Category Archives: Level

Playing Black against Queen’s-Pawn Openings (3): without c2-c4

Posted on by

A2 Playing actively against
1. D4

The Stonewall
Attack

I will follow some lines from Fine in his 1943 book
The Ideas behind the Chess Openings. You
will soon see the connection with this section.

 

Start: 1. d4 d5 2. e3 Nf6 3. Bd3

[3. f4 is sometimes played to avoid the 3…Nc6
line]

3… c5

[More to the point is 3… Nc6 4. f4 [

or 4. c3 e5

] 4… Nb4 5. Nf3 Nxd3+ 6. cxd3 g6 7. Nc3 Bg7 8. O-O O-O]

4. c3 Nc6 5. f4

r+bqkb-r
pp+-pppp
-+n+-n-+
+-pp+-+-
-+-P-P-+
+-PBP-+-
PP-+-+PP
RNBQK-NR

Now play might go:

5… e6 (which doesn’t look quite right, as it blocks
the Bc8)

6. Nf3 Bd6 7. O-O O-O 8. Ne5 Qc7

White’s threatening Ne5 needed some response; Black could also
try to occupy e4

9. Nd2 Re8 10. g4 (DIAGRAM)

with a crushing attack.

This is the ideal Stonewall position.

r+b+r+k+
ppq-+ppp
-+nbpn-+
+-ppN-+-
-+-P-PP+
+-PBP-+-
PP-N-+-P
R-BQ+RK-

Let’s go back to the first diagram.

Instead, we might try for Black 5… Bg4,

and play then might go 6. Nf3 e6 7. Nbd2 Bd6 8. h3 Bh5
9. b3 cxd4 10. cxd4 Rc8 (DIAGRAM)

Black is comfortable
-+rqk+-r
pp+-+ppp
-+nbpn-+
+-+p+-+b
-+-P-P-+
+P+BPN+P
P+-N-+P+
R-BQK-+R

Because Black can see what White is up to, Black can arrange the
development to counter it. White’s opening plan is not camouflaged
enough to stop Black from seeing what is going on and opposing it,
and the opening moves are not flexible enough to try any other
plan. This is why you don’t see the Stonewall very often among
stronger players.

One place where the Stonewall formation will not go away is
Black playing it in the Dutch Defence. Why is this more
common?

­ White, starting first, is usually trying to get an
advantage and won’t play just to equalise with moves like Bf4,
Bxd6, Ne5 and f4.

­ Instead, White will often adopt an attacking formation on
the Queen’s side to start with and so there is a tendency for each
side to attack on opposite sides.

­ White often plays g3 and Bg2, creating a slow game with a
slightly weakened King’s side. Black can hope to get the …f4
break in at some point.

This may help explain why you see the Stonewall is a better idea
played a move behind in the Dutch Defence than played straight away
as White. Perhaps the real reason is that World Champion Mikhail
Botvinnik kept playing and winning with it for decades. Take a look
at these games:

 

A2.1 The Dutch Defence,
Stonewall Variation

Rabinovitch – Botvinnik (Ussr Ch’p,
1927)

1. d4 e6 2. c4 f5 3. g3 Nf6 4. Bg2 Be7 5. Nc3 O-O 6. Nf3
d5 7. O-O c6 8. Qc2 Qe8 9. Bf4 Qh5 10. Rad1 Nbd7 11. b3 Ne4 12. Ne5
Ng5

[12… Bf6 is better, says MB]

13. h4

[13. f3 Nh3+ 14. Bxh3 Qxh3 15. e4 += MB]

13… Ne4 14. Bf3 Qe8 15. Nxd7 Bxd7 16. Kg2
Bb4

r+-+qrk+
pp+b+-pp
-+p+p+-+
+-+p+p+-
-bPPnB-P
+PN-+BP-
P+Q+PPK+
+-+R+R+-

White seems to have defended more than got on with his own
plans. He now makes a mistake:

17. Bxe4 ? 17… fxe4 18. Rh1 Qh5 19. f3 Qg6 20. Kf1 e5
21. dxe5 Rxf4 22. gxf4

r+-+-+k+
pp+b+-pp
-+p+-+q+
+-+pP-+-
-bP+pP-P
+PN-+P+-
P+Q+P+-+
+-+R+K+R

Black has some clear achievements: the open g-file, the two
bishops, the upset White King.

22… Qg3

threats …Bc5/…e3

23. Nxe4 dxe4 24. Rxd7 Bc5 25. e3 Qxf3+ 26. Qf2 Qxh1+
27. Ke2 Qh3 28. f5 Qg4+ 29. Kd2 Rf8 30. e6 Qxf5 31. Qxf5 Rxf5 32.
Rxb7 Rf2+ 33. Ke1 Rf6 34. b4 Bxe3 0-1

 

Another decisive King’s side attack:

Steiner – Botvinnik, Groningen,
1946

1. d4 e6 2. c4 f5 3. g3 Nf6 4. Bg2 Bb4+ 5. Bd2 Be7 6.
Nf3 d5 7. Nc3 c6 8. O-O O-O 9. Bf4 Qe8 10. Qc2 Qh5 11. Rae1 Nbd7
12. Nd2

Aiming at e4, but too slowly. Another plan is to attack c6 with
the b-pawn.

12… g5 13. Bc7 Ne8 14. Be5 Nxe5 15. dxe5
f4

Black’s plans are well-advanced; e4 will now be answered by
..f3

16. gxf4 gxf4 17. Nf3 Kh8 18. Kh1 Ng7 19. Qc1 Bd7 20. a3
Rf7 21. b4 Rg8

-+-+-+rk
pp+bbrnp
-+p+p+-+
+-+pP-+q
-PP+-p-+
P-N-+N+-
-+-+PPBP
+-Q-RR+K

Making use of the open g-file

22. Rg1 Nf5 23. Nd1 Rfg7

-+-+-+rk
pp+bb-rp
-+p+p+-+
+-+pPn+q
-PP+-p-+
P-+-+N+-
-+-+PPBP
+-QNR-RK

Black has a winning position

24. Qxf4 Rg4 25. Qd2 Nh4 26. Ne3 Nxf3 27. exf3 Rh4 28.
Nf1 Bg5 0-1

-+-+-+rk
pp+b+-+p
-+p+p+-+
+-+pP-bq
-PP+-+-r
P-+-+P+-
-+-Q-PBP
+-+-RNRK

if the Q moves, …Bf4 forces mate.

Here’s an important game against a powerful rival.

 

Flohr – Botvinnik (10) Match,
1933

1. d4 e6 2. c4 f5 3. g3 Nf6 4. Bg2 Be7 5. Nc3 d5 6. Nf3
c6 7. O-O O-O 8. b3

[8. Bf4 is better, says Botvinnink, or 8. Qc2 Qe8 9. Bg5
with Bxf6]

8… Qe8 9. Bb2 Nbd7 10. Qd3

[ 10. Ng5 Bd6 11. f4 Botvinnik]

10… Qh5 11. cxd5

[11. Bc1 Botvinnik]

11… exd5 12. Nd2

[12. Ne1 and f4]

12… Ne4 13. f3

[13. f4 is now met by 13… Nxd2 14. Qxd2 Nf6 when White
cannot really hope to get the N to e5]

13… Nxc3 14. Bxc3 f4 ! 15. Rfe1 Bd6 16. Nf1 Rf7 17. e3
fxg3 18. Nxg3 Qh4 19.Nf1 Nf6 20. Re2 Bd7 21. Be1 Qg5 22. Bg3 Bxg3
23. Nxg3 h5!

r+-+-+k+
pp+b+rp-
-+p+-n-+
+-+p+-qp
-+-P-+-+
+P+QPPN-
P+-+R+BP
R-+-+-K-

the final phase

24. f4 Qg4 25. Rf2 h4 26. Bf3

[26. h3 Qe6 27. Nf1 Ne4 is still -+]

26… hxg3 27. Bxg4 gxf2+ 28. Kg2 Nxg4 29. h3 Nf6 30.
Kxf2 Ne4+ 0-1

 

And lastly, a more complicated game from an early
tournament:

Yudovitch – Botvinnik,
1934

1. c4 f5 2. d4 Nf6 3. g3 e6 4. Bg2 Be7 5. Nf3 d5 6. O-O
O-O 7. Nc3 c6 8. Qc2 Qe8 9. Bf4

[9. Bg5 Chekhover]

9… Qh5 10. b3 Nbd7 11. Rad1 Kh8 12. Kh1

a loss of tempo, and perhaps not even a better square

12… Rg8 13. e3 g5 14. Bc7 Ne8 15. Be5+ Nxe5 16. Nxe5
Nf6 17. f3

r+b+-+rk
pp+-b-+p
-+p+pn-+
+-+pNppq
-+PP-+-+
+PN-PPP-
P+Q+-+BP
+-+R+R+K

the right plan for White

17… Bd6 18. e4 Nd7 19. g4

[19. Nxd7 Bxg3]

19… Qe8 20. Nxd7 Bxd7 21. e5 Bb4 22. gxf5 exf5 23.
cxd5

r+-+q+rk
pp+b+-+p
-+p+-+-+
+-+PPpp-
-b-P-+-+
+PN-+P+-
P+Q+-+BP
+-+R+R+K

 

23… Bxc3 24. dxc6 risky 24… Bxc6 25. Qxc3 Qe6 26.
Qd2 Bd5 27. Rc1 Rg7 28. Rc2 f4 29. Qc1 Rag8 30. h3 h5 31. Kg1 g4
32. hxg4 hxg4 33. Kf2 Rh7 34. Rh1 g3+ 35. Ke1 Rxh1+ 36. Bxh1 Qh6
37. Bg2

the last move before the time-check

37… Bc6

[37… Be6]

38. a4 Bd7

going for complications instead

[38… Bd5]

39. d5 Bf5 40. Rc7 Qh2 41. Qb2 Qg1+ 42. Bf1 Qe3+ 43. Be2
Be6 44. Qc2 Rg7

-+-+-+-k
ppR-+-r-
-+-+b+-+
+-+PP-+-
P+-+-p-+
+P+-qPp-
-+Q+B+-+
+-+-K-+-

45. dxe6

[45. Rc8+ Bg8 46. Qf5 and Rxg8+, getting perpetual]

45… Qf2+ 46. Kd2 Qd4+

controlling d8

47. Ke1 Rxc7 0-1

 

Since Nigel Short has ventured the Stonewall on occasion
interest in the opening has grown again.


Martin – Troger [A94] 1995

1. Nf3 f5 2. d4 Nf6 3. g3 e6 4. Bg2 Be7 5. O-O O-O 6. c4
d5 7. b3 c6 8. Ba3 Bd7 9. Bxe7 Qxe7

rn-+-rk+
pp+bq-pp
-+p+pn-+
+-+p+p+-
-+PP-+-+
+P+-+NP-
P+-+PPBP
RN+Q+RK-

Black has played it the old-fashioned way: more interest
recently has been in the idea of parking the Queen’s Bishop on b7.
White has responded with another traditional recipe – exchange off
Black’s good bishop and milk the dark squares.

10. Nc3 (?)

Martin was unhappy about this natural move afterwards.
Either

[10. Nbd2 Be8 11. Ne5 Nbd7 12. Ndf3 Bh5]

or

[10. Qc1 Be8 11. Qa3 Qxa3 12. Nxa3 Nbd7]

could have been tried, but Black is by no means losing either
game.

10… Be8 11. Qc2 Nbd7 12. cxd5 cxd5!

[Not 12… exd5 13. Qxf5 Ne4 14. Nxd5 cxd5 15. Qxd5+ Bf7 16.
Qxb7]

13. e3 Bh5 14. Rfc1 Bxf3 15. Bxf3

r+-+-rk+
pp+nq-pp
-+-+pn-+
+-+p+p+-
-+-P-+-+
+PN-PBP-
P+Q+-P-P
R-R-+-K-

=+ Martin

15… Rac8 16. Qb2 Nb6

[16… Nb8]

17. a4 g5 18. a5 Nbd7 19. a6 b6 20. Be2 Nb8

Right idea but too late: White is now better.

21. Nb5 Nc6 22. Rc2 Nd7

[22… Nb4 23. Rxc8 Rxc8 24. Qa3]

23. Rxc6

else …Nd7-b8 and Black is ready to attack the King

23… Rxc6 24. Nxa7 Rc7 25. Nb5 Rcc8 26. a7 Nf6 27.
Qa2

-+r+-rk+
P-+-q-+p
-p-+pn-+
+N+p+pp-
-+-P-+-+
+P+-P-P-
Q+-+BP-P
R-+-+-K-

27… Kg7 28. Qa6 Qd8 29. Qb7+ Kg6 30. Ra6 Ra8 31. Nc7
Qe7 32. Qxb6 Qd8 33. Nxa8 Qxa8 34. Qxe6 Rf7 35. Bd3
1-0

 

A2.2 White avoids the
Stonewall

There is no Exchange Variation against the Dutch but there are
some annoying ways for White to avoid the Stonewall. You can avoid
all these by playing first …d5, …e6, …c6 and …f5, but you
must then face the Exchange QGD.

1. d4 f5

A2.2a Modern System with Bg5xf6

2. Nc3 Nf6 3. Bg5 d5 4. Bxf6 exf6 5. e3 Be6 6. Bd3
g6

This is currently very popular. I offer you a selection of games
in the examples section.

 

A2.2b Staunton Gambit with e4

2. e4 fxe4 3. Nc3 Nf6

Now White can play:

(a) 4. Bg5 Nc6 5. d5 Ne5 6. Qd4 Nf7 7. Bh4

[7. Bxf6 exf6 8. Nxe4 f5 9. Ng3 g6 10. O-O-O Bh6+ 11. f4 O-O
12. Nf3 Bg7 13. Qd2 b5 14. Nd4 Nd6

r+bq-rk+
p-pp+-bp
-+-n-+p+
+p+P+p+-
-+-N-P-+
+-+-+-N-
PPPQ-+PP
+-KR+B+R

= BCO2]

7… g5 8. Bg3 Bg7 9. O-O-O

[9. Nxe4 O-O]

9… c6 =+ BCO2

 

(b) 4. f3

4… Nc6

[4… d5 5. fxe4 dxe4 6. Bg5 Bf5 7. Bc4 e6

[7… Nbd7 8. Nge2 Nb6 9. Bb3 Qd7 = BCO2]

8. Nge2 Bb4 9. O-O c6 =]

5. fxe4 e5 6. dxe5 Nxe5 7. Nf3 d6 8. Bf4
Ng6]]

 

A2.2c Korchnoi Gambit with g4

Korchnoi has offered a number of gambits with g2-g4, making use
of the target on f5.

See the example game Menadue-Pert.

 

A2.2d Others

These shouldn’t be any problem

BCO2 gives:

2. Qd3 d5 3. Bf4 e6 4. Qg3 Na6 5. e3 c6 =+

Ivkov


Examples of White avoiding the Dutch

Karayannis-Bellin 1993

1. d4 e6 2. c4 f5 3. e4

rnbqkbnr
pppp+-pp
-+-+p+-+
+-+-+p+-
-+PPP+-+
+-+-+-+-
PP-+-PPP
RNBQKBNR

This almost forgotten gambit is not much worse than the
others which surface sporadically. Even though dubious, all such
gambits require precise defence from Black. — BELLIN

3… fxe4 4. Nc3 Nf6 5. g4 h6 6. h4 d5 7. Nh3 Nc6 8. Nf4
e5 9. Ng6

[9. dxe5 Nxe5 x f3]

[9. Nfxd5 exd4 10. Nxf6+ Qxf6 11. Nd5 Bb4+ is also
fine]

9… Bxg4 10. Qa4

White insists on being shown, but 10. Be2 was better

10… exd4 11. Nxh8

[11. Nxd5 Nxd5 12. cxd5 Bb4+ 13. Bd2 Bxd2+ 14. Kxd2 Qxd5 and
the White King will not survive …e3+]

11… dxc3 12. bxc3 d4 13. Rb1

[13. Ng6 dxc3 14. Ne5 Bb4 15. Nxc6 Qd2+ 16. Bxd2
cxd2#]

[13. Bh3 Bxh3 14. Rxh3 Qd7 15. Rg3 Bd6 is very good for
Black]

13… dxc3 14. Rxb7

[14. Bh3 Qd3]

[14. Ng6 Qd7 and White is all but paralysed]

14… Qd7 15. f3

[15. Rb5 Bb4 16. Rxb4 Nxb4 17. Qxd7+ Kxd7]

[15. Bh3 Bxh3 16. Rxh3 Bb4 17. Rxb4 Nxb4 18. Qxb4 Qxh3 19.
Ba3 O-O-O]

15… exf3 16. Be3 Bc5 17. Rxc7 Qd2+ 18. Bxd2
f2#

A triumph for the spear-carriers

 

Menadue – Pert 1995

1. d4 e6 2. Nf3 f5 3. h3 Nf6 4. g4 b6

Normally White would try to blot this out by d5 but there is no
Pc4

5. gxf5 exf5 6. Bg2 Bb7 7. Bg5 Be7 8. Nc3 O-O 9.
h4

rn-q-rk+
pbppb-pp
-p-+-n-+
+-+-+pB-
-+-P-+-P
+-N-+N+-
PPP+PPB+
R-+QK-+R

White is wasting too much time on attacking-looking moves but
has no real plan.

[9. d5!?]

9… Qe8 10. Qd3 Nc6 11. O-O-O

[11. Qxf5 Nb4 12. O-O-O Ne4 -+]

11… Nb4 12. Qc4+ d5 13. Qxc7 ?

opens a file against the King

13… Ba6 14. Qe5 Rc8 15. Qxf5 ?

[15. a3]

15… Rxc3 16. Qe6+ Kh8 17. bxc3 Nxa2+ 18.
Kd2

-+-+qr-k
p-+-b-pp
bp-+Qn-+
+-+p+-B-
-+-P-+-P
+-P-+N+-
n+PKPPB+
+-+R+-+R

[18. Kb2 Nxc3!]

18… Bb4!

a beautiful bit of opportunism

19. Bh3

[19. Qxe8 Bxc3+ 20. Ke3 Ng4#]

19… Bxc3+ 20. Ke3 Nb4 21. Qxe8

[21. Rc1 Qb5 22. Rhe1 Bxe1 23. Rxe1

[23. Nxe1 Qxe2+ 24. Kf4 Nh5#]

23… Nxc2+ 24. Kd2 Ne4+ 25. Kxc2 Rxf3 26. exf3 Qd3+ 27. Kc1
Qc3+ 28. Kb1

[28. Kd1 Nxf2#]

28… Bd3+ 29. Ka2 Qa5+ 30. Kb2

[30. Kb3 is better but only delays the inevitable 30… Bc4+
31. Kb2 Qb4+ 32. Kc1 Qa3+ 33. Kd1 Bb3+ 34. Ke2 Qa2+ 35. Kd3 Qc2+
36. Ke3 Qd2#]

30… Qb4+ 31. Ka2 Nc3+ 32. Ka1 Qa3#]

21… Ng4+ 22. Bxg4 Nxc2# 1-0

 

Langeweg,K – Perez Garcia,H [A80] Wijk-B, 1986

1. d4 f5 2. Nf3 Nf6 3. g3 g6 4. Bg2 Bg7 5. O-O O-O 6. b3
c5 7. e3 cxd4 8. exd4 d5 9. Ne5 Nc6 10. Re1 Ne4 11. f3 Nxe5 12.
fxe4 Nf3+ 0-1

 

Sparreboom,W – Bellin,R [A80] Guernsey op, 1988

1. d4 f5 2. Nf3 e6 3. Ne5 d6 4. Nd3 Nc6 5. e3 Nf6 6. Nd2
e5 7. Nb3 Be7 8. d5 Nxd5 9. Nxe5 dxe5 0-1

 

Barczyczyn – Vasiukov,E [A80] Bled op, 1989

1. d4 f5 2. Nc3 d5 3. Nf3 Nf6 4. Bf4 c6

The London System vs. the Dutch

5. h3 e6 6. e3 Be7 7. Be2 O-O 8. Ne5 Nbd7 9. g4 Nxe5 10.
dxe5 Ne4 11. Nxe4 fxe4 12. Qd2 Bh4 13. O-O-O Bxf2 14. g5 Qb6 15.
Bf1 Rxf4 16. exf4 Be3

oops

17. Bg2 Bd7 18. Rhe1 Bxd2+ 19. Rxd2 Rf8

-+-+-rk+
pp+b+-pp
-qp+p+-+
+-+pP-P-
-+-+pP-+
+-+-+-+P
PPPR-+B+
+-K-R-+-

20. Bxe4 Rxf4 21. Bd3 0-1

 

Ligterink,G (2470) – Van Heste,J (2290) [A80] NLD-ch,
1987

1. d4 f5 2. Nc3 Nf6 3. Bg5 d5 4. Bxf6 exf6 5. e3 c6 6.
Bd3 Bd6 7. Qf3 g6 8. h3 Qe7 9. g4 f4 10. O-O-O fxe3 11. Re1 O-O 12.
Rxe3 Qc7 13. Nge2 f5 14. gxf5 Bxf5 15. Bxf5 Rxf5 16. Re8+ Kf7 17.
Qe3 Be7 18. Rh8 Kg7 19. Re8 Bg5

rn-+R+-+
ppq-+-kp
-+p+-+p+
+-+p+rb-
-+-P-+-+
+-N-Q-+P
PPP+NP-+
+-K-+-+R

20. f4 Rxf4 21. Kb1 Rf1+ 22. Rxf1 Bxe3 23. Rxe3 Na6 24.
Nf4 Kh6 25. Nd3 Qd6 26. Ne5 Rf8 27. Nf7+ Kg7 28. Ref3 Qe7 29. Ne5
Rxf3 30. Rxf3 Qh4 31. Ne2 Qe4 32. Rf7+ Kg8 33. Rf2 Nb4 34. Nc1 Qxd4
35. Re2 Qd1 36. a3 Na2 37. Kxa2 Qxc1 38. Nd3 Qg5 39. Nc5 Qh4 40. b3
b6 0-1

 

Maksimovic,S (2345) – Akhmilovskaya,E (2420) [A80] Sochi,
1987

1. d4 f5 2. Nc3 Nf6 3. Bg5 d5 4. Bxf6 exf6 5. e3 c6 6.
Bd3 g6 7. Qf3 Bb4 8. Nge2 Nd7 9. h3 Ne5

A characteristic tactic.

10. dxe5 fxe5 11. O-O-O e4 12. Bxe4 fxe4 13. Nxe4 Rf8
14. Qg3 Qe7 15. N4c3 Bd6 16. f4 Bd7 17. Rhe1 O-O-O 18. Nd4 b5 19.
Nf3 b4

-+kr-r-+
p-+bq-+p
-+pb-+p+
+-+p+-+-
-p-+-P-+
+-N-PNQP
PPP+-+P+
+-KRR-+-

20. Nb1 Rde8 21. Nbd2 Qf6 22. Qf2 Bc5 23. Nb3 Bb6 24.
Qd2 Re4 25. Ne5 Re8 26. Qd3 Rxe3 27. Qa6+ Kc7 28. Rxe3 Qxf4 29. Kb1
Qxe3 30. Nxd7 Kxd7 31. Qb7+ Kd6 32. Qxh7 Qe4 33. g4 Re7 34. Qg8 Kc7
35. Qf8 Kb7 36. h4 a5 37. a4 bxa3 38. bxa3 a4 39. Nd2 Qe2 40. Rf1
Bc5 0-1

 

Cazzaniga,W – Speck,H [A80] Mendrisio op, 1988

1. d4 f5 2. g4 d5 3. Bg5 Nf6 4. h3 c6 5. Bxf6 exf6 6. e3
Qb6 7. b3 Bd6 8. Bd3 f4 9. exf4 Bxf4 10. Ne2 Qc7 11. Nxf4 Qxf4 12.
Qd2 Qf3 13. Qe2+ Qxe2+ 14. Kxe2 b6 15. Nd2 Kf7 16. f4 Ba6 17. c4
Nd7 18. a4 c5 19. Bf5 Rhd8

r+-r-+-+
p-+n+kpp
bp-+-p-+
+-pp+B+-
P+PP-PP+
+P+-+-+P
-+-NK+-+
R-+-+-+R

20. Bxh7 cxd4 21. Kf2 dxc4 22. Be4 Rac8 23. Bd5+ Kf8 24.
bxc4 Nc5 25. g5 Re8 26. gxf6 Nd3+ 27. Kg3 Re3+ 28. Kh4 Nxf4 29.
fxg7+ Kxg7 30. Rhg1+ Kh6 31. Bf3 Rf8 32. Rg4 Bc8 33. Kg3 Bxg4 34.
hxg4 Rd3 35. Rh1+ Kg7 36. Rh2 Ng6 37. Re2 Rf7 0-1

 

 

B. English
opening

This subtle system is out to stop you playing …d5, and then
taking over the centre or Queen’s-side later.

 

B1 Playing solidly against
1. c4

The …e6 system is a nice counter to the English; …c6 is OK
as a system as long as White does not transpose into something
unfamiliar to you.

1. c4

rnbqkbnr
pppppppp
-+-+-+-+
+-+-+-+-
-+P+-+-+
+-+-+-+-
PP-PPPPP
RNBQKBNR

1… e6

[1… c6

Now

(a) 2. Nf3 is OK

2… d5 3. b3 Nf6 4. Bb2 Bg4

[or 4… Bf5]

BUT

(b) 2. e4 d5 3. exd5 cxd5 4. d4 Nf6 5. Nc3 e6 6. Nf3 Bb4 is
a Caro-Kann or Nimzo-Indian line which is OK for Black but is
outside the scope of the repertoire I recommend]

2. Nf3 d5 3. b3 c6 4. g3 Nf6

An alternative system is:

Kurajica [A13] Agincourt Defence (French-English),
1995

1. c4 e6 2. Nf3 d5 3. g3 c6

offering to transpose into standard QP lines

4. b3

rnbqkbnr
pp+-+ppp
-+p+p+-+
+-+p+-+-
-+P+-+-+
+P+-+NP-
P+-PPP-P
RNBQKB+R

insisting on independent lines

[4. d4]

[4. Bg2 dxc4 5. Qc2 b5 6. a4 Bb7 -/+ Carls-Nimzovitch
1925]

[4. Qc2 Nf6 5. Bg2 a5 6. O-O Na6 7. a3 Be7 8. d4

[8. b3]

8… O-O 9. Nbd2 b6 Naranja-Larsen 1973]

4… b5

Black intends to bite the c-pawn until it screams in
pain ” Benjamin/Schiller

5. Bg2 Ba6

rn-qkbnr
p-+-+ppp
b+p+p+-+
+p+p+-+-
-+P+-+-+
+P+-+NP-
P+-PPPBP
RNBQK-+R

6. cxd5

[6. d3 Qb6 != Kurajica]

6… cxd5 7. O-O Nf6 8. Bb2 Be7 9. d3 O-O

rn-q-rk+
p-+-bppp
b+-+pn-+
+p+p+-+-
-+-+-+-+
+P+P+NP-
PB-+PPBP
RN+Q+RK-

10. e4

White could also try:

[10. Nbd2 Nc6 11. a3

[11. Rc1 Qb6 =+ Masic-Kurajica 1972]

11… b4 12. axb4 Nxb4 13. Ne5 Qb6 = Romanishin-Kurajica
1977]

[10. Ne5!? is a suggestion of Watson]

10… dxe4 11. dxe4 b4 =+ Hartoch-Kurajica 1974 =

 

B2 Playing actively against
1. c4

Your Dutch-style system is a fine counter to the English. The
first time I ever tried it I beat a 140-grade player in about 30
moves.

Theory of the
Anglo-Dutch

1. c4 e5 2. Nc3

This is the Sicilian Reversed line of the English Opening,
sometimes called the King’s English. Black can play two lines with
a Dutch feel, playing on the second move either 2…d6 or 2…Nc6.
The first risks being met by 3. d4 (if that is a risk), the second
may not be quite the right square for the Knight. If you play the
Closed Sicilian as White, this must be the best choice for you.

Example lines go:

After 2… d6:

(a) 3. d4 as in Hubner-Kasparov m1 1979

(b) 3. Nf3 f5

[or 3… Bg4 idea 4. g3 Bxf3 5. exf3 Nc6]

4. g3 Nf6 5. Bg2 Nc6 6. O-O Be7

[or 6… g6]

(c) 3. g3 f5

[or 3… Be6 4. Bg2 c6]

After 2…Nc6:

3. Nf3 f5

r+bqkbnr
pppp+-pp
-+n+-+-+
+-+-pp+-
-+P+-+-+
+-N-+N+-
PP-PPPPP
R-BQKB+R

4. d4 e4

r+bqkbnr
pppp+-pp
-+n+-+-+
+-+-+p+-
-+PPp+-+
+-N-+N+-
PP-+PPPP
R-BQKB+R

Now White has a number of moves:

(a) 5. Bg5

e.g. 5… Be7 6. Bxe7 Ngxe7 7. Nd2 Nxd4 8. Ndxe4 Nec6 9. Nd2
O-O 10. g3 d6 11. Bg2 f4 12. O-O fxg3 13. hxg3 Bg4

r+-q-rk+
ppp-+-pp
-+np-+-+
+-+-+-+-
-+Pn-+b+
+-N-+-P-
PP-NPPB+
R-+Q+RK-

 

(b) 5. Ng5 h6

[or 5… Be7 6. Nh3 ]

[or 5… Nf6 6. e3 and now

6… h6

[6…g6]

7. Nh3 g5

r+bqkb-r
pppp+-+-
-+n+-n-p
+-+-+pp-
-+PPp+-+
+-N-P-+N
PP-+-PPP
R-BQKB+R

after 5…h6 White can retreat with

6. Nh3

[6…g5!?]]

or spuddle with

6. Nd5

 

(c) 5. Nd2

as in Miles-Chaves

 

Instead of the immediate 3…f5 Black can play more slowly
e.g.

3… g6 4. Bg2 Bg7 5. e3 d6 6. Nge2

and now Black has tried:

6…f5

6…h5

Play in these hypermodern openings is more flexible and less
forcing, so both sides have a lot of choice about their early move
orders. I’ve tried to give an example of each line cited in the
games below.

 

 

Example games in the
Anglo-Dutch

System with
2…d6


Hubner – Kasparov (1, Hamburg) [A21] 1985

1. c4 e5 2. Nc3 d6 3. d4

Most folk used to think this was good for White… until this
game!

3…exd4 4. Qxd4 Nf6 5. g3 Nc6 6. Qd2 Be6 7. Nd5
Ne5

r+-qkb-r
ppp-+ppp
-+-pbn-+
+-+Nn-+-
-+P+-+-+
+-+-+-P-
PP-QPP-P
R-B-KBNR

Creating trouble on c4

8. b3 Ne4 9. Qe3 Nc5 10. Bb2 c6 11. Nf4 Ng4

r+-qkb-r
pp+-+ppp
-+ppb+-+
+-n-+-+-
-+P+-Nn+
+P+-Q-P-
PB-+PP-P
R-+-KBNR

The pesky Knights keep hopping around, not letting Black
settle.

12. Qd4 Ne4

Very alert

13. Bh3

[13. Nxe6 fxe6 14. Qxe4 Qa5+ 15. Kd1 Nxf2+]

13… Qa5+ 14. Kf1 Ngxf2 15. Bxe6 fxe6 16. Nxe6 Kd7 17.
Nh3 Nxh3 18. Qxe4

r+-+-b-r
pp+k+-pp
-+ppN+-+
q-+-+-+-
-+P+Q+-+
+P+-+-Pn
PB-+P+-P
R-+-+K+R

Black’s initiative persists.

18… Re8 19. Nc5+ Qxc5 20. Qg4+ Kc7 21.
Qxh3

-+-+rb-r
ppk-+-pp
-+pp-+-+
+-q-+-+-
-+P+-+-+
+P+-+-PQ
PB-+P+-P
R-+-+K+R

21… Be7 22. Bxg7 Rhf8+ 23. Bxf8 Rxf8+ 24. Ke1 Qf2+ 25.
Kd1 Qd4+ 26. Kc2 Qe4+ 27. Kd2 Bg5+ 28. Kc3 Qe5+

-+-+-r-+
ppk-+-+p
-+pp-+-+
+-+-q-b-
-+P+-+-+
+PK-+-PQ
P+-+P+-P
R-+-+-+R

0-1

 

Gonzalez-Rossolimo
1952.

1. c4 e5 2. Nc3 d6 3. g3 f5 4. Bg2 Nf6 5. e3 Be7 6. Nge2
c6 7. d4 O-O 8. b3 Nbd7 9. O-O h5 10. h4 Ng4 11. f3 Nh6 12. Ba3 Qe8
13. dxe5 dxe5 14. Bxe7 Qxe7 15. Qd2 Nc5

r+b+-rk+
pp+-q-p-
-+p+-+-n
+-n-pp+p
-+P+-+-P
+PN-PPP-
P+-QN+B+
R-+-+RK-

Black has more space.]

 

 

Korchnoi-German 1962.

1. c4 e5 2. Nc3 d6 3. g3 f5 4. Bg2 Nf6 5. b4 c6 6. b5 c5
!

Now White can’t open a file on the Q-side.

7. Bb2 Nbd7 8. d3 g6 9. a4 a5 10. bxa6 Rxa6 11. Nf3 Bg7
12. Nd2 O-O 13. Nb5 Rf7 14. Bc3 Nf8 15. e3 Ne6 16. O-O g5 17. Qe2
Re7 18. Rfe1 g4 19. f4 gxf3 20. Nxf3 Nf8 21. Nd2 Ng6 22. Nb3 Bh6
23. a5 Ng4 24. Bd5+ Kh8 25. Qd2 Rg7 26. Kh1

-+bq-+-k
+p+-+-rp

r+-p-+nb
PNpBpp+-
-+P+-+n+
+NBPP-P-
-+-Q-+-P
R-+-R-+K

Black has his open lines and could create more with

26… f4 27. exf4 Nxf4

 

 

Zlotnikov-Minasian 1993

1. c4 e5 2. Nc3 d6 3. g3 f5 4. Bg2 Nf6 5. d3 Be7 6. Nf3
O-O 7. O-O Kh8 8. b4

[After 8. Bd2 the ever-inventive Speelman did once try
…Na6 but 8…Qe8 is still Black’s best]

8… Qe8 9. Bb2 Qh5 10. e3 Nc6 11. a3 Bd7 12. Nd2
Qh6

r+-+-r-k
pppbb-pp
-+np-n-q
+-+-pp+-
-PP+-+-+
P-NPP-P-
-B-N-PBP
R-+Q+RK-

Black is well-placed to build up on the K-side.

…0-1

 

 

Hallerod-Hearst 1960

1. c4 e5 2. Nc3 d6 3. g3 f5 4. Bg2 Nf6 5. d3
Be7

5… g6 is a Closed Sicilian position: see below

6. Nf3 O-O 7. O-O Qe8

8. c5 c6 9. cxd6 Bxd6 10. b4 Kh8 11. Rb1 Nd5 12. Qb3
Be6

rn-+qr-k
pp+-+-pp
-+pbb+-+
+-+npp+-
-P-+-+-+
+QNP+NP-
P+-+PPBP
+RB-+RK-

= 13. Ng5 Nxc3 14. Qxc3 Bxa2 15. Ra1 Bg8 16. Bb2 Qe7 17.
Nf3 Nd7 18. Ba3 a6 19. Nd2 Nb6 20. Rfb1 Nd5 21. Qb2 Nc7 22. Nc4 Nb5
23. Rc1 Bxc4 24. Rxc4 a5

r+-+-r-k
+p+-q-pp
-+pb-+-+
pn+-pp+-
-PR+-+-+
B-+P+-P-
-Q-+PPBP
R-+-+-K-

0-1 : a Queen’s-side decision!

 

System with
2…Nc6

 

Miles-Chaves 1977

1. c4 e5 2. Nc3 Nc6 3. Nf3 f5 4. d4 e4 5. Nd2 Nf6 6. e3
g6 7. Be2 Bg7 8. Rb1 a5 9. a3 O-O 10. b4 axb4 11. axb4 Ne7 12. Qb3
d6 13. b5 Kh8 14. Ba3 f4 15. Ncxe4 fxe3 16. fxe3 Nxe4 17. Nxe4 Bf5
18. Bd3

r+-q-r-k
+pp-n-bp
-+-p-+p+
+P+-+b+-
-+PPN+-+
BQ+BP-+-
-+-+-+PP
+R+-K-+R

18… Nd5 19. O-O

[19. cxd5 Bxe4 20. Bxe4 Qh4+ 21. Kd1 Qxe4 22. Rb2]

19… Nxe3 20. Rf3 Qh4 21. g3 Qg4 22. Rxe3 Rxa3 23. Qxa3
Qh3 24. Kh1 Bxe4+ 0-1

White resigned here but 25. Rxe4 Rf2 26. Re8+ Bf8 27. Rxf8+
Rxf8 28. Qa2 looked worth trying first!

 

Bruno-Kurajica 1985

1. c4 e5 2. Nc3 Nc6 3. Nf3 f5 4. d3 Nf6 5. Bg2 Bb4 6.
Bd2 O-O 7. Nf3 d6 8. a3 Bxc3 9. Bxc3 Qe8 10. O-O Qh5 11.
Qd2

r+b+-rk+
ppp-+-pp
-+np-n-+
+-+-pp+q
-+P+-+-+
P-BP+NP-
-P-QPPBP
R-+-+RK-

11… f4 12. gxf4 h6 13. fxe5 dxe5 14. d4 Bh3 15. dxe5
Rad8 16. Qf4

[16. Qc2 Bxg2 17. Kxg2 Ng4 18. Rfd1 Rxf3 19. exf3

[19. Rxd8+ Nxd8 20. Kxf3 Qh3+ 21. Ke4 Nxf2+ 22. Kd5 Qe6+ 23.
Kd4 Nc6+ 24. Ke3]

19… Qxh2+ 20. Kf1 Ne3+]

16… Bxg2 17. Kxg2 Nd5 18. Qc1 Nf4+ 0-1

 

 

Darga-Herter 1968

1. c4 e5 2. Nc3 Nc6 3. Nf3 f5 4. d4 e4 5.
Ng5

Black now plays more quietly:

5…Be7 6. Nh3 Bf6 7. e3 d6 8. Nf4 Nge7 9. g4 Ng6 10.
Nfd5 Bh4 11. Bg2 O-O 12. O-O Nce7 13. gxf5 Bxf5 14. Nf4 Nxf4 15.
exf4 d5 16. cxd5 Nxd5 17. Nxe4 Bxe4 18. Bxe4 Nxf4 19. Qg4 Qxd4 20.
Bf3

r+-+-rk+
ppp-+-pp
-+-+-+-+
+-+-+-+-
-+-q-nQb
+-+-+B+-
PP-+-P-P
R-B-+RK-

20… h5 0-1

21. Qxh4 Ne2+]

 

 

Seirawan-Browne 1979

1. c4 e5 2. Nc3 Nc6 3. Nf3 f5 4. d4 e4 5. Ng5 h6 6. Nh3
g5

r+bqkbnr
pppp+-+-
-+n+-+-p
+-+-+pp-
-+PPp+-+
+-N-+-+N
PP-+PPPP
R-BQKB+R

This is a noisier line!

7. f3 exf3 8. exf3 Bg7 9. d5 Qe7+ 10. Kd2 Nd4 11. Bd3
Kd8 12. Ng1 b5 13. Nge2 bxc4 14. Bxc4 Qc5 15. Kd3 Rb8

-rbk-+nr
p-pp+-b-
-+-+-+-p
+-qP+pp-
-+Bn-+-+
+-NK+P+-
PP-+N+PP
R-BQ+-+R

16. Be3 ?

16… Qxc4+ 17. Kxc4 Ba6+ 18. Nb5 Nxb5 0-1

[19. Qa4 Na3+ 20. Kc5 d6+ 21. Kc6 Ne7#]

[19. Nd4 Nxd4+ 20. Kc3 Ne2+ 21. Kd2 Rxb2+ 22. Ke1 Bc3+ 23.
Kf1

[23. Bd2 Nf4 24. Rg1 Nd3+ 25. Ke2 Rxd2+ 26. Qxd2 Bxd2 27.
Kxd2]

23… Nf4+ 24. Kg1 Rxg2#]

 

Reversed Closed
Sicilian

Grunberg-Kasparov
simul.1987

1. c4 e5 2. Nc3 d6 3. g3 f5 4. Bg2 Nf6 5.
d3

We have seen all this above. Now

5… g6

is a Closed Sicilian position

6. e4 Bg7 7. Nge2 O-O 8. O-O c6 9. h3 Be6 10. exf5 gxf5
11. Be3 Qe7 12. Qd2 Kh8 13. Rae1 Nbd7 14. f4 Rg8

r+-+-+rk
pp+nq-bp
-+ppbn-+
+-+-pp+-
-+P+-P-+
+-NPB-PP
PP-QN+B+
+-+-RRK-

Black’s position is fine.

15. Kh2 Qf7 16. Bf3 Rae8 17. b4 e4 18. dxe4 fxe4 19.
Bxe4 Bxh3 20. Kxh3 Nxe4 21. Qd3 Bxc3 22. Qxc3+ Nxc3
0-1

 

 


Hodgson-Short 1986

1. c4 e5 2. Nc3 Nc6 3. g3 g6 4. Bg2 Bg7 5. e3 d6 6.
Nge2

6… h5 7. h3 h4 8. g4 f5 9. gxf5 Bxf5 10. d4 exd4 11.
Nxd4 Nxd4 12. exd4 c6 13. Be3 Nf6 14. Qd2 Qd7

r+-+k+-r
pp+q+-b-
-+pp-np+
+-+-+b+-
-+PP-+-p
+-N-B-+P
PP-Q-PB+
R-+-K-+R

15. O-O-O Kf7 16. Bg5 b5 17. cxb5 cxb5 18. Bxa8 Rxa8 19.
Qe2 Rc8 20. a3 a5 21. f3 b4 22. Kd2 bxc3+ 23. bxc3 Qb7

-+r+-+-+
+q+-+kb-
-+-p-np+
p-+-+bB-
-+-P-+-p
P-P-+P+P
-+-KQ+-+
+-+R+-+R

0-1

 

 

Pierson-Calverley 1983

1. c4 e5 2. Nc3 Nc6 3. g3 g6 4. Bg2 Bg7 5. e3 d6 6.
Nge2

6… h5 7. d4 e4 8. a3 Nf6 9. O-O O-O 10. b4 Ne7 11. Bb2
g5 12. d5 Ng6 13. Na4 Qe7 14. Rc1 f4 15. Bxf6 Rxf6 16. Nd4 Ne5 17.
Bxe4 Bh3 18. Re1 fxg3 19. fxg3 Raf8 20. Qc2 Qf7 21. Qb1 Rf2 22. Ne6
Rg2+ 0-1

23. Kh1

[23. Bxg2 Qf2+ 24. Kh1 Qxg2#]

23… Qf2 24. Bxh7+]

 

 

|Psakhis
-Kasparov, 199|

One of the best example games I have on file for the Reversed
Closed Sicilian is this one

1. c4 g6 2. Nc3 Bg7 3. g3 Nc6 4. Bg2 d6 5. Nf3 e5 6. d3
f5 7. O-O Nf6

r+bqk+-r
ppp-+-bp
-+np-np+
+-+-pp+-
-+P+-+-+
+-NP+NP-
PP-+PPBP
R-BQ+RK-

8. Rb1 h6 9. b4 O-O 10. b5 Ne7 11. a4 Be6 12. Ba3
Rc8

-+rq-rk+
ppp-n-b-
-+-pbnpp
+P+-pp+-
P+P+-+-+
B-NP+NP-
-+-+PPBP
+R+Q+RK-

Black does not rush but secures the Q-side.

13. Nd2 b6 14. e3 g5 15. d4 exd4 16. exd4
f4

-+rq-rk+
p-p-n-b-
-p-pbn-p
+P+-+-p-
P+PP-p-+
B-N-+-P-
-+-N-PBP
+R+Q+RK-

17. Re1 Bg4 18. Nf3 Qd7 19. c5 Rce8 20. Rc1 Nf5 21. Qd3
Kh8 22. cxd6 cxd6 23. Rxe8 Qxe8 24. Rf1 Qh5

-+-+-r-k
p-+-+-b-
-p-p-n-p
+P+-+npq
P+-P-pb+
B-NQ+NP-
-+-+-PBP
+-+-+RK-

The Black pieces hover like vultures

25. Ne4 Nxe4 26. Qxe4 Bh3 27. Ne5 Bxg2 28. Kxg2 g4 29.
Bxd6 Rf6 30. Bb8 Qh3+

-B-+-+-k
p-+-+-b-
-p-+-r-p
+P+-Nn+-
P+-PQpp+
+-+-+-Pq
-+-+-PKP
+-+-+R+-

0-1

 

C Reti Opening and King’s Indian
Attack

rnbqkbnr
pppppppp
-+-+-+-+
+-+-+-+-
-+-+-+-+
+-+-+N+-
PPPPPPPP
RNBQKB+R

Again, White doesn’t want to rush into the centre without
preparation, and plays Nf3 first to stop you playing …e5.

 


C1 Playing solidly against 1. Nf3

David Norwood, who is a specialist in the King’s Indian Attack,
reckons that Black equalises easily in this line which:

“…offers excellent chances of equality. Black’s plan is
extremely logical – to limit the scope of the fianchetto bishop
with …d5 & …c6, then develops the B to g4 where it can
either exchange or retreat. I predict it will remain difficult for
KIA players to prove any advantage in this system.

1. Nf3 d5 2. g3 c6 3. Bg2 Bg4

rn-qkbnr
pp+-pppp
-+p+-+-+
+-+p+-+-
-+-+-+b+
+-+-+NP-
PPPPPPBP
RNBQK-+R

4. O-O

[4. d3 Nd7 5. O-O Ngf6 6. c4 dxc4 7. dxc4 e5

r+-qkb-r
pp+n+ppp
-+p+-n-+
+-+-p-+-
-+P+-+b+
+-+-+NP-
PP-+PPBP
RNBQ+RK-

8. Nc3 Be7 9. b3 O-O 10. Bb2 Re8 11. Qc2 Bf8 12. h3 Bh5 13.
Nh4 Nc5 14. Rad1 Qc7 15. g4 Bg6 16. Nxg6 hxg6 17. e3 a5

r+-+rbk+
+pq-+pp-
-+p+-np+
p-n-p-+-
-+P+-+P+
+PN-P-+P
PBQ+-PB+
+-+R+RK-

Todorcevic-Rodriguez, Salamanca 1990 …Drawn (47)]

4… Nd7 5. d3 Ngf6 6. Qe1

[6. Nbd2 e5 7. e4 Bd6 8. Re1 O-O 9. Nf1 Bh5 10. Ne3 Re8 11.
Nf5 Bf8 12. c3 dxe4 13. dxe4 Nc5

r+-qrbk+
pp+-+ppp
-+p+-n-+
+-n-pN+b
-+-+P+-+
+-P-+NP-
PP-+-PBP
R-BQR-K-

14. Qxd8 Raxd8 Fahrner-Luther, Graz 1991 …0-1]

6… e5

r+-qkb-r
pp+n+ppp
-+p+-n-+
+-+pp-+-
-+-+-+b+
+-+P+NP-
PPP+PPBP
RNB-QRK-

7. e4 dxe4 8. dxe4 Bc5 9. b4

[9. Nbd2 Qc7 10. Nc4 Be6 11. Qe2 b5 12. Ncd2

r+-+k+-r
p-qn+ppp
-+p+bn-+
+pb-p-+-
-+-+P+-+
+-+-+NP-
PPPNQPBP
R-B-+RK-

Dizdarevic-Huss, Swiss 1990 12… O-O = Norwood]

9… Bd6 10. Na3 Qe7 11. c3 b5 12. Nc2 a5 13. bxa5 O-O
14. c4 Be6 15. cxb5 cxb5 16. Nh4 Bc5 17. Nf5 Qd8 18. Qd2 Qxa5 19.
Qg5

r+-+-rk+
+-+n+ppp
-+-+bn-+
qpb-pNQ-
-+-+P+-+
+-+-+-P-
P+N+-PBP
R-B-+RK-

|Drawn: Vaganian-Dorfman, Moscow
199|

 

You may be interested in this excellent game, which features our
system with colours reversed.

Smyslov,V (2565) – Nunn,J (2565) [A48] (Tilburg 34/91),
1982

1. d4 Nf6 2. Nf3 g6 3. Bg5 Bg7 4. Nbd2 O-O

[4… c5 5. Bxf6 Bxf6 6. Ne4 Bxd4 7. Nxd4 cxd4 8. Qxd4 O-O
9. c4 Nc6 10. Qd2 d6 11. Nc3 += Smyslov-Ernst, London
1988]

5. e4 d6 6. c3 h6 7. Bh4

rnbq-rk+
ppp-ppb-
-+-p-npp
+-+-+-+-
-+-PP+-B
+-P-+N+-
PP-N-PPP
R-+QKB+R

Does driving the bishop back have any effect in this formation?
Yes – it does further weaken the kingside fortress.


7…c6 8.Bb5 Bd7 9. O-O a6 10. Bc4 e5 11. dxe5 dxe5 12.
Re1

Overprotection of e4 frees up the minor pieces for more useful
tasks.

12… Qe8

[12… b5 13. Bf1 followed by an eventual a2-a4 would put
strong pressure on the queenside.]

13. a4 Nh5 14. Nb3 g5 15. Bg3 Rd8 16. Nfd2

-+-rqrk+
+ppb+pb-
p+n+-+-p
+-+-p-pn
P+B+P+-+
+NP-+-B-
-P-N-PPP
R-+QR-K-

White’s pieces have been quckly transferred to the queenside.
Black’s pieces, especially the offside knight, cannot get there so
quickly.


|6… Nxg3
17. hxg3 Kh8 18. Qe2
Qe7 19. Nf1|

The exchange of the Black knight for the Bg3 has created new
opportunities on the kingside. Smyslov is the master of harmonic
play – his pieces are often ready to switch to new targets
quickly.

19… Qf6 20. Nc5 Bc8 21. Ne3 Ne7 22. a5
Qg6

Black has chosen to sue the Bc8 to defend the queenside, but the
heavy guns are all on the kingside, and White controls a bit more
of the center. But before foraging on the queenside, Smyslov
squashes the counterplay.

23. g4! b6?!

Black is paralyzed on the kingside, unable to transfer the
knight to f4 due to the placement of the queen at g6. But this
sacrifice of a queenside pawn leads to disaster. There is nothing
more rueful than a lost pawn formation. Black could resign without
remorse

24. Nf5! Nxf5

[24… bxc5 25. Nxe7 Qd6 26. Nxc8 Rxc8 27. Bxa6+/-
]

25. gxf5 Qc6 26. Nxa6 Bxa6 27. Bxa6 bxa5 28.
Rxa5

Now White has an extra pawn and better bishop. The rest is easy
for a player of Smyslov’s caliber.

28… Ra8 29. Rea1 Rfd8 30. Bc4 Rxa5 31. Rxa5 Kg8 32.
Ra6 Qd7 33. Bd5 Qe7 34. Qh5 Rd6 35. Rxd6 cxd6 36. b4
1-0

Resigns; a tale of two bishops…

 

C2 Playing actively against
1. Nf3

There is a slight problem here:

1. Nf3 f5

can be met by the awkward gambit

2. d3 Nf6 3. e4 fxe4 4. Ng5

So you may prefer to play into you line with

1. Nf3 d5 2. c4 c6 3. g3 e6.

The other way to play into the Dutch allows some
transpositions:

1. Nf3 e6

2. g3

[2. e4 d5 is a French Defence which is OK for
Black]

[2… c5 is a Sicilian: White can play the King’s Indian
Attack with 3. d3 or play it open with 3. d4 e.g. 3…cxd4 4. Nxd4
Nf6 5. Nc3 Nc6 6. a3 Be7 7. Be2 O-O 8. O-O d5 9. exd5
Nxd5]

[2. b3 Be7]

2… f5 3. Bg2 Nf6 4. O-O Be7

rnbqk+-r
ppppb-pp
-+-+pn-+
+-+-+p+-
-+-+-+-+
+-+-+NP-
PPPPPPBP
RNBQ+RK-

Both sides are quietly getting on with their own systems. The
trouble with meeting White’s flexible setup with the Dutch is that
Black may be denied the outpost on e4 and White can even try to
blow up the pawn structure by playing e2-e4.

5. d3

[5. b3 c5 6. Bb2 O-O 7. c4 Nc6 8. Nc3 e5 9. e3 d6 10. d4 e4
11. Ne1 Qe8 12. Nd5 Bd8 13. dxc5 dxc5

r+bbqrk+
pp+-+-pp
-+n+-n-+
+-pN+p+-
-+P+p+-+
+P+-P-P-
PB-+-PBP
R-+QNRK-

This is better for White]

5… O-O 6. Nbd2 d6 7. e4 fxe4 8. dxe4 e5 9. c3 Qe8 10.
Nh4 Nc6 11. Nc4 Qh5 12. Qxh5 Nxh5 13. Nf5 Bd8

r+bb-rk+
ppp-+-pp
-+np-+-+
+-+-pN+n
-+N+P+-+
+-P-+-P-
PP-+-PBP
R-B-+RK-

With about equal chances.

 

 

D Sokolsky opening
(Polish)

rnbqkbnr
pppppppp
-+-+-+-+
+-+-+-+-
-P-+-+-+
+-+-+-+-
P+PPPPPP
RNBQKBNR

This is an oddly effective line; White stops active play with
…c5 and prepares to bring the Bb2 onto the long diagonal.

 

D1 Playing solidly against
1. b4

I think the most solid system is

1. b4 e5 2. Bb2 Bxb4 3. Bxe5 Nf6

when I know of no way for White to secure the advantage.

White can try

1. b4 e5 2. a3

but this is fairly harmless:

2…d5 3. Bb2 f6

should be fine for Black

 

 

D2 Playing actively against
1. b4

Of course you can play

1. b4 f5

but the theory on this line is hardly explored.

White may play d3 at some point which may rob you of some of
your best ideas.

 

E Nimzo-Larsen
Opening

rnbqkbnr
pppppppp
-+-+-+-+
+-+-+-+-
-+-+-+-+
+P+-+-+-
P+PPPPPP
RNBQKBNR

This is a flexible line, aiming at first to post the Bc1 on b2,
pointing at the e5 point and beyond at the Black King’s-side.

The Bb2 needs watching but you should be OK in this opening.

 

E1 Playing solidly against
1. b3

1. b3 d5 2. Bb2 Nf6

is fine for Black

 

 

E2 Playing actively against
1. b3

Go for it…

1. b3 f5

…and Black should not be without play.

1. b3 f5 2. Bb2 Nf6 3. d3 d6 4. e4 e5 5. exf5 Bxf5 6. Ne2
Nc6 7. d4 Be7 8. Ng3 Bg6 9. dxe5 dxe5 10. Qxd8+ Rxd8 11. Bb5
O-O
-+-r-rk+
ppp-b-pp
-+n+-nb+
+B+-p-+-
-+-+-+-+
+P+-+-N-
PBP+-PPP
RN+-K-+R

Black has active play and won in 23 moves! —
KEENE]

 

 

F Various other
openings

This obviously can transpose to other openings, and it is
probably best to try to do just that.

 

F1. Benko’s Opening,
1.g3

rnbqkbnr
pppppppp
-+-+-+-+
+-+-+-+-
-+-+-+-+
+-+-+-P-
PPPPPP-P
RNBQKBNR

1…d5

and

1…f5

both look playable. White may well transpose into lines
considered above.

 


F2. Bird’s opening, 1. f4

rnbqkbnr
pppppppp
-+-+-+-+
+-+-+-+-
-+-+-P-+
+-+-+-+-
PPPPP+PP
RNBQKBNR

The obvious snag is, you can’t play the Dutch against this:

1. f4 f5 2. e4

is awkward.

But why not play the most awkward lines for White: the From
Gambit.

1. f4 e5

Now

2. fxe4 d6 3. exd6 Bxd6

gives you a development lead and free play for your pieces.
Instead:

2. e4

transposes into the King’s Gambit, which I think most Bird
players will do. See the booklet on Playing Black in e4
openings

 

F3. The Dunst, 1.
Nc3

rnbqkbnr
pppppppp
-+-+-+-+
+-+-+-+-
-+-+-+-+
+-N-+-+-
PPPPPPPP
R-BQKBNR

A while ago I wouldn’t have bothered with this odd-looking
opening, but it has become a bit of a secret weapon among those in
the know. What to play against it depends on what else you play;
it’s probably the best of the unusual lines.

1…f5 walks into 2. e4.

1…c5 offers a Sicilian, and after 1…d5 2. e4 you can with
2…d5 offer a Caro-Kann or with 2…e6, a French. Perhaps 2…dxe4
3. Nxe4 and …c6 may appeal.

1…d5 2. e4 d4 3. Nce2

is a well-known sequence, after which

3…e5 4. Ng3 Be6

Else 5. Bc4 will follow. This looks like Black’s best idea to
me.

Example game in the
Dunst:

Ekebjaerg,Ove – Strand,Torger cr
Nielsen-mem, 1987

1. Nc3 d5 2. e4 d4 3. Nce2 e5 4. Ng3 Be6 5. Nf3 Nd7 6.
c3 c5 7. cxd4 cxd4 8. Be2 Bd6 9. O-O h5 10. d3

r+-qk+nr
pp+n+pp-
-+-bb+-+
+-+-p-+p
-+-pP+-+
+-+P+NN-
PP-+BPPP
R-BQ+RK-

This doesn’t look to me very promising for White, although White
did win.

 

 

 

F4. Grob’s opening, 1.
g4

rnbqkbnr
pppppppp
-+-+-+-+
+-+-+-+-
-+-+-+P+
+-+-+-+-
PPPPPP-P
RNBQKBNR

The idea of this odd-looking move is…

1. g4 d5 2. Bg2 Bxg4 3. c4!

…when the pin on the b7 point may be embarrassing.

The two best-known players of this line, Henri Grob and Claude
Bloodgood, agree that one of the most awkward lines for White
is

1. g4 e5

with the idea 2. Bg2 h5! when the pawn cannot advance to
g5.

Grob himself played this against 1. g4. So Bloodgood reckons
White’s best try is

2. d3

To be honest, many Grob players have no idea that this is a
known line, all they know about is the …Bxg4 variation. So they
may be out-tricked in their own opening!

 

Some sample lines in this rare opening:

Ott – Grob, Corr

1. g4 e5 2. Bg2 h5 3. gxh5 Rxh5 4. e3 Rh8 5. c4 f5 6.
Qc2 g6 7. Nc3 c6 8. Nge2 Nf6 9. d4 d6 =

 

Hug – Grob, Corr

1. g4 e5 2. Bg2 h5 3. gxh5 Rxh5 4. e3 Nf6 5. c4 c6 6.
Nc3 d5 7. cxd5 Rg5 8. Bf3 cxd5 9. Qa4+ Nc6 10. d3 Rg6 11. e4 d4 12.
Nd5 Be6 13. Qb5 Qd7 14. Bd2 Bxd5 15. exd5 Nb4 16. Qxd7+ Kxd7 17.
Bxb4 Bxb4+ 18. Kd1 Kd6 = [or 18… Bd6]

 

Grob – Aebi (corr) &
Analysis

1. g4 e5 2. d3! d5 3. Bg2

[3. g5 Be7 4. h4 h6 =+]

3… Bxg4 4. c4

Now this gambit is not as good for White as in the lines without
d3 and …e5.

4…Bb4+ 5. Nd2 c6 6. cxd5 Ne7

[6… cxd5 7. Qb3 Nc6 8. Bxd5 Qe7 9. h3 Bh5 dr]

7. dxc6 Nbxc6 8. a3 =

 

Grob – Stingelin+ Analysis,
1993

1. g4 e5 2. d3! d5 3. Bg2 c6 4. h3 Ne7 5. Nf3 Ng6 6. Nc3
f5 =/+

[6… h6 was the game: 7. e4 !]

If this sly system doesn’t appeal you might fancy the emerging
main line approach:

Basman – Keene, Benedictine,
1981

1. g4 d5 2. h3 e5 3. Bg2 c6 4. d4 e4 5. c4 Bd6 6. Nc3
Ne7 7. g5

Basman has also tried:

[7. Qb3 O-O 8. Bg5 f6 9. cxd5 cxd5 10. Nxd5 Be6 11. Nxe7+
Qxe7 12. d5 Bf7 13. Be3 Na6

r+-+-rk+
pp+-qbpp
n+-b-p-+
+-+P+-+-
-+-+p+P+
+Q+-B-+P
PP-+PPB+
R-+-K-NR

-+ Keene]

[7. Bg5 f6 8. Bd2 unclear, (Basman – Kudrin, Benedictine,
1981)]

7… Be6 8. h4 Nf5 9. Bh3 O-O 10. cxd5 cxd5 11.
Nxd5

rn-q-rk+
pp+-+ppp
-+-bb+-+
+-+N+nP-
-+-Pp+-P
+-+-+-+B
PP-+PP-+
R-BQK-NR

11… Ng3 12. Nf6+ gxf6 13. fxg3 Bxg3+ 14. Kf1 Nc6 15.
Be3 Nb4 16. Kg2 Nd5 17. Kxg3 Nxe3 18. Qd2 Qd6+ 19. Kf2 Qf4+ 20. Nf3
exf3

r+-+-rk+
pp+-+p+p
-+-+bp-+
+-+-+-P-
-+-P-q-P
+-+-np+B
PP-QPK-+
R-+-+-+R

0-1

21. Qxe3 Qxh4+ 22. Kxf3 Bd5+

 

 

Also ran: 1. e3, 1. a3, 1.
a4, 1. h4, 1. f3

I can’t imagine these giving you any trouble: You can certainly
play your usual Colle or Dutch, and various 1. e4 lines can be
played with colours reversed.

1. e3 Van T’Kruy’s Opening hopes for a reversed French. 1…d5
is OK for Black.

1. a3 has some idea of playing b2-b4; just 1…d5 and 2…c6 in
reply is a good start for playing fast or slow. You can also blow
up the Queen’s-side with …a5 if White does play b4.

1. a4 might tempt you to 1…e5 if that’s what you usually
play.

1. h4 e5 must be all right too.

1. f3 is a bit of a joker; 1…d5 or 1…e5 should give you an
easy game.

Index of Games

Pribyl – Penrose (Nice) 1974 [*]

Marshall,F – Tarrasch,S, Nuremberg, 1895 [*]

Ottaviani,W – Liying,P (Novi-14) [D52] Cambridge Springs: loose
Bg5, 1990 [*]

Buthali,D – Figueroa,C (Novi-14) [D52] cambridge springs: loose
Bg5, 1990 [*]

Borovikov,V – Shabanov,Y (Podolsk) [D52] Cambridge Springs:
Black grabs material, 1990 [*]

Duemer,K – Meyer,Frh (2.BLSW) [D52] cambridge springs: Q-side
attack, 1989
[*]

El Mezwaghi,H – Mubarak,A (Novi-12) [D52] cambridge springs:
Queen’s-side majority in EG, 1990 [*]

Michaelsen,N – Hort,V (FRG-ch) [D52] cambridge springs: break on
Q-side, 1989 [*]

Perez,A – Perera,M [D52] cambridge springs: chances with NN,
1989 [*]

Lengyel-Karpov, Moscow 1972 [*]

Tukmakov-Korchnoi Leningrad 1973 [*]

Arkell-Teichmann 1985 [*]

Burn – Teichmann (Hastings) [D46] 1895 [*]

Miralles,G – Granda Zuniga,J [D45] 1989 [*]

Rohde,M – Shabalov,A (8) [*]

[D45] Philadelphia, 1990
[*]

Hegeler,F – Wockenfuss,K [D46] 2BLN, 1989 [*]

Kraai,J – Donaldson,J (2) [D46] American, 1989 [*]

Karpov – Tal [D46] Moscow, 1973 [*]

Plachetka,T – Drtina,M (5) [D46] Trnava, 1989 [*]

Curtis-Teichmann 1985 [*]

Serebrjanik-Maximenko 1991 [*]

Kasparov – Short (10) [D35] WCh, 1994 [*]

Steinbacher,M – van der Sterren,P (5) [D36] Ostend, 1989 [*]

??-?? [D34] [*]

Davidovic,A – Smagin,S (4) [D36] It-open, Dortmund, 1989
[*]

Von Gleich,A – Ekstroem,R (1) [D36] Lugano, 1989 [*]

Yermolinsky – Shipman,W (3) [D36] MCC, 1989 [*]

Deze,A – Tadic,K (1) [D35] Novi, 1989 [*]

Paduch,A – Ghafour,Y (8) [D35] A.Kotov memorial, Singapore,
1990 [*]

Tisdall,J – Inkiov,V (5) [D36] Gausdal, 1990 [*]

Rabinovitch – Botvinnik (Ussr Ch’p, 1927) [*]

Steiner – Botvinnik, Groningen, 1946 [*]

Flohr – Botvinnik (10) Match, 1933 [*]

Yudovitch – Botvinnik, 1934 [*]

Martin – Troger [A94] 1995
[*]

Karayannis-Bellin 1993 [*]

Menadue – Pert 1995 [*]

Langeweg,K – Perez Garcia,H [A80] Wijk-B, 1986 [*]

Sparreboom,W – Bellin,R [A80] Guernsey op, 1988 [*]

Barczyczyn – Vasiukov,E [A80] Bled op, 1989 [*]

Ligterink,G (2470) – Van Heste,J (2290) [A80] NLD-ch, 1987 [*]

Maksimovic,S (2345) – Akhmilovskaya,E (2420) [A80] Sochi, 1987 [*]

Cazzaniga,W – Speck,H [A80] Mendrisio op, 1988 [*]

Kurajica [A13] Agincourt Defence (French-English), 1995 [*]

Hubner – Kasparov (1, Hamburg) [A21] 1985
[*]

Gonzalez-Rossolimo 1952. [*]

Korchnoi-German 1962. [*]

Zlotnikov-Minasian 1993 [*]

Hallerod-Hearst 1960 [*]

Miles-Chaves 1977 [*]

Bruno-Kurajica 1985 [*]

Darga-Herter 1968 [*]

Seirawan-Browne 1979 [*]

Grunberg-Kasparov simul.1987 [*]

Hodgson-Short 1986
[*]

Pierson-Calverley 1983 [*]

Psakhis – Kasparov, 1990 [*]

Smyslov,V (2565) – Nunn,J (2565) [A48] (Tilburg 34/91), 1982 [*]

Ekebjaerg,Ove – Strand,Torger cr Nielsen-mem, 1987 [*]

Ott – Grob, Corr [*]

Hug – Grob, Corr [*]

Grob – Aebi (corr) & Analysis [*]

Grob – Stingelin+ Analysis, 1993 [*]

Basman – Keene, Benedictine, 1981 [*]

The Windmill

Posted on by

What’s a windmill? Glad you asked…

Dr.Dave’s Adventures at East Devon 2016

Posted on by

Friday night:

My entry to our local congress is sometimes deranged by family visits,
but an expectedly free weekend allowed another excursion in Exeter’s
St.George’s Hall, now renamed the Corn Exchange.

[It’s about as big a hall as a corn exchange would be, but Exeter is a
wool town, not a grain one, and this unhistoric renaming of a post-war
building rather makes me wince. Not as much as the chess, though…]

I have played less this season, quite deliberately; I’ve been finding
evening chess very hard, and in October even lost to a club member graded
50 points below me, when our grades suggest I should win every single
game. But in the daylight, I was hoping for better things.

Click on […] to see games list.

1. Black vs de Piro (141) – win.

Well, the first one is of course an evening game, after a week at work
and an abbreviated encounter with the Junior Club.

Tristram joined the Exeter club for a year or so recently, and in many
friendly games I couldn’t rememeber him playing much theory, so I
chanced my arm with the main line, but found, to my horror, that he knew
it all backwards. I scrambled together some reasonable moves from bits
of half-remembered theory and analogy with the …Qb6 lines that I have
always played before, but got to a position which used to be the main
line, yet has since fallen from favour. Characteristically, Tristram
went for the attack, but soon had to give away a piece to save his
Queen. I wonder how easy the endgame would be; I liked the passed pawn,
but in the post mortem I couldn’t make progress.

2. White vs. Kazanov (210?) – loss.

What an unforgiving game chess is. After being handed a space advantage,
I didn’t find a plan to make use of it and was brought back to focus by
my opponent breaking on the King’s side. It was not clear whose King
was the most exposed, but after some swaps we arrived at an endgame.
Under pressure to reach move 40 in time, I chose an active, forcing move
which made life more difficult for me, even impossible, when a calmer,
stabilising move would probably draw. But my real irritation is not
making more of the good position from the opening. (Maybe h2-h4? But
that’s not my style.)

3. Black vs. Jepps (150) – win.

On the four previous occasions we have met, Gerry has walked off with
the whole point each time. He is my Kryptonite: he loves gambit play, I
hate it; he attacks very well, I defend very badly … I thought I’d
play a straight bat against 1.e4 and my opponent, rather than playing
some evil underground gambit, went down a main line of theory, hoping to
play the Alekhin-Chatard Attack. Finding himself in the unfamiliar
MacCutcheon, he found most of the right moves in the opening, but
mistakenly judged his Bishop worse than mine (fearing …c4), and
swapped it off, losing time, when I think Black must have at least
equality. The standard attack down the c-file seemed to work smoothly
enough, and Gerry’s attacking verve and tactical opportunism didn’t
surface.

4. White vs. Wilson (155) – win.

I got a nice game the last time I played Matt with White, and hoped
to repeat the same line, or something like it. But my opponent bashed
out a completely different line that I rarely see, and a search of the
memory banks returned a familiar result: 404 Page Not Found. Black
seemed to equalise very easily, and while I had the Bishop pair it
seemed both of them were bad! I couldn’t see what else to do but
instigate a minority attack and hope Matt faltered on the other wing. My
attack flowed well enough, yielding a pawn, then poor Matt missed a
sequence of cheap forks around the time control.

[I have something of a reputation as a theory hound, but this is clearly
quite unfounded: I read fairly widely, but my knowledge is as shallow as
a gnat’s bidet.]

5. White vs. Helbig (194) – draw.

I have drawn and even won against Paul Helbig, a strong South West
player, but the most common (and expected) result has been a loss. My
single win came about from this line of the Pirc, with which I’ve had
some good results. However, once again my opponent bashed out what seems
to be a simple equalising line with little hesitation … which I should
have expected, as that’s exactly what he did last time! I was beginning
to find my position sinking into rigidity, even the rigor of death, but
a good-looking Queen manoeuvre by Black was met by an even stronger one
by White. Black had to concede a pawn, but, as always with classy
players, found the most awkward way of doing so, and I could only retain
the pawn by swapping off into an opposite-coloured Bishop endgame with
slender hopes of a win.

Overall: This unremarkable performance won me the upper grading prize,
remarkably enough (AKA the ‘not bad for an old duffer’ prize). I came
away happier with the result than the games; I got caught out in the
opening too often, and was in moderate time trouble in nearly every
game. But I can’t complain, that’s my best tournament result for a
while.

Dr.Dave’s Adventures at East Devon, 2000

Posted on by

This tournament somehow escaped record until 2016… I was going through a 1.e4 phase in a vain attempt to sharpen my game.

Click on […] to see games list.

R1: It’s always nice to start a tournament with a win. White plays the
theoretically-pointless Exchange French and gets a standard IQP attacking
position out of it. Surprisingly, everything worked out well for me, Black
never getting any counterplay going despite a cheeky Rook manoeuvre.

R2: I remember feeling optimistic then remember losing…

R3: I hadn’t met Graham before… He was visibly disappointed with my opening and with his 13th move.

R4: No comment.

R5: Ian had walked off with our club championship the previous year, so I tried to treat him with respect.

Who would win in a fight between a lion and a bear? (endgame fortresses)

Posted on by

My young colleague Leif enjoys endgames, and has an endless curiosity about unbalanced endgames. So he asks:
can you win with three pawns against a Bishop?
how about a Knight?
what about two Knights?

A pattern we kept running into was:
united pawns on their start squares don’t win against a piece (a)
united and *advanced* pawns win against a piece (b)
but
there are some special cases where the side with the piece can set up a blockade or fortressagainst advanced pawns (c)



So it’s less like that famous Internet question
who would win in a fight between a lion and a bear?
but
who would win in a fight between a fox and a hedgehog?

Anyhow, we ended up looking at a few fortresses, some I knew, some I had
to look up, and some I found out more about.

There are cases where a lone King can be a ‘toad in a stone’, wedged in and impossible to shift.

The Japanese might say a ‘bear in the hole’… Notice that these cases
are all in the corner of the board. Edges and corners are friends of the defending side.

With a pawn to help, the King can resist near a corner without being in
it:

It’s perfectly possible to draw when you are the exchange behind, if you
can keep out the enemy King. That’s another theme: keeping out the
attacking King.

The mighty Queen can be kept at bay, as long as the attacking King can’t
get in:

We played around with variations on that last fortress, and then looked
it up. It’s sort of interesting: if the pawn is advanced, the Queen can
get behind your defences and you lose, but if the pawn is advanced and
on the edge, you are able to hold again.

To break down the defence, you have to use zugzwang to make the Rook
abandon the King.

The same ideas occur in the ‘simple’ Q vs R endgame, which six-times US
champion GM Walter Browne failed to win against a computer in the 1970s,
before looking up the right technique… Try it against your own
computer!

Fortresses in practice

Here’s one from a game I had a year or two ago: I got through, but I
think I shouldn’t have been allowed to.

A couple of well-known ones at GM level: a great swindle by Zsuzsa
Polgar:

Another sad tale of the wrong Rook’s Pawn!

And a spectacular save:

P.S. Foxes are said to eat hedgehogs by rolling them into water, when the hedgehog will unroll to swim, and loses its life.

Jokes

Posted on by

I usually have about my person some positions to amuse young players at the end of an evening.

Here are some of my favourites:

Problems
Hints
Solutions

Problems.

White to play and…

1. Mate in half a move (?)

2. Mate in 6 (Halumbirek)

3. Mate in 2 (?)

The board is the right way around — those are eight pawns ready to promote!

4. Mate Black without taking a pawn (Brown)

5. Mate in 2 (Loyd)

6. Mate in…14!

Hints.

1. Is there a move in chess that you make in two halves?

2. Seriously, if you can’t solve this one, you should give up chess!

3. Two piece moves will give mate — but which piece do you move first?

4. A puzzle inspired by the Iron Cage of Tamerlane.

5. A puzzle called ‘Organ Pipes’: imagine it’s Black to move?

6. With the White King on g6, and Black to move…

Solutions.

1. 1.Ra1-d1 completes Queen’s-side castling.

2. All moves are forced: 1. d4 b5 2. d5 b4 3. axb4 a3 4. b5 a2 5. b6 a1=Q 6. b7# 1-0

3. 1. Nc6! and now e.g. 1…a1=Q 2. Ba6# by discovered check.

Also:
(1… f1=Q 2. Bf5#)
(1… e1=Q 2. Be6#)
(1… d1=Q 2. Bd7#)
(1… b1=Q 2. Bb7#)
(1… c1=Q 2. Be6#)
(1… f1=Q 2. Bf5#)
(1… g1=Q 2. Bg4#)
(1… h1=Q+ 2. Bh3#)

4. 1. Nec6+ dxc6 2. dxe3+ fxe3 3. Rh4+ Be4 4. Rhxe4+ dxe4 5. Be5+ dxe5 6. Rxd8+
Nd5+ 7. Rxd5+ cxd5 8. Nc6# 1-0

5. 1. Qa5 Bb7 2. Nf5# or…

(1… Bd7 2. Qd5#)
(1… Be6 2. Qe5#)
(1… Bf5 2. Nxf5#)
(1… Rd6 2. Qxb4#)
(1… Rd5 2. Qxd5#)
(1… Re5 2. Qxe5#)
(1… Bc5 2. Qa1#)
(1… Bb7 2. Nf5#)

6. 1. Kg7 Qh3 2. Kf8 Qh4 (2… h4 3. Kg7 Ne5 4. Nxe5#) 3. Ke7 Qh3 4. Kd8 Qh4
5. Kc7 Qh3 6. Kc8 Qh4 7. Kd8 Qh3 8. Ke7 Qh4 9. Kf8 Qh3 10. Kg7 Qh4 11. Kg6 Qh3
12. Kxg5 Qh4+ 13. Kxh4 Nc3 14. Nd4# 1-0

Opening Workshop 2015

Posted on by

[A Q&A at a coaching session]

A bit of perspective

Your opening choices are determined by:

  1. Your style: are you a Steady Eddie or a Bonkers Billie?
  2. Your memory: can you commit the key traps and variations to memory?
  3. Your study time: can you find and absorb what you need to play this system well?
  4. Your aims: are you trying to get a playable position? are you trying to
    set your opponent problems, so they make a mistake? are you inviting
    your opponent to waltz with you blindfold on the edge of a cliff? are
    you trying to lure them into unfamiliar territory, or a trap?

Trouble with b6

“I’m having trouble getting …b6 to work against 1.e4”

1.e4 b6

“I’m not surprised!”

Any opening is only as good as the ideas you bring to it. I don’t think
I heard much from you about what your ideas were in playing …b6: what
sort of position do you hope to get to play?

The ideas behind some systems can be pretty straightforward – for
example, I think the Evans Gambit and the French Defence and the Colle
System can be picked up pretty quickly by club players, and the extra
ideas you need as your opponents get better at meeting your new opening
can be added fairly easily. The French Defence in particular often
leads to the same sort of pawn structure (white Pd4 Pe5 vs black Pd5
Pe6), so, even if you don’t recognise the exact variation, you can still
have a good idea about the best plans for both sides.

1…b6 is a rarity – you will struggle to find many books to read, or
games to follow. If you look it up in the books, you will find most of
the lines end in +=. The ideas behind the opening are hard to find or
understand: I think it can be best interpreted as a hypermodern defence,
letting White occupy the centre then hoping to get play later, either by
deciding on your own central setup once you have seen what White has
done, or using the centre as a target. I think it ends up as += because
that is hard to do! Also, you aren’t going to get the same structures
and ideas in each game, and you are going to lose games that you don’t
understand.

My advice: pick something else!

Philidor for Beginners

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 d6

In some ways, the Philidor is a risky opening to try: there are dozens
of traps that Black can fall into in the first few moves.

*[ http://exeterchessclub.org.uk/content/lessons-philidors-defence ]

But if you learn the right order for your first few moves (especially
3…Nf6), you can usually get to a solid position from which you can
play the middlegame. Yes, White gets a space advantage, but it’s not a
huge one, and space advantages are not so easy to make use of. An extra
piece, or a doubled pawn, or a bare King’s-side, all tell you what to do
next. A space advantage just tells you that, whatever you want to do,
you will probably be able to do it more easily than your opponent.

Philidor inspiration:

The (Hyper)-Accelerated Dragon

Anyone who plays the main line Sicilian Dragon will have met the deadly Yugolav Attack.

White is going to castle long then push the h-pawn.

Maybe it’s not as deadly these days, as Black players have learned how
to fight back, but it’s the most important line in the Dragon and there
are whole books written about it.

If you like the Dragon setup, but are unwilling to take on the task of
learning how to defend against the Yugoslav, then you can try a cunning
move order to head White off.

The Accelerated Dragon goes

1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 g6

One of Black’s ideas is that …d7-d5 can be played in one move.

For example,

5.Nc3 Bg7 6.Be3 Nf6 7.Be2 0-0 8.Qd2? d5!

or

8.0-0 d5!

Now, if White tries to set up the Yugoslav Attack, it all goes wrong

5.Nc3 Bg7 6.Be3 Nf6 7.Qd2?! Ng4!

5.Nc3 Bg7 6.Be3 Nf6 7.f3?! 0-0! 8.Qd2 d5!

5.Nc3 Bg7 6.Be3 Nf6 7.Bc4! Qa5! 8.f3? Qb4! 9.Bb3 Nxe4!

an amazing move, but it works!

if 10.Nxc6, Qxc3!

and Black comes out ahead

After 7…Qa5, 8.0-0

must be tried, and then Black has successfully
avoided the Yugoslav. These positions are not ever so promising for
Black – perfectly solid, but perhaps the Qa5 is misplaced, vulnerable
to Nb3 Qc7 and a later Nd5

Black can try one other line to make use of the omission of …d6:

7…0-0

Uogele’s Variation.[

Now Black has the usual bunch of tricks waiting for Qd2 and f3

8.Qd2 Ng4!
or 8…Nxe4 9.Nxe4 d5!

8.f3 Qb6!?
(or 8…e6!?, maybe even 8…d5!?)

So White should play

8.Bb3!

Now Black has one last chance to keep White from setting up a
Yugoslav-style attack:

8…a5!? 9. f3!? d5!?

Black gambits the d-pawn to get active play.

White’s not worse here and may have chances of advantage, but there is
no chance of the standard Yugslav Attack. (I expect White’s best try on
move 9 is 9.0-0, when 9…d6 is OK for Black and 9…a4 is
“interesting”.)

So, Black’s extra pressure against d4 means that White cannot get into the
Yugoslav. You don’t get anything for free in chess, so Black’s missing
pressure against e4 means that White can omit Nc3 and play c4, the
dreaded Maroczy Bind, also a bit less dreaded these days.

The Hyper-accelerated Dragon is the move order with 2…g6.

This avoids problems with 3.Bb5 and also gives you some extra options
against the Maroczy Bind, for example,

1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 g6 3.d4 Bg7 4.c4 Qb6!?

Anti-Sicilians for the Dragon player

Charlie was suspicious about his White opponents who want to play around
with their own move order tricks, avoiding the main lines of the
Accelerated Dragon to play, e.g.

1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 g6 3.Nc3

or

1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 g6 3.c3

or even

1.e4 c5 2.c3

I think
1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 g6 3.Nc3
is not much of a problem: after 3…Bg7
or 3…Nc6, White doesn’t have any clever ways of delaying d4.

If you like to meet

1.e4 c5 2.c3

with

1.e4 c5 2.c3 Nf6

or

1.e4 c5 2.c3 d5 3.exd5 Qxd5 4.d4 e6

then White’s move order with

1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 g6 3.c3

means that you can’t play your preferred line.

The good news is that you can get a perfectly playable game after

1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 g6 3.c3 d5 4.exd5 Qxd5

or perhaps even better

1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 g6 3.c3 Bg7 4.d4 cxd4 5.cxd4 d5!

Now

6.e5 Bg4!
(intending e6, Nge7, and either Qb6 or f6,exf6,Qxf6) gives you an excellent game.

6.exd5

is OK:

6…Nf6 7.Nc3 Nxd5?! 8.Bc4 Nxc3 9.Qb3!

is awkward, but

8…Nb6

is fine, while

6.exd5 Nf6 7.Bb5+ Nbd7

should recover the d-pawn without too much pain, but it’s worth looking up the theory.

Trouble with b3

Ah, since El Presidente’s pursuit of 1.b3, we have all wondered what we should do against it.

I think after 1.b3,1…e5 is generally accepted as the most challenging move. (When Nimzowitsch himself used to play this system now known as the Nimzo-Larsen Attack, he used to start with 1.Nf3 Nf6 2.b3 to avoid …e5.)

After

1.b3 e5,

play can continue

2.Bb2 Nc6 3.e3 d5 4.Bb5 Bd6,

when White has two ways of nibbling the centre, 5.f4 and 5.c4 (with one
idea 5…Nf6 6.c5!?). I expect Black is doing OK in most of these
lines, but I think we can see the Hypermodern approach working well:
Black has set up a big centre, and White is having fun making threats
against it.

A more solid approach is

1.b3 e5 2.Bb2 Nc6 3.e3 d6,

occupying a smaller portion of the centre for a lower cost.

One game from here that created a lot of interest was Minasian-Adams:

4.Bb5 Bd7

When I tried angling for this against Tim, he was happy to play into the
line

4.d4 exd4 5.exd4 d5.

Black can claim that White’s position doesn’t make a lot of sense, with
the Bb2 having a very poor view, but it’s very early days in the game
and Tim has more experience in this line than I do.
I expect the best line in this position for White is

4.Nf3.

after which Black can happily challenge on the long diagonal with

4…g6,

as 5.d4 Bg7 6.dxe5 Nge7! allows Black to get a bit more sorted
before recapturing on e5.

Approaching the Sicilian

Jeremy has discarded the Caro-Kann (quite right too…) in favour of the
Sicilian. He has decided that 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 makes sense, but
is still making up his mind about what to do after 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4
Nf6 5.Nc3.

Options include:

5…g6 Dragon Variation

5…a6 Najdorf Variation

5…Nc6 Classical Variation

These are some of the most interesting and theoretical variations in
chess. They are also a bit of a challenge to take on: White has some
razor-sharp options like the Sozin, Richter-Rauser and Velimirovic
variations.

6.Bc4

6.Bg5 7.Qd2

6.Be3 7.Bc4 8.Qe2

5…e6 Scheveningen Variation

This is a good deal less hair-raising than the three alternatives above,
and a steady option for Black. I wrote a booklet on this for the
juniors, so let me know if you would like a copy.

I’m going to put in a word for 5…e5, heading for the Sveshnikov (or
Lasker-Pelikan) Variation. It also has a fair amount of theory, but
as some of the structural decisions have been made, you can plan your
approach for development with more certainty. Its reputation as a sharp
and theory-laden line has been balanced by a respect for how solid it
is. Black’s pawn structure maybe looks weak and hard to handle, but
White’s Na3 is out of play and Black has a very solid stake in the
centre, so any of those ‘mad axeman’ attacks with f4/g4/h4 are just
going to bounce. Moreover, most of Black’s strategy for coping with the
messy pawns is ‘lots of activity’ and ‘dump the bad bishop’, which
shouldn’t be too hard for anyone!

Sveshnikov inspiration:

English, Reti, Dutch

Sean ponders moving from the Reti to the English The key challenge to the English Opening is 1.c4 e5; the big plus to approaching the English with 1.Nf3 is that White avoids this line. There are also advantages in leaving the Ng1 at home: the long diagonal is kept open and in particular White can adopt the popular Botvinnik set-up, recomended repeatedly in repertoire books (Soltis 1980, Kosten 1998, Marin 2004). These three books also recommend leaving the Nb1 at home at first, thus:

1.c4 e5 2.g3 Nf6 3.Bg2

as this doesn’t allow Black the well-known equalising lines with

1.c4 e5 2.Nc3 Nf6 3.g3 c6

1.c4 e5 2.Nc3 Nf6 3.g3 Bb4

(White is perhaps best advised to throw in 1.c4 e5 2.Nc3 Nf6 3.Nf3 Nc6 before 4.g3).
Black may take advantage of White’s slow approach by setting up a big
centre. …d5 is restrained, but what about …f5?

1.c4 e5 2.Nc3 f5 3.d4!

is promising for White, but

1.c4 e5 2.g3 Nc6 3.Nc3 f5

is playable

Kosten points out

1.c4 e5 2.g3 Nc6 3.Nc3 f5 4.Bg2 Nf6 5.e3 d5!? 6.cxd5 Nb4!

but is content with

1.c4 e5 2.g3 Nc6 3.Nc3 f5 4.Bg2 Nf6 5.a3 Bc5 6.e3

(I wonder if Black can then escape the Botvinnik with d6/g6.)

Marin has a new approach:

1.c4 e5 2.g3 Nc6 3.Nc3 f5 4.Nf3!

with the idea

4…e4 5.Nh4!

hitting the f-pawn and preparing to go to f4 via g2. It has some links with the Hyper-Accelerated Dragon approach we saw above.

4…Nf6 5.d4 e4 6.Nh4 has the same ideas.

Preparation in club play

Do you prepare to play into your opponent’s main opening system or try
to dodge? Does it even matter at club level?

a. Done badly

“I think Dave knows his openings pretty well, and I don’t really like
playing against the French… I know, I’ll play 1.d4, that will surprise
him! Against 1.d4, he plays some rubbish with …b6, and I can beat that
easily!”

1.d4 f5

“Oh. I forgot he sometimes plays the Dutch. Now what do I do?”

b. Done well

“I think Dave knows his openings pretty well, and he nearly always plays
the French these days. In particular, he plays the Euwe Variation
against the Advance French, and I have a recent book on how to play
that line for White.”

Blunder-proofing your chess

Posted on by

Three quite shocking examples from junior chess.



[I will say I was most impressed by the group’s ability to find the
blunders almost instantly! It’s as though we have a special instinct
for such moves…]

There are three sorts of blunder, it seems to me, and we have seen examples of each:

A. you overlook your opponent’s threat (you are asleep)
B. you overlook your own threat (you are lazy)
C. you overlook your opponent’s reply to your threat (you are over-excited)

Some fairly shocking examples from the club championship of recent years… One of each type, again.

It is hard to know which is most common, and it may be that you
specialise in a particular type. Let us try to find out… The cure for
type B is the tactical awareness discussed with the group by Tim last
week, so see how you get on with these, which feature errors of types A
and C.

(see attached PDF, side 1)

Blunder-proofing your game

Three treatments may be recommended, each suited to curing you of a particular sort of blunder:

a. suspicious minds — look before you leap!
b. tactical awareness — practise doing puzzles — add speed to accuracy
c. hesitation — check it before you move it — finish your line of thought with the best move for your opponent

The first and last thing to do

…is check for your opponent’s threats.

First, when your opponent moves, look at everything the move does.
Then choose a move.

Lastly, before making your chosen move, check every forcing reply. If
you can, do the same for the position at the end of your analysis.

So, let’s try that again, from the top:

*[Turn over!]

When you don’t have time for all this…

What about when you are in time trouble, or playing in a rapidplay?
There may not be time to do a proper analysis, in which case you will
have to settle for a ‘good enough’ move. If you rehearse good thinking
habits when playing slowly, I hope you develop some intuition for when
you don’t have proper thinking time.

[There are also strategical blunders, overlooking what is going on positionally, which
are equivalent:

  • overlooking your opponent’s best plan
  • overlooking your best plan
  • overlooking your opponent’s best counter to your plan]

Blunder15.pdf

What are the odds?

Posted on by

We discussed odds-giving last Friday – that is, starting without one or more of your pieces.

I mentioned one of my favourite Lasker stories, where he teased a player who didn’t know hime, which I quote from Chernev (1948):

Lasker `I think the odds of a Knight is an advantage to the odds-giver. You can get your Queen Rook into play quickly, and work up a strong attack. Let me try to give you a Knight odds.’ Lasker’s adversary assured him that at Knight odds, he (Lasker) would not have a chance. They tried a game though, and Lasker won. `You see,’ said
Lasker, `that proves my statement. Now give me a Knight.’ They played again, and Lasker lost. Now Lasker gave the odds-and won. After a few more games where they alternated in giving up a Knight, with the result that the side without a knight always won, Lasker’s opponent, bewildered by the `proof,’ got up and said, `I guess you’re right after all. It does seem to be an advantage to give a Knight!'”

And here is a startling odds game: Potter starts without a Queen, plays six moves, then announces mate in eight! That is, his combination was longer than the game.

Openings workshop 2014

Posted on by

Work in progress…

How to decide if the Dutch Defence is good for you
————————————————–
Just taking the Dutch Defence as an example…

Do you think it suits you? (Do your friends think it suits you?)
Do the ideas you read about go into your memory?
Do the ideas you remember actually turn up in your games?
Do you get good results with it?
Do the results in your games have anything to do with the opening?
Can your opponents avoid the lines you like to play?

Philidor’s Defence — see recent post
————————————-
http://exeterchessclub.org.uk/content/lessons-philidors-defence-live-act…

London System
————-
Some opening systems are ‘good’: they are played by Grandmasters and
have enough point to give other Grandmasters some problems in getting
equality as Black.

Some opening systems are not so good: they are rarely played by GMs and
don’t have enough about them to give other GMs problems.

What does all this have to do with club players?

A good opening for a club player is one that gives your opponents problems.

And the London System? It’s not generally considered to set enough
problems to be played against GMs, although some GMs will use it as a
‘rabbit-bashing’ system, keeping out of theory and known equalising and
simplifying lines.

In amateur play, it may be possible to learn a a defence against the
London System which is enough to put White off playing it. If your
opponents don’t know any such defence, your greater familiarity with the
system may give you great practical chances.

A good example of White’s practical chances:


A good example of Black’s strongest defence:


But can White avoid this defence by a clever move order?!

Does it matter if Black can equalise with …Bd6?

Scheveningen Sicilian for Black: move order issues
——————————-

Scheveningen
Paulsen/Taimanov
Nadforf

The original Scheveningen was

Approaching via Najdorf move order
avoid g4, allow Bb5+

Approaching via Taimanov move order
take sting out of g4, allow c4