The Hypermodern Approach

Posted on October 5, 2000 by DrDave

how to handle newfangled openings

[There is a superb essay by Reti on the legacy of
the hypermoderns which was published in Virginia
Chess in 1993, archived at Palle Mathiasen’s World
Champions site at http://www.chesschampions.com/reti.html]
Oh dear, link rot got to it. Reproduced without permission here.

NIMZOVITCH founded the HYPERMODERN school, and wrote a very
engaging text My System in which he expounded his
views on the centre, centralisation, prophylaxis,
and various pawn formations. The other Hypermoderns, of whom we may
take RETI of Czechoslovakia as an example, proposed no really new
theory of the middlegame but revolutionised the treatment of the
opening.

You know that you should sieze the centre in the opening, and
use it to dominate the game. Like this:

Boleslavsky – Scitov (Moscow, 1933). 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3.
Bc4 Bc5 4. c3 Nf6 5. d4 exd4 6. cxd4 Bb6?

This move gives White too much of a free hand. The “Plan A” pawn
centre just rolls over the Black position.

7. e5 Ng4 8. h3 Nh6 9. d5 Ne7 10. d6 Ng6 11. Bg5 f6 12.
exf6 gxf6 White can win a piece, but: 13. Qe2+ Kf8
14. Bxh6# 1-0

The hypermoderns said (and showed) that there was no need to try
to grab the centre immediately – and in fact, you could safely let
your opponent rush into the centre with pawns in the opening, using
them as a target for attack. The idea is not to ignore the centre
but to control it, perhaps from a distance. If the opponent
occupies the centre, you can hit fiercely at it; if not, your own
occupation of the centre later will be more secure for being
delayed. In fact, Reti said, to occupy the centre directly as White
merely allowed Black either to blockade or blow up what White has
established, whereas keeping things unfixed was the most awkward
thing White could do. They would develop the Bishops in
fianchetto, and use side-swipes like c4 to undermine the
centre. As White they played flank openings like the
English and the Reti; for Black Alekhin’s
Defence and the Grunfeld Defence are good examples of
the hypermodern legacy. Other examples include the Pirc
and Modern Defences, and the more rarely seen English
Defence.

Whiteley – Keene. [A40] 1. d4 e6 2. c4 b6 3. e4 Bb7 4. Nc3 Bb4 5.
Bd3 f5 6. d5

Barden recommended 6.d5 (without analysis) just before this game…

6… fxe4 7. Bxe4 Qh4 8. Qd3 exd5 9. cxd5 Nf6 10. Bf3 Ba6 11.
Qe3+ Kf7 12. Qf4 Re8+ 13. Kd1 Qxf4 14. Bxf4 Bxc3 15. bxc3 d6 16.
Nh3 h6 17. Kc2

17… Bc4 ( not …g5 allowing counterplay ) 18. Rhd1 Nbd7 19. a4 ?

19… Nc5 20. Rd4 Be2 21. Bxe2 Rxe2+ 22. Kd1 Rae8 23. Ra3 Re1+
24. Kc2 R8e2+ 25. Bd2 Rh1 26. c4 Rxh2 27. a5 Re7 28. axb6 axb6 29.
g4 Re4 30. Rxe4 Ncxe4 31. Rf3 g5 32. Be3 Kg6 33. Kd3 Nc5+ 34. Bxc5
bxc5 35. Rg3 Nxg4 36. Ke2 Kh5 37. Ke1 Ne5 38. Kf1 Kh4 39. Ng1 g4
40. Rc3 Kg5 1-0

Cursoux-Letzelter, 1977 [B03] Alekhin’s Defence

1. e4 Nf6 2. e5 Nd5 3. d4 d6 4. c4 Nb6 5. f4 dxe5 6. fxe5 c5 7.
d5 e6

DIAGRAM

Alekhin’s Defence takes a certain amount of courage to play. Black
sacrifices tempi and space to get White to over-extend the centre.

8. Nc3 exd5 9. cxd5 c4 10. Nf3 Bg4 11. Bxc4 Nxc4

DIAGRAM White has an almost perfect centre to look at, but is about
to lose his grip. The game enters a very messy phase.

12. Qa4+ Nd7 13. Qxc4 Bxf3 14. gxf3 Nxe5 15. Qe4 Qh4+ 16. Ke2
Qh5 17. Bf4 Kd7 18. Qa4+ Kd8 19. Rhf1 Rc8 20. Qa5+ b6 21. Qxa7 Bc5
22. Rac1 Re8 23. Ne4 Nxf3 24. Rxc5 Nd4+ 25. Kd3 Qe2+ 0-1

White still occupies the centre, and it is symbolic that the
King dies there!

Lilienthal – Korchnoi [D86] Modern Grunfeld, 1954

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. Nc3 d5 4. cxd5 Nxd5 5. e4 Nxc3 6. bxc3 Bg7
7. Bc4 O-O 8. Ne2 Nc6 9. O-O Qd7 10. Ba3 [10. Be3] 10…
Na5 11. Bd3 b6

Korchnoi has been an occasional devotee of the Grunfeld throughout
his career, and I’m sure it suits his counter-punching style.

12. Nf4 ?

This lets Black get a move ahead, as well as loosening the dark
squares in the centre.

12… Bb7 13. Qe2 Rfd8 14. Rad1 e6 15. e5 c5

A typical flank blow in a hypermodern opening: it always reminds me
of judo.

16. dxc5 Qc7 17. cxb6 Qxe5 18. Qxe5 Bxe5 19. Ne2 axb6 20. Bc1
Bd5 -+

Black’s pieces dominate the game, and Korchnoi went on to win. 21.
Bg5 f6 22. f4 fxg5 23. fxe5 Nc4 24. Bxc4 Bxc4 25. Rxd8+ Rxd8 26.
Re1 Rd2 27. Ng3 Rxa2 28. Ne4 Bd5 29. Nf6+ Kf7 30. Nxd5 exd5 31. Rb1
Ra6 32. Rb5 Ke6 33. Kf2 Kxe5 34. Kf3 Ra3 35. Kg4 Rxc3 36. Rxb6 Rc2
37. Kg3 d4 38. Rb7 d3 39. Rxh7 d2 40. Rd7 Ke4 41. Kg4 Rc4 42. Rxd2
Ke3+ 43. Kxg5 Kxd2 44. Kxg6 Ke3 45. h3 Kf4 46. g4 Rc5 47. Kh6 Rg5
0-1

This is the good side of the hypermodern approach: Black getting
good winning chances in an unbalanced game, but it does have a
shady side.

Firstly, if you hesitate for a moment in the attack on a big
centre, it really will crush you. Norwood, in his book
Winning with the Modern, offers this game as a
reason for Black to avoid the Austrian Attack (f4) at all
costs.

Bareev – Norwood, Marseilles, 1990[B09] 1. d4 d6 2. e4 Nf6
3. Nc3 g6 4. f4 Bg7 5. Nf3 c5 6. e5 [Book is 6. dxc5
or 6. Bb5+] 6…Ng4 [6… Nfd7! was
essential] 7. dxc5 dxc5 8. Qxd8+ Kxd8 9. h3 Nh6 10.
Be3 b6 11. O-O-O+ Bd7 12. g4 Kc8 13. Ng5 f6 Yeuch
14. Rxd7 Kxd7 15. Bb5+ Kc8 16. Ne6 Bf8 17. Nd5 Nf7 18. Ndc7
Nd8 19. Rd1 Nxe6 20. Nxe6 fxe5 21. Rd8+ Kb7 22. Bd3 DIAGRAM
1-0

A famous world-class encounter:

Larsen, B-Spassky, B, Belgrade USSR-World 1970

1.b3 e5 2.Bb2 Nc6 3.c4 Nf6 4.Nf3 e4 5.Nd4 Bc5 6.Nxc6
dxc6 7.e3 Bf5 8.Qc2 Qe7 9.Be2 O-O-O 10.f4 Ng4 11.g3 h5
White may already be lost.

12.h3 h4 DIAGRAM

13.hxg4 hxg3 14.Rg1 Rh1 15.Rxh1 g2 16.Rf1 Qh4+ 17.Kd1
gxf1=Q+ 0-1

So, if GMs like Norwood and Larsen can get it wrong, club
players can too. I have often seen straightforward, even
simple-minded, attacking play bring down hypermodern systems tried
by players a class or two above the attacker. It may be that at
club level the attack is easier than the defence.

Secondly, it may be easier for White to gain an advantage against
hypermodern defences through more conservative play – rather than
grabbing the whole centre, just taking on a better slice of it.
Karpov has repeatedly shown the efficacy of this approach:

Karpov-Nunn 1983 1.e4 d6 2.d4 Nf6 3.Nc3 g6 The
sharp Pirc defence, which Karpov meets modestly. 4.Nf3 Bg7 5.Be2
O-O 6.O-O Bg4 7.Be3 Nbd7 8.h3 Bxf3 9.Bxf3 e5 10.g3 c6 11.Bg2 Qa5
12.Qd2 Rfe8 13.Rad1 b5 14.a3 Nb6 15.b3 Nfd7 16.Ra1 Nf8 17.d5 {!}
Black’s pieces are slightly wrong-footed.

17…Rac8 18.Rfd1 c5 19.Bf1 c4 20.a4 {!} DIAGRAM

20…cxb3 21.Nxb5 Qxd2 22.Rxd2 Rxc2 23.Rxc2 bxc2 24.a5 Nc8 25.Rc1
Nd7 26.Rxc2 Nc5 27.Nxd6 Nxd6 28.Rxc5 Nxe4 29.Rc7 Bf8 30.a6 Rd8
31.Rxa7 1-0

Thirdly, it may be harder for White to gain an advantage with a
hypermodern opening if Black is not tempted to take on more than
can be easily chewed. Larry Evans in The Chess Opening for
You complains about an opponent who replied to his King’s
Indian Attack (1.Nf3 2.g3 3.Bg2 4.d3 5.O-O 6.Nbd2) with 1…Nf6
2…g6 3…Bg7 4…d6 5…O-O 6…Nbd7, and Evans had nothing to
shoot at.

Appendix

Here’s two examples of the style from Reti – a hit and a miss.

[Event “Hypermodern Openings”][Site “?”][Date “??.??.??”][Round
“?”]

[White “Reti”][Black “Rubinstein”][Result “1-0”]

1.Nf3 d5 2.g3 Nf6 3.Bg2 g6 4.c4 d4 5.d3 Bg7 6.b4 O-O 7.Nbd2 c5
8.Nb3 cxb4 9.Bb2 Nc6 10.Nbxd4 Nxd4 11.Bxd4 b6 12.a3 Bb7 13.Bb2 bxa3
14.Rxa3 Qc7 15.Qa1

The characteristic Reti touch

15…Ne8 16.Bxg7 Nxg7 17.O-O Ne6 18.Rb1 Bc6 19.d4 Be4 20.Rd1 a5
21.d5 Nc5 22.Nd4 Bxg2 23.Kxg2 Rfd8 24.Nc6 Rd6 25.Re3 Re8 26.Qe5 f6
27.Qb2 e5 28.Qb5 Kf7 29.Rb1 Nd7 30.f3 Rc8 31.Rd3 (!)

{now if …Nb8, c5!}

White’s grip on the centre and Q-side is decisive

31…e4 32.fxe4 Ne5 33.Qxb6 Nxc6 34.c5 Rd7 35.dxc6 Rxd3 36.Qxc7+
Rxc7 37.exd3 Rxc6 38.Rb7+ Ke8 39.d4 Ra6 40.Rb6 {!} 40…Ra8 41.Rxf6
a4 42.Rf2 a3 43.Ra2 Kd7 44.d5 g5 45.Kf3 Ra5 46.h4 gxh4 47.gxh4 Ke7
48.Kf4 Kd7 49.Kf5 {1-0}

[Event “hypermodern opening”][Site “NY”][Date “1924.??.??”][Round
“?”]

[White “Reti”][Black “Lasker”][Result “0-1”]

1.Nf3 d5 2.c4 c6 3.b3 Bf5 4.g3 Nf6 5.Bg2 Nbd7 6.Bb2 e6 7.O-O Bd6
8.d3 O-O 9.Nbd2 e5 10.cxd5 cxd5 11.Rc1 Qe7 12.Rc2 a5 13.a4 h6
14.Qa1 Rfe8 15.Rfc1 {two opposing chess strategies perfectly
placed!}

15…Bh7 16.Nf1 Nc5 17.Rxc5 Bxc5 18.Nxe5 Rac8 19.Ne3 Qe6 20.h3 Bd6
21.Rxc8 Rxc8 22.Nf3 Be7 23.Nd4 Qd7 24.Kh2 h5 25.Qh1 h4 26.Nxd5
hxg3+ 27.fxg3 Nxd5 28.Bxd5 Bf6 29.Bxb7 Rc5 30.Ba6 Bg6 31.Qb7 Qd8
32.b4 Rc7 33.Qb6 Rd7 34.Qxd8+ Rxd8 35.e3 axb4 36.Kg2 Bxd4 37.exd4
Bf5 38.Bb7 Be6 39.Kf3 Bb3 40.Bc6 Rd6 41.Bb5 Rf6+ 42.Ke3 Re6+ 43.Kf4
Re2 44.Bc1 Rc2 45.Be3 Bd5 0-1

Club games: Steve Webb at work

Posted on October 5, 2000 by DrDave

Webb, S – Annetts, I [D04] Exeter vs.
Tiverton, 1996

1. d4 d5 2. Nf3 Nf6 3. e3 Bf5

A familiar anti-Colle line, making Bd3/e3-e4 difficult.
White correctly changes plan.

4. c4 e6 5. Qb3 Qc8

Passive but tenable; White has a harmonious development
and an easier game.

6. Nc3 c6 7. Be2

It is common in Queen’s Gambit lines for Black to wait for a move
of this Bishop before taking the c-Pawn, so gaining a tempo.
However, this exchange must be followed by a concrete plan to put
White’s centre under pressure, as Black has lost the strongpoint
d5.

7… dxc4 8. Bxc4 Nbd7 9. O-O Nb6

[9… Be7 idea …O-O, …c5]

10. Be2 Bd6 11. Nd2 Bg6 12. e4 Be7

e4-e5 was threatened, but this is an admission that Black
is worse.

[12… e5 13. d5 cxd5 14. exd5 Qc5]

13. a4

Rather than try to cash in immediately, White aims to
control the whole board and deprive Black’s pieces of squares. This
is accumulation theory: don’t try and fiorce the issue,
and keep collecting pluses thoughout the game.

13… O-O 14. a5 Nbd7 15. f4 h6 16.
Bf3

16… Bh5? drops a piece 17. e5 Bxf3 18.
exf6 Bxf6 19. Nxf3 c5 20. Be3 cxd4 21. Nxd4

[21. Bxd4 to get the pieces off]

21… Nc5 22. Qc2 Rd8 23. Rad1 b6 24. axb6 axb6
25. Qe2 Qb7 26. Ndb5 Be7 27. Qg4 Ne4 28. f5 Nf6 29. Qg3 Kh7 30.
fxe6 fxe6 31. Bd4 Bc5 32. Bxc5 bxc5 33. Rd6 Qe7 34. Rfd1 Ne8 35.
Qd3+ 1-0

Webb, S – Pattinson, J [D02] Devon II vs.
Leicestershire, 1996

1. d4 d5 2. Nf3 Nc6

The classical argument is that …Nc6 precludes …c5
(although …e5 may be aimed at). In the Colle …c5 is a good
strategy, but usually fits better with …Nbd7 than …Nc6. This is
because if White plays e3-e4, Black can isolate the d-Pawn with
…cxd4/…dxe4. So White may precede e3-e4 with dxc5, and if so,
Black will prefer to recapture …Nd7xc5 than …Be7xc5, hitting e4
– DR.

3. e3

[3. c4 is the Tchigorin Defence, which I did not want
to go into.]

3… Nf6 4. c3 g6

[4… e6 5. Bd3 Bd6 6. Nbd2 e5]

5. Bb5

[5. Bd3 Bg4]

5… Bd7 6. Nbd2 Bg7 7. Bd3 O-O

[7… Bg4]

8. O-O Re8 9. e4 dxe4 10. Nxe4 e5

White has followed Colle principles but this looks pretty
level. How can White play for a win?

11. d5!? Nxd5 12. Qb3 Bc8?!

[12… Nb6 13. Neg5 Qe7]

[12… Nf4 13. Bc4 Be6 14. Neg5 Bxc4 15. Qxc4
Ne6]

13. Bg5 Nde7?!

[13… Nf6 14. Rad1 Qe7]

14. Rad1 Be6 15. Bc4 Bxc4

[15… Na5?? 16. Rxd8 Nxb3 17. Rxe8+ Rxe8 18. Bxb3+-
]

16. Qxc4 Qc8 17. Nf6+ Bxf6 18. Bxf6

White has been making natural-looking moves and Black has
been cowed into making a series of inferior and passive choices,
and White now has good compensation for the Pawn.

18… Qf5 19. Qh4 idea g4 19… h5 20. Rfe1 Nc8?
21. Nxe5! Nxe5?? 22. Rxe5 Qxe5 23. Bxe5 Rxe5 24. Rd8+ Kh7 25. f4
Rf5 26. Qf2 Nb6 27. Rxa8 Nxa8 28. Qxa7 Nb6 29. Qxb7 Nd5 30. g3 c5
31. a4 g5 32. fxg5 Ne3 great idea, but… 33. Qe4
1-0

Nash, R – Webb, S [B10] Barnstaple vs.
Exeter, 1995

1. e4 c6 2. Nc3

[2. d4 d5 3. Nc3 dxe4 4. Nxe4 is the main line
approach; now 4… Bf5 5. Ng3 Bg6 6. h4 h6 7. h5 Bh7 8. Nf3 Nf6 9.
Bd3 Bxd3 10. Qxd3 with good chances for equality]

2… d5 3. Nf3 dxe4 4. Nxe4 Bf5?!

[4… Bg4]

5. Ng3 Bg6 6. h4 h6 7. Ne5 Qd6!

[7… Bh7? 8. Qh5 g6 9. Qf3 Nf6

[9… Qd5 10. Qxd5 cxd5 11. Bb5+ Kd8 12.
Nxf7+]

10. Qb3 Qd5 11. Qxb7 Qxe5+

[11… c5 12. Bb5+ Nbd7 13. Qxd5]

12. Be2 1-0, Lasker-Muller, Zurich 1934]

8. d4 Nd7 9. Nxg6

[9. Bc4 Qb4+ Webb 10. Bd2]

9… Qxg6

White has been successful with his coup and now holds the two
Bishops. In order to take advantage of this, White must play
actively, deny the Knights central posts, and try to open up lines
for the Bishops. In the game none of this happens.

10. Bd3 Qd6

“Hoping to gain a tempo by attacking the d-Pawn” – SW –
but risking loss of a tempo because of another Queen move! – DR

11. c3

[11. Be3 idea c2-c4]

11… Ngf6 12. Qe2 e6 13. Nf5

pretty but pointless

13… Qc7 14. Bd2 Nd5 15. g3 O-O-O 16. Ne3 Bd6?!
17. Nc4! Rde8 18. Nxd6+ Qxd6 19. O-O-O

White has the two Bishops but they are poorly placed. Black
undogmatically opens lines to make use of his better pieces.

19… e5! 20. dxe5 Nxe5 21. Bf5+ Kb8 22. Kb1 Qc5
23. Qe4 g6! 24. Bh3 Ka8 25. Qg2 Nd3 26. Rhf1 Qb5

27. Kc2 Nxb2 28. Rb1 Qd3+ 29. Kc1

[29. Kxb2 Qxd2+]

29… Nc4 30. Rd1 Nxd2

[30… Nxc3]

31. Rb2 Nxc3 0-1

Middlegame endings and endgame openings

Posted on September 27, 2000 by DrDave

What is an endgame, and what is a queenless middlegame? I’ll look at a couple of the latter, then a game of mine which moved from one into the other. Lastly, I include some examples of lines to practice with.

Anon – Barcza (Debrecen) 1934

e4 Nc6 2. d4 d5 3. exd5 Qxd5 4. Nf3 Bg4 5. Nc3 ? 5… Bxf3 6. Nxd5 Bxd1 7. Nxc7+ Kd7 8. Nxa8 Bxc2 9. Bf4 e5 10. dxe5 Bb4+

   [Event "Diagram 1"]   [Site "?"]   [Date "????.??.??"]   [Round "?"]   [White "?"]   [Black "?"]   [Result "*"]   [FEN "N5nr/pp1k1ppp/2n5/4P3/1b3B2/8/PPb2PPP/R3KB1R w - - 0 11"]   [SetUp "1"]   *

The key themes of this position: rapid development, open lines, exposed king and giving up material or development – have little to do with the ending (pawn majority, rook on the seventh, active king, etc.)

Ke2 ?

[11. Bd2 Bxd2+ 12. Kxd2 Bf5 with about equal material]

11… Nge7 12. Nc7 Nd4+ 13. Ke3 Nef5# 0-1

Hubner – Benko (Hungary) 1976 [Mednis]

d4 g6 2. c4 d6 3. Nc3 Bg7 4. e4 e5 5. dxe5 dxe5 6. Qxd8+ Kxd8

   [Event "Diagram 2"]   [Site "?"]   [Date "????.??.??"]   [Round "?"]   [White "?"]   [Black "?"]   [Result "*"]   [FEN "rnbk2nr/ppp2pbp/6p1/4p3/2P1P3/2N5/PP3PPP/R1B1KBNR w - - 0 7"]   [SetUp "1"]   *

A more complex queenless middlegame in modern master play

f4 Nd7 8. Nf3 c6 9. Be2 f6 10. O-O Ke8 11. g3 Nh6 12. Kg2 Nf7 13. Be3 Bf8 14. Rad1 b6 15. a3 Be7 16. Ne1 Bc5 ?!

Black was afraid of Nd3 and; b4

Nc2 Bxe3 18. Nxe3 h5 19. b4 Bb7 20. Kg1 Rd8 21. h4 Nf8 22. c5

   [Event "Diagram 3"]   [Site "?"]   [Date "????.??.??"]   [Round "?"]   [White "?"]   [Black "?"]   [Result "*"]   [FEN "3rkn1r/pb3n2/1pp2pp1/2P1p2p/1P2PP1P/P1N1N1P1/4B3/3R1RK1 b - - 0 22"]   [SetUp "1"]   *

White is better developed and starts to open lines – again, classic middlegame ideas, but not so much in the ending when direct attacks have little chance of success.

22… Rxd1 23. Bxd1 bxc5 24. Bb3 Nd7

[24…cxb4 25. axb4 and Rd1]

Rd1 Bc8 26. b5

still working for open lines

26… cxb5 27. Nxb5 exf4 28. gxf4 Nb6 29. Nxa7 Bb7 30. Nb5 Ke7 ?

[30… Bxe4 31. Bxf7+ Kxf7 32. Nd6+]

[30… Bc6]

Bxf7 Kxf7 32. Nd6+ Ke7 33. Nxb7 Ra8 34. Nxc5 Rxa3 35. Kf2 Rc3 36. Rb1 1-0

Regis,D – Dobber,P (Paignton #3)

e4 d6 2. d4 e5 3. dxe5

[3. Nf3 of course transposes to the Philidor, but I thought the text was critical]

3… dxe5 4. Qxd8+ Kxd8 5. Bc4 f6 6. Be3 c6

[6… Nd7 ! 7. Nc3 Bc5 this idea my opponent showed me the following day; I think it equalises 8. Bxc5 Nxc5 9. O-O-O+ Nd7 10. f4 exf4]

Nc3 Kc7 8. O-O-O Nd7 9. f4 Bb4 10. Nf3 Ne7 11. fxe5 fxe5 12. Rhf1 Ng6

   [Event "Diagram 4"]   [Site "?"]   [Date "????.??.??"]   [Round "?"]   [White "?"]   [Black "?"]   [Result "*"]   [FEN "r1b4r/ppkn2pp/2p3n1/4p3/1bB1P3/2N1BN2/PPP3PP/2KR1R2 w - - 0 13"]   [SetUp "1"]   *

White is better mobilised but needs a breakthrough. The next phase shows White trying various ideas and angles …

[13. h4 h5 14. Bf7 Ne7 15. Be6 Bxc3 16. bxc3 Nf6 17. Bxc8 Raxc8 18. Nxe5 Rcd8]

13… Nf6 14. Bf7

[14. Nf7 Rf8 15. Bg5 Bxc3 16. Bxf6 gxf6 17. bxc3 Bg4 18. Rd2 Nf4 19. g3 Be2 20. Bxe2 Nxe2+ 21. Rxe2 Rxf7 22. Ref2 Raf8 23. g4 h6]

14… Ne7 15. Be6

[15. Ne6+ Bxe6 16. Bxe6 was worth a punt – next game!]

15… h6 16. Bxc8 Raxc8

[16… hxg5 17. Be6 Bxc3 18. bxc3 Rae8 19. Bxg5 Rxh2 20. Bxf6 gxf6 21. Rd7+ Kb6 22. Bf7]

Nf7 Ng4 18. Bg1 Rhf8 19. h3 Nf6 20. Nxe5 Bxc3 21. bxc3 Rcd8

White has a pawn but it is very vulnerable

[22. Rxd8 Rxd8 23. Nf7 is interesting: 23… Rd7 24. Bh2+ Kb6 25. e5 Nfd5 26. Kb2 Ne3]

22… Rxd1+ 23. Rxd1 Re8

how to keep the pawn?

Bd6+ Kb6 25. Nc4+ Ka6 26. Rd4 Ng6 27. e5 Nd5 28. Rg4

determined but inadequate: …b5 will bring the house down

28… Re6 29. Kd2 b5 30. Nb2 Nxe5 31. Bxe5 Rxe5 32. Rxg7

   [Event "Diagram 5"]   [Site "?"]   [Date "????.??.??"]   [Round "?"]   [White "?"]   [Black "?"]   [Result "*"]   [FEN "8/p5R1/k1p4p/1p1nr3/8/2P4P/PNPK2P1/8 b - - 0 32"]   [SetUp "1"]   *

32… Rg5

Knight endings are harder to draw than rook endings but Black hoped to sac the knight for the K-side pawns and blockade on the Queen’s-side

[32… Nf4 draws, I’m pretty sure 33. Rf7 Nxg2 34. Rf6 Rh5 35. Rxc6+ Kb7 36. Rg6 Nf4 37. Rg7+ Kb6 may even be better for Black]

Rxg5 hxg5 34. g3 Nf6 35. h4 Ne4+ 36. Kd3 Nxg3 37. hxg5 Kb6

some careful footwork secures the win

c4 Kc5 39. cxb5 cxb5 40. g6 Nh5 41. Ke4 Kb4

[41… Kd6 42. Kf5 Ke7 43. Kg5 Ng7 44. Nd3 Ne6+ 45. Kh6 Kf6 46. Nf4]

Nd3+ Kc3 43. Nf4 Nf6+ 44. Ke5 Ng8

[44… Ng4+ 45. Kf5 Nh6+ 46. Kg5 Ng8 47. Nd5+ Kxc2 48. Nf6 Ne7 49. g7 Kb2 50. Nd5 Ng8 51. Kg6 a5 52. Kh7 b4 53. Kxg8 b3 54. axb3 Kxb3]

Nd5+ Kxc2

[45… Kb2 saves a move, but is still too late]

Nf6 Ne7

[46… Nh6 47. Kf4 Kb2 48. Kg5 Ng8 49. Nxg8 a5 50. Nf6]

g7 1-0

Endgame Openings

King’s Indian Defence

d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. Nc3 Bg7 4. e4 d6 5. Nf3 O-O 6. Be2 e5 7. dxe5 dxe5 8. Qxd8 Rxd8 9. Bg5

   [Event "Diagram 6"]   [Site "?"]   [Date "????.??.??"]   [Round "?"]   [White "?"]   [Black "?"]   [Result "*"]   [FEN "rnbr2k1/ppp2pbp/5np1/4p1B1/2P1P3/2N2N2/PP2BPPP/R3K2R w - - 0 1"]   [SetUp "1"]   *

English Opening, Andersson-Book line

c4 Nf6 2. Nc3 d5 3. cxd5 Nxd5 4. Nf3 g6 5. e4 Nxc3 6. dxc3 Qxd1+ 7. Kxd1

   [Event "English Opening, Andersson-Book line"]   [Site "?"]   [Date "????.??.??"]   [Round "?"]   [White "?"]   [Black "?"]   [Result "*"]   [FEN "rnb1kb1r/ppp1pp1p/6p1/8/4P3/2P2N2/PP3PPP/R1BK1B1R w - - 0 1"]   [SetUp "1"]       *

English Opening, Double Fianchetto

c4 c5 2. Nf3 Nf6 3. g3 b6 4. Bg2 Bb7 5. O-O g6 6. b3 Bg7 7. Bb2 O-O 8. Nc3 d5 9. Nxd5 Nxd5 10. Bxg7 Kxg7 11. cxd5 Qxd5 12. d4 cxd4 13. Qxd4+ Qxd4 14. Nxd4 Bxg2 15. Kxg2

   [Event "Diagram 8"]   [Site "?"]   [Date "????.??.??"]   [Round "?"]   [White "?"]   [Black "?"]   [Result "*"]   [FEN "rn3r2/p3ppkp/1p4p1/8/3N4/1P4P1/P3PPKP/R4R2 w - - 0 1"]   [SetUp "1"]       *

French Defence, Tarrasch Variation

e4 e6 2. d4 d5 3. Nd2 c5 4. exd5 exd5 5. Bb5+ Bd7 6. Qe2+ Qe7 7. Bxd7+ Nxd7 8. dxc5 Qxe2+ 9. Nxe2 Bxc5

   [Event "Diagram 9"]   [Site "?"]   [Date "????.??.??"]   [Round "?"]   [White "?"]   [Black "?"]   [Result "*"]   [FEN "r3k2r/pp1n1ppp/8/2b5/4P3/8/PPPNNPPP/R1B1KB1R w - - 0 1"]   [SetUp "1"]   *

Sicilian Defence, Accelerated Dragon

e4 c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 g6 5. c4 Nf6 6. Nc3 Nxd4 7. Qxd4 d6 8. Bg5 Bg7 9. f3 O-O 10. Qd2 Be6 11. Rc1 Qa5 12. b3 Rfc8 13. Be2 a6 14. Na4 Qxd2+ 15. Kxd2

   [Event "Diagram 10"]   [Site "?"]   [Date "????.??.??"]   [Round "?"]   [White "?"]   [Black "?"]   [Result "*"]   [FEN "r1r3k1/1p2ppbp/p2pbnp1/6B1/N1P1P3/1P3P2/P2KB1PP/2R4R w - - 0 1"]   [SetUp "1"]       *

Sicilian Defence, Dragon Variation

e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 g6 6. Be3 Bg7 7. f3 O-O 8. Qd2 Nc6 9. g4 Nxd4 10. Bxd4 Be6 11. O-O-O Qa5 12. Kb1 Rfc8 13. a3 Rab8 14. g5 Nh5 15. Nd5 Qxd2 16. Rxd2 Bxd5 17. exd5

   [Event "Diagram 11"]   [Site "?"]   [Date "????.??.??"]   [Round "?"]   [White "?"]   [Black "?"]   [Result "*"]   [FEN "1rr3k1/pp2ppbp/3p2p1/3P2Pn/3B4/P4P2/1PPR3P/1K3B1R w - - 0 1"]   [SetUp "1"]       *

Modern Defence, Averbakh Variation

e4 g6 2. d4 Bg7 3. c4 d6 4. Nc3 e5 5. dxe5 dxe5 6. Qxd8+ Kxd8 7. f4

   [Event "Diagram 12"]   [Site "?"]   [Date "????.??.??"]   [Round "?"]   [White "?"]   [Black "?"]   [Result "*"]   [FEN "rnbk2nr/ppp2pbp/6p1/4p3/2P1PP2/2N5/PP4PP/R1B1KBNR w - - 0 1"]   [SetUp "1"]       *

Petroff Defence, Lasker Variation

e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nf6 3. Nxe5 d6 4. Nf3 Nxe4 5. Qe2 Qe7 6. d3 Nf6 7. Bg5 Nbd7 8. Nc3 Qxe2+ 9. Bxe2

   [Event "Diagram 13"]   [Site "?"]   [Date "????.??.??"]   [Round "?"]   [White "?"]   [Black "?"]   [Result "*"]   [FEN "r1b1kb1r/pppn1ppp/3p1n2/6B1/8/2NP1N2/PPP1BPPP/R3K2R w - - 0 1"]   [SetUp "1"]       *

Ruy Lopez Exchange Variation

e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6 4. Bxc6 dxc6 5. d4 exd4 6. Qxd4 Qxd4 7. Nxd4

   [Event "Diagram 14"]   [Site "?"]   [Date "????.??.??"]   [Round "?"]   [White "?"]   [Black "?"]   [Result "*"]   [FEN "r1b1kbnr/1pp2ppp/p1p5/8/3NP3/8/PPP2PPP/RNB1K2R w - - 0 1"]   [SetUp "1"]       *

e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6 4. Bxc6 dxc6 5. O-O f6 6. d4 exd4 7. Nxd4 c5 8. Nb3 Qxd1 9. Rxd1

   [Event "Diagram 15"]   [Site "?"]   [Date "????.??.??"]   [Round "?"]   [White "?"]   [Black "?"]   [Result "*"]   [FEN "r1b1kbnr/1pp3pp/p4p2/2p5/4P3/1N6/PPP2PPP/RNBR2K1 w - - 0 1"]   [SetUp "1"]       *

Lessons from Korchnoi

Posted on September 25, 2000 by DrDave

There are many candidates for the title of ‘the best chessplayer never to win the world championship’. I think I first heard Keres given that title, and he was the second-highest-rated player at some point (according to Jeff Sonas’ ChessMetrics website http://www.chessmetrics.com ). Other second-highest-rated players include Chigorin, Zukertort, Blackburne, Nimzowitsch, Tarrasch, Schlechter, Najdorf and Ivanchuk. In fact, there are a number of players who were the highest-rated in Jeff’s lists at some point but who never became World Champion: Pillsbury, Maroczy, Kolisch, Gunsberg, Janowsky, Rubinstein, Reshevsky, Bogoljubow… and Viktor Korchnoi. Korchnoi was primus inter pares for the last quarter of 1965, following a dominating tournament win
http://chessmetrics.com/cm/CM2/PlayerProfile.asp?Params=199510SSSSSWS067916000000111000000000016610100

He competed strongly in Candidates’ Matches in the 1967 cycle, but didn’t qualify for a Championship match until 1978, when his actual rating was rather higher.

“I have heard so many times that Korchnoi had the great misfortune of meeting me when his best playing was already behind him. Nothing of the sort! Korchnoi’s best years arrived exactly at the time he battled me”
— Anatoly Karpov

In the end, Korchnoi was a Candidate in 10 of the 11 cycles held between 1962 and 1991, and a Challenger in 1978 and 1981. His Candidates’ Final match with Karpov in 1974 turned out to be a Championship match in effect, when Fischer could not agree terms to defend his title, and forfeited it.

Korchnoi’s style is … complex! He seems to make life as difficult for himself as his opponent, relishing the role of defender — or rather, counter-attacker.

“I like to coax my opponents into attacking, to let them taste the joy of the initiative, so that they may get carried away, become careless, and sacrifice material”

For this reason, Korchnoi’s style is also exciting, not to say nerve-wracking, to watch… Perhaps for these or other reasons, he was often in time trouble.

“It is a gross overstatement, but in chess, it can be said I play against my opponent over the board and against myself on the clock”

The drama and political intrigue of his life are every bit as rich and compelling as his chess, but here I will take a few moments from his battles over the board.

Opening

I’ve always liked this example of Korchnoi’s play. His counter-attacking style seems ready-made for the Grunfeld, where White is invited to set up an ‘ideal’ centre, while Black has fluent development without weaknesses, and can strive to undermine it.

  [Event "URS-ch21 Final"]  [Site "Kiev"]  [Date "1954.01.14"]  [Round "5"]  [White "Lilienthal, A."]  [Black "Korchnoi, Viktor"]  [Result "0-1"]  [ECO "D86"]  [Annotator "centre: hypermodern opening"]  [PlyCount "94"]   1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. Nc3 d5 4. cxd5 Nxd5 5. e4 Nxc3 6. bxc3 Bg7 7. Bc4 O-O 8.  Ne2 Nc6 9. O-O Qd7 10. Ba3 (10. Be3) 10... Na5 11. Bd3 b6 {[#]} 12. Nf4 {?} Bb7  13. Qe2 Rfd8 14. Rad1 e6 15. e5 c5 {[#] White's proud centre is awfully  brittle.} 16. dxc5 (16. Be4 Qa4) (16. Bb1 Qc6 {Konstantinopolsky}) (16. Nh5  gxh5 17. Qxh5 h6 18. Bc1 Qd5 19. f3 (19. Qh3 cxd4) 19... cxd4 20. Bxh6 Qxe5)  16... Qc7 17. cxb6 Qxe5 18. Qxe5 Bxe5 19. Ne2 (19. Bb4 axb6 20. Nh3 Bd5 21.  Rfe1) 19... axb6 20. Bc1 Bd5 {[#] -+ White's centre has vanished, and Black is better. This position which shows that the  hypermodern idea is an idea only about the opening, not the importance of the  centre in the middlegame. Black is better here partly because he is better  centralised (the duff c3 pawn helps!)} 21. Bg5 f6 22. f4 fxg5 23. fxe5 Nc4 24.  Bxc4 Bxc4 25. Rxd8+ Rxd8 26. Re1 Rd2 27. Ng3 Rxa2 28. Ne4 Bd5 29. Nf6+ Kf7 30.  Nxd5 exd5 31. Rb1 Ra6 32. Rb5 Ke6 33. Kf2 Kxe5 34. Kf3 Ra3 35. Kg4 Rxc3 36.  Rxb6 Rc2 37. Kg3 d4 38. Rb7 d3 39. Rxh7 d2 40. Rd7 Ke4 41. Kg4 Rc4 42. Rxd2  Ke3+ 43. Kxg5 Kxd2 44. Kxg6 Ke3 45. h3 Kf4 46. g4 Rc5 47. Kh6 Rg5 0-1

Here’s a quote about Korchnoi, rather than from him directly:

“Viktor Korchnoi was always saying: if you want to make progress, you have to learn new openings all the time. If such a person gives you such an advice, you should listen to it” Boris Gelfand

Korchnoi’s annotations to this game made a strong impression on me: surely Grandmasters know everything, or at least, know everything that they play? The unknowable nature of chess that was revealed was somehow more alluring than the prospect of a knowable nature.

  [Event "IBM"]  [Site "Amsterdam"]  [Date "1976.??.??"]  [Round "7"]  [White "Langeweg, Kick"]  [Black "Kortschnoj, Viktor"]  [Result "0-1"]  [ECO "A17"]  [WhiteElo "2450"]  [BlackElo "2670"]  [PlyCount "56"]  [EventDate "1976.07.??"]   {"Nearly five years ago I first started to use the opening system 1.c4 e5. This is quite a good system with which to reach an equal position, but when it had been analysed to death by other grand masters I became bored with it and adopted a different system using my own move order. The play has some delicate features which I myself don't fully understand."}  1. Nf3 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 Bb4 4. Qc2 O-O 5. a3 Bxc3 6. Qxc3 b6 7. g3 Bb7 8.  Bg2 d5 9. d4 dxc4 10. Qxc4 Bd5 11. Qc3 Nbd7 12. b4!? a5 13. b5?! c6 14. bxc6 Rc8  15. O-O Rxc6 16. Qe3 Qa8 17. Bd2 b5?! 18. Rfb1 Rb8 19. Ne1?! Bxg2 20. Nxg2 Ne4! 21.  Qd3 Rd6 22. Be3?! Ne5 23. Qc2? Rc8 24. Qb3 Nc4 25. Rc1 Rdc6 26. Qxb5 Nxa3 27. Qa4  Nc2 28. Rab1 Rc4 0-1

Middlegame

Korchnoi is the great sceptic of chess. He is never overly impressed with an opponent’s attacking ideas, not even when they are conjured up by the magician from Riga. Korchnoi had a large plus score against Tal; here he wins as Black when Tal was at the height of his powers.

  [Event "URS-ch26"]  [Site "Tbilisi"]  [Date "1959.??.??"]  [Round "18"]  [White "Tal, Mihail"]  [Black "Kortschnoj, Viktor"]  [Result "0-1"]  [ECO "B94"]  [PlyCount "120"]  [EventDate "1959.01.09"]   1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 a6 6. Bg5 Nbd7 7. Bc4 Qa5 8.  Qd2 e6 9. O-O h6 10. Bh4 Be7 11. Rad1 Ne5 12. Bb3 g5 13. Bg3 Nh5 14. Ba4+ b5  15. Bxe5 dxe5 16. Nc6 Qc7 17. Nxe7 Kxe7 18. Bb3 Nf6 19. Qe3 Bb7 20. a4 b4 21.  Na2 a5 22. c3 Ba6 23. Rfe1 bxc3 24. Rc1 Rab8 25. Rxc3 Qb6 26. Qxb6 Rxb6 27.  Rc7+ Kd6 28. Ra7 Bb7 29. Bc4 Ra8 30. Rd1+ Ke7 31. Rxa8 Bxa8 32. Bb5 Bxe4 33. b4  axb4 34. Nxb4 Bb7 35. Nd3 e4 36. Ne5 Bd5 37. Rb1 Rb8 38. Rc1 Rb7 39. Kf1 Ne8  40. Rd1 Nc7 41. Be2 f6 42. Ng4 f5 43. Ne5 Rb2 44. Rc1 Ra2 45. Ng6+ Kd6 46. Nh8  e5 47. Rd1 Ke6 48. Bh5 Kf6 49. Bf7 Bxf7 50. Nxf7 Kxf7 51. Rd7+ Ke6 52. Rxc7 f4  53. Rc6+ Kd5 54. Rxh6 f3 55. gxf3 exf3 56. Ke1 Rxa4 57. Rb6 Ra1+ 58. Kd2 Rf1  59. Ke3 g4 60. Rb5+ Kc4 0-1

Korchnoi also has an awesome record with White against the King’s Indian. Here is one example from hundreds: in his seventh decade, he plays blindfold in the very double-edged Mar del Plata variation. Black cannot do much about White’s Queen’s-side attack, but can instead start a dangerous attack against the white King.

  [Event "Amber-blindfold 03rd"]  [Site "Monte Carlo"]  [Date "1994.??.??"]  [Round "10"]  [White "Kortschnoj, Viktor"]  [Black "Polgar, Judit"]  [Result "1-0"]  [ECO "E98"]  [WhiteElo "2615"]  [BlackElo "2630"]  [PlyCount "95"]   1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. Nc3 Bg7 4. e4 d6 5. Be2 O-O 6.  Nf3 e5 7. O-O Nc6 8. d5 Ne7 9. Ne1 Ne8 10. Be3 f5 11. f3 h5 12. c5 f4 13. Bf2  g5 14. a4 Rf6 15. a5 Rg6 16. cxd6 Nxd6 17. h3 Kh8 18. Nd3 Ng8 19. Nc5 Qe7 20.  Ra3 Nh6 21. Nb5 g4 22. fxg4 hxg4 23. Nxd6 cxd6 24. Ne6 Bxe6 25. dxe6 f3 26. Bc4  fxg2 27. Kxg2 Rf8 28. h4 g3 29. Bxg3 Qxh4 30. Rxf8+ Bxf8 31. Bd5 Qg5 32. Rc3  Ng4 33. Qc1 Qe7 34. Rf3 Nf6 35. Qc8 b6 36. Kf1 Rg4 37. axb6 axb6 38. Bf2 Kg7  39. Bxb6 Kh7 40. Qd8 Rf4 41. Qxe7+ Bxe7 42. Rxf4 exf4 43. b4 Kg6 44. b5 Ng4 45.  Bd4 f3 46. b6 Bh4 47. b7 f2 48. Ke2 1-0

And a fine example of Korchnoi’s brave counter-attacking style, the first game in Simon Webb’s [em]Chess for Tigers[/em]

“A good illustration of how to play on your opponent’s weaknesses is provided by the way Korchnoi tackled Geller in their semi-final match in the 1971 World Championship Candidates’ series. He knew that he couldn’t outplay Geller positionally (as he frankly admitted after the
match); so he deliberately aimed for complicated and unclear positions, in which he believed Geller would be uncomfortable. This approach paid off handsomely. Geller continually became short of time trying to fathom
the complications which Korchnoi produced, failed to find the right answers, and lost 5.5-2.5. Indeed he lost 3 of the 8 games on time. ” — Webb

  [Event "Candidates qf2"]  [Site "Moscow"]  [Date "1971.??.??"]  [Round "8"]  [White "Geller, Efim P"]  [Black "Kortschnoj, Viktor"]  [Result "0-1"]  [ECO "B85"]  [WhiteElo "2630"]  [BlackElo "2660"]  [PlyCount "74"]   1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6  5. Nc3 a6 6. Be2 e6 7. O-O Be7 8. f4 O-O 9. Kh1 Nc6 10. Be3 Qc7 11. a4 Bd7 12.  Nb3 b6 13. Bf3 Rfd8 14. Qe2 Be8 15. Bf2 Rdc8 16. Bg3 Nd7! 17. Rad1 Bf6 18. e5!  dxe5 19. fxe5 Be7 20. Nd4 Nxd4 21. Rxd4 Ra7 22. Rg4 h5! 23. Re4 g6 24. h3  (24.Bxh5!+-)  24...Bf8  25. Bh2 Bg7 26. Re3 Nc5 27. Qe1 Bc6 28. Bxc6 Qxc6 29. Qh4 Rd7 30. Ref3 b5 31.  axb5 axb5 32. b4 Nd3 33. Ne4 Qxc2 34. Nf6+ Bxf6 35. exf6 Rd5 36. Re3 Qc4 37.  Qg3 h4 0-1 {time}

Endgame

Nunn’s awesome attacking talent and theoretical knowledge are tamed by accepting a small disadvantage in what looks like a technical endgame. Korchnoi does not intend to swap everything and draw, however, but increases the tension over the whole board, and White can’t quite hold it together. A game quite in the style of Lasker — whom both players admire.

  [Event "WchT 1st"]  [Site "Luzern"]  [Date "1985.??.??"]  [Round "9"]  [White "Nunn, John DM"]  [Black "Kortschnoj, Viktor"]  [Result "0-1"]  [ECO "C11"]  [WhiteElo "2615"]  [BlackElo "2630"]  [PlyCount "68"]  [EventDate "1985.11.??"]   1. e4 e6 2. d4 d5 3. Nc3 Nf6 4. e5 Nfd7 5. f4 c5 6. Nf3 Nc6 7. Be3 cxd4 8. Nxd4  Bc5 9. Qd2 Bxd4 10. Bxd4 Nxd4 11. Qxd4 Qb6 12. Qxb6 Nxb6 13. O-O-O Bd7 14. Bd3  h5 15. Ne2 Ke7 16. Nd4 g6 17. g3 Bc6 {Recycling the Knight.} 18. Rde1 Nd7 19.  c3 Rag8 20. Rhf1 g5 21. f5 g4 22. Re2 h4 23. b4 hxg3 24. hxg3 Ba4 25. Kb2 Rh3  26. Rg1 Rgh8 27. Ka3 $1 Rc8 $5 (27... Nb6 28. b5 a6 29. bxa6 bxa6 30. Rb1 Bb5  31. Bxb5 axb5 32. Rxb5 Ra8+ 33. Kb4 $11) 28. Kb2 $15 {White blinks first.} (28.  Kxa4 $1 Rxc3 $1 {with mating threats which White can, however, survive. Not an  easy call, though!} 29. Bc2 Nb6+ (29... Rhxg3 30. Rxg3 Rxg3 31. Bb3 $14) 30.  Kb5 Ra3 31. Bb3 Nd7 32. Ba4 (32. Nc6+ $5) 32... Rhxg3) 28... a6 29. Rgg2 Bd1  30. Re3 Nb6 31. Rf2 Rh1 32. fxe6 fxe6 33. Rf1 Na4+ 34. Kc1 Rxc3+ 0-1

Lastly, a terrific win against Karpov. Neil McDonald has written about how he was perplexed by Korchnoi’s choice of plan — surely you are supposed to play the minority attack in such positions? But Korchnoi has other ideas.

  [Event "World Championship 29th"]  [Site "Baguio City"]  [Date "1978.10.12"]  [Round "31"]  [White "Kortschnoj, Viktor"]  [Black "Karpov, Anatoly"]  [Result "1-0"]  [ECO "D36"]  [WhiteElo "2665"]  [BlackElo "2725"]  [PlyCount "141"]   1. c4 e6 2. Nc3 d5 3. d4 Nf6 4. cxd5 exd5 5. Bg5 Be7 6. e3 O-O 7. Bd3 Nbd7 8.  Nf3 Re8 9. Qc2 c6 10. O-O Nf8 11. Bxf6 Bxf6 12. b4 Bg4 13. Nd2 Rc8 14. Bf5 Bxf5  15. Qxf5 Qd7 16. Qxd7 Nxd7 17. a4 Be7 18. Rfb1 Nf6 19. a5 a6 20. Na4 Bf8 21.  Nc5 Re7 22. Kf1 Ne8 23. Ke2 Nd6 24. Kd3 Rce8 25. Re1 g6 26. Re2 f6 27. Rae1 Bh6  28. Ndb3 Bf8 29. Nd2 Bh6 30. h3 Kf7 31. g4 Bf8 32. f3 Rd8 33. Ndb3 Nb5 34. Rf1  Bh6 35. f4 Bf8 36. Nd2 Nd6 37. Rfe1 h6 38. Rf1 Rb8 39. Ra1 Rbe8 40. Rae1 Rb8  41. e4 dxe4+ 42. Ndxe4 Nb5 43. Nc3 Rxe2 44. Rxe2 Bxc5 45. bxc5 Rd8 46. Nxb5  axb5 47. f5 gxf5 48. gxf5 Rg8 49. Kc3 Re8 50. Rd2 Re4 51. Kb4 Ke8 52. a6 bxa6  53. Ka5 Kd7 54. Kb6 b4 55. d5 cxd5 56. Rxd5+ Kc8 57. Rd3 a5 58. Rg3 b3 59. Kc6  Kb8 60. Rxb3+ Ka7 61. Rb7+ Ka6 62. Rb6+ Ka7 63. Kb5 a4 64. Rxf6 Rf4 65. Rxh6 a3  66. Ra6+ Kb8 67. Rxa3 Rxf5 68. Rg3 Rf6 69. Rg8+ Kc7 70. Rg7+ Kc8 71. Rh7 1-0

Lessons from Judit Polgar

Posted on September 24, 2000 by DrDave

I don’t entirely like the parade of endless men in the ‘Lessons from…’ series, so here’s one from the other half of humanity, and a fine Appendix to the list of guys that ever joined the ‘Vera Menchik Club’.

Judit Polgar was strongest woman chess player ever. She never became World Champion, and was never interested in becoming Women’s World Chess Champion ( a title held by her two sisters, Susan and Sofia). She was in the world top ten and improving when she retired.

Opening

   [Event "Buenos Aires Sicilian"]   [Site "Buenos Aires ARG"]   [Date "1994.10.??"]   [EventDate "?"]   [Round "8"]   [Result "0-1"]   [White "Alexey Shirov"]   [Black "Judit Polgar"]   [ECO "B45"]   [WhiteElo "?"]   [BlackElo "?"]   [PlyCount "58"]1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 e6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nc6 5.Nc3 d6 6.g4 a6 7.Be3 Nge7 8.Nb3 b5 9.f4 Bb7 10.Qf3 g5!  {breaking up the pawn wave and securing e5} 11.fxg5 Ne5 12.Qg2 b4 13.Ne2 h5 14.gxh5 Nf5 15.Bf2 Qxg5 16.Na5 Ne3 17.Qg3 Qxg3 18.Nxg3 Nxc2+ 19.Kd1 Nxa1 20.Nxb7 b3 21.axb3 Nxb3 22.Kc2 Nc5 23.Nxc5 dxc5 24.Be1 Nf3 25.Bc3 Nd4+ 26.Kd3 Bd6 27.Bg2 Be5 28.Kc4 Ke7 29.Ra1 Nc6 0-1

In 2003, Polgár scored one of her best results: an undefeated clear second place in the Category 19 Corus chess tournament in Wijk aan Zee, Netherlands, just a half-point behind future World Champion Viswanathan Anand, and a full point ahead of then-world champion Vladimir Kramnik. She devised this TN over the board.

   [Event "Corus"]   [Site "Wijk aan Zee NED"]   [Date "2003.01.15"]   [EventDate "2003.01.11"]   [Round "4"]   [Result "0-1"]   [White "Anatoly Karpov"]   [Black "Judit Polgar"]   [ECO "E12"]   [WhiteElo "2688"]   [BlackElo "2700"]   [PlyCount "66"]1. d4 Nf6 2. Nf3 e6 3. c4 b6 4. a3 Bb7 5. Nc3 d5 6. cxd5 Nxd5 7. Qc2 Nxc3 8. Qxc3 h6 9. e3 Nd7 10. b4 Be7 11. Bb2 O-O 12. Rd1 a5! {TN} 13. b5 Rc8 14. Qb3 c6 15. bxc6 Bxc6 16. Bb5 Bb4+ 17. axb4 Bxb5 18. bxa5 Bc4 19. Qa3 bxa5 20. Qd6 Bb5 21. d5 Rc2 22. Rd2 Qc8 23. Qa3 Rxd2 24. Kxd2 Nb6 25. Qc3 Nc4+ 26. Kc2 e5 27. Kb1 Qg4 28. Rc1 Rb8 29. Rc2 f6 30. d6 Qxg2 31. Nd2 Qh1+ 32. Ka2 Nxd6 33. Qc5 Rc8 0-1

   [Event "Chess Olympiad (Women)"]   [Site "Thessaloniki GRE"]   [Date "1988.11.23"]   [EventDate "?"]   [Round "10"]   [Result "1-0"]   [White "Judit Polgar"]   [Black "Pavlina Chilingirova"]   [ECO "B31"]   [WhiteElo "?"]   [BlackElo "?"]   [PlyCount "33"]1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 g6 4.O-O Bg7 5.c3 e5 6.d4 exd4 7.cxd4 Nxd4 8.Nxd4 cxd4 9.e5 Ne7 10.Bg5 O-O 11.Qxd4 Nc6 12.Qh4 Qb6 13.Nc3 Bxe5 14.Rae1 Bxc3 15.bxc3 Qxb5 16.Qh6 Qf5 17.Qxf8+ 1-0

Middlegame

For Polgar, chess is the attack, so I’ve shown some of her best and best-known, but her imposition of a classic good-N-bad-B on Anand is very classy, with a glorious finish.

   [Event "7th Essent"]   [Site "Hoogeveen NED"]   [Date "2003.10.12"]   [EventDate "2003.10.12"]   [Round "1"]   [Result "1-0"]   [White "Judit Polgar"]   [Black "Anatoly Karpov"]   [ECO "C42"]   [WhiteElo "2722"]   [BlackElo "2693"]   [PlyCount "51"]1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nf6 3. Nxe5 d6 4. Nf3 Nxe4 5. d4 d5 6. Bd3 Be7 7. O-O Nc6 8. c4 Nb4 9. Be2 O-O 10. a3 Nc6 11. cxd5 Qxd5 12. Nc3 Nxc3 13. bxc3 Qd6 14. Rb1 b6 15. Re1 Be6 16. Bd3 Rae8 17. Rb5! Na5 18. Rbe5 Nc6 19. R5e2 (19.Rxe6!?) 19...Bd7 20. d5 Na5 21. Ne5 Bf6 22. Bf4 Bxe5 23. Bxe5 Qxa3 24. Re3 Qc5 25. Bxh7+ Kxh7 26. Qh5+ 1-0

   [Event "Hunguest Hotels Super Chess Tournament"]   [Site "Budapest HUN"]   [Date "2003.04.18"]   [EventDate "2003.04.11"]   [Round "7"]   [Result "1-0"]   [White "Judit Polgar"]   [Black "Ferenc Berkes"]   [ECO "C11"]   [WhiteElo "2715"]   [BlackElo "2578"]   [PlyCount "47"]1. e4 e6 2. d4 d5 3. Nc3 Nf6 4. Bg5 dxe4 5. Nxe4 Be7 6. Bxf6 Bxf6 7. Nf3 O-O 8. Qd2 Nd7 9. O-O-O Be7 10. Bd3 b6 11. Neg5 h6 12. Bh7+ Kh8 13. Be4 hxg5?! 14. g4!! Rb8 15. h4 g6 16. hxg5+ Kg7 17. Qf4 Bb7 18. Rh7+ Kxh7 19. Qh2+ Kg8 20. Rh1 Bxg5+ 21. Nxg5 Qxg5+ 22. f4 Qxf4+ 23. Qxf4 Bxe4 24. Qxe4 1-0

The trapper trapped! <p> Someone commented on this next one, it’s like exchange chess: no time to count the pieces, the initiative is everything!

   [Event "Dos Hermanas"]   [Site "Dos Hermanas ESP"]   [Date "1999.04.06"]   [EventDate "1999.04.06"]   [Round "1"]   [Result "1-0"]   [White "Judit Polgar"]   [Black "Viswanathan Anand"]   [ECO "B81"]   [WhiteElo "2677"]   [BlackElo "2781"]   [PlyCount "67"]1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 a6 6. Be3 e6 7. g4 e5 8. Nf5 g6 9. g5 gxf5 10. exf5 d5 11. Qf3 d4 12. O-O-O Nbd7 13. Bd2 dxc3 14. Bxc3 Bg7 15. Rg1 O-O 16. gxf6 Qxf6 17. Qe3 Kh8 18. f4 Qb6 19. Qg3 Qh6 20. Rd6 f6 21. Bd2 e4 22. Bc4 b5 23. Be6 Ra7 24. Rc6 a5 25. Be3 Rb7 26. Bd5 Rb8 27. Rc7 b4 28. b3 Rb5 29. Bc6 Rxf5 30. Rxc8 Rxc8 31. Bxd7 Rcc5 32. Bxf5 Rxf5 33. Rd1 Kg8 34. Qg2 1-0

   [Event "Hoogovens Group A"]   [Site "Wijk aan Zee NED"]   [Date "1998.01.22"]   [Round "6"]   [White "Judit Polgar"]   [Black "Viswanathan Anand"]   [Result "1-0"]   [ECO "B90"]   [PlyCount "111"]   [EventDate "1998.01.16"]1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 a6 6. Be3 e5 7. Nf3 Be7 8. Bc4 O-O 9. O-O Be6 10. Qe2 b5 11. Bb3 Bxb3 12. axb3 Nbd7 13. Rfd1 Qc7 14. Bg5 Rfc8 15. Ne1 Qb7 16. Bxf6 Nxf6 17. Nd5 Nxd5 18. Rxd5 Rc5 19. Rad1 Rxd5 20. Rxd5 Rc8 21. c3 b4 22. c4 g6 23. g3 Rc5 24. Rd1 a5 25. Nc2 Kg7 26. Qd3 Rc6 27. Ne3 Qc8 28. Kg2 Qe6 29. Qe2 Bd8 30. Nd5 Rc5 31. Qe3 Be7 32. Rd3 Bd8 33. Qd2 Rc6 34. Qd1 Kg8 35. h4 Kg7 36. h5 Bg5 37. Qf3 Rc8 38. Rd1 Rc6 39. Qe2 Rc8 40. Rh1 Kg8 41. f3 Rb8 42. Qf2 Rb7 43. hxg6 fxg6 44. c5 dxc5 45. Qxc5 Bd8 46. Rc1 Kf7 47. Qe3 Kg7 48. Rc4 Rd7 49. Qc1 h5 50. Rc6 Rd6 51. Rc8 Qd7 52. Qc5 Kh6 53. Rb8 Bf6 54. Qe3+ Bg5 55. f4 exf4 56. Rh8+ (56. Rh8+ Kg7 57. Qd4+ Bf6 (57... Kf7 58. Rh7+) 58. Qxf6+ Rxf6 59. Rh7+ Kxh7 60. Nxf6+ Kh6 61. Nxd7) 1-0

Endgame

Like all top GMs, the endgame is a strength of Polgar, but may not be noticed among the maulings… <p>This is just about space, but in a position with just one pair of pieces, and you could argue that White has the worse Bishop!

   [Event "12th European Individual Championship"]   [Site "Aix-les-Bains FRA"]   [Date "2011.03.30"]   [EventDate "2011.03.22"]   [Round "8"]   [Result "1-0"]   [White "Judit Polgar"]   [Black "Gadir Guseinov"]   [ECO "B36"]   [WhiteElo "2686"]   [BlackElo "2584"]   [PlyCount "123"]1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 g6 5. c4 Nf6 6. Nc3 Nxd4 7. Qxd4 d6 8. Be2 Bg7 9. Bg5 O-O 10. Qd2 Be6 11. Rc1 Qa5 12. f3 Rfc8 13. b3 a6 14. Rc2 b5 15. Nd5 Qxd2+ 16. Kxd2 Nxd5 17. cxd5 Rxc2+ 18. Kxc2 Rc8+ 19. Kb1 f6 20. Be3 Bd7 21. Rc1 Rxc1+ 22. Kxc1 Kf7 23. Kc2 f5 24. Bd3 fxe4 25. Bxe4 Be5 26. h3 Bf6 27. g4 Be8 28. Kd3 Bd7 29. Bd2 Bg7 30. Bg5 Bf6 31. Bh6 Bg7 32. Bxg7 Kxg7 33. h4 h6 34. g5 hxg5 35. hxg5 Kf7 36. a3 a5 37. Kd4 Kg7 38. Bd3 Kf7 39. f4 Kg7 40. Kc3 Kf7 41. b4 a4 42. Kd4 Kg7 43. Ke3 Kf7 44. Kf3 Kg7 45. Kg3 Kf7 46. Be2 Kg7 47. Bg4 Bf5 48. Be2 Bd7 49. Bf1 Kf7 50. Bd3 Kg7 51. Kh4 Be8 52. Be2 Kf8 53. Bg4 Bf7 54. Be6 Be8 55. Kg4 Kg7 56. Kf3 Kf8 57. Ke4 Kg7 58. Bc8 Kf7 59. Kd4 Kf8 60. Bb7 Bd7 61. Bc6 Ke8 62. f5 1-0

PS “She has fantastic chess talent, but she is, after all, a woman. It all comes down to the imperfections of the feminine psyche. No woman can sustain a prolonged battle.” Garry KASPAROV <p> PPS https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judit_Polg%C3%A1r#Kasparov_touch-move_controversy <p>PPPS

   [Event "Russia - The Rest of the World"]   [Site "Moscow RUS"]   [Date "2002.09.09"]   [EventDate "2002.09.08"]   [Round "5"]   [Result "1-0"]   [White "Judit Polgar"]   [Black "Garry Kasparov"]   [ECO "C67"]   [WhiteElo "2681"]   [BlackElo "2838"]   [PlyCount "84"]1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 Nf6 4. O-O Nxe4 5. d4 Nd6 6. Bxc6 dxc6 7. dxe5 Nf5 8. Qxd8+ Kxd8 9. Nc3 h6 10. Rd1+ Ke8 11. h3 Be7 12. Ne2 Nh4 13. Nxh4 Bxh4 14. Be3 Bf5 15. Nd4 Bh7 16. g4 Be7 17. Kg2 h5 18. Nf5 Bf8 19. Kf3 Bg6 20. Rd2 hxg4+ 21. hxg4 Rh3+ 22. Kg2 Rh7 23. Kg3 f6 24. Bf4 Bxf5 25. gxf5 fxe5 26. Re1 Bd6 27. Bxe5 Kd7 28. c4 c5 29. Bxd6 cxd6 30. Re6 Rah8 31. Rexd6+ Kc8 32. R2d5 Rh3+ 33. Kg2 Rh2+ 34. Kf3 R2h3+ 35. Ke4 b6 36. Rc6+ Kb8 37. Rd7 Rh2 38. Ke3 Rf8 39. Rcc7 Rxf5 40. Rb7+ Kc8 41. Rdc7+ Kd8 42. Rxg7 Kc8 1-0

That was the first time a woman had beaten the best player in the world, although in 2006 she took Topalov outside a couple of times and filled him in, when he was the top-rated player and FIDE champion.

Bishop Endgames

Posted on August 28, 2000 by DrDave

Bishop endings are generally easier to win than rook endings
because there is no way for the defending side to exclude the
attacking King, and neither is there a perpetual check. But perhaps
because they are less common, they may be neglected in a player’s
study.

General Advice for bishop
endings

(1) The easiest endings to draw are those with opposite coloured
bishops.

(2) Do not place pawns on the colour of your bishop.

(3) BB vs. BN or NN are usually a real advantage.
In open positions the two bishops are murder: in most other
positions they are a real advantage.

[See Double Bishop Endings.]
(4) In open or semi-open positions a lone bishop is usually
superior to a lone knight.
The knight is superior to the bishop in blocked positions or when
the bishop is hemmed in by pawns on the same colour squares as the
bishop.

K+B vs. K+P

Normally the bishop can keep an eye on the P from far enough away
to keep the draw in hand, even two Ps if the opposing K is not
close

K+B+P vs. K

A simple win unless it’s an a-/h-P when the lone K can blockade on
the colour square opposite to the B. Similarly, K+B vs. K+B+gP+hP
may be drawn for this reason if BxgP is allowed.

K+B vs. K+B+P

Often a draw unless the P is far advanced. The side with the P must
try to drive the B from covering the path of the P. This can
usually be done only if the Bs travel on the same colour squares –
bishops of opposite colours usually can set up immovable blockades
or threats of sacrifice – and even then, only if the Pawn is not a
central one and the defending K is not close.

K+N vs. K+B+P

The bishop can try to create zugzwang positions when the N must
move away, and although blockades are possible the ending is
promising. K+N vs. K+B+gP+hP may be drawn for the reason noted
above if NxgP is allowed.

K+B vs. K+N+P

The N+P have far more difficulty winning against the B, but again
on the wing the B may run out of squares and the K may be distant.

Key ideas in bishop
endings:

sacrifice to draw, running out of space at the edge, draw with
a-/h-pawns, draw with opposite coloured bishops, controlling the
diagonals leading to the queening square

space to dodge

The White King cannot control the bishop from here. 1 Bd8 Bf4, 2
Be7 Bc7, 3 Bd6! Ba4 holds.

With both Kings distant it’s the same; with wKe8, Bke1
1.Bb4! wins (threat Be7) [thanks to Bart Robeyns for rescuing this
example].

no space at the edge

1 Bb8 Bd4, 2 Bc7 Ba7, 3 Bb6! 1-0

draw with bishops of opposite colour

White cannot control the squares d5 or f5 and chase away the bishop
at the same time:

1 Kd6 Bg8, 2 Ke7 and if later Kf6, …Bh7! when d5 is no
threat.

controlling diagonals

The short diagonal can be dominated by the White King.

1 Bf6 Kc2, 2 Be7 Be3 3 Bd6 Bg5, 4 Be5! and 5 Bf6

Studies

These comprise the selection given by John Littlewood in
Chess Coaching. Littlewood also gives an ABC for
Pawn, Knight, Rook and Queen endings.

128 BP
W to play wins

The bishop is poorly placed. 1 c6! Be5; 2 b6
winning

129 BP
W to play draws against best defence

Better bB position: 1 c6 Bd8! or 1 b6 Bd4! 2 b7
Be5

130 BP
W to play draws

The wK is just close enough to hold. 1 Kc2! f4; 2 Kd1
f3; 3 Ke1, f2+; 4 Kf1, Kf3; 5 Bd4, g3; 6 Bxf2,
gxf2 stalemate or 2…g3; 3 Ke1, g2; 4 Bxf4+! draws

131 B
W to play wins

If Black can control e7 with the B, the pawn can never
advance without …Bxe7 drawing. White must drive off the B:
1 Bf6+ Kc8; 2 Be7, Bf2; 3 Bd6, Bh4; 4 Be5 (1…Kc7; 2 Be7, Bf2; 3
Bd6+!)

132 B
B to play draws
The bK is closer to the pawn, and can nip round to prevent 6
Bf6:
1…Kd5! 2 Bf6, Ke4! 3 Be7, Bf2; 4 Ba3, Bh4; 5 Bb2, Kf5!

133 B
W to play wins

(check)

1 Kg8! controlling the ‘short side’ and threatening 2
Bf8, Be3; 3 Ba3, Bh6; 4 Bb2 and 5 Bg7,
so 1…Kf5, but 2 Bf8, Be3; 3 Ba3, Bh6; 4 Bc1!

134 B
W to play wins

(Centurini)

Take a deep breath…

If White’s bishop were on a7, 1 Bb8, Bg1; 2 Bg3, Ba7; 3
Bf2! wins
But 1 Bh4, Kb6! 2 Bf2+ Ka6 and wB can’t get to a7.
If the bB was on g3, 1 Bh4! Bh2; 2 Bf2 and 3 Ba7, 4 Bb8 wins.
It’s not quite zugzwang, since with Black to move 1…Bd6!
2 Be7, Bh2 holds (3 Bc5 isn’t possible here)
So, zugzwang would be on if one of the squares h2 or d6
were taken away from the bB.
1 Bh4, Kb5; 2 Bf2, Ka6; 3 Bf5! Bg3; 4 Be7, Kb5; 5 Bd8, Kc6; and now
6 Bh4! Bh2 when 7 Bf2, Bf4; 8 Ba7, Bh2; 9 Bb8, Ba7; 10 Bg3, Ba7; 11
Bf2! bingo!

135 NB
W to play wins, B to play draws

1 Ke7, Nd8; 2 Be4, Nf7; 3 Bf3, Nd8; 4 Bd5!
zugzwang
1… Nd6+; 2 Ke7, Nc8+! 3 Ke6, Nb6 draws
[This is a common drawing resource in Knight endings]

136 NB
W to play wins, B to play draws

1 Bb4+ Ke6; 2 Kc7, Kd5; 3 Ba3! zugzwang

1…Ne7+ 2 Kd8 Nc6+ 3 Ke8, Ke6 draws

137 NB
W to play wins

If the bK were on b5, 1 Bd4 would be an immediate
zugzwang, so

1 Bc3! Kb6! 2 Ba5+! Kb5! 3 Bd8! (guarding f6) 3…Kc5; 4
Bg5, Kb5! (4…Kd5; 5 Be7 or 4…Kb6; 5 Be3+ Kb5; 6 Bd4!) 5 Bh4!
Kc5; 6 Bg3+ Kd5; 7 Bd4! Nd6; 8 c7 wins

138 NB
W to play wins

1 Nc6! Kf2; 2 Kd6 ( threat 3 Ne7, Bg3+; 4 Kc6)

2…Bg3+! 3 Kc5! and now
3…Bc7? 4 Kb5! heading for b7
or 3…Bh4; 4 Kd5! with 5 Ke6 and 6 Ne7 winning

139 NB
W to play wins (Kosek)

1 Ng5! Bg8; 2 Nf7!! Kd2; 3 Kf8, Kh7; 4
Ng5 and now
4…Bg6; 5 Kg7, Be8; 6 Ne4+ Ke3; 7 Nd6, Kh5; 8 Kh6!
4…Bd3; 5 Ne6! Bg6 (5…Bf5 loses as above); 6 Nf4! Bb1; 7 Ke7,
Ba2; 8 Ne6 winning

140 NB
W to play wins (Horwitz)

1 Nc7, Bh1; 2 Ne6+ Ke5; 3 Nd8, Ba8! 4 Kc7,
Kd5! (idea 5 Kb8? Kd6! 6 Kxa8, Kc7! drawing)

5 Nb7! Ke6! (idea 6 Kb8, Kd7; 7 Kxa8,
Kc8! drawing)

6 Na5! Ke7; 7 Kc8! Ke8; 8 Nc4! Ke7; 9 Kb8, Kd8;
10 Nd6, Kd7; 11 Nb7! Kc6; 12 Kxa8, Kc7; 13 Nd6!
zugzwang

Example Bishop
Endings

Fischer – Taimanov #4 [B47]
Bishop Ending: B/N, 1971

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Qc7 5. Nc3 e6 6. g3 a6 7.
Bg2 Nf6 8. O-O Nxd4 9. Qxd4 Bc5 10. Bf4 d6 11. Qd2 h6 12. Rad1 e5
13. Be3 Bg4 14. Bxc5 dxc5 15. f3 Be6 16. f4 Rd8 17. Nd5 Bxd5 18.
exd5 e4 19. Rfe1 Rxd5 20. Rxe4+ Kd8 21. Qe2 Rxd1+ 22. Qxd1+ Qd7 23.
Qxd7+ Kxd7 24. Re5 b6 25. Bf1 a5 26. Bc4 Rf8 27. Kg2 Kd6 28. Kf3
Nd7 29. Re3 Nb8 30. Rd3+ Kc7 31. c3 Nc6 32. Re3 Kd6 33. a4 Ne7 34.
h3 Nc6 35. h4 h5 36. Rd3+ Kc7 37. Rd5 f5 38. Rd2 Rf6 39. Re2 Kd7
40. Re3 g6 41. Bb5 Rd6 42. Ke2 Kd8 43. Rd3 Kc7 44. Rxd6 Kxd6

White has the classic advantage of Bishop against Knight with pawns
on both sides of the board. Black also has the disadvantage of
having his pawns advanced and fixed, with an entry point on the
Queen’s-side.

45. Kd3 Ne7 46. Be8 Kd5 47. Bf7+ Kd6 48. Kc4 Kc6 49. Be8+
Kb7 50. Kb5 Nc8

Black is being stretched.

51. Bc6+ Kc7 52. Bd5 Ne7 53. Bf7 Kb7 54. Bb3 Ka7 55. Bd1
Kb7 56. Bf3+ Kc7 57. Ka6 Nc8 58. Bd5 Ne7 59. Bc4 Nc6 60. Bf7 Ne7
61. Be8

zugzwang

61… Kd8 62. Bxg6 Nxg6 63. Kxb6 Kd7 64. Kxc5 Ne7 65. b4
axb4 66. cxb4 Nc8 67. a5 Nd6 68. b5 Ne4+ 69. Kb6 Kc8 70. Kc6 Kb8
71. b6 1-0

Walther – Fischer [B99] Bishop
Ending: OCB As Draw, 1960

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 a6 6. Bg5 e6 7. f4
Be7 8. Qf3 Nbd7 9. O-O-O Qc7 10. Bd3 b5 11. Bxf6 Nxf6 12. Rhe1 Bb7
13. Kb1 Rc8 [13…b4] 14. g4 Nd7 15. g5 Nb6 16. f5 e5 17.
f6 gxf6 18. gxf6 Bf8 19. Nd5 Nxd5 20. exd5 Kd8 21. Nc6+ Bxc6 22.
dxc6 Qxc6 23. Be4 Qb6 24. Qh5 Kc7 25. Bf5 Rd8 26. Qxf7+ Kb8 27. Qe6
Qc7 28. Re3 Bh6 29. Rc3 Qb7 30. f7 Bg7 31. Rcd3 Bf8 32. Qxe5 dxe5
33. Rxd8+ Ka7 34. R1d7 h5 35. Rxb7+ Kxb7 36. c3 Kc7 37. Ra8
[37. Re8!] 37…Kd6 38. Rxa6+ Ke7 39. Re6+ Kxf7 40. Rxe5
b4 41. cxb4 Bxb4 42. h3 Kf6 43. Rb5 Bd6 44. Be4 Re8 45. Rf5+ Kg7
46. Bf3 Re1+ 47. Kc2 Rf1 48. Rd5 Rf2+ 49. Rd2 Rxd2+ 50. Kxd2

50… h4 51. Kd3 Kf6 52. Kc4 Ke7 53. Kb5 Kd7 54. a4 [54.
b4] 54… Kc7 55. b4 Kb8 56. a5 Ka7 57. Kc4 Bg3 58. b5 Bf2 59.
Be2 Be3 60. Kb3 Bd2 61. b6+ Kb7 62. Ka4 Kc6 63. Bb5+ Kc5 1/2-1/2

Capablanca,Jose –
Janowsky,Dawid (NY 03) [D15] B ending: same colour, 1916

1. d4 Nf6 2. Nf3 d5 3. c4 c6 4. Nc3 dxc4 5. e3 Bg4 6. Bxc4 e6 7. h3
Bh5 8. O-O Be7 9. Qb3 Qb6 10. Ne5 Nbd7 11. Qxb6 axb6 12. Nxd7 Kxd7
13. Bd2 b5 14. Bd3 Bg6 15. Bxg6 hxg6 16. Rfc1 Ra6 17. a3 Rha8 18.
Na2 Nd5 19. Rab1 f5 20. Kf1 Ra4 21. Nc3 Rc4

Concedes the exchange for some attack

22. b3 Rxc3 23. Bxc3 Rxa3 24. Be1 Bf6 25. Ke2 e5 NEXT
DIAGRAM

Black’s pieces are placed as well as they can be, so now we see the
break. However, this may only serve in the long run to open lines
for the Rook.

26. dxe5 Bxe5 27. f4 Bd6 28. Bc3 Ra2+ 29. Kf3 Bc5 30. Rd1
Ke6 31. Rd3 Bf8 32. Be5 b4 33. Rc1 g5 34. g4 g6 35. e4 fxe4+ 36.
Kxe4 Re2+ 37. Kf3 Rh2 38. Kg3 Re2 39. h4 gxh4+ 40. Kxh4 Be7+ 41.
Kg3 g5 42. Kf3 Rh2 43. Re1 Rh3+ 44. Ke4 Rh4 45. fxg5 Bxg5 46. Kf3
Rh3+ 47. Bg3+ Kd7 48. Kg2 Rh7

White decides to give back the exchange to get chances to advance
the g-pawn. 49. Re5 Bf6 50. Rexd5+ cxd5 51. Rxd5+ Ke8 52. Rb5 Rd7
53. Rxb4 Kf7 54. Rb6 Bd4 55. Rd6 NEXT DIAGRAM

Forcing the exchange of Rooks, which are often a strong drawing
factor, giving a pure Bishop ending.

55… Rxd6 56. Bxd6

56… Kg6 57. Kf3 Bf6 58. Bf4 Kf7 59. Ke4 Ke6 60. Be3 Be7 61. g5
Bd8 62. Kf4

Bc7+ 63. Kg4 Be5 64. Kh5 Kf7 65. Kh6 Kg8 66. Bb6 Bc3 67. Kg6 Bd2
68. Kf6 Bc3+ 69. Ke6 Bd2 70. g6 Bc3 71. Kd5 Bd2 72. Bd4 b5 73. Ke4
b4 74. Be3 Bc3 75. Kd3 Be1 76. Bd2 Bf2 77. Ke4 Bc5 78. Kd5 Be7 79.
Kc4 Kg7 giving up the g-pawn for the b-pawn 80. Bxb4 Bd8 81. Bc3+
Kxg6 82. b4 Kf5 83. Kd5

The change of front has left White with a pawn which can Queen on a
dark square, and the Black King with difficulties in approaching.
Black resigned, but Averbach later showed an amazing save (used by
Fischer vs. Taimanov) which was known to Centurini in the last
century!

[83. Kd5 Kf4 ! and Black rushes around the
back.]

Menchik,V – Capablanca,JR
(Hastings 1930/31) [A47] bishop ending: same colour, 1996

1. d4 Nf6 2. Nf3 b6 3. e3 Bb7 4. Bd3 c5 5. O-O Nc6 6. c3 e6 7. Ne5
d6 8. Nxc6 Bxc6 9. Qe2 Be7 10. Bb5 Qd7 11. Bxc6 Qxc6 White is
slipping behind in development and activity. 12. Nd2 O-O 13. dxc5
dxc5 14. e4 Rad8

White would of course like to move her Knight, but the next puts a
pawnon a dark square.

15. e5 Nd5 16. Nf3 Rd7 17. Rd1 Rfd8 18. Bd2 b5 19. Kf1
Nb6 20. Bf4 h6 21. Rxd7 Rxd7 22. Rd1 Rxd1+ 23. Qxd1

Black’s next pushes the Bishop out of action on g3, then Black
makes a raid on the Queen’s-side.

23… Qe4 24. Bg3 Qc4+ 25. Qe2 Qxe2+ 26. Kxe2 Na4 27. Kd2
Nxb2 28. Kc2 Nc4 29. Nd2 Nxd2 30. Kxd2

The Bishop ending that follows is very difficult for White: a pawn
down with a duff Bishop.

30… c4 31. Bf4 a6 32. Be3 Kf8 33. Bb6 Ke8 34. Ke3 Kd7
35. Kd4 Kc6 36. Ba7

White is running out of squares for the Bishop.

36… f5 37. a4

Doing Black’s work for him.

37… g6 38. f4 h5 39. axb5+ Kxb5 40. g3 a5 41. Ke3 Bc5+
42. Bxc5 Kxc5 1-0

A disaster in the Stonewall

Posted on March 30, 2000 by DrDave

Alsop,A – Blundell,J [D00] East Devon Minor (Exeter) (4), 05.03.2000

  [Event "East Devon Minor"]  [Site "Exeter"]  [Date "2000.03.05"]  [White "Allsop"]  [Black "Blundell"]  [Result "1-0"]  [Variant "Standard"]  [ECO "D00"]   1.d4 d5 2.e3 Nf6 3.Bd3 Nc6 4.f4 e6 5.Nf3 Bd6 6.Nbd2 0-0 7.0-0 Re8 8.Ne5 Bd7 9.g4 Nb4 10.Be2 b6 11.c3 Nc6 12.g5 Ne4 13.Rf3 Nxd2 14.Bxd2 a5 15.Rh3 Nxe5 16.dxe5 Be7 17.Bd3 g6 18.Qg4 f5 19.exf6 e5 20.f5 gxf5 21.Bxf5 Bxf5 22.Qxf5 Qc8 23.Qxh7+ Kf8 24.Qg7# 1-0

What went wrong here? Play over this game twice, once fairly quickly to see how it went, and then again slowly to see what went on in more detail, and think of other ideas.

Lessons from this game:

Play with a plan . If you understand the ideas behind your chosen openings you have a big advantage over your opponent and can often win games very quickly. In this game White played with one idea – to lock up the centre then attack the King’s-side – and carried it out. Black went from move to move without making any huge mistakes, but this is not enough.
If you think your opponent will stop your plan, play it straight away! Black did have one chance to play …c5, but in trying to make it better, lost the chance.
Open a file for your Rooks . Rooks are worth half a Queen each, and if you don’t get them working, it’s like being a Queen behind! When you plan where to put your pieces in the opening, you must also think about your Rooks. In this game Black suffered from not getting the c-file open for his Rooks. This started to go wrong at move 3!
Don’t castle into an attack . In this game White was ‘pointing’ towards the King’s-side. If Black had blocked this attack – or not castled King’s-side – White’s pieces might have been on silly squares.
Swap off your opponent’s good pieces, keep your own . Black swapped his good Ne4 for a duff White piece on d2, but he did have the good idea of exchanging the Nc6 for the Bd3. Without the Bd3 White would be pretty planless.

None of these criticisms are made because Black is a poor player, it’s just very hard to play positions where you don’t know what to do. It takes a lot of experience before you can plan what to do in positions you haven’t seen before, but it is possible to pinch ideas from other people. So, try to play positions you understand, try to understand the positions you play.

With light notes:

  [Event "East Devon Minor"]  [Site "Exeter"]  [Date "2000.03.05"]  [White "Allsop"]  [Black "Blundell"]  [Result "1-0"]  [Variant "Standard"]  [ECO "D00"]   1.d4 d5 2.e3 Nf6 3.Bd3 Nc6   {Already I worry about how your Rooks are going to get out! You need to get in ...c7-c5 or ...e7-e5, and after this move I can't see you getting either of these in. This move is actually part of a reasonable plan (Tchigorin's), but I don't think you played it as part of a plan, I think you just played it!}   4.f4   {Else Black will play 4...e5!}   4...e6   {Blocking in the poor Bc8.}   (4...Nb4! 5.Be2 Bf5! 6.Na3 c5! 7.c3 Nc6 8.dxc5 e5)   5.Nf3 Bd6 6.Nbd2 0-0   {Into White's clockwork attack, I'm afraid.}   7.0-0 Re8   {The Rook has no future here.}   8.Ne5 Bd7 9.g4 Nb4 10.Be2   10...b6   (10...c5 {immediately!})   11.c3 Nc6 12.g5 Ne4 13.Rf3   13...Nxd2   {That was your best piece!}   14.Bxd2 a5 15.Rh3   {Ready or not, here we come.}   15...Nxe5   (15...f6 {planning ...e6-e5 might have been worth a try})   16.dxe5 Be7 17.Bd3 g6 18.Qg4 f5 19.exf6 e5 20.f5 gxf5   (20...e4)(20...Qc8)   21.Bxf5 Bxf5 22.Qxf5 Qc8 23.Qxh7+ Kf8 24.Qg7# 1-0

Dr.Dave’s Best Games

Posted on December 31, 1999 by DrDave

The best?

dodd,n – regis,d [A40]

BEST: caius vs. downing, Cambridge UCC, 1981

1. d4 e6 2. c4 b6 3. Nc3 Bb4 4. a3 Bxc3+ 5. bxc3 Bb7 6. Bf4 d6 7. e3 Nd7 8. Nf3 Qe7 9. Be2 Ngf6 10. O-O Ne4 11. Bd3 O-O-O 12. Qc2 f5 13. h3 h6

Having played through Korchnoi-Szabo (see Strategy section of canon) I never put a piece in front of my pawns for ages. Here’s one game that helped confirm me in that!

14. Nd2 Nxd2 15. Qxd2 g5 16. Bg3 h5 17. f3 Rdg8 18. Kf2 g4 19. Bf4 gxh3 20. Rg1 e5 21. Bh2 hxg2 22. Bg3 h4 23. Bh2 e4 24. fxe4 fxe4 25. Be2 h3 26. Ke1 Nf6 27. Kd1 Qd7 28. Kc1 Ba6 29. Kb2 Qa4 30. Bd1

White is setting a trap, but needs the Bd1 to keep the Knight out of g4 30… Qxc4 31. Bb3 Qe2 32. Qxe2 Bxe2 33. Bxg8 Rxg8 34. Bf4 Bf3 35. Rac1 Rh8 36. Bh2 Ng4 0-1A game where (for once) I couldn’t find any errors: if you find any, I don’t think I want to know!

Regis,D (1820) – Lane,PC (2080) [A00] 1996

1. g3 The first and only time I played this. Pete has a opening repertoire (French and KID) which he knows inside out and kills 190-grades with, so my one ambition was to avoid playing into either. Given that I’ve been playing King fianchetto systems most of my life, this was the front runner. 1…Nf6 2. Bg2 g6 3. e4 d6 4. d4 Bg7 5. Ne2 c5 6. dxc5 Qa5+ 7. Nbc3 Qxc5 8. Be3 Qa5 9. h3 Nc6 10. O-O I was amazed, typing in the game afterwards, to find that Fritz regarded all of the above as theory. I dunno about Peter, but I was making it all up! We now get a standard Sicilian formation where White is better placed to attack in the centre and Queen’s-side than the King’s-side – but so is Black! Hence some little tactics where White can’t just play the normal positional moves e.g. Nd5 without caution. 10…Rb8 11. a4 a6 12. Nf4 O-O 13. Nfd5!? Nxd5 14. Nxd5 b5 15. c3 Qd8 16. a5!? e6!? 17. Bb6 Qd7 18. Ne3 Bf6 19. Qd2 Bd8 20. Bxd8 Rxd8 Black now may have trouble holding the dark squares. 21. Rfd1 Ne5 22. Qd4 Bb7 23. b4!? Rbc8?! 24. f4! Nc4masking the weakling on c3 25. Ng4 Qc6 26. Nf6+ Kf8 27. Nxh7+ Ke8 28. Nf6+ Ke7

This beginning left something to be desired, and also left us each with about 5 minutes to get to move 36, but all is forgivable after a return to hack mode…

29. Nd5+ exd5 [else 30.Qf6 anyway] 30. exd5 Qc7 31. Re1+ Kd7 32. Qf6 Ra8 33. Re7+ Kc8 34. Rxc7+ Kxc7 35. Re1 Rd7 36. Re7 Rad8 37. Qxf7 1-0

Dr.Dave’s best blunders and swindles

Posted on December 31, 1999 by DrDave

the best blunders and swindles

I consider it a matter of disquiet that the most heartfelt tributes to my chess prowess include the following:

{*FrankNStein says: Baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaastaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaard*} [BICS]
“f***ing cheapo, bl**dy swindling b*gg*r” [OTB National Club Championships]
{*Walt tells you: you played me a set of dirty schwindles*} [Dutch ICS]

The sporting achievements that led to these fine compliments are to be found here, but below are the ones I am proudest of… You might also enjoy:

Swindle your way to success: An introduction to the ignoble art, which uses some games from below.

gray,t (1695) – regis,d [A40]

SWINDLE: Ian Miles Chp., Andover CC, 1983

1. d4 e6 2. c4 b6 3. Nf3 Bb7 4. e3 f5 !? 5. Nc3 Bb4 !? 6. Be2 Nf6 7. Qb3 ! 7… a5 7 … Na6 8. a4 O-O 9. O-O Bxc3 10. bxc3 Qe7 11. Ba3 d6 12. c5 Nbd7 13. cxd6 cxd6 14. Ne5 ! (zok) 14… Ne4 15. Rad1 Kh8 16. Bb5 ! (pow) 16… Nec5 17. dxc5 Nxe5 18. c6 (kazango)

18… Nxc6 19. Bxd6 Qg5 !? 20. Bf4 [20. g3] 20… Qg6 21. f3 e5 22. Bg3 f4 23. exf4 exf4 24. Be1 Ne5

25. c4 Rac8 26. Qa3 Qf7 27. Rd6 Nxc4 28. Bxc4 Qxc4 29. Rxb6 Ba6 30. Rf2 Rfe8 31. Rb1 Re3 32. Qa1 Qc5 33. Kh1 ? [33. Rd1 Rce8 34. Qb1 Re2 35. Qa1 Qe3 36. h3]

33… Bd3 ? Surprisingly, Black still has enough to win a piece 34. Rb7 [34. Rd1 Rxe1+ 35. Rxe1 Qxf2 36. Re7 Rg8] 34… Qe5 35. Qxe5 Rxe5 36. Bc3 ?! 36… h6 ! 37. g3 Rxc3 38. gxf4 Rf5 39. Kg2 Rxf4 40. Kg3 g5 41. Rd2 Kg8 42. Ra7 Rxa4 43. Rb2 Rb4 44. Ra2 Be4 45. R2xa5 Rxf3+ 46. Kg4 Rf4+ 0-1

willis,r – regis,d (1855) [A40]

SWINDLE: exeter club ch’p #2, 1994

1. d4 g6 2. c4 Bg7 3. Nf3 d6 4. Nc3 Bg4 5. e3 Nc6 6. Be2 e5 7. d5 Nce7 8. O-O

8… f5 9. Ng5 Bxe2 10. Qxe2 Bh6 11. Ne6 Qd7 12. Nb5 c6 13. Nbc7+ Kf7 14. Nxa8 cxd5 15. cxd5 [15. Nac7 +-] 15… Nxd5

16. Nec7 [16. Qc4 Qxe6 17. Nc7 +-] 16… Nxc7 17. Qc4+ [17. Nxc7 Qxc7 18. Bd2 +-] 17… Ne6 18. Nc7 Qxc7 19. Qxc7+ Nxc7 Whew… 20. Bd2 Nf6 21. Rac1 Ne6 22. Bb4 Rd8 23. Rfd1 d5 24. Bc3 d4 25. Bd2 Ne4 26. Rc2 Nxd2 27. Rcxd2 e4 28. Rc2 d3 29. Rc4 Bg7 30. b3 Bb2 31. Rd2 Be5 32. g3 Ng5 33. Kg2 Nf3 34. Rd1 Rd7 35. h3 Rc7 36. Rb4 a6 37. g4 b5 38. gxf5 gxf5 39. Kf1 Bd6 40. Rd4 Nxd4 41. exd4 Bf4 42. f3 Rc1 43. Rxc1 Bxc1 hang your head in shame… 0-1

fayle,a (1735) – regis,d (1940) [B83]

SWINDLE: exeter univ. v teignmouth, 1986

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 e6 6. Be2 Be7 7. Be3 O-O 8. Qd2 a6 9. a4 Nc6 10. O-O Bd7 11. f4 Nxd4 12. Bxd4 Bc6 13. Bf3 e5 14. Be3 b5 15. fxe5 dxe5 16. Rfd1 Qxd2 17. Bxd2 Bc5+ 18. Kf1 b4 19. Nd5 Bxd5 20. exd5 e4 21. Be2 Nxd5 22. Bc4 Nb6 23. Bb3 a5 24. Ke2 Kh8 25. Be3 Rac8 26. Bxc5 Rxc5 27. Rd4 f5 28. Rad1 h6 29. g3

There is only one thing Black has to watch for… 29… Rfc8 30. Rd8+ Rxd8 31. Rxd8+ Kh7 32. Bg8+ Kg6 33. Rd6+ Kg5 34. h4+ Kg4 35. Rg6+ Kh3 36. Rxb6

36… Rxc2+ 37. Ke3 Rxb2 38. Be6 Kxg3 39. Bxf5 Ra2 40. Bxe4 Ra3+ 41. Bd3 Rxa4 42. Rg6+ Kxh4 43. Rxg7 Ra1 44. Kf4

Looking tricky… 44… b3 45. Rg6 h5 (?) [45…Kh5!] 46. Rg7 Kh3 47. Kf3 a4 48. Rg5 Kh4 49. Rg7 [49. Kf4 Re1] 49… a3 50. Kf4 Rh1 51. Be2 a2 52. Rg5 Rf1+ 53. Bxf1 a1=Q 0-1

regis,d (1740) – garret, derek (bcf 103, age 50[?]) [D34]

SWINDLE: exeter vs. devon juniors(!), 1993

1. c4 c5 2. g3 Nf6 3. Bg2 e6 4. Nf3 Nc6 5. d4 d5 6. cxd5 exd5 7. Nc3 Be7 8. O-O O-O 9. dxc5 Bxc5 [9… d4 10. Na4] 10. Na4 Be7 (!) 11. Be3 b6 12. Rc1 Bb7 13. Nc3 ?! ( brian thought 13 h3 with a quiet build-up was better ) 13… Qd7 14. Nb5 Rad8 15. Nbd4 Nxd4 16. Nxd4 ?! [16. Bxd4 is better: 16… Rc8 17. Qd3] 16… Ng4 17. Qd3 ?! [17. Bf4 I avoided this because of 17… g5 ?! (…Rc8) but after 18. Bd2 Qd6 19. Bh3 h5 20. f3 Nh6 21. Bf5 it’s +=] 17… Nxe3 18. Qxe3 Bc5 19. Qd3 Qa4!

20. e3 ? (idea 21 b3, Qxa2? 22 Ra1 +- ) 20… Ba6 ( oh dear ) 21. Qb3 Qxb3 22. Nxb3 Bxf1 23. Bxf1 Bd6 24. Rd1 Be5 25. Nd4 Bxd4 26. Rxd4 Rd6 27. Bc4 !

( by this time I had seen the swindle in the distance ) 27… Rfd8 28. Bb3 Kf8 29. Kf1 Ke7 30. Ke2 Ke6 ? 31. e4 !

31… f6 32. exd5+ Rxd5 ? ( unforced, so he must have been going for a draw ) [32… Kf5 33. h3 Re8+ 34. Kd2] 33. Ke3

33… f5 ?? ( the losing move, I thought: 33…R8d7 must be at least level for Black ) 34. Kf4 h6 35. h4 g6 36. Rxd5 Rxd5 37. Bxd5+ Kxd5 38. h5 ! 38… g5+ 39. Kxf5 1-0

beckett,t – regis,d [A04]

SWINDLE: king’s lynn vs. cambridge univ, nmcc, 1981

1. Nf3 c5 2. b3 Nc6 3. Bb2 d6 4. e4 e5 5. Nc3 Nge7 6. Bc4 g6

7. Ng5 d5 uncooperative 8. exd5 Nd4 9. d6 Nd5 10. Nxd5 Qxg5 11. Bxd4 exd4 [11… Qxg2 12. Nf6+ Kd8 13. Bd5] 12. Nc7+ Kd8 13. Qf3 Bxd6 14. Nxa8 I make that a whole rook down on body count

14… Re8+ 15. Kf1 Bg4 16. Qxb7 Qxd2 17. f3 Bf5 18. Qd5 Re6 19. Qb7 Re7 20. Qc6 10 minutes left 20… Bf4 21. Qd5+ Bd7 22. Nb6 axb6 23. Qa8+ Kc7 24. Qa7+ Kc6 [24… Kd8 25. Qxb6+ Ke8 26. Qxc5 Be3 27. Be2 d3 28. Qxe7+ Kxe7 29. cxd3] 25. Qa8+ 1/2

regis,d – greet,an [A20]

SWINDLE: torbay open, 1994

1. c4 g6 2. g3 Bg7 3. Bg2 d6 4. Nc3 Nf6 5. e4 O-O 6. Nge2 e5 7. O-O c6 8. d3 a6 9. a4 ANG thought this a mistake 9… a5

10. f4 ?? [10. h3] 10… Qb6+ 11. Kh1 Ng4 12. Qe1 Na6 13. Nd1 Nc5 14. f5 Nb3 15. Ra3 Nxc1 16. Nxc1 Bh6 17. h3 Bxc1 18. hxg4

18… Bxb2 19. Qd2 Go on, I dare you [19. Ra2 Bc1]

19… Bxa3 20. f6 Kh8 21. Qh6 Rg8 22. Bf3 g5 [22… d5 23. Kg2 Bf8 24. Qh4 Qd8 25. Rh1 h6 26. g5 h5 27. Bxh5] 23. Kg2 Rg6 [23… Qd8 24. Rh1 Rg6 25. Qxh7#] 24. Qf8+ Rg8 25. Qh6 1/2

kelly,mike (1780) – regis,d (1740) [E16]

SWINDLE: vs. totnes (peter rooke memorial K/O), 1993

1. d4 e6 2. Nf3 b6 3. g3 Bb7 [3… Nf6 ( reserving the …Ba6 line ) 4. Bg2] 4. Bg2 Nf6 5. c4 Bb4+ 6. Bd2 Be7 [6… Bxd2+ bco/eco] 7. O-O O-O 8. Nc3 d5 ! pachman 9. cxd5 Nxd5 10. Re1 [10. Qc2 += bco/eco] 10… Nxc3 11. Bxc3 [11. bxc3] 11… c5 12. Rc1 Nc6 13. e3 ?! ( building for e4 looked like the only sensible plan for white, but White had been moving with a lot of speed and confidence, while I was trying to reconstruct some half-remembered theory from Pachman) 13… Rc8 14. Qe2 ?! ( allows …Nxd4 attacking the queen and thus forestalling Bxb7 in reply ) 14… cxd4 ( I offered a draw here in a loudish voice. MK recently won the Paignton congress, with grade = 178! so disdained offer. ) 15. Nxd4

15…Nxd4 16. Bxd4 Bxg2 17. Rxc8 Qxc8 18. Qg4 ?? Having publicly declined the draw White finds it too difficult to play Kxg2 =. I am ashamed to say, had I offered a draw more quietly he might have taken it or not tried to push his luck. I don’t do things like this any more. Often. 18… e5 [18… e5 19. Qxc8 Rxc8 20. Kxg2 exd4 21. exd4 Bf6 22. d5 Bxb2 23. d6 Rd8 24. d7 Kf8] 0-1

Dr.Dave’s early games

Posted on December 31, 1999 by DrDave

hammond,g – regis,d [C50]

FIRST: fenland guards jnr chp, 1974

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Bc5 4. Nc3 Nf6 5. d3 d6 6. Bb5 Bd7 7. b3 a6 8. Bc4 b5 9. Bd5 Nxd5 10. exd5 Bb4 11. Bd2 Nd4 12. a3 Bxc3 13. Bxc3 c5 14. a4 b4 15. Bd2 Bg4

16. h3 Bxf3 17. gxf3 Qf6 18. c3 Nxf3+ 19. Ke2 O-O 20. cxb4 Rae8 21. bxc5 dxc5 22. h4 e4 23. Rc1 exd3+ 24. Kxd3 Qd4+ 25. Kc2 Nxh4 26. Re1 [26. Qh5] 26… Qxf2 27. Qg4 Nf3 28. Rf1 Qxd2+ 29. Kb1 Nh2 30. Qf4 Nxf1 31. Qxf1 Qxd5 32. Qc4 Qxc4 33. bxc4 f5 34. Rd1 Re4 35. Rc1 f4 36. Kb2 f3 37. Kb3 f2 38. Rf1 Re1 39. Rxe1 fxe1=Q 40. a5 Rf3+ 41. Kc2 Rc3+ 42. Kb2 Qc1+ 43. Ka2 Ra3# Not much of a game, but the first (and only) title I ever won. 0-1

FIRST: march v ely, 1975

regis,d – hooper,ht [D30]

1. d4 My first move for March! 1… d5 2. c4 e6 3. e3 2. c4 was as much as I knew! 3… Nf6 4. Nc3 Be7 5. Nf3 O-O 6. Bd3 Nbd7 7. cxd5 exd5 8. O-O c6 9. Re1 Re8 10. Qc2 h6 11. e4 Clearly still influenced by patterns seen in Chernev’s LOGICAL CHESS … 11… dxe4 12. Nxe4 Nxe4 13. Bxe4 Nf6 14. Bf4 14… Nxe4 15. Rxe4 ??

15… Bf5 16. Rae1 Bxe4 17. Rxe4 Bf6 18. Be5 Bxe5 19. dxe5 Qc7 20. Qe2 Rad8 21. Qe3 b6 22. g4 Rd5 23. h4 Red8 24. g5 Rd3 25. Qe2 h5 26. e6 fxe6 27. Rxe6 Kf8 28. Ne5

I’m still (1992) taken with the determined attitude of White here! 28… R3d6 29. Ng6+ Kg8 30. Ne7+ Kf7 [30… Kf8 31. Qf3+ Ke8 32. Nd5+ Kd7 33. Re7+ still] 31. g6+ Ke8 32. Nd5+ Kd7 33. Re7+ Kc8 34. Rxc7+ Kb8 35. Qa6 Rxg6+ 36. Kf1

It is an omen that my first ever competitive game featured both a cheapo AND a swindle. 1-0

regis,d – richard dixon (CORR_92/93) [B36]

FIRST: devon vs glos. (ward-higgs I), 1993

My first and only correspondence game, during which I made comments to myself throughout. I can only add here NEVER AGAIN: I found the experience appalling – months of paranoia, hesitancy and self-recrimination. At least OTB you can let it go at the end of the day (usually…), although I know there are folk who feel OTB slow chess is too heavy.

1. c4 g6 ( I knew a game of Portisch‘s which I had in mind throughout) 2. g3 Bg7 3. Bg2 Nf6 4. Nc3 O-O 5. e4 ( new for me this season: I played the e3/Nge2/d4 plan for years but recently fancied this, which looked more enterprising ) 5… d6 6. Nge2 c5 ( black had a lot of choice at this point: …e5/…c6/etc. ) 7. O-O Nc6 8. d3 Ne8 9. Be3 Nc7 ( ?! in the books ) [9… Nd4] 10. d4 ! ( in the books ) 10… cxd4 11. Nxd4 Ne6 12. Nde2 Ne5 ! TN – threatens c4 and e3 via g4 [12… Nc5 13. Rc1 Be6 14. b3 Qa5 15. Qd2 Rac8 16. Nf4 +- and black is in trouble: barcza-szilagyi 1967] 13. b3 b6 ( transposing to a hedgehog formation looks better than szilagyi’s setup ) 14. h3 ( stopping the …Ng4 lines seemed sensible, especially since last move they were possible. The knights now need to get out of the way of the pawn roller ) 14… Bb7 15. Rc1 ( looks slow and a bit aimless with hindsight ) 15… Nc5

16. f4 ( now I thought I was on the right lines: turn that space into attack, as in the portisch game ) 16… Ned7 17. g4 a5 ( I would have preferred …a6 ) 18. Ng3 ( I don’t know where this is going yet, unless black can be obliged or tempted to take on f5 eventually – if not the Ng3 and Bg2 are very passive ) 18… Bc6 ( ! I now wanted the wN back on e2 ) 19. a4 ( this isn’t really necessary [19…a4; 20 b4 looked good ] but I thought was justified psychologically – what is black’s plan now ? the real challenge of course is to find white’s plan! The wQ is badly tied to b3 and d3 ) [19. Bd4 ( this was better I thought afterwards ) 19… e5 20. Be3 exf4 21. Bxf4 Ne5 22. Rc2 Ned3] 19… Rb8 20. Rf2 ( Nicely ambiguous [ ideas of Qd2 or Rd2 ] but d3 is now more tender ) 20… Qc8 21. Nd5 ( I’m obviously entertaining pushing f4-f5-f6 ) 21… Re8 22. g5 ( not f5 yet ) 22… Qb7 ( adds to pressure but locks in Bc6 ) 23. f5 ( It’s starting to get hard for me to find a plan which doesn’t involve f5 but Black can play …e6 and build up nicely now. I had some fun with 23 f5 and 24 Nh5 in analysis which was all bluff but looked worth starting ) 23… Bf8 ( I looked at …Bxd5 and …Be5 in analysis but this looked most solid. If …e6 white can afford …exd5 because exd5 wins the Bc6 ) 24. Bd4 ( 24 f6 simply takes a good square away from the knight. Now I have more realistic-looking threats but I must say by this stage I thought it was all starting to slip away ) 24… Ne5 25. Rc3 Bg7 ( I now entered a short sequence of moves which I thought were most solid and maintained a space advantage despite exchanges ) 26. f6 Bf8 27. fxe7 Bxe7 28. h4 Bxd5 ( the two bishops are no real advantage here as the Bg2 is inactive ) 29. exd5 Bf8 30. Rf4 ( else Qf1,Bg7 will threaten …Nf3+ and …Bxd4 ) 30… Bg7 31. Qf1 ( both sides have consolidated after some white initiative and I thought we’re now in for a phase of manoeuvring ) 31… Re7 32. Bxc5 [32. Rf6] 32… bxc5 ( obviously not 32…dxc5; 33 d6 ) 33. Ne4 ( This move cheered me up a little; I felt I had some chances for the initiative ) 33… Rd8 34. Nf6+ [34. Nxc5 ( idea d6 again ) 34… Qb6] 34… Bxf6 35. gxf6 Ree8 36. Re4 h5 ( I admit I analysed this only after sending off my last move – I concluded I had some chances of a combinative breakthrough on the K-side but this couldn’t be forced, and I became slightly less alarmed about possible endgames ) 37. Rce3 Kh7 38. Qf4 ( I couldn’t see a way of winning after what I thought was the best line, …Qb4, but I didn’t have to lose either. White can try to contrive a lever with Bh3, Qg5 and now Bf5, but …Qb4 & …Rg8 (forces Kh1) slows or stops it) 38… Qc8 ( I thought at the time, not as strong as …Qb4, but realised it’s trickier ) 39. Bh3 Qb8 ( if the knight moves don’t work this is probably best ) 40. Kh1 Qc7 41. Bf5

41…Qb8( I immediately thought this was too resigned ) 42. Qg5 ( mates in six ) 1-0

Briggs, Tom – regis,d [C02]

FIRST: march cc friendly, 1975

Tom founded March Chess Club and worked hard for the club until his death. I played many games with Tom as a young player and was always impressed by his consistent good humour and generosity. Like Andersson, he met defeat only with laughter and praise for his opponent. Chess is full of people like Tom, although we tend to notice only the Kasparovs.

1. e4 This game is probably fairly typical for the time, and features my first and long-time favourite French Defence to 1.e4.

1… e6 2. d4 d5 3. e5 Nc6 4. Nf3 f6 5. Bf4 g5 6. Bg3 fxe5 7. dxe5 Bg7 8. Bb5 Nge7 9. O-O a6 10. Ba4 Bd7 11. c3 Ng6 12. Bxc6 Bxc6 13. Re1 Bb5 14. Nd4 Qd7 15. a4 Bc6 16. b4 b5 17. a5 O-O-O 18. Qg4 h6 19. Qxe6 Qxe6 20. Nxe6 Rd7 21. Nc5 Re7 22. Nd3 Rhe8

23. f4 Nxf4 24. Nxf4 gxf4 25. Bxf4 Bxe5 26. Bxe5 Rxe5 27. Nd2 Re2 ??? 28. Nf3 d4 29. Rxe2 Rxe2 30. Nxd4 Rxg2+ 31. Kf1 Bb7 32. Re1 Rxh2 33. Re2 Rh3 34. Rc2 Be4 35. Re2 Bd3 36. Kg2 Rh5 37. Re8+ Kb7 38. Re3 Bc4 39. Kg3 Rg5+ 40. Kh4 Rg8 41. Nf5 Rh8 42. Kh5 Bf7+ 43. Kh4 h5 44. Re7 Rf8 45. Nh6 Bg6 46. Kg5

46…Be8 47. Re3 Kc8 48. Nf5 Rg8+ 49. Kf6 Rg4 50. Rxe8+ Kb7 51. Re3 Kc8 52. Rh3 Rc4 53. Kg5 c5 54. Nd6+1-0

regis,d – rivett,dv [D16]

FIRST: lowestoft friendly, 1977

1. d4 Another ‘dues’ game – my uncle Don was a very important benchmark for me, and was endlessly patient with my early efforts. This was a game I remember being proud of at the time, having finally taken half a point from him. I also remember not really understanding how, though! 1… d5 2. Nf3 Nf6 3. c4 c6 4. Nc3 dxc4 5. a4 Bd7 6. e4 b5 7. axb5 cxb5 8. Be2 e6 9. O-O Be7 10. d5 a6 11. Ne5 Qc7 12. Nxd7 Qxd7 13. Bf4

13… exd5 14. exd5 O-O 15. d6 Bd8 16. Bf3 Nc6 17. Nxb5 Rb8 18. Nd4 Nb4 19. Rc1 Rc8 20. Bg5 Rc5 21. Nb3 Rc8 22. Bxf6 Bxf6 23. Bg4 Qc6 24. Bxc8 Rxc8 25. Re1 Qd7 26. Qe2 Nd3 27. Rxc4 Nxe1 28. Rxc8+ Qxc8 29. Nc5 Kf8 30. d7 Qd8 31. Qxe1 Be7 32. Qe3 Qa5 33. h3 g6 34. Nb7 Qd51/2-1/2

35. Qc3! should have been promising.