The Fabulous 80s and Beyond: Dealing with the Leningrad Dutch 7…Qe8

First Steps: The Bareev Game and a Wasted TN

In Naestved, Denmark 1988 I was paired against an IM in the first round. Nothing so special about that, but it turned out to be young Evgeni Bareev, rated 2560. Ut-oh, that’s rather high for an IM.  You might wonder why I (2420) was paired in this way in the first round.  It turns out the organizers had consulted what appeared to be the back of a cracker-jack box and instituted quarter pairings throughout the event.  Near the last round, a 1900-player was in serious danger of taking one of the top spots and Gyula Sax was totally freaking out.  Only an upset defeat of that A player prevented a “scandale totale.”

Here was the game.

M. Ginsburg – E. Bareev (2560), Naestved Denmark 1988. Round 1.

1. c4 f5 See this post for a discussion of the poor move order 1. Nf3 f5?.

2. d4 Nf6 3. g3 g6 4. Bg2 Bg7 5. Nf3 O-O 6. O-O d6 7. Nc3 Qe8 8. Nd5 Hoping for 8….c6? 9. Nxf6+ Bxf6 10. Bh6 or 9…Rxf6 10. Bg5 with a pleasant advantage.

8…Nxd5 9. cxd5 Qb5 Recommended by theory. Curiously, this position was just reached in Yaeger-Young, US Junior 2008, but Yaeger played the innocuous 10. Qc2 now and lost later on. After 10. Qc2 c6 nothing special is going on.

10. e4!?! TN My improvised TN! which was mentioned in passing in an Andrew Martin pamphlet! A fantastic blitz move! Bareev started to think, and think, and think.

Position after the shocker 10. e4!?

10…fxe4 11. Ng5 c6!? The point of all this is revealed after the greedy 11…Qxd5 12. Bxe4 Qxd4? 13. Qb3+! with advantage. Black also has 12…Qb5 13. a4 Qc4 (staying on the sensitive b3-g8 diagonal) and now after 14. Be3 c6, 15. Nxh7 leads only to a draw. On 14…Nc6, 15. Rc1 Qb4 puts black’s queen on a weird place and with 16. b3 white can keep the game going, or venture 16. Nxh7 with as far as I can see nothing more than a draw after 16…Kxh7 17. Qh5+ Kg8 18. Qxg6 Rf6. The conclusion is that 11…Qxd5 is playable, unless I am overlooking something. Bareev did not care to enter into the pawn grab waters.

12. Nxe4 The knight tour continues. If 12…cxd5? 13. Nc3! forks b5 and d5 with advantage. One simple line is 12…cxd5? 13. Nc3 Qa5 14. Nxd5 Nc6 15. Bd2 gaining additional time and then 15…Qd8 16. Bc3 with a solid edge.

12…Qb6! Bareev is too smart for 12…cxd5? and this move, in fact, I had not foreseen.

13. Qe2! The right reaction to get on the e-file. If 13…cxd5? 14. Ng5! Qxd4 15. Ne6 and it looks very loose for black. If 13…Qxd4!?, white can play for an attack with 14. Rd1 Qb4 15. Ng5! with king-side ideas. The threat of Ng5xh7 becomes real after 15. Ng5 Be5 16. Be4!. However, black has 16…Qb5! to defend.

13…Qa6!? Another interesting move. But in this case it may not be best, since 13…Qxd4!? was in fact quite playable.

14. Qxa6? Wrong! After playing inventively, white should continue in that manner and keep the queens on with 14. Qe3. After, for example, 14. Qe3 cxd5? we know that 15. Ng5 gives good chances. But what else can black play? Nf3-g5 is happening anyway! After 14. Qe3!, white has an advantage.

14…Nxa6 White has helped black develop. 15. dxc6? Better is 15. Nc3 Bd7 16. Bg5 Rf7 17. Rae1 with equality.

15…bxc6 16 d5?? A huge lemon. 16. Nc3 Nb4 17. Bg5 keeps white in the game.

16…c5 Of course! Now black is much better. Very poorly played by me.

17. a3 Rb8 18. Ra2 Really rather pathetic.

18….c4? Black gaffes. 18….Bb7! was much stronger. 19. Nc3 Nc7 with Ba6 to come and white is really suffering.

19. Bg5! Now I’m all right again.

19…Bf5 20. Rc1? I make yet another mistake! Jet lag?? After the obvious 20. Bxe7! Bxe4 22. Bxe4 Re8 23. Bxd6 Rxe4 24. Bxb8 Nxb8 25. Rc2 and 26. Ra1, white is right back in it!

20…Rfc8 21. Nd2? Now it’s not the same: 21. Bxe7 Bxe4 22. Bxe4 c3! 23. bxc3 Re8 24. Bxd6 Rbd8 25. Bb4 Rxe4 26. c4 Rc8 with some edge to black. Even so, I should have played this. The text is hopeless.

21…Bd3! With total paralysis. What a bad first round!

22. b4 c3 23. Nf1 Rb7 24. Bh3 Rcc7 25. Be6+ Kh8 27. Ne3 a5! 28. bxa5 Na6! 29. Ng4 Rb2 30. Raa1 Nc5 31. Nh6 Nxe6 32. dxe6 Bd4 33. Nf7+ Kg7 34. Be3 Bxe3 35. fxe3 h6 0-1

Later on, I tried to be more ‘normal’ and I couldn’t have come closer to a KO.

MG – IM J. Sarkar, US Ch. 2006, San Diego
1. c4 f5 2. d4 Nf6 3. g3 g6 4. Bg2 Bg7 5. Nf3 O-O 6. O-O d6 7. Nc3 Qe8

I don’t trust this move. It’s so uni-dimensional and committal! (with the crude idea of e5). But how to punish it? White should aim for structures where one of two things happens: 1) achieving the idea of e5 is playable tactically but positionally hurts black! or 2) by changing structures, white can aim to entice black to give up on e5 (for example, reverting to a Stonewall). Then, the fundamental point of Qe8 is lost and white is happy. Let’s see some variations.

8. d5!? A useful space gaining move. But, as we shall see, it is crude and black has counterchances on the dark squares.

Positionally more motivated is my recommendation of 8. Qb3! which of course has been seen in lots of games. In most of the games, though, either one side or the other played inaccurately right off the bat.

Position after 8. Qb3! – Analysis.

Continuing, 8…c6 9. Rd1! which is a very accurate sequence.

As a sidenote, going back to the analysis diagram, the droll point of 8. Qb3 is the rather crude trap 8…e5?? 9. c5+! (Very aesthetic!) 9…Kh8 10. cxd6 cxd6 11. Nb5! e4 12. Ng5! (a fantastic sortie by the two knights!) 12…Qd7 13. d5 and black has a miserable game. For those who like further sadistic variations on this theme, 8…e5?? 9. c5+ Qe6 10. Qxe6+ Bxe6 11. Ng5 Bc8 12. Nd5! wins.

Similarly, 8…Nc6?! 9. c5+! is also a white edge. If white takes away e7-e5, the main point of Qe8 is lost. The clumsy looking 8. Qb3! Kh8 is also met by 9. Rd1.

Let’s proceed with the ‘main line’. After 8. Qb3 c6 9. Rd1, if 9…Na6 for example then 10. c5+! anyway gives an advantage after the forceful sequence 10…Qf7 11. Qxf7 Rxf7 12. Ng5! Rf8 13. cxd6 exd6 14. d5! c5 15. Bf4! Ne8 16. Ne6!. If 10…d5 “Stonewalling” it, this represents a failure of the black principal idea to play e5 and white simply continues with 11. Bf4! enjoying a nice edge.

Korchnoi has also shown in a related line the idea of Qb3-a3 and then the b-pawn can rush up, defeating Dolmatov in a nice miniature. That game went
1. c4 f5 2. Nf3 Nf6 3. g3 d6 4. d4 g6 5. Bg2 Bg7 6. O-O O-O 7. Nc3 c6 (not Qe8, but we see Qe8 soon) 8. Qb3 Kh8 9. Rd1 Na6 10. Qa3! Qe8 11. b4! Nc7 12. Bb2 e5 13. dxe5 dxe5 14. Qa5 Na6 15. b5 b6 16. Qa3 Nc5 17. bxc6 e4 18. Nd4 Qf7 19. Rac1 Be6 20. Ncb5 a6 21. Nd6 Qc7 22. Nb7 1-0, Korchnoi-Dolmatov, FIDE WC Candidates, Las Vegas 1999. At the time, this game made a big impression for its consistent positional message.

Lastly, if 8. Qb3 Na6, there is nothing wrong with the thematic move 9. c5+ but it’s not the powerful dagger blow as it is in other lines. After 9…Kh8?! 10. cxd6 exd6 11. Be3 black has an offside knight. More accurate for black is 9…Qf7! 10. Qxf7+ Rxf7 11. Ng5 Rf8 12. c6!? b6 and he should be able to unangle. White can play more abstractly with 9. Bf4!? awaiting events and taking away e5 for the time being.

8…a5 9. Nd4 Na6 10. e4 fxe4 11. Nxe4 Nxe4 12. Bxe4 Bh3 13. Re1 Nc5 14. Bh1 Qf7 15. Be3 Rae8?! The unprejudiced 15…Bf5!, offering a trade of this optically nice bishop, is a good move for black. The text is mechanical and after the upcoming e5 break, white gets some nice squares.

16. Qd2 a4 17. Rad1 e5 18. dxe6 Nxe6 19. Nb5! White has an edge!

19…Qd7 20. f3!? This waiting move I thought was very nice. White shuts down black’s simplifying idea of Bg4 for the time being. But, I had the scary looking 20. Bxb7 c6 21. Nxd6 Rb8 22. Qb4 Nd8 23. Ba7! and the Rybka engine says I can do this, with some advantage.
20…Nd8?! Correct was 20…Rf7.

21. Nc3 Be6 22. c5?! 22. b3! +=

21…Nf7?! 22…a3! =

23. f4 Bg4 24. Rc1 dxc5? A big lemon. Now white swarms. Better, again, was 24…a3.

25. Qxd7 Bxd7 26. Bxc5 Rxe1+ 27. Rxe1 Rb8? This should have been the decisive blunder. 27…a3 was the last chance. Then, 28. Bxa3 is +=, but not 28. Bxf8?? Kxf8! =.

28. Bd5? White is just hugely better with fantastic piece activity. But I had 28. Re7! first, and if 28…Be8 29. Rxc7 just wins.
28…Bf8 29. Ne4 Bc6 30. Nf6+ Kh8 I get confused by all the possible captures. I start on the right path…

31. Bxf8 Bxd5 32. Bb4?? No!!!! Playing for mate in time-trouble is the wrong thing to do!
Simply 32. Nxd5 Bxd5 33. Re7 and it’s all over, black cannot escape the vice and loses the ending quickly. In the game, black managed to evade the attack and survive!
32..Bxa2 33. Bc3 Rd8 34. Re7 Kg7 35. Rxc7 b5 36. Rb7 Bc4 37. g4 The quiet 37. Kf2! offered better winning chances.

37…h6 38. h4 Rd3? Necessary was Kf8, either with Rd1+ thrown in or without.

This is white’s last chance in the first time control. It’s a problem, white to play and win.

Position after 38…Rd3. Can white solve this tricky problem?

39. g5?? Wrong! White allows black’s trick! The quite beautiful answer was 39. Ne4+ Kf8 (39…Kh7 40. g5! wins) 40. Bf6! setting up a fantastic mating net. if 40…Kg8, 41. Rb8+ Kh7 42. g5! and now 43. Be7 and Nf6+ mating is threatened. Suppose black defends with 42…Rd7. White plays 43. Be7!! anyway! This is worth a diagram.

Position after 43. Be7!! winning (analysis).

All these variations are quite study-like. Another nice one is 39. Ne4+! Kf8 40. Bf6! Ke8 41. Nc5!! hitting the rook, threatening the lethal Rb8+, and winning. Fantastic N & B coordination. I just didn’t have the time to observe all these nice things and forgot to play the knight check in time.

39…hxg5 40. hxg5 40. fxg5 does not seem to make much of a difference.

40…a3! The last move of time control and black finds an equalizing shot! How embittering.
41. Ne4+ Too late for this!

41…Rxc3! 42. bxc3 Bd5 43. Rxb5 Bxe4 44. Ra5 Nd6 45. Rxa3 Kf7 46. Ra5 Ke6 47. Kf2 Nc4 48. Rc5 Bd3 49. Kf3 Kd6 50. Rc8 Kd7 51. Ra8 Kc6 52. Rc8+ Kd7 53. Rf8 Bc2 54. Rf6 Bd3 55. Kf2 Kc7 56. Ra6 Kd7 57. Ra1 Kc6 58. Rd1 Bc2 59. Rd8 Bf5 60. Kg3 As befits a poorly conducted middlegame, it is white now that has to worry.
60…Nd6 61. Kf2 Kc5 62. Ke3 Nb5 63. Ra8 Nxc3 64. Ra5+ Kc4 65. Ra1 Nd5+ 66. Kf3 Kd4 67. Ra4+ Kd3 68. Ra3+ Nc3 69. Rb3 Be4+ 70. Kg4 Kc4 71. Rb8 Nd5 72. Re8 Kd4 73. Re5 Ne3+ 74. Kg3 Nf5+ 75. Kf2 Bd5 76. Re1 Be4 77. Rd1+ Bd3 78. Re1 Be4 1/2-1/2

Postscript – Something Completely Different (Nh3, Nf4)

When Leningrad Specialist Mikhail Gurevich loses a miniature, that is a cause for attention. His opponent, FIDE Women’s ex-WC Stefanova, plays very cleverly in the first phase. This is a way for white to sidestep the main lines we saw above.

[Event “Gibraltar”]
[Site “Gibraltar ENG”]
[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 This knight placement with the idea of a quick h2-h4-h5 makes sense because when black kicks the knight with g5, white has the intermediate move h5-h6! hitting the B/g7 to not give black the time to play himself h7-h6 to keep the pawn chain intact.  Thus the black king side pawn formation will be damaged.

4…Bg7 5. Bg2 O-O 6. h4! Naturally.  h4-h5 will be a problem.

Position after 6. h4!

6…Nc6 6…d6 is also met by 7. h5! – here is some craziness: 7….e5 8. hxg6! exf4 9. gxh7+ Nxh7 (or 9…Kh8 10. Bxf4 with an edge) 10. Bd5+ Kh8 11. Bxf4 with white edge! For example, 11…Nc6 12. e3.

7. h5 g5 8. h6 Bh8 9. Nd3 Nxd4 10. Bxg5 Well, this was the point. Black’s king side is compromised.

10…Ne6 11. Bh4 d5 12. Nd2 c6 13. c4 Ne4 14. cxd5 14. Rc1! was a good alternative here and white retains pressure.

14…cxd5 15. Nf3 Qd6 16. Qb3 Bd7 16…b6 is also possible.

17. Nf4? 17. Rc1 was correct with equal chances.

17…Bc6? Black had the strong 17…N6c5! here and after 18. Qxd5+ Qxd5 19. Nxd5 e6 he is even somewhat better as he will take on b2 next.

18. Nxe6 Qxe6 Curiously, at this stage, black had reasonable defensive chances but soon went under to a tactical trick.

19. Rd1 a5 20. Nd4 Qf7? The unprejudiced 20…Bxd4 21. Rxd4 Rf7! gives the king an escape chance and black has counter-chances.

21. g4 21. Qe3 was also strong.

21…Bxd4 One move too late! White has a huge attack.

22. Rxd4 e5 Black has clearly missed white’s next tactically, but he had no other good moves at this point. He made too many concessions.

23. gxf5! exd4 24. Bxe4 The point! Black’s king has no refuge. After 24…dxe4 25. Qg3+ Kh8 26. Qe5+ is the decisive zig-zag maneuver with Rh1-g1 next.

Rae8 25. Qg3+ Kh8 26. Bd3 b5 27. Qf4 Qa7 28. Qd6 Qf7 29. Rg1 b4 30. Rg7 Qh5 31. Rg8+ 1-0

A crushing defeat inflicted on the veteran by Stefanova, although admittedly there were inaccuracies and black could have completely turned the tables on move 17.

Selected ICC Shouts

Blitzovich(GM) shouts: the study of crime begins with the knowledge of yourself

Finegold notes most people are motivated by achievement… food/sex are ok… but achieving goals and being successful at what you do is more important… ship it!

Detroit-Warrior what do i gotta do to find a hot chess girl??

aries2 googled for “is gasol soft?” and the third link coming back was the name of some chick i met at a vicary party in brooklyn

Chess Art of the Day

This angry picture of “Blokade.”

Search Terms as of June 17, 2008.

These terms were used in searches to stumble across my site.

kramnik	2
icc handle steve odendahl	2
cochrane gambit	2
gyula sax	2
gheorghiu florin	2
transportation of denmark	1
“manuel gerardo monasterio”	1
another country 1983	1
knight chess history	1
modern defense	1

Advertisement

The Fabulous 1980s: Naestved, Denmark 1988 Photos

Future GM and future US Champion IM Michael Wilder using a typical mode of transportation in Denmark.

Future GM, Swedish battler IM Ferdinand Hellers, has discovered the Tuborg beer cache.The astute reader has already learned some Danish: Øl for Beer. Mr. Hellers, particularly strong and theoretically well versed with the white pieces, ruined Mr. Wilder’s tournament by inflicting a harsh defeat on young Mike in the last round.

IM F. Hellers (2490) – IM M. Wilder (2505), Naestved 1988.

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 Nc6 6. Bg5 e6 7. Qd2 a6 8. O-O-O h6 9. Be3 Be7 10. f4 Nxd4?!

10…Qc7 is commonly seen as is 10…Bd7.

11. Qxd4 Qa5  White is simply much better here. Weirdly, GM Vassily Ivanchuk (then rated 2625) also lost with this poor variation vs Hellers in 1988.

12. Be2 e5  Ivanchuk tried 14…exf4 15. Bxf4 but had a bad game; Hellers-Ivanchuk, Adelaide 1988.  White won in 42 moves.

13. Qd3 Be6 14. Kb1 Rc8 15. Nd5 Bxd5 16. exd5 exf4 17. Bxf4 O-O 18. Rhf1 Rc5?  Unnatural. Better is 18…Rfe8 with a small white edge.

19. Bd2 19. Qg3 is also very strong.

19…Qd8 20. Rf5! Re8 21. Rdf1 Nd7 22. Rxf7 Ne5 23. Qf5 Qc8 24. Qh5 Rxc2  Black cannot survive after 24… Nxf7 25. Qxf7+ Kh8 26. Bxh6 and wins.

25. Bxh6 g6 26. Rg7+ 1-0

The Classic 80s Part 6: Naestved Open 1988

The tournament in the tiny town of Naestved, Denmark 1988 was a lot of fun. It was near the beach at Karresboekminde (OK, this beach in the North Sea was brrrr cold!!) and had a lot of good players such as Ljubomir Ljubojevic, Bent Larsen, Gyula Sax, Lars Bo Hansen, and others. Here is a strange tussle from that event I played versus a Romanian IM.

IM Julius Armas (2465, ROM) vs IM Mark Ginsburg (2415, USA)
Naestved Open, 1988

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 e6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 d6 6. Be3 a6 7. Qd2 b5 8. f3 Be7 9. g4

White tries the English Attack about half a decade before it became popular.

9… O-O 10. O-O-O Bd7 11. g5 Ne8 12. h4 Nc6 13. Nxc6 Bxc6 14. h5 Nc7 Black’s construction is a little weird but GM Vlastimil Hort had played something like this in similar positions and I wanted to avoid black …h7-h6, giving white a clear target on the kingside.

15. Bd3 d5 16. g6 d4 17. h6 Maximum Action!

17… fxg6 18. hxg7 Rxf3 19. Qh2 h5!

Black finds all the right defensive moves and gradually beats off the short-lived white attack.

20. Bxd4 Qxd4 21. Be2 Qe3+ 22. Kb1 Rf4 23. Rdg1 Be8 24. Nd1 Qd2 25. Qg3 Qd6 26. Nf2

26… Rxf2 This surprising move has the effect of simplifying the game and preventing any nasty surprises in slight time pressure.

27. Qxf2 Qe5 28. Rf1 Kxg7 29. Bxh5 Bf6 30. c3 gxh5 31. Qg2+ Bg6 The two bishops form a very effective defensive barrier.

32. Rhg1 Bg5 33. Qxg5 Qxg5 34. Rxg5 Kh6

35. Rc5 Bxe4+ 36. Kc1 Nd5 Now black is technically winning, but still the winning process takes work.

37. Rc6 Re8 38. Rxa6 h4 39. Re1 Nf6 40. a4 h3 41. Re2 Bg2 42. Rexe6 Rxe6 43. Rxe6 h2

44. Re1 Ne4 45. axb5 Ng3 46. b6 Ne2+ 47. Kd2 Ng1! White could have resigned here. The rest is smooth sailing.

48. Re8 Kg7 49. Re7+ Kg6 50. b7 Bxb7 51. Rxb7 h1=Q 52. Rb4 Nf3+ 53. Kc2 Kf5 54. Kb3 Qd1+ 55. Ka2 Nd2 0-1

Here’s another tough struggle versus future GM L.B. Hansen, a very solid player.
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 g6 White has to play very concretely now to compensate for his isolated queen pawn.

13. Bh6 Bg7 14. Qd2(!) Nf6 15. Bc2 b6 16. Rad1 Bb7 17. Bb3 Ned5 18. Bg5 A small change of mind but white retains some initiative.

18…Nxc3 19. bxc3

19… Qc8 20. Qd3 Qc7 21. c4 Nd7 22. Nxd7 Qxd7 23. Qh3 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

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

 

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! 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

And here is a third game from the event versus Swedish wildman, future GM Johnny Hector.
Johnny Hector vs Mark Ginsburg
Naestved Open, 1988

Sicilian Defense, Taimonov Variation

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 e6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 a6 5. c4 Nf6 6. Nc3 Qc7 The move 6…Bb4 here is very risky due to 7. e5!

7. Be2 Nc6 8. O-O Bd6!? 9. Kh1 A well known opening position in which both sides have their chances. 10. h3 Bh2+ 11. Kh1 Be5 wouldn’t cause black many problems.

9… Bf4?! Correct was 9…Nxd4 10. Qxd4 O-O.

10. c5! A strong move, going for a black square bind.

10…O-O 11. Nc2?! 10. Nf3 was much stronger.

11…Bxc1 12. Rxc1 b6 13. cxb6 Qxb6 14. f4 Qxb2? Much safer was 14…d5 with a small disadvantage. The grubby text is looking dubious for black.

15. Rf3?! An inaccuracy in return. 15. Qd3! was correct with a gigantic plus.

15…Qb8 15…Ng4!? was possible.

16. e5 Ng4? 16…Ne8 was circumspect and better.

17. Ne4 Ncxe5!? I could not resist this speculative piece sac. However, it’s asking too much from the position and the modest 17…Bb7 was better. The point would be if 18. Nd6, black has the surprising shot 18…Nb4!! hitting the rook on f3 and simplifying close to equality.

18. fxe5 Qxe5 19. Rg3 Bb7 20. Bxg4 Bxe4 21. Qd4 21. Bf3! was stronger.

21…Qxd4 22. Nxd4 f5! For the first time since 14…Qxb2?, black has a completely OK game.

23. Be2 e5

24. Nb3 d5 Is this a formidable pawn wedge or not? Exactly five years earlier, I got a winning and really pleasing pawn wedge vs Patrick Wolff (NY Open 1983) but here, it was not to be. But, believe it or not, black might even have a small edge here.

25. Kg1 a5? A very bad waste of time. 25…Rfc8! was correct to get rid of a pair of rooks. For example, 25…Rfc8 26. Rxc8+ Rxc8 27. Bxa6 Rc2! and black’s high level of activity saves the game. This easy line should not have been missed.

26. a4 f4 27. Rgc3 h6? Another bad move. Correct was a more constructive waiting move like 27…Kf7 28. Rc7+ Kg6 with only some disadvantage.

28. Bd3?! Here, 28. Rc5 was stronger.

28…Rfb8? Another poor selection. 28…Bxd3 was necessary; 29. Rxd3 Rfd8 and black has decent chances to hold.

29. Bb5! Of course. Now white has a monumental bind and black fades into oblivion. A very poorly played middlegame.

29…Kh7 30. Rc7 Rb6 31. Nd2 Bg6 32. Rd7

It is becoming painfully clear that black’s pawns are held up and the white monster on b5 rules the roost. The rest is agony for black.

32… e4 33. Rxd5 Rf8 34. Rd7 Bf5 35. Rd4 e3 36. Nc4 Rg6 37. Rxf4 Bh3 38. Rxf8 Rxg2+ 39. Kh1 e2 40. Ne3 1-0

 

Drat!!! Ugh. Poop.

 

The readers should see a very interesting encounter between future GM and future US Champ Mike Wilder and venerable Danish GM and former Candidate, Bent Larsen.

Michael Wilder – Bent Larsen

Naestved 1988

Sicilian Defense, Maroczy Bind

 

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 g6 5. c4 Bg7 6. Be3 Nf6 7. Nc3 Ng4 A variation that is very passive and has gone totally out of favor in modern chess.

8. Qxg4 Nxd4 9. Qd1 Ne6 The positionally hideous 9…e5?! is at least a fighting choice.

10. Rc1 d6 11. Bd3 a5 This looks slow. I would prefer 11…O-O immediately.  Compare this to a similar bad position black got in Ginsburg-Wozney covered in my US Open 1976 installment.

12. O-O O-O 13. Bb1 Bd7 14. Qe2 Bc6 14….Rc8 deserves attention.

15. Rfd1 b6 16. f4 Qb8 17. Nd5 Ra7 18. f5 Nc5 19. Bg5 Here, 19. Qf2 is also good. The position is totally bad for black and white, making simple moves, is on the verge of winning.

19…Re8 20. Qf2 Bxd5 21. exd5 b5 22. Rf1 22. b3 maintains a crushing position. The text should also win.

22…bxc4 23. fxg6 fxg6 24. Bxg6! Rf8 25. Bf7+ Kh8 26. Qh4 Qxb2 27. Rxc4 Nd3 So far, so good, White is on the verge of upsetting the famous GM. Many strong spectators such as Sax and Ljubojevic were now staring aghast at the shambles of black’s position.

28. Qxh7+??? Oh no! Mike loses his nerve in the presence of the famous opponent!

Correct was 28. Be3! and white wins quickly and easily in all variations. For example, 28…Rb7 29. Bg6! (Crushing, hitting both h7 and d3, winning a piece) 29… Rxf1+ 30. Kxf1 Qf6+ (30… Qb1+ 31. Bc1 will mate shortly) 31. Qxf6 Bxf6 32. Bxd3 and black must resign, down a piece.

28… Kxh7 1/2-1/2 It’s just a repetition draw after 29. Rh4+ Bh6 30. Rxh6+ Kg7 31. Rg6+ Kh7. A very disappointing anti-climax, roundly booed by Ljubojevic.

 

The Classic 80s Part 5: Naestved, Denmark 1988

Naestved, Denmark (not very close to Copenhagen; somewhat close to the beach village of Karrasboekminde) was a real hoot in 1988. I went over there with IM (soon to be GM) Michael Wilder. Participating in this strong swiss were legends GM Larsen, GM Sax, GM Ljuobjevic, GM Jansa, IM (soon to be GM) Ferdinand Hellers, and a host of others such as Danish solid guy (future GM) Lars Bo Hansen and another Hansen, Soren Bech Hansen. Don’t confuse this FM player (b. 1967) with GM Sune Berg Hansen (b. 1971; drainyou on ICC) who happens to also be S.B. Hansen!

Here is a game versus S.B. Hansen the Lesser.

Mark Ginsburg vs Soren Bech Hansen
Naestved Open, 1988

Gruenfeld Defense, Exchange Variation

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. Nc3 d5 4. cxd5 Nxd5 5. e4 Nxc3 6. bxc3 Bg7 7. Nf3 c5 8. Rb1

This variation, a favorite of GM Khalifman, was a real newcomer to me. I never played it before or after!  It makes a lot of sense, though, to get the rook off the sensitive a1-h8 diagonal.

8… O-O 9. Be2 cxd4 10. cxd4 Qa5+ Black adopts the recommended approach and trades queens to reduce white’s potential initiative.

11. Qd2  Of course, 11. Bd2 Qxa2 is a highly topical gambit idea that has seen many high-level tests through the years.

11…Qxd2+ 12. Bxd2 e6 13. O-O b6

 

14. d5 The only way for white to do anything at all is to try to make a passed pawn and expand it.  At least the position is not completely dead and black still has to be accurate.

14…exd5 15. exd5 Bb7 16. d6 Rd8 17. Bf4 Nd7 18. Rfc1

We reach a critical position. Fortunately for me, black blunders badly now.

18… Nc5?? 19. Rxc5! Of course! White is simply winning at this point and need only exercise a little caution to wrap up the win.

19…Bxf3 20. Bxf3 bxc5 21. Bxa8 Rxa8 22. Rb7 Bd4 23. Kf1 Kg7 24. d7 Bf6

Black is really powerless to contest the pawn on d7.

25. Ke2 Bd8 26. Kd3 Kf6 27. Kc4 Ke6 28. Kxc5 f6 29. Kc6 a5 30. Rb8 Rxb8 31. Bxb8 a4 32. Bc7 Ke7 33. Bxd8+ Kxd8 34. Kd6 a3 35. Ke6

1-0

If only my other games in Naestved went that smoothly. Watch this space for more struggles from this event vs IM Armas (Romania), L.B Hansen, and others.