Posts Tagged ‘Chess Theory’

The Fabulous 00s: Can Blitz Teach Us Anything about the King’s Indian Defense Bayonet Attack?

December 30, 2007

The ICC and other online forums (fora??) are, I think, a good vehicle for learning-by-example. More specifically, the 5-minute pool where there are plenty of GMs to serve as sounding boards.

I like trying out the Bayonet Attack in the King’s Indian Defense.  It happens to have the ECO code of E97 – this can be useful when conducting online searches.  Let’s see how it did in some recent ICC blitz games.

IM Aries2 – GM Boing777 (Orazly Annageldyev) 

The first moves are familiar – popularized by Kramnik and his second, Dutch GM Loek van Wely.

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. Nc3 Bg7 4. e4 d6 5. Nf3 O-O 6. Be2 e5 7. O-O Nc6 8. d5 Ne7 9. b4

I like this variation because it is forcing and white can often channel black into some special, narrow, labyrinths.  Van Wely has had some exciting games versus Radiabov recently (admittedly, Teimour came out on top, but Loek certainly had his chances as he explains in New In Chess magazine). And here the Central Asian GM plays a common defensive scheme.

9…a5!?

bayo1.png

Position after 9…a5!?  Is this a good reaction? 

Is this a good reaction, or playing on the side of the board where white is stronger?
It brings back good memories for me, I defeated GM Biyiasis way back in 1982 in this line.  But black can be more clever and introduce the a7-a5 move in a roundabout way. For example, 9…Nh5!? (the most common) in  aries2- SNOEBE ICC blitz 2007 which saw 9…Nh5!? 10. c5!? a5!? (a mixture of ideas with some thematic links to this game) and there followed 11. cxd6 cxd6 12. bxa5 Rxa5 13. a4 with murky play.  White won the game but it had little to do with the opening.

I’ve also faced 9…Nh5 in numerous OTB games.  Here, for example is a smooth win over Dmitri London, a player who created a stir in the early 80s with some flashy wins over strong players – but then “retired”, I suppose, probably by simply entering the workforce.

IM M. Ginsburg – NM D. London NY State Masters 1982
1. c4 Nf6 2. Nc3 g6 3. e4 d6 4. d4 Bg7 5. Nf3 O-O 6. Be2 e5 7. O-O Nc6 8. d5 Ne7 9. b4 Nh5 10. c5!? (Kramnik later popularized 10. Re1) 10…Nf4!? 11. Bxf4 exf4 12. Rc1 a5 13. a3 axb4 14. axb4 Kh8 15. Qd2 Ng8 16. Rfe1 f5 17. Bd1!? Nf6 18. cxd6 cxd6 19. exf5 Bxf5 20. Nd4 Qd7 21. Qxf4! (Safe!) 21…Bd3 22. Qd2 Bc4 23. Ne6 Rfc8 24. Bf3 b5 25. h3 Ra3 26. Nxg7 Kxg7 27. Qd4 Re8 28. Ne4 Re5 29. Nxf6 Kxf6 30. Bg4 Qa7 31. Qf4+ Black resigns 1-0.  

The reader may be wondering about the leap 10…Nf4!? – is it necessary?  No, the move 10…f7-f5 is also possible.

Here’s an example:

IM Aries2 – NM WaShiHwanNi  ICC Blitz 2007 

1. Nf3 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. Nc3 Bg7 4. e4 d6 5. d4 O-O 6. Be2 e5 7. O-O Nc6 8. d5 Ne7 9. b4 Nh5 10. c5 f5 11. Nd2 Nf6 12. f3 f4 13. Nc4 g5 14. a4 (White is faster in this race on opposite wings) 14…Ng6 15. Ba3 Rf7 16. b5 Bf8 17. b6! (A thematic breakthrough; black is lost) 17…axb6 18. cxb6 h5 19. Nb5 Ne8 20. bxc7 Nxc7 21. Nbxd6 Once the bastion on d6 falls, the rest is carnage. 21…Rg7 22. Nxc8 Rxc8 23. d6 Ne8 24. Qd5+ Kh7 25. Nxe5 Nxe5 26. Qxe5 Nf6 27. Qf5+ Kh8 28. Rac1 Black resigns 1-0

And we’ve already seen this subvariation 9…Nh5 10. c5!? Nf4!? in the famous M. Ginsburg – I. Gurevich “Pawn Box” game in another post.  I also had it in a game versus NM Glenn Lambert, Lloyds Bank 1978 as reported in a Lloyds Bank nostalgia post.

Another quite original idea is aries2- IM Roberto Paramos (xadrezgalego), ICC Blitz 2007, which saw 9…Ne8!? 10. c5 f5 11. Nd2 a5!? 12. cxd6 Nxd6! (behold the value of 9…Ne8!) 13. bxa5 Rxa5 with complex play. That game was eventually drawn.

But let’s see the thoroughly modern December 2007 blitz game with the newfangled 9….a5!? first.

10. bxa5 Rxa5 11. a4 c5!? 12. Nd2 Nd7 13. Nb3

According to chessgames.com Openings Explorer feature (a ‘premium’ feature for those members who want ‘to go to 11’ [cf. Spinal Tap movie]), 13. Nb5!? has been seen in a few recent games with mixed results.   In this game, I innovate by dispensing with the leap Nc3-b5. It’s not clear how useful that is, anyhow.   Just to give one example of 13. Nb5!?:   13. Nb5 Ra6 14. Ra3 Kh8 15. Qc2 f5 16. exf5 gxf5 17. Nf3 h6 18. Nh4 e4 19. f3 exf3 20. Raxf3 Ne5 21. Rg3 Kh7 and white had some edge and went on to win a sharp game, Gulko-Reinderman, Las Vegas FIDE World Ch. 1999.

13…Ra6 14. a5 f5 15. f3 f4 16. g4!?   The move g2-g4 is seen in other King’s Indian lines, in particular 9. Ne1 variations. White doesn’t want to sit and wait passively for a pawn storm to swamp his kingside.  Philosophically, does white have the “right” to create some holes on the kingside in exchange for the obvious claims to some space?  Can the bottled up rook on a6 justify this ambitious scheme? 

bayo2.png

Position after 16. g4!?  What’s going on? 

16…h5 17. h3 g5 18. Bd2 Ng6 19. Be1 Nf6 20. Kg2 Nh4+

The situation is very sharp. White loses his useful dark square bishop but maintains a king side blockade. 

21. Bxh4 gxh4 22. Qe1 Nh7 23. Na4 Qg5 24. Nb6 Rxb6 25. axb6 Nf6 26. Kh2(!) Sidestepping problems. The sacrifice introduced by black on move 24 may be insufficient.

26… hxg4 27. hxg4 Bxg4 28. Rg1 Qh6 29. Nd2 Bh5 30. Ra7 Rf7 31. Qxh4 Kh7 32. Qg5! This simplification wins.

32…Bg6+ 33. Qxh6+ Bxh6 34. Rga1 Nh5 35. Rxb7!

A typical blitz finale. Black gives up as 35….Rxb7 36. Ra7 wins for white. 

1-0

I am going to add to this post and introduce the historical 1982 Biyiasis material, as well as other topical games in this 9…a5!? defensive line.  Interestingly, I could not find the Biyiasis game (Philadelphia Swiss) in the usual Chessbase databases – yet another game from the past that this column will “contribute” to future databases.

The Fabulous 00s: More Defending vs. The Keres Attack

December 14, 2007

I will be discussing this variation in my upcoming DVD series, “Thinking Your Way to Chess Mastery in the Opening.” My first disc will cover the Keres Attack, playing White versus the Hedgehog, and playing White in the Bayonet Attack, King’s Indian Defense.

IM D. Pruess – IM Aries2 ICC 5-minute Blitz Dec. 2007

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 e6 6. g4 Nc6!?

keresstart.png

Position after 6…Nc6!? – An Unusual Defense to the Keres Attack

There’s something very logical looking about this move. 6…h6 gives white a lever for a later g4-g5. And the older 6…a6, once the most popular, has been convincingly shown to be too slow. So that leaves 6…Be7 (similar to the text) and the very risky 6…e5?! which we will cover in another installment. For more on 6…Nc6, see my first article (the GM Vogt game).

7. g5 Nd7 8. f4?!

This looks a little premature. 8. Be3 or 8. h4 are normal.

8. Rg1 is also possible. This was tested in another interesting ICC blitz game. It is possible to learn from these games, as I especially find out after analyzing blown opportunities such as the following:

NM Jefferson – IM Aries2 ICC 5-minute, December 2007.

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 e6 6. g4 Nc6 7. g5 Nd7 8. Rg1 Nde5! Our thematic regrouping. 9. Be3 Na5 10. b3 Nac6! Returning now that the b2-b3 weakness was induced. 11. f4 Nxd4 12. Bxd4 Nc6 13. Bb5 Bd7 14. Bxc6 bxc6 15. Qd3 c5 16. Be3 Qa5 17. Bd2 Rc8 18. f5 c4! Black is fine. 19. Qf3 cxb3 20. cxb3 When white recaptures this way, you know black is doing well. 20…Qe5 21. O-O-O Be7 22. Kb1?! First of all, 22. f6?! gxf6 23. h4 fxg5 24. hxg5 a5 25. Kb2 a4 26. Rc1 axb3 27. axb3 Rb8 is very bad for white. The difficult 22 Kb2! is correct; 22…exf5 23. Rgf1 d5 24. exf5 d4 25. Ne4 Bc6 26. Rfe1 d3+ 27. Kb1 O-O 28. Qg4 Bxe4 29. Rxe4 Qc7 is about equal) 22… O-O 23. Rc1 d5?! (23… exf5! 24. Nd5 Bd8 is just good for black, e.g. 25. Rxc8 Bxc8 26. exf5 Bxf5+ 27. Kc1 Qa1 mate) 24. f6 Ba3! 25. fxg7 Qxg7 26. exd5 Bxc1? An instructive lapse. Black should keep attacking with 26…exd5 27. Qxd5 Rfd8 28. Qe4 Rc5 29. Ka1 Bf5 30. Qe2 Rcd5 31. Bf4 Rc8 32. Rg3 Rdc5! and this nice switch-back costs white decisive material. In the game, after 27. Rxc1 exd5 28. Nxd5 Rxc1+ 29. Bxc1 Be6?? 30. Ne7+ Kh8 31. Bb2 f6 32. Bxf6 Rxf6 33. Qxf6 white even won. Yuck! 1-0.

Now back to the main game after 8. f4?!

8…h6! Is this a TN?

keresh6.png

8…h6!? – TN or not?

I could not find this logical reply in ChessBase. Black exploits the trick that 9. gxh6? Qh4+ is just bad for white (10. Bf2? Qxf4). Playable is the similar 8… Nxd4 9. Qxd4 h6! 10. Be3 hxg5 11. fxg5 Ne5 and black is comfortable. For example, 12. O-O-O a6 13. Bf4 b5 (not 13… Qc7?? 14. Bxe5 dxe5 15. Nb5!! and wins) 14. h4 Nc6 15. Qd3 b4 16. Ne2 e5 17. Be3 Bg4 18. g6 Qd7 19. Qd5 fxg6 20. Bh3 Bxh3 21. Rxh3 b3 22. Rf3 bxc2 23. Rdf1 Rb8 24. Rf7 Nb4 25. Qb3 Qh3 and things are really murky.

9. Nf3 The sacrifice 9. Nxe6!? fxe6 10. Qh5+ comes to mind. Black is going to be forced to switch his king and queen’s start positions in a weird sequence. After 10…Ke7 11. Be3
Qe8 12. Qh3 Kd8 13. O-O-O Kc7 14. Nb5+ Kb8 15. Nxd6 is refuted by 15… Bxd6 16. Rxd6 hxg5 and black wins. On other white 15th moves, black is better but not completely winning. So the sacrifice 9. Nxe6 is really deserving a “?!” instead.

9… hxg5 Sensible is 9… Be7 10. g6 (10. Be3 hxg5 11. Nxg5 a6 with a decent game) 10… Bh4+ 11. Ke2 O-O 12. Qxd6 Qb6! – a peculiar, imaginative, and nice gambit idea. Black has good attacking chances. For example, 13. gxf7+ Rxf7 14. Kd1 Nc5 15. Qd2 Rd7 16. Bd3 Bf6.

10. Nxg5 a6 Very interesting is 10… Qb6 11. Nb5 Nb4 12. a3 Na6 13. Qe2 Nc7
14. Be3 Qa5+ 15. c3 Nxb5 16. Qxb5 Qxb5 17. Bxb5 a6 and black is fine.

11. Be3 b5 12. Bg2 Bb7 13. Qe2 Qa5 14. O-O b4 15. Nb1 Be7 16. Nd2 Qc7 Very playable is 16… Bxg5 17. Nc4 Qc7 18. fxg5 Nce5 – this is nice and solid and nice for black.

17. f5 The sharpest try but black has an adequate response.

17…d5! A thematic line-opener to try to get at white’s king. Black attacks the h2 pawn.

pru_f5.png

Position after 17…d5!? – Very Sharp.

18. Bf4 Bd6?? The text should have been a losing blunder. An amazing resource is 18… Nd4!! – showing that unusual and very strong moves are possible even in the opening.

pru_nd4.png

Position after 18…Nd4!! (analysis)

First we dismiss 19. Qf2?? Qxf4! 20. Qxf4 Ne2+ (the point!) and black wins; the WN on g5 is dangling. And if 19. Bxc7 (19. Qe3 is bad – 19…Bxg5 20. Bxg5 Qxh2+ 21. Kf2 Nxc2 22. Qg3 dxe4 and black wins; if 19. Qd3 e5 20. Be3 Nc5 and again black wins) 19…Nxe2+ 20. Kf2 Nd4 21. fxe6 fxe6 22. Ngf3 Nxc2 or 22…Nxf3 and black wins. So as strange as it seems, 18….Nd4!! wins in all lines!

19. Nxf7? The wrong sacrifice. The game goes from a white win to a draw in terms of evaluation. The right move, 19. fxe6 is crushing: 19…Bxf4 20. exf7+ Ke7 21. exd5+ Be5 22. dxc6 and black has to give up.

19… Kxf7 20. fxe6+ Kg8 Now it is about equal.

21. Bxd6 Qxd6 22. exd5? A losing mistake. Correct is 22. exd7 Qxh2+ 23. Kf2 Qh4+ (23… Nd4 24. Qd3) 24. Kg1 Qh2+ with a perpetual.

22… Qxh2+ 23. Kf2 Nd4 (23… Qh4+ 24. Kg1 Nd4 25. Qd3 Ne5! When the knights dance like this, the party is over for white. For example, 26. Qe4 Qh2+ 27. Kf2 Rh4 28. Nf3 Nexf3.

24. Qe4 Rf8+ 25. Ke1 Nf6 Correct is 25… Rh4 to involve everything in the attack. This move wins easily.

26. Qxd4 Qxg2 27. e7 Re8 28. d6 Rh2 29. Nc4 29. Qe3 was”relatively best” but with a little care black can destroy white’s passed pawns: 29… Bc8 30. Rf2 Qg1+ 31. Nf1 Rxf2 32. Qxf2 Qxf2+ 33. Kxf2 Ne4+ does the trick.

29… Qe2# 0-1

Here’s another one, played February 11, 2008 (also on ICC).

GM Dejan Pikula (“Kipi”) – aries2 ICC 5-minute, February 2008

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 e6 6. g4 Nc6 7. g5 Nd7 8. Rg1

I direct readers to my Foxwoods 2008 post for a discussion of a game I had as black vs GM Becerra starting from this point.

8…Nde5 For some reason, in the Foxwoods 2008 game, I played 8…Nb6?! (more passive) against Becerra.  I gained a draw only with difficulty.

9. Rg3!? A very rare sideline. We have an example here with 9. Nb3. Black can respond 9… h6!? 10. gxh6 g6 11. Bg5 and now a very funny line here is 11… f6! 12. Bd2 Bxh6 13. f4 f5!! 14. fxe5 Qh4+ 15. Ke2 Qh5+ 16. Kf2 Qh4+ forcing a draw, since 17. Rg3?? f4 wins for black. In the game, black played 11…Qb6? and lost in 34 moves, Kedziora,C-Merz,H/Goch 1991.

pikula1.png

Position after 9. Rg3!? – A Rare Sideline

9… Nxd4 It might be stronger to wait with 9… Be7 10. h4 O-O 11. Be3 Na5!? 12. b3 d5 13. Qd2 Nac6 14. Nxc6 bxc6 15. O-O-O Qa5 16. Kb1 Bb4 and black is all right.

10. Qxd4 Nc6 11. Qd1 Putting the queen offside with 11. Qa4 Bd7 12. Be3 a6 13. a3 b5 14. Qb3 Be7 15. O-O-O Na5 16. Qa2 , although a computer line, looks very strange.

11… a6 12. Be3 Be7? Correct is 12… b5 13. a3 Qa5 14. Qd2 b4 15. Ne2 Bd7 16. Nd4 Rb8 17. Be2 Be7 18. h4 O-O 19. Kf1 Nxd4 20. Bxd4 e5 21. Ba7 Rb7 and black is OK.

13. Qh5! g6 14. Qh6 Qa5 15. Qg7 Not the best. White should wait for this and play 15. O-O-O Bf8 16. Qh4 b5 17. Kb1 b4 18. Ne2 Be7 19. f4 Bb7 20. Nd4 and he has an edge.

15… Qe5 16. Qxe5 dxe5

pik2.png

Position after 16…dxe5. White should eliminate black’s two bishops.

17. O-O-O?! Another inaccuracy. White should play 17. Na4! b5 18. Nb6 Rb8 19. Nxc8 Rxc8 20. c3 Na5 21. a4 Nc4 22. axb5 axb5 23. Bxc4 bxc4 24. Kd2! and nurse a small edge in the ending – the queenside pawn majority will prove troublesome.

17… b5! Ruling out Na4 to b6.

18. h4 h6 19. f4 Black can handle 19. gxh6 Bf8 20. h5 gxh5 21. h7 Rxh7 22. Rg8 f6 23. Bc5 Ne7.

19… hxg5 20. hxg5 exf4 21. Bxf4 Bb7 22. Re1?! Safer is 22. Bg2.

22… O-O-O! Of course! Now black has a big initiative.

23. Bd3 Rh4 24. Rf1 Rxf4 It’s more practical to wait and play 24… Bc5 25. a3 Bd4.

25. Rxf4 Bd6 26. Rgf3 Stronger is 26. Ne2 Bxf4+ 27. Nxf4 Ne5 28. Rh3 and white is holding.

26… Bxf4+ 27. Rxf4 Ne5 A beautiful horse!

28. Kd2 Rh8 29. Ke3 Rh5 30. Be2 Rxg5 31. Kf2 f5 32. a4 b4 33. Na2 a5 34. c3 Bxe4 The rest is not hard.

35. cxb4 Rg2+ 36. Ke1 g5 37. Rf2 Rg1+ 38. Kd2 If 38. Rf1 Rxf1+ 39. Kxf1 Bd5 and black wins.

38… g4 39. bxa5 g3 40. Rf1 Rxf1 41. Bxf1 g2 41… f4 42. Nc3 f3! wins too.

42. Bxg2 Bxg2 43. b4 f4 44. a6 Nc4+ 45. Ke2 e5 46. b5 e4 47. Nb4 e3 48. a5 f3+ 49. Kd3 f2 50. Kxc4 f1=Q+ 51. Kc5 e2 52. b6 e1=Q 53. b7+ Bxb7 54. axb7+ Kxb7 0-1

How Fearsome is the Keres Attack?

November 6, 2007

I have always wondered how to best meet the primitive move of Paul Keres, the audacious 6. g4!? in the Sicilian Scheveningen. This is a very interesting question; it greatly depends on the temperment of the two players. For example, if white is one-dimensional (attack-only) the answer might be quite different than a white player who is more positionally sophisticated. Likewise, is black yearning to counter-attack or is he content, à la Ulf Andersson, to slowly accumulate positional advantages?  Before we start, I refer interested readers to a postage stamp featuring Mr. Keres!

Let’s examine these issues in a crazy game I played as black in the Swiss “A” Team League vs. GM Lothar Vogt.

GM L Vogt (Biel) – IM Mark Ginsburg (Riehen)    2000

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 e6 6. g4!?

keres1.png

Is it just me, or does this move look weakening?  Maybe I am being too Soviet here (“pawns do not move backward”).  One of the key squares weakened is f4.   Maybe black can get a knight there later?  Maybe black can interfere with white castling long (make him castle short) and then exploit the overextended kingside pawns? Strangely, as a junior playing white, I saw no objection to 6. g4 and played it a lot – scoring both a win and a loss versus NM John Meyer when very young. White’s agenda is clear – g4-g5 and further space gaining.  If 6…h6, black has slowed white down a little bit but he’s given white a “lever” that might help the future pawn storm. Let’s focus on the less usual methods that avoid 6…h6.

6…Nc6!?  An interesting suggestion in the old book by Kasparov and Nikitin on the Scheveningen. Black plans Nc6xd4 at some point followed, usually, by a timely …e6-e5.  This is particularly effective if white has played f2-f4.

 7. g5 Nd7 8. Be3  Logical.  A very natural alternative (but one that does not develop!) is 8. h4.  Black can then respond with 8…Nxd4 or 8…Be7 or even the provocative 8…Nde5!? aiming to exchange off a pair of knights to lessen the defensive burden.  The first one appears rather weak but the other two are more playable.  Let’s take a look.

A. Not equalizing is 8. h4 Nxd4?! 9. Qxd4 Ne5 10. Be2 Nc6 11. Qd3 Ne5 12. Qg3 Bd7 13. f4 Nc6 14. Be3 Qa5 15. O-O-O Rc8 16. a3 and white is better.

B.  8. h4 Be7 9. Be3 Qc7 10. Qd2 a6 11. O-O-O with a small edge.

C. The most principled try is 8. h4 Nde5!? 9. Be2 a6 10. Be3 Na5 11. f4 Nec4 12. Bc1 Qb6 with murky play.  White can also play 9. Nb3, avoiding the knight exchange. Then we have this example game:  8….Nde5 9. Nb3 Be7!  10. f4 Ng6 11. Qd2 h6 12. gxh6 Bh4+ 13. Bf2 Rxh6  Black is fine here. 14. O-O-O Bxf2 15. Qxf2 Qh4 16. Qxh4 Rxh4 17. Nb5 Kf8 18. f5 (18. Nxd6 Nxf4 is about level) 18… exf5 19. exf5 Bxf5 20. Nxd6 Bg4 21. Rd2 Bf3 22. Rg1 Nce5 23. Bg2 (Relatively best is 23. Nd4 Rf4 24. c3 Rd8 25. N6f5 Nc6 26. Bb5 Rd5 27. Rxg6 fxg6 28. Ne6+ Kf7 29. Nxf4 Rxd2 30. Kxd2 gxf5) 23… b6 24. Nd4 Bxg2 25. Rgxg2 Rf4 and black drew the game eventually,  1/2-1/2 Willumsen,H-Larsen,O/Aarhus 1989/EXT 1998

In this line, rather dubious is 8….Nde5 9. Nb3 Na5?! (as above, 9…Be7! is correct and not the time-wasting text) 10. Nxa5 Qxa5 11. f4 Nc6 12. Qd2 a6 13. O-O-O Be7 14. Qf2 Qc7 15. Bb6 Qb8 (white has a huge edge; I just provide the rest for tragi-comedy) 16. h4 O-O 17. f5 Bd8 18. Be3 b5 19. f6 Ne5 20. fxg7 Re8 21. Bd4 Qc7 22. Ne2 Bb7 23. Ng3 Rc8 24. Kb1 d5 25. Bd3 Nc6 26. Bc3 d4 27. Bd2 Ne5 28. Bf4 Nxd3 29. cxd3 Qd7 30. Rdf1 b4 31. Bd2 a5 32. g6 hxg6 33. h5 g5 34. h6 f5 35. Rh5 Ba6 36. Qe2 f4 37. Bxf4 gxf4 38. Rxf4 (Poor GM Kindemann!  Time trouble? He misses a forced mate with the elegant 38. h7+ Kxg7 39. h8=Q+! Rxh8 40. Qg4+ Kf7 41. Qxf4+ Ke7 42. Rh7+!! Rxh7 43. Qf8 mate) 38… Rc1+!!  A stunning black defense that must have shocked the Grandmaster. 39. Kxc1 Qc7+ 40. Kb1 Qxf4 41. Rh3 Kh7 42. Nh5 Qf7 43. Rf3?  (And now white even loses). 43…Qxh5 44. Rf8 Qxe2 45. g8=Q+ Kxh6 46. Qh8+ Kg5 47. Qg7+ Kh4 48.Qh6+ Kg3 49. Qg6+ Kh3 0-1 and black pulled off an improbable and very lucky upset, Kindermann,S (2500)-Dietze,W (2290)/Germany 1991/GER-chT.  I could not find this fiasco on chessgames.com.

 8…Be7?!  Very interesting is 8…Nde5!? here, carrying out the principal idea without delay. 

keres3.png 

Position after 8…Nde5!? (Analysis) 

For example, 9. Be2 Na5!? 10. f4 Nec4 11. Bc1 (11. Bf2!?) 11…d5! with a very unclear game where black has sufficient chances.  

If white decentralizes tries the interesting 9. Nb3 avoiding exchanges, 

keresnb3.png 

Position After 9. Nb3 – This might be pretty good 

black has the simple 9…Be7 10. f4 Ng6! with a reasonable game. The knight is well placed on g6 observing the weak squares that white’s 6th move created.  For example, 11. Qd2 h6! 12. gxh6 Bh4+ and black is fine, as was shown in Willumsen-O. Larsen 1/2, Aarhus 1989.  But 11. Qd2 looks weak; see the next paragraph for an improvement; namely 11. h4!  – in retrospect, 9. Nb3 might be good. This needs further work.

December 2007 note: recently I had the opportunity to test this line versus GM BOOrrj on ICC in a 5-minute game.

GM BOOrrj – Aries2  ICC 5-Minute, 12/28/07

9.  Nb3 Be7 10. f4 Ng6 11. h4! and this indeed is critical. White wants to swamp black and punish the unusual N on g6.  The game went: 11….h6 12. Qf3 and I could find nothing better than 12…hxg5 13. hxg5 Rxh1 14. Qxh1 and white obviously has an edge. This line needs revisiting.

 9. Rg1!? is another logical try.  9. Rg1 Nxd4 10. Bxd4 Nc6 11. Be3 Qa5! is a good move.  There might follow 12. Qd2 Be7 13. h4 O-O 14. O-O-O Rb8! Another good move to get the rook behind the battering b-pawn ram. 15. Kb1 b5 16. h5 b4 17. Ne2 Bb7 18. g6 b3!! A tactical motif well worth remembering.  Black has dynamic equality after 19. Qxa5 bxc2+.

9. h4 O-O 10. Qe2!?  White also has 10. Qd2 here but after 10…Nde5 black has no particular problems.  For example, 10. Qd2 Nde5! 11. Be2 (white has to watch the N fork on f3) 11…Na5! 12. b3 (what else?) Nac6 and black forced white into a rather ugly concession. 

The eagle-eyed reader would have noticed by now another path. Completely different is the surprisingly strong gambit line 10. g6! and white gets a strong attack after 10…hxg6 11. h5 g5 12. h6!.  Black can also defend with 10. g6!? Nde5, but after 11. gxh7+ Kh8 12. Rg1 it is looking very good for white.  Conclusion: the game move 8…Be7 is inaccurate and black would be better off with 8…Nde5 which needs practical tests.

10…Nxd4 11. Bxd4 e5   This is very commital, of course. Black gives away d5 to commence active operations.

There is the interesting (a little crazy, but interesting) gambit 11… b5!? here to scare white away from the natural plan of castling queenside. There might follow 12. Nxb5 Ba6 (Also possible is 12… Qa5+ 13. Nc3 or 13. Bc3) 13. a4 and white looks to be better, but this is a good blitz try. Black will enjoy some open lines.

The slower 11… a6 12. O-O-O b5 13. g6 fxg6 14. Bh3 Nb6 15. e5 d5 16. Qg4 Nc4 17. h5 b4 18. Ne2 g5 19. h6 g6 20. Qg3 a5 21. c3 gives white some edge.

12. Be3 Nb6 Following Nikitin and Kasparov to prepare Be6 and Rc8 and temporarily guard d5.

13. Bh3  White can play 13. O-O-O; but there are tricks. Here is an example of a pitfall line, 13…Be6 14. Rg1 Rc8 (Obvious intentions) 15. h5? Rxc3! 16. bxc3 Nc4! and black is much better after the forced and sad 17. Qf3 Qa5 18. Bxc4 Bxc4 with a huge attack.  And note that 15. Nd5? Nxd5 16. exd5 Bf5! is also very good for black. Thus black is not too afraid of 13. O-O-O.

13…Be6?!  A very cool tactical break-out here and a great blitz try is 13… d5!!?

 keres2.png

Position after 13….d5!!?  (Analysis) 

14. Bxb6! (Note that 14. Bxc8? Qxc8 15. exd5 Ba3!! is very good for black!) 14…Qxb6 15. O-O-O! (The best reaction, other moves give nothing) 15…d4 16. Nd5 Qc5 17. Rdg1 Be6?! (nobody likes to play the more passive 17… Kh8 18. Bxc8 Raxc8 19. Rh3 f5 20. gxf6 Bxf6 21. h5 Rc6 and white is a bit better) 18. Nf6+! Kh8 19. Qh5 gxf6 20. Bxe6 d3 21. Bb3 Qxf2 and black is hanging on but it’s not a lot of fun.

14. g6! Our familiar gambit line is still good. Black has to play and pretend that everything is in order, but in reality white has a huge edge.

14…hxg6 15. Bxe6 fxe6 16. h5 Most accurate is 16. O-O-O! Qe8 17. Qg4 Rf6 18. Bg5 Rxf2 19. Qxe6+ Kf8 20. Qg4 and white has a big initiative.

16… gxh5 17. Rxh5?! Here, 17. Qxh5! Nc4 18. O-O-O Nxe3 19. Rdg1! Bf6 20. fxe3 Qe8 21. Rg6 is very strong and really too much for black to handle.

 17… Rc8 18. O-O-O  A good alternative here is 18. Qg4! Qd7 19. O-O-O Nc4 20. Rh6 Bf6 21. Nd5 Nxe3 22. fxe3 with a big white plus.

18… Bf6 19. Qg4 Kf7 20. Bg5  The obvious 20. Rh7 Nc4 21. Bh6 Rg8 22. Rd3 with a big attack is too strong.  However, white hasn’t done anything wrong yet – see the note to his next move.

20… Rh8 21. Rd3? Now white misses a really crushing shot. 21. Nb5! is very hard to handle. 21… Nc4 22. b3 a6 23. Na7 Ra8 24. bxc4 Rxa7 25. Bxf6 gxf6 26. Rxd6! and white wins.

21… Rxh5 22. Qxh5+ Kg8 23. Bxf6 Qxf6 24. Qe2?  Another bad miscue. 24. Rxd6! Rf8 25. Kb1 Qxf2 26. Rd1 Nc4 27. Rh1 Ne3 28. Ne2 Nf1 29. a3 Nd2+ 30. Ka2 Nf3 31. Nc3 Qxc2 32. Qg6 and white is better.

24… Qg5+ 25. Kb1  Now black is completely OK.

25…Rxc3?!!  This move was not necessary.  Black is fine after the safe and sound 25… Rc6 26. Nb5 d5 27. Nxa7 Rc4 28.exd5 exd5 29. Rg3 Rh4 30. a3 Qf4 31. Qb5 Rh6 and even has winning chances due to his superior coordination. White’s knight is sadly offside. 

26. bxc3 Na4  Yes, this looks optically great for black.  But there is no KO.

27. Qd1 d5  Black gains nothing from 27…Qh4 28. Ka1 Qxf2 29. Rxd6.

28. Ka1 Nb6   The attacking 28… Qe7 29. exd5 (white also has the simple 29. Qh5! and the black queen cannot move off of the defense of e8) 29…Qa3!? can be met by 30. Qb1 e4 31. Rh3 e3 32. Rxe3 Nxc3 33. d6! Nxb1 34. Rxa3 Nxa3 35. d7 and wins.

29. Rg3 Qf4 30. Qg1 Qf7  Playable is 30… Qf6 31. Rg6 Qf7 and black holds.

31. Rh3 dxe4  Natural and good was 31… Qf4 with a solid game.

32. Qg4 Qf5  Perfectly good is 32… Nd5 33. Qh5 Qxh5 34. Rxh5 Nxc3 35. Rxe5 Kf7 36. Kb2 Nd1+ 37. Kc1 Nxf2 38. Kd2 b6 and black has enough pawns to bother white – the chances are balanced.   The weird computer-y move 32…Nd7 is also OK: 33. Qxe4 Qxf2 is equal.

33. Rg3 Qxg4??  Awful.  Mild time trouble was no excuse.  Black holds on after 33… Qf6 or 33… Qf7 34. Rg1 Nd5 35. Qxe4 Qxf2 36. Re1 Kf7 37. Qxe5 Qf5. The exchange of queens is clearly suicide.

34. Rxg4 Now white wins easily.

34…Kf7 35. Rxe4 Kf6 36. Rb4 Kf5 37. c4 g5 38. c5 Nd7 39. Rxb7
Nxc5 40. Rxa7 g4 41. Rc7 Ne4 42. a4 Kf6 43. a5 Nxf2 44. a6 g3 45. Rc3 1-0

Very sad.  But let the investigation of defending the Keres Attack without ….h6 begin!

3 Decades of a Variation

October 1, 2007

I have always been interested in sidelines, particularly in Gruenfeld structures. Here are two games spanning 27 years on the same theme.

Let’s start with the happier, and more recent, game.

IM M. Ginsburg – NM Ralph Zimmer

North American Open, Las Vegas, NV 12/28/05

1. c4 c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Nc3 g6 (?!) Purists believe this move order is slightly inaccurate. However, it might not be true – see the Ibragimov game mentioned in the note to the 8th move and if you believe in black’s position, try it out. The text gets ?! in some books, but it may not be necessarily so.

4. e3! Nf6 The text is correct, preparing a Gruenfeld-like d7-d5 advance. A further inaccuracy, which is important to mention because it occurs frequently, is 4….Bg7?!. White then plays the simple 5. d4 cxd4 6. exd4 d6 7. d5! and stands seriously better. For example, 7…Ne5 8. Nxe5 Bxe5 9. Bd3 Bd7 10. O-O Nf6 11. h3 O-O 12. Be3 a6 13. Rc1 Bd7 14. Na4! b5 15. Nb6 Rb8 16. Nxd7 Nxd7 17. cxb5 axb5 18. b4! with a nice bind, M. Ginsburg-Gilruth, Harry Nelson Pillsbury Open New England, 1987. White duly won in 46 moves.

5. d4 cxd4 5…d6 6. d5! with a small white edge is playable.

 

In 1989 I faced Senior Master S.C. Sahu (2417) at the Manhattan Chess Club and had a pleasant experience: 6. d5 Ne5 (6…Ng8 just admits opening failure) 7. Nxe5 Bxe5 8. e4 Nf6 9. Bd3 Ng4? The Rybka-approved line, 9…Bd7 10. O-O Qb6!? 11. h3 O-O, looks highly unnatural but the text is simply bad. 10. h3 Nf6 11. Bh6 Rg8 12. Qd2 Qa5 13. f4 Bd4 14. Nb5! Bf2+ 15. Ke2 Qxd2+ 16. Kxd2 Kd8 17. e5 Ne8 18. Rhf1 a6 19. Nxd6! White wins easily. 19…Nxd6 20. Rxf2 Nf5 21. Bg5 h6 22. Bxf5 gxf5 23. Bxh6 f6 24. d6 Be6 25. dxe7+ Kxe7 26. exf6+ Kf7 27. Bg5 Rad8+ 28. Kc3 Rd4 29. b3 Rgd8 30. Re1 b5 31. Rfe2 R8d6 32. g4 bxc4 33. gxf5 Rd3+ 34. Kb2 c3+ 35. Ka3 Bxf5 36. Re7+ Kg6 37. Rg7+ Kh5 38. f7 Rd8 39. Bxd8 Rxd8 40. Rg8 1-0

 

6. exd4 d5 7. cxd5 Nxd5 8. Bc4 Nxc3? It is this move that is seriously wrong. Here, 8…Nb6 is the only correct move in my opinion. Play might proceed 9. Bb3 Bg7 10. Be3!? (10. d5 Na5 is nothing) 10…O-O 11. O-O Na5 12. Bc2 Nac4 13. Bg5!? with murky play, Ibragimov-Kedrov, Moscow 1996. Black lost this game, but he’s OK here and only lost via blunders in the middlegame.

9. Qb3!

zimm1.png

The first important moment. The zwischenzug text is accurate, because 9…Ne4? 10. Bxf7+ Kd7 11. Qe6+ and 12. Qxe4 is clearly out of the question. I had this game in a 1993 USATE playoff and won easily. The position is very good for white.

9…e6 10. bxc3 Na5 10…Bd7 11. Bb5! (or 11. Bd3 right away, for example 11…Qb6 12. O-O Qxb3 13. axb3 Bg7 14. Ba3 and white is much better, and won, in Charbonneau-Tan, Oropesa del Mar 2001) 11…a6 12. Be2 Na5 13. Qc2 b5 14. O-O is very good for white. In the next game, we will see the semi-insane “gambit” 10….Bd7 11. d5??! (THEORETICAL LEMON, TL) Na5 12. dxe6 relying on the fact that the queen is immune for the time being. However, as we shall see, 12…fxe6 is basically the refutation of this “junior” attack. See the second game for more on this crazy line.

Black can also try 10…Bg7. But after 11. Ba3, stopping castling, white is better. For example, 11…Bf8 (what else?) 12. Bxf8! Kxf8 13. O-O and white is much better. Note for historical purposes the American future GM Ken Rogoff played the fine 12. Bb5!? here and stood better, but lost due to a later blunder vs. the Frenchman Huguet in Malaga 1970. 12. Bb5 was also seen in a drawn Botvinnik-Petrosian game, Moscow 1983. Another good move is 12. O-O! and white also stands better here.

11. Bb5+ Bd7 12. Qa4 Nc6 13. d5! 13. O-O is good for white, and the well motivated attacking text aims for even more. Clearance sacrifices, exposing the enemy king, are always extremely difficult to meet in practical play.

zimm2.png

13…exd5 14. O-O Be7 15. Bh6 f6? A much better try is 15… Qa5 16. Qb3 O-O-O 17. c4 d4 18. Ng5 Bf8 19. Bxf8 Rhxf8 20. c5 Qc7 and black stays afloat. The text weakens e6 severely and could have had fatal consequences in the near-term.

16. Rfe1 Kf7

zimm3.png

17. Qf4? The text looks and is absurd. The best move is extremely simple-minded 17. Rad1!. This position is a good test of attacking abilities. Those with a quick eye will recognize that 17…Be6 is smashed (note in passing that 17…a6 18. Bc4!! dxc4 19. Qxc4+ Ke8 20. Bg7 Rf8 21. Qh4 Rf7 22. Qxh7 Rxg7 23. Qxg7 wins, for example 23…Ne5 24. Qg8+ Bf8 25. Qxg6+ Ke7 26. Nxe5 Be6 27. Qf7+ Bxf7 28. Ng6 mate which is especially gruesome) by 18. Rxe6!! which is completely crushing. Once the white squares fall, the black king is cornered. 18…Kxe6 19. Bc4 and white wins shortly.

17… Bf5 18. Rad1 Bd6 19. Qd2 Ne7 19… Be7 20. Qb2 threatening c4 is very good for white.

20. Nd4 Bg4 21. Rb1 Curiously, 21. Qe3! is strong here.

21…a6 22. Be2 Bc8 23. Bd1 Re8 24. Bb3 Bc5 25. h3?! Here, 25. c4! Bxd4 is met by the surprising zwischenzug 26. cxd5! (26. Qxd4 is also good, but this is stronger) and white is much better.

25… Bxd4 26. Qxd4 Be6?? A bad blunder. Necessary is 26…b5! 27. Rbd1 with a white edge but nothing decisive yet. Now we have yet another tactical exercise with the same solution!

zimm4.png

27. g4?? A blunder in return. 27. Rxe6!!, a thematic blow we’ve already seen above, wins nicely. For example, 27…Kxe6 28. Qe4+ Kf7 29. Rd1! is a very pleasing double pin and black is paralyzed and loses shortly. For example, 29…f5 (equally bad is 29… g5 30. Rxd5 Nxd5 31. Bxd5+ Qxd5 32. Qxd5+ Kg6 33. Bxg5 fxg5 34. Qxb7 and wins) 30. Rxd5! fxe4 31. Rf5 double checkmate is a nice geometric spectacle.

27…Nc6 28. Qf4 Qb8 Now black is right back in the game. Also acceptable is 28… Kg8 29. Re3 g5 30. Qg3 Bf7 31. Rxe8+ Qxe8 32. f4 d4.

29. Qd2 Qd6 The position is about level.

30. Bf4 Qd7? 30…Ne5! is rock solid for equality.

31. Re3 Now, 31. Rxe6! Kxe6 is still a good try: 32. Bg3 Ne5 33. Bxe5 fxe5 34. Bxd5+ Qxd5 35. Rb6+ Qc6 36. Rxc6+ bxc6 37. f4 exf4 38. Qxf4 Re7 39. g5! with some winning chances for white. It stands to reason that white is still blind to this possibility.

31… Kg7 32. Bh6+ 32. Rbe1 Bf7 33. Bh6+ is a small edge to white.

32… Kh8 33. Qe2 Ne5 This is fine. Also fine is 33… Bf7.

34. Re1 Bf7 35. g5 Nc4?! Solid is 35… Kg8 36. gxf6 Nc4 37. Bxc4 Rxe3 38. Qxe3 dxc4 and black is fine.

36. Bxc4? Very weak. 36. Re7! poses some problems for black.

36…Rxe3 37. Qxe3 dxc4?! Another inaccuracy. But black had no time and cannot be criticized. In fact, at this moment, black forfeited on time still a few moves shy of the time control at move 40. A good defense was 37… Re8 38. Qd2 Rxe1+ 39. Qxe1 dxc4 40. gxf6 Qe6 and it’s completely drawn.

1-0

After the weak text, white could find 38. Qb6 Qc6 39. Qxc6 bxc6 40. Re7 Kg8 41. gxf6 a5 42. a4 with a rather unpleasant ending for black.

 

Now let’s go back to my 1978 game in the ECI Youth tournament, Sas Van Gent, Holland. This is the tournament where I met the personable British youth player Suzzane Wood! Note her first name is not misspelled.

M. Ginsburg – NM Erik Pedersen (DEN)

ECI Sas Van Gent, Holland August 1978

1. c4 c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Nc3 g6 4. e3 Nf6 5. d4 cxd4 6. exd4 d5 7. cxd5 Nxd5 8. Bc4 Nxc3 9. Qb3! So far, as above.

9…e6 10. bxc3 Bd7!? Pedersen’s specialty, he played it another European tournament – Groningen 1978 (perhaps later, I’m not sure about that). However, the position is good for white!

11. d5??! THEORETICAL LEMON, TL. 11. Bb5, 11. Be2, and 11. Bd3 are all very good for white. 11. Be2 Na5 12. Qc2 Qc7 13. Ne5! (13. O-O is also good for white) Rc8 14. Bd2? (14. Rb1! or even the simple 14. Nxd7 Qxd7 15. O-O and white is better) 14…Bg7 15. f4? (15. Qe4!) and white even lost with this bad structural weakening, Grinberg-Pederson, Groningen 1978. See the first game for other examples of white doing well here.

12…Na5 12. dxe6 My “amazing point.”

peder1.png

12…fxe6! Oh. He had that? I had “expected” 12…Nxb3?? 13. exf7+ Ke7 14. Bg5+ Kd6 15. Rd1+ Nd4 16. Bxd8 Rxd8 17. Nxd4 and I win easily. A very naive “junior” assessment. The text is the start of a very cold shower.

13. Qd1 What else? This is my “secondary point” – that 13….Nxc4 14. Qd4 “wins the piece back”.

Time for another tactical quiz. What’s black’s best move?

peder2.png

13…Bg7? Wrong. The text is winning (and black did win the rather long, drawn-out ending after 14. Be2 Bxc3+), however black had better: (quiz solution:) 13…Nxc4 14. Qd4 Ba4!! A very unusual and crushing shot! Black can safely leave a couple of pieces hanging. 15. Qxh8 Qd1 mate is unplayable and so is 15. Qxc4 Qd1 mate, so black remains a piece up!

At any rate, black had no problem converting the pawn up ending in about 50 moves (he correctly didn’t accept the exchange sac on a1 and just played an ending with one pawn more).

0-1