Pulling No Punches

HOW many people still buy a chess magazine?

It is many years since I saw a copy in WH Smith, and the opportunity to buy one at a congress diminished as quickly as the presence of bookstalls.

The main culprit is the rise of the internet, which put paid to one of my favourite publications, Inside Chess.

This afternoon the April edition of Chess dropped through my letterbox.

Pride of place goes to former world champion Boris Spassky

So far I have only read Michael Pein's editorial, but for entertainment value it is alone worth the price of admission.

His two bugbears this month are Fide's Fair Play Commission - compared unfavourably with the KGB - and cheating at correspondence chess.

You might think the latter is impossible, bearing in mind all serious governing bodies allow the use of engines. 

Indeed, one of the first questions asked of newly crowned world champions at the Fide-recognised International Correspondence Chess Federation is which engines they have, and how they use them (answers are normally somewhat uninformative).

However, it seems I am rather naive ...

Lessons From Bad Wörishofen IV

MY round-four game reached the following position after White's ninth move.

There are 1,142 examples of this setup in ChessBase's 2025 Mega database

*****

*****

*****

*****

*****

The game continued with the move that occurs in 651 of the Mega25 games, 9...0-0-0?!

The list of well-known names who have played this is impressive, including Alexander Alekhine, Rudolf Spielmann, Lev Psakhis, Nigel Short and Wesley So.

But the move reminds me of correspondence player Charles Warburton's comment in My Chess Adventures that queenside castling is "probably the most dangerous move in chess."

Certainly the engines strongly dislike castling long in the diagram, whereas after castling short they reckon Black is close to having equalised.

LESSON: queenside castling is often the more-exciting choice in chess, but it is usually double-edged, especially for Black.

Footnote 1: My Chess Adventures is an entertaining read. If you see a secondhand copy for a reasonable price, it is well worth getting - the sole one I could find at Amazon is on offer at £71.87.

Footnote 2: I have had the position after 9...0-0-0?! five times with white, scoring +2=1-2. That is hardly setting the world on fire, but in those five games my average rating was 1875, and I performed to an average of 1994.

Lessons From Bad Wörishofen III

IN rounds three and eight I faced the same somewhat-unusual variation of the Queen's Gambit Declined.

Both games began 1.d4 d5 2.Nf3 e6 3.c4 Nf6 4.e3!?, reaching what is probably best described as a line from the Normal Position,  or System, of the QGD.

I wrote somewhat-unusual because this position occurs 19.728 times in ChessBase's 2025 Mega database, which means it is far from a rarity

*****

*****

*****

*****

*****

Black, not surprisingly in view of White's slow fourth move, has quite a free hand as how to continue, but in all 11 games in my praxis I have played 4...c5.

More popular in Mega25 are 4...c6 and 4...Be7, but all three score a respectable 48%, and, as Black in many lines of  the QGD goes to some pains to get in the move ...c5, it seems sensible to play it when the chance is offered.

I was discussing the position with Geoffrey Stern of Luxembourg, and he said that on first facing it he played the most popular move, 4...Be7, but got into a passive position and lost.

Naturally 4...Be7 cannot be blamed for the loss, but all-in-all I feel 4...c5 is perfectly reasonable, and may even be best at club level, where most players are far better at attacking than defending.

What made my BW games truly unusual is that both continued 5.cxd5 exd5 6.Bb5+, reaching a position occurring 667 times in Mega25.

What is Black's best response?

*****

*****

*****

*****

*****

In round three, against a 1719, I played 6...Bd7, which is the commonest continuation in Mega25.

After 7.Bxd7+ I recaptured with the queen's knight, at which point Stockfish17 and Dragon1 reckon White can get an edge with both 7...b3!? and 7....dxc5!?

Instead my opponent met 7...Nbxd7 with 8.0-0, after which the engines agree 8...c4!? is better than the more popular 8...Bd6 and 8...Be7, although the game was drawn.

Three years ago in Brno, the only previous time I have faced 6.Bb5+, Stefan Arndt (2176) - Spanton (1771), went 6...Bd7 7.Bxd7+ Qxd7, which seems at first glance to be asking to be punished by 8.Ne5, but the engines reckon that is well-met by Jonathan Speelman's 8...Qc7, or their suggested novelty of 8...Qe6!?

Instead the Brno game went 8.0-0 Nc6 9.b3 cxd4!? 10.Nxd4 Be7 11.Bb2 0-0, with an isolated queen's pawn position that the engines reckon slightly favours White (but ½–½, 24 moves).

In round eight at Bad Wörishofen I switched to 6...Nc6, meeting 7.0-0 with 7...a6!?, which the engines do not like.

However they are unsure as to what Black should play, fluctuating between 7...Be7, 7...Be6, 7...Bd7, 7...Bd6 and 7...cxd4!?, in each case giving White a slight edge.

So which move is better: 6...Bd7 or 6...Nc6?

*****

*****

*****

*****

*****

Actually, the question should be, which move is best?, for there is a third option, the rarely played 6...Nbd7!? (43 appearances in Mega25, against 275 for 6...Nc6 and 349 for 6...Bd7).

It scores much better percentagewise, and it is the top choice of the engines.

The main reply is 7.dxc5!?, when the engines like 7...a6!?

After 8.Bxd7+ Bxd7 White can try to hold on to the pawn with 8.b4 a5 9.Qd4, but Black has enough compensation, eg 9...axb4 10.Qxb4 Ra4!? 11.Qxb7 Bxc5, with the bishop-pair and more development.

Second-most popular in Mega25 is 7.0-0, when 7...c4!? is the engines' top suggestion, one line running 8.b3 a6 9.Bxd7+ Bxd7 10.bxc4 dxc4 11.e4 Bb4!?, with the engines preferring Black's queenside majority over White's centre.

A third choice is 7.Nc3, when Black has what seems a pleasant choice between 7...c4!? and 7...a6.

LESSON: there is a lot to think about in the position in the second diagram above, but it seems the slightly counterintuitive 6...Nbd7!? is worth a try. It could easily catch White unprepared, and comes with engine endorsement.

Default

WAS supposed to play on board one (of four) for Battersea against South Norwood in division three of the Croydon & District League last night, but my scheduled opponent, Paul Dupré (1911), failed to show. Battersea won the match 3.5-0.5.

Lessons From Bad Wörishofen II

MY round-two game featured a battle of structure against the bishop-pair, which is typical of the Rossolimo Variation in the Sicilian

That arises from the moves 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5, and in the game my opponent played the unusual 3...a6!?, strongly inviting the aforementioned battle.

After the further moves 4.Bxc6 bxc6 5.d3 d5!? (marginally more popular in ChessBase's 2025 Mega database is 5...d6) 6.0-0 Black continued active play with 6...Bg4.

This position occurs 113 times in Mega25

*****

*****

*****

*****

*****

As I understand it, White's plan is to keep lines closed, and in particular to fix the central pawn-structure with a long-term view of exploiting the weakness of Black's queenside formation.

Black's plan, again as I understand it, is to remain flexible, looking for ways to exploit the striking power of the bishops.

Stockfish17 and Dragon1 reckon White in the diagram has the upper hand.

The game continued 7.Nbd2 e6 8.Re1 Nf6 9.b3 Be7 10.Bb2 0-0.

How should White continue?

*****

*****

*****

*****

*****

Two games reach this position in Mega25. A 2337 played 11.h3, which is the engines' top choice, and a 2181 chose 11.Nf1, which is the engines' second choice.

I preferred 11.c4?!, which in this specific position may be a mistake.

Often the move c4 is good in this structure as it helps fix the centre, but here what may be of more importance is that it takes the c4 square away from a white knight, which would be excellently placed on c4 in the event of Black grabbing space in the centre with ...d4.

The game saw 11...Nd7, which may be better than immediately pushing on.

The engines reckon White should reply 12.cxd5!? cxd5 13.exd5 exd5 14.d4, which dissolves the doubled pawns and opens lines, but to a certain extent fixes the centre, giving equal chances, according to the engines.

Instead the game continued 12.Qc2?! d4!, which closes the centre but gains space, and, as Black correctly reasons, it will be a relatively simple matter to open lines by pushing the f7 pawn.

After 13.e5 Qc7 14.h3 Bh5 15.Qd1?! (the engines suggest 15.Re4) Rae8 16.Qe2 Black was ready to play 16...f6.

How should White respond?

*****

*****

*****

*****

*****

The game went 17.g4 Bf7!? (17...Bg6 may be stronger) 18.Rad1 fxe5 19.Nxe5 Nxe5 20.Qxe5 Bd6 21.Qe2 Bg6, after which Black's active bishops, extra space in the centre and safer king give an advantage, although not as big a one as would be the case if the light-square bishop had gone straight to g6.

The engines reckon a slightly better approach from the diagram is 17.exf6 Rxf6 18.Rf1, but again lines have been opened, and Black's advantages in the centre and on the kingside massively outweigh White's potential on the queenside.

LESSON: imbalanced positions, such as the one in the first diagram, put a premium on understanding one's strengths, and playing to them, while understanding the opponent's weaknesses, and playing against them.