The Fabulous 70s: The National Chess League

Before the current-day US Chess League, we had the National Chess League played with telephones!  (pre-Web).  Runners would relay the moves with lingo like “Baker echo 7″ (Be7).  Often times, a move was mis-relayed causing the game to back up and restart.  Games could take hours with the relay delays, although nominally the time control was G/1 hour with no increment.

Here are 3 amusing contests from the 1979 season, including one from the playoffs.

IM Dumitru Ghizdavu (CLE) – Mark Ginsburg (DC)  Sicilian Scheveningen, 4/22/79

I would hazard a guess my opponent hies from Romania.

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 Nf6 4. Nc3 cxd4 5. Nxd4 e6 6. Be3 a6 7. f4 b5 8. Qf3 Bb7 9. Bd3 Nbd7 10. g4 b4 A wild line very popular at the time.

11. Nce2 e5 12. Nb3 h5!?

Wild Stuff

13. g5 Ng4 14. f5 Nxe3 15. Qxe3 a5 16. O-O-O a4 17. Nd2 d5!? 18. exd5 Bc5 19. Qg3 Bxd5 20. Be4 Bxa2 21. Bc6

Key Moment

21…Rc8? I totally missed 21… O-O! 22. Ne4? (22. f6 Rc8  unclear) 22… Qb6 23. Bxd7 Be3+ 24. Nd2 Rfd8! and black wins.

22. Bxa4 O-O 23. Ne4 Qb6 24. Rxd7 Be3+ 25. Kd1 Rfd8 Still, I generate play against white’s floating king.

26. Ke1 Rxd7 27. Nf6+ Kh8 28. Nxd7 Qa7 29. b3 Rxc2 30. Qf3 Bxb3! The craziness continues.  Quite a game!

31. Qxh5+ Kg8 32. g6

Key Moment Deux

32…Bh6? I don’t think I had a lot of time left.

This second blunder is fatal.  I could have survived with  the wild sac (consistent with the rest of the game) 32… Rxe2+! 33. Kxe2 (33. Qxe2 Bxa4 34. gxf7+ Kxf7 35. Nxe5+ Kg8 36. Qc4+ Kh7 37. Qxb4 Bc2 38. Qc3 Bxf5) 33… Bc4+ 34. Kf3 Bd5+ 35. Kg4 Bh6)

33. Bxb3 Qa1+ 34. Kf2 Qd4+ 35. Kg3 Bf4+ 36. Kh3 Qd3+

I should have at least tried 36… Qe3+ hoping for 37. Ng3??  Rxh2+! 38. Rxh2 Qxg3 mate but it is hard to believe Ghizdavu would fall into that one.

37. Kh4 Bg5+ 38. Qxg5 Qe4+ 39. Qg4 Qxh1 40. gxf7+  1-0

In an amusing postscript, Ghizdavu recently popped up on the Arizona Scorpions USCL blog (see Comments section) announcing he’s moved to …. surprise ….. Surprise, AZ!   I would have to guess that DC won this Cleveland match but I didn’t record the individual board results.

M. Ginsburg (DC) – Julius Loftsson (LA)  Sicilian Taimanov 3/18/79

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 e6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nc6 5. Nb5 d6 6. c4 Nf6 7. N5c3

Unusual and tried by Ljubojevic sporadically.

A Ljubo Special

7…Be7 8. Be2 O-O 9. O-O b6 10. Bf4 Bb7 11. Nd2 a6 12. Re1 Rc8 13. Rc1 Ne5 14. Bg3 Qc7
15. b4 Qb8 16. Qb3 Bc6 17. f4 Ng6 18. h4?! A very junior move. All my pawn advances come to naught and black is fine.

Rfd8 19. h5 Nf8 20. a4?! a5! I have no idea why I played my 20th.

21. bxa5 bxa5 22. Bf3 N8d7

Time for a Horrific Blunder

23. e5?? Utter confusion on my part. A really ugly and mistimed advance that should have just handed black the game.

23… dxe5 24. fxe5 Bxf3 25. Qxb8 Nxb8 26. Nxf3 Nxh5 27. Bh2 Rxc4 I shed some pawns with no compensation.  Can you envision white winning?  No?  But look what happens.

"White to play and win"

28. Ne4 Rxc1 29. Rxc1 g6?!

Simplest was 29… Na6 stopping any play; e.g.  30. Nd6 g6 and black wins.

30. Rc7 Nd7 31. Nd4 Nc5?

Black had the nice 31… Bc5! 32. Nxc5 Nxc5 33. Rxc5 Rxd4 34. Rxa5 g5 and he should win.

32. Nd6 Bxd6? Another mistake and this one is serious enough to turn the game completely around.  32… Bg5! 33. Rxc5 Be3+ 34. Kf1 Bxd4 35. Rxa5 Ng7 36. Ke2 Nf5 37. Ra6 Rb8 and black is better.  He was probably in time trouble.

33. exd6 Ne4 Black is also losing after 33… Na6 34. Nc6 Rf8 35. d7 Nxc7 36. Bxc7 Nf6 37. Ne7+ Kg7 38. d8=Q Rxd8 39. Bxd8

34. d7 1-0

I think that DC won this match as well against LA.

So we got into the playoffs and here is a game from the Semi-Finals, DC versus the strong Berkeley Squad.  This time around I did record individual board results (see below).

IM Julio Kaplan (Berkeley Riots) – M. Ginsburg (DC Plumbers)  King’s Indian, 4 Pawns Attack, Benko-Gambit-esque

If you are wondering about the Plumbers name, look up the White House Plumbers and the notorious Watergate Scandal that occurred during President Nixon’s reign of terror.
1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 c5 3. d5 g6 4. Nc3 d6 5. e4 Bg7 6. f4 O-O 7. Nf3 b5

Believe it or not, at the time I notated this as “!”  It works out well in the game but white was very compliant, opening lines up for black.

8. cxb5 a6 9. e5?! Former World Junior Champ Kaplan is aggressive, but I don’t like this at all.

9…dxe5 10. fxe5 Ng4 11. Bf4 Nd7 12. bxa6 Ndxe5 Black has a great game now.

Big Plus Already! What can go wrong?

13. Nxe5 Nxe5 14. Qd2 c4! I’m playing well!  These motifs are obvious to Benko players but I was totally on my own.

15. Bxe5 Bxe5 16. Bxc4 Qc7 17. Be2 Bxa6 18. Bxa6 Rxa6 19. O-O Bxh2+ 20. Kh1 Be5 21. Rf3 Rf6 22. Rxf6 Bxf6 23. Ne4 Bg7 24. Re1 Rd8 25. Nc3 Qc4 26. Re3? A huge lemon, of course, but white had a bad game.

Qf1+ 27. Kh2 Bh6 As simple as that, black is winning.  But remember a kid is playing an ending, and accidents can happen to kids.

Yay. I win?

28. Re1 Bxd2 29. Rxf1 Bxc3 30. bxc3 Rxd5 31. Rf2 e5 32. a4 Rc5 33. Rc2 Rc4 34. Ra2 Rxc3
35. a5 Rc7 36. a6 Ra7 37. Kg3 f6 38. Kf3 Kf7 39. Ke4 Ke6 40. g4

Is it possible not to win?

It’s hard to conceive of black not winning this position.

40…f5+

Easier is 40… h5 41. gxh5 gxh5 42. Kd3 Kd5 43. Ra5+ Kc6 44. Ke4 Kb6 and after dealing with the white pawn there are no obstacles for black.

41. gxf5+ gxf5+ 42. Kf3 h5 43. Ra1 Kf6 44. Ra2 h4? Completely off my radar was the simple 44… f4! 45. Ke4 h4 46. Ra5 h3 47. Rxe5 Rh7 48. Rf5+ Kg6 and black wins, since the h1-a8 diagonal skewer is decisive.

45. Ra1 Ra8?? Did I really do that?  What a nonsensical blunder. Well by now it was obvious I was incompetent so I doubt another stronger move would have “won” for me.

46. a7 h3 47. Kg3 e4 48. Kxh3 Kg5 49. Ra5 Kf4 50. Kg2 Kg4 51. Ra4 f4 52. Rxe4 Rxa7 53. Re8 Ra2+ 54. Kg1 Kf3 55. Rf8 Ra5 56. Rf7 Ra1+ 57. Kh2 Rf1 58. Ra7 Re1 59. Rf7 Re5 60. Kg1 Rg5+
61. Kf1 1/2-1/2 Quelle desastre!

Here are the board results:

DC                     –       Berkeley

Mark Diesen   0   John Grefe

future IM Steve Odendahl 0  Paul Whitehead (I commented that Odendahl stood much better and went nuts)

Larry Kaufman  1  Jay Whitehead

Richard Delaune 1/2  Cornelius

John Meyer 0  DeFirmian (I noted that John lost on time with a queen versus a rook!)

So we lost this Semi-Final match 2 to 4.

And for Something Different

World Open 1985

Vince McCambridge (right) and a fan, World Open, 1985.

Military History, Anyone?

Is anyone awake at the Pentagon?

This Afghanistan story of heavy American casualties from cnn.com:

“The battle Saturday in which eight U.S. troops were killed was so fierce that, at one point, U.S. forces had to fall back as attackers breached the perimeter of their base, a U.S. military official with knowledge of the latest intelligence reports on the incident said.

Forward Operating Base Keating, seen in 2007, is surrounded by tall ridge lines.

more photos »

The new revelations about the battle that engulfed Forward Operating Base Keating in Kamdesh District are a further indication of how pinned down and outmanned the troops were at the remote outpost. The base, in an eastern Afghanistan valley, was surrounded by ridge lines where the insurgents were able to fire down at U.S. and Afghan troops.

The facility had been scheduled to be closed within days, CNN has learned. The closing is part of a wider effort by the top commander in Afghanistan, Gen. Stanley McChrystal, to cede remote outposts and consolidate troops in more populated areas to better protect Afghan civilians.”

It’s hard to believe that we haven’t learned our lesson from famous failures in the past to hold remote outposts.  A classic siege, Dien Bien Phu, saw the French try to hold a similar, ridiculously located, forward base to great cost.  Read “Hell in a Very Small Place” by Bernard Fall for that incredible account. I attach more information about this amazing book at the bottom of this article.  Even the USA’s own President, LBJ, when fortifying the ludicrous outpost Khe Sanh in Vietnam said “I don’t want another damn DIN BIN FOO.”

Why did we try to keep and hold a new DIN BIN FOO in Afghanistan?  A failed strategy cannot work if you fast-forward it in time.  This is the theme of the classic book of repetitious military failure throughout the ages, “The March of Folly” by Barbara Tuchman.  Hello, Pentagon?  Once agin:  we don’t want another damn DIN BIN FOO.  Forward, remote operating bases are sitting ducks.

If we are going to be in a far-away country trying our hand at “World Police” (that didn’t work too well for the British in the early 20th century), we might as well learn from prior military disasters.

More on “Hell in a Very Small Place”

From Amazon,

“he siege of Dien Bien Phu, in which a guerrilla force of Viet Minh destroyed a technologically superior French colonial army, must rank with Waterloo, Gettysburg, Midway, Stalingrad, and Tet as one of the decisive battles in military history. Not only did Dien Bien Phu put an end to French imperial efforts in Indo-china, but it also convinced the Viet Minh, when they came to power in Communist North Vietnam, that similar tactics would prevail in their war with the United States. As an American army officer told Bernard Fall during the Vietnam War: ”What we’re doing here basically is, we’re exorcising Dien Bien Phu.”Bernard Fall in this monumental work has written an exhaustive, revelatory, and vivid account of the battle, leading the reader from the conference rooms of the U.S. State Department to the French Foreign Office to the front lines of Indo-China and the strategy sessions led by General Giap and Ho Chi Minh. Among the many historical curiosities here disclosed is evidence that then-Secretary of State John Foster Dulles offered atomic bombs to the beleaguered French, and that then-Senator Lyndon Johnson played a key role in defeating a proposal to aid the French with critical air support. Without U. S. aid, the fortress at Dien Bien Phu fell on the very day that the cease-fire conference opened in Geneva.Based on hitherto unavailable documentation from the French Defense Ministry, and replete with detailed maps of the many assaults, Hell in a Very Small Place is a first-rate military history. But even more powerful is the political wisdom it imparts about a war that was not only the beginning of the end of the French colonial empire but a rehearsal for American involvement in Vietnam.”

Tragically, the author Bernard Fall died while embedded with Marines in South Vietnam in 1967.

The Fabulous 90s: From the Vaults – San Francisco 1999 Dake Memorial

The Arthur Dake Memorial was a 9 round invitational held at the venerable Mechanics Institute Chess Club in downtown San Francisco (Post Street, visit it at some point!).  I think I tied for 2nd by defeating NM Lobo in the last round.  My only loss was to IM Guillermo Rey. Here is a miraculous escape versus Vinay Bhat, who scored an IM norm in this event.  I believe Jesse Kraii did as well and also Omar Cartagena.  Most of the games were contested in the main room, but former US Champion John Grefe and I played our game in a drafty back room for some reason.

[Event "Arthur Dake Int"]
[Site "San Francisco"]
[Date "1999.07.14"]
[Round "4"]
[White "Bhat, Vinay S"]
[Black "Ginsburg, Mark"]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[ECO "B06"]
[WhiteElo "2388"]
[BlackElo "2381"]

1. e4 g6 2. d4 Bg7 3. Nc3 d6 4. Be3 a6!? 5. a4 Nc6 I don’t think 5. a4 is the most testing move.  Black is all right now. In fact, I equalized quickly with this line vs Ben Finegold, Brugges Belgium 1990.  Queenside castling is out for white.

6. h3 Nf6 7. g3 e5 8. Nge2 d5! How dynamic and natural enough versus white’s slow buildup!  It’s still about equal.

The Center Blows Up

9. dxe5 Nxe5 10. Bg2 Nc4 11. Bd4 The line 11. Bg5 h6 12. Bxf6 Bxf6 13. b3 d4! 14. bxc4 dxc3 15. Qxd8+ Bxd8 seems OK for black.

11… dxe4 But here black had a serious choice.  Probably safer is 11… Nxb2! 12. Qb1 Nc4 13. exd5 O-O and black is solid.

12. Nxe4 O-O 13. Nc5 Qe7 14. O-O Rd8 15. Nd3! I really missed most of white’s regroupings in this phase of the game and my opponent got control of all the key squares.

15..Ne4? A huge lemon.  If black develops with 15… Bf5! 16. b3 Na5 17. Re1 he should be able to hold.

16. Bxg7 Kxg7 17. Nef4! Totally missed by me.

17…Nc5? Flustered, I make an even worse mistake.  Required was 17… Nf6 18. Re1 Qd6 19. Qc1! and white has a big plus.

18. Nd5 Qd6 19. Nxc5 Qxc5 20. b4! I can resign!  From a good position on move 8 to this?  Boo.

Not....liking....it

20…Qd6 21. Qd4+ Qe5 22. Qxc4 Be6 It is blind luck that I’m not losing a piece.

23. Qxc7 Rxd5 24. Qxb7 Rb8 25. Qxa6? White is somewhat short of time and I start to get rays of hope.  Very pretty was the decisive tactical blow 25. Rae1!! Rxb7 26. Rxe5 Rxe5 27. Bxb7 Bxh3 28. Rd1 Bf5 29. c4 Bc2 30. Rd6 Bxa4 31. Rxa6 and white wins.

25… Rd6 26. Qa5 Qxa5 27. bxa5 Ra6 28. Rfb1 Rxb1+ 29. Rxb1 Rxa5 30. Rb4 Rc5 31. Rb2 It’s also hard work after 31. Bf1 Rxc2 32. a5 Ra2 33. a6 Bd5 34. Rb5 Bf3 35. Rb1 Kf6; black always has activity.  The shot missed on move 25 looms large.

31… Ra5 32. Bc6 Rc5 33. Bb5 Bxh3 34. a5 Rc3 35. a6 Be6 36. Bd3 Ra3 37. Kf1 h5 38. Ke1 More accurate is 38. Ke2.  The position is very easy for black to play and for white, without much time, it’s not a lot of fun.  But on move 39 (see the note) white could have gotten back on track.

38… g5 39. Rb6?! The computer likes the aesthetic 39. Rb4 Kf6 40. f4! gxf4 41. Rxf4+ Ke5 42. Rb4 and white has clarified the kingside and should be winning without too many problems.

39… h4! Of course.  Who knows how real it is, but it is counterplay.

40. gxh4 gxh4 This pawn looks scary so the players agreed to a draw here.  The position is a hard slog.  For example, 41. Kf1 Kf6 42.
Kg1 Ra1+ 43. Kh2 Kg5 44. Kg2 Bd5+ 45. f3 Kf4 46. Kf2 h3 47. Rb4+ Ke5 48. f4+ Kd6 49. Kg3 Rh1 50. Ra4 Ba8 51. a7 h2 52. Bc4 Rf1 53. Kxh2 Rxf4 and it’s still work.

1/2-1/2

International Quiz

The Return of Polugaevsky

A recent e-mail banter exchange.

The query:
dewaynepittman wrote:
Hi,
I am SSG Dewayne Pittman, an active American soldier serving in Iraq, I am serving in the military of the 1st Armored Division in Iraq, as our mission here is highly exclusive due to insurgents everyday and car bombs are attacking our peaceful mission here. We managed to secure funds from the war zone. The total amount is US$ 9 Million dollars in cash.

We want to move this money out of this place,this place is a war zone, so that you may keep our share for us till when we will come over to meet you.We will take 70%, my partner and I.You take 30%. No strings attached, just help us move it out of Iraq, Iraq is a war zone. We plan on using diplomatic courier and shipping the money out in a large box, using diplomatic immunity.

If you are interested I will send you the full details, my job is to find a good partner that we can trust and that will assist us. Can I trust you? When you receive this letter, kindly send me an e-mail signifying your interest including your most confidential telephone/fax numbers for quick communication also your contact details.

This business is risk free. The box can be shipped out in 48hrs if you want to handle the deal with us as brothers.

Respectfully,
SSG Dewayne Pittman

The response:

Sounds great.

I am Lev Polugaevsky and I watched as Soviet tanks rolled into Afghanistan.   The next move is yours, mein Freund.

Stay tuned — let’s see if we can catch some bait with this lure.

The Fabulous 00s: Player Freakouts

Players and Their Freakouts

I laughed my butt off at Vinay Bhat’s World Open blog where he describes NM Chris Williams freaking out and the deleterious effect on Vinay’s opponent, FM Thomas Bartell.  Well, of course, it’s not so funny for Bartell who blew a winning game during the Williams freakout.  Apparently Williams was quite a distance away yet still managed to ratchet up the volume level to a full scream and, typical of freakouts, sustained the yelling for a good, long, while.

It reminded me of the time I was playing much closer (the next board over) in Las Vegas from a player destined (bad luck for me) to freak out in the round, Jerry Hanken.  In both Bhat’s case and my case, the offending party would-not-shut-up.

The Infamous Hanken Freakout

Perhaps even more infamous since he’s a perennial officer in the ‘Chess Journalists of America’ – but here he made it impossible for me to … play chess.  I would think “Chess Journalists” would want to allow chess to occur.

[Event "National Open"]
[Site "Las Vegas, NV"]
[Date "2005.06.17"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Steigman, A.J.."]
[Black "Ginsburg, Mark"]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[ECO "B23"]

Closed Sicilian

1. e4 c5 2. Nc3 e6 3. Nge2 a6 4. a4 Nc6 5. g3 Nf6 6. Bg2 Be7 7. O-O d6 8. h3 O-O 9. d3 Qb6 Just for fun, I’m trying something unusual.

10. g4 Re8 11. Ng3 Bf8 12. Rb1 Nd7 13. g5 Qc7 14. f4 Nd4 15. Be3 b5 16. Nce2 Nxe2+ 17. Qxe2 bxa4 18. f5?! This is not good.  Correct is … not to do it!

18…Ne5 Black can also play simply 18…exf5 19. Nxf5 Ne5 with some edge.

19. Rf4?! White should clog things up with 19. f6! g6 20. h4 Bb7 21. h5 d5 22. Bf4 Bd6 23. Kh2 Rab8

19… exf5 20. exf5 Bb7 21. Rxa4 d5 22. Rh4 Nxd3 23. Rxh7?? This move is not even close to working. 23. Nf1 Nf4 24. Bxf4 Qxf4 25. Rxf4 Rxe2 26. Rf2 for better or worse white has to accept this sort of inferior ending.

Hankenized

23… g6?? Correct, of course, was 23… Qxg3.  This should have been very easy to find.  However, Jerry Hanken on the adjacent board had just resigned and was talking to himself loudly. I told him to be quiet and he would not.   He would NOT.  ARGHHHHH.   As my time ticked down, and Hanken kept up his monologue rant, I could not focus so I committed a blunder that could have turned the game around 360 degrees.  After the correct 23…Qxg3! 24. Qh5 Qxe3+ This position is an elementary forced mate. 25. Kh1 Nf2+ 26. Kg1 Nd1+ 27. Kh1 Qe1+ 28. Kh2 Bd6 mate. Oh my God. The simple fact that black’s bishop can go to d6 in all  lines, giving check, had escaped black’s attention during the Hanken nonsense.   A “Chess Journalist” should not make noises (talking to oneself, or snorting, or fake-coughing) to disrupt other players.  I don’t think it’s just me with this opinion.

24. fxg6 Qxg3 25. Rh8+?? White is also oblivious to the tactical possibilities, in all likelihood due to the Hanken noise machine next board, and mistakenly goes for the perpetual. If 25. gxf7!+ Kxh7 26. Qh5+ Kg7 27. fxe8=N+! Rxe8 28. Qh6+ Kf7 29. Qf6+ Kg8 30. Qg6+ and white wins.

25… Kg7 26. Rh7+ Kg8 1/2-1/2 Guess what.  NOW, Hanken was packing up his pieces and was preparing to leave the tournament hall docilely and silently. ARGHHHH.

A Happy Ending Freakout

At the 1981 Lone Pine tournament, Reshevsky offered a draw to Fedorowicz.  After letting his time tick down, Fedorowicz accepted.  Reshevsky then in a bald-faced absurd maneuver, denied he had made the offer. A massive multi-party (the players, witnesses, the TD) lengthy freakout ensued.  The TD, Kashdan, eliminated all the witnesses saying they were “friends of Reshevsky’s opponent” and upheld Reshevsky’s fabrication.   I am not too nostalgic for the “old days” when TDs engaged in rampant cheating and/or bogus pairings on behalf on their buddies.

The Lone Pine game continued and …. Sammy lost.  Frontier Justice meted out in Lone Pine, which happens to be in Death Valley!

Even more rare than player freakouts are lengthy, borderline hysterical, TD freakouts.  The only one I’ve witnessed belonged to excitable “colors don’t matter in my pairings” Weikel.

And Now It’s Your Turn

Readers, please send in your own freakout stories, particularly if they influenced your game or a game you were watching.

Poll Time!

---

---

Enough Unpleasantness, Time for Some Chess

What’s the best way to get rid of the bad taste of player antics?  Some blitz chess!

Here I am playing a Ghost.

Information about F-Ghost(GM) (Last disconnected Tue Jul 28 2009 12:36):

rating [need] win  loss  draw total   best
Bullet          2405  [8]   195   169    21   385   2430 (19-Feb-2001)
Blitz           2923  [8]  1210  1095   272  2577   2981 (18-Nov-2000)
5-minute        2402        295   192    62   549   2515 (04-May-2008)

1: Born 1976 in USSR
2: Lost the way and perished in 2002 in BiH
3: —————————————
4: Kosovo je Srbija

[Event "ICC 5 Min Blitz"]
[Date "2009.07.28"]
[White "GM F-Ghost"]
[Black "Aries2"]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "B40"]
[EventDate "2008.09.18"]
[EventType "blitz"]

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 e6 3. c3 d5 4. e5 d4 5. Bb5+ Bd7 6. Qe2 Nc6 7. O-O Nge7 8. Na3 Ng6 9. Qe4 a6 10. Bd3 Qc7 11. Re1 b5 12. h4 c4 13. Bf1 d3 Well, this attempt cutting the board in two is very optimistic, and demands a careful white reaction.

14. b3?! A little slow.  Faster is 14. h5! Bxa3 15. hxg6 Bc5 16. b4 Be7 17. a4 Rb8 with white initiative.

Time to Go Loco

14… Ngxe5? Too frisky.  I was trying to emulate a classic brilliancy, Sax-Ljubojevic London 1980.  I recommend to the readers that they play over the Sax-Ljubojevic game; it is astounding. Better was the sane and very nice 14… Bc5! 15. bxc4 Qb6! (excellent tactics!) 16. Re3 Bxe3 17. dxe3 Qc5  and black is very happy.

15. Nxe5 f5 16. Qf3 Nxe5 17. Qxa8+ 17. Rxe5! puts an end to black’s fantasies.

17…Kf7 18. Rxe5 Qxe5 19. Qb7? Here although the path is getting a little harder, 19. Qf3 Bd6 20. g3 Rc8 21. bxc4 bxc4 22. Qf4! and white wins.  With the text, white presents black with an unexpected chance. Now, it’s quiz time. What do I do?

19…Ke8 WRONG.

The spectacular correct move is 19… Bd6!! 20. Qxd7+ Kf6  and black is assured of at least a draw!  Not so incredible, since white’s entire queenside force is ‘asleep’.  The line continues 21. g3 Bc5! and feast your eyes on the tableau:

Black's Tiny Army Fights Successfully

Position after 21…Bc5! (Analysis).  Black has at least a draw!

22. Qc6 Qxg3+ 23. Qg2 Bxf2+ 24. Kh1 Qxh4+ 25. Qh3 Qe4+ 26. Kh2 and now black can play aggressively with 26… g5  or force an immediate draw with 26… Ba7 27. bxc4 Bb8+ 28. Kg1 Ba7+.   It’s amazing how black’s well-coordinated, but TINY army, saves the day and even preserves winning chances!

20. bxc4 Bd6 21. g3 The simple 21. Bxd3! winning demonstrates how bad black’s 19th was.

21…f4 22. Qf3 Rf8 23. g4! Effective enough.

23…Ke7 24. Bxd3 Bc6 25. Qxc6 f3 26. Qb7+ Kd8 27. Kf1 Qh2 28. Ke1 Bg3 29. fxg3 f2+ 30. Kd1 f1=Q+ 31. Bxf1 Rxf1+ 32. Kc2 Qxg3 33. Qb8+

HAHAHAHA.  Since black has seconds left and will lose on time in any event, white moves his queen en-prise.  A classical Naka taunt.

33…Ke7 34. Qxg3 1-0

And for More Humor: CNN Text Scroll Gaffes

For those who can’t get enough humor, I went to lunch today at PF Chang.  The TV overhead was tuned to CNN at a very low volume but it had a text scroll at the time (presumably for hard of hearing viewers).  Amusingly the text scroll made some mistakes that almost made sense in the context of the story, but not quite.

First, CNN was running a story on Pres. Obama addressing the AARP on health care reform.  According to the text scroll, Obama told the AARP audience, “I know hell care is not working for you.  I know I have to fix hell care.  I know we have big problems with hell care.”   That one drew some yucks.  The next story up:  quarterback Michael Vick was reinstated into the NFL after a long jail stint for dog fighting.  The text scroll kept saying “Victory Dogs…”  …. “Victory Dogs”…. the story was actually trying to say “Vick’s dogs.”

Playing The Oddball

The following poll starts to measure your oddball experiences.

---

The Fabulous 00s: The Resurgence of the 1890s

Behold, Once Again, the Two Knights

GM Nakamura scored a key win over GM Friedel in the last round of the US Championship 2009 with a two knights sideline opening fresh from the 1890s.  Curiously, GM Friedel in his notes in Chess Life Online did not mention the most active way to play.  He played a “safe” “solid” way but that way was passive, white kept an extra pawn, and won easily. Maybe he hasn’t looked it up yet!  Postscript Sunday June 28: I am not sure what’s in the water, but now the game has appeared in print annotated by both parties, and in neither case black’s best 8th move was mentioned.  Presumably the annotators have had time to reflect and present the readers with the right move, so I don’t know what’s going on.

Here is how the key game started.

Nakamura-Friedel US Championship 2009

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Nf6 There is a school of thought that, for safety’s sake, or even more precisely, for logic’s sake,  follow what Karpov does.  GM Short told me that if GM Karpov plays 3…Bc5 here, it is likely to be best.  Logical!  Logic in the opening by proxy!  But when Karpov starts dancing with his king on f8 in Caro’s, well, watch out.

4. Ng5 d5 5. exd5 Na5 Known to be bad is 5…Nxd5? 6. d4!.  Not so clear is the schoolboy favorite, 6. Nxf7, the Fried Liver Attack.  I think d4! first then taking on f7 is the way theory recommends.

6. Bb5+ c6 7. dxc6 bxc6 Black has a sidelined knight on a5 and a pawn minus, but a lead in development and prospects for gaining more time by hitting the knight on g5. This position has been seen a lot, and white’s next is no novelty at all.

8. Bd3 Not new at all. In fact, quite old.  And also played in a major league game in 2008.  Both old and new!   A double-headed monster that needs to be … well….. looked at.  GM Short told me that he faced this in blitz vs GM Morozevich, “reaching a good game but then losing.”  In a curious “double”, Nakamura once scored easily with 1. c4 Nf6 2. Nc3 e6 3. e4 d5 4. e5 d4 5. exf6 dxc3 6. bxc3 Qxf6 7. Bd3!? vs an Argentinian GM and ex-world junior champion Pablo Zarnicki, HB Global Challenge Minnesota 2005. At this point Friedel writes in CLO, “I vaguely recalled it, but of course had no clue what to do.  I  decided to go  “solid” again with Be7 and 0-0.  Better might have been an earlier h6 followed by Nd5 and f5-e4 with counterplay.”  Needless to say, 8…Be7? was a huge lemon and Nakamura had no trouble whatsoever scoring the full point in short order.  Although on ICC there were some funny moments when GM Kraai (perhaps inebriated, that would be my guess) started scream/kibitzing after Friedel’s unsound sac on d3 that “the panda’s junk was all over the board”  – it took quite a bit of deduction to figure out he was referring to Friedel as the Panda.  Nevertheless, the junk (I think) stayed back in its package as Nakamura just pocketed the material and then trapped the queen. The most ‘objectionable’ thing is that Chess Life Online readers come away with nothing at this key juncture.  But it’s more or less free… the peanuts and monkeys syndrome?

Instead of solid, we need fast!  More precisely, there’s a faster way for black to ‘get there’ in Friedel’s counterplay notion.  Better is what Emanuel Lasker found in 1892 versus Henry Bird!  (And repeated in recent memory by Erwin L’Ami).  The right move is 8…Ng4! When facing something strange, do something “strange” – but the move is really quite logical!

Postscript Sunday June 28: I received New in Chess magazine 2009/4 in the mail (late, I know; I go with the chessplayer’s stingy surface mail option) – and I was very surprised to see Nakamura annotate this game and pass by 8…Be7 without comment. His secrets after 8…Ng4 go unmentioned. On purpose?  The readers come away with absolutely no information.

This is the way to get the Panda's Junk on the Board

Bird-Lasker Newcastle-on-Tyne 1892 (have you heard of that event??!) saw 8…Ng4 9. Nf3 f5! The correct followup. After 10. h3 e4! we had true chaos on board, and Lasker outplayed Bird subsequently. But let’s not trust a game from 1892.  We need to look at this try more carefully. The most interesting recent game, between two young Dutch lions, saw in

Stellwagen-L’Ami, Maastricht 2008, 8…Ng4! 9. Ne4!? f5! Always this!  Black needs this.  10. Be2 h5! with absolute chaos once again! 11. h3 fxe4 12. hxg4 Bc5! with madness and a definite black initiative.  The kind one is supposed to get with the …Na5 gambit! I am pretty sure Friedel might have looked this up by now.  Or maybe not?  Anyway it looks like 8…Ng4 is the way to go, and I look forward to Nakamura being challenged with this!  (but maybe he’ll switch away now that the surprise is gone).  In the meantime, can readers switch on their collective Rybkas and give me best play and evaluation after this?  Merci et adieu.

A Weird “Double”

From the Copper State International, Altounian-Barcenilla (copied from Chess Life Online, annotations by GM Alex Yermolinsky unless italicized by MG)

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Ng5

This old line, known as the Fried Liver Attack, is making an unexpected comeback these days. I faced it against David Pruess in 2007, and there was a recent Nakamura-Friedel U.S. Championship game. I have mixed feelings about it. On the one hand, modern computer analysis can re-evaluate some positions from the defensive point of view. On the other hand, it’s hard to believe that generations of chess players were wrong in their assessment of resulting positions as good for Black

4…d5 5.exd5 Nd4

Altounian was quite surprised by this little known sideline. 5…Na5 6.Bb5+ c6 7.dxc6 bxc6 and the old move 8.Be2 is being superseded by(8.Qf3 Pruess; or 8.Bd3 Nakamura.)

6.c3 b5 7.Bd3!? Shadows of Hikaru… 7.Bf1 Nxd5 transposes to well-known theoretical lines, such as 8.Ne4 Ne6 9.Bxb5+ Bd7 10.Bxd7+ Qxd7; Another chapter is 7.cxd4 bxc4 and now either 8.Qa4+ (or 8.dxe5 Qxd5 9.exf6 Qxg5 10.Qf3 Rb8) 8…Qd7 9.Qxc4 Qxd5 In both cases, the computer gives White a big plus for whatever that’s worth.

7…Nxd5 The alternative 7…Bf5 was seen in Morozevich-Timman, 1996 where after 8.Bxf5 Nxf5 9.Qf3 Nh4 (9…g6!?) 10.Qh3 Ng6? the young Alexander missed the crushing shot (better was 10…Nxd5 11.Qxh4 Be7 12.d4 Nf4 13.Bxf4 exf4 with some play for a pawn; but not 10…Qxd5 11.Qxh4 Qxg2 12.Rf1 h6 13.d3 and White keeps the extra piece.) 11.Nxf7 and instead went on to lose the game.

8.Nxf7 8.cxd4 Qxg5 9.Bxb5+ Kd8 10.Qf3 is another transposition to the 7.Bf1 theoretical line.

8…Kxf7 9.cxd4 Nf4 Should further analysis prove White’s advantage in the way the game went, it might be worth looking at the crazy line 9…Nf6 10.Bxb5 exd4!? (I don’t think Black has anything going after 10…Qxd4 11.Nc3 Bc5 12.Qe2 Be6 13.d3) 11.Bc4+ Kg6 12.0-0 Bd6 13.Qc2+ Bf5 14.Bd3 Qd7 and the hyperactive black king may turn out to be a real asset in the endgame. 10.Be4

10…Qxd4!

Barcenilla must get credit for energetic play. Weaker was 10…Rb8 11.dxe5 Nd3+ 12.Kf1 and Black cannot maintain the knight on d3 because of the exposed position of his own king (checks from b3, f3 or h5 are coming).

11.d3 White was not advised to take the gift, 11.Bxa8? Nd3+ 12.Ke2 Bg4+ 13.Bf3 (13.f3 Nf4+ 14.Ke1 Nxg2+ 15.Ke2 Nf4+ 16.Ke1 Be7 bringing more pieces into the fray.) 13…Nf4+ 14.Kf1 Bxf3 15.Qxf3 Qc4+ 16.Ke1 Qxc1+ 17.Qd1 Nxg2+ 18.Ke2 Nf4+ 19.Ke1 Nd3+ 20.Ke2 Qc4 and Black’s attack just doesn’t seem to let up.; A more reasonable possibility, along with the text move, was 11.Nc3 Nd3+ 12.Bxd3 Qxd3 13.Qb3+ Be6 14.Qxb5 although the black bishop pair would provide ample compensation even after the queens are swapped.

11…Bb4+ 12.Nc3 Bxc3+ 13.bxc3 Qxc3+ 14.Bd2 Nxd3+ 15.Kf1

15.Ke2 Nf4+ 16.Bxf4 exf4 17.Bxa8 Be6 clearly favors Black.

15…Qc4 16.Qe2? A serious mistake. White had to play 16.Qb3 to get the queens off. There are various ways for Black to proceed, but I can’t see a fully satisfactory continuation.

In fact White should win after 16. Qb3!.  This was the key moment.  If Altounian had won the game, he would have been in great shape to make a GM norm.  As it happened, the victor in this game did make a norm!  Such is chess.

16…Rd8!! Absolutely brilliant!

17.Bxa8 Bf5 18.Bb7 18.Bf3 e4 19.Bg4 Bxg4 20.Qxg4 Ne5+ 21.Qe2 Rxd2 wins for Black.

18…Qd4 19.Rd1 Nb2!? 19…Nf4 20.Qe3 Qc4+ 21.Kg1 Ne2+ 22.Kf1 Nf4+ was enough for a draw, but Rogelio was after the jackpot.

20.Qh5+ Ke6 21.Ke1?? Levon could keep on fighting after 21.Rc1 Qxd2 22.Rc6+ Rd6 23.h3

21…Nd3+ White gets mated on the next move.

0-1 A very sad finish for Levon.  This was a tough tournament with a fast time control and many strong opponents.

The Fabulous 00s: WGM Hou Yifan’s 8th Move Offends me to the Very Core of My Chess Being and Hanken foists some nonsense on CL Readers

Hou Yifan Offends and Wins

Corus “B” Wijk aan Zee 2009 [Round "12"] WGM Hou Yifan” (2571) – Vallejo Pons (2702)

Watch what young WGM Hou Yifan does in this game.  I could not believe it when I replayed it on ICC.

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Nc3 Nf6 4. Bb5 g6 5. e5 Ng4 6. Bxc6 dxc6 7. h3 Nh6 8. g4?

OMFG.  What a horrible move.  She gives up her light square bishop then opens up the d5-h1 diagonal to create a “fake bind” against the black knight on h6.  I wasn’t there, but Pons may have glanced at her with a pitying “you’re a beginner” look.  Pawns-don’t-move-backward.  The last time I saw a hideous lunge like this was the “fugly” Caro varation discussed in a prior post. The fact, as a commentator pointed out, that the move has scored well in Megabase 2008 means very little – it’s still incredibly unaesthetic.

So Fugly

Position after 8. g4? : Is Corus “B” a beginner’s sandbox? Then the game proceeded incomprehensibly (giving the false appearance of a smooth and logical white victory) which seems to have “tricked” newspaper columnists Peters and Kavalek by the Siren’s Song of the Final Result (a typical bias in the rushed day to day life of the newspaper writer).

8…Bg7 9. d3 f5 10. exf6 exf6 11. Qe2+ Kf7 12. Be3 Re8 13. O-O-O Kg8 14. d4 cxd4 15. Nxd4 Qc7 16. Rhe1 Nf7 17. Qc4 Qh2 18. Nce2 Qxh3 19. Nf4 Qxg4 20. Rg1 Qd7 21. Nde6 Qe7 22. Nxg7 Kxg7 23. Nh5+ Kh8 24. Bc5 Qe6 25. Rge1 Qxe1 26. Qxf7 Qxd1+ 27. Kxd1 Bg4+ 28. Kd2 Rad8+ 29. Kc3 Bxh5 30. Bd4 Rxd4 31. Qxe8+ 1-0 and the 2700-rated Pons had suffered a humiliating defeat.

My reaction at first when I played this continuation over is that Pons must have missed many ways to get a good game.  This was validated with Rybka 3 and indeed, Rybka found some really amazing resources for black.

Quiz for the readers:  how should black play after white’s 8th?  To help answer the question, what does 8. g4 do wrong?  Verbalizing the answer helps construct the responses.

1) It helps the player with the bishop pair try to open the game later with pawn breaks such as f6 or f5, or h5 after the N on h6 moves.  In addition, when the black king is safe and he breaks with f6, after white takes on f6, he can break again with f6-f5!  After the second break, black’s knight finds a great home on f7 attacking and defending.

Black only needs to be mindful to do this when his king has been secured (Pons forgot that).

2) It does not develop. Let’s now see the various ways black can react – by preserving dynamic potential and not letting his kingside pieces get hemmed in the “fake bind” of P/g4.  It’s a position where time is important, so black should try to do things with gain of time in order to wrest the initiative – a big factor with the latent power of the bishop pair.

And of course, king safety is a consideration – for both sides.   The “executive summary” is that black must try to expose the complex of weak squares that g2-g4 created. We start with the game moves 1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Nc3 Nf6 4. Bb5 g6 5. e5 Ng4 6. Bxc6 dxc6 7. h3 Nh6 8. g4? – I’m sorry, this move is just a lemon.

A.   8…Bg7 Safe and sound.  Pons played this. Let’s consider this last.

B.  8…Ng8!? Challenging.    Black dispenses with Bg7 and will hit right away with h7-h5 and we get some very unusual positions. Let’s see some sample lines. 8… Ng8 9. d3 h5 10. Rg1? (pretty much forced is 10. g5 Be6 11. Be3 Qd7 and now, e.g.,  12. Bxc5 Bxh3 13. Qe2 Bg4 and this is a position of “mutual ugliness” – for example, 14. Qe3 Bg7 15. d4 b6 16. Ba3 O-O-O and black is OK; there are other lines but black always has nice posts for his QB) 10… hxg4 11. hxg4 Nh6 12. g5 Nf5 and black has a great game.

C  8… c4!? Also very interesting.   Black dissolves his doubled pawns and retains the bishop pair for the time being. 8….c4!? 9. Qe2 Be6 10. Ng5 Going to nullify the bishop pair.  This sortie, moving a developed piece twice, fizzles out to equality. Note in passing Rybka 3 shows a truly amazing resource on the plausible 10. b3  cxb3 11. axb3 Bg7 12. d4 Ng8 13. Be3 h5 14. g5 Qd7 15. h4 Bg4 16. Rg1 Rh7!!  A fantastic, inhuman Rybka move 17. Rg3 e6 18. Ne4 Ne7 19. Nd6+ Kd8

Position after 19…Kd8 (analysis).  Rybka steered for this position (!!). 20. Nxf7+ Kc7 21. Nd6 Nf5 22. Nxf5 Bxf5 23. Kf1 Bf8 24. c4 Rf7 and black has juicy  compensation – an incredible line where black connived to leave white with useless pieces by suckering the active knight deep to f7 where it was then exchanged.  Did anyone expect the mysterious R on h7 to get so active? It could only do so by luring the WN to f7 to win a pawn.  A fantastic and original conception.

Going back to the move 10. Ng5, 10… Qd4! gums up the works. 11. Nxe6 fxe6 12. Qe4 O-O-O 13. Qxd4 Rxd4 14. d3 cxd3 15. Be3 Rd7 16. cxd3 Nf7 17. d4 c5 18. Rc1 cxd4 19. Nb5+ Kb8 20. Bxd4 (On 20. Nxd4 black has the cool 20…Bh6!  totally equalizing.  For example, 21. Nxe6 (21. Bxh6? Rxd4 22. Be3 Ra4  and black is on top) 21… Bxe3 22. fxe3 Nxe5 and it’s equal) 20… b6 and again this is equal.

Let’s go back to (A), 8…Bg7, as played by Pons.  Nothing wrong with this.  It develops and prepares castling. 9. d3 f5?!  Pons played this but there was no rush.  He could have simply castled with a fine game.  Once his king is safe, he can break with no qualms and black will being work against white’s weak squares. For example, 9… O-O 10. Be3 f6!  and it’s surprisingly safe to “lose” the c5 pawn.  White is way behind in development. In fact, this line is very easy to find and I’m surprised Pons did not do it.

Position after 9…f6! – not even a sacrifice.

A1.  11. Bxc5 fxe5 and black cannot complain.

A2.  11. exf6 exf6 12. Bxc5?!  Prima facie, very risky.   (12. Qd2 Nf7 13. O-O-O Qa5 14. Kb1 f5 15. gxf5 Bxf5 16. Nd5 Qd8 17. Nc3 b6 and black is fine, or 12. O-O f5 13. g5 Nf7 14. Bxc5 Re8 15. h4 Qa5 16. Bd4 Bxd4 17. Nxd4 Qb4 18. Nce2 c5! and black is doing well) 12… Re8+ 13. Be3 f5! 14. g5 f4 15. gxh6 Bxh6 and black is on top) The above sample lines give a rich idea of black’s resources.

Even in the game Pons was fully OK until later. Going back to the Pons game, his miscue was not fatal. After 10. exf6 exf6 11. Qe2+ Kf7 12. Be3 Re8 13. O-O-O Kg8 14. d4  he made a more serious misstep with 14…cxd4? opening the game at the wrong moment.  He had the rather simple 14… f5! 15. dxc5 Qe7!  with excellent play.  After, for example, 16. g5 Nf7 17. Qe1 (17. Rhe1??  Bxc3! 18. bxc3 f4 ooops!) 17… Ne5 18. Nxe5 Bxe5 and black has great activity.

Returning the the Pons game, 15. Nxd4 Qc7 16. Rhe1 Nf7 17. Qc4 Qh2 18. Nce2 Qxh3 19. Nf4 Qxg4 20. Rg1 Qd7 21. Nde6 Qe7?  Here is where he missed his last chance.  He had  21… b5!? hoping white will follow the tactical course in the game. After the tactical shot 21…b5!?, if 22. Qc3 b4 23. Qc4? (wrongly following the actual game’s tactics; 23. Qxb4! is correct with a white plus) 23… Qe7 24. Nxg7 Kxg7 25. Nh5+ Kh8 26. Bc5 Qe6 27. Rge1 Qxe1 and now if white plays as in the game, 28. Qxf7??  backfires horribly and gets White mated to 28… Qxd1+ 29. Kxd1 Bg4+ 30. Kd2 Rad8+ and the pawn on b4 plays a key part hemming in the white king.  So white would have to play 28. Rxe1 with a complex struggle.  After this missed final chance, Pons did indeed go down the drain.

Chess Life Editor Asleep at the Switch: Hanken allowed to write chess comments unedited and CL Suffers!

Jerry Hanken annotations cannot be passed through to the readership unedited!  In a recent February 2009 CL, Hanken “annotates” a main line Dragon.  But he goes horribly awry, puzzled over the main line move.    This would be bad analysis in even a state magazine; I hate to be the bearer of really sickening news, but here is what he wrote, incredibly enough, on page 29 of the 2/09 CL.

Sevillano – Khachiyan  American Open 2008 Dragon MAINLINE – BUT VIRGIN TERRITORY FOR HANKEN

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 cd 4. N:d4 Nf6 5. Nc3 g6 6. Be3 Bg7 7. f3 Nc6 8. Qd2 O-O 9. O-O-O d5 10. exd5 Nxd5 11. Nxc6 bxc6 This position has occurred in thousands of master games. Yet Hanken acts like he’s never seen it before. Sevillano played the normal and strong move 12. Bd4!.  Hanken, led astray by the RESULT of the game (a common blunder by would-be commentators, but CL desparately needs better), says “White’s move here is hard to understand.   He yields one tempo for what?” What an incredibly bad comment.  White, obviously, is shutting down the h8-a1 diagonal after the game continuation 12…e5 13. Bc5.  As master games have shown, white scores better than 50% from here, keeping the diagonal shut and black’s counterplay on the queenside, in most cases, is insufficient.  Check, for example, Friedel – Harper, Foxwoods ‘08.  And many other games. White is not yielding a tempo.  He makes black block the diagonal, then repositions the bishop.    It is normal, strong, and postionally motivated.  A brief glance by any master would “reveal” this elementary conclusion. Someone MUST supervise Hanken’s comments or else there is no hope for CL.

Conclusion:  CL Editor, you must check Hanken’s chess notes and pass them off to a competent second set of eyeballs!  The net effect, as it stands, is that CL continues to be a laughingstock in the chess world.  It used to be different with Gligoric and Benko and Kavalek writing lengthy, thoughtful, articles.  Reclaim chess accuracy in the notes!

If you agree, I would think a letter to the CL Editor is in order.  Changes need to happen.

The Fabulous 00s: North American Open 2008

Let’s see my 7th round game vs GM Slavko Cicak.  Shortly after this interesting game concluded, we could both be found at the Bally’s poker table.  I, in fact, lost my $100 chip stack in record time by betting wildly. GM Varuzh Akobian could be spotted at the next table over.

GM Slavko Cicak – M. Ginsburg  Round 7 NAO Las Vegas 12/28/08.

Sicilian Defense, 3. c3 4. Bc4 irregular

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. c3 Nf6 4. Bc4!? A pet line of Cicak’s that he employed in a prior round (not known to me at the time of this game).

Position after 4. Bc4!?

4…e6 After lengthy reflection I could not work out the ramifications of 4… Nxe4!? 5. Qa4+ Nc6 6. Bxf7+ Kxf7 7. Qxe4.  But more insight reveals the surprising 7…Qd7!  overprotecting the light squares  (less convincing is 7… h6 8. O-O e5 9. Na3 Qf6) and black is fully confident with the bishop pair.  For example, 8. O-O Qf5 9. Qe3 e5 10. Re1 Be7 11.d4 exd4 12. cxd4 Be6 13. Nc3 cxd4 14. Nxd4 Nxd4 15. Qxd4 Rhc8 and black is fine!  I am not sure if this approach has been seen in prior play.   Objectively 4. Bc4 cannot yield anything.

5. Qe2 Be7 6. d4 cxd4 7. cxd4 d5 8. Bb5+ Nc6 9. e5 Ne4 10. O-O O-O 11. Bd3 Black faces no particular problems after 11. Nc3 Nxc3 12. bxc3 Bd7 13. Bd3 Na5.  After the text, black must find a promising pawn sacrifice since 11….f5?! looks weakening.

Position after 10. Bd3.  Time for black to fight back.

11… Nb4! 12. Bxe4 dxe4 13. Qxe4 Bd7 14. Qe2 During the game I was more concerned about 14. Nc3 Bc6 15. Qg4, but after the careful 15… Kh8! black is OK.  For example,  White can get tricky offering a piece: 16. Rd1 Rc8 17. Be3 Nd5 18. Ne4 h6 19. Bg5! Bxg5 (clearly 19…hxg5? is not possible due to the queen and knight mate)  20. Nfxg5 Qb6! 21. b3 Qb4! 22. h4 Rc7 and black has enough counterplay.

14… Bc6 15.Be3 After 15. Nc3 Rc8 16. Be3 h6 17. Rfd1 Nd5 18. Rac1 Qa5 19. Bd2 Nxc3 20. bxc3 Bd5! black has plenty of Gruenfeld-like compensation.

15… Bxf3!  It’s a shame to get rid of black’s beautiful bishop, but the shattering of white’s pawns leads to full compensation in all lines.

16. gxf3 f5! 17. f4 What else?  And with this move white offered a draw.  It’s card-playing time!   A sample continuation is 17… Rc8 18. Nc3 Qd7! (the most accurate; less good is 18…Qa5) 19. Rac1 Rfd8 20. Rfd1 Nd5 21. Qf3 Nxc3 22. Rxc3 Rxc3 23. bxc3 b5! and black keeps full compensation with an iron light square blockade. It’s almost impossible for white to undertake anything.

Position after 17. f4 – Final Position

1/2-1/2

Mark Diesen Memorial Articles Available!

My Mark Diesen (World Junior Champ 1976) articles are available at US Chess Online.

Don’t forget to read about Mark Diesen’s life and play over some selected games of his here (Part 2) and here (Part 1).

Facebook Rules

A lot of chess players are flocking to Facebook.  Each profile has a “wall” that can be scribbled on (and counter-scribbled).

Where else can you:

a) discuss astrophysics with Vanessa Pinkham in South Africa as she prepares to go to Madagascar

b) learn that Ben Finegold is a fan of Hypnotoad

c) see all the possible choices Carina Jorgensen has in eyewear (here’s one of her artworks).

d) gawk at pictures of Dave Vigorito and his fiancee

And for something different

The Streatham & Brixton Chess Club website has this pearl:

“Two could play at that

To his surprise, instead of making a pass at him, she sauntered over to join him at the service niche. She took up an Imperial armorers’ sponge in her fingers, and began cleaning and disinfecting the blade of an épée, which showed that she knew what she was doing.

Her curled hand stroked firmly up and down the long shaft, leaving a gleaming trail of moisture where the sponge in her palm had pressed. The erotic suggestion was almost certainly deliberate.

Two could play at that.

A short excerpt from Knight’s Fork by Rowena Cherry who, according to her publicity

:

…has played chess with a Grand Master and former President of the World Chess Federation (hence the chess-pun titles of her alien romances).

She has spent folly filled summers in a Spanish castle; dined on a sheikh’s yacht with royalty; been seranaded (on a birthday) by a rockstar and an English nobleman; ridden in a pace car at the 1993 Indy 500; received the gold level of the Duke of Edinburgh’s Award; and generally lived on the edge of the sort of life that inspires her romances about high-living alien gods.

As for me, I’ve lived on the edge of the sort of life which inspires me to note that there are at least three errors of English in the paragraph above. But that’s probably why I shall be playing chess today, and Ms Cherry (not, I suspect, her maiden name) will be living a life among alien gods. Or something similar.

Or maybe she will be busy at her desk, adding to her apparently Orwell-inspired oeuvre – among which are such works as Forced Mate, Mating Net and Insufficient Mating Material.

I, at least, am not making this up.”

Author’s note:  the jig may be up – I may have to give up the anonymity afforded by the moniker “Ms. Cherry.”

Blast from the Past

Going back to 1990, here is the author tangled up with Jorge Zamora (Sammour-Hasbun) in Massachusetts.

Jorge was strong back in 1990, too

This may have been the tournament featuring my surreal victory over Jack Young. (Plymouth, 1990).

Search Engine Terms

Readers used these terms to find my site.

the watchmen	2
manhattan chess club	2
carina jorgensen	2
“lev alburt”	1
the watchmen characters	1
awardee “deming prize”	1
smith morra gambit	1
10.ba3	1
mark ginsburg	1
ozymandias watchmen	1
john litvinchuk	1
berkeley riot	1

Mark Diesen RIP 1957-2008

Kenny Regan alerted me to the shocking news of the untimely demise of IM Mark Diesen (World Junior Champ 1976) in December 2008 – Conroe, TX.

Mark Diesen grew up in Potomac Maryland (the next town over from me in Bethesda).  He was part of a strong group of players including Larry Kaufman, Larry Gilden, Eugene and John Meyer, Robert Eberlein, Richard Delaune, Robin Spital, and others.

I played him a couple of times OTB and knew him very well since the 1970s.  He was only two years older than me.

Mark Diesen pictured along with the other victorious Washington Plumbers (National Chess League) May 1976.  Mark is standing second from right; GM Lubosh Kavalek (Mark’s coach at the World Junior Champs that Mark won) is at right.  If you’re wondering about the team name, Google it – it harkens to the fantastically evil Nixon era.

I used to have a great action photo (that I misplaced) of 16 year old Mark Diesen playing 16 year old Larry Christiansen in the US Junior Championship, San Francisco, 1973.  The caption read “they battle to a draw in a Pirc.”  I think it was a Koltanowski article in the SF Chronicle.

Mark Diesen playing Black favored defensive and counter-attacking schemes as black in the Pirc, Alekhine’s, and Sicilian Scheveningen.  He had noticeable positional superiority over most of his peers as he ascended in the mid 1970s. I posted games and memories Part I (there will be a 2nd part) on the US Chess Online site.

The Fabulous 00s: The North American Open 2008

This amusing annual Bill Goichberg event (always at the Bally’s hotel, Las Vegas) was, well… amusing again.   In one droll episode, NM Zimbeck arrived late for a game with SM Bryant.  Zimbeck bashes out 1. d4 without filling in the player names or the move on his scoresheet and Bryant plays 1… Nf6.  Zimbeck continues to not keep score and emphatically blitzes out one of the worst moves possible, 2. f3.  I found it quite droll that this move merited not keeping score.  To continue with the drollity, in his middlegame Zimbeck was visited by a lady friend who seemed to be tubercular, emitting continuous coughs that were not alleviated by a cough drop.  Since I was right next to all this, it was good theater – except I #$%*#* drew Rubshamen.  I will present the Rubshamen game so you see the irritation.

The chess for me was hard slogging.  Many of the lower rated masters, such as the Champion of Hawaii (!) Rubshamen (2260), defended doggedly coming up with many defensive resources (in both the G/75 and the 40/2 games).  Lower rated players must be getting stronger?

I played in four such tiring G/75 games (2.5 out of 4), drew the aforementioned agonizing superior middlegame vs. Rubshamen by transposing into the wrong ending, then recouped somewhat in the last two rounds with a win over ICC personality “f-pawn” (Aigner) and a rather fortunate draw with black against tough GM Cicak (2664) in the last round, so finishing with 4.5 out of 7.    Let’s see a sharp Round 2 struggle versus GM Alex Shabalov.

Ginsburg – GM Shabalov NAO 08, Round 2.  G/75.   1…b6.

The last time and only time I played Alex, Reno 1992 (one of my three blacks in a row courtesy of the bizarre Weikel “policy” of occasionally awarding three blacks in a row for no reason in critical last rounds – Weikel defended the policy by bellowing incoherently at the top of his lungs), he misplayed as white and I took a draw in a winning position, not realizing it was winning.  I was chided by Bruce Leverett in the chess newsgroups (remember those, they were big in 1992). Time for the second game.

1. c4 b6 2. d4 e6 3. a3 f5 I had pleasant memories of this offbeat variation from my Hammer game. Of course, remembering prior games precisely is not always easy. And not everyone would sacrifice early like Jon Ludwig.

4. Nc3 Nf6 5. d5 Ba6 A strange move, but in the wise words of GM Hellers, “you have to do something.”  It was indicative of my state of mind that I considered 6. e4!? seriously here – I mut have been in crazy attack mode. In the end, I settled for a good, solid, move.  But in fact 6. e4!? is fine, since 6…fxe4! (note that black is worse in the nice forcing sequence after 6…Nxe4? 7. Nxe4 fxe4 8. Qh5+ g6 9. Qe5 Rg8 10. dxe6 Nc6 11. exd7++ Kxd7 12. Qd5+ Bd6 13. Be2!) 7. dxe6 dxe6 8. Qxd8+ is just equal.

Position after 5…Ba6

6. Qa4 exd5 The subtleties of this variation are beyond me.  As black, I would not do this (yet) and play 6…Bd6 instead.  The risky 6…Bc5 is also available. 

7. cxd5 Bd6 8. Bf4! An unusual set-up (Qa4 protecting f4) allows this trade which is to white’s advantage.

8…Qe7 Not absurd is 9…O-O!? 10. Bxd6 cxd6 10. Nf3 Qc8!?.

9. Bxd6 Qxd6 10. Rd1! No reason to put the king on the open queenside.  10…O-O 11. Nf3 Re8 12. e3! Bxf1 13. Kxf1 Ne4! The best way to keep activity but white has an edge. 14. Nb5 Qc5 15. Qb3! White is getting alarming attacking chances.

15…Kh8

Position after 15…Kh8.  Go for the throat?

16. d6? I am too excited to make a direct attack in this action game.  As Shabalov mentioned after the game, the simple g2-g3 and Kf1-g2 keeps a very solid edge for white. For example, 16. g3 Na6 17. Kg2 c6 18. dxc6 dxc6 19. Nbd4 and black’s position is very bad.

16…cxd6 17. h4 a6 Another good move here is 17… f4! with a sample variation 18. Rd5 Qc6 19. exf4 Qc1+ 20. Rd1 Qc5 21. Nfd4 Nc6 22. Qd3 Rac8 23. Rh3 d5 and it’s balanced.

18. Nbd4? Another mistake.  18. Rd5! is clearly right.  18… Qc1+
19. Rd1 Qc5 repeats, and 18….Qc6 19. Nc3! (I did not see this move) is a white edge as the dangerous N/e4 is eliminated, freeing the WN on f3 to do damage.  Black should therefore give the check to repeat.   If black does not repeat with 18…Qc1+ 19. Rd1 Qc6?, then 20. Nbd4 Qc5 21. Ng5! is crushing.  For example, 21…Nxg5 22. hxg5 Nc6 23. g6 h6 24. Rxh6+! (a typical attacking idea) 24…gxh6 25. Qf7 and wins.

18… Nc6 19. Ng5 Re7! Excellent play.  I didn’t see this which explains the prior mistake. If white gives a check on f7, black takes, takes on d4, and invades with the queen, winning.

20. Ne2 Rf8 21. Nf4? Again, I am too focused on attack against the BK when it’s high time to figure out the best ending to hold.  A better try is 21. Rd5 but black has the nice and aesthetic shot 21…Re5!! keeping a small edge.  On the other hand, the move I saw, 21… Na5 22. Rxc5 Nxb3 23. Rc7 Nf6 24. g3 Re5 25. Nc3 Rc5 26. Ra7 a5 is about equal.

21… Na5 22. Qd5 Nc4 Of course.  Black’s once dormant knight is now a powerhouse on c4.

23. h5?? Completing the ‘attack suicide’.   White can only stay in the game with 23. Nxe4 fxe4 24. Qxc5 dxc5 25. b3 Nxa3 26. Ra1 Nb5 27. Rxa6 Rb8 and although black is better, much work remains.  It’s important in action games to resist like this.

23… Nxe3+! Did I really expect 23… Nxg5 24. Ng6+ hxg6 25. hxg6+ mating?  Absurd. since 23…Ng3+ also won easily for black.

24. fxe3 Ng3+ and white resigned  0-1 in view of ruinous material loss.  Since each G/75 game followed the prior one by a short span you can see how much nervous energy is lost in the course of a single day.  Still, many players such as Shavadorj, Ehlvest, etc., tried their luck in this format.

Here is one of the tough slog G/75 games versus Show Kitagami (2075).

Ginsburg – Kitagami Round 4 (G/75) King’s Indian Averbakh

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. Nc3 Bg7 4. e4 d6 5. Be2 O-O 6. Bg5 c5 7. d5 h6 8. Be3 e6 9. Qd2 exd5 10. exd5 Kh7 11. h3 b5?! A good way to make counter-play in an action game, although it is not objectively good.

12. cxb5 a6 13. Nf3 axb5 14. Bxb5 Na6 15. O-O Nc7 16.Bc4? (It was criminal for white to miss 16. Bc6! Rb8 17. Rfe1 Bb7 18. Rab1 Nfxd5 19. Bxd5 Bxc3 20. bxc3 Bxd5 21. Bxh6 and white should win.)

16… Rb8 17. Rfe1 Nd7 18. a3 (18. Rac1 Nb6 19. Bb3 Re8 20. Bf4!) 18… Nb6 19. Ba2 Ba6 20. Rab1 (Again good for white was 20. Bf4! Nc4 21. Bxc4 Bxc4 22. Re4 Bxc3 23. Qxc3 Bxd5 24. Bxh6) 20… Nc4 21. Bxc4 Bxc4 22. b4! cxb4 23. Rxb4 Rxb4 24. axb4 Even so, this is good for white.

24…Qa8 25. Bd4! Bxd4 26. Qxd4 Bxd5 27. Re7 (The strong move 27. Nh4!  never occurred to me)

27… Bxf3 28. gxf3 Ne6 29. Qf6 Ng5 30. Ne4 Kg8 31. Kg2 By far the simplest was 31. Nxg5 hxg5 32. b5! and this is clearly good for white.
31… Nxe4 32. fxe4 Qb8 A truly amazing variation was behind the scenes.  32… d5! is a good move. If  the tempting 33. e5 (33. b5! dxe4 34. b6! is stronger)  33….d4+  34. Kh2 Qd8? (34… Qb8! is correct but the text has the merit of a fantastic combination coming up) 35. e6 d3  and now study this position.  White to play and win.  The solution is really incredible.

The solution:

36. f4! (36. exf7+?? Kh7 37. f4 Qc8 38. Qd4 Qc2+ 39. Kg3 d2 40. Rd7 Qb3+ 41. Kg2 d1=Q 42. Qxd1 Qxb4 and it’s drawn) 36… d2 37. exf7+
Kh7 38. f5 gxf5 (38… Qb8+ loses more slowly and less elegantly)

39. Qxf5+ Kg7 40. Qg4+ Kh7 and now let’s pause again.  White to play and mate.  The stunning conclusion:

41. Qg8+!! Rxg8 42. f8=N double check!! Kh8 43. Rh7 mate!  Wow!  That mating pattern is not often seen!

Returning to the prosaic game, with both sides low on time,

33. Qd4 Qd8 34. Qa7 Re8!! (Escaping the bind elegantly) 35. Rxf7 (35. Rxe8+ Qxe8 36. Qb7 Qd8 37. Qd5 Qb6 38. b5 Kf8 and black is fighting)

35… Qg5+ 36. Kf3 Qh5+ 37. Ke3 Qe5 (Black misses a great blow, 37…Qxh3+ 38. f3 Rxe4+!! 39. Kxe4 Qe6+ 40. Kd4 Qxf7 41. Qxf7+ Kxf7 42. b5 Ke6) 38.  Rf4 Qe6! I had actually forgotten about this simple defense. 39. Qd4 Qxh3+ 40. Rf3 Qf1 41. Rf6 Qe1+ 42. Kf4 Qc1+ 43. Qe3 g5+ 44. Kf5 Re5+ 45. Kg6 and this crazy position the players descended into blitz chess chaos and I eventually won somehow.

Here’s the round 6 Aigner game in which I find myself once more permanently fighting against the Leningrad Dutch (I’ve previously discussed games with Fishbein, Guillermo Rey, Jack Young on this site).

Ginsburg – NM Aigner   NAO Round 6 40/2

1. d4 f5 Tigran Petrosian exclaimed “What a delight!  I love playing against the Dutch” when he faced Bent Larsen in San Antonio 1972.  I concur.

2. g3 No crazy gambit with 2. Nc3 d5 3. e4!? dxe4 4. Bf4! for me today, although white does get good play.  See my strange Fishbein game. Also well motivated is 2. Nc3 d5 3. Bg5.

2…Nf6 3. Bg2 g6 4. Nf3 There is a strong argument for the well-motivated and solid 4. Nh3! Bg7 5. c3! here, blunting the black bishop and preparing e2-e4.  For example, 5…O-O 6. Qb3+! d5 7. Nf4 e6
8. h4 c5 9. h5 gxh5 and white was better and went on to win, Hebden,M (2530)-Motwani,P (2470)/London 1990}  See also former Women’s Champ Antonia Stefanova’s crushing defeat over veteran GM Mikhail Gurevich in this line at Gibraltar 2008.  I played over this amazingly one-sided game in NIC magazine with great interest – an off-day for Gurevich who has scored many wins in this system.   Antonia did without c3 and just went right for the caveman h2-h4-h5.  Gurevich at one point had a fully acceptable game but succumbed quickly to the onslaught.

4… Bg7 5. O-O d6 6. c4 O-O 7. Nc3 Qe8 8. Qb3 More than twenty years ago I greatly surprised IM (!) Evgeny Bareev in Naestved, Denmark with 8. Nd5 Nxd5 9. cxd5 Qb5 10. e4! TN (my TN; other moves are totally harmless) and after 10…fxe4 11. Ng5! wild complications ensued.  For example, 11…Qxd5?! (he did not play this) 12. Bxe4 Qb5 13. a4 Qb4 14. a5 and white has dangerous threats. Students should look at this line some more as it has many resources for both sides.  Of course, it’s an amazing blitz weapon!  There’s no way black can navigate this position easily.  One of white’s ideas is the crude Bg2xe4, followed by Ng5xh7 and Qh5+ tearing black’s king apart.

This was the first and only time I played a 2560 FIDE-rated IM.  The game with Bareev is presented in detail here.

By the way, I picked up Bareev and Levitov’s book “From London to Elista” at the NAO Bookstore and it’s amazingly good.

8…Na6! White is hoping for black to execute his plan and … get a lost game with 8… e5?? 9. c5+ Kh8 10. cxd6 cxd6 11. Nb5! Qe7 12. Nxd6! and wins.

Position after 8…Na6 – an important moment.

9. Qa3?! The try 9. Ng5!? is very dangerous.   The tricky 9…e5  10. dxe5 Nc5?? backfires horribly – 11. exf6!! Nxb3 12. Bd5+! and white is better.

Another very serious move is 9. Rd1! and white is somewhat better.  Objectively 9. Rd1! may be the best. The moves Qb3 and Rd1 taken together are very logical to anticipate black’s telegraphed e7-e5 break.  The text prepares b2-b4 but leaving the c-pawn alone gives black fairly easy to find counter-chances.

9… c6 9… Qf7 is well met by 10. d5 h6 11. Be3 Ng4 12. Bd2 Nc5 13. h3 Nf6 14.  Ne5!! TN  (in a tournament game white missed this tactic) 14…Qe8 15. Nb5 Na6 16. Nd3 c6 17. dxc6 bxc6 18. Nc3 and white is much better.

10. b4 Nc7 10… e5 looks to best met by  11. dxe5 dxe5 12. b5! with white initiative.  Black is better off with the text move to activate the offside knight.

11. Bb2 Be6 Surprisingly here 11… e5!? is tactically feasible. If 12. dxe5 (12. e3  is not ridiculous) 12… dxe5 13. Qa5 and here the double-attack on c7 and e5 looks dangerous….but, 13…Qe7! is an effective answer.  If  14. Qxe5 (14. Nxe5 Ne4 15. Nxe4 fxe4 16. Rab1 Rf5! 17. Bxe4 Rxe5 18. Bxe5 Bxe5 and black is doing well) 14… Qxb4 and again black is fine.  In a similar Dutch position Viktor Korchnoi indeed did use the c7 and e5 double attack to quickly defeat Sergey Dolmatov as Viktor explains in his “Best Games” series.

12. d5?! A little crazy.  My eyes were burning from the lengthy games I had conducted previously in this tournament and I could not bear another slog.   If 12. Nd2 d5 13. c5 Ne4 14. Nf3 Qd8 15. e3 a5 black is fine and the game is locked up and turgid.

12… cxd5 13. Ng5 13. Nd4?? is just a blunder due to 13…Bf7!.

13… dxc4 14. Nxe6 Nxe6 15. Bxb7 Rb8 16. Bg2 I don’t eat with the queen on a7 because nasty pins can occur with the queen and bishop lined up.  The plan was long-term compensation with the bishops but it’s not correct.

16…Nd4! 17. Rac1 Ne4! 18. Nxe4? An unsound adventure.  Correct is 18. Kh1 and white can fight on although it’s uphill.

18… Nxe2+ Black also had 18… Nb5!?, which I had not forseen in my moribund state.   Fortunately white can hold with 19. Qe3 Bxb2
20. Ng5 c3!? (20… Bxc1? 21. Rxc1 e5 22. Bd5+ Kh8 23. Rxc4 Qe7 24. Rh4 h5 25. Ne6  and this variation is nice because white builds up an attack out of nowhere with the funny Rc4-h4 motif) 21. a4 Nc7 22. Qxa7 and the game toddles on.

19. Kh1

Position after 19. Kh1.  Black has a winning path.

19…Bxb2? A clear and serious misstep.  Correct is 19… Nxc1! 20. Bxg7 Kxg7 21. Ng5 and my anemic calculations only went this far anticipating an attack on black’s king, a clear case of hope-chess.  The computer quickly shows 21…Nd3! cutting off white’s queen for the moment. If 22. Ne6+ (22. Qc3+ Rf6 23. Qxc4 Nxb4 and black wins) 22… Kh6! and this is the ultimate cold shower; black is winning.  Now white is on the b2-h8 diagonal and black’s king is in big trouble.

20. Qxb2 Nxc1 21. Ng5! Nd3 22. Qd4! This position I considered to be completely hopeless for black due to the numerous threats but
the computer still finds moves.

22… h6? Collapse.  Another lemon is 22… e5 (black was reaching for this move then retracted his hand) as 23. Qxc4+ Kh8 24. Qc7! kills.

The toughest is the natural 22…Nxb4 23. a3! (23. Ne6?? Rf6) 23… h6 24. Ne6 Rf6 25. axb4 Rxb4 and the machine shows black can fight on although of course white is better.  The game ended prosaically.

23. Bd5+ Qf7 24. Bxf7+ 1-0

Study Material – The Gibraltar Upset

[Event "Gibraltar"]
[EventDate "2008.01.22"]
[Round "2"]
[Result "1-0"]
[White "Antoaneta Stefanova"]
[Black "Mikhail Gurevich"]
[ECO "A81"]
[WhiteElo "2464"]
[BlackElo "2607"]

1. d4 f5 2. g3 Nf6 3. Nh3 g6 4. Nf4 Bg7 5. Bg2 O-O 6. h4 Nc6 7. h5 g5 8. h6 Bh8 9. Nd3 Nxd4 10. Bxg5 Ne6 11. Bh4 d5 12. Nd2 c6 Black is actually OK here and only tosses the game away later. 13. c4 Ne4 14. cxd5 cxd5 15. Nf3 Qd6 16. Qb3 Bd7 17. Nf4 Bc6 18. Nxe6 Qxe6 19. Rd1 a5 20. Nd4 Qf7 21. g4 Bxd4?! 22. Rxd4 e5? 23. gxf5 exd4 24. Bxe4 Rae8 25. Qg3+ Kh8 Now it’s very obvious black’s king is too exposed.  He probably underestimated his opponent.

26. Bd3 b5 27. Qf4 Qa7 28. Qd6 Qf7 29. Rg1 b4 30. Rg7 Qh5 31. Rg8+! 1-0 A brutal finale.

Elsewhere on the Internet – No Comeback for Bad Bird’s

I noted with horror from Michael Goeller that attempts were being made in some quarters to rehabilitate some pretty bad variations of the Bird Defense to the Ruy Lopez.

Fortunately (for chess logic) it’s easy to see they are no good.

For example, 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 Nd4?! (a move that doesn’t make much sense) 4. Nxd4 exd4 5. O-O g6? was one such bad line presented as perhaps OK. But it’s not.  White has the simple move 6. c3! (not considered in the article, where 6 d3 is called the “main line”).  Yet the extremely simple and logical  6. c3! is clearly strong.  After 6…dxc3 7. Nxc3 Bg7 8. d4 black has a horrible game.    Openings genius Kenny Regan in the 1970s was actually the paragon of Bird enthusiasts but he kept to the straight and narrow with …Bc5 and …c6  lines.

After 6. c3! Bg7 white can swing for the fences with 7. e5 but then with 7…Nh6! black holds on.    After 6…Bg7 with the straightforward 7. cxd4! Bxd4 it’s not hard to see the floating black bishop is not going to bode well.    The best there is 8. d3! (deferring Nc3 because it’s not certain the N belongs there) and white is well on top, scoring 100% in the database examples I have. Even more amusingly, there is a second way for white.  The TN 7. Qa4! c6 8. Bd3 is also very good for white.  For example, 8….b5 9. Qb3 Ne7 10. a4! and white is having a lot of fun.

Conclusion:  5….g6? is terrible.

The Fabulous 00s: Where are they now

A nice chess personality (hint:  Tucson, female, retired from chess) from bygone days happens now to live in a cool house!

Whoah!  More like a “Dome” or a “Lair”.

I must credit the social network “Facebook” for this find.  Facebook as I recall used to be not so good. It has really improved!   Now I can keep up with the latest doings of Jessica Ambats, Ben Finegold, and Susan Polgar!  When I check on them, I locate other long-lost buddies – hence the dome find pictured above!  And Facebook is certainly more fun than “LinkedIn” which is occupied, to a large extent, by self-gratifying ego puffery passages.  Such as mine.    I am very talented at droning on and on about my Edgar-on-the-Internet development work or my academic information systems writings.  Borrrring.

In the next post, I will go back to the squares with Nakamura’s win over Vachier-Lagrave in the “Dlugy” Benko.  This variation was a subject of pre-computer study in the early 1990s when such players as Gennadi Sagalchik and Josh Waitzkin were active.

Let’s End the War in Iraq, Shall We?

Jolly good idea.  Let’s proceed, forthwith.   Maybe we need a little more than shoe tossing – but kudos to the brave soul who hurled his shoes.

“The brother of the journalist who hurled his shoes at President Bush
said his sibling’s actions were “spontaneous” and represented millions
of Iraqis who want to “humiliate the tyrant.” Dhirgham al-Zaidi
described his brother’s hatred for the “material American occupation”
and the “moral Iranian occupation.”  This guy was a real hero to take this action (resulting in his arrest) at a bla bla bla press conference!

Grandparents of Caylee Anthony bla bla bla

http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/12/15/caylee.anthony.body.found/index.html?iref=mpstoryview

U.S. news is often so depressing.  I wouldn’t be surprised if the killer had help covering up the crime. This is as much a downer as the little kid who shot his dad and his dad’s friend dead in Arizona after the dad incomprehensibly showed him how to shoot guns.

The Fabulous 00s: Lars Bo Hansen appears on Chess.FM

A Danish Appearance

I just got a broadcast e-mail from John Henderson.  Danish Grandmaster Lars Bo Hansen is going to appear on John Watson’s Chess.FM Show.   A propos of Denmark, that’s where Shakespeare’s play Hamlet took place.  A quick refresher:

The protagonist of Hamlet is Prince Hamlet of Denmark, son of the recently deceased King Hamlet. After the death of King Hamlet, his brother, Claudius hastily marries King Hamlet’s widow, Gertrude, Hamlet’s mother. In the background is Denmark’s long-standing feud with neighbouring Norway, and an invasion led by the Norwegian prince, Fortinbras, is expected.

The play opens on a cold night at Elsinore, the Danish royal castle. The sentinels try to persuade Hamlet’s friend Horatio that they have seen King Hamlet’s ghost, when it appears again. After hearing from Horatio of the Ghost’s appearance, Hamlet resolves to see the Ghost himself. That night, the Ghost appears to Hamlet. He tells Hamlet that he is the spirit of his father, and discloses that Claudius murdered King Hamlet by pouring poison in his ears. The Ghost demands that Hamlet avenge him; Hamlet agrees and decides to fake madness to avert suspicion. He is, however, uncertain of the Ghost’s reliability.

Busy with affairs of state, Claudius and Gertrude try to avert an invasion by Prince Fortinbras of Norway. Perturbed by Hamlet’s continuing deep mourning for his father and his increasingly erratic behaviour, they send two student friends of his—Rosencrantz and Guildenstern—to discover the cause of Hamlet’s changed behaviour. Hamlet greets his friends warmly, but quickly discerns that they have turned against him.

Polonius is Claudius’ trusted chief counsellor; his son, Laertes, is returning to France, and his daughter, Ophelia, is courted by Hamlet. Neither Polonius nor Laertes thinks Hamlet is serious about Ophelia, and they both warn her off. Shortly afterwards, Ophelia is alarmed by Hamlet’s strange behaviour and reports to her father that Hamlet rushed into her room but stared at her and said nothing. Polonius assumes that the “ecstasy of love”^[7] is responsible for Hamlet’s madness, and he informs Claudius and Gertrude. Later, in the so-called Nunnery Scene, Hamlet rants at Ophelia, and insists she go “to a nunnery“.

A Dane Appears circa 2008

Going back to 1989, here is Lars Bo competing in the 1989 Berlin Summer Open (Joel Benjamin and I also made the foray to Berlin; this was just before the Berlin Wall came down!).

Lars Bo Hansen, Berlin, West Germany (American Sektor), 1989

What else is notable about this Chess.FM event?  Well, first of all, (and this is not widely known), John Watson was once a partyer.  What else is notable?  Lars Bo Hansen had a life as an IM before he was a GM!  Here he is as an IM battling yours truly in a provincial Danish town back in the day.

Mark Ginsburg vs Lars Bo Hansen (DEN)
Naestved Open, 1988

1. c4 Nf6 2. Nc3 c5 3. Nf3 e6 4. e3 Be7 5. d4 cxd4 6. exd4 d5 7. cxd5 Nxd5 8. Bd3 Nc6 9. O-O O-O 10. Re1 Bf6?! I don’t trust this variation for black; it looks too passive.

11. Be4 Nce7 12. Ne5 12. Qd3 is very popular in the database as well.

12…g6 Now if 12…Nc6?! 13. Qd3 and white has scored well.  White has to play very concretely now to compensate for his isolated queen pawn.

Position after 12…g6

13. Bh6 Bg7 14. Qd2 The main line in the databases is 14. Bxg7 Kxg7 15. Qf3. However, 15. Qd2! is dangerous for black (planning Rac1 and also sometimes h2-h4).   For example, 15. Qd2 b6 16. Rac1 Bb7 17. f3!? and white retains some pressure. The move in the game also has these dark square ideas.

14…Nf6 15. Bc2 It’s not clear how much of an edge 15. Bxg7 Nxe4!? 16. Nxe4 Kxg7 17. Rac1 Nd5 will be.  In addition, black can try 17…b6 18. Rc3!? Bb7! 19. Rh3 h5! (and not 18…Nf5? 19. g4!).  The kind of thing black does not want is instructive: 15. Bxg7 Kxg7? 16. Bf3! Ned5 17. Rac1 b6 18. Nxd5 Nxd5 19. Bxd5! (19. Ng4? occurred in a minor-league game) 19…Qxd5? 20. Rc7! Qxa2 21. Ng4! and wins.  Or, 19…exd5 and white is comfortably better with the superior minor piece.  Nigel Short won a game recently with this kind of advantageous structural transformation.

15…b6 16. Rad1 16. Bxg7 looks more to the point.

16…Bb7 17. Bb3 Ned5 18. Bg5 A small change of mind but white retains some initiative.

18…Nxc3 18…Rc8 is more careful.

19. bxc3

Position after 19. bxc3

19… Qc8 20. Qd3 Qc7 An interesting moment.  If 20…Nd7 21. Nxf7!? is possible. 21…Rxf7 22. Bxe6 Qf8 23. Re3 Kh8 24. Bxf7 Qxf7 25. Re7 Qd5 26. Qh3 and in this scary situation, 26…Bc6! defends (but not 26…Qxg5?? 27. Rxg7! and wins).  25. c4!? is also possible in this line.  Black’s careful move avoids this possibility.

21. c4?! Correct is 21. f3 first.  21. f3 Rac8 22. c4 Ba6 23. Rc1 with a small edge.

21…Nd7! Now the b3-f7 diagonal is blocked off and black doesn’t have to worry.

22. Nxd7 22. Ng4 is met by the simple 22..h5! 23. Ne3 Rfe8! with excellent play.  Black is fine.

22…Qxd7 23. Qh3 23. d5 e5 is about equal.

23…b5! A well-timed bid for counterplay.

24. d5! This aggressive counter looks very good at first sight, but black can defend adequately.

24…bxc4 25. dxe6

Position after 25. dxe6.  Black to play and draw.

25… Qb5! 26. Be7 cxb3 27. Bxf8 Rxf8 28. e7 Re8 29. Rd8! Brief fireworks have broken out, but equilibrium is quickly reached.

Position after 29. Rd8

29… bxa2 30. Qb3! It is kind of cool to be able to hang one’s queen on purpose, but after black’s next white has nothing better than to steer for the draw.

30…Bc6! It was too much to hope for black to fall into the elementary tactical trap 30…Qc6?? 31. Qxb7 winning.

31. Rxe8+ Bxe8 32. Qxb5 Bxb5 33. e8=Q+ Bxe8 34. Rxe8+ Bf8 35. Re1 Bg7 And it’s a draw by repetition. A very interesting game! I had the distinct sense I was playing a Danish version of solid American GM Yasser Seirawan.

1/2-1/2