 29. Kf2 Bxa3 30. Nxd6 and wins.

26…Nf6 27.g3? These pawn moves in front of white’s king are a concession.  27. Rd2 with the idea of 27. Rc2 was much stronger. For example, 27. Rd2 d5?! 28. Rc2 Qd7 29. Rxc8+ Qxc8 30. f4 with a big edge.

27… Bb2 28.a4 Qe7! 29.f3 d5! This active defensive sequence saves the day.

30.exd5 Qxb4 31.Qd2  It appeared that white was reaching for 31. d6?? but of course then 31…Qe1+ 32. Kg2 Re8! would just win. White retracted his hand and played the sensible move.

31…Qxd2 32.Rxd2 Be5 33.Kg2 Kg8 34.Rd3 Kf8 35.f4 Bd6 36.Kf3 g6? If black hurries with his N to c5, he can even play for a win in this drawish ending, given the crazy time control. For example, 36…Nd7 37. Nd4 Nc5 38. Re3 g6 and black can keep playing although objectively of course it is still level.

37. Nc3  With this knight arriving soon on e4, there is nothing left to play for.

1/2-1/2

A very interesting Smith-Morra theory game.  Further analysis is required on 15…Be6!? or 15…Bh5!?.

Strangeness in the 1970s: Actual, Physical, Letters

In the old days, people wrote letters (not e-mail)!

Here is an example of a chessic correspondence. Click several times to enlarge.

A couple of things to note.

First of all, note the zeitgeist use of the word (Miss) in parentheses. Secondly, I have no idea what happened to this Evans book I supposedly won, nor do I remember ever seeing it. Thirdly, I have no idea what happened to RHM Press. And why did they have an office in Puerto Rico? At some point Burt Hochberg (the chief editor) got mad at me in the early 1980s, but more on that later.

Letters were not confined to contests. I would also routinely get mail regarding receipt of an entrance fee (particularly amusing were missives from “Peter Morris, Stoneyfields Lane, Edgware, Middlesex” for Lloyds Bank entries) and also post-event congratulation letters, even for menial prizes. For example, I got an 8th place congratulations (!) from Franklin and Marshall College after the 1974 US Junior Open. They might have not written the letter if they had realized chess players had trashed their reading room with an indoor frisbee contest. For more information on that brutal frisbee flinging spree, please contact Don Reents or James Keith Melbourne.

Here is that letter.  I’m telling you, physical (actual) letters should be brought back – makes chess very classy. 🙂

See?  Heartwarming. I offer F&M College belated apologies for the absurd indoor frisbee fight that took place in their sedate, intellectual, reading room.