Monthly Archives: October 2006

Dr.Dave’s Next Adventures at East Devon

Posted on by

East Devon Update 2001-2006

Well, been a while since I posted one of these.  Dunno who reads them but just for the record…

East Devon Premier 2001  1/4 Something’s rotten…

Well, I’ve never had such a bad start that I qualified for the bye… Something’s not right with my play this year.

Game 1 (1) Cowley,D – Regis,D [A46] 1-0
Game 2 (2) Dunn,A – Regis,D [A46] 1-0
Game 3 (3) Regis,D – Turner,J [A29] 0-1
Bye
Game 5 (4) Regis,D – Parker,J [A15] 1-0

East Devon Premier 2002 1.5/5 No better

This wasn’t hugely more encouraging: it’s not just that I’m losing games, it’s the way I’m losing them that is sometimes discouraging.

Game 5 (5) Regis,D (1744) – Dunn,A (1900) [A26] 1/2-1/2
Game 6 (6) Woodruff,A (1808) – Regis,D (1744) [A40] 1-0
Game 7 (7) Regis,D (1744) – Evans-Quek,S (2160) [A40] 0-1
Game 8 (8) Williams,D (1688) – Regis,D (1744) [C12] 1-0
Game 9 (9) Regis,D (1744) – Ponter,I (1936) [A11] 0-1

East Devon Major 2003 3.5/5 A confidence-booster?

Well, I need to do something to stop the rot, so now that I have a grade low enough to enter a Major or two, perhaps I ought to build myself back up that way.  But it didn’t get off to a good start…

Game 10 (10) Regis – Farina [C24] 0-1
Game 11 (11) Oughton – Regis [A25] 0-1
Game 12 (12) Regis – Dean [D40] 1/2-1/2
Game 13 (13) Sellwood,C – Regis [C12] 0-1
Game 14 (14) Regis – Moreland [A16] 1-0

East Devon Premier 2004 (-)

My partner’s Dad died; first one I’ve missed.

East Devon Premier 2005 1/5 The other tournament from hell…

I was absolutely punch drunk in this tournament, lurching from disaster to disaster.  There were some spells of coherent play but the impression is of someone who can’t hold it together… and sometimes, can’t see as far as the nose on his face.

Game 15 (15) Hutchings,P – Regis,D [C01] 1-0
Game 16 (16) Regis,D – Wright,R [A10] 0-1
Game 17 (17) Taylor,G – Regis,D [C02] 1-0
Game 18 (18) Jepps,G – Regis,D [C00] 1-0
Game 19 (19) Regis,D – Chapman,P [A20] 1-0

East Devon Premier 2006 1.5/5 Some signs of life?

I wouldn’t say this was an unqualified success – in fact, I think it’s the first tournament I’ve played in where I’ve not won a single game – but it feels a bit more together: although I’m still missing things, I’m missing mostly more subtle things, and although I’m still losing games, I don’t think I’m such an easy mark.

Game 20 (20) Regis,D – Helbig,P [A25] 0-1
Game 21 (21) Whymark,D – Regis,D [A37] 1/2-1/2
Game 22 (22) Regis,D – Kneebone,J [A39] 1/2-1/2
Game 23 (23) Page,M – Regis,D [C12] 1/2-1/2
Game 24 (24) Regis,D – Richmond,J [A26] 0-1

Some context

[Did you know I do statistics for a living?]

 

Year White Black vs. 1.e4 Black vs. 1.d4 Score at East Devon Grading performance Grading over year Games played
2001 English Opening, few Bishop’s Opening etc French Defence, a few Modern Defences English Defence 1/4 130 143 28
2002 English Opening, a few more Bishop’s opening etc French Defence, a more few Modern Defences and Sicilians English Defence 1/5 142 144 ?
2003 English Opening French Defence, occasional Sicilian English Defence 3.5/5 (Major) 150 154 31
2004 English Opening French Defence, occasional Sicilian English/Dutch* (-) (-) 163 23
2005 English Opening French Defence, occasional Sicilian English/Dutch, some other experiments 1/5 114 159 31
2006 English Opening French Defence, occasional Sicilian English/Dutch, some other experiments 1.5/5 140 163 24

* Actually, I seem to get rather few people play 1.d4, and if they do, 1…e6 doesn’t always lead to the Dutch, so although theoretically I play the Dutch as Black, I only get one or two a year.

Discussion and conclusions

 

  1. I had a fond idea when starting this section of the website, that I would be able to record my reflections about my play and also, maybe, muse smugly on the improvements seen as a result of all this study and navel-gazing.  The reality has been something else.
  2. I have had some really rather poor form in the early  part of this century which has only just shown signs of recovery.  I have won the Club Championship twice, in 2005 and 2006, which might some measure of success (after 15 years of trying) although I had only one strong player to beat in each year and could as easily be interpreted as evidence of a fall in strength in the club!
  3. I conclude: It is not realistic to expect improvements in your play unless have time to devote to improvement and few other demands on your time and energy.  My knowledge of the game, its history, opening and endgame theory, and so on, is probably more than I need, but I’ve not able to put in the hours thinking through things at the board (at home or in tournaments) that I need to in order to improve.  Sometimes I have come to a chess match and looked at the board almost uncomprehending, for my time and energy have been caught up with work or home matters; at other times I have spent the week before a game doing nothing but work on a chess book, yet come to the board absolutely out of form, for all my thoughts have been about  typefaces and paragraph styles.

Cowley, Dennis – Regis, D.

East Devon Premier, 03/02/2001

A painful loss… I have not a lot of respect for White’s chosen opening, but this is my third loss to the Colle without putting up much of a fight. Thinking there was no danger, I overlooked some fairly basic threats….

1.d4 e6 2.Nf3 c5 3.e3 Nf6 4.c3 b6 5.Bd3 Bb7

[5…Ba6]

6.Nbd2 d5

[6…Nc6 7.e4 cxd4 8.cxd4 Nb4 9.Bb1 Ba6]

7.Ne5 Nbd7 8.f4 Bd6

[8…Be7]

9.O-O Qe7 10.Ndf3 Ne4

[10…a6 is a little more thoughtful.]

11.Bb5 Bxe5 12.Nxe5 Nef6 13.a4 O-O 14.Nxd7 Nxd7 15.f5 exf5 16.Rxf5 Nf6 17.a5 Ne4? White’s idea wasn’t that hard to spot.

[17…Qd6]

 

[17…bxa5 18.Rxa5 c4 19.Qa4 a6 20.Bxa6 Qc7 21.Qb5 Rfb8]

18.a6 Bc8 19.Rxd5 Qh4 20.Qf1 Nf6

[20…Be6 21.Re5 Nd6 22.Bd3 c4 23.Bc2]

21.Rd6 Ne4 22.Bc6 Nxd6 23.Bxa8 cxd4

[23…Bxa6 24.Rxa6 Rxa8 25.dxc5]

24.exd4 Bxa6 25.Rxa6 Rxa8 Black has material equality but no co-ordination.
26.Bf4 Ne4 27.Ra1

[27.d5]

27…g5 28.Be5 g4?? 29.Qf4 Ng5 30.Qf6

1-0

Dunn, Andy – Regis, D.

East Devon Premier, 03/03/2001

 

1.d4 Not again… Andy Dunn is a fine player but I thought he got away with this one. I just got horribly short of time looking for counterplay that wasn’t there…

1…e6 [

1…c5 2.e3

(2.c3 cxd4 3.cxd4 d5) 2…cxd4 3.exd4 d5 4.Bd3

(4.c4) 4…Nc6 5.c3 Qc7 6.Ne2 Bg4 7.Qb3 Bxe2 8.Bxe2 Rd8 9.Bg5 g6 10.Nd2 Bh6 11.h4 Kf8 12.Nf3 Kg7 13.h5 a6 Polgar,J-Karpov,A/Roquebrune 1992/0-1 (62)]

2.Nf3 c5 [2…Nf6]

[2…f5 Cobb,J-Williams,S/It, Cardiff WLS 1997/ – (61)
3.d5]

3.e3 Nf6 4.Bd3 [4.c3 1-0 Cowley,D-Regis,D/East Devon Premier 2001 (29)]

4…b6 5.O-O Be7 6.c4 O-O? 7.d5! Aaron Summerscale’s Killer Chess Opening Repertoire has a lot to answer for.
7…exd5 8.cxd5+/- NCO d6 [8…Bb7 9.Nc3+/- Re8 10.e4]

9.Nc3 Ba6 10.Re1 c4 11.Bc2 Nbd7 12.Nd4 Re8 13.e4 Nc5 14.b4 cxb3 15.axb3 Bb7 [15…Bc8]

16.b4 Ncd7 17.f4 a6 White has a winning game here, achieved with the simplest of means.
18.Bb2 [18.Nf5]

18…Rc8 19.Ra3 86/90m 19…b5 20.e5 dxe5 21.fxe5 Nxd5 [21…Bxb4! Not too hard to spot, even in time trouble.
22.exf6 Bxa3 23.Bxa3 Rxc3]

22.Nxd5 Bxd5 23.Bxh7+ [23.Qd3 Nf8]

23…Kf8 [23…Kxh7 24.Qh5+ Kg8 25.Rh3 f5 26.e6+-]

24.e6 Nf6 [24…Bxb4]

25.exf7 Bxf7 26.Rh3 Bxb4 27.Rxe8+ Qxe8 28.Bf5 Rd8 29.Rh8+ Ng8 Black is holding this, I think.
30.Be6 [30.Bh7]

30…Bc5 31.Kh1 b4 [31…Rd6! 32.Bxf7 Qxf7 33.Qc1 Qf6 34.Nf3-/+]

[31…Bxd4 32.Ba3+]

[31…Rxd4!? was the one he was afraid of while I was thinking, but it’s no good:
32.Bxd4 Bxd4 33.Bxf7 Qxf7 34.Qxd4 Qf1+ 35.Qg1+/-Qf5 36.Rh3 Nf6 37.Ra3 Qe6 38.Qa1+-]

32.Bxf7 Kxf7 33.Qh5+ Kf8 34.Qxc5+ I was bound to allow something like that: these positions are so much easier to play for the attacker at our level.

1-0

Regis, Dave – Turner, Joseph

East Devon Premier, 03/03/2001

A bit of chess blindness – I didn’t play especially well, but enough to keep making the play up to that point.

1.c4 e5 2.g3 Nf6 3.Bg2 d5 4.cxd5 Nxd5 5.Nc3 [5.Nf3 Chiburdanidze,M-Botsari,A/EuT-ch (women), Pula CRO 1997/1-0 (31)]

5…Be6 6.Nf3 Nc6 7.O-O Be7 8.d4 [8.d3 1-0 Stoliar,E-Winter,I/Worishofen 1992 (16)]

[8.b3 Raddatz,W-Kaaber,N/Bargteheide 1989/1-0 (38)]

[8.a3 Schmitt,C-Lajarige,H/FrTCh, Montpellier FRA 1998/1-0 (44)]

8…Nxc3 [8…exd4 1-0 Havlicek,J-Svabensky/Ostrava 1946 (14)]

[8…Bf6 Backe,P-Bjornsson,A/Hallsberg 1982/1-0 (48)]

9.bxc3 e4 [9…exd4 Gulko,B-Sigfusson,S/Reykjavik,ICE 1996/1-0 (41)]

[9…f6 Backe,P-Sunnebjr,A/Hallsberg 1985/1-0 (67)]

10.Ne1 [10.Nd2 1-0 Filip,V-Szabo,F/corr ch-CR 1995 (25)]

[10.Ne5 Bonaldi,P-Cena,J/La Falda ch-ARG jr 1984/1-0 (42)]

10…Bd5 [10…f5 Backe,P-Angqvist,T/Sundsvall 1989/1-0 (38)]

11.Nc2 f5 12.Ne3 g6 13.Nxd5 Qxd5 14.f3 exf3 15.Bxf3 Qd7 16.Rb1 Na5 White has a nice advantage.
17.Bf4 [17.Bxb7 is a nice Bishop, but Black has no light-squared bishop of his own.]

17…Rb8 18.Be5 Rf8 [18…O-O]

19.e4 [19.Qd3]

19…Nc4 20.Qe2 [20.Bf4 g5 21.Bc1+ / -]

20…Nxe5 21.dxe5 f4 22.Bg4 Qc6 23.gxf4 h5 24.Bxh5 Chess blindness: the f-file had been open so long…
[24.Bh3]

24…gxh5 25.Qxh5+ Rf7 …I thought I could play Qxf7!!??
26.Rbe1 Qe6 27.Re2 Kd7 28.Rd2+ Kc6 29.Rd5 [29.Qd1 Qc4 30.Qf3 Bc5+

(30…Rg8+ 31.Kh1 b6 32.f5)

(30…b6 31.f5 Qc5+ 32.Kh1 Qxe5 33.Rd5 Qg7 34.e5+-) 31.Kh1 Be3-/+

]

 

29…Rg8+ 30.Kh1 Qg4 31.Qxg4 Rxg4

0-1

Regis, D. – Parker, John

East Devon Premier, 03/04/2001

After a bye, I would have hated to go away without a win at all… This was an unpretty but determined attempt to go away with at least one.

1.c4 e6 2.g3 Nf6 3.Bg2 Be7 4.Nf3 O-O 5.O-O c6 6.b3 h6 7.d4 d5 8.Nc3 Nbd7 9.Bb2 Rb8 10.Qd3 a6 11.a4 Nh7 12.e4 dxe4 13.Nxe4 f5 14.Nc3 Ng5 15.Rad1 Nxf3+ 16.Qxf3 Nf6 17.Rfe1 Bb4 18.Re2 Bd7 19.Qd3 Qc8 20.Na2 Bd6 21.Rde1 Rf7 22.Nc3 Qf8 White has a comfortable advantage.
23.d5

[23.c5]

23…e5

[23…cxd5 24.cxd5 e5]

24.dxc6

[24.Rd2]

24…bxc6

[24…e4]

25.Rd1 White has nothing here.
25…Bc7 26.Nb1 e4 27.Qc3 Bd6 28.Nd2 Bb4 29.Qc2 Re8 30.Nf1 Bc5 White is getting better…
31.Bd4 Bxd4 32.Rxd4 c5 33.Rd1 Bc6 34.Red2 Rd7 35.Rxd7 Nxd7 36.Ne3 Ne5 37.Nd5 Bxd5 38.cxd5 Qd6 39.h4 g6

[39…Nd3! is very good for Black]

40.Bf1 Nf3+ 41.Kg2 f4 42.Qc4 a5 43.Qb5 Rd8 44.Qxa5

[44.Qc6 Qxc6 45.dxc6 Rxd1 46.c7]

44…fxg3 45.fxg3 Nd4 46.Qc3 Rf8 White has slipped again…
47.b4 Rf3 48.Qe1 Nf5 49.bxc5 Rxg3+ 50.Kh1 Qxc5 51.Bg2 Re3

[51…Rg4- +]

52.Qd2 Rd3 53.Qe1 Ng3+ 54.Kh2 Rxd1 55.Qxd1 Qd6 It’s just a big check.
56.Qg4 Ne2+ 57.Kh1 Ng3+ 58.Kh2

[58.Kg1]

58…e3 59.Qxg3 e2 60.Qxd6 e1=Q 61.Qe6+ Qxe6 62.dxe6 Kf8 63.a5

1-0

Regis, D. (1744) – Dunn, A. (1900)

East Devon Premier, 03/01/2002
Round 1 A good scrap, where we each held the advantage at one point or another.

1.c4 e5 2.g3 Nc6 3.Bg2 g6 4.Nc3 Bg7 5.e4 d6 6.Nge2 Be6 7.d3 Qd7 We were both very happy with the opening variation, Andy has played a lot of Closed Sicilians as White.
8.Nd5 I usually forget to play this move.
8…Nce7 [8…f5 1-0 Westerman,H-De Ruiter,T/corr ch-NLD 1990 (19)]

[8…Nd8 1-0 Franco Ocampos,Z-Mantovani,R/8th Valle d’Aosta Open 2000/The Week in Chess 276 (24)]

[8…h6 Panbukczijan,A-Praszak,M/PZU SA Open 1999/1-0 (44)]

[8…Rc8 Gorbatov,A-Tikhonov,A/Novgorod 1995/1-0 (58)]

[8…Nd4 Dichev,N-Dijoux,F/Open 2000/1-0 (70)]

9.Be3 [9.d4 1-0 Timman,J-Bednarski,J/Dieren 1970 (24)]

[9.O-O Amesz,J-Wortel,M/Lost Boys Open 2000/The Week in Chess 302/1-0 (36)]

[9.h3 De Coverly,R-Dunn,A/Folkestone 1991/1-0 (72)]

9…c6 10.Nxe7 Nxe7 11.Qb3 d5 12.exd5 cxd5 13.O-O O-O 14.Bc5 Rfe8 15.Nc3 [15.Bxe7 dxc4 16.dxc4 Rxe7]

15…dxc4 16.dxc4 Qc7 17.Qa3 Logical but not worth the pawn.
[17.Bxe7 Rxe7

(17…Bxc4 18.Bd6+-) 18.Nd5+/-

]

 

17…Bxc4 18.Rfd1 Nc6 19.b3 Ba6 20.Nd5 Qc8 21.Rac1 Be2 22.Re1 Bg4 23.Bd6 Qf5 24.Ne3 [24.Nc7 Nd4 25.Nxa8 Rxa8

(25…Nf3+ 26.Bxf3 Qxf3) 26.Bxb7 Rd8 27.Bc7 Bf3 28.Qa6 Bxb7 29.Qxb7 Nf3+ 30.Qxf3 Qxf3 31.Bxd8 e4 32.Rc8 f5

]

 

24…Qh5 25.Nxg4 [25.Rxc6 is risky.]

25…Qxg4 26.Rc4 Qd7 27.Rcc1 Rad8 28.Bc5 Qf5 29.Qa4 Rd2 30.Be3 Red8 31.Be4 Qh3 As usual, Andy is trying to win by a direct attack.
32.Bxc6 [32.Bxd2 Rxd2 33.Bxc6 bxc6 34.Qxc6]

32…bxc6 33.Rxc6 R2d7 34.b4 This is about equal.
34…Qh5 35.b5 Qf3 36.Rcc1 e4 37.Qc4 h5 38.h4 Be5 39.Qe2 Qf5 40.Bc5 [40.Bg5 f6 41.Qxe4]

40…Kh7 41.Qxe4 Qxe4 42.Rxe4 Rd5 43.a4 [43.Bxa7 Rxb5 44.a4+-]

43…f5 44.Rec4 R8d7 45.a5 Rb7 46.b6 [46.a6 Rxb5 47.Bxa7 Ra5 48.Rc6 Kg7]

46…axb6 47.axb6 Kg7 48.Be3 Kf7 49.Rc7+ Rd7 50.Rxd7+ [50.Rxb7 Rxb7 51.Rc6]

50…Rxd7 51.Bf4 [51.Rc6 Rb7 52.Kf1]

51…Bxf4 52.gxf4 Ke7 53.Rc6 Rd6 54.b7 Rd1+ 55.Kg2 Rb1 56.Rxg6 Kf7 There would have been no harm in playing on, but I realised I’d blown most of the advantage.
[56…Kf7 57.Rg5 Kf6 58.Rxh5 Rxb7 59.Rh6+ Kg7]

1/2-1/2

Woodruff, Adam (1808) – Regis, D. (1744)


East Devon Premier, 03/02/2002
Round 2 I was quite pleased with this game although I lost. I just couldn’t settle to a plan in the key phase of the game.

1.d4 e6 2.c4 b6 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.Bd2 Nf6 [4…f5 Gervais,C-Weclawski,D/Duisburg Wch U16w 1992/0-1 (53)]

5.Qc2 [5.e4 Gulko,B-Zvjaginsev,V/New York Open 1997/0-1 (51)]

5…Bb7 6.O-O-O O-O 7.f3 c5 8.a3 cxd4 9.axb4 dxc3 10.Bxc3 I think this ia already easier for Black.
10…Qc7 11.e4 d5 12.Qd2 dxe4 13.Bxf6 gxf6 14.fxe4 Bxe4 Now I have a pawn. As usual, this is my cue to assume the game is won until it becomes obvious that I’m losing…
15.Nh3 Nc6 16.Qc3 Qe5 [16…Rfd8! 17.Qxf6 Rxd1+ 18.Kxd1 Qd8+ 19.Qxd8+ Rxd8+ 20.Ke2 Nxb4]

17.Be2 Qxc3+ [17…a5! 18.b5

(18.Qxe5 Nxe5 19.bxa5 Rxa5 20.Rhf1 Ra1+ 21.Kd2 Rd8+ 22.Kc3 Rdxd1 23.Bxd1 Bxg2 24.Rg1 Kf8 25.Bc2 Rxg1 26.Nxg1 f5) 18…Nb4 19.Qxe5 fxe5 20.Nf2 Bf5 21.g4 Bg6

]

 

[17…Rac8?! 18.Rhf1 Qxc3+ 19.bxc3 Ne5 20.Rxf6 Nxc4 21.Rd4 Bd5 22.Nf4 Rfe8 23.Bh5 Ne5]

18.bxc3 Ne5 [18…Rfd8]

[18…Kh8!]

19.Rd4 Bg6 [19…Bxg2 20.Rg1]

20.Nf4 Rac8 21.Rf1 Kg7 22.Kb2 Rc7 23.h4 h5 [23…h6= / + 24.h5 Bh7

(24…Bf5)

]

 

24.Bxh5 Persistent badgering has got some play for White.
24…Nxc4+ 25.Kb3 [25.Ka2 e5]

25…Ne5 [25…Bc2+! 26.Kxc2

(26.Ka2) 26…Ne3+ 27.Kd3 Nxf1- +

]

 

26.Bxg6 Nxg6 27.Nh5+ Kh6 28.Nxf6 And now he has his pawn back with a good position.
28…Rfc8 29.Rf3 Ne5 30.Rg3 Rc4 31.Ng4+ And now an exchange…
31…Nxg4 32.Rxc4 Rxc4 33.Kxc4 Ne5+ 34.Kb5

1-0

Regis, D. (1744) – Evans-Quek, Suan (2160)


East Devon Premier, 03/02/2002
Round 3 I just rolled over…

1.c4 b6 Ironic: I’ve played a lot of this as Black.
2.d4

[2.Nc3 Bb7 3.e4 e6]

 

[2.e4 is what I would normally play, but thought I’d be clever…
2…Bb7 3.d3 e6 4.Nc3 Bb4]

2…Bb7 3.Nc3 f5 4.Nf3

[4.Bg5 1-0 Alekhin Alexander-Rosanov V/St Petersburg nt 1909 (21)]

 

[4.f3 1-0 Fiedler,W-Kersten,M/Berliner Sommer 1995/EXP 47 (30)]

 

[4.Bf4 1-0 Von Scheve,T-Seuffert,P/Leipzig 1894 (23)]

4…e6 5.e3 Now I thought I’d play solidly, but Black is easily equal already.

[5.g3 Tillmann,M-Jorns,B/Ambassador Open 2000/The Week in Chess 323/1-0 (37)]

5…Nf6 6.Bd3 Be7 7.O-O O-O 8.b3 Qe8 9.Bb2 Qh5 10.Be2 Qh6 11.d5 Na6 12.Nd4 Bd6 13.g3 Rae8 14.Ncb5

[14.Bf3]

14…Bc5 15.a3 Qh3 White has allowed the Bb7 to become a monster.
16.b4 Bxd4 17.Qxd4 exd5 18.cxd5

[18.Bf3]

18…Bxd5 19.f3 Rf7 20.Qd2

[20.Rf2 “holds” in some sense, but Black has a very easy game to play and an extra pawn.]

20…Ng4 21.Bd1 Rxe3 22.Nc3 Rd3 23.Qc2 Ne3 24.Qf2 Rd2

0-1

Williams, D. (1688) – Regis, D. (1744)


East Devon Premier, 03/03/2002
Round 4 Rabbit Pie. Again, you get to point where you’re at the bottom of the draw and you need a win…

1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bg5 Bb4 5.e5 h6 I get very few of thse, although it’s supposed to be my main line defence.
6.Bxf6? gxf6 7.Nf3 c5 8.a3 Bxc3+ 9.bxc3 Nc6 Black has managed to make a mess of the White pawns without missing the two bishops. White can argue that ths dark-squared one was bad, but it makes life easier for Black is a break doesn’t allow such a piece access to all the weak squares in his camp.
10.Qd2 fxe5 11.dxe5 Qc7 12.Bb5 Bd7 13.Bxc6 Bxc6 14.O-O O-O-O 15.Qf4 f5 A standard MacCutcheon trick.
16.Rfe1 Rdg8 17.g3 Rg4 18.Qe3 Qa5 A pincer movement…
19.Nd2 b6 20.Nb3 Qa4 21.f4 h5 22.Kf2 h4 23.Ke2 White panics and runs for it…
23…hxg3 24.hxg3 Rh2+ 25.Kd1 Rg2 26.Rg1 R4xg3 House! 27.Rxg2 Co-operative…

[27.Qxg3 Rxg3 28.Rxg3 Qxf4]

27…Rxe3 28.Rg8+ Kb7 29.Nxc5+ bxc5 30.Rb1+ Ka6 31.Rc8 Rxc3 32.Rb2 Qd4+ 33.Kc1 Qg1+ 34.Kd2 Qe3+ 35.Kd1 Bb5

0-1

Regis, D. (1744) – Ponter, Ian (1936)


East Devon Premier, 03/03/2002
Round 5

1.c4 Nf6 2.g3 c6 3.Bg2?? Again! [3.Nf3]

3…d5 4.cxd5 [4.b3 is the move I want to play, but…
4…dxc4 5.bxc4 Qd4]

[4.Nf3 is a Gambit which Kosten recommends but which I haven’t studied at all.]

4…cxd5 5.Nf3 [5.d4 Hansen,V-Haahr,T/Aalborg 1965/1-0 (54)]

[5.Nc3 Kowarsch,H-Zahn,W/Bayern chB 1984/1-0 (46)]

5…Nc6 [5…Nbd7 6.d4 g6 7.Nc3 Bg7 8.Bf4 O-O 9.O-O Qa5 10.a3 b5 11.Ne5 e6 12.Nc6 Qb6 13.Rc1 Bb7 14.Ne5 Rfc8 15.Qd3 Vannay,J-Jankovics,I/Zalaegerszeg 1959/1-0 (45)]

[5…Bf5 6.Nc3 h6 7.Qb3 Qd7 8.Ne5 Qd6 9.Qxb7 Qxe5 10.d4 Qxd4 11.Be3 Qe5 12.Bf4 Qd4 13.Qxa8 Qc5 14.Qxb8+ Bc8 15.Qb5+ 1-0 Finegold,R-Halstead,K/Monroe ch-MI op 1986]

6.O-O [6.d4 Groszpeter,A-Horvath/Keszthely 1981/1-0 (40)]

6…e5 [6…Bg4 1-0 Sehner,N-Moehring,G/BL2-W 1991/BL2 (40)]

[6…g6 Bailey,J-Kebrdle,M/Eastpointe ch-MI 1993/1-0 (35)]

7.d3 Bf5 [7…Be7 Schleifer,M-Ochkoos,J/Toronto 1992/1-0 (52)]

8.Qa4 This is a reversed Pirc, or Alapin Sicilian.
8…Bd6 9.Nc3 O-O 10.Bg5 Be7 This ought to be OK for White, he just needs a plan.
11.e4 [11.Qb5 a6!]

[11.Nxe5! Nxe5 12.Qf4 Bxd3 13.Qxe5 Bc4 14.b3 Ba6+ / -]

11…Be6 12.exd5 Nxd5 13.Bxe7 Ndxe7 14.Rfe1 f6 15.Rad1 [15.d4! exd4

(15…Nxd4 16.Nxd4 exd4 17.Rxe6 dxc3 18.bxc3+-) 16.Rxe6 dxc3 17.bxc3+ / -

]

 

15…Qb6 16.b3 Rad8 Black is nicely centralised while White is vaguely organised.
17.Ne2 [17.d4!= / + Nxd4 18.Nxd4 Rxd4 19.Rxd4 exd4 20.Nb5 d3 21.Nd4 d2 22.Rd1 Rd8 23.Rxd2 Nc6]

17…Rd6 18.d4 Rfd8 19.Rd2 e4 Just hoped something would turn up if I sacrificed a little material, but being so disorganised, of course it did not.
20.Nf4 exf3 21.Nxe6 fxg2 22.Nxd8 Qxd8 23.Kxg2 Kf8 24.Red1 Rd5 25.Qc4 Qd7 26.b4 b5 27.Qc2 Rxd4 28.Rxd4 Nxd4 29.Qxh7 Qd5+ 30.Kh3 Qe6+ 31.g4 [31.Kg2]

31…Ndc6 32.Qh5 Qxa2 33.Qxb5 Qxf2 34.Rf1 Qe3+ 35.Kg2 Qe4+ 36.Kg3 Ne5 37.h3 Qe3+ 38.Kg2 Kf7 39.Qb7 Qd2+ 40.Kg3 Qd4 41.Qa6 Qe3+ 42.Kg2 Nd3 43.Qa2+ Kf8 44.Qc4 Ne1+ 45.Kh2 Qd2+ 46.Kg3 Qg2+ 47.Kf4 Nd5+

0-1

Regis – Farina


East Devon Major, 02/28/2003
Round 1 Yes, the major.

1.e4 e5 2.Bc4

[2.Nc3 Nf6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.f4 – Short,N-Speelman,J/London, Candidates Match ENG 1991 (14)]

2…Nf6 3.d3 Bc5 4.Nc3 c6 5.Nf3 b5 6.Bb3 Qb6 7.Qe2 d6 8.Be3 Bxe3 9.Qxe3 Qxe3+ 10.fxe3 Nbd7 11.O-O Nc5 12.h3 O-O 13.Nh4 a5 14.a3 Nxb3 15.cxb3 Normally I like to be the one attacking weak pawns…
15…Be6 I decided just to let it go.
16.Nf5 Bxb3 17.Ne7+ Kh8 18.Nxc6 Bc2 19.d4 Nxe4 20.dxe5 Nxc3 21.bxc3 Be4 22.Nd4 dxe5 23.Nxb5 Bd3 24.Nc7 Bxf1 25.Nxa8 Bxg2 26.Kxg2 Rxa8 About the best I could hope for I guessed: a pawn down in a rook endgame.
27.Rb1 f6 28.Kf3 g6 29.Rb7 Rc8 30.Ra7 Rxc3 31.Rxa5 Kg7 32.a4 Ra3 33.Ra7+ Kh6 34.a5 f5 35.Kf2 Kg5 36.Rxh7 Rxa5 One pawn, and all on the same side, but it’s still not good enough…
37.Kf3 e4+ 38.Kg3 Kf6 39.h4 Ra1 40.Kf2 Ra2+ And rather than retreat (or lose the e-pawn) I thought I’d start again tomorrow. So much for warming up my game with against some easier opposition. I usually go through and annotate a game with at least my immediate thoughts on the day of the match, but this one was so disheartening I didn’t bother until I cam to do this web page in 2006.

0-1

Oughton – Regis


East Devon Major, 03/01/2003
Round 2 Nothing dramatic, just make sure you’re never worse.

1.c4 e5 2.Nc3 Nc6 3.g3 f5 4.e3 Nf6 5.Bg2 d6

[5…d5]

6.d3 Be6 7.b3 Qd7 8.Nf3 Be7 9.O-O h6 10.d4 Bf7 11.dxe5 dxe5 12.Qxd7+ Nxd7 13.Bb2 O-O-O 14.Nd5 Bd6 15.Rfc1 Rhe8 16.Ne1 g6 17.Nc3 e4 18.Nb5 Be5 19.Bxe5 Ndxe5 20.Rd1 a6 21.Nc3 Nb4 22.a3 Nbd3 One advantage.
23.Nxd3 Nxd3 24.Bf1 Nc5 25.Rxd8+ Rxd8 26.b4 Nb3 27.Rd1 Nd2 28.c5 Bb3 29.Rc1 Now all my pieces are better than each of his.
29…Nf3+ 30.Kg2 Rd2 31.c6 Ne5 32.cxb7+ Kxb7 33.h3 Nd3 34.Bxd3 exd3 Passed pawn.
35.Ra1 Rc2 36.Nd1 d2

0-1

Regis – Dean


East Devon Major, 03/01/2003
Round 3

1.e4 Thankfully I remember nothing about this game.

1…c6 2.d4 d5 3.exd5 cxd5 4.c4 Nf6 5.Nc3 e6 6.Nf3 Be7 7.Bd3 [7.cxd5 Nxd5 8.Bd3

(8.Bc4)

]

 

7…O-O 8.O-O dxc4 9.Bxc4 I’ve been trying to persuade myself for a while to master either side of IQP positions.
9…Nc6 10.Re1 [10.a3 1-0 Janosevic,D-Schroeder,W/Dortmund op 1987/TD 87\03 (28)]

[10.Be3]

[10.Bg5 1-0 Tenenwurzel,E-Black,R/New York 1911 (17)]

10…b6 [10…Nb4 11.a3 Nbd5 12.Ne5 Bd7 13.Bd3 Bc6 14.Bc2 Qb6 15.Qd3 Rfd8 16.Bg5 Qxb2 17.Nxd5 Rxd5 18.Bxf6 Bxf6 19.Rab1 1-0 Djurhuus,R-Johannessen,S/Jarleslaget, Trondheim NOR 1997]

11.a3 Na5 12.Ba2 Bb7 13.Bf4 Nd5 14.Bg3 Nxc3 15.bxc3 Rc8 16.Qd3 Bd5 17.Bb1 g6 18.h4 Nc4 19.h5 Determined to follow through the attacking plan, rather than admit I was on the slide.
19…Nxa3 Now an exchange sac to keep some sort of initiative…
20.Rxa3 Bxa3 21.hxg6 fxg6 22.Ne5 Qg5 23.c4 Bb4 24.Re3 Bb7 25.Qb3 Bd6 26.c5 Bd5 27.Qa4 Bxe5 28.dxe5 Rxc5 I can only assume he was short of time or in need of grading points.

1/2-1/2

Sellwood, C. – Regis


East Devon Major, 03/02/2003
Round 4 A cruise after he fell into an opening trap.

1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bg5 Bb4 5.e5 h6 6.Bd2 Bxc3 7.Bxc3

[7.bxc3]

 

[Better is7.bxc3 Ne4 8.Qg4!]

7…Ne4 8.Bb4?

[8.Ba5?! Fischer,R-Petrosian,T/Curacao ct 1962/CAND/ 0-1 (43) The (bad) idea behind 7.Bxc3]

8…c5!= / + NCO 9.dxc5?

[9.Ba3 Qa5+]

 

[9.Bxc5 Nxc5 10.dxc5 Nd7 11.Qd4 Qc7 0-1 Kovchan,A-Vysochin,S/Bank Zachodni Open 1999 (23)]

9…Nxf2 10.Kxf2 Qh4+ 11.g3 Qxb4 12.Nf3 Qxc5+ 13.Kg2 Nc6 14.c3 Qe3 15.Qe1 Qxe1 16.Rxe1 Bd7 17.Bd3 O-O 18.Rhf1 f6 19.Nh4 Nxe5 20.Bc2 Rae8 21.Rxe5 fxe5 22.Ng6 Rxf1 23.Kxf1 Bb5+ 24.Ke1 e4 25.Bb3 Kf7 26.Nf4 g5 27.Ng2 Ke7! 28.Ne3 Rf8 29.Bd1 Kd6 30.a4 Bd3 31.Bg4 a5 32.b4 axb4 33.cxb4 d4 34.Nd1 e3 35.Bh3 Bc2 36.Nb2 Rf2 37.Nc4+ Kd5 38.Na5 d3

0-1

Regis – Moreland


East Devon Major, 03/02/2003
Round 5

1.c4 An early draw offer suggested Black wasn’t taking the game seriously, but I wanted blood.

1…g6 2.Nc3 Bg7 3.g3 Nf6 4.Bg2 c6 5.e4 d6 6.Nge2 [6.d4 1-0 Laco-Magrin/Milan ch 1968 (22)]

6…O-O [6…Na6 1-0 Welling-Kok,P/Eindhoven 1986 (23)]

[6…Nbd7 1-0 Lobos,M-Martin,V/VII Open 2000/The Week in Chess 296 (25)]

7.O-O Be6 [7…e5 8.d3

(8.d4 1-0 Luque-Vilar/Cordoba 1991 (25)) 8…a5 9.h3 Nbd7 10.Be3 Nc5 11.f4 1-0 Gerber,P-Wiltink,J/Giessen op 1995/GER 11 (25)

]

 

[7…a6 Watson]

8.d3 Qc8 9.Rb1 Bh3 10.Bg5 Bxg2 11.Kxg2 h6 12.Be3 Ng4 13.Bd2 Nf6 14.f4 Nbd7 15.h3 Qc7 16.Be3 Nb6 17.Qd2 Kh7 Not really trying… White is allowed to build up an attack just as he wishes.
18.Rf2 e6 19.Rbf1 d5 20.e5 Nfd7 21.c5 Nc8 22.d4 White now has a complete lock on the position.
22…b6 23.b4 bxc5 24.bxc5 Ne7 25.g4 Rab8 26.Ng3 Qa5 27.f5 Ng8 28.f6 Bh8 29.h4 Bxf6 30.exf6 Ndxf6 31.g5 Ng4 32.Rxf7+ Still only 3.5 out of 5 against players I might have hoped to beat in each game.
[32.Rxf7+ Rxf7 33.Rxf7+ Kh8 34.h5]

1-0

Hutchings, P. – Regis, D.


East Devon (Exeter), 03/04/2005
Round 1 A nice positional buildup for Black with a firm step on a big banana skin at the end.

1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.exd5 exd5 4.Bd3 Nc6 5.Nf3 Bd6 6.Bg5 f6 7.Bh4 Qe7+ 8.Be2 Already it’s gone wrong for White, although it took some maturity of character to play this move at all.
8…Nh6 9.Nc3 Be6 10.Bg3 Bxg3 11.hxg3 O-O-O 12.Qd2 Nf5 13.O-O-O g5 14.Bb5 Qd6 15.g4 Nfe7 16.Nh2 h5 17.gxh5 Rxh5 18.Nf3 Rdh8 19.Rxh5 Rxh5 20.Re1 g4

[20…Bg4]

21.Ng1 Nf5 22.Nge2 Bf7 23.Bxc6 Qxc6 24.Nf4 Rh2 25.Qd3 Qd7 26.Nd1 Nh4

[26…Nd6]

27.Qg3 A simple fork with the queen wins for White.
27…Nxg2 28.Nxg2 Rh3 29.Qf4

1-0

Regis, D. – Wright, R.


East Devon (Exeter), 04/04/2005
Round 2 A nice positional buildup with a banana skin in the middle.

1.c4 g5 Irritating, but of course that’s the point.
2.d4 h6 3.e4 Bg7 4.Nc3

[4.h4 c5 5.hxg5 Bxd4 6.Nf3]

4…c5 5.Nge2 cxd4 6.Nxd4 d6 7.Be3 Nf6 8.Be2 a6 9.O-O g4 10.f4 gxf3 11.Bxf3 I don’t know why this version of the Maroczy Bind shouldn’t be good for White, but it still needs winning.
11…h5 12.h3 e5 13.Nf5

[13.Nc2]

13…Bxf5 14.exf5 Qd7 15.Qd2

[15.Na4]

15…Nc6 16.Rad1 O-O-O 17.Bb6 I thought I’d got him now.

[17.Na4 Kb8 18.Nb6 Qc7]

17…Bh6 18.Qe2

[18.Qd3 Nb4 19.Qe2 Rde8 20.Ne4 Nxe4 21.Qxe4]

18…Rde8 19.Ne4

[19.Nd5 Nxd5 20.Bxd5]

19…Nxe4 20.Qxe4 Nd4 Now I missed a big one…
21.Bxd4

[21.Kh1]

 

[21.Bxh5]

21…exd4 22.Qd3 Be3+ Would have been even more serious had I captured the pawn… So, start again, but now it’s tough.
23.Kh1 f6 24.Bd5 Qg7 25.Qa3 Rd8 26.c5 dxc5 27.Qxc5+ Qc7 28.Be6+ Kb8 29.Qxc7+ Kxc7 30.Rd3

[30.g3]

30…h4 Black is simply better, and it’s hard to set him problems. In doing so, I give him opportunities that he is pleased to take…
31.g4 hxg3 32.Kg2 Rh7 33.Kxg3 Rdh8 34.Rh1 Kd6 35.Bb3 Ke5 White is out of ideas and also uncoordinated.
36.Bc2 Rc8 37.Bb1

[37.Rh2 Rg7+]

37…Rg7+ 38.Kf3 Rcg8 39.Rb3 Rg3+ 40.Ke2 Rg2+ 41.Kd3 b5 42.a4 Rd2#

0-1

Taylor, GP. – Regis, D.


East Devon (Exeter), 04/04/2005
Round 3 A nice positional build-up with a banana skin right at the start.

1.e4 Knaak e6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 c5 4.c3 Nc6 5.Nf3 Bd7 6.a3 [6.Be2]

6…f6 [6…c4]

7.Bd3 [7.b4 fxe5 8.Nxe5

(8.bxc5 e4 9.Ng5 Nf6= / +)

(8.dxc5 Nf6 9.Bb5 e4) 8…Nxd4 Nxe5 Nf5

(8…cxd4 exd4)

]

 

7…Qc7 [7…cxd4 8.cxd4 Nh6 9.Bxh6 gxh6 10.Nh4 Qb6 11.Qh5+ Kd8-/+]

[7…fxe5 8.dxe5 Qc7 9.Qe2 Nh6 10.O-O Nf7 11.Re1 c4 12.Bc2 Be7 13.h4 O-O-O

(13…Bc5 & …Qb6) 14.Bf4 Rdg8 15.Nbd2 Qd8 16.g3 g5 17.hxg5 Nxg5= / +

]

 

8.O-O [8.Bf4 c4 9.Bc2 O-O-O 10.Nbd2 Nh6 11.Bg3 f5 12.Bf4 Nf7 13.h4 Be7 14.Qe2 g6 15.g3 h6]

8…fxe5 [8…O-O-O is what they all play, but I had a vague idea I could get away with taking the pawn.
9.Bf4

(9.Qe2 h6 10.b4 c4 11.Bc2 f5 12.Nh4 Be8 13.f4 Be7 14.Nxf5 exf5 15.Bxf5+ Kb8 16.Qg4 g5 17.fxg5 hxg5 18.Bxg5 Bh5 19.Qg3 Bxg5 20.Qxg5 Nge7 21.Nd2 Rdg8 22.Qe3 Nxf5 23.Rxf5 Qh7 24.Rf6 Be2 25.h3 Bd3 26.Kh2 Ne7 27.Nf3 Nf5 28.Qf4 Ka8 29.Rg1 Qh5 30.e6 Be4 31.Rf1 Rg3 32.Rxf5 Qxh3+ 0-1 Grischuk,A-Short,N/19th Open 2000/The Week in Chess 284)

(9.g3 fxe5 10.dxe5 c4 11.Bc2 Bc5 12.b4 cxb3 13.Bxb3 Rf8 14.Qe2 Nge7 15.c4 dxc4 16.Bxc4 Rxf3 17.Qxf3 Nxe5 18.Qc3 Bd4 19.Qb3 Bxa1 20.Bf4 N7g6 21.Nd2 Bd4 22.Bxe6 Nxf4 23.gxf4 Bxe6 24.Qxe6+ Qd7 25.Rc1+ Kb8 0-1 Sikorova,O-Taborsky,R/TCh-CZE 2001-2 2002/The Week in Chess 388)

(9.Re1 c4 10.Bf1 Nge7 11.Bf4 h6 12.h4 g5 13.Bh2 f5 14.hxg5 Ng6 15.Nbd2 Be8 16.Be2 Qh7 17.Nf1 Na5 18.b4 Nb3 19.Ra2 Ba4 20.Qb1 Be7 21.gxh6 Qxh6 22.Ne3 Nh4 23.Nxh4 Qxh4 24.Nf1 Bg5 25.g3 Qh3 26.Bf3 f4 27.Bg2 Qh6 28.gxf4 Bxf4 Schneider,D-Smith,B/6th Foxwoods Open 2004/The Week in Chess 493/0-1 (42)) 9…c4

(9…g5? 10.Bg3 g4 11.exf6+ / -) 10.Bc2 h6! 11.h4

(11.Bg3 f5 (11…f5 Knaak 12.h4 Be8 13.Nbd2 Bh5 14.Bf4 Be7 15.Qb1 Rf8 Qd8, g7-g5)) 11…Be8!

(11…f5 12.h5+/-) 12.b3

(12.Nbd2 Bh5 13.Qe1 f5= / +)

(12.Bg3= / + Knaak) 12…cxb3 13.Bxb3 Bh5 14.Nbd2

(14.Qd3 g5 15.Bg3 (15.hxg5 hxg5 16.Bg3 Bxf3 17.Qxf3 (17.exf6 Qf7 18.Qxf3 Qh7- +) 17…Qh7- +) 15…f5 16.hxg5 Bxf3- +) 14…fxe5?

(14…g5! 15.Bg3 (15.Be3 f5-/+) 15…f5-/+) 15.dxe5 Bc5= / + 16.Qb1

(16.Qe1 Nge7 17.Be3) 16…Nge7 17.c4

(17.Bh2 Rhf8 18.Bd1-/+) 17…Rhf8 18.Bh2 Bxf3 19.Nxf3 Rxf3! 20.gxf3 Nd4 21.Kg2

(21.Bd1 Knaak dxc4- +) 21…Nef5 22.Bg3 Qf7! 23.f4

(23.Bd1 Qg6)

(23.cxd5 Knaak Nxh4+ 24.Bxh4 Qxf3+ 25.Kh2 Qh5 26.Qe4 Nxb3- +) 23…g5 24.cxd5 gxf4 25.dxe6

(25.Bxf4 Knaak Nxh4+- +) 25…Qh5 26.e7 Nxh4+ 0-1 Adams,M-Epishin,V/Ter Apel 1992/[Anand]

(26…Nxh4+ 27.Bxh4 Qg4+ 28.Bg3 f3+ 29.Kh2 Qh5+ 30.Kg1 Ne2#)

]

 

9.dxe5 [9.Nxe5 Nxe5 10.Bf4 Qb6

(10…Bd6 11.dxe5+ / -) 11.Bxe5 Qxb2 12.Qh5+ Kd8-/+

]

 

9…Nxe5 [9…g6 10.Ng5 Bg7 11.f4 Nge7]

10.Nxe5 Qxe5 11.Re1 Qf6 [11…Qd6 12.Qh5+ Kd8]

12.Qh5+ Kd8?? [12…g6 13.Qxd5 O-O-O and Black’s still very much in the game.]

13.Bg5

1-0

Jepps, G. – Regis, D.


East Devon (Exeter), 05/04/2005
Round 4 You always feel swindled when you lose to one of these gambits: you know they’re not supposed to be good, but that can lead you to think you’re winning before you really are.

1.d4 e6

[

1…d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.f3

 

]

2.e4 d5 3.Be3 dxe4 4.f3 Nf6 5.fxe4 Nxe4 6.Nd2 Nf6 7.Ngf3 Nbd7 8.Bd3 Be7 9.O-O O-O 10.Qe1 c5 11.Qh4 cxd4 12.Bg5 White has his open lines I guess but I’m happy enough with Black.
12…g6

[12…Qa5]

 

[12…h6 invites 13.Bxh6 and while Black may still be better, why give him the opportunity to play the game he wants.]

 

[12…Re8! 13.Ne5? Nxe5 14.Bxf6 Nxd3]

13.Ne4 Typical of these positions: White tries to increase the activity of his pieces without allowing exchanges as they get nearer…

[13.Rae1 After the game we thought this might be better, bringing the last white piece into play when Black is unable to respond in kind.]

13…Re8 14.Ne5 Nxe4 15.Rxf7 Marks for effort!
15…Nxg5 Big think from White here.
16.Bxg6 And without a lot of thought…
16…Nf3+

[16…Nxe5 wins handily]

17.gxf3 Bxh4 18.Bxh7+ Kh8 19.Ng6# Really, what else could White’s idea be? But I didn’t give him the credit for having one. Gary Lane was so impressed with this swindle that he wrote it up for Chess Cafe… I just did a whizz through a database to see how the BDG fared in local games, and out of 100 efforts White won 36 and Black 37. To read Gary’s book, you’d think that gambits like this always bloody win, but of course the losses are usually prosaic and never get into print.

1-0

Regis, D. – Chapman, P.


East Devon (Exeter), 05/04/2005
Round 5 Again, reduced to trying to claw a win from the last round…. fortunately I had an opponent even more demoralised than I was.

1.c4 d6 2.g3 e5 3.Bg2 c6 4.Nc3 Nf6 5.e4 Be7 6.Nge2 O-O 7.O-O a5 8.h3 Na6 9.d3 Bd7 10.a4 Nc7 11.Be3 Ne6 12.f4 Solid play by Black, but as I always say, you do need a plan as well.
12…exf4 13.gxf4 Qc8 14.d4 Nc7 15.f5 Nfe8 16.Ng3 f6 17.Qh5

1-0

Regis, D. – Helbig, P.


East Devon (Exeter), 03/03/2006
Round 1 Not bad, but nowhere near good enough: Black has won this tournament in the past.

1.c4 g6 2.Nc3 d6 3.g3 Bg7 4.Bg2 e5 5.e4 Nc6 6.Nge2 h5 7.h4 Bg4 8.f3 Be6 9.d3 [9.Nd5! 1-0 This is the only way to put pressure on Black’s game… makes you wonder a bit about how good the opening is, then…. Deleyn, G-Acevedo,V/Dubai 1986 (26)]

9…Qd7 10.Be3 [10.Nd5 1-0 Lie,K-Bogdanov,D/Politiken Cup 2004/The Week in Chess 508 (31)]

[10.Bg5 1-0 Syrjanen,J-Maki,V/Pori SM 1986 (38)]

[10.Rb1 1-0 Koenig,D-Gelman,G/USA 1993 (54)]

10…Nd4 11.Qd2 Ne7 12.Rb1 c6 13.O-O O-O 14.f4 Bh3 15.Bf2 Nxe2+ 16.Qxe2 [16.Nxe2]

16…Bxg2 17.Kxg2 exf4 18.gxf4 d5 Revealing White’s lack of pressure. Black is crusing towards a better structure, so I threw in a pawn for a good Knight and some attacking prospects.
19.cxd5 cxd5 20.Bc5 d4 21.Bxe7 Qxe7 22.Nd5 Qxh4 23.Rh1 Qd8 24.Rh3 [24.Rbc1]

24…Re8 25.Qf3 Rc8 26.Rf1 Rc2+ 27.Kh1 Qd7 28.f5 Passers-by were quite impressed with my position, but it’s hard to create real threats.
28…Rec8 29.f6 [29.fxg6 fxg6 30.Rg3 Kh7 31.Rfg1

(31.Qf6) 31…R2c6

]

29…Bf8 30.Rxh5 Rc1 31.Rh2 Bd6 32.Rhf2 [32.Rg2]

32…Rxf1+ 33.Rxf1 Rc2 34.Rf2 Rxf2 35.Qxf2 Qh3+ It’s all gone Pete Tong.
36.Kg1 Qxd3 37.Ne7+ Kf8 38.Qh4 Qe3+ 39.Kf1 Qf3+ 40.Kg1 Qg3+ 41.Qxg3 Bxg3 42.Kg2 Be5 43.Nd5 Ke8 44.Kf3

0-1

Whymark, DW. – Regis, D.


East Devon (Exeter), 03/04/2006
Round 2 Not crisp enough: again, I thought I’d solved the problem of the opening and went to sleep, waking up to find I was in big trouble.

1.Nf3

[1.c4 0-1 Smyslov,V-Fischer,R/Palma de Mallorca izt 1970/IZT (43)]

1…g6 2.c4 Bg7 3.Nc3 c5 4.g3 Nc6 5.Bg2 e6 I’ve liked this position for Black ever since I read Levy’s book on Fischer as a nipper. However, it will be clear that I’m not as good as him…
6.O-O Nge7 7.d3

[Better is7.e3 0-1 Doda,Z-Fischer,R/Havana 1965 (36) Petrosian=:P]

7…d5 8.Rb1 O-O 9.a3 b6 10.Bd2 Easy so far, now I have to think of moves on my own.
10…a5

[10…Bb7 0-1 Petrosian,T-Fischer,R/Belgrade 1970 (66)]

11.Nb5 a4 12.b3 axb3 13.Qxb3 Na5 14.Qc2 dxc4 15.dxc4 Bb7 16.Bf4 Moving to swindle mode… I need a randomiser!
16…e5 17.Bxe5 Bxe5 18.Nxe5 Bxg2 19.Kxg2 Nec6 20.Rfd1 Qe7 21.Nd7 Nd4 Glad to have found that one.
22.Rxd4 cxd4 23.Nxf8 Qxf8 24.Nxd4 Qc5 Had to see that one a while back…
25.Nb3 Qxc4 26.Qxc4 Nxc4 27.Nd4 Rxa3 Whew.

1/2-1/2

Regis, D. – Kneebone, Jeremy


East Devon (Exeter), 03/04/2006
Round 3 I did enough to get a plus but Black wasn’t playing as though he was worse…

1.c4 Nf6 2.Nc3 c5 3.g3 Nc6 4.Bg2 g6 5.Nf3 Bg7 6.O-O O-O 7.d4 cxd4 8.Nxd4 a6 9.h3

[9.Nc2 1-0 Pirc,V-Golombek,H/Hastings 1938 (20)]

 

[9.c5 1-0 Wojtkiewicz,A-Langenberg,J/Soest 1996 (21)]

9…Qb6

[9…Nxd4 1-0 Basman-Smit/Islington 1976 (31)]

10.Nc2 d6 11.Rb1 Be6 12.Be3 Qd8 13.Nd5 Bxd5 14.cxd5 Ne5 15.a4 Rc8 16.Na3 Ned7 17.Qd2 Nc5 18.a5

[18.b3]

18…Nfd7 19.Rfc1

[19.b4]

[19.b3]

19…Nb3 Oops, missed that one, fortunately it’s not fatal, but now Black has the initiative.
20.Rxc8 Qxc8 21.Qb4 Ndc5 22.Nc4 Qf5 23.Re1

[23.Qe1]

23…Qc2 24.Bf3 Rc8 Drawn 25.Nb6 Rd8 26.Nc4 Bxb2 27.Nxb2 Qxb2 28.Bxc5 dxc5 29.Qxb7 ia a plausible continuation.

1/2-1/2

Page, M. – Regis, D.


East Devon (Exeter), 03/04/2006
Round 4

1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bg5 Bb4 5.e5 h6 6.Bd2 Bxc3 7.bxc3 Ne4 8.Qg4 g6 9.Bd3 Nxd2 10.Kxd2 c5 11.h4 Nc6 12.Nf3 Qa5 This is supposed to be my main line defence, but usually White deviates long before now and I’m not that familiar with the positions.
13.Qf4 [13.Rab1 0-1 Gensler,K-Harger,D/Midwest Masters Inv 1989 (24)]

[13.dxc5 Pozo Vera,S-G uia Garcia,J/II Marcelo Salado Cup Gp A 2003/The Week in Chess/0-1 (44)]

[13.Rhe1 Davies-Happel,H/Guernsey 1988/0-1 (51)]

13…cxd4 [13…b6 0-1 Goodger,M-Kiseleva,N/12th Monarch Assurance 2003/The Week in Chess 465 (28)]

[13…Bd7 Matjushin,G-Budnikov,O/Caissa Open 2000/The Week in Chess 284/0-1 (60)]

14.Nxd4 [14.h5 0-1 Terrieux,K-Benitah,Y/18th Touraine Open 2003/The Week in Chess 457 (35)]

14…Nxd4 15.Qxd4 Now, structurally Black has made some gains, but the skeleton of a plan needs a little more piece activity before it can be called alive.
15…Bd7 [15…b6 Sellwood,C-George,I/Camborne Club Championship 2002/[14/4/2002]

/0-1 (46)

]

16.Rhb1 [16.Rab1 0-1 Vuori,H-Tuominen,R/Tampere 1991 (37)]

16…Bc6 [16…b6 Arakhamia,K-Peng Zhaoqin/3rd EIWCh 2002/The Week in Chess 396/0-1 (69)]

17.a4 O-O 18.Rb4 Rac8 19.Rab1 Kg7 20.Bb5 Ironically, White is attacking where I am supposed to attack…
20…Rc7 [20…b6= / + Not too hard to dream up.]

21.f3 Rfc8 22.R1b3 Bxb5 23.Rxb5 Qa6 Now Black is clearly worse.
24.Qf4 Kh7 [24…b6= / +]

25.a5 Qc6 26.Qb4 Rb8 [26…d4! 27.Rxb7

(27.c4 Qxc4) 27…dxc3+ 28.Kc1 Qd7-/+

]

27.Qd6 Qxd6 28.exd6 Rd7 29.Rc5 Rxd6 30.Rc7 Kg7 31.Rbxb7 Rxb7 32.Rxb7 White has seized the seventh as he hoped, but it’s not enough.
32…Ra6 33.Rb5 Kf6 34.Ke3 Rc6 35.Kd3 g5 [35…Rc4 36.Rb7

(36.Rb4 Rc5 37.Ra4 e5-/+) 36…Rxh4 37.Rxa7 Ra4 38.a6? h5 39.Ke3 e5 40.Kf2 Ke6 41.Ke3 f6

]

 

[35…Rc7]

36.hxg5+ hxg5 37.Rb7 Ra6 38.Rb5 Rc6 39.Rb7 By the time White got his King to b5, my King might be able to do something on g2, so it feels too commital for White to try and win this.

1/2-1/2

Regis, D. – Richmond, J.


East Devon (Exeter), 03/05/2006
Round 5 A good scrap: I didn’t see Black’s idea to win a pawn, then she chose to win it in the worst way. But I never got a grip of the attack…

1.c4 e5 2.Nc3 Nc6 3.g3 g6 4.Bg2 Bg7 5.e4 d6 6.Nge2 Be6 7.d3 Qd7 8.Be3

[8.Nd5 I never remember to play this move… Regis,D-Dunn,A/East Devon Premier 2002/ – (56)]

8…h5 9.h4 Nh6 10.Nd5 Ng4 11.Bd2 Nd4 12.Nxd4 exd4 13.f3 Ne5 14.Bg5 Bxd5 15.cxd5 Qb5

Missed this idea to win a pawn… oh dear, back in swindle mode again! Black actually allows me a lot of activity but I couldn’t find anything concrete.
16.O-O Nxd3 17.a4 Qa6 18.Qc2 Nc5 19.b4 d3 20.Qd1 Nd7 21.Be3 Rooks don’t like defending, so if I am in swindle mode, I’m usually happy to throw in an exchange for some attack.
21…Bxa1 22.Qxa1 O-O-O 23.Bd4 Rhe8 24.Bh3

[24.Qc3]

24…f5 25.b5 Qa5 I was feeling OK at this point, but White’s fun is coming to an end…
26.exf5 Qd2 27.Rd1 Qe2 28.Bf1 Qxf3 29.Rxd3 Qxf5 30.Kh2 Re4 31.Qd1 Rde8 32.Bg2 Re2 Zok!

33.Rd2 Re1 34.Qb3 R8e2 Pow!

35.Rxe2 Rxe2 36.Qd1 Qe4 Splat!

Not a single win, but some better play than previously and against some good opposition. I finished the season on 159, which is higher than I have been recently.

0-1

Spanish Torture? The Ruy Lopez

Posted on by

+-----------------+
|r+b1kgn4|
|0p0p+p0p|
|.+n+.+.+|
|+B+.0.+.|
|.+.+P+.+|
|+.+.+N+.|
|P)P).)P)|
|$NGQI.+R|
+-----------------+

Introduction

The Spanish priest Ruy Lopez, who was the strongest
player of his day, described in
the 1500s the opening which now bears his name. At least, the British
and Americans know it as the Ruy
Lopez: in Europe they are more likely to call it the Spanish Game,
and Tartakower wryly referred to it as Spanish Torture. (Because I
was brought up in East Anglia and not Spain, I described it for
years as the “Royal Opez”, but I believe it is properly pronounced more
like
“Ree Lop’eth”.)

It remains the most important of the King’s-side openings, and
is still generally considered the best way to keep White’s
initiative going after 1…e5. It is no accident that most
of the games in Bronstein’s book “200 Open Games” begin with
the Ruy Lopez opening.

The ideas for each side in the Ruy Lopez are very many and
varied; I hope below to introduce some of the basic concepts and
give you some landmarks for your own exploration of this fine
opening.

The first few moves of the Ruy Lopez opening are easy to follow:
1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 is very natural. The moves often played
by juniors here, 3. Bc4 and 3. d4, are also easy to
understand, but may not be the strongest. 3.d4, the Scotch
Opening, leads to an early clash but perhaps also an early
simplification, with a loss of tension and thus winning chances for
both sides. The Italian game with 3. Bc4, hitting f7 and
hoping to deter …d5, paradoxically rather invites …d7-d5 and an
early exchange in the centre, with equality. This is because the
logical follow-up 3. Bc4 Bc5 4. c3 Nf6, results in Black
regaining control of the d5 point.

The Ruy Lopez move, 3. Bb5, keeps the idea of taking over
the centre with d2-d4 (or with c2-c3 and d2-d4), but first does a
number of important other jobs. Like in the Italian Game, the
Bishop clears the way for White to castle, and then play Rf1-e1.
But on b5 rather than c4 the Bishop cannot be hit by …d7-d5. If
Black does ever move the d-Pawn, the half-pin of the Knight on c6
becomes a full pin, undermining Black’s control of e5 and d4.

In the short term there is an immediate threat: the Bishop
attacks the Knight that defends the pawn attacked by the Knight
(the house that Ruy built). It would be great for White if it
worked so simply, but after 3…(pass); 4 Bxc6, dxc6! 5 Nxe5?!
Qd4! Black will regain his pawn through the double
attack. So, the immediate threat to the Pawn isn’t quite so
deadly, but once White has castled and/or protected the e-Pawn the
threat will become real. Also, the Pawn on e5 is a lot easier to
get at than the one on f7, and Black can get badly tied up or just
stiff and cramped trying to hold on to a share of the centre.

The other tactical point to note is that the counterattack by
Black on e4 by …Nf6 can be met by White castling, since after
…Nf6xe4 White has Rf1-e1: if White does not win a piece, it is at
least often awkward for Black to get the King’s-side sorted. So :
1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 Nf6 4. O-O! Nxe4 5. d4! and White
has an edge.

The most natural sequence of moves trying to hold onto e5 leads
to trouble for Black: after 1 e4, e5; 2 Nf3, Nc6; 3 Bb5, d6; 4
d4, Bd7; 5 Nc3, Nf6; 6 0-0, Be7; 7 Re1, exd4; 8 Nxd4, O-O; 9
Bf1! (to stop the exchanges threatened by 9…Nxd4) when Black
has lots of pieces but not enough space.

Why does Black play 7…exd4 when I said the idea is to
hold on in the centre? Tarrasch’s famous trap showed that Black
cannot play 7…0-0 because of the forcing continuation
8.Bxc6 Bxc6 9.dxe5 dxe5 10.Qxd8 Raxd8 [10…Rfxd8 allows 15 Kf1
– see later 11.Nxe5 Bxe4 12.Nxe4 Nxe4 13.Nd3 f5 14.f3 Bc5+ 15.Kf1]
11.Nxe5 Bxe4 [11…Nxe4 12.Nxc6] 12.Nxe4 Nxe4 13.Nd3 f5 14.f3
Bc5+
15.Nxc5 [15.Kf1 Bb6 16.fxe4 fxe4+; 15.Kh1 Nf2+ 16.Nxf2 Bxf2 17.Rf1]
15…Nxc5 16.Bg5 Rd5 [16…Rde8 17.Be7] 17.Be7 Re8 18.c4
winning
the exchange. (If instead 10…Rexd8 White would have 15 Kh1
(15…Rxd3; 16 fxe4).) Tarrasch won a game with this against Marco
AFTER publishing it as analysis! (If
instead 10…Rexd8 White would have 15 Kh1
(15…Rxd3; 16 fxe4).)

These lines had a strong effect on players who started to
realise just how good the Ruy Lopez is. The Giuoco Piano is a great
opening for your early chess years; the Ruy Lopez is an opening for
life.

Black has many lines, which fall into basically two approaches
(as usual): defence or counterattack. Defence of the
strong point at e5 we have looked at with 3…d6, the
Steinitz Defence, (or 3…a6; 4 Ba4, d6, the
Deferred Steinitz Defence), but we have seen that the point
cannot be held for long; counterattack may be attempted with
3…Nf6, the Berlin Defence, or 3…a6; 4 Ba4,
Nf6; the Morphy Defence. The Morphy move 3…a6 was an
important refinement of Black’s resources, making the Bishop choose
its diagonal and allowing the pin-breaking …b5. Reuben Fine gives
an instructive comparison of variations with and without …a6:

In reply to the Morphy the obvious 5 Nc3 is rather boring, but
White can play 5 O-O since, as we have seen, Black cannot
really win the e4 pawn. The Morphy has itself a strong point line,
5 O-O, Be7; 6 Re1, b5; 7 Bb3, d6, the Closed Morphy
Defence, and a counter-attacking line, 5 O-O, Nxe4; 6 d4, b5; 7
Bb3, d5, the Open Morphy Defence. These are systems of
great richness, and the Closed Morphy best avoided until your chess
understanding is well advanced.

 

The Ideas
behind the Ruy Lopez

White plays for an immediate break in the centre

5 d4 or 5 Qe2 (idea O-O and Rd1)
or 5.Qe2/6.Qe2 lead to more familiar open and attacking
e-pawn styles of game. An example: 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6
4. Ba4 Nf6 5. d4 exd4 6. O-O Be7 7. Re1 b5 8. Bb3 d6 9. Bd5 Nxd5
10. exd5 Ne5 11. Nxd4 O-O

This is about even, and, I hope, a game juniors would enjoy
playing as either colour; these variations are a good introduction
to the Ruy Lopez.

Black plays for an immediate break
in the centre

This is probably a good way to play the Ruy for Black
in your early career. The Open Morphy Defence relies above all on
piece activity, and obeys two good general opening rules for
Black:

(a) If your opponent lets you take a central Pawn, take it off
if you do not lose a piece (viz. 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6
4.Ba4 Nf6 5.0-0 Nxe4 and now after 6. Re1 Black is in no
pin, so 6…Nc5 or 6…Nd6 are quite all right.)

(b) Aim to play …d5 yourself if you can

Grandmaster theory suggests that Black is taking on rather a lot
of weaknesses when playing this way, but that may not be so
important if you are not playing Grandmasters. Siegbert Tarrasch,
who was so effective playing the Ruy as White, preferred to play
this way as Black, and since then Max Euwe, Victor Kortchnoi, Artur
Yusupov, Jan Timman and Viswanathan Anand have all been happy to
play the Open Morphy at World Championship and Candidates’ level,
so you can see that this is not very much of a handicap.

The veteran English player Vernon Dilworth suggested the most
aggressive way of playing the Open Morphy as Black:

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6
5.0-0 Nxe4 6.d4 b5 7.Bb3 d5 8.dxe5 Be6 9.c3 Bc5 10.Nbd2 0-0 11.Bc2
Nxf2

Black sacrifices two active pieces for a Rook while
White is still getting the Queen’s-side organised. Black will
follow up with …f6, attacking down the f-file.

+-----------------+
|r+.1.4k+|
|+.0.+p0p|
|p+n+b+.+|
|+pgp).+.|
|.+.+.+.+|
|+.).+N+.|
|P)BH.hP)|
|$.GQ+RI.|
+-----------------+

Black can play more calmly at move 11
(11…Bf5 is fashionable since Kortchnoi adopted it), or
earlier play 9…Be7 (Euwe’s preference) or 9…Nc5
(Kortchnoi’s other preference). These lines are all rather complex
and there is a lot of theory on them, but until your opponents know
all the theory, get stuck in!

There are several other lines where we see an early …d5 by
Black:

…d5 in the Marshall Gambit, a favourite of club players:
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.0-0 Be7 6.Re1 b5 7.Bb3
0-0 8.c3 d5 9.exd5 Nxd5 10.Nxe5 Nxe5 11.Rxe5 c6, e.g. 12.d4
Bd6 13.Re1 Qh4 14.g3 Qh3 15.Be3 Bg4 16.Qd3 Rae8 17.Nd2 f5 18.f4 Kh8
19.Bxd5 cxd5 20.Qf1 Qh5 21.Qg2 Re4 22.a4 bxa4 23.Rxa4 g5 24.Nxe4
fxe4 25.Rxa6 gxf4 26.Rxd6 fxe3 27.Rxe3 Bh3 28.g4 Qxg4 29.Rg3
Qd1+ 0-1, Kosten-Hebden, 1982.

…d5 in the normal Closed Morphy: e.g. Kasparov,G (2800) –
Karpov,A (2730) [C92] Wch35-KK5 USA/FRA (New York) (8), 1990
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.0-0 Be7 6.Re1 b5 7.Bb3 d6
8.c3 0-0 9.h3 Nd7 10.d4 Bf6 11.a4 Bb7 12.Be3 Na5 13.Bc2 Nc4 14.Bc1
d5! TN

…d5 in the Classical Defence: 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 Bc5
4. c3 d5?!! Or more sanely, Unzicker – Fischer Leipzig 1960
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 Bc5 4.c3 Nf6 5.d4 Bb6 6.0-0 0-0 7.Re1 exd4
8.cxd4 d5 9.e5 Ne4 10.Nc3 Bg4 11.Bxc6 bxc6 12.Nxe4 dxe4 13.Rxe4
Bxf3 14.Qxf3 Bxd4 15.Be3 Bxb2 16.Rb1 f5 17.exf6
½-½

And wherever else White is slack, e.g. 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6
3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6 5. Nc3 or 5. d3 when Black should get
castled and look for …d7-d5. Tiviakov,S (2625) – Sokolov,I
(2665) [C86]Wijk (10), 1996 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6
5.Qe2 Be7 6.c3 0-0 7.0-0 b5 8.Bb3 d5 9.d3 Re8 10.Re1 h6 11.Nbd2 Be6
12.Nf1 Bc5 13.Ng3 a5 (…0-1, 41),

White’s outpost on d5

Tal – Bronstein
[C96] 1956

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6
5.0-0 Be7 6.Re1 b5 7.Bb3 d6 8.c3 0-0 9.h3 Na5 10.Bc2 c5 11.d4 Nc6
12.Nbd2 Qb6 13.dxc5 dxc5 14.Nf1 Be6 15.Ne3 Rad8 16.Qe2 g6 17.Ng5 c4
! 18.a4 Kg7 19.axb5 axb5 20.Rb1 Na5 21.Nf3 Qc7

Every White piece is queuing up behind the e-pawn,
waiting for…

+-----------------+
|.+.4.4.+|
|+.1.gpip|
|.+.+bhp+|
|hp+.0.+.|
|.+p+P+.+|
|+.).HN+P|
|.)B+Q)P+|
|+RG.$.I.|
+-----------------+

22.Nd5 ! 22…Bxd5
23.exd5

White’s pieces control many central squares, and the
Bishops have new avenues of attack.

23…Rfe8 24.Qxe5 Qxe5 25.Nxe5 Nxd5
26.Ra1 Nb3 27.Bxb3 cxb3 28.Bh6+ ! 28…Kg8 ?! 29.Nc6 Rc8 30.Rad1
Rxc6 31.Rxd5 f6 32.Rxb5 g5 33.Rxb3 Kf7 34.Rb7 Re6 35.Rxe6 Kxe6
36.h4 Rg8 37.f4 Bc5+ 38.Kf1 gxh4 39.Rb5 Rc8 40.f5+ Kd6 41.b4 h3
42.Rxc5 h2 43.Bf4+ 1-0

White’s outpost on f5

This is a simple way to play all closed double
King’s-Pawn positions: park a Knight on f5 and play for a
King’s-side attack.

Teichmann,R – Schlechter,C [C90]
Karlsbad, 1911

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6
5.0-0 Be7 6.Re1 b5 7.Bb3 d6 8.c3 0-0 9.d3

White plays quietly in the centre, hoping to avoid
distractions there.

9…Na5 10.Bc2 c5 11.Nbd2 Qc7 12.Nf1
Nc6 13.Ne3 Bb7 14.Nf5 Rfe8 15.Bg5 Nd7 16.Bb3 Nb6 17.Bxe7 Nxe7
18.Bxf7+ Kxf7 19.Ng5+ Kg8 20.Qh5 Nxf5 21.Qxh7+ Kf8 22.Qxf5+ Kg8
23.Qg6 Qd7 24.Re3 1-0

White’s central play

You should never forget that one of the key aims for
White in the e-Pawn openings is to take over the centre with c3 and
d4. If Black takes his eye off the ball White can switch to this
plan with effect, and in fact White can win a lot of games through
simple domination of the centre. More space and more
manoeuvrability means chances of attack:

Fischer,R – Barczay,L [C95] Sousse
izt Rd: 1, 1967

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6
5.0-0 Be7 6.Re1 b5 7.Bb3 d6 8.c3 0-0 9.h3 Nb8 10.d4 Nbd7

+-----------------+
|r+b1.4k+|
|+.0ngp0p|
|p+.0.h.+|
|+p+.0.+.|
|.+.)P+.+|
|+B).+N+P|
|P).+.)P+|
|$NGQ$.I.|
+-----------------+

11.Nh4 exd4 12.cxd4 Nb6 13.Nf3 d5
14.e5 Ne4 15.Nbd2 Nxd2 16.Bxd2 Bf5 17.Bc2 Bxc2 18.Qxc2 Rc8 19.b3
Nd7 20.e6 fxe6 21.Rxe6 c5 22.Ba5 Qxa5 23.Rxe7 Qd8 24.Ng5
1-0

White’s King’s-side attack

The Bishop that lurks on c2 is an ace up White’s
sleeve: while Black is distracted elsewhere White can suddenly whip
out a King’s-side attack. A glorious example of this was:

Kasparov,G (2800) – Karpov,A (2730) [C92] (20), 1990

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6
5.0-0 Be7 6.Re1 b5 7.Bb3 d6 8.c3 0-0 9.h3 Bb7 10.d4 Re8 11.Nbd2 Bf8
12.a4 h6 13.Bc2 exd4 14.cxd4 Nb4 15.Bb1 c5 16.d5 Nd7 17.Ra3 f5
18.Rae3 Nf6 19.Nh2 Kh8 20.b3 bxa4 21.bxa4 c4 22.Bb2 fxe4
23.Nxe4

+-----------------+
|r+.1rg.i|
|+b+.+.0.|
|p+.0.h.0|
|+.+P+.+.|
|Php+N+.+|
|+.+.$.+P|
|.G.+.)PH|
|+B+Q$.I.|
+-----------------+

23… Nfxd5 24.Rg3 Re6 25.Ng4 Qe8
26.Nxh6 c3 27.Nf5 cxb2 28.Qg4 Bc8 29.Qh4+ Rh6 30.Nxh6 gxh6 31.Kh2
Qe5 32.Ng5 Qf6 33.Re8 Bf5 34.Qxh6+ [34.Nf7+ is Mate in 6!
34…Qxf7 35.Qxh6+ Bh7 36.Rxa8 Ne7 37.Rxf8+ Ng8 38.Rgxg8+ Qxg8
39.Qxh7#] 34…Qxh6 35.Nf7+ Kh7 36.Bxf5+ Qg6 37.Bxg6+ Kg7
38.Rxa8 Be7 39.Rb8 a5 40.Be4+ Kxf7 41.Bxd5+ 1-0

White can also say nonchalantly that: Black is
cramped, and so will find it difficult to organise a defence, so I
will attack the King in any event. The situation is usually more
complex than this bluntness implies, but the core plan is still
played:

Nunn – Short (Brussels) [C98] 1986
[JDMN]

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6
5.0-0 Be7 6.Re1 b5 7.Bb3 d6 8.c3 0-0

[8…Na5 9.Bc2 c5 10.d4 Qc7 11.h3
Nc6 12.Be3 0-0 13.Nbd2 Rd8 14.Rc1 Bd7 15.Nf1 b4 16.d5 Na7 17.c4 Nc8
18.g4 Nb6 19.b3 a5 20.Ng3 g6 21.Kh2 a4 22.Rg1 axb3 23.axb3 Bf8
24.Qd2 Ra2 25.Bg5 Bg7 26.Qe3 Rda8 27.Bb1 R2a3 28.Ne1 Kh8 29.Qd3 Ng8
30.Nc2 R3a7 31.Rcf1 Be8 32.Be3 Nd7 33.Ne1 Qd8 34.g5 Qa5 35.h4 Qd8
36.h5 Qe7 37.Nf3 Nb6 38.Rh1 Qd7 39.Kg2 Ne7 40.hxg6 fxg6 41.Rh3 Bf7
42.Rfh1 Bg8 43.Nf5 Rf8 44.Nxg7 Kxg7 45.Qe2 1-0
Capablanca,Jose-Kupchik,Abraham/New York (07) 1915]

9.h3 Na5 10.Bc2 c5 11.d4 Qc7 12.Nbd2
Nc6 13.d5 Nd8 14.Nf1 Ne8

+-----------------+
|r+bhn4k+|
|+.1.gp0p|
|p+.0.+.+|
|+p0P0.+.|
|.+.+P+.+|
|+.).+N+P|
|P)B+.)P+|
|$.GQ$NI.|
+-----------------+

“In olden times White would often
attack by g4 and Ng3 in the Closed Spanish; once in a while White
would break through with a Nf5 sacrifice, but now it is recognised
that so long as all Black’s pieces can reach the King’s-side, a
direct attack should not work. Thus, the emphasis has switched to
diversionary Queen’s-side play, with a King’s-side attack being
reserved for a favourable moment when Black’s pieces have been
lured away. Moreover, the King’s-side attack is usually based on f4
rather than g4, since only f4 offers the chance of activating the
light-squared Bishop on c2.”

“White’s preliminary a4 gives him control of the a-file; this
may not appear relevant to the conduct of a King’s-side attack, but
watch what happens later!” John Nunn

15.a4

[15.g4 g6 16.Ng3 Ng7 17.Kh2 f6
18.Be3 Bd7 19.Qd2 Nf7 20.Rg1 Kh8 21.Raf1 Rg8 22.Ne1 Raf8 =
Robatsch-Padevsky, Amsterdam 1972]

15…Rb8 16.axb5 axb5 17.b4 c4
18.Ng3 g6 19.Nh2 Ng7 20.Rf1 Bd7 21.f4 Bh4 22.Qf3 f5 23.fxe5 dxe5
24.exf5 Bxg3 25.Qxg3 Nxf5 26.Qf2 [26.Qe1 +/-]
26…Nb7 27.Ng4 h5 28.Ra6 hxg4 29.Rxg6+ Ng7 30.Rxg7+ [30.Rxg7+
Kxg7 31.Bh6+ Kxh6 (31…Kg8 32.Qxf8+ Rxf8 33.Rxf8#; 31…Kh8
32.Qxf8+ Rxf8 33.Rxf8#) 32.Qh4+ Kg7 33.Qh7#] 1-0

Black’s Queen’s-side attack

Of course, what else may distract Black from defence
of the King’s-side is an opportunity to attack the Queen’s-side,
and this attack can succeed against the best opposition:

Kasparov,G (2700) – Karpov,A (2720)
[C92] Wch32-KK2 Moscow (5), 1985

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6
5.0-0 Be7 6.Re1 b5 7.Bb3 d6 8.c3 0-0 9.h3 Bb7 10.d4 Re8 11.Nbd2 Bf8
12.a4 Qd7 13.axb5 axb5 14.Rxa8 Bxa8 [14…Rxa8?!
15.Ng5±] 15.d5 Na5 16.Ba2!? N 16…c6 17.b4 Nb7! 18.c4
Rc8!? [18…Nd8+=] 19.dxc6?! [19.Qe2] 19…Qxc6= 20.c5?!
[20.Bb2] 20…Nd8 21.Bb2

+-----------------+
|b+rh.gk+|
|+.+.+p0p|
|.+q0.h.+|
|+p).0.+.|
|.).+P+.+|
|+.+.+N+P|
|BG.H.)P+|
|+.+Q$.I.|
+-----------------+

21…dxc5! =+ 22.bxc5 Qxc5 23.Bxe5
Nd7 24.Bb2 Qb4! 25.Nb3?! [25.Qb1] 25…Nc5-/+

Black has the advantage but there is still a lot of
tension in the position.

26.Ba1 Bxe4 27.Nfd4 Ndb7 28.Qe2 Nd6
29.Nxc5 Qxc5 30.Qg4 Re8 31.Rd1 Bg6 32.Qf4 Qb4 33.Qc1 Be4 34.Re1 Qa5
35.Bb3 Qa8 36.Qb2 b4 37.Re3 Bg6 38.Rxe8 Qxe8 39.Qc1 Ne4 40.Bd5 Nc5
41.Nb3 Nd3 0-1

White’s Queen’s-side attack

Often, Black will stake out some space on the
Queen’s-side with …a6 and …b5. Whether in a given position this
represents Queen’s-side counterplay or Queen’s-side weaknesses is
one of the key Ruy Lopez questions!

Karpov – Westerinen,H [C87]
1974

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 d6
5.0-0 Bd7 6.d4 Nf6 7.c3 Be7 8.Nbd2 0-0 9.Re1 Re8 10.Nf1 h6 11.Ng3
Bf8 12.Bd2

Modest, but White is not so much concerned to point a
battering-ram at a weak spot (there aren’t any) as to maintain a
flexible position where Black will be less able to re-arrange the
pieces to counter White’s latest idea.

12…b5 13.Bc2 Na5 14.b3 c5 15.d5
Nh7 16.h3 Be7 17.Nf5 Nb7 18.a4 bxa4 19.b4 a5 20.Bxa4 axb4 21.cxb4
Bf8 22.Bc6 Qc7 23.b5 Nf6 24.Qc2 Reb8 25.Ne3 Bc8 26.Nc4 Be7 27.b6
Qd8 28.Ra7

+-----------------+
|r4b1.+k+|
|$n+.gp0.|
|.)B0.h.0|
|+.0P0.+.|
|.+N+P+.+|
|+.+.+N+P|
|.+QG.)P+|
|+.+.$.I.|
+-----------------+

The point of using an open file is to provide
invasion points for rooks, although it’s unusual for a Rook to
arrive on the seventh, supported by a Pawn. Black cannot bear this,
but the exchange concedes a monster pawn on a7.

28…Nd7 29.Qa4 Rxa7 30.bxa7 Ra8
31.Qa6 Qc7

Black’s pieces are standing on each other’s toes and
cannot escape the attack of White’s pieces. The Black Rook has
nowhere to move to.

32.Bxd7 Qxd7 [32…Bxd7
33.Nb6] 33.Nb6 Nd8 34.Qa1 1-0

(see also the first game of the Deep Blue-Kasparov
return match in 1997)

Black’s King’s-side
attack

Not a common occurrence but there are several
attacking plans for Black. There are several …Bg4 lines where an
incautious h2-h3 can be met by …h7-h5!

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 d6 4.c3 Bg4
5. h3 h5! or

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4. Bxc6 bxc6 5. O-O Bg4 6.
h3 h5!

A more complex line is seen in the Archangel
Variation: 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.0-0 b5 6.Bb3
Bb7 7.Re1 Bc5 8.c3 d6 9.d4 Bb6 10.Bg5 h6 11.Bh4 Qd7

+-----------------+
|r+.+k+.4|
|+b0q+p0.|
|pgn0.h.0|
|+p+.0.+.|
|.+.)P+.G|
|+B).+N+.|
|P).+.)P)|
|$N+Q$.I.|
+-----------------+

Black announces his intention to abandon all subtlety
and play for a King’s-side attack.

12.a4 0-0-0 13.axb5 axb5
14.Bxf6

[14.Na3 g5 15.Bg3 h5 16.dxe5
(16.h4 gxh4 17.Bxh4 Rh6 18.Nxb5 Rg8 19.Qd3 exd4 20.cxd4 Nb4)
16…h4 17.exf6 hxg3 18.hxg3 g4 19.Nd4 Rh7 20.Bd5 Rdh8 =+ BCO2]

14…gxf6 15.Bd5 Rhg8 16.Kh1 Qg4
17.Rg1 exd4 18.cxd4 f5 19.Nc3 fxe4 20.Nxe4 Qf5 21.Nc3 Nb4 22.Bxb7+
Kxb7 Klovans-Shirov 87 = BCO2

Black also has some gambit lines: as well as the
Marshall Attack (see above), Black has several opportunities to
play …f5. The immediate 3…f5 (or 3…a6 4. Ba4 f5) is often
frowned upon but also often played, and if White is a little slow
in the Steinitz Variation Black may play the Siesta Variation, a
far from sleepy line.

Reti,R – Capablanca,J [C74] Berlin
(14), 1928

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 d6 4.c3 a6
5.Ba4 f5 6.d4 fxe4 7.Ng5 exd4 8.Nxe4 Nf6 9.Bg5 Be7 10.Qxd4 b5
11.Nxf6+ gxf6 12.Qd5 bxa4 13.Bh6 Qd7 14.0-0 Bb7 15.Bg7 0-0-0
16.Bxh8 Ne5 17.Qd1 Bf3 18.gxf3 Qh3 0-1

Some Key Variations of the Ruy
Lopez

 

Variations
of the Ruy Lopez without 3…a6

These are less important at GM level than the main
lines with 3…a6, but at club level they have many virtues: less
theoretical, less well-known, and often sim pler to understand.
Moreover, I often find that club players when faced with 3…a6
often play 4. Bxc6, and if they do play 4. Ba4, after 4…Nf6 they
cannot be trusted to play 5.O-O, and instead play some clod-hopping
move like 5. d3 or 5. Nc3. While these are not particularly
strong lines they may be more stodgy than you would wish to play
against as Black, and many of these old lines may lead to more open
or complex games at club level. They may be grouped as follows:

Strong-point
lines with …d6, …Nge7 and/or …g6.

Black can hold the centre without 3…a6 using one or
some
combination of these moves. White’s strongest plan in each case is
undoubtedly to play an immediate c3 and d4, with or without O-O.
Black can then hope to slug it out in a roughly equal position
(although Black has not yet castled and may find it awkward if he
has not castled and the centre opens up.)

Hindermann Felix – Yudkovsky Yair [C60/02] 05 European Youth
U14 Boys, Tallinn EST, 1997

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 Nge7 4.c3 g6
5.d4 exd4 6.cxd4 d5 7.e5 Bg7 8.Bg5 0-0 9.h3 Bf5 10.Nc3 Be4 11.Nxe4
dxe4 12.Bxc6 bxc6 13.Nd2 h6 14.Bxe7 Qxe7 15.Nxe4 Rad8 16.Qa4 Qh4
17.Qxc6 Rxd4 0-1

Active lines with …Bc5 and/or
…Nf6

Both Fischer and particularly Spassky have
experimented with the Classical Variation (3…Bc5), and the
related Berlin Classical 3…Nf6 4. O-O Bc5 . Again White is
best advised to go for central break, and again it is reasonable
for Black to hope for equality.

Ady JJ – Spassky BV [C65] London, 1984

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 Nf6 4.0-0
Bc5 5.Nxe5 Nxe5 6.d4 a6 7.dxe5 axb5 8.exf6 Qxf6 9.Nc3 c6 10.Qh5 d6
11.Bg5 Qg6 12.Qh4 h6 13.Bf4 b4 14.Ne2 0-0 15.Ng3 Re8 16.Rfd1 d5
17.Be3 Be7 18.Qf4 Bd6 19.Qh4 Bxg3 20.hxg3 Qxe4 21.Rd4 Qxc2 22.Rxb4
Rxa2 23.Rxa2 Qb1+ 24.Kh2 Qxa2 25.Bxh6 Qb1 26.Be3 Qc2 27.Qg5 f6
28.Qh5 Re5 29.Qh4 c5 30.Ra4 Rxe3 31.fxe3 g5 32.Qh6 Qxa4 33.Qxf6 Qc6
34.Qxg5+ Kh7 35.Qe7+ Kg6 36.g4 Bxg4 37.Qh4 Qd6+ 0-1

Make a mess with 3…Nd4

One on its own, Bird’s Defence has never been refuted
and leads to unique positions in which White may be uncomfortable,
or at least less fluent:

Short Nigel D – Ivanchuk Vassily [C61] Linares (Spain),
1989

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 Nd4 4.Nxd4
exd4 5.Bc4 Nf6 6.Qe2 Bc5 7.e5 0-0 8.0-0 d5 9.exf6 dxc4 10.Qh5 b6
11.fxg7 Re8 12.d3 cxd3 13.cxd3 Ba6 14.Qf3 Qe7 15.Bf4 Qe2 16.Nd2
Qxf3 17.Nxf3 Bxd3 18.Rfe1 Be2 19.Bxc7 d3 20.a3 a5 21.Bf4 Re4 22.Bd2
Rae8 23.Bc3 a4 24.Ng5 Rc4 25.Rad1 Rc8 26.Ra1 Rd8 27.Nf3 Rxc3
28.bxc3 d2 29.Rxe2 d1Q+ 30.Rxd1 Rxd1+ 31.Ne1 Rc1 32.Re4 f5 33.Re8+
Kxg7 34.Kf1 Rxc3 35.Ke2 Rxa3 36.Nd3 Ra2+ 37.Kf3 Ra3 38.Rd8 Rc3
39.Kf4 a3 40.Rd7+ Kf8 41.Ne5 a2 42.Kxf5 a1Q 43.Rd8+ Kg7 44.Rd7+ Kg8
0-1

Variations of the Ruy Lopez with
3…a6

The Exchange Variation

We have seen that after 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5
a6 4. Bxc6 dxc6 White cannot win a pawn with 5. Nxe5
because of 5….Qd4.

What you may not know is that White can play this line to win,
because in some sense, he is already a pawn up!

Let me explain.

If you have an extra pawn, you should:

  • ­ exchange off
    pieces, not pawns
  • ­ create a passed
    pawn
  • ­ advance the
    passed pawn and either:
  1. – force your opponent to give up material to stop it queening,
    or
  2. – force your way into the opponent’s position to take material
    yourself (usually pawns)

With this in mind, let’s look at the pawn formation after 1.
e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6 4. Bxc6 dxc6 5. d4 exd4 6. Qxd4 Qxd4 7.
Nxd4:

+-----------------+
|.+.+.+.+|
|0p0.+p0p|
|.+p+.+.+|
|+.+.+.+.|
|.+.+P+.+|
|+.+.+.+.|
|P)P+.)P)|
|+.+.+.+.|
+-----------------+

Now, if there were only Kings on the board, White
could easily create a passed pawn with f4, e5 and f5 and e6.

But Black cannot do the same on the other side, unless White
allows all the front pawns to come to a4,b4 and c4, when there is a
trick with …b3! e.g. axb3, c3! bxc3 and …a3. As long as White
avoids that trap, the passed pawn on the King’s side should
win.

This is what I mean by already being a pawn up. You have an
extra pawn on the King’s-side, and Black’s extra Queen’s-side pawn
is useless. This is not the only thing going on in the position
(else the Lopez would be an easy win for White) but it is a
constant fallback plan for White.

Emanuel Lasker played this several times, and more recently,
Bobby Fischer discovered that you could also play 5. O-O!
with an awkward moment for Black, because now there really is a
threat to the e5 pawn which is not easy to meet.

Lasker,E – Tarrasch,S [C68]
Duesseldorf, 1908

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Bxc6
dxc6 5.d4 exd4 6.Qxd4 Qxd4 7.Nxd4 c5 8.Ne2 Bd7 9.b3 Bc6 10.f3 Be7
11.Bb2 Bf6 12.Bxf6 Nxf6 13.Nd2 0-0-0 14.0-0-0 Rd7 15.Nf4 Re8 16.Nc4
b6 17.a4 a5 18.Rxd7 Nxd7 19.Rd1 Ne5 20.Nxe5 Rxe5 21.c4
Re8

+-----------------+
|.+k+r+.+|
|+.0.+p0p|
|.0b+.+.+|
|0.0.+.+.|
|P+P+PH.+|
|+P+.+P+.|
|.+.+.+P)|
|+.IR+.+.|
+-----------------+

22.Nh5 Rg8 23.Rd3 f6 24.Kd2 Be8
25.Ng3 Bd7 26.Ke3 Re8 27.Nh5 Re7 28.g4 c6 29.h4 Kc7 30.g5 f5 31.Ng3
fxe4 32.Nxe4 Bf5 33.h5 Rd7 34.Rc3 Rd1 35.Kf4 Bd7 36.Re3 Rh1 37.Ng3
Rh4+ 38.Ke5 Rh3 39.f4 Kd8 40.f5 Rh4

+-----------------+
|.+.i.+.+|
|+.+b+.0p|
|.0p+.+.+|
|0.0.IP)P|
|P+P+.+.4|
|+P+.$.H.|
|.+.+.+.+|
|+.+.+.+.|
+-----------------+

41.f6 gxf6+ 42.Kxf6 Be8 43.Nf5 Rf4
44.g6 hxg6 45.hxg6 Rg4 46.Rxe8+ Kxe8 47.g7 Kd7 48.Nh4 Rxg7 49.Kxg7
Ke6 50.Nf3 Kf5 51.Kf7 Ke4 52.Ke6 Kd3 53.Kd6 Kc3 54.Kxc6 Kxb3 55.Kb5
1-0

The Closed Morphy Defence

This is the classic battle ground in the Ruy. Black
may find it difficult to hold tight in the closed Morphy, but
perhaps not as difficult as it is for White to keep everything
under control. There are some classic positional themes here,
determined by the pawn formation:

+-----------------+
|.+.+.+.+|
|+.0.+p+.|
|.+.0.+.+|
|+.+.0.+.|
|.+.)P+.+|
|+.).+.+.|
|.+.+.).+|
|+.+.+.+.|
+-----------------+

1. Space: Apart from any commitment to passive play
being bad match tactics, as long Black has a Pawn on d6 it will
always be a little more easy for White to manoeuvre than Black, for
the Black position has a bottleneck on the d-file. Stean explains
that this is why White spends so much time in the opening avoiding
the exchange of the light-squared Bishop: while Black retains all
four minor pieces, this slight cramp will be most clearly felt.

2. Flexibility: Moreover, it is extremely important to have good
manoeuvring skills, because at any point the Pawn formation can
shift: from the basic formation (a) we can go at least four
different ways (b-e below)…

Another line of thought I found useful:

Nunn – Olafsson (Teesside) [C54]
1982

1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Nf6 3.d3 Nc6 4.Nf3 Bc5
5.0-0 d6 6.c3 Qe7 [6…0-0 7.Nbd2 a6 8.Bb3 Ba7]
7.Nbd2 a6 8.Bb3 0-0 9.Re1 Be6 10.Nf1 [10.Bc2] 10…Ba7
11.Bc2

“…why is the Ruy Lopez (which this
opening has virtually become) so difficult for Black to combat?
Look at the present position: Black’s pieces are sensibly
developed; he has as much space as White; his pawns are strong. Yet
he has problems.”

“The answer seems to be that in this type of Ruy Lopez position
Black can easily get caught in a situation where his game cannot
unfold. Here for instance, White has his plans of Ng3-f5 and later
d4, but it is less easy for Black to find something profitable to
do without weakening himself or making some serious concession. His
pieces may look reasonably placed, but they cannot readily achieve
anything constructive or relevant. I should make it clear that this
does not have to happen in a Lopez; it is far from being a bad
opening for him. But in practice one error (6…Qe7) can leave him
in misery. And so, if a player seems to have a respectable game (in
a Ruy Lopez or any other opening for that matter), yet still loses,
his misfortune may often be traced back to this lack of life in his
position.” — NUNN AND GRIFFITHS

We also recognise that the tension may even be added to by Black
playing …c5, (the Tchigorin line) – see later.

(a) Closed KP centre, Tension form (Ruy Lopez)

+-----------------+
|.+.+.+.+|
|+.0.+p+.|
|.+.0.+.+|
|+.+.0.+.|
|.+.)P+.+|
|+.).+.+.|
|.+.+.).+|
|+.+.+.+.|
+-----------------+

Black may resolve the tension
by playing …e5xd4 (c3xd4) which results in an unbalanced position
where White has an extra central Pawn (b).

(b) Double Pawn centre, KP unopposed

+-----------------+
|.+.+.+.+|
|+.0.+p+.|
|.+.0.+.+|
|+.+.+.+.|
|.+.)P+.+|
|+.+.+.+.|
|.+.+.).+|
|+.+.+.+.|
+-----------------+

These adjacent Pawns in a more open position confer a
bigger advantage, but in a more open position may be more
vulnerable to attack e.g. along the e-file.

White may resolve the tension in the first formation, by
playing either d4-d5 (giving a closed centre (c) with an advanced
d-Pawn), or by playing d4xe5 (…d6xe5) with a balanced, semi-open
KP centre (d).

(c) Closed centre with advanced d-Pawn.

+-----------------+
|.+.+.+.+|
|+.0.+p+.|
|.+.0.+.+|
|+.+P0.+.|
|.+.+P+.+|
|+.).+.+.|
|.+.+.).+|
|+.+.+.+.|
+-----------------+

The advanced d-Pawn gives a space advantage,
particularly on the Queen’s-side. To play for a win the c-Pawn and
maybe b-Pawn should be advanced, to seize more space and perhaps
open lines on that side. The opponent may consider an advance of
the f-Pawn to undermine the d-Pawn and counter-attack on the
King’s-side.

(d) Balanced, semi-open KP centre

+-----------------+
|.+.+.+.+|
|+.0.+p+.|
|.+.+.+.+|
|+.+.0.+.|
|.+.+P+.+|
|+.).+.+.|
|.+.+.).+|
|+.+.+.+.|
+-----------------+

This is a very common formation in KP openings. If
neither side can achieve a sharp advance of the f-Pawn, play will
be dominated by piece play on either wing. There are natural posts
for Knights on d5 and f5 (d4 and f4 for Black), and if Black’s
c-Pawn has pushed to c5 earlier, the d5 point is even more
attractive. Control of the d-file is a good idea but can usually be
countered, resulting in exchanges. Occupation of the mutual
outposts f5 and f4 by Knights is less straightforward to counter,
and while your opponent is sorting out that threat, it may be that
you can get the d-file then.

(e) Semi-open unbalanced KP centre.

+-----------------+
|.+.+.+.+|
|+.0.+p+.|
|.+.0.+.+|
|+.+.+.+.|
|.+.+P+.+|
|+.).+.+.|
|.+.+.).+|
|+.+.+.+.|
+-----------------+

The e-Pawn confers a space advantage and attacking
prospects on the King’s-side, which may be added to by f2-f4. The
e-Pawn is exposed on the half-open file, and should be restrained
(e.g. by …Re8) from breaking open lines for the attack by e4-e5.
Black’s break …d6-d5 is a natural plan to dissolve the
centre.

The
Tchigorin Counterattack

So, as a result of facing all this hassle, Black
developed a plan of Queen’s-side counterplay in the closed
Morphy:

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6
5.0-0 Be7 6.Re1 b5 7.Bb3 d6 8.c3 0-0 9.h3 Na5 10.Bc2 c5
11.d4

Black’s idea is two-fold: to maintain the e5 point in
the centre, while attacking on the Queen’s-side.

+-----------------+
|r+b1.4k+|
|+.+.gp0p|
|p+.0.h.+|
|hp0.0.+.|
|.+.)P+.+|
|+.).+N+P|
|P)B+.)P+|
|$NGQ$.I.|
+-----------------+

Almost every legal move has been tried here:

11…Qc7 was Tchigorin’s original recipe

11…Nd7 was famously tried by Keres

11…Bb7 is a good idea but may be squashed by d4-d5, so Black
may prefer to preface this with 11…cxd4. After 12. cxd4 as well
as 12…Bb7 we also see two new ideas: 12…Nc6 and 12…Bd7

As we have seen White has a variety of plans in response:

+-----------------+
|.+.+.+.+|
|+.+.+p+.|
|.+.0.+.+|
|+.0.0.+.|
|.+.)P+.+|
|+.).+.+.|
|.+.+.).+|
|+.+.+.+.|
+-----------------+

(a) just to manoeuvre, keeping the tension as long as
possible and improving the position of your own pieces, relying on
the slight extra space referred to above

(b) break up the Queen’s-side with a2-a4,

(c) seal the centre with d4-d5 (a Ruy Lopez formation which has
a lot in common with the King’s Indian!),

(d) open up the d5 outpost with dxc5 (or dxe5). However, White
is not yet terribly close to putting a Knight on d5, and Black can
now think about a plan like …c5-c4, and …Na5-b7-c5-d3, with a
monster Black Knight on d3. In fact, Black can aim for …c4
whether or not White exposes the d5 point, and can play for it from
formations other than the main line Tchigorin.

+-----------------+
|.+.1rgk+|
|+b+n+p0.|
|.+.0.+.0|
|+p+P+.+.|
|.+pHP+.+|
|).+n+.+P|
|.+.H.)P+|
|+BGQ$.I.|
+-----------------+

Kasparov-Karpov (1990),
m14

So this is a formation that requires some delicate footwork by
both players.

Modern
variations in the Closed Morphy.

More recently Black has experimented with more
restrained plans than the Tchigorin, hoping to avoid the
disadvantages of this line (decentralised Knight on a5, potential
Queen’s-side weaknesses) and instead manoeuvre more adroitly to
secure adequate play across the board. These lines have included,
after 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.0-0 Be7 6.Re1 b5
7.Bb3 d6 8.c3 0-0 9.h3:

The Breyer Variation, 9…Nbd7, where Black hopes to
reorganise his pieces smoothly at a time when White is by no means
well-developed. This was the ‘grower’ when I was a boy, and is
still an important line.

The Smyslov Variation, 9…h6, waiting for White to show
his hand, a line which has been superceded by…

The Flohr-Zaitsev Variation, 9…Bb7, which has been the
height of current fashion since Zaitsev showed that the old plan
with …Na5 (e.g. Fischer,RJ – Stein,L, 1967) was less safe
than re-organising with …Re8 and …Be7. This is a pretty
heavyweight GM line outside my own experience and I won’t comment
further, but you will see it about:

Kasparov,G (2700) – Karpov,A (2720)
[C92] WCh32-KK2 Moscow (9), 1985

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6
5.0-0 Be7 6.Re1 b5 7.Bb3 d6 8.c3 0-0 9.h3 Bb7 10.d4 Re8

[If White wants, there is a draw to be had by 11. Ng5 Rf8 12.
Nf3]

11.Nbd2 Bf8 12.a4 h6 13.Bc2 Nb8 14.Bd3 c6 15.Nf1 Nbd7
16.Ng3 Qc7 17.Bd2 g6 18.Qc1 Kh7 19.b3 Bg7 20.Qc2 Nf8 21.Be3 Ne6
22.Rad1 Rac8 23.Bf1 Bf8 24.Rd2 Qb8 25.Qb1 Ba8 26.b4 Bb7

+-----------------+
|.1r+rg.+|
|+b+.+p+k|
|p+p0nhp0|
|+p+.0.+.|
|P).)P+.+|
|+.).GNHP|
|.+.$.)P+|
|+Q+.$BI.|
+-----------------+

Amazing: 26 moves without any exchanges. And it has
been suggested that White’s 27th was inferior to
Qa2!

27.axb5 axb5 28.Red1 Qc7 29.Rc1 Bg7
30.Rcd1 Rcd8 31.dxe5 dxe5 32.Rxd8 Rxd8 33.Rxd8 Nxd8 34.c4 bxc4
35.Bxc4 Ne8 36.Qa2 Nd6 37.Bb3 Nb5 38.h4 Nd4 39.Bxd4 exd4 40.h5 Qe7
41.Qd2 c5 42.Qc2 cxb4 43.hxg6+ fxg6 44.Qc4 h5 45.e5 Bxf3 46.gxf3
Bxe5 47.f4 Bxf4 48.Qg8+ Kh6 49.Bc2 Qg7 50.Qxd8 Bxg3 51.fxg3 Qe5
52.Qf8+ Kg5 53.Kg2 ½-½

 

Index of
games:

 

Tal – Bronstein [C96] 1956 *

Teichmann,R – Schlechter,C [C90] Karlsbad,
1911 *

Fischer,R – Barczay,L [C95] Sousse izt Rd: 1,
1967 *

Nunn – Short (Brussels) [C98] 1986
[JDMN] *

Kasparov,G (2700) – Karpov,A (2720) [C92]
Wch32-KK2 Moscow (5), 1985 *

Karpov – Westerinen,H [C87]
1974 *

Reti,R – Capablanca,J [C74] Berlin (14),
1928 *

Lasker,E – Tarrasch,S [C68] Duesseldorf,
1908 *

Nunn – Olafsson (Teesside) [C54]
1982 *

Kasparov,G (2700) – Karpov,A (2720) [C92]
WCh32-KK2 Moscow (9), 1985 *

 

Bibliography

+ STEAN Simple Chess (Faber)

+ EUWE/KRAMER, The Middle Game Vol.1 (Bell)

+ SUETIN The Complete Spanish (Batsford)

+ FISCHER My 60 Memorable Games (Faber)

+ SUETIN Modern Chess Opening Theory (Appendix) (Pergamon)

+ KING/PONZETTO, Understanding the Spanish (Batsford)

+ KARPOV The Open Game in Action (Batsford)

+ BARDEN The Ruy Lopez: Winning Chess with 1. P-K4!
(Pergamon)

= YUDOVICH Spanish without 3…a6 (Batsford)

= THOMAS Spanish 5. d4! (Chess Player)

– TAULBUT, How to play the Ruy Lopez (Batsford)

+ SUETIN, The Complete Spanish (Batsford)

= YUDOVITCH, Spanish without …a6 (Batsford)

= SOLTIS, Winning with the Ruy Lopez Exchange Variation (Chess
Digest)

= RUNKE, Meet CARL (Centre Attack in Ruy Lopez)

= FILIPOWICZ & KONIKOWSKI, 4…d5 in the Cordel Defence,
Spanish Game (Ruy Lopez) (Chess Enterprises)

Chess from Morphy to Botwinnik by Imre Konig

Posted on by

This is one of my favourite books and though rather dated (the last game cited is from 1948) it’s also extremely instructive.

In 100 annotated games, Konig discusses the opening theory of four openings: the Ruy Lopez, Queen’s Gambit, English Opening and King’s Gambit.

It takes an evolutionary approach to chess theory, and instead of jumping straight in to contemporary theory, tells the story of how that theory came about. So we trace the English Opening from Staunton’s new(!) approach in 1843 to Golombek’s ideas in 1939.

The book can still be found in the original Bell hardback edition from 1951 and later Dover reprints. It is in descriptive notation and is sparing with its diagrams, so for my own convenience I put together a collection of the 100 games. I fear they won’t mean a lot without Konig’s notes, but if you have the book, here they are.

P.S. My interest in this book was rekindled by watching a lecture by Sokolov on the Lopez, where he went back to some games chosen by Konig to explain the state of theory.

CFM2B_IK.pgn

Basic Rook Endgames

Posted on by

We lost on board count to old rivals Teignmouth in the Peter Rooke Cup
at the end of January. One of the last games to finish involved a
simple-looking Rook endgame. Just as it was getting crucial, White,
short of time, found a time-saving blunder:

So what should the result have been? I discussed it briefly with my
friend Bill Ingham. As is often the way, he fancied his side’s chances
to win, and I hoped for a draw, but the discussion showed how vague we
all are about some basic theory. To be fair, some apparently small
differences can change the best obtainable result:

{White to move: draw.} 1/2-1/2

{White to move: win.} 1-0

So, what was the right result for the Teignmouth game?

Before I answer that, I want to decide: regardless of the right result,
what is the right approach?

You probably know the Philidor and Lucena positions. Philidor showed a
draw, with the defending King having control of the Queening square. The
defender keeps out the attacking King. White can make progress only by
pushing the pawn, the Black shows a draw by sending the Rook a long way
away and playing a flurry of checks.

The ‘Lucena’ position, shown by Salvio and attributed to Sciapino, is a
win for the attacking side. With the defending King cut off by at least
two files, the defending Rook has to play the flurry of checks from
across the board. The attacker either makes an escape hatch for the
King, or ‘builds a bridge’ so that the Rook can step in at the right
moment.

Please note: sending the Rook a long way away. If the defending Rook is
too close to the attacking King, the King will be able to chase the Rook
away all by itself.

This is the idea of checking distance, and will help us understand less
clear-cut positions.

We all know that the Rook belongs behind the pawn, but that’s not true
for every position. For example, in this one, the defending Rook has
checking distance only in front of the pawn.

[White Cheron, Andre]

How does this help us understand the Teignmouth position? Well, the
defending King doesn’t have access to the Queening square, but there may
be checking distance from the side.

Now, when Bill and I were playing around with this position, I managed
to persuade him that it might be a draw, because he couldn’t escape the
flurry of checks, because he didn’t approach the Rook with his King. I
didn’t know the theoretical result, but I did know the best thing to
try.

It’s very well worth your while to play out these positions against a
friend or a computer, so that if and when it turns up in one of your
games, you won’t hesitate to adopt the right approach.

A very useful online resource is this implementation of the Nalimov
tablebases:
http://www.k4it.de/index.php
which give the theoretical best obtainable result from any given simple position.