MARCH has been my busiest ever month, as far as I can recall, for team chess.
For Battersea I lost to a 174, drew with a 169, drew with a 159 and beat a 165.
For Sussex I lost to a 173 and beat a 171.
For Hastings & St Leonards I beat a 148 and drew with a 152.
My updated first-season Battersea stats (CLL is Central London League; LL is London League):
Event..............Colour...Grade...Opponent's Grade...Result
CLL................White.....169.........183............................L
CLL................White.....169.........197............................L
LL...................Black.....169.........158............................W
CLL................White.....169.........158............................W
LL....................Black.....169........204............................L
CLL................White....169.........203.............................L
CLL..................Black.....169........180............................L
Eastman Cup...Black.....169........199............................D
CLL.................Black.....163.........172*...........................L
CLL.................White.....163.........153...........................W
LL...................White.....163.........188............................D
CLL.................Black......163.........166...........................L
LL...................White.....163.........150............................D
CLL.................Black.....163.........175............................D
CLL.................White.....163.........174............................L
LL....................White.....163.........169............................D
CLL.................White......163........159............................D
LL....................Black......163........165............................W
*Opponent has no official grade. Last published grade was 172 in 1997, which was pre-recalibration, and he was in the 180s before then.
Overall for Battersea I am +4=6-8 for a grading performance of 164.
Overall for Sussex this season I have lost to a 172, beaten a 169, lost to a 173 and beaten a 171, for a grading performance of 171.
Overall for Hastings & St Leonards this season I have beaten a 156, beaten a 148 and drawn with a 152, for a grading performance of 185.
It is said you can prove anything with statistics. That is an exaggeration but, despite my 185 grading performance for Hastings, there is no way I would rate my results there as better than my results for Sussex.
Indeed, it could be argued that my results for Battersea (no losses against lower-graded opponents, but a win against a higher-graded opponent, and with four of my six draws coming against higher-graded opponents) are better than for either Hastings or Sussex. I guess it is just a quirk of the English Chess Federation grading system.
Monday 26 March 2018
Monday 12 March 2018
Good Wörishofen (part ten)
Helmut Specht (1913) - Spanton (1901),
Bad Woerishofen B (U2000), Round 9
I HAD lost to Specht in the same tournament in 2016 and 2017.
In the 2016 game, in which he had White, play went 1.d4 d5 2.c4. I tried the Albin, and got crushed. This time, in a game in which the winner would receive 150 euros for coming third-fourth, he was to prefer the fashionable New London.
1.d4 d5 2.Bf4 e6 3.e3 Bd6
Topalov and Rublevsky are among strong players who have favoured this simple answer to White's system.
4.Bxd6!?
I felt this helped Black, so I was surprised to later discover it is quite popular and, what is more, eventually becomes Stockfish9's choice.
4...cxd6!?
4...Qxd6 is much more popular, and was the choice of Yusupov in 2013, but I like the idea of half-opening the c file, and having a pawn covering the e5 and c5 squares.
5.c3?!
Excessively passive.
5...Nc6N 6.Nd2
6...e5!?
In some ways, White's play is reminiscent of boxer Muhammad Ali's rope-a-dope tactics, but why shouldn't Black take over the centre if White shows little inclination to fight for it?
7.Nb3 Nf6 8.Nf3 0-0 9.Be2 Re8
9...Bg4 is 'natural', but I didn't want to play it before White had castled as I feared 10.h3 Bh5, with White preparing long-castling and the pawn-thrust g4.
Such a plan would be double-edged, to say the least, as White's king would hardly be at its safest on the queenside. But I felt it was unnecessary to go in for such lines when Black has a relatively stable central advantage.
10.0-0 Bg4 11.Re1 e4
I'd had several chances earlier to gain space by closing the centre in this way, but I wanted to wait for the best moment, and I did not fear White going in for dxe5 dxe5.
12.Nfd2 Qd7 13.Bxg4 Nxg4 14.Nf1 f5
Both players would be better off with their e-file rooks on the f file.
15.h3 Nf6 16.a3 Kh8
Analysis engines reckon the position is roughly equal, or only slightly favourable to Black. But it seemed to me - and my opinion has not changed - that the position is much easier for Black to play.
After ...
17.f4 exf3 18.Qxf3 Nd8
The knight is heading for e4.
White's backward e pawn is much weaker than Black's doubled d pawns. I now held the initiative, and eventually won in 40 moves, although only after HS blundered.
I HAD lost to Specht in the same tournament in 2016 and 2017.
In the 2016 game, in which he had White, play went 1.d4 d5 2.c4. I tried the Albin, and got crushed. This time, in a game in which the winner would receive 150 euros for coming third-fourth, he was to prefer the fashionable New London.
1.d4 d5 2.Bf4 e6 3.e3 Bd6
Topalov and Rublevsky are among strong players who have favoured this simple answer to White's system.
4.Bxd6!?
I felt this helped Black, so I was surprised to later discover it is quite popular and, what is more, eventually becomes Stockfish9's choice.
4...cxd6!?
4...Qxd6 is much more popular, and was the choice of Yusupov in 2013, but I like the idea of half-opening the c file, and having a pawn covering the e5 and c5 squares.
5.c3?!
Excessively passive.
5...Nc6N 6.Nd2
 |
| Position after 6.Nd2 |
In some ways, White's play is reminiscent of boxer Muhammad Ali's rope-a-dope tactics, but why shouldn't Black take over the centre if White shows little inclination to fight for it?
7.Nb3 Nf6 8.Nf3 0-0 9.Be2 Re8
9...Bg4 is 'natural', but I didn't want to play it before White had castled as I feared 10.h3 Bh5, with White preparing long-castling and the pawn-thrust g4.
Such a plan would be double-edged, to say the least, as White's king would hardly be at its safest on the queenside. But I felt it was unnecessary to go in for such lines when Black has a relatively stable central advantage.
10.0-0 Bg4 11.Re1 e4
I'd had several chances earlier to gain space by closing the centre in this way, but I wanted to wait for the best moment, and I did not fear White going in for dxe5 dxe5.
12.Nfd2 Qd7 13.Bxg4 Nxg4 14.Nf1 f5
Both players would be better off with their e-file rooks on the f file.
15.h3 Nf6 16.a3 Kh8
Analysis engines reckon the position is roughly equal, or only slightly favourable to Black. But it seemed to me - and my opinion has not changed - that the position is much easier for Black to play.
After ...
17.f4 exf3 18.Qxf3 Nd8
The knight is heading for e4.
White's backward e pawn is much weaker than Black's doubled d pawns. I now held the initiative, and eventually won in 40 moves, although only after HS blundered.
Sunday 11 March 2018
Good Wörishofen (part nine)
Spanton (1901) - Mario Bossoni (1907), Bad Woerishofen B (U2000)
The Liberated Bishop Defence has become popular over the last four years, at least at club level, thanks to a New in Chess book of the same name by Russian grandmaster Alexey Bezgodov.
The book was generally positively reviewed, eg American coach Jeremy Silman declared that it "fills a void in chess literature and can be strongly recommended."
The basic idea of the defence is that after 1.d4 d5, Black meets both 2.c4 and 2.Nf3 with 2...Bf5. The former, at least, used to be known as the Baltic Defence.
This is supposedly because it was a favourite with Paul Keres and other Baltic States players. In fact, if you consult ChessBase's 2018 Mega database, you will not find a single example of Keres playing 2...Bf5 after 1.d4 d5 2.c4 (but there are five examples of him playing 2...Bf5 after 1.d4 d5 2.Nf3).
This is not very surprising as Keres, along with many of his contemporaries, overwhelmingly preferred 1...Nf6 to 1...d5.
Silman has some interesting words on move orders in his review: "Most of the grandmaster games with 2...Bf5 come from the sequence 1.Nf3 d5 2.d4 Bf5. The more direct 1.d4 d5 2.c4 Bf5 is not seen as often. What keeps more players trying 1.d4 d5 2.c4 Bf5 is 3.cxd5. After 3...Bxb1 4.Qa4+ Qd7 5.Qxd7+ Nxd7 6.Rxb1, or 4...c6 5.dxc6 Nxc6 6.Rxb1 Qxd4 7.Qxd4 Nxd4, the queens come off the board and the first player has the potential advantage of the two bishops."
It was by Silman's 'approved' move order that I faced the Liberated Bishop for the first time in round eight at Bad Wörishofen.
1.Nf3 d5 2.d4 Bf5 3.c4 e6 4.Nc3 c6?!
Easily the most popular move in this position, played by the likes of Shirov, Short and Morozevich. However, strong players have also chosen 4...Nc6, 4...Nf6 and 4...Bb4.
My punctuation of Black's fourth move may seem provocative - impertinent, even - but more on this later.
5.Qb3
It makes sense to pressure Black's queenside when most of his pawns there are on light squares and the light-square bishop has been developed outside of its pawn chain.
5...Qb6
Again the most popular move, and again it has been played by Shirov, Short and Morozevich.
6.c5
A key point. White's second-most popular move, 6.Qxb6, helps Black as his a pawn is promoted to a more-central b pawn and he gets pressure down the a file.
After 6...axb6 the pawn on b6 is doubled, but is not really weak - after all, how can White attack it?
I am tempted to give 6.c5 an !, but that would be a bit rich as the idea is well-known.
6...Qxb3
It should not surprise that White is for choice after this.
But the alternative 6...Qc7 runs into 7.Bf4!, which is even better for White.
I do not have Bezgodov's book, but a friend does, and he reports that Bezgodov calls 4...c6 "unnecessarily passive."
Silman wrote in his review: "One major revelation for this reviewer is that after 1.d4 d5 2.Nf3 Bf5 3.c4 e6 4.Nc3, Black’s best move is not 4…c6. [typos corrected]"
7.axb3 h6?!
Giving his light-square bishop a refuge on h7 is only Black's fourth-most popular move. It scores much better percentage-wise than the more frequent 7...Nd7, 7...Na6 and 7...Nf6, but I find it hard to believe Black can afford to play so slowly when behind in development.
8.Bf4 Nd7 9.e3 Ngf6 10.h3?!
Analysis engines want me to get on with it with 10.b4.
My choice, like MB's at move seven, is typical of club players' obsession with structure over dynamism.
10...Be7 11.Be2?!
Again it was probably better to get on with White's thematic 11.b4 attack.
11...0-0 12.0-0 Rfc8
I guess the idea is to organise an exchange of bishops by ...Bd8-c7.
Komodo9 suggests an immediate 12...Ne4, but prefers White after 13.Nxe4 Bxe4 14.b4.
13.Ra4
13...Ne4
The idea of ...Bd8-c7 is too slow, eg 13...Bd8 14.Rfa1 a6 15.b4 Bc7 16.Bxc7 Rxc7 17.b5 cxb5 18.Nxb5 Rcc8 19.Nd6 Rc7 and now comes the second b pawn: 20.b4.
14.Rfa1
White's pieces are well-placed for a queenside attack. The game continued:
14...Nxc3 15.bxc3 a6 16.b4
...with a large advantage.
Later, I was winning, but a series of weak moves in which I lost the thread of the position saw the game drawn after 47 moves.
The Liberated Bishop Defence has become popular over the last four years, at least at club level, thanks to a New in Chess book of the same name by Russian grandmaster Alexey Bezgodov.
The book was generally positively reviewed, eg American coach Jeremy Silman declared that it "fills a void in chess literature and can be strongly recommended."
The basic idea of the defence is that after 1.d4 d5, Black meets both 2.c4 and 2.Nf3 with 2...Bf5. The former, at least, used to be known as the Baltic Defence.
This is supposedly because it was a favourite with Paul Keres and other Baltic States players. In fact, if you consult ChessBase's 2018 Mega database, you will not find a single example of Keres playing 2...Bf5 after 1.d4 d5 2.c4 (but there are five examples of him playing 2...Bf5 after 1.d4 d5 2.Nf3).
This is not very surprising as Keres, along with many of his contemporaries, overwhelmingly preferred 1...Nf6 to 1...d5.
Silman has some interesting words on move orders in his review: "Most of the grandmaster games with 2...Bf5 come from the sequence 1.Nf3 d5 2.d4 Bf5. The more direct 1.d4 d5 2.c4 Bf5 is not seen as often. What keeps more players trying 1.d4 d5 2.c4 Bf5 is 3.cxd5. After 3...Bxb1 4.Qa4+ Qd7 5.Qxd7+ Nxd7 6.Rxb1, or 4...c6 5.dxc6 Nxc6 6.Rxb1 Qxd4 7.Qxd4 Nxd4, the queens come off the board and the first player has the potential advantage of the two bishops."
It was by Silman's 'approved' move order that I faced the Liberated Bishop for the first time in round eight at Bad Wörishofen.
1.Nf3 d5 2.d4 Bf5 3.c4 e6 4.Nc3 c6?!
Easily the most popular move in this position, played by the likes of Shirov, Short and Morozevich. However, strong players have also chosen 4...Nc6, 4...Nf6 and 4...Bb4.
My punctuation of Black's fourth move may seem provocative - impertinent, even - but more on this later.
5.Qb3
It makes sense to pressure Black's queenside when most of his pawns there are on light squares and the light-square bishop has been developed outside of its pawn chain.
5...Qb6
Again the most popular move, and again it has been played by Shirov, Short and Morozevich.
 |
| Position after 5...Qb6. How should White treat the position? |
A key point. White's second-most popular move, 6.Qxb6, helps Black as his a pawn is promoted to a more-central b pawn and he gets pressure down the a file.
After 6...axb6 the pawn on b6 is doubled, but is not really weak - after all, how can White attack it?
I am tempted to give 6.c5 an !, but that would be a bit rich as the idea is well-known.
6...Qxb3
It should not surprise that White is for choice after this.
But the alternative 6...Qc7 runs into 7.Bf4!, which is even better for White.
I do not have Bezgodov's book, but a friend does, and he reports that Bezgodov calls 4...c6 "unnecessarily passive."
Silman wrote in his review: "One major revelation for this reviewer is that after 1.d4 d5 2.Nf3 Bf5 3.c4 e6 4.Nc3, Black’s best move is not 4…c6. [typos corrected]"
7.axb3 h6?!
Giving his light-square bishop a refuge on h7 is only Black's fourth-most popular move. It scores much better percentage-wise than the more frequent 7...Nd7, 7...Na6 and 7...Nf6, but I find it hard to believe Black can afford to play so slowly when behind in development.
8.Bf4 Nd7 9.e3 Ngf6 10.h3?!
Analysis engines want me to get on with it with 10.b4.
My choice, like MB's at move seven, is typical of club players' obsession with structure over dynamism.
10...Be7 11.Be2?!
Again it was probably better to get on with White's thematic 11.b4 attack.
11...0-0 12.0-0 Rfc8
I guess the idea is to organise an exchange of bishops by ...Bd8-c7.
Komodo9 suggests an immediate 12...Ne4, but prefers White after 13.Nxe4 Bxe4 14.b4.
13.Ra4
 |
| Position after 13.Ra4. Black would love to be able to place a rook on b8 to make his defence easier |
The idea of ...Bd8-c7 is too slow, eg 13...Bd8 14.Rfa1 a6 15.b4 Bc7 16.Bxc7 Rxc7 17.b5 cxb5 18.Nxb5 Rcc8 19.Nd6 Rc7 and now comes the second b pawn: 20.b4.
14.Rfa1
White's pieces are well-placed for a queenside attack. The game continued:
14...Nxc3 15.bxc3 a6 16.b4
...with a large advantage.
Later, I was winning, but a series of weak moves in which I lost the thread of the position saw the game drawn after 47 moves.
Saturday 10 March 2018
Good Wörishofen (part eight)
IN round seven I grabbed a pawn, only to come under a strong attack that should have been decisive.
Neither player found the best moves, but Black later won his pawn back and still had powerful pressure.
Black wins with 56...Qxb5!, eg 57.Qxb4 Qxa6+ 58.Kb2 Re2+ 59.Rd2 Qxd3 (Stockfish9).
Instead, BL won a piece by 56...Bc3+ 57.Ka2 Qe2+ 58.Ka3 Rxd3 59.Rxd3 Qxd3, but after 60.a7 Qe4 61.b6, he played 61...Qe7+? (61...Qc6 would have drawn) and lost following 62.Ka4 Qb7 63.Qb5+? (63.Qc4 wins easily) Kf8? (63...Kg7 seems to draw) 64.Qc5+.
At this point, in time trouble, BL picked up his queen and tried to play 64...Qa6+. The game finished 64...Qe7 65.Qxe7+ Kxe7 66.a8Q (1-0).
Neither player found the best moves, but Black later won his pawn back and still had powerful pressure.
 |
| Position after 56.a6 in Spanton (1901) - Boris Litfin (1978) |
Instead, BL won a piece by 56...Bc3+ 57.Ka2 Qe2+ 58.Ka3 Rxd3 59.Rxd3 Qxd3, but after 60.a7 Qe4 61.b6, he played 61...Qe7+? (61...Qc6 would have drawn) and lost following 62.Ka4 Qb7 63.Qb5+? (63.Qc4 wins easily) Kf8? (63...Kg7 seems to draw) 64.Qc5+.
At this point, in time trouble, BL picked up his queen and tried to play 64...Qa6+. The game finished 64...Qe7 65.Qxe7+ Kxe7 66.a8Q (1-0).
Friday 9 March 2018
Good Wörishofen (part seven)
THERE was an instructive moment in the late-opening of my round six game.
I replied 12...Bg4?, thinking I was adding to the pressure along the e file.
But the move gives White a tempo to untangle, which he did by 13.f3 Bh5 14.Kf2, although RU was unable to convert his edge (½–½, 42 moves).
Instead, I should have chosen a line such as 12...Be6 13.f3 Nb6 14.Kf2 Bc4 (Stockfish9), getting rid of White's bishop-pair.
 |
| White has just played 12.Ng1-e2 in Rudolf Urban (1841) - Spanton (1901) |
But the move gives White a tempo to untangle, which he did by 13.f3 Bh5 14.Kf2, although RU was unable to convert his edge (½–½, 42 moves).
Instead, I should have chosen a line such as 12...Be6 13.f3 Nb6 14.Kf2 Bc4 (Stockfish9), getting rid of White's bishop-pair.
Thursday 8 March 2018
Good Wörishofen (part six)
MY luck ran out with a vengeance in round five.
Having built a huge advantage in the opening, I completely misjudged the middlegame, seriously underestimating my opponent's dynamic counter-chances.
The game finished:
27.Rxe3??
27.Rxd3 would have been much better, although Black has all the chances after 27...Rxd3.
27...Rd1+ 28.Kf2 Qxf4+ 29.Qf3 R8d2 0-1.
Having built a huge advantage in the opening, I completely misjudged the middlegame, seriously underestimating my opponent's dynamic counter-chances.
 |
| Position after 26...Re8-d8 in Spanton (1901) - Alfred Kerber (1939) |
27.Rxe3??
27.Rxd3 would have been much better, although Black has all the chances after 27...Rxd3.
27...Rd1+ 28.Kf2 Qxf4+ 29.Qf3 R8d2 0-1.
Wednesday 7 March 2018
Good Wörishofen (part five)
I GOT lucky in round four.
Having blundered a pawn in the opening, I sacrificed a second one for attacking chances.
White's last move was the best in the position, according to my analysis engines.
I played ...
25...Nxg3!?
... having seen that after ...
26.fxg3 Rxg3+ 27.Kh2
(Not 27.Kg1?? Qe4+, and mate follows)
... Black gets nowhere with 27...Rg2+ 28.Kh1.
Instead, I played ...
27...Rgxe3
Judging by my opponent's body language, he had missed this possibility.
After some considerable thought, there followed:
28.Qf5?? Re2+ 29.Qf2 Rxf2+ 30.Rxf2 h6 (1-0, 35 moves).
But going back to the position after 27...Rge3, White wins easily with 28.Qg4, eg 28...Re2+ 29.Kh1 Qc6+ 30.Qf3, when his king is plenty safe enough and White is up a bishop for a pawn.
Having blundered a pawn in the opening, I sacrificed a second one for attacking chances.
 |
| Position after White played 25.g2-g3 in Stefan Wibel (1768) - Spanton (1901) |
I played ...
25...Nxg3!?
... having seen that after ...
26.fxg3 Rxg3+ 27.Kh2
(Not 27.Kg1?? Qe4+, and mate follows)
... Black gets nowhere with 27...Rg2+ 28.Kh1.
Instead, I played ...
27...Rgxe3
Judging by my opponent's body language, he had missed this possibility.
After some considerable thought, there followed:
28.Qf5?? Re2+ 29.Qf2 Rxf2+ 30.Rxf2 h6 (1-0, 35 moves).
But going back to the position after 27...Rge3, White wins easily with 28.Qg4, eg 28...Re2+ 29.Kh1 Qc6+ 30.Qf3, when his king is plenty safe enough and White is up a bishop for a pawn.
Tuesday 6 March 2018
Good Wörishofen (part four)
I BUILT a substantial advantage from the opening in my round three game, only to choose a fundamentally flawed middlegame plan.
Visually, White is much better, and indeed analysis engines reckon White's positional advantage is worth about a pawn or more.
I played 21.f4, but this may throw away most, if not all, of White's edge. Komodo9, for example, continues 21...a6 22.Nc3 Bf6, reckoning the position to be equal.
Looking at the diagram position in the light of the analysis engines' verdict, I believe the point is that although White has a beautifully posted knight on f5, there is little chance of a mating attack as Black has so many pieces clustered around his king.
This is why the engines reckon White maintains a substantial advantage by playing on the queenside, for example with 21.Bd2 or 21.a4.
In the game, AS "believed" my kingside attack, meeting 21.f4 with 21...f6?, which horrendously weakens the light squares around Black's king.
After 22.h5, the engines reckon White is winning, and I did indeed eventually crash through on the kingside.
 |
| How should White proceed (in general terms - no need for a specific line) after Black played 20...Rc8-a8 in Spanton (1901) - Alfred Schmidt (1784)? |
I played 21.f4, but this may throw away most, if not all, of White's edge. Komodo9, for example, continues 21...a6 22.Nc3 Bf6, reckoning the position to be equal.
Looking at the diagram position in the light of the analysis engines' verdict, I believe the point is that although White has a beautifully posted knight on f5, there is little chance of a mating attack as Black has so many pieces clustered around his king.
This is why the engines reckon White maintains a substantial advantage by playing on the queenside, for example with 21.Bd2 or 21.a4.
In the game, AS "believed" my kingside attack, meeting 21.f4 with 21...f6?, which horrendously weakens the light squares around Black's king.
After 22.h5, the engines reckon White is winning, and I did indeed eventually crash through on the kingside.
Good Wörishofen (part three)
IN round two I misplayed an IQP position as Black, and felt obliged to take a draw against a much lower-rated opponent.
My main analysis engines (Stockfish9 and Komodo9) agree with my in-game assessment that White has a substantial advantage (0.6 of a pawn, according to S9; 0.86, according to K9).
I thought Black's best try was 18...Qc6, but I rejected it because after 19.Nxe6 Qxc1 20.Rxc1 Rxc1+ 21.Bf1 Rxe6 22.Qxb5, Black's pieces are uncoordinated, he has weak pawns and a back-rank problem, and anyway a queen and a pawn are worth more than two rooks.
The analysis engines disagree, reckoning the position is dead equal after 22...g6 23.Qxd5 Rxe2 24.Kg2 and now 24...Re7 or 24...Re5.
So perhaps I should have played on.
But objectively I should not as, after 18...Qc6, Stockfish and Komodo give 19.e4!, continuing 19...Qb6 20.Nxe6 Rxc1 21.Rxc1 dxe4 22.Bxe4 Qxe6 23.Bxh7+, when Black is simply a pawn down.
 |
| White has just played 18.Na4-c5 and offered a draw in Dietmar Redemann (1778) - Spanton (1901). Could I have reasonably played on? |
I thought Black's best try was 18...Qc6, but I rejected it because after 19.Nxe6 Qxc1 20.Rxc1 Rxc1+ 21.Bf1 Rxe6 22.Qxb5, Black's pieces are uncoordinated, he has weak pawns and a back-rank problem, and anyway a queen and a pawn are worth more than two rooks.
The analysis engines disagree, reckoning the position is dead equal after 22...g6 23.Qxd5 Rxe2 24.Kg2 and now 24...Re7 or 24...Re5.
So perhaps I should have played on.
But objectively I should not as, after 18...Qc6, Stockfish and Komodo give 19.e4!, continuing 19...Qb6 20.Nxe6 Rxc1 21.Rxc1 dxe4 22.Bxe4 Qxe6 23.Bxh7+, when Black is simply a pawn down.
Sunday 4 March 2018
Good Wörishofen (part two)
IN round one at Bad Wörishofen I played a junior rated 1704, scoring what seemed a fairly smooth victory.
But going over the game with my main analysis engines (Stockfish9 and Komodo9), a critical position is revealed in the opening.
Spanton (1901) - Anais Abele (1704), Bad Woerishofen B (U2000)
1.c4 c5 2.Nc3 Nc6 3.g3 g6 4.Bg2 Bg7 5.d3
The English is an opening that particularly lends itself to symmetrical play, with Black usually getting to choose when to break the symmetry. I say "usually," because a position can arise in which White plays a forcing move that Black cannot safely ape.
5...e6
Indeed, 5...d6 is the most popular move in ChessBase's 2018 Mega database, although the text scores a better percentage and has been the choice of Kasparov and Svidler.
6.e4
This is White's commonest reply, setting up a Botvinnik formation, but the position is open to many interpretations. 6.Nf3 and 6.h4!? are the next most-popular, albeit a long way behind 6.e4.
The main point of the text, I believe, is to prevent Black playing the freeing ...d5. Its drawback is the hole left at d4. White will try to get in the move d4 to eliminate the hole, while Black waits for a suitable moment to land a knight on the key square.
6...d6 7.Nge2 Nge7 8.0-0 0-0 9.a3
You might think White would prefer 9.Be3, and that is the top choice in Mega18. But it is arguably a slight positional mistake, because Black can reply with the perfectly timed 9...Nd4!
The point is that White can only eliminate the knight by giving up his bishop-pair, and he would be giving up his better bishop too.
The main line runs 10.Qd2 (White decides to play around the knight, and instead exchange Black's fianchettoed bishop) 10...Nec6 11.Bh6.
Another try is 10.f4, when White might hope to play Bf2 followed by Nxd4. But Black can easily counter this with ...Nec6, ensuring that the d4 knight will be replaced by its comrade.
9...b6
I played ...
10.Be3
... and AA replied ...
10...Bb7
The game continued with what seems to be a novelty ...
11.d4
... and after ...
11...cxd4 12.Nxd4
... White had a pleasant Maroczy Bind (1-0, 56 moves).
But going back to the position after 10.Be3, I had planned to meet 10...Nd4! with 11.e5 Rb8 12.Nxd4 cxd4 13.Bxd4.
But after 13...dxe5 (13...Nf5 is also good) 14.Be3, Black is at least equal, and has what seems to me to be the easier position to play.
The point is that I still have a hole on d4, my d pawn has become backward on a half-open file and Black has a promising pawn-storm on the kingside. True, White has a queenside pawn-majority, but that is an endgame factor that is unlikely to become relevant for a long time, if at all.
But going over the game with my main analysis engines (Stockfish9 and Komodo9), a critical position is revealed in the opening.
Spanton (1901) - Anais Abele (1704), Bad Woerishofen B (U2000)
1.c4 c5 2.Nc3 Nc6 3.g3 g6 4.Bg2 Bg7 5.d3
The English is an opening that particularly lends itself to symmetrical play, with Black usually getting to choose when to break the symmetry. I say "usually," because a position can arise in which White plays a forcing move that Black cannot safely ape.
5...e6
Indeed, 5...d6 is the most popular move in ChessBase's 2018 Mega database, although the text scores a better percentage and has been the choice of Kasparov and Svidler.
6.e4
This is White's commonest reply, setting up a Botvinnik formation, but the position is open to many interpretations. 6.Nf3 and 6.h4!? are the next most-popular, albeit a long way behind 6.e4.
The main point of the text, I believe, is to prevent Black playing the freeing ...d5. Its drawback is the hole left at d4. White will try to get in the move d4 to eliminate the hole, while Black waits for a suitable moment to land a knight on the key square.
6...d6 7.Nge2 Nge7 8.0-0 0-0 9.a3
You might think White would prefer 9.Be3, and that is the top choice in Mega18. But it is arguably a slight positional mistake, because Black can reply with the perfectly timed 9...Nd4!
The point is that White can only eliminate the knight by giving up his bishop-pair, and he would be giving up his better bishop too.
The main line runs 10.Qd2 (White decides to play around the knight, and instead exchange Black's fianchettoed bishop) 10...Nec6 11.Bh6.
Another try is 10.f4, when White might hope to play Bf2 followed by Nxd4. But Black can easily counter this with ...Nec6, ensuring that the d4 knight will be replaced by its comrade.
9...b6
 |
| Can White take advantage of Black's last move? |
10.Be3
... and AA replied ...
10...Bb7
The game continued with what seems to be a novelty ...
11.d4
... and after ...
11...cxd4 12.Nxd4
... White had a pleasant Maroczy Bind (1-0, 56 moves).
But going back to the position after 10.Be3, I had planned to meet 10...Nd4! with 11.e5 Rb8 12.Nxd4 cxd4 13.Bxd4.
But after 13...dxe5 (13...Nf5 is also good) 14.Be3, Black is at least equal, and has what seems to me to be the easier position to play.
The point is that I still have a hole on d4, my d pawn has become backward on a half-open file and Black has a promising pawn-storm on the kingside. True, White has a queenside pawn-majority, but that is an endgame factor that is unlikely to become relevant for a long time, if at all.
Saturday 3 March 2018
Good Wörishofen
FOR the 13th year running, I played at the Bad Wörishofen chess festival in Bavaria, which finished today.
My score of +5=3-1 in the Open B (U2000) was good enough to share third-fourth place, gaining 27 Fide elo and 150 euros.
Bad Wörishofen is an upmarket spa town that promotes an unusual form of hydrotherapy invented in the 19th century by a Catholic priest, Sebastian Kneipp.
There are statues and portraits of him all over the town, but because the scores of kneippanlages - I guess that should be kneippanlagen - are dependant on running water, the "cures" cannot be carried out in winter.
That's where chess helps fill the gap, and for nine days in the late winter/early spring, some 300+ chess players descend on the town, bringing much-appreciated off-season trade to Bad Wörishofen's hotels, bars and restaurants.
My score of +5=3-1 in the Open B (U2000) was good enough to share third-fourth place, gaining 27 Fide elo and 150 euros.
 |
| I finished third-fourth in the Open B, but my inferior tiebreak meant I missed out on collecting one of these trophies |
There are statues and portraits of him all over the town, but because the scores of kneippanlages - I guess that should be kneippanlagen - are dependant on running water, the "cures" cannot be carried out in winter.
That's where chess helps fill the gap, and for nine days in the late winter/early spring, some 300+ chess players descend on the town, bringing much-appreciated off-season trade to Bad Wörishofen's hotels, bars and restaurants.
 |
| Chess figures in the entrance of the Hotel Adler, which has one of Bad Wörishofen's smartest restaurants |
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)