Archive for the ‘The 1960s’ Category

For Your Eyes Only: Games from the Albert Kapengut Files

March 23, 2011

Unearthed: Kapengut versus Dzindzihashvili

Recently I noticed that chess veteran Albert Kapengut has been playing for New Jersey (!)  in the US Chess League.  He has had a pretty good record to date. Albert was kind of enough to send me all of his encounters with Roman Dzindzihashvili from their junior years and beyond.  Enjoy!   In case you were wondering, he sent me the games after I commented on the USCL game Kapengut-Pasalic, supplying notes to my own game in a Sicilian offbeat variation (Ginsburg-Zaltsman, Lone Pine 1980).

Roman, of course, is a very strong Grandmaster who lives in the USA.  He was born in 1944. His Wikipedia entry reveals many interesting items: “Born in Tbilisi, Georgian SSR in the family of Georgian Jews, he earned the International Master title in 1970. He left the U.S.S.R. in 1976 for Israel, and earned the GM title in 1977. In 1979, Dzindzichashvili settled in the United States, and he won the Lone Pine tournament the next year. He led the U.S. Olympiad team in 1984.”  However it doesn’t discuss his affinities to backgammon and other games of chance!  Roman is one of many all-around gamesplayers in the world.  Karpov is another, enjoying the card game ‘bridge’ and other such diversions.

Roman, probably from the 1980’s

In the games that follow, Kapengut himself annotated lightly and sometimes I make a brief comment in italics.

The first game sees the two gladiators battling in the 1959 USSR Junior in Riga, Latvia!  Depending on the month, Roman was either 14 or 15 years old!

[Event “Riga USSR-jcht”]
[Date “1959.??.??”]
[Round “?”]
[White “Kapengut, Albert”]
[Black “Dzindzichashvili, R.”]
[Result “1-0”]
[ECO “B76”]
[PlyCount “69”]
[EventDate “1959.??.??”]

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 d6 6. Be3 g6 7. f3 Bg7 8. Qd2
O-O 9. O-O-O

Wanting no part of any 9. Bc4 discussions.


The most principled.  9…Nxd4 10. Bxd4 Be6 is a more passive reaction.

10. exd5 Nxd5 11. Nxc6 bxc6 12. Bd4 e5 13. Bc5 Be6 14. Ne4 Re8

A topical Dragon still being debated in the 21st century!  In many lines, black leaves the rook on f8 (a standard exchange sacrifice) but white usually does not take it.

15. Ba6 Rb8 (15… Qc7 16. g4 (16. Kb1 Rab8 17. c4 Nf6 18. Qd6 Qa5 19. Nxf6+
Bxf6 20. Qxc6 e4 21. Bd4 Bxd4 22. Rxd4 exf3 23. Bb5 Bf5+ 24. Ka1 Re1+ 25. Rd1
Rxh1 26. Rxh1 f2 27. Qf3 Qe1+ 28. Qd1 Qxd1+ 29. Rxd1 Bd3 30. a4 f1=Q 31. Rxf1
Bxf1 32. g3 Rd8 {0-1 Ballarani,P-Barbieri,G/ITA corr ;CR97-88 1988}) 16… Red8
17. Qe1 Nf6 18. Rxd8+ Rxd8 19. g5 Nxe4 20. fxe4 Bf8 21. Bxf8 Kxf8 {
1/2-1/2 Keres,Paul-Averbakh,Yuri/Tbilisi ch-SU (??) 1959}) 16. g4 Rb6 (16…
Nf4 17. Qxd8 Rbxd8 18. Rxd8 Rxd8 19. Rd1 Bd5 20. Bf1 f5 21. gxf5 gxf5 22. Ng3
Ne6 23. c4 Nxc5 24. cxd5 cxd5 25. Nxf5 Bf6 26. Kb1 e4 27. Rxd5 Rxd5 28. Bc4
exf3 29. Bxd5+ Kf8 30. Bxf3 Na4 31. b4 Nc3+ 32. Kb2 Nb5+ 33. Kb3 Nd4+ {
1/2-1/2 Fiensch,G-Beckel,F/DDR Tch5 ;Horror 1981}) 17. Bc4 Rb8 18. h4 Nf4 19.
Qxd8 Rexd8 20. Bxe6 Nxe6 21. Bxa7 Ra8 22. Rxd8+ Rxd8 23. Rd1 Rxd1+ 24. Kxd1 Bf8
25. b3 f5 26. gxf5 gxf5 27. Ng3 Ng7 28. Bb8 f4 29. Ne4 Nf5 30. Bxe5 Nxh4 31.
Nf6+ Kg7 32. Nd7+ Kf7 33. Nxf8 Nxf3 34. Bd6 h5 35. Nd7 {…???} 1-0

Now we move to another Junior event, Moscow 1960!  Not sure why Event Type in the PGN says “Simul.”

[Event “USSR-jch”]
[Site “Moscow”]
[Date “1960.??.??”]
[Round “?”]
[White “Dzindzichashvili, R.”]
[Black “Kapengut, Albert”]
[Result “0-1”]
[ECO “B01”]
[PlyCount “110”]
[EventDate “1960.??.??”]
[EventType “simul”]
[EventRounds “7”]
[EventCountry “RUS”]

1. e4 d5 2. exd5 Qxd5 3. Nc3 Qa5 4. d4 e5 5. Qe2 Nc6 6. dxe5 Bb4 7. Bd2 Bf5 8.
Qb5 O-O-O 9. Nf3 Bg4 10. Qxa5 Bxa5 11. O-O-O Bxf3 12. gxf3 Nxe5 13. Bh3+ Kb8
14. Bf4 Nc6 15. Rxd8+ Nxd8 16. Nd5 Nf6 17. Nxf6 gxf6 18. Rg1 Ne6 19. Bxe6 fxe6
20. Rg7 Kc8 21. b4 Bb6 22. c4 e5 23. Be3 Bxe3+ 24. fxe3 Rd8 25. Kc2 Rd7 26.
Rg8+ Rd8 27. Rg3 Rd7 28. c5 Kd8 29. h4 Ke7 30. h5 Ke6 31. h6 c6 32. Kc3 f5 33.
Kc4 f4 34. exf4 Rd4+ 35. Kb3 Rxf4 36. Kc3 Rf6 37. Kd3 Rxh6 38. Rg7 Rf6 39. Rxb7
Rxf3+ 40. Kc4 Rf4+ 41. Kb3 Rf7 42. Rb8 e4 43. Kc3 Rd7 44. Rg8 Kf7 45. Rg1 e3
46. a4 a6 47. Re1 Re7 48. b5 cxb5 49. axb5 axb5 50. Kb4 e2 51. Kxb5 Re4 52. c6
Ke6 53. c7 Kd7 54. Kb6 h5 55. Rc1 Kc8 0-1

The next game takes place in what appears to be a Byelorussia versus Georgia republic team match (Gruzia is Russian for Georgia).  Roman, of course, plays for Georgia.

[Event “Byelorussia-Gruzja”]
[Site “?”]
[Date “1962.??.??”]
[Round “?”]
[White “Kapengut, Albert”]
[Black “Dzindzichashvili, R.”]
[Result “0-1”]
[ECO “B56”]
[PlyCount “102”]
[EventDate “1962.??.??”]
[EventType “team”]
[Source “Millennium 2000”]
[SourceDate “1999.01.01”]

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 d6 6. Be3 Ng4 7. Bb5 Nxe3 8.
fxe3 Bd7 9. O-O e6 10. Bxc6 bxc6

This is a very sharp variation.  I had a crazy game vs Vitaly Zaltsman at Lone Pine 1980 in this line.

11. Qf3 Qf6 12. Qe2 Qd8 13. Qf3 Qf6 14. Qe2 Qd8 15. e5 Be7 16. exd6 Bxd6 17. Rad1 O-O 18. Ne4 Bxh2+ 19. Kxh2 Qh4+ 20. Kg1 Qxe4 21. Rf4 Qe5 22. Nf3 Qc7 23. Qd3 Bc8 24. Rh4 h6 25. Kf2 Rb8 26. b3 Rb7 27. Rdh1 f6 28. Qg6 Qf7 29. Qg3 Kh7 30. Qf4 Qg6 31. Qc4 Rd8 32. g4 Rbd7 33. Rh5 Rd2+ 34. Nxd2 Rxd2+ 35. Kf3 Rxc2 36. Qb4 e5 37. R5h2 f5 38. Rxc2 fxg4+ 39. Kg3 Qxc2 40. Qd6 Qe4 41. Rxh6+ gxh6 42. Qe7+ Kg6 43. Qe8+ Kg5 44. Qd8+ Kh5 45. Qe8+ Qg6 46. Qxc8 Kg5 47. Qb8 Kf5 48. Qxa7 h5 49. Qd7+ Kg5 50. a4 h4+ 51. Kh2 Qc2+
Now we have yet another junior encounter,Moscow 1962.

[Event “USSR-jch”]
[Site “Moscow”]
[Date “1962.??.??”]
[Round “?”]
[White “Dzindzichashvili, R.”]
[Black “Kapengut, Albert”]
[Result “1-0”]
[ECO “B39”]
[PlyCount “89”]
[EventDate “1962.??.??”]
[EventType “simul”]
[EventRounds “2”]
[EventCountry “RUS”]

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 g6 5. c4 Bg7 6. Be3 Nf6 7. Nc3 Ng4 (?!) 8. Qxg4 Nxd4 9. Qd1 Ne6

Former World Champ Petrosian liked this simplification but Portisch dealt with it convincingly in 1974 versus a lesser opponent and also Petrosian lost a stunning brilliancy to Bent Larsen in Santa Monica 1966, so we don’t see this much anymore.

10. Be2

Larsen played the accurate 10. Qd2! here.

Bxc3+ 11. bxc3 Qa5

The classical battle of the latent power of the bishop pair versus a deformed pawn structure has shaped up.

12. O-O d6 13. Qd5 Qxc3 14. Qb5+ Kf8 15. Rac1 Qg7 16. Rfd1 h5 17. c5 dxc5 18. Bxc5 Qf6 19. Ba3 Qg5 20. Rd5 Qh4 21. Bb2 f6 22. e5 a6 23. Qb6 Nf4 24. Rd8+ Kf7 25. Bc4+ Be6 26. Bxe6+ Nxe6 27. Rxa8 Rxa8 28. Qxb7 Re8 29. exf6 Qa4 30. fxe7 Rxe7 31. Qf3+ Qf4 32. Qb3 Qe4 33. h3 g5 34. Qc3 Qg6 35. Qf3+ Kg8 36. Qd5 Kh7 37. Re1 Qf7 38. Qe5 Kg6 39. Re3 Re8 40. Qd6 a5 41. Rf3 Rd8 42. Qb6 Qe7 43. Rf6+ Qxf6 44. Bxf6 Kxf6 45. Qxa5 1-0

Now we appear to be in an adult championship, Moscow 1963.

[Event “URS-chT”]
[Site “Moscow”]
[Date “1963.??.??”]
[Round “?”]
[White “Dzindzichashvili, R.”]
[Black “Kapengut, Albert”]
[Result “1/2-1/2”]
[ECO “A37”]
[PlyCount “67”]
[EventDate “1963.??.??”]
[EventType “team”]
[EventCountry “RUS”]
[Source “Inforchess”]
[SourceDate “2002.12.13”]

1. c4 c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Nc3 g6 (?!) 4. g3

4. e3! with the idea of d2-d4 is very effective versus black’s somewhat inaccurate first moves.

Bg7 5. Bg2 d6 6. O-O Bd7 7. e3 Nh6 8. d4 O-O 9. b3 Bg4 10. h3 cxd4 11. exd4 Bxf3 12. Bxf3 Nf5 13. Bxc6 bxc6 14. Ne2 d5 15. c5 e5 16. dxe5 Bxe5 17. Rb1 Qe7 18. Qc2 a5 19. Bf4 Bxf4 20. Nxf4 Nd4 21. Qd3 Qxc5 22. Rbc1 Qb6 23. Rfd1 Ne6 24. Qd2 a4 25. b4 a3 26. Re1 Ng5 27. Qe3 Qxb4 28. h4 Ne4 29. Rxc6 Rfd8 30. h5 Qd2 31. Nxd5 Qxd5 32. Qxe4 Qxe4 33. Rxe4
Rd2 34. h6 1/2-1/2

Going back to Riga for 1964 Junior action (light Chessbase notes by Kapengut):

[Event “USSR-jch Shakhmaty Riga /19-19]”]
[Site “Riga”]
[Date “1964.??.??”]
[Round “?”]
[White “Kapengut, Albert”]
[Black “Dzindzichashvili, R.”]
[Result “1-0”]
[ECO “B44”]
[PlyCount “61”]
[EventDate “1964.??.??”]
[EventType “game”]
[EventCountry “LAT”]

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 e6 5. Nb5 d6 6. c4 a6?! (6…Nf6) 7. N5c3 Be7 8. Be2 Nf6 9. O-O O-O 10. Be3 b6 11. f3 Bb7 12. Na4 Nd7 13. Nbc3 Rc8 14. b3 Bg5!?  15. f4!  (15. Bxg5 Qxg5 16. Qxd6 Qe3+ 17. Rf2 Rfd8 with compensation)
15… Be7 16. Qe1 Nb4 17. Rc1 Nc5 18. Qd2 Qc7 19. Rfd1 Rfd8 20. Qe1 Nc6 21. Qf2 Ba8 22. a3 Nxb3!?  23. Bxb6 Nxc1 (23… Qd7 $2 24. Rb1 Nc5 25. Bxc5) 24. Bxc7 Nxe2+ 25. Qxe2 Rxc7 26. c5? (26. Qe3 Rb8 27. e5 with white edge) 26… Bb7 27. cxd6 Rxd6 28. e5!? (28. Rxd6 Bxd6 29. Qe3 Bxa3 30. Qb6 Rd7 31. Nc5 Bxc5+ 32. Qxc5 and white has a slight advantage)
28… Rxd1+? (28… Rd4!  29. Rxd4 Nxd4 30. Qb2 Nb5 31. Nxb5 axb5 32. Qxb5
Bxa3 with equal chances) 29. Qxd1 Na5 (29… Bxa3 30. Ne4!) 30. Qd4! Nc4 31. Qa7 (31… Rd7 32. Qb8+ Bf8 33. Nc5 and wins)


Now we move into the heavyweight division – USSR Championship, Krasnodar!  Roman would be 22 or 21 years old depending on the month.

[Event “USSR-ch”]
[Site “Krasnodar”]
[Date “1966.??.??”]
[Round “?”]
[White “Kapengut, Albert”]
[Black “Dzindzichashvili, R.”]
[Result “1-0”]
[ECO “E93”]
[PlyCount “65”]
[EventDate “1966.??.??”]
[EventType “tourn”]
[EventRounds “6”]
[EventCountry “RUS”]

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. Nc3 Bg7 4. e4 d6 5. Nf3 O-O 6. Be2 e5 7. d5 Nbd7 8. Bg5
h6 9. Bh4 g5 10. Bg3 Nh5

A very sharp variation in the Petrosian System of the King’s Indian Defense appears.

11. Nd2 Nf4

It is quite possible to take on g3 in these structures.

12. O-O f5 13. exf5 Nf6 14. Bxf4 exf4 15. g4 c5

Now Albert supplies a long theory interlude; with some of his own games mixed in.

(15… fxg3 16. fxg3 Qe7 (16… c5 17. Bd3 g4 18. Qe2 Bd7 19. Rae1 Qb6
20. Nde4 Nxe4 21. Qxe4 Rae8 22. Qxg4 Rxe1 23. Rxe1 Qxb2 24. Nb5 Bxb5 25. cxb5
Qd4+ 26. Qxd4 Bxd4+ 27. Kg2 Be5 28. Kh3 Kg7 29. Kh4 Kf6 30. Re4 Kf7 31. Ra4 Ra8
32. b6 a6 33. Rg4 Re8 34. Kh5 Bf6 35. Rg6 Re3 36. Bxa6 bxa6 37. b7 Re8 38. Rxh6
Rb8 39. g4 Rxb7 40. Rh7+ Bg7 41. g5 Rb8 {
0-1 Weise,D-Hottes,D/Bad Prymont 1961/EXT 2000 (41)}) (16… c6 17. Nb3 (17.
Qc2 Nd7 18. Nde4 Ne5 19. g4 h5 20. h3 hxg4 21. hxg4 Qb6+ 22. Kg2 Qd4 23. Rad1
Nxc4 24. Bxc4 Qxc4 25. b3 Qb4 26. a3 Qb6 27. f6 Bxg4 28. Nxg5 {
1-0 Kapengut,A-Zelkind,E/Minsk BSSR-ch 1978 (28)}) 17… Qb6+ 18. Kg2 Bd7 19.
g4 cxd5 20. Nxd5 Nxd5 21. Qxd5+ Kh8 22. Bf3 Rae8 23. Rae1 Bc6 24. Qd2 Bxf3+ 25.
Kxf3 Qa6 26. Rxe8 Rxe8 27. Re1 Qc6+ 28. Kf2 Rxe1 29. Qxe1 Be5 30. Nd2 Qb6+ 31.
Kf1 Qd4 32. Qe2 h5 33. gxh5 Qxb2 34. Ne4 Qc1+ 35. Kg2 Kh7 36. f6 Qf4 37. Qf3
Qxh2+ 38. Kf1 Bf4 39. f7 Kg7 40. Nxg5 Qxa2 41. Qxf4 {
1-0 Hort-Nemet,I/Vinkovci 1976 (41)}) (16… Re8 17. Qc2 Re5 18. Bd3 Ng4 19.
Nd1 c6 20. h3 Nf6 21. Nf3 Re7 22. g4 cxd5 23. cxd5 b6 24. Nc3 Bb7 25. Rae1 Rc8
26. Rxe7 Qxe7 27. Re1 Qc7 28. Qa4 Qc5+ 29. Kg2 Nxd5 30. Re8+ Rxe8 31. Qxe8+ Bf8
32. Qe6+ Kh8 33. Nxd5 Qxd5 34. Qf6+ Bg7 35. Qd8+ Kh7 36. Be2 Qe4 37. Kf1 Qe3
38. Qxd6 Bxf3 39. Bd3 Bf6 40. Qd7+ Kh8 41. Qc8+ Kg7 42. Qd7+ Qe7 43. Qc8 Bb7
44. Qc4 Qc5 45. Qb3 Qc1+ {
0-1 Byrne,S-Canfell,G/AUS-ch Melbourne 1991/EXT 91ch (45)})

17. Qc2 Bd7 18.
Rae1 Rae8 19. Qd3 g4 20. Nb3 Qe3+ 21. Qxe3 Rxe3 22. Nd1 Ree8 23. Bd3 Nh7 24.
Rxe8 Rxe8 25. Kg2 h5 26. Nd2 Re5 27. h3 c6 28. hxg4 hxg4 29. Rf4 cxd5 30. cxd5
Nf6 31. Nc3 Bh6 32. Nde4 Bxf4 33. Nxf6+ Kf7 34. Nxg4 Rxf5 35. Bxf5 Bxf5 36.
gxf4 Bxg4 37. Nb5 Ke7 38. Nxa7 Be2 39. Nc8+ Kd7 40. Nb6+ Kc7 41. Na4 Bc4 42.
Nc3 b5 43. b4 {1-0 Bazan,O-Behrensen,J/ARG-ch Buenos Aires 1960/MCD-ch (43).})
(15… h5 16. h3 Nd7 17. Nf3 Bxc3 18. bxc3 Qf6 19. Qd4 Qh6 20. Kg2 Rf7 21. Rae1
Nf6 22. Nd2 b6 23. Bf3 Bd7 24. Rh1 Raf8 25. Qd3 Bc8 26. Bd1 Qg7 27. Qd4 Re7 28.
Rxe7 Qxe7 29. Nf3 Qg7 30. Nd2 Re8 31. Bf3 Qe7 32. Rg1 h4 33. Bd1 Bd7 34. Nf3
Qg7 35. Re1 Rxe1 36. Nxe1 {1-0 Maedler,J-Starck,B/DDR-ch Magdeburg 1964 (36)})

16. Qc2 Nd7 17. h3 Ne5 18. Nf3 Bd7 19. Ne4 Qe7 20. Rfe1 a6 21. Rab1 b5 22. b4 cxb4 23. c5 dxc5 24. d6 Qf7 25. f6 Nxf3+ 26. Bxf3 Bh8 27. Nxc5 Bxf6 28. Bxa8 Rxa8 29. Nxd7 Qxd7 30. Qg6+ Qg7 31. Re8+ Rxe8 32. Qxe8+ Qf8 33. d7 1-0

Student Championships!

[Event “ch students”]
[Site “Odessa”]
[Date “1968.??.??”]
[Round “?”]
[White “Dzindzichashvili, R.”]
[Black “Kapengut, Albert”]
[Result “1/2-1/2”]
[ECO “E91”]
[PlyCount “40”]
[EventDate “1968.??.??”]
[EventType “simul”]
[EventRounds “13”]
[EventCountry “UKR”]

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. Nc3 Bg7 4. e4 O-O 5. Be2 c5 6. Nf3 d6 7. O-O Na6

A rather dubious placement but apparently the opponents were not combative on this day.

8. d5 Nc7 9. Bf4 Bg4 10. h3 Bxf3 11. Bxf3 Rb8 12. a4 Nfe8 13. Qc2 e5 14. Bd2 b6 15.
Nb5 Rb7 16. b4 cxb4 17. Bxb4 a5 18. Bd2 Na6 19. Rab1 Bf6 20. Rb2 Bg5 1/2-1/2

Here, the Event name is a mystery, because if the date is right, Roman is 25 or 26 years old.  He has achieved a 2605 rating already, which was very high in those days.  Albert is doing well too at 2530.  Both players have shown steady improvement since their junior days.

[Event “URS-ch U18”]
[Site “Dubna”]
[Date “1970.??.??”]
[Round “?”]
[White “Kapengut, Albert”]
[Black “Dzindzichashvili, R.”]
[Result “1-0”]
[ECO “C62”]
[WhiteElo “2605”]
[BlackElo “2530”]
[PlyCount “125”]
[EventDate “1970.??.??”]
[EventType “tourn”]
[EventRounds “15”]
[EventCountry “URS”]
[Source “ChessBase”]
[SourceDate “2000.11.22”]

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 d6 4. O-O Bd7 5. d4 exd4 6. Nxd4 g6 7. Nxc6 bxc6 8. Ba4 Bg7 9. Nd2 Ne7 10. Nc4 O-O 11. Bg5 h6 12. Be3 f5 13. Na5 fxe4 14. Nxc6 Bxc6 15. Bxc6 Nxc6 16. Qd5+ Rf7 17. Qxc6 Qe8 18. Qxe8+ Rxe8 19. Rab1 c6 20. Rfd1 d5
21. b4 Rd7 22. Bd4 Kf7 23. Rb3 Bxd4 24. Rxd4 Ke6 25. Re3 a5 26. a3 axb4 27. axb4 Kd6 28. f3 c5 29. bxc5+ Kxc5 30. c3 Rde7 31. fxe4 dxe4 32. Kf2 Re5 33. Rh3 Ra8 34. Ke3 Ra3 35. Kf4 Rg5 36. Rd2 Rf5+ 37. Kxe4 h5 38. Rhd3 Rf6 39. Rd5+ Kc6 40. c4 Re6+ 41. Re5 Rf6 42. Re8 Ra1 43. Rc8+ Kb7 44. Rc5 Re1+ 45. Kd4 Rf4+ 46. Kd3 Kb6 47. Rg5 Rf6 48. Rb2+ Kc6 49. c5 Rf5 50. Rb6+ Kxc5 51. Rbxg6 Rfe5 52. Rxe5+ Rxe5 53. Ra6 Kb5 54. Kd4 Rg5 55. Ra2 Kc6 56. Ke4 Kd6 57. Kf4 Rg4+ 58. Kf3 Rg5 59. Re2 Rg8 60. g3 Kd5 61. Kf4 Kd6 62. Kf5 Kd7 63. Re4 1-0

I would guess the next game is Russian Championship, 39th Edition?  A very long, drawn-on tournament if this is round 15!  The players ratings are quite a bit lower here.  Perhaps input error on this game or the prior game?

[Event “URS-ch39”]
[Site “Leningrad”]
[Date “1971.10.06”]
[Round “15”]
[White “Kapengut, Albert”]
[Black “Dzindzichashvili, R.”]
[Result “1-0”]
[ECO “B42”]
[WhiteElo “2450”]
[BlackElo “2480”]
[PlyCount “119”]
[EventDate “1971.09.15”]

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 e6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 a6 5. Bd3 Nf6 6. O-O d6 7. b3 Be7 8. Bb2 O-O 9. c4 Bd7

A little slow and deliberate but not bad.

10. Qe2 Nc6 11. Nd2

These days, white usually captures on c6 himself in such situations.

Nxd4 12. Bxd4 Bc6 13. Rad1 (13. f4 d5 14. cxd5 exd5 15. e5 Ne4 16. f5 Re8 17. f6 Bf8 18. fxg7 Bxg7 19. Qh5 Rf8 20. Rf6 Bxf6 21. exf6 Kh8 22. Nf3 Bb5 23. Bxb5 axb5 24. Ne5 Nd6 25. Ng6+! Kg8 (25…fxg6 26. f7+ Qf6 27. Bxf6#) 26. Ne7+ Kh8 27. Qh6 {1-0 Fuller,M (2380)-Steedman,J (2200)/Chester 1979/MCD/[#0930]} (27. Qh6 Rg8 28. Qg7+! Rxg7 29. fxg7 mate))

13… e5 14. Bc3 Nd7 15. Bc2 b5 16. f4 b4 17. Bb2 a5 18. Nf3 Qc7 19. a4 exf4 20. Qd2 Ne5 21. Qxf4 Bf6 22. Kh1 Nxf3 23. Bxf6 Ne5 24. Qg3 Ng6 25. Bb2 Rad8 26. h4 Ne5 27. h5 f6 28. Rf4 h6 29. Rdf1 Qe7 30. Bd4 Be8 31. Bd1 Kh8 32. Rf5 Bf7 33. Qe3 Rc8 34. Qd2 Be6 35. R5f2 Nc6 36. Bb6 Ra8 37. Be2 Ne5 38. Rd1 Nf7 39. Qf4 Rfb8 40. Bd4 Ne5 41. Bf3 Nf7 42. Qg3 Re8 43. e5 dxe5 44. Bxa8 Rxa8 45. Bb6 f5 46. Rfd2 f4 47. Qg6 Rg8 48. Bxa5 Qh4+ 49. Kg1 Ng5 50. Bd8 Bg4 51. Bxg5 hxg5 52. h6 Qxh6 53. Qxh6+ gxh6 54. Ra1 e4 55. a5 e3 56.Rd6 Kg7 57. a6 f3 58. gxf3 Bxf3 59. Rd3 Re8 60. Re1 1-0

Now we go to Baku, the hometown of Garry Kasparov, 1972!  Roman is now 28 years old with a rating of 2500.  Kapengut is not far behind at 2485 and manages to draw the game.

[Event “URS-ch40”]
[Site “Baku”]
[Date “1972.11.19”]
[Round “3”]
[White “Dzindzichashvili, R.”]
[Black “Kapengut, Albert”]
[Result “1/2-1/2”]
[ECO “D02”]
[WhiteElo “2500”]
[BlackElo “2485”]
[PlyCount “45”]
[EventDate “1972.??.??”]
[EventType “tourn”]
[EventRounds “21”]
[EventCountry “AZE”]
[EventCategory “11”]
[Source “Inforchess”]
[SourceDate “2002.12.13”]

1. Nf3 Nf6 2. g3 d5 3. Bg2 c5 4. O-O Nc6 5. d4 Bg4 6. Ne5 cxd4 7. Nxg4 Nxg4 8. e3 Nf6 9. exd4 e6 10. c3 Bd6 11. Qe2 O-O 12. Nd2 Qc7 13. Nb3 Rae8 14. Bg5 Nd7 15. Be3 Na5 16. Nd2 b5 17. b4 Nc4 18. Nxc4 Qxc4 19. Qxc4 bxc4 20. a4 a5 21.
Rfb1 Ra8 22. Bf3 Rfb8 23. Bd2 1/2-1/2

Good stuff!

The Fabulous 60s: McKelvie upsets Benko

March 18, 2009

This just in from Dr. Neil McKelvie (Chemistry Professor at CCNY and Chess Master)

Mark…I noticed that (a) there have been no comments on my Denker submission; BUT (b) if you look up “Neil McKelvie” on GOOGLE, which I just did out of curiosity, I note that the first three entries – meaning most often accessed – are for me. (The next ones: I am not the principal of a religious English school in Yorkshire, and I do not play drums in a NZ rock band!) No 3 is for your BLOG. I have received no comments – have you?

MG Note: New Zealand (NZ) is a fantastic place, every chess player should visit it. The most recent NIC magazine has a story about the Queenstown, NZ Open organized by GM Chandler.  As Dr. McKelvie points out, in Auckland, NZ there happens to be MacKelvie Street but it’s listed as McKelvie Street.

McKelvie on Benko

Now: Pal Benko! I played him twice in MCC championships, and once in a US Open in Boston; but several times in Rapids (once coming in second to Bobby Fischer…7-0 I think was HIS score – ahead of Bisguier and Benko) This game is similar to the Denker game in that I played a highly speculative and probably unsound improvised gambit. *I* think that the most interesting Chess often comes from doubtful moves that no decent Computer would ever play! (Benko scored 7-0 the next year, ahead of Bisguier 5 1/2 – 1 1/2 and me 5-2)

McKelvie – GM Pal Benko Manhattan Club Championship – date 1966?

MG Note to readers: The Manhattan CC moved all over Manhattan, including a stint at the world famous Carnegie Hall at 57th and 7th Avenue.  This game was played before that venue.  Notes in the body of the game are by MG with Rybka kibitzing… see next section for McKelvie’s notes.

1. e4   c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3  e6 6. f4 a6 7. Be3 b5

As in many games, for example SM Bill Kelleher – M. Ginsburg, New England, 1980s (possibly early 90s).

Old Theory

Old Theory

8. e5!? Just as Kelleher played!  Theory presumes this to be premature but play gets very sharp.  It’s odd to see super sharp McKelvie openings because when I (MG) played him he reacted very passively in a QGD MCC Ch. 1985.  Maybe decaf that day?

In the 1970s, this type of structure was covered in a Scheveningen textbook.  Let’s see it:

What we had to work with in the 1970s

What we had to work with in the 1970s

However this 8. e5!? lunge was little covered.  I was certainly shocked when Kelleher tried it against me.

8….dxe5 9. fxe5 Nd5 Just for completeness, 9….b4!? TN 10. exf6 bxc3 11. fxg7 Bxg7 12. bxc3 Qc7 is a small edge for white – thus playable.

10. Nd5 Qxd5 11. Be2 Still following the Kelleher game.  I don’t have that game score handy….(I won after insane complications).  The bizarre computer choice 11. Nf3 retains equality.

11…Qxe5 I  believe that I, too, accepted this pawn because it’s hard to see what else black can do.

12.Qd2    Bb7 A very important position for the theory of this line has been reached.  Interesting, Rybka judges white has almost equal chances.  Black has one narrow way (see next note) to get something.  As McK mentions in his notes below, 12…Bc5! is a good alternative here and Rybka agrees.

13.Bf4    Qd5(? – McK) The best, not easy to see at the board, is 13…Qc5! 14. O-O-O Be7 15. Nb3 Qc8! 16. Bd6 Qd8! 17. Nc5 Bd5! and black has a small plus.

14. O-O-O! A wild continuation hanging a2.  However in the end this turns out to be justified. Rybka mentions 14. Bf3 Qd7 15. Rf1!? with compensation.    It also gives an inhuman line 14. Bf3 Qd7 15. Qc3 Bxf3 16. gxf3!?, also with good compensation.

14…Qd7  (? – Rybka) Benko blinks first, makes a move that doesn’t contribute to development, and he lands in a lost game!  But starting here we have a fascinating battle of the chess engines.  It would be interesting to turn even more engines loose on this one.

Naturally Rybka 2.2 doesn’t like this game choice and recommends 14…Qxa2 15. Nb3 Be7 (forced) 16. Bd6 Bf6 17. Be5! O-O (17…Be7?! 18. Bxg7 is good for white after 18…Rg8 19. Qh6)  18. Bxf6 gxf6 19. Qf4 (or 19. Qh6) – thus far McK analysis- and now a truly amazing defense, 19…Nc6!! 20. Qxf6 Na5 and white has nothing better than a perpetual with queen checks on g5 and f6.  Incredible.   But hang on to your hats.  Rybka 3.1 has seen deeper!  19…Nc6 20. Qxf6 Na5 21. Nc5 Rac8 22. Rd4! and wins!  Thus we have to revise our opinion and say black should not grab on a2!

Rybka 3.1 indicates black should not grab on a2 just yet, develop with 14…Be7, but then 15. Bf3 Qxa2 16. Qc3! causes obvious problems.  Is there any defense at all?  Let’s take a look at this position; the resource it finds for black is truly amazing.

Position after 16. Qc3 (Analysis)

Position after 16. Qc3 (Analysis)

Readers:  A) What should black play from the diagram position above?  B) What’s the correct evaluation with best play for both sides?

15. Qc3! Now black has a horrible game in all lines.

15…Bd5? This makes it worse. 15…b4, while very lame, was the best chance.

16. Nf5! A real cruncher.  Black is dead lost.

16…Nc6 17. Rxd5! exd5  18. Bg4!  Kd8 What a depressing move to have to play. In fact, black could have resigned – see the note to white’s next move.

19. Nd4 (“!” – McK, “?”   – Rybka)

Rybka hates this move because of what’s out there.  Indeed, one of Rybka’s juicy moves, 19. Ne7!!, forces resignation after 19…Qxg4 20. Nxc6+.  Even worse, if that is possible, is 19…Qxe7 20. Qxc6 with utter destruction.   For the sadists in the audience, 19. Nh6!! is just as effective.  For example, 19. Nh6!! Nb4 20. Bg5+ Be7 21. Nxf7+ and it’s +13.95 in computer speak!

This just in from McKelvie:  “Just incidentally….I DID intend Ne7, which of course wins easily, but then picked Nd4, which wins a piece and ALSO wins easily. Why? After Ne7 Black can play B:e7 and then K:d7, with R+N for Q and dead lost, but at least developed and able to survive for a while. After Nd4 Black is still with a useless R and unmoved B. The way I played SHOULD have led to immediate resignation after Qe1/e3 instead of Re1…now THAT was careless of me, or perhaps I wanted to enjoy winning against Benko a bit longer!

I suspect Rybka cannot understand failing to win Q for two pieces instead of just winning a piece, unless I have missed some amazing defence after my Nd4.   Cheers – Neil McKelvie”

19…Nb4! Black doesn’t have to be asked twice to do this. He’s now at only -1.2; if white had done 19. Ne7 it would have been -5 in computer-speak.

20. Kb1 Qb7 20. Rc8 21. Qh3 also loses: 21…Qb7 22. Bg5+! Kc7 23. Qc3+ Kb8 24. Bf4+ and wins the rook.

21. a3 h5 22.  Bh3 a5 23. ab Ra6   24. Nxb5 axb5 25. Bc7+ Ke8  26. Re1+ Re6   27.B:e6   fe   28.Qh3    Rh6    29.R:e6+  Kf7  30.R:h6   gh   31.Qf5+   Kg8   32.Qe6+   Kh7   33.Qf7+   Bg7 34.Nd4    Qa7    35.Nf5    Qg1+ 36.Ka2    b3+  37.K:b3   Resigns

I will try to find the “counter-twin” Kelleher game.

Some notes by McKelvie

Some notes: 12….Bc5 looked good for Black, although after 13.O-O-O O-O (?! – Rybka)  (MG: Rybka likes 13….Bb7! first) 14.Bf3 Ra7 15.Bf4!? Qd4 16.Qd4 Bd4 17.Rd4 White has a little compensation with two Bishops…
13….Qc5 was much better than 13…Qd5. If 14…Qa2 15.Nb3  Be7 16.Bd6 Bf6 17.Be5 O-O(?)
18. Bf6 gf 19 Qh6 a5(?) 20. Bd3 f5 21.g4,,,,  (MG:  See game notes for a discussion of a preliminary computer try, 19…Nc6)
26. Qe3+ was quicker.

Cheers….Neil McKelvie

McKelvie Puzzle

One McK creation from MANY years ago…a Mate in Four (but the first move is fairly obvious).
White: Qh1; Kg2; Pg4; Nb4; Ne8 Black: Kd7 Pb7

9/21/09:  Neil sent in a correction, the above puzzle had a typo. Here is the right version.

White: Kg2; Qh1; N’s b5 and e8; P g4;

Black: Kd7; Pb7    White to play and Mate in 4.

Solution: 1.Ne8-c7
If 1….Ke7 2.Qh7+ If then 2…Kf6 3.Nd5+ and then mirror mates from 4.Qh5 or Qf5 Other moves are uninteresting. HOWEVER
If 1…..Kc6; some logic. Black’s possible second moves with the K are 2…Kb6; 2…Kc5 and 2…K back to d7.  For the Q to then mate in two more moves, it has to get to a3, d4, and e5 respectively. There is only one square from where all three can be reached: a1!
SO: 2.Qa1. But now; what if 2…Pb6. NOW, the K has three squares available: 3…c5 or d7 or b7. To mate then, the Q has to get to c3, e8…AND a8. There is only one square from which to reach all three:3.Qh8. Therefore: Z for Zugswang! Q from h1 -> a1; h8; and a8.

McKelvie on Celts, Irish, Scots

“Mc” and even “M’ ” are valid SCOTTISH (and Irish) abbreviations for “Mac”. For my family name, which comes from the whole area of northern Ireland, the islands to the north, and the Scottish land area to the east; south of Glasgow, “McKelvie is the Scottish spelling, and “McKelvey” is the Ulster spelling. We are supposedly all descendants of a chieftain named “Cielbach Mac Cielbach”, where the “C” turned sometimes into “K” and sometimes into “S” (the northern English name “Selby”) over 2000+ years.

Scots from the North ,”highlanders”, are invariably “Mac”. Lowland Scots, who originally came from Northern ireland anyway, are usually “Mc”. The ROMANS named the group from Northern Ireland the “Scotti”. They were in constant war with the O’Neill’s from the south of Ireland, and so pushed into the south of Scotland, then occupied by the Picts. The two groups united against the Roman invaders. Later a character called Kenneth MacAlpine had married a daughter of the Pictish King, and when he died he became the first king of a united Scotland, having had other claimants killed off. To this day the tall fair-haired Highlanders – descendants of the Picts? – look, think, and talk differently from the Lowlanders. The groups do not always get on well together.
So; the Northern Ireland conflict has a 2000+ year history.

MG Note:  Since I was/am a Philistine savage, previously I believed “Mc” was Irish and “Mac” was Scottish and that was that.  Clearly things are much “Highland mistier.”

The Fabulous 60s: Dr. Neil McKelvie on Arnold Denker

June 13, 2008

MG Note: This guest article by Dr. Neil McKelvie, long-time MCC official and Professor of Chemistry at CCNY, was originally a comment on my 1989 Manhattan Chess Club Championship post.

McKelvie-Denker : Lasker-esque Psychology

Here from memory – is a wild game by me vs. Arnold Denker, against whom I had a plus score of 3-2 (FURIOUSLY denied by Arnold, until I provided the details! He didn’t like to lose!)

Manhattan championship – year??
Neil McKelvie – Arnold Denker
1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 e6 3. d4 cd 4.N:d4 a6 5. Nc3 Qc7
6. Bd3 Nc6 7. Be3 MG Note: We now know 7. Nxc6!

7…Nf6 8. Qe2(?) Bd6 9. g3??!
This is a truly awful move – but played deliberately! Denker, as I knew from long experience, was prone to overconfidence, and this made him smile happily! (A real Patzer move!!) White’s white-sqiare weakness will be very bad. MG: This was a typical Emmanuel Lasker ploy! In this case, the move isn’t *that* bad.

Position after the “lemon” 9. g3 (It isn’t that bad)

9…N:d4 10.B:d4 e5 11.Be3 Bb4 12.O-O! B:c3 13 bc O-O? (…d6! and White has a miserable position)

14, Bg5 Qc6 15. f4 ef! 16. e5 f3!

Position after 16…f3!? Both sides are swinging for the fences.

Addendum by McKelvie 4/9/09:
“After Denker’s f3….I “should” have taken on f3 with my Queen! Then …Q:f3 is forced, I think; R:f3; if then …Ng4; Be7 Re8; Bd6 N:e5; Re3 f6; Bc4 Kh8; Bf7  wins the exchange, right? Other lines; White seems to have a “winning: game, with two B’s and a B position suffering from acute constipation!
Cheers – Neil McKelvie”

17 R:f3 Ng4
Thinking that the W e-pawn will be lost…..

18.Be7 Re8 19.Bd6
Denker intended 19…N:e5 20 B:e5 d6, but then looked, and saw 21. B:h7+
IF 21…K:h7 22, Qd3+ Kg8? 23. B:g7! K:g7 24. R:f7+! K:f7 and White wins in all variations. This would not work without Black’s 4…a6 and 14…..Qc6, because one variation is 24 Qh7+ Ke6 25.Re1+ Kd5 26. Qd3+ Kc5 27. Qd4+ Kb5 28. Qb4++
However; B should play 22…f5. 23. R+f5 can lead to a draw by perpetual check, but no more. I planned 23. Bd4. Denker thought this was bad for him, at least cosmetically, but his W. Bishop is equally frightening. Maybe both sides are losing! I haven’t had the nerve to give this position to a computer.

Denker played, after L O N G thought, 19……b5? (Why do so many long thinks lead to chessic mental paralysis and a blunder?)
20.Qe4! Q:e4 21.B:e4 Ra722.Bd5 Nh6 23.Raf1

Position after 23. Raf1.  Denker is Toast.

23…Re6 (threat was 24 R:f7!)
24.B:e6 de 25.c4 bc 26.Rc3 Bd7 27.Rb1 f5 28.Bb8 Ra8 29.R:c4 Nf7 30.Rb7 Nd8 31.R:d7 R:b8 32.Rcc7 Resigns 1-0

Denker, Club Member X, Organic Chemistry, and a Playboy Bunny

Finally, a very funny Manhattan Chess Club story, again involving Denker.

Year: 1966 or 1967? A young lady appeared in my Organic Chemistry lecture (”J.” ;) She had worked as a Bunny in the Playboy Club, and had adopted that style of dressing, minus the ears, for everyday use, It wasn’t exactly usual then to see a young blonde lady wearing a see-through blouse and no underwear, and very short shorts. Of course, *I* received full voltage! (She asked another girl, since this didn’t seem to work, “Is he Gay?” “No; he has a young and very pretty wife! You are wasting your time!)

So, she got friendly with one of my PhD students, who was doing the exam grading. She said to me, “David tells me you are a chess master”. “Yes.” “David has been teaching me to play” (??!!) “Can I see you play Chess?”

Inspiration! Denker had a keen appreciation of the ladies. “Can you come to the Manhattan Chess Club in the Henry Hudson Hotel this Sunday at 2 pm? I’m playing former US Champion Arnold Denker. However, please stand behind me when I’m playing so that I don’t get distracted!” “I can come, but I’ll be dressed for a date. Won’t this be too much for a Chess Club” (If they are playing Chess, they’ll never notice you!!”

Denker sat up in his chair and his eyes goggled. Shortly after, he made a mistake, and I was a pawn up with a good position. At this point Club Member X came in. He had listed his non-Chess occupation as “sex consultant” (I assume this could have meant “pimp” but I kept my
thoughts to myself… ;) He saw me talking to “J”. “Is she a friend of yours?” “Not exactly; she is a student in my class,” (Is it OK if I talk to her?” “None of my business, but she is with her date.”

10 minutes later… “J” was playing with her date, with our hero Club Member X practically draped over her. I was so fascinated by the human drama going on behind me that *I* blundered!!
Eventually Denker won.
Next day. “J”: “I don’t think I like Chess that much. Who was that creep?”

Next Sunday’s round, our hero “X” gave me his business card.
“Can you give this to that very lovely young lady? I think I could really teach her a lot!!”