I Am #1! (part four)

THERE is a silly but fun pastime at the end of a college football season in the United States where boosters of even the lowliest university set out to prove that their school is really number one or, as it is usually written, #1!

For example, in 2022 the national championship game was won by the team I support, Georgia Bulldogs.

But during the season they lost to Alabama Crimson Tide, who in turn had lost to Texas A&M, who lost to Mississippi State, who lost to Memphis Tigers, etc, etc.

Eventually the chain leads to one of the lowliest teams in the land, which can thus make a claim to be #1!

It is possible to play a similar game in chess, by which you trace your wins up to a victory over a reigning world champion, thus putting yourself in position to claim, however far-fetched the claim may be, to be #1!

The final link in my chain comes from Max Euwe's 1935 world championship match against world champion Alexander Alekhine. Below is his quickest win, which came in game 12.

Euwe - Alekhine

Grünfeld

1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 d5 4.Qb3!?

This is sixth-most popular in ChessBase's 2024 Mega database, well behind 4.Nf3 and especially 4.cxd5, but was cutting-edge in 1935.

4...dxc4!?

This surrender-of-the-centre is the commonest continuation.

5.Qxc4 Bg7

In game two of the match, Alekhine lost with 5...Be6. He switched to the text in game four, and won. After that he started playing the Slav, returning to the Grünfeld in this game, when the score stood in his favour +5=3-3.

6.e4

Euwe played 6.Bf4 in game four.

6...0-0 7.Nf3 a6!?

Cecil Purdy, the first world correspondence champion, gave this move a double-question mark, claiming it "seems to be based on an extraordinary miscalculation." He quotes Grigory Levenfish as giving 7...b6!!, although it is not clear who has awarded the exclamation marks (probably Purdy).

Stockfish16 and Kokmodo14.1 like the text, and 7...Nc6, the former being today's commonest continuation.

8.Bf4 b5!?

Should White grab the proffered pawn?

*****

*****

*****

*****

*****

9.Qxc7

Stockfish16 and Komodo14.1 agree this is best - necessary, even, if White is to get any edge out of the opening.

9...Qe8?

This is given an exclamation mark by an anonymous annotator in Mega24, but the move is a mistake. Black scores an excellent 63% in Mega24 after 9...Qxc7, the mainline running 10.Bxc7 Bb7 11.e5!? Nd5 12.Nxd5 Bxd5 13.Be2 Rc8, when Black has at least the better part of equality.

Purdy thought "Alekhine's original intention was presumably to play 9...Qxc7 10.Bxc7 b4 and win the e pawn, overlooking that 11.Na4 would threaten Nb6!" Purdy added: "Sheer lassitude." Others put Alekhine's play down to the fact it was his birthday*, and he had been celebrating earlier than was wise, especially for a 43-year-old.

Put simply, in both lines White is a pawn up. However, after 9...Qe8? Black's queen is awkwardly placed, and is arguably more inconvenienced than its opposite number, while after 9...Qxc7 10.Bxc7 Black will gain time on White's dark-square bishop and generate pressure against White's centre.

10.Be2

Possibly even stronger is the engines' 10.e5.

10...Nc6

10...b4 would seem to be an improvement, eg 11.Nd5 (11.Na4?? Qxa4) Nxd5 (11...Nxe4? 12.Nb6) 12.cxd5 Qd8!?

11.d5

The engines prefer 11.e5!? Nh5 12.Be3.

11...Nb4?!

The anonymous ChessBase annotator recommends "11...e5!" without further comment. The move is almost certainly an improvement on the text, but after 12.dxc6 exf4 13.e5 Ng4 the engines give 14.Nd5 Nxe5!? 15.Ne7+ Kh8 16.Nxe5 Bf6 17.0-0-0 Qxe7 18.Qxe7 Bxe7 19.Nd7, claiming the upper hand for White.

12.0-0 Nxe4!?

Desperation, but it may be there is already nothing better, although Purdy reckoned 12...Bg4 "might have prolonged the agony." Either way, the black queen's knight is trapped, so Alekhine sacrifices the other knight for two pawns, albeit in a position in which Black is already a pawn down.

13.Nxe4 Nxd5 14.Qc1 Bf5 15.Ng3 Rc8 16.Qd2 Nxf4 17.Qxf4

Black has a pawn and the bishop-pair, but they do not add up to a piece

*****

*****

*****

*****

*****

17...Bc2

As is pointed out in Mega24, Black can get mated after 17...Bxb2?!, ie 18.Nxf5 Bxa1? 19.Qh6 gxf5 20.Ng5. Better is 18...gxf5, but 19.Qxf5 keeps the white queen's rook safe as White threatens 20.Bd3 and 20.Ng5.

18.Qb4 Qd8 19.Ne1 Ba4!?

Preserving the bishop-pair, but at a cost.

20.Rb1 Bd4?!

This seems to make the situation worse, but the engines' suggestion of 20...Bc2!? would hardly have inspired Alekhine.

21.Nf3 Bc5 22.Qh4 Bc2

The bishop escapes entombment, but the whole manoeuvre has cost time.

23.Rbc1 f6!?

Prevents Ng5

24.Bc4+!?

This seems even better than 24.Rxc2 Bxf2+ 25.Rxf2 Rxc2.

24...bxc4 25.Qxc4+ Kg7 26.Qxc2

Now Black has neither a pawn nor the bishop-pair, and could resign to spare himself more agony

*****

*****

*****

*****

*****

26...Qa5 27.Qe2 e5

Probably not 27...Qxa2?! 28.Rxc5! Rxc5 29.Qxe7+ etc.

28.a3 Be7 29.Nd4!? Rxc1 30.Rxc1 Kh8 31.Nc6 Qc7 32.Qxa6 Rc8 33.Nf1 Rb8 34.Nxe7! Qxe7

Not 34...Qxc1? 35.Qxf6#.

35.Rc8+ Rxc8 38.Qxc8+ 1-0

*Alekhine was born in Moscow on October 31, 1892, at a time when Russia was still using the Julian calendar. This game was played on October 19, 1933, according to the Gregorian calendar, which had been adopted in most of Europe centuries earlier, and in Russia in 1918.

Part Two Of Worth A (Scandinavian) Punt?

Alexander Alekhine - Ludovic Morelle

Milan Simul 1923

1.e4 d5 2.exd5 c6!? 3.dxc6 Qc7?!

It is hard to believe Black can afford this extravagance.

4.cxb7 Bxb7

Black has a lead in development and open lines but, unlike with 3...Nxc6, is unlikely to get a central space advantage

*****

*****

*****

*****

*****

5.d4 Nf6 6.Nc3 Nc6!? 7.Nf3

If 7.d5?! then 7...Rd8 or 7...0-0-0.

7...0-0-0!? 8.Bd3

How should Black proceed?

*****

*****

*****

*****

*****

8...e5

Not 8...Nxd4? 9.Nxd4 Rxd4 10.Bf5+.

9.0-0!?

Now both sides have castled, how would you assess the position?

*****

*****

*****

*****

*****

Black still has a handy lead in development, which gives practical chances, but remains two pawns down and has the less-safe king, despite there being a lot of black pieces in its vicinity. Stockfish15.1 and Komodo14.1 reckon White is winning.

9...exd4 10.Nb5

Not 10.Nxd4?? as the white knight is simply lost after 10...Nxd4.

10...Qd7 11.Bf4 Bc5 12.a3 Nh5

How should White continue?

*****

*****

*****

*****

*****

13.Bg3?

This 'safety-first' move is a serious mistake. Best-play, according to the engines, runs 13.Ne5 Nxe5 and either Bxe5 or Qxh5!?, eg 14.Bxe5 Nf6 (14...Qd5 can be met by 15.Bf5+) 15.b4 Qd5 16.Bf5+ Nd7 17.Qg4, and if 17...Qxe5 then 18.Rfe1 h5 19.Qh3 Qd5, when both 20.c4 and 20.Be4 seem to give a huge attack. This is tricky stuff to find over-the-board, especially in a simul, but certainly not beyond the future world champion's abilities. Probably simpler, for White at least, is 14.Qxh5!? Qd5 15.Qh3+ Kb8 16.Bc4! Qe4 17.Qg3 f6 18.Rfe1 Qxg2+ 19.Qxg2 Bxg2 20.Bxe5+ fxe5 21.Rxe5! with a large advantage.

13...Nxg3 14.fxg3!

The engines agree this is best. After 14.hxg3 White does not have a good answer to 14...a6.

14...g6

If 14...a6?! then 15.Ng5 is strong. The text covers the sensitive f5 square.

15.b4 Bb6?!

The engines prefer 15...Bf8!?, removing the bishop from being a target for White's queenside pawns.

16.a4!? Nxb4

Black has won back both his sacrificed pawns, and even has the bishop-pair, but the black king is still the more-exposed, although the position remains chaotic

*****

*****

*****

*****

*****

17.a5 Bc5 18.a6 Ba8

The white a pawn has charged down the board, but what should White play now?

*****

*****

*****

*****

*****

19.Kh1?!

Another safety-first move, and probably another mistake. The engines reckon 19.Qd2 and 19.Rb1 retain an edge for White.

19...Rhe8 20.Qd2?!

The engines prefer 20.Qb1!? or 20.Na3!?

20...Nc6?

Missing a chance to cause White major problems by 20...Nxd3, eg 21.Qxd3 Bc6 22.Rab1 Re3 23.Qc4 Qd5 24.Qxd5 Rxd5, after which White's pieces have difficulties finding useful moves.

21.Rab1

Stronger seems to be the engines' 21.Ra4!?, after which Black has problems defending d4.

21...f6?!

Almost certainly too slow. The engines like 21...Ne5 or 21...Re3.

22.c3! dxc3 23.Qxc3 Bb6

Or 23...Qxd3 24.Qxc5 with what seems to be a decisive attack, eg 24...Rd7?! 25.Rfc1 Kd8 26.Nxa7! Rxa7 27.Rd1. Probably better is 24...Rd5 but 25.Nxa7+ Kd7 26.Qf2 looks very good for White.

24.Bc4 Re3?

White's advantage is much less clear after 24...Kb8.

25.Qc2?

The 'greedy' 25.Qxf6 wins a pawn and keeps the pressure on Black's position.

25...Kb8 26.Rfd1 Qe7 27.Bd5?

Walking into a combination. White maybe has a slight edge after 27.Rxd8+, according to the engines.

Black to play and win

*****

*****

*****

*****

*****

27...Rxd5

Also winning is 27...Nb4.

28.Rxd5 Nb4 29.Rd7!?

Desperation, but White's position is beyond saving.

29...Qxd7 30.Rxb4 Rxf3!? 31.Rf4

Or 31.Rb1 Qxb5!

31...Qxb5 32.Rxf3 Bxf3 33.Qc1

If 33.gxf3 then 33...Qf1#.

33...Be4 34.Qf4+ Kc8 0-1

CONCLUSION: it is not surprising 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 c6!? attracts tactically minded grandmasters and other strong players, especially at fast time rates. Objectively the gambit must be borderline unsound, but if it is good enough to sometimes beat titled players, it is surely worth an outing at club level, particularly if you know your opponent likes a quiet, positional life.

Alexander Alekhine's Forgotten Weapon Against The Italian Game (part two)

ONE of the best-known games in the Semi-Italian: 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 d6 is from a simultaneous exhibition.

It reaches the starting point of the Semi-Italian from a Philidor move-order, and owes its fame to being included by Alekhine as among his best games.

M. Rodzinski - Alekhine

Paris (simul) 1913

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 d6 3.Bc4 Nc6 4.c3 Bg4

The most-popular move, after which play can get very sharp. There is much less theory on the Semi-Italian than there is on other Italian lines, eg the Guioco Piano, the Two Knights Defence and the Evans Gambit. But it certainly helps to know the basic ideas. The point of 4...Bg4 is to put pressure on the centre that White is building, and is part of Black's plan to play on the kingside, which is where his central pawns are pointing.

5.Qb3!?

This critical response has been given a question mark, for example in ChessBase's 2021 Mega database, but is the choice of the analysis engines Stockfish12 and Komodo11.01.

Most popular in Mega21 is 5.d3, after which Martin Beardsley (unrated) - Spanton (unrated), Sinclair (correspondence) 2012, went 5...Qd7 6.Nbd2 (a young Vladimir Kramnik played 6.b4 g6 7.Nbd2 in a 1990 game) Nf6 (Mega21 has three games with 6...Na5 and one with 6...0-0-0, but the text transposes to a known position) 7.Nf1 d5!? (but this may well be a real novelty) 8.exd5 Nxd5 9.Ne3 Be6 10.Ng5 Nxe3 11.Bxe6? (11.Bxe3 Bxc4 12.dxc4 Rd8 13.Qxd7+ Rxd7 is slightly better for Black, according to Stockfish12; equal, according to Komodo11.01) Nxg2+ 12.Kf1 fxe6 13.Kg2 0-0-0, when Black's extra pawn may not count for much but pressure down the d file and having the safer king do (0-1,  24 moves).

Also slightly more popular than the text is 5.h3, after which Päivi Walta (1808) - Spanton (1975), Riga, Latvia, 2012, continued 5...Bh5 6.d3 Be7 7.Bb3 Nf6 8.Nbd2 Qd7 9.Nf1 d5!? 10.Ng3!? (not in Mega21, but it is the engines' choice) Bg6 11.Qe2 0-0 12.0-0 (12.exd5 Nxd5 13.Nxe5 Nxe5 13.Qxe5 wins a pawn, but Black is better after the engines' 13...Nb4!!) Rad8 13.Bd2 Rfe8 14.Rad1, which the engines reckon is slightly better for White (but 0-1, 55 moves).

5.0-0 Qf6 6.d3 Bxf3 7.Qxf3 Qxf3 8.gxf3 was about equal in John E Richards (2050) - Spanton (2115), British Major (Torquay) 1998 (½–½, 43 moves).

5...Qd7

5...Na5?! 6.Bxf7+ Ke7 7.Qa4 seems good for White.

How should White proceed?

*****

*****

*****

*****

*****

6.Ng5!?

White has two tempting alternatives.

6.Bxf7+ Qxf7 7.Qxb7 Kd7! 8.Qxa8 Bxf3 9.d3! (9.gxf3 Qxf3 gives Black huge compensation) Bxg2 10.Rg1 Bf3 with advantage to Black, according to the engines.

6.Qxb7 Rb8 7.Qa6 Be7! (Jonny Hector's move, which comes to be the engines' choice) 8.d3 Bxf3 9.gxf3, when both engines like White but disagree as to how much advantage White has. In any event White will have long-term problems with king safety.

6...Nh6

The engines much prefer the untried - at least it is not in Mega21 - 6...Nd8!?, which covers b7 as well as f7.

7.Bxf7+?

The engines like 7.Qxb7!? (not in Mega21) Rb8 8.Qa6 Be7 9.d3, when they put great stock in White's extra pawn.

7.Nxf7 can be met by 7...Na5 8.Qb4 Nxc4 9.Nxh6 (9.Nxh8 Nb6 seems better for Black) gxh6 10.Qxc4 Be6 11.Qe2 Rg8, when Black has good compensation for a pawn.

7...Nxf7 8.Nxf7 Qxf7?

Missing the winning 8...Be6, but without the text we would not get to see the spectacular finish for which this game is famous.

9.Qxb7 Kd7!?

Stockfish12 much prefers 9...Rd8 10.Qxc6+ Bd7, claiming Black has an edge, despite being two pawns down. Komodo11.01 likes the text as much as 9...Rd8.

10.Qxa8 Qc4 11.f3

The only move to keep the game going.

11...Bxf3!?

Also interesting is 11...Nd4!? 12.d3! Nxf3+! (12...Qxd3 13.cxd4 Bxf3 14.Nc3!) 13.gxf3+ Qxd3 14.Qd5! (14.fxg4 Be7!) Qxf3 15.Qb5+, which the engines reckon is dead-equal, eg 15...Kd8 16.Qb8+ Kd7 17.Qb5+ etc.

12.gxf3 Nd4!?

The engines reckon 12...Qd3 is also a draw.

13.d3?

White had to play 13.cxd4, after which 13...Qxc1+ 14.Ke2 Qxh1 15.dxe5 dxe5 is equal, according to the engines.

13...Qxd3

13...Nxf3+? 14.Ke2.

14.cxd4 Be7! 15.Qxh8 Bh4#

Alexander Alekhine's Forgotten Weapon Against The Italian Game

AFTER 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Black normally plays 3...Bc5 (more than 107,000 examples in ChessBase's 2021 Mega database) or 3...Nf6 (almost 80,000 examples).

Other moves seen reasonably often include 3...Be7 (more than 12,000 examples) and 3...h6!? (more than 5,000 examples).

What I am covering in this series is yet another continuation, called the Semi-Italian Opening by Wikipedia, starting with 3...d6!?

The position can also be reached via the Philidor, ie 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 d6 3.Bc4 Nc6.

The starting position of the Semi-Italian

Grandmaster Andrew Soltis in Winning With The Giuoco Piano And The Max Lange Attack (Chess Digest 1992) calls this line Alekhine's Variation.

He writes: "This early favourite of Alexander Alekhine's prepares to exert pressure on the centre with ...Bg4 in connection with either ...Qe7 and ...g6 or ...Qf6 and ...0-0-0."

Here is Alekhine playing the line after he had become world champion.

Henri Grob - Alekhine

Zürich 1934

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 d6!? 4.c3

Slightly more popular in Mega21 is 4.d4, but the text has also been played by grandmasters. For what it is worth, the analysis engines Stockfish12 and Komodo11.01 prefer the text.

4...Be6!?

The main move is 4...Bg4.

Soltis warns that "4...Nf6? walks into 5.Qb3 Qd7 6.Ng5." However this seems very good for Black after 6...Qg4, when White has problems defending the g2 and e4 pawns as well as his king's knight. However, 4...Nf6?! probably is bad, despite being the third-most popular move in Mega21, as White has 5.Ng5 d5 6.exd5, which is the same as a famous line in the Two Knights Defence except White has the extra move c3.

5.Bxe6 fxe6 6.Qb3 Qc8 7.Ng5 Nd8 8.d4 Nf6!?

This counterattack against e4 seems best.

9.dxe5 dxe5 10.0-0

10.Qb5+!? Nc6 11.Qc4 Nd8 12.f4 Bd6 13.0-0 was roughly equal, according to the engines, in Boris Kantsler (2491) - Yaacov Zilberman (2473), Israeli Team Championship 2003 (½–½, 23 moves).

10...h6 11.Nf3 Bd6 12.Nbd2 0-0 13.Qc2!?

The engines prefer the natural-looking 13.Nc4, although White is slightly better after the text too.

13...Nc6 14.b4 a6 15.a4 Qe8 16.Bb2 Ne7 17.Rad1 Ng6

Black's doubled central pawns look a liability, but they give him an extra half-open file and therefore kingside attacking chances.

18.g3 Qc6 19.Rfe1?

An extraordinary mistake for a top-class player to make. The engines give White a slight edge after 19.Ba3 or 19.Qb3!?

19...Bxb4 20.Kg2 Kh7 21.h3 Bd6 22.c4 Nd7 23.h4 b6 24.h5 Ne7 25.Re2 Qb7 26.Qc1 Nc6 27.Qa1 Rf7 28.Nh4 Ne7 29.Ndf3 Qc6 30.Nxe5 Nxe5 31.Bxe5 Qxc4 32.Rdd2 Bxe5 33.Qxe5 Nc6 34.Qa1 Rd8 35.Rc2 Qd4 36.Qc1?

White is still in the game, albeit a pawn down, after 36.Qxd4 Nxd4 37.Red2.

36...Ne5 37.Rxc7?

Better, according to the engines, is 37.Qb2 Qxb2 38.Rxb2, although Black is well on top.

37...Nd3

Grob must have missed this. It is fair to say this was not his day.

38.Qc3 Rxf2+ 39.Rxf2 Qxf2+ 40.Kh3 Qf1+ 41.Kh2 Qe2+ 42.Kg1

42.Kh3 Nf2+ leads to a quick mate.

42...Qf2+ 43.Kh1 Qxg3 0-1

To be continued

Champion Of Champions (part four)

HERE is the tournament bracket after three matches.

Round of 16               Quarter-Finals
1. Steinitz
v----------------------------Carlsen
16. Carlsen (+102.5)

8.Tal (+8.5)
v----------------------------Tal
9.Petrosian

6. Botvinnik (+66)
v----------------------------Botvinnik
11. Fischer

13. Kasparov
v--------------------------
4. Alekhine

3. Capablanca
v--------------------------
14. Kramnik

5. Euwe
v--------------------------
12. Karpov

7. Smyslov
v--------------------------
10. Spassky

15. Anand
v--------------------------
2. Lasker

Now for the match-up I have been eagerly anticipating.

Round of 16
Match Four: Kasparov v Alekhine
Game One
Garry Kasparov - Alexander Alekhine
Queen's Indian
1.d4
Favoured over 1.e4 in Kasparov's games in ChessBase's 2020 Mega database by 691 to 639.
1...Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nf3 b6 4.a3!?
Twenty-six games with this move compared with 25 for 4.Nc3 and 20 for 4.g3.

Alekhine never faced 4.a3!?

Well, that was an anti-climax. The engines Stockfish11 and Komodo11.01 are not impressed with White's play, giving Kasparov an averaged advantage of just +4.
I hope game two will be more interesting.

Game Two
Alexander Alekhine - Garry Kasparov
Sicilian Najdorf
1.e4 c5
I am intrigued to see how Alekhine will deal with Kasaprov's Najdorf.
2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3
Only just - there are four Alekhine games in Mega20 with the text and three with 5.f3!?
5...a6

As far as we can get - Alekhine never faced 5...a6

Another anti-climax. The engines's averaged evaluation gives Alekhine a score of +25.5, meaning he wins the match with a score of +21.5.
Here is the updated tournament bracket.

Round of 16               Quarter-Finals
1. Steinitz
v----------------------------Carlsen
16. Carlsen (+102.5)

8.Tal (+8.5)
v----------------------------Tal
9.Petrosian

6. Botvinnik (+66)
v----------------------------Botvinnik
11. Fischer

13. Kasparov
v----------------------------Alekhine
4. Alekhine (+21.5)

3. Capablanca
v--------------------------
14. Kramnik

5. Euwe
v--------------------------
12. Karpov

7. Smyslov
v--------------------------
10. Spassky

15. Anand
v--------------------------
2. Lasker

Note that the older generation has won three of the four matches in the top half of the bracket.

Champion Repertoire (part four)

ALEXANDER Alekhine has the distinction of being the only world chess champion to die in office.

A repertoire based on his games in ChessBase's 2020 Mega database includes some offbeat lines as well as more-familiar openings.
Even if you do not want to adopt the full repertoire it might well be worth considering the surprise stuff.

White

Play 1.e4 with the aim of reaching a mainline Spanish by 1...e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.0-0 Be7, but then continue with the Worrall Attack: 6.Qe2. After 6...b5 7.Bb3 Alekhine's opponents usually played 7...d6 8.c3 0-0, whereupon Alekhine won all three games in which he attacked on the queenside with 9.a4. Today 7...0-0 is more popular. Alekhine only faced it three times - winning twice with 8.a4 and once with 8.c3.

Against the Open Variation: 5...Nxe4 6.d4 b5 7.Bb3 d5 8.dxe5 Be6 Alekhine scored 68% with 9.c3.

Against the Steinitz Deferred: 4...d6 I suggest playing 5.0-0, which was Alekhine's most frequent (just) reply and transposes after 5...Nf6 to a more common move-order from his games: 4...Nf6 5.0-0 d6. Continue 6.c3 followed by a quick d4.

He played 4.d4 against the Steinitz: 3...d6 and 4.0-0 against the Berlin: 3...Nf6. Against the Classical: 3...Bc5 he played 4.c3.

Against the Petrov: 2...Nf6 he scored 86% with Steinitz's favourite 3.d4, and against the Philidor: 2...d6 he used the same move to score 90%.

Against the French Classical: 1...e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Nf6 he liked Adolf Anderssen's attacking line 4.Bg5 Be7 5.Bxf6!? Bxf6 6.Nf3, holding the tempo-gaining e5 in reserve.

Against the MacCutcheon: 4...Bb4 he won all three games in which he played the unusual line 5.Nge2 dxe4 6.a3 Be7 7.Bxf6 and 8.Nxe4.

Against Burn's Variation: 4...dxe4 5.Nxe4 Be7 he scored 83% with the mainline 6.Bxf6 Bxf6 7.Nf3.

Against Rubinstein's Variation: 3...dxe4 he scored best with quick development, the commonest line in his games running 4.Nxe4 Nd7 5.Nf3 Ngf6 6.Bd3.

Against the Winawer: 3...Bb4 he scored 79% with a line similar to his favourite against the MacCutcheon, ie 4.Nge2 dxe4 5.a3.

Against the Sicilian: 1...c5 he scored heavily in the lines 2.Nf3 d6 and 2.Nf3 Nc6 with the Open Variation: 3.d4, but after 2.Nf3 e6 he did much better with the somewhat unusual 3.c4 Nc6 4.Nc3.

Alekhine's games against the Caro-Kann: 1...c6 2.d4 d5 split almost evenly between 3.exd5 and 3.Nc3, but he scored 10 percentage points better with the latter.

Against his own defence, 1...Nf6 he scored 73% with 2.Nc3, happily meeting 2...e5 with 2.Bc4!?, and 2...d5 with 3.exd5 Nxd5 4.Bc4.

The only other defence to 1.e4 he met all often was the Scandinavian: 1...d5 with 2.exd5 Qxd5 3.Nc3 Qa5, which he usually met with 4.Nf3, which was also his commonest choice against 3...Qd8.

Black v 1.e4

Against the mainline Spanish: 1...e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.0-0 Alekhine varied his approach but scored best with 5...Be7 6.Re1 b5 7.Bb3 d6 8.c3 0-0. After 9.h3 he won all three games that went down what is still very much the main line: 9...Na5 10.Bc2 c5 11.d4 Qc7. After the chief alternative, 9.d4 he scored 62% with 9...Bg4.

He scored heavily against the Exchange Variation: 4.Bxc6, including one-and-a-half points out of two in the modern line 4...dxc6 5.0-0 Bg4 6.h3 h5 7.d3 Qf6.

He met the Italian Game: 3.Bc4 with 3...Bc5. He faced 4.c3 seven times, winning all seven games by keeping the position closed with 4...Qe7 or 4...Bb6. He always played 4...d6 against 4.d3, 4.0-0 and 4.Nc3. He only faced the Evans: 4.b4 twice, winning with both 4...Bxb4 5.c3 Ba5 and 4...Bxb4 5.c3 Bc5.

Against 3.Nc3 he scored 80% with the Three Knights Variation: 3...Bb4.

Against the Scotch: 3.d4 exd4 4.Nxd4 he varied almost equally between 4...Bc5 and 4...Nf6, scoring heavily with both, and against the Ponziani: 3.c3 he replied 3...d5.

Against the King's Gambit: 2.f4 he scored 83% by accepting it with 2...exf4 but varied his play after 3.Nf3. The one time he faced 3.Bc4 he replied 3...d5, which was also one of his replies to 3.Nf3.

Against the Bishop's Opening: 2.Bc4 he played 2...Nf6, and he declined the Danish: 2.d4 exd4 3.c3 with 3...d5 or 3...d3.

Black v 1.d4 and Others

Alekhine scored 75% with the Nimzo-Indian: 1...Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 Bb4, rising to 80% when he met the main reply in his day, 4.Qc2, with 4...d5. Against 4.e3 he scored even more heavily with 4...0-0, and he usually met 4.Qb3 with 4...c5. Other fourth moves are too rare in his games to give a repertoire recommendation.

After 3.Nf3 Alekhine also scored 75% with the Queen's Indian: 3...b6, nearly always continuing 4...Bb7, including against 4.g3.

Against 2.Nf3 he scored even better, 78%, by going for a Queen's Indian set-up with 2...b6.

He twice faced the Trompowsky: 2.Bg5, winning both games after replying 2...d5.

Against 1.Nf3 he scored 80% with 1...d5, meeting the Réti: 2.c4 with 2...d4.

Against the English:1 c4 he usually played ...e5, either immediately or after 1...Nf6. If White fianchettoed with an early g3, he opened the position with a quick ...d5.

Here is Alekhine playing his early ...b6 for France against Italy at the 1931 Olympiad.
Stefano Rosselli del Turco - Alekhine
4th Olympiad (Prague) 1931
Queen's Fianchetto Defence
1.d4 Nf6 2.Nf3 b6
Carlsen and Nakamura are among modern grandmasters who have played this.
3.g3
The most-popular response, and it has the seal of approval of having been Kasparov's choice when he faced this line as White.
3...Bb7 4.Bg2 c5!?
More popular today is 4...e6, but then White can switch into a mainline Queen's Indian with 4.c4.
5.dxc5
This was first played by Levenfish in 1924, according to Mega20, but GMs have also tried 5.0-0, 5.c3, 5.c4 and 5.e3.
5...bxc5 6.c4 g6 7.b3 Bg7 8.Bb2 0-0 9.0-0

What would you play as Black?

*****
*****
*****
*****
*****
9...d6
Nimzowitsch beat Rubinstein with 9...Nc6 10.Nc3 a5!? at Marienbad 1925 while Tal played 9...e6 10.Nc3 Qe7 in a 1977 draw with Pfleger.
10.Nc3 Nc6
This may have been a novelty. Two years earlier Capablanca beat Monticelli at Barcelona with 10...Ne4 (Tartakower awarded this an exclamation mark) 11.Qc1 Nxc3 12.Bxc3 Bxc3 13.Qxc3 a5.
11.Qd2 Nb4 12.Rfd1
Wrong rook? Yes according to Komodo11.01 but No according to Stockfish11.
12...Rb8 13.Nh4!?
Weakening the king's position seems a little strange, especially as after ...
13...Bxg2 14.Kxg2
... Black's remaining bishop, although technically it could be called bad (Black has central pawns on dark squares), is at least as active as White's remaining bishop. However Rosselli's idea is to set up a Maroczy Bind in which he does not want a bad light-square bishop.
14...Qd7 15.f3 Rfd8
Black could have saved a tempo on the game continuation by playing 15...Rbd8!
16.e4 e5!?
The backward d pawn will be covered by a knight transferring to d4.
17.Bc1 Nc6 18.Qf2 Nd4
This knight cannot be swopped off by White without giving Black a protected passed pawn.
19.Be3 Rf8
The rook will be useful here to support the pawn lever ...f5.
20.Qd2 Ne8 21.Bh6 Nc7 22.Rf1 f6
22...f5!?
23.Bxg7 Qxg7 24.Kh1 f5 25.Ng2 f4 26.g4?!
The problem with this move is it creates a lever for ...h5, so White should probably have preferred 26.gxf4 when 26...exf4 leaves the knight on d4 less stable.
26...g5!?
This gives White a lever for h4, but Black is better placed than White to exploit an open h file.
27.Kg1 h5 28.h3 Qh6 29.Ne1 Kf7 30.Rf2 hxg4 31.hxg4 Rh8
Black already threatens mate in one. This is easily parried but Black can get reinforcements to the kingside quicker than White.
32.Rh2 Qg7 33.Rd1 Rxh2 34.Qxh2 Rh8 35.Qg2 Rh4 36.Rxd4!?
Desperation but, for example, 36.Nc2 Qh8 37.Nxd4 cxd4 38.Ne2 Rh3 leaves Black well on top after, say, 39.a3 Ne6 40.b4 Qh4 when the threat of ...d3 is very hard to meet, for instance 41.a4 d3! 42.Rxd3 Qe1+ 43.Qf1 Rh1+.
36...exd4 37.Ne2 d3! 38.Nxd3 Qa1+ 39.Nec1 Ne6 40.Qb2 Qxb2 41.Nxb2 0-1

Champion Repertoire (part three)

IT will surprise many people to learn that third world champion José Capablanca played 1.e4 more often than 1.d4.

But he scored a higher percentage with the latter and it came to dominate his opening choice with the white pieces.

After 1.d4 Capablanca scored highly against 1...d5 but even better against the modern favourite 1...Nf6, which makes him an interesting repertoire-model for today's club player.

White

After 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4  the Nimzo-Indian: 2...e6 3.Nc3 Bb4 was all the rage when Capablanca was at the peak of his career. He scored 76% (all percentages are from ChessBase's 2020 Mega database) with 4.Qc2. The main line then went 4...d5 5.cxd5 Qxd5 when Capablanca preferred 6.Nf3, meeting 6...c5 with 7.Bd2 Bxc3 8.Bxc3. Today 5...exd5 is more popular - Capablanca met it with 6.Bg5, which is still the main reply.

Capablanca scored heavily against the Grünfeld: 2...g6 3.Nc3 d5 without establishing a favourite between 4.Nf3, 4.Bf4 and 4.cxd5. Perhaps 4.Bf4 is the way to go as it is the least-common of these moves today but has been played by Giri, Anand, Aronian, Ivanchuk and many other top grandmasters.

Capablanca only faced the King's Indian: 3...Bg7 once, choosing the Sämisch: 4.e4 d6 5.f3.

After 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 most of Capablanca's opponents transposed to the Queen's Gambit Declined with 3...d5. Most games continued 4.Bg5 Nbd7 5.e3 Be7 (Black's last two moves were quite often played in reverse-order) 6.Nf3 0-0 7.Rc1 c6 8.Bd3 dxc4 9.Bxc4 Nd5 10.Bxe7 Qxe7 which is still the main line today. Capablanca scored 71% after 11.0-0.
Against the Slav: 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 Capablanca scored 79% with 3.Nf3, rising to 85% when he met 3...Nf6 with 4.e3. He was usually happy going down the main line: 4...e6 5.Nc3 Nbd7 6.Bd3 dxc4 7.Bxc4 b5, scoring 67% in three games with 8.Bd3 but 50% in three games with less-popular 8.Be2.
He seems to have only faced 4...Bf5 twice, drawing with 5.Qb3 but winning with 5.cxd5 cxd5 6.Qb3.
He only faced the Queen's Gambit Accepted: 2...dxc4 four times, playing four different replies, drawing with 3.Nc3 and 3.e4 but winning with 3.Nf3 and 3.e3. 

Against the Dutch: 1...f5 Capablanca scored a sprightly 60% with the Staunton Gambit: 2.e4.

Against 1...e6 he nearly always went for a French with 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3, meeting the Classical: 3...Nf6 with 4.Bg5 Be7 5.e5 Nfd7 6.Bxe7 and after 6...Qxe7 he scored highly with both 7.Nb5 (Lasker's favourite) and 7.Qd2.

Again like Lasker he met the McCutcheon: 4...Bb4 with 5.exd5.

Against the Winawer: 3...Bb4 he kept the game open and scored well, albeit from a small sample, with 4.Bd3!?

Black v 1.e4

Capablanca overwhelmingly replied 1...e5, meeting the Spanish: 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 with the Steinitz Deferred: 3...a6 4.Ba4 d6. He only faced today's favourite 5.c3 three times, but won both games in which he replied with the sharp Siesta Variation: 5...f5. More common in his day was 5.0-0 Bd7 6.c3, which he met with 6....g6.

Against the modern Deferred Exchange: 5.Bxc6+ bxc6 6.d4 he scored 87% with the main reply 6...f6.

Against the Vienna: 2.Nc3 Capablanca played the slightly unusual 2...Nc6, which has also been the choice of Carlsen, Caruana, Nakamura and Aronian. One of the points is to avoid the theory-laden sharp lines of 2...Nf6 3.f4. Capablanca's opponents nearly always replied 3.Nf3 after which he was happy to transpose into a Four Knights with 3...Nf6.

Against the King's Gambit: 2.f4 Capablanca scored 100% with 2...exf4, meeting 3.Nf3 with 3...g5.

Against the Italian Game: 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 he usually replied 3...Bc5 but scored much better with the Two Knights: 3...Nf6, meeting the critical 4.Ng5 with 4...d5 5.exd5 Na5.

He successfully met the Scotch: 3.d4 exd4 4.Nxd4 with 4....Nf6, but had trouble with the Scotch Gambit: 4.Bc4, scoring just one draw from three outings with the very-sharp 4...Bc5 5.0-0 Nf6 6.e5 d5 7.exf6 dxc4 8.Re1+ Be6 9.Ng5 etc. Theoretically this is fine for Black but requires a lot of memorisation. An interesting alternative is 5...Nge7 which Capablanca won with the only other time he faced this line.

Black v 1.d4 and Others

Capablanca normally replied 1...Nf6 but after 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 he usually switched to the Queen's Gambit Declined with 3...d5, whereupon many of his games went 4.Bg5 (no one played 4.cxd5) Be7 5.e3 0-0 6.Nf3 Nbd7 7.Rc1 c6 8.Bd3 dxc4 9.Bc4 Nd5 10.Bxe7 Qxe7. This is very mainline but not so relevant today, at least at club level, as most Whites now play 4.cxd5, for which Capablanca's games are no help. Similarly, after 3.Nf3 he most often played 3...d5.

Capablanca only faced the London: 2.Nf3 d5 3.Bf4 four times, scoring two-out-of-two with 3...c5, the idea being to quickly generate queenside pressure with ...Qb6.

Against 1.Nf3 he usually played 1...Nf6, meeting 2.c4 with 2...e6.

The English: 1.c4 was a rare bird in Capablanca's day but he usually replied 1...Nf6, meeting 2.Nf3 with 2...e6 and 2.Nc3 with 2...c5.

Capablanca famously lost his world title to Alexander Alekhine, but what is less well-known is that their career score favoured the Cuban by +9 =33 -7.
His match wins against Alekhine, and his win at Nottingham 1936 (their first encounter since Capablanca lost their 1927 match), appear in many anthologies.
Here is a lesser known game from earlier in their careers.
Alekhine - Capablanca
St Petersburg 1914
Spanish Steinitz
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 d6 4.d4 exd4 5.Nxd4 Bd7 6.Nc3 Nf6 7.0-0 Be7
There are more than 1,600 games with this position in ChessBase's 2020 Mega database.
8.Nf5!?
A double-edged choice - White gets the bishop-pair at the cost of a damaged pawn-structure.
8...Bxf5 9.exf5 0-0 10.Re1
Twenty-one years later Alekhine played 10.Bf4 in a simul loss.
10...Nd7!?
This seems slow. Normal is 10...Re8.
11.Nd5 Bf6 12.c3
Both players presumably felt 12.Nxf6+ Qxf6 swops a well-placed knight for a bishop that looks active but after the text is blunted by White's queenside pawn-structure.
12...Nb6 13.Nxf6+
Alekhine changes his mind and goes for exchanges that will see him give up the bishop-pair but have the slightly better pawn-structure.
13...Qxf6 14.Bxc6 bxc6 15.Qf3 Rfe8 16.Be3

What, if anything, should Black do about his hanging c6 pawn?

*****
*****
*****
*****
*****
16...c5
Much better than 16...d5? which leaves the white bishop very active on the central dark squares. However 16...Nd5!? is playable although the analysis engines Stockfish11 and Komodo11.01 like White after preserving the bishop with 17.Bd4 or 17.Bd2.
17.Re2 Re5 18.Rae1 Rae8
Tarrasch pointed out that 18...Rxf5?? loses to 19.Bg5, and also gave 18...Qxf5 19.Qxf5 Rxf5 20.Bxc5!
19.Qb7?!
Decentralising the queen to go after pawns proves dangerous. White holds the balance with, for example, 19.Bf4 Rxe2 20.Rxe2 Rxe2 21.Qxe2 Kf8 22.g4 as 22...g6?? loses to 23.Bh6+.
19...Qxf5 20.Qxc7 Qe6 21.Qxa7 Nd5
White has, temporarily at least, won a pawn, and his extra pawn is passed on the a file, but it is a long way from threatening to queen.
22.Kf1?
The engines reckon a lesser evil is 22.g3 although they prefer Black after 22...h5 or 22...f5.
22...Nf4 23.Rd2 Nxg2
Also winning is Tarrasch's 23...Qg4 24.f3 Qe6 and the engines' 23...Qc4+ 24.Kg1 Nxg2.
24.Kxg2 Qg4+ 25.Kf1 Qh3+ 26.Ke2 Rxe3+ 27.fxe3 Qxe3+ 28.Kd1
Or 28.Kf1? Qf3+ 29.Rf2 Qh1#
28...Qxe1+ 29.Kc2 Qe4+ 30.Kb3?
This makes it easier for Black. As Tarrasch pointed out, there was more resistance in 30.Kc1, eg 30...Qf4 31.Kc2 g6 32.Qd7 although Black's extra pawn and safer king should tell in the long run.
30...Qc6
The engines point out a quicker win starting with 30...Ra8, eg 31.Rxd6 h6 32.Qd7 Rb8+ 33.Qc2 etc.
31.a4 d5
But now ...Ra8 is not so clear after 32.Rxd6!
32.a5 Qb5+ 33.Ka3 Rb8 34.Ka2 h6 35.a6?
This allows an immediate finish.
35...Qb3+ 0-1
White is mated after 36.Kb1 Re8 etc.

New Spice

NONE of us has much idea when normal over-the-board chess activities will resume.
Some people are trying to make up for this by playing online more, but it is not the same thing.
A lot of players will, I am sure, be using their enforced absence from the board as an opportunity to spruce-up opening repertoires.
Now is a good time to remove some of the stodge and try to inject new spice into our favourite lines.
On the other hand, if we have managed to last this long without theory-laden sharp lines, why change now?
As a compromise, I am planning to put forward a number of sharp lines, often gambits, but lines which, while respectable, do not require memorising loads of theory.
For example, after 1.e4 e5 it is all-too-easy to suggest 2.f4. That would certainly add spice to most repertoires, but it requires a detailed theoretical knowledge.
Similarly, after 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 it is a simple matter to suggest continuing 3.d4 exd4 4.Bc4 - the Scotch Gambit.
But the Scotch Gambit has been deeply analysed for literally hundreds of years.
So instead, in part one of this series, I am starting with the Göring Gambit: 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 exd4 4.c3!?
It is named after German master Carl Göring, although authors vary as to why, with some saying he introduced the line into master play, although the date of this varies.
In fact the gambit was played back in the 1840s by Howard Staunton, whose lead was followed in the 1850s by Alexander Meek and in the 1860s by Louis Paulsen and Albert Merian.
Other masters also experimented with it before the first known outings, largely unsuccessful, in the 1870s by Göring.
Be that as it may, the gambit's heyday came, long after those masters were dead, in the late 1950s and 1960s when it notched wins for the likes of Tal, Gufeld, Velimirović, Ribli, Ljubojević and, in Britain, Penrose and Levy.
The commonest response to the gambit is to accept with 4...dxc3, but Black's best results percentage-wise in ChessBase's 2020 Mega database come when it is declined with 4...d5.
I will also cover the two other main ways of declining the gambit, namely 4...d3 and 4...Nf6.
A) 4...dxc3
When George Botterill wrote Open Gambits (Batsford 1986), he felt obliged to admit he could not describe the Göring as "playable."
That verdict was effectively echoed by Larry Kaufman in The Chess Advantage In Black And White (McKay Chess Library, 2004), who recommended Black accepts the gambit as it "does not give White enough lead in development to fully offset the pawn sacrificed."
But then along came an even stronger author, Viktor Bologan, who in Bologan's Black Weapons In The Open Games (New In Chess, 2014) said he wanted to recommend acceptance but had found a sideline where he "wasn't able to find any advantage for Black."
After 4...dxc3, White can offer a second pawn with 5.Bc4!?, but I want to look at what I think can be called the main line, 5.Nxc3.

Position after 5.Nxc3

In some ways the position reminds me of the Morra Gambit in the Sicilian, except that in the diagram Black has a pawn on c7 instead of e7.
For White this is both good news (Black has less central influence) and bad news (Black is not so far behind in development, as he has opened a diagonal for his dark-square bishop).
From this it can be argued that the Morra is better than the Göring for White in the short term, but White's prospects in the long term are better in the Göring.
Jacob Yuchtman - Mikhail Tal
USSR Championship (Tbilisi) 1959
5...Bb4
Theoreticians are unanimous, as far as I can discover, in recommending this continuation for Black. Indeed Kaufman gives it in The Chess Advantage without comment.
The main alternative is 5...d6, after which 6.Bc4 is obvious and good, and the main line continues 6...Nf6 7.Qb3 Qd7! (7...Qe7 8.0-0 is embarrassing for Black in that the analysis engines Stockfish10 and Komodo10 reckon best now is 8...Qd7).
After 7...Qd7!, Whites overwhelmingly play 8.Ng5, but I am putting forward the calmer choice of the engines, namely 8.Qc2!?
This was played in a game in 2000 by German teenager Leonid Kritz - then a 'mere' 2424, but three years later a grandmaster.
The idea is that White does not need to rush matters. He has four development tempi - the knights, the queen and the light-square bishop - and has more space.
Black effectively only has two development tempi in that, while he has developed three pieces, it will take him an extra tempo to develop his light-square bishop as the c8-h3 diagonal is blocked by the black queen.
So 8.Qc2!? supports the e pawn and takes the string away from ...Na5, which would be an effective answer to 8.0-0.
A natural continuation after 8.Qc2!? is 8...Be7 9.0-0 (Kritz played 9.Bf4?! in his 2000 game and only drew) 0-0 10.Rd1!?, when the engines reckon Black's best is 10...Qe8!?, after which White's compensation is clear for all to see.
6.Bc4 d6 7.0-0
7.Ng5!? is little-played but liked by the engines at least as much as the text.
7...Bxc3
Black usually captures on c3 as soon as the knight is unpinned. Indeed Kaufman reckons Black's most precise move-order is 6...Bxc3+!? 7.bxc3 d6 so as to avoid White playing 7.Qb3, instead of 7.0-0, the idea being to meet ...Bxc3 with Qxc3.
8.bxc3 Nf6
The game reached this position by a different move-order: 1.e4 e5 2.d4 exd4 3.c3 dxc3 4.Nxc3 Nc6 5.Nf3 Bb4 6.Bc4 Nf6 7.0-0 Bxc3 8.bxc3 d6.
Botterill recommended 8...Bg4 9.Qb3 Bxf3 10.Bxf7+ Kf8 11.gxf3 Ne5 12.Bxg8 (Stockfish10 prefers 12.Bd5!?) Rxg8 13.f4 Nf3+ 14.Kg2 Nh4+ 15.Kh1 Qd7. This is a long line but, as Botterill points out, is largely forced. Known continuations are 16.f5 and 16.c4, both aimed at keeping the black queen out of h3. But the engines reckon White can ignore this threat by playing 16.f3!! The point is that 16...Qh3 is met by 17.Rf2, eg 17...b6 18.Qd5 Re8 19.Qh5 h6 20.c4 with a winning attack against the black king. For that reason, instead of 16...Qh3, the engines suggest 16...Qc6, but Black's pieces are uncoordinated, and White is winning (Stockfish10) or at least much better (Komodo10) after 17.Qe6 or 17.Bd2.
9.e5!
Alekhine played 9.Ba3 in a 1919 win over Isakov, but Penrose came unstuck with the same move against Smyslov in 1958. The text was given by Alekhine as an improvement.
9...dxe5
Kaufman recommended 9...Nxe5 10.Nxe5 dxe5, after which the engines reckon best play is 11.Qxd8+ (Kaufman only covers 11.Qb3) Kxd8 12.Bxf7 Kxe7 13.Bb3 Be6 14.c4, as seen in Yuchtman - Semyon Furman, also in the 1959 USSR Championship, but eight rounds later. The position is unclear (Stockfish10 likes Black, but Komodo10 thinks the position is equal). In the game, White's bishop-pair and Black's somewhat-exposed king helped lead to a quick draw, although both sides could easily have played on.
10.Ng5 0-0!?
Black is two pawns up, so Tal offers the exchange to get his king to safety.
11.Ba3 Qxd1 12.Raxd1 Bf5
Not 12...Rd8? 13.Bxf7+ Kh8 14.Bb3 Re8 (best) 15.Nf7+ Kg8 16.Nd6+ etc.
13.Bxf8 Rxf8 14.Rfe1 h6 15.Nf3 Bg4 16.Rb1
The engines give 16.Bb5!? e4 17.Bxc6 bxc6 18.h3 Bh5 19.g4 Bxg4 20.hxg4 exf3 21.Rd3 Nxg4 22.Rxf3 with advantage to White, even though Black has three pawns for the exchange.
16...e4 17.Nd4 Ne5 18.Bf1 c5 19.Nb5 c4?!
The engines reckon White is only slightly better after 19...Rd8.
20.f3 Bxf3!?
Tal must have planned this combination as 20...Be6?! 21.fxe4 leaves White much better.
21.gxf3 Nxf3+ 22.Kf2 Ng4+ 23.Kg3 Nxe1 24.Rxe1 f5 25.Bxc4+
White has emerged from the complications with a bishop for three pawns. The position is unclear, but the engines prefer White.
25...Kh7 26.Be2 Ne5 27.Kf4 Ng6+ 28.Ke3 f4+ 29.Kd4
29.Kxe4?! f3 30.Nxa7 (any bishop move loses the rook) fxe2 31.Rxe2 is at best equal for White.
29...Kh8?
Tal was presumably worried about a possible pin on his knight after later pushing the e pawn, but correct is a move such as 29...Nh4, with equal chances according to the engines. The text is a mistake because it gives the white rook a tempo to get out of the potential skewer on the e file.
30.Rg1 Nh4 31.Kxe4 Re8+ 32.Kd3
Now Black only has two pawns for the bishop, and only one is a passer (1-0, 40 moves).
(To be continued)

Worth A Punt?

IMAGINE  a defence to 1.d4 that receives virtually no serious attention from anyone with the white pieces.
Further, imagine it is a defence played by the likes of Paul Keres, Rudolf Spielmann, Kurt Richter and Emil Diemer.
Add to this the fact that Alexander Alekhine was among those Whites who on occasion failed to beat the defence (he was once significantly worse against an amateur after just seven moves), and you might think it is indeed worth giving it an outing.
Because it is a gambit, it can be especially effective at relatively fast time limits, and as a surprise weapon (which it almost always will be).
The defence is the Englund Gambit, which arises when Black meets 1.d4 with 1...e5!?
Here is the game where a future world champion struggled to show his superior talent.
Alekhine - V Lifschitz
Bern (Switzerland) Simul 1922
1.d4 e5!? 2.dxe5 d5!?
Overwhelmingly most popular is 2...Nc6, which makes 2...d5!? a surprise move in what is already a surprise defence. But probably a better way of implementing this idea is 2...d6!?
3.exd6!?
This is White's usual response, at least in ChessBase's 2020 Mega database, but the analysis engines Stockfish10 and Komodo10 reckon White is much better off with a move such as 3.e4, which is less good after 2...d6!?
3...Bxd6
For his pawn, Black has opened diagonals for both bishops and has a developed piece, while White has merely opened a diagonal for one of his bishops.
4.Nc3 Nf6 5.e4 0-0 6.Bg5?!
This natural-looking move may be a mistake. The engines give 6.Bd3 with advantage to White.
6...Re8 7.Bd3?!
Better is the engines' 7.Qf3.

How should Black proceed?

*****
*****
*****
*****
*****
7...Nc6
Strong is 7...Nxe4!, one point being that 8.Bxd8?? loses to 8...Nxc3+, eg 9.Ne2 Nxd1 10.Bxc7 Nxf2 11.Bxd6 Nxd3+ 12.cxd3 Bg4 etc. Better is 8.Nxe4, but 8...Qxg5 9.Nge2 Nd7 is very good for Black.
8.Nge2 h6 9.Bh4 Bg4 10.h3 Bxe2 11.Nxe2 g5 12.Bg3 Nxe4 13.Bxe4 Rxe4 14.0-0
White gets his king to safety, but meanwhile Black has won back his pawn and has fully equalised (½–½, 27 moves).
(to be continued)

Lasker's Spanish Inquisition (conclusions)

IN his 10 games with 5.d4 lines in the Spanish Exchange, Lasker scored +6=3-1, which is 75%.
If you remove the three games from simultaneous exhibitions, at least two of which were against master-strength opposition, his record is even more impressive: +5=1-1, or 78.6%.
The five wins were against Tarrasch (1908 world championship), Janowski twice (second Paris match), Capablanca (St Petersburg 1914) and Marshall (New York 1924).
The only blemishes on Lasker's record in these important games were a draw against Showalter (Cambridge Springs 1904) and a loss to Steinitz (1894 world championship).
Playing 4.Bxc6 was not Lasker's only weapon against the Spanish. He chose 4.Ba4 three times as often, but scored a much lower percentage - 63% with 4.Ba4, 82% with 4.Bxc6 (he was especially deadly with the follow-up 5.Nc3), according to ChessBase's 2020 Mega database.
The following traits can be seen in Lasker's 5.d4 Spanish Exchanges:
1. The white king usually stays in the centre, ready to support the white kingside pawns (but White castles long if circumstances dictate). White should not fear losing castling rights after a major-piece exchange on d1 - the king shuffles sideways to the e file.
2. With pawns on e4 and f4, the anti-positional thrust f5 can be surprisingly effective. If Black responds with ...f6, or has played the move earlier, the square e6 can become an outpost for a white knight. The Black f pawn can also be attacked by White's g pawn.
3. Piece exchanges generally favour White, even though a less-cluttered board usually enhances the power of a bishop-pair. This is because exchanges bring an endgame closer, which greatly favours White if the pawn-majorities are still as they are from the opening, ie White has a 4-3 kingside majority that can easily yield a passed pawn, while Black's 4-3 queenside majority can rarely do the same.
4. If both sides advance their pawn-chains and the pawns become fixed, this almost certainly favours the player with a knight rather than a bishop.
Here is one of my games, from last year's Pimlico summer congress, that illustrates some of the above points.
Spanton (171) - Gergely Kiss (207)
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Bxc6 dxc6 5.d4 exd4 6.Qxd4 Qxd4 7.Nxd4 Bc5!? 8.Be3 Nf6!?
Black's set-up is aggressive and has been tried by strong players, including Capablanca, but was condemned by Alekhine, who said it endangered the bishop-pair.
9.f3 0-0 10.Nf5!?
Alekhine's recommendation. Lasker played 10.Nd2 in a simul: https://beauchess.blogspot.com/2020/01/laskers-spanish-inquisition-part-four.html
10...Bb4
Three previous opponents of mine played the too-accommodating 10...Bxe3?!
11.c3 Bxf5 12.cxb4 Rfe8 13.Kf2 Bg6
As Alekhine warned, Black's bishop-pair is gone, but White's queenside pawn-formation is damaged. Stockfish10 and Komodo10 reckon White has the upper hand.
14.Nc3 Nd7 15.Bf4 Ne5 16.Rhd1
I cannot recall why I did not play 16.Nxe5. I guess I must have feared Black's bishop combining with his rooks in a way that White's knight cannot work with the white rooks.
16...Kf8 17.h3
Threatening to trap the bishop with 18.Bxe5 Rxe5 19.f4 etc.
17...f6 18.Bxe5
Now I exchange minors, and get a rook to the seventh into the bargain.
18....Rxe5 19.Rd7 Re7 20.Rad1 Ke8 21.Rxe7+ Kxe7 22.Ke3 Bf7 23.f4 Bc4 24.Rd4 b5 25.Rd2 a5 26.bxa5

How should Black proceed?

*****
*****
*****
*****
*****
26...Rxa5
Black seems to have excellent drawing chances with the engines' 26...b4!? Their main line runs 27.Na4 Bxa2 28.Nc5 Rxa5 29.Rc2, when White is a pawn down but Black's queenside is weak. The engines continue 29...Rb5 30.b3 Bb1 31.Rc1 Kd6! 32.Kd4 Rxc5 33.Rxc5 Bxe4 34.Kc4 Bxg2 35.Kxb4, when Black has two pawns for the exchange, and the reduced material makes a draw very likely.
27.a3
Better is 27.Kd4!, but I missed that 27...Bxa2?? loses to 28.b4.
27...Ra8 28.g3 h5!?
We have a typical Spanish Exchange ending of white knight and rook versus black bishop and rook. Usually White has much-the-better pawn-majority. Here that is not quite as pronounced as usual, but even so it will be difficult for Black to create a passed pawn. The text becomes Komodo10's top choice, but in my view is double-edged - it gains space, but puts another pawn on the same-coloured squares as the black bishop, which weakens Black's dark squares.
29.h4 g6!? 30.Kf3
The engines prefer the Lasker-like thrust 30.f5.
30...Rh8 31.Nd1 Rd8?
Definitely a mistake - removal of the rooks makes it much easier for the white knight and king to manoeuvre.
32.Rxd8 Kxd8 33.b4
Fixing the c pawns.
33...Ke7 34.Ke3 Kd6
KG offered a draw.
(The rest of the notes are from my original post about this game.)
Normally a bishop outplays a knight in an ending with rival pawn-majorities. But here White can stop Black activating his queenside majority, after which it is just a question of whether White can win or only draw with his kingside majority. Bearing in mind that Black's bishop is fairly bad - four out of six black pawns are on light squares - Black's practical chances of holding this ending are very low.
35.Kd4 Be2 36.Nc3 Bf3 37.a4 bxa4 38.Nxa4 Bd1 39.Nc5 Bf3 40.Nb7+
40.e5+ is probably a quicker way to win, but there is no harm in probing with the knight as Black cannot prevent White coming back to the e5+ idea.
40...Ke6 41.Nd8+ Kd7 42.Nf7 Ke6 43.Nd8+
I got cold feet about 43.Nh8 because of 43...f5, when 44.Nxg6 seems to be the only way to keep winning chances. White then has to be certain he is winning after both 44...fxe4?! and 44...Bxe4. I was not sure, but I was fairly confident that returning the knight to the queenside would win.
43...Kd7 44.Nb7 Ke6 45.Nc5+ Kd6 46.Nd3 Ke6 47.Ke3 Bg2?
This speeds defeat, as does 47...Bg4? 48.Nf2. Black had to play 47...Bd1 or 47...Bh1, but in each case White wins slowly but comfortably, eg 47...Bd1 48.Nc5+ Kd6 49.Na6 Ba4 50.Kd4 Bc2 51.e5+ fxe5 52.fxe5+ Kd7 (52...Ke6 53.Nxc7 Kf5 54.e6 Kf6 55.Kc5) 53.Ke3 Bf5 54.Kf4 Bc2 55.Nb8+.
48.f5+ gxf5
If 48...Kf7, then 49.Nf4.
49.Nf4+ 1-0

Lasker's Spanish Inquisition (part six)

THIS was the first game of the 1908 world championship match.
Emanuel Lasker - Siegbert Tarrasch
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Bxc6 dxc6 5.d4
Lasker had played 5.Nc3 in a win against Tarrasch 12 years before.
5...exd4 6.Qxd4 Qxd4 7.Nxd4 c5!?
Fred Reinfeld & Reuben Fine condemned this in a 1935 book, reprinted by Dover in 1965 as Lasker's Greatest Chess Games 1889-1914, for weakening Black's queenside, but it has been the choice of many strong players.
8.Ne2 Bd7 9.b3!?
Reinfeld & Fine criticise this rare move as "an indifferent idea," preferring 9.Bf4 followed by Nd2 "with pressure on Black's queenside pawns."
Andrew Soltis in Why Lasker Matters (Batsford, 2005) says "the natural response to ...c5" is Nbc3, intending Nd5.
9...Bc6
Reinfeld & Fine recommend castling, with ...f6 to follow to blunt White's bishop.
Soltis says Alekhine was impressed by Schlechter's recommendation of 9...c4. The future world champion used it in a 1909 game, meeting 10.bxc4 with 10...Ba4?!, when 11.c3 0-0-0 was unpleasant for White. But Stockfish10 and Komodo10 come up with a major improvement, 11.Nbc3, the point being that Black's light-square bishop is trapped after 11...Bxc2?? 12.Kd2, so instead has to retreat with loss of tempo.
10.f3 Be7 11.Bb2 Bf6?!
Reinfeld & Fine are surely right in calling this "illogical, since Black's only compensation for his weakened queenside is his two bishops." Soltis calls it "a curious decision."
12.Bxf6 Nxf6 13.Nd2 0-0-0 14.0-0-0 Rd7 15.Nf4 Re8
As Soltis points out, 15...Rhd8? loses a pawn to 16.Nd3 as 16...b6?? allows 17.Ne5.
16.Nc4 b6 17.a4
Soltis gives this an exclamation mark, but does not explain why.
17...a5
This is Komodo10's choice, but Reinfeld & Fine call it "purposeless," saying Black should have played ...Kb7 followed by ...b5 to create counterplay.
18.Rxd7 Nxd7 19.Rd1 Ne5 20.Nxe5 Rxe5
Reinfeld  & Fine say the ending favours White "because of the relative immobility of Black's bishop."
21.c4
This gets an exclamation mark in both books, but the move is almost compulsory as otherwise Black undoubles his pawns with ...c4.
21...Re8 22.Nh5 Rg8?!
A horrible-looking move. The engines point out the better 22...Re6, which effectively prevents 23.Nxg7 as White does not want to allow 23...Rg6 followed by ...Rxg2.
23.Rd3 f6 24.Kd2 Be8 25.Ng3 Bd7
Soltis: "In principle, Black should be reluctant to trade rooks (...Bg6 and ...Rd8) because there is a danger that White will simply create a passed kingside pawn. Here ...c6 followed by ...Kc7 and ...b5 looks right."
26.Ke3 Re8 27.Nh5 Re7 28.g4
Another move that Soltis rewards with an exclamation mark, but does not explain what is so good about it. However, note that 28.f4? loses the e pawn, eg 28...Bc6 29.Ng3 h5 30.h4 Bxe4 31.Nxe4 f5 etc.
28...c6
Soltis praises this move, saying it is necessary to keep the knight out of d5.
29.h4 Kc7

How should White proceed?

*****
*****
*****
*****
*****
30.g5?!
This move passes without comment in both books, but it seems to be an example of how Lasker occasionally became impatient to finish a game.
The engines suggest 30.Rd1, but do not really come up with a plan for further activating White's kingside.
Perhaps 30.Kf4!? was best. The idea is to be able to play g5 without allowing the reply ...f5.
30...f5 31.Ng3 fxe4 32.Nxe4
Soltis says "the thematic" 32.fxe4 is better, but that Black is fine with ...b5. The engines reckon ...Rf7 is also satisfactory.
32...Bf5 33.h5 Rd7! 34.Rc3!?
The players have seen, and the commentators agree, that White cannot make progress after 34.Rxd7+ Kxd7 35.Kf4 Ke6. The text, hardly surprisingly, does not improve White's position, but avoids simplification - a sign, surely, that Lasker regarded himself as the superior player.
34...Rd1 35.Kf4 Bd7?
Tarrasch goes wrong almost immediately. He had a simple draw with 35...Bxe4 36.Kxe4 Rh1, which wins the h5 pawn, although White is in no trouble either as Black cannot create a passer on the queenside.
36.Re3 Rh1 37.Ng3 Rh4+ 38.Ke5 Rh3  39.f4 Kd8 40.f5 Rh4 41.f6 gxf6+ 42.Kxf6 Be8 43.Nf5!
Not the only way to win but, as Reinfeld & Fine say, "pretty and decisive."
43...Rf4
Or 43...Rxh5? 44.Rxe8+ Kxe8 45.Ng7+.
44.g6 hxg6 45.hxg6 Rg4 46.Rxe8+!? Kxe8 47.g7 Kd7 48.Nh4 Rxg7!?
A desperate last try, but White has it all covered.
49.Kxg7 Ke6 50.Nf3 Kf5 51.Kf7 Ke4 52.Ke6 Kd3 53.Kd6 kc3 54.Kxc6 Kb3 55.Kb5 1-0

In 19th-Century Style

PLAYED on board eight (of 10) for Battersea away to Cavendish in division one of the London League last night.
Spanton (168) - Daire McMahon (193*)
Spanish Berlin/Classical
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 Nf6 4.0-0 Bc5
Much less popular than 4...Nxe4, but there are more than 3,600 examples of this move in ChessBase's 2020 Mega database. The position also arises from a Classical move order, ie 3...Bc5 4.0-0 Nf6.
5.Nxe5
The main line, which seeks another way of taking advantage of the placing of Black's dark-square bishop on c5, runs 5.c3 0-0 6.d4 Bb6 7.Bg5 h6 8.Bh4 with a position Stockfish10 and Komodo10 assess as equal.
5...Nxe5 6.d4 a6
Mikhail Yudovich in Spanish Without ...a6 (Batsford, 1986) says Boris Spassky "recently revived" this move.
7.Ba4
Yudovich treats 7.Be2 as the main move.
7...Nxe4 8.dxc5?!
The text involves a pawn sacrifice that is not liked by the engines. The main move is 8.Qe2, which Alekhine used to meet with 8...Be7 9.Qxe4 Ng6.
White can get an edge with 8.Re1 Be7 9.dxe5 Nc5 10.Nc3, according to Stockfish10.
 8...Nxc5 9.Qd5
9.Qd4 is more commonly seen.
9...Qe7 10.Bf4
Not 10.Re1?? Nf3+ 11.gxf3 Qxe1+ 12.Kg2 Nxa4.
10...f6
If 10...Nxa4, then 11.Bxe5, and White recovers his pawn.
11.Nc3 c6 12.Qd2
12.Qd4 Ne6 is good for Black.
12...0-0!?
The a2-g8 diagonal looks to be a weakness for Black, but it is hard for White to exploit it.
13.Rfe1 d6 14.Rad1 Rd8?!

How can White take advantage of Black's last move?

*****
*****
*****
*****
*****
Black's last move allows a combination. The engines prefer 14...d5, when White's compensation for his pawn-minus looks insufficient.
15.Rxe5! fxe5 16.Bg5 Qf8 17.Bxd8 Qxd8 18.Qxd6 Qxd6 19.Rxd6 Bf5 20.Rd2 Kf7 21.f3 Ke7 ½–½
Black can get an ending of rook-and-bishop versus rook-and-knight (plus pawns) at his choosing, but any theoretical advantage is unlikely to be significant.
*Last published grade from January 2018.
Cavendish won the match 7-3.
My updated Battersea statistics for 2019-20
Event*..Colour...Grade...Opponent's Grade...Result
CLL..…...B....…..168...………169...……….....W
CLL...…..B...…...168...………196...…………..D
CLL...…..W...…..168...………176...…………..L
LL....……W...…..168...…....…175...………….D
CLL...…..B...…...168...………192...…………..D
CLL...…..W...…..168...………181...…………..L
LL...…….W...…..168...………168...…………..L
EC...…….B...…..168...………175...……….….L
CLL...…...B.........168...………170...…………..L
LL...…….W...…..168...………193...…………..D
Overall this season for Battersea I have scored +1=4-5 for a grading performance of 160.
In season 2018-19 I scored +12=12-13 for a grading performance of 169.
In season 2017-18 I scored +10=8-9 for a grading performance of 175.
*CLL: Central London League; LL: London League; EC: Eastman Cup.

Ponzing About (part three)

Alexander Alekhine - Konstantin Ivakov
Moscow spring championship 1907
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.c3 d5
Black's sharpest reply and also, I suspect, the move most Whites hope for as it requires the greatest book knowledge.
4.Qa4
White's most popular response.. Black answers with a set-up favoured by Steinitz.
4...f6 5.Bb5 Ne7 6.exd5 Qxd5 7.0-0 Bd7 8.d4 e4
8...exd4!? 9.cxd4 Ne5! 10.Nc3 Nxf3+ 11.gxf3 Qf5 looks fine for Black, but the position is unclear and the line is not forced, eg White could try 9.Rd1. The text seems to have been first played by Steinitz.
9.Nfd2 f5 10.Nb3 Ne5 11.Nc5 c6 12.Be2 Bc8 13.Be3 b5 14.Qa5?!
Even better may be14.Qc2. The text lets Black win the bishop-pair.
14...Nc4 15.Bxc4 Qxc4
After the counter-intuitive 15...bxc4!, White is only slightly better, according to Stockfish10 and Komodo10. The text allows White an initiative.
16.Nd2 Qd5 17.a4 Ng6 18.f3 Bxc5 19.dxc5 Qd3 20.Bg5?
White is better after 20.Rfe1, eg 20...0-0 21.Rad1 with a continuing initiative.
20...h6?
Natural and best was 20...0-0. The text loses by force.

White to play and win

*****
*****
*****
*****
*****
21.Nxe4! hxg5?
21...fxe4 is met by 22.Rfd1, so Black should have castled, when the engines' mainline runs 22.Nf2 Qe2 23.Rfe1 Qxb2 24.Be3, with what they reckon is a large, but not yet winning, advantage for White.
22.Nd6+ Kd7 23.Rad1 Qe3+ 24.Kh1 Qf4 25.g3 Qxa4 26.Nxb5+ 1-0

Uncork The Bubbly

TASTED my first champagne of the year last night after Battersea beat Kings Head to claim the unofficial title of best amateur team in London.
As you can see in the table below, our win in a match postponed from earlier in the season means we finish second in division one of the London League to the all-pro Wood Green.

Team	Matches played	Won	Drawn	Lost	TBD	Games for	Games against	Games diff.	Adjourn.	Match points	Double defaults	Penalty points	Penalty Match points
Wood Green 1	11	11	0	0	0	95	15	+80	–	11	–	–	–
Battersea 1	11	9	1	1	0	72.5	37.5	+35	–	9.5	–	-2	–
Richmond & Twickenham 1	11	8	1	2	0	71.5	38.5	+33	–	8.5	–	–	–
Streatham & Brixton 1	11	5	2	4	0	61.5	48.5	+13	–	6	–	–	–
Hackney 1	11	6	0	5	0	57.5	52.5	+5	–	6	–	-2	–
Wimbledon 1	11	5	2	4	0	54.5	55.5	-1	–	6	–	-2	–
Athenaeum 1	11	5	1	5	0	59.5	50.5	+9	–	5.5	–	–	–
Cavendish 1	11	2	4	5	0	52	57	-5	–	4	1	–	–
Mushrooms 1	11	2	2	7	0	45	65	-20	–	3	–	-2	–
Drunken Knights 1	11	3	0	8	0	19.5	88.5	-69	–	3	2	–	–
Kings Head 1	11	2	1	8	0	45	65	-20	–	2.5	–	-2	–
Drunken Knights 2	11	1	0	10	0	23.5	83.5	-60	–	1	3	-4	–

My contribution to this was a score of +3=1-2 for a grading performance of 173.

Captain Midhun Unnikrishnan (centre) with five other members of Battersea's first team

My game last night was the second to finish in a match that ended in our favour 7.5-2.5.
Afterwards I was congratulated by at least two of our stronger plays on a smooth positional performance. However, it was anything but …
Spanton (171) - Alistair Morton (122)
Spanish Exchange
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6
On the morning of the match, Battersea captain Midhun Unnikrishnan sent an email with the admonition: "Do remember, the NWGC trophy (non-Wood Green championship) is at stake in this match. Every half a point matters."
I took this to be a plea not to try anything crazy as our likely grading advantage should take care of itself, so I played:
4.Bxc6 dxc6 5.d4
The oldest and most thematic approach. White dispenses with subtleties such as 5.0-0 or 5.Nc3 and gets on with creating a kingside pawn-majority.
5...exd4 6.Qxd4 Qxd4 7.Nxd4 Nf6?!
A popular move, but it was condemned almost 80 years ago by Alekhine, who wrote: "This is an inferior move since White's e4 square can easily be protected while the knight has only very small prospects at f6. The correct plan consists of occupying the centre files with the rooks, not reducing the forces (particularly maintaining the two bishops) and gradually restricting the enemy pieces."
8.f3 Bc5?!
Easily the most-popular move in the position, but again Alekhine did not like it: "Now the exchange of one of the bishops is necessary without the slightest positional compensation."
[The quotes are from a collection of Alekhine's training annotations, published by Oxford University Press in 1980 as 107 Great Chess Battles.]
9.Be3 0-0 10.Nf5
"Of course!" - Alekhine.
The move was not so obvious to Lasker, who preferred 10.Nd2 and only drew in a simul given during his 1908 British tour.
10...Bxe3
Alekhine's comment: "10...Bb4+ would be no better; 11.c3 Bf5 12.cb etc with advantage to White."
11.Nxe3
A final word from the fourth world chess champion: "From now onwards any exchange that does not alter the pawn structure will favour White because it will facilitate the exploitation of his extra pawn on the king's side."
While during the game I did not recall Alekhine's exact words, I did remember the general thrust, and I rather stupidly thought the rest of the game would play itself.
11...Be6 12.Nc3
In two previous games in this line I preferred 12.Nd2, which allows queenside castling.
12...Rad8 13.Rd1
The game Alekhine was commenting on, Walter Cruz - Fricis Apsenieks, 1939 Olympiad, saw 13.0-0 (1-0, 46 moves).
13...Rxd1+ 14.Kxd1 Rd8+ 15.Ke2 Kf8 16.Rd1 Rxd1 17.Nxd1
Intending to route the knight via f2 to d3, from where it would eye the important dark squares c5, e5 and f4.
17...c5
Not 17...Bxa2?? 18.b3 etc.
18.a3 b5 19.Nf2 c4

White to make an instructive mistake

*****
*****
*****
*****
*****
20.c3?
It is normal for White in the Spanish Exchange to arrange his queenside pawns in a V formation as it makes Black's task of creating a passed pawn extremely difficult (but not impossible, as we shall see).  However, there was as yet no need to move the c pawn, and here the main effects of playing c3 are to weaken the d3 square and leave White's queenside very inflexible, in particular making the b pawn a weakness.
Interestingly, Kings Head's top board David Okike (203), going over the game with my opponent, made some comment such as "yes" or "of course" when c3 was played on the board. That only goes to show how natural-looking the move is, but nevertheless it is a mistake and the root cause of White's later problems. A much better plan was to get on with it on the kingside with 20.f4 or 20.e5.
20...Nd7!
The knight heads for a4.
21.f4 f6 22.Nc2 c5
This takes away the c5 square from Black's knight but keeps White's pieces out of d4. Meanwhile Black's knight will continue its odyssey to a4.
23.Ke3 Nb6 24.h3 Ke7 25.Ne1 Kd6 26.g4 Na4 27.Nd1 h5!?
I am not sure Black should be pushing pawns on the kingside, where he is weaker, but my main analysis engines Komodo9 and Stockfish10 are happy with the move, assessing the position as completely equal.
28.f5
A la Lasker's famous win over Capablanca at St Petersburg 1914, as someone was kind enough to comment afterwards.
28...Bf7 29.Kf4 a5 30.Nf3 b4

A critical moment … Black threatens to win with 31...Nxb2! as 32.Nxb2 loses to 32...bxa3, when Black's cleverly created passer (see note to White's 20th) cannot be stopped

*****
*****
*****
*****
*****
31.axb4
This averts the immediate crisis, but better was 31.e5+! I rejected it because of 31...fxe5+ 32.Nxe5 Nxb2?? missing that White has 33.Nxb2 bxa3 34.Nbxc4+ Bxc4 35.Nxc4+ and 36.Nxa3.
Instead of 31...fxe5+, the engines prefer 31...Ke7 32.exf6+ gxf6, with rough equality after 33.axb4 or 33.Ne1.
31...cxb4
Now Black has the better pawn-majority, and the only bishop (nearly always superior to a knight in a race between rival majorities).
32.Nd4?!
Trying to keep watch on the queenside and the kingside at the same time, but a knight is not well-suited to such work. The pawn thrust e5+ was still the way to go, although now it is good for no more than equality.
32...Kc5
This may not be the best - the engines cannot agree - but, like many moves for Black here, it is enough for an edge.
33.e5?
Now e5 is a mistake. It seems White had to settle for defence with 33.Nc2 or 33.Ke3.
33...fxe5+?
Returning the compliment - Black wins with 33...bxc3 34.bxc3 Nxc3! 35.Ne6+ Bxe6 36.fxe6 (or 36.Nxc3 fxe5+ 37.Kxe5 Bg8) Nd5+.
34.Kxe5 hxg4 35.hxg4 Nb6?
The final mistake. Correct was 35...bxc3 36.bxc3 Nb6, which the engines reckon is equal, but there is still a lot of play in the position.
36.Ne6+ Bxe6 37.Kxe6
This wins, whereas 37.fxe6 only draws.
37...b3
Nothing saves Black, eg 37...Nd5 38.g5 bxc3 39.Nxc3 Nxc3 40.bxc3 a4 41.f6 gxf6 42.gxf6 a3 43.f7 a2 44.f8=Q+ - the check gives White time to capture the a pawn.
38.g5 a4 39.f6 1-0
My updated Battersea statistics for 2018-19
Event...Colour...Grade...Opponent's Grade...Result
CLL........B..........167...….........196...............…D
LL...…….B...…...167...………..159...………….D
CLL...…..B...…...167...………..161...………….W
CLL...…..B...…...167...………..190...………….D
LL...…….W...…..167...………..161...….………W
CLL...…..W...…..167...………..148...………….D
CLL...…..W...…..167...………..165...………….W
CLL...…..W...…..167...………..160...………….D
CLL...…..W...…..167...………..159...………….D
LL...…….B...…...167...………..168...………….D
LL...…….W...…..171...………..159...………….W
CLL...…..B...…...171...………..198...……….….L
CLL...…..B...…...171...………..169...…………..L
CLL...…..B...…...171...………..196...…………..L
LL...…….B...…...171...………..182...…………..D
CLL...…..W...…..171...………..189...…………..L
LL...…….B...…...171...………..178...…………..L
CLL...…..B...…...171...………..164...…………..D
LL...…….B...…...171...………..188...………….W
CLL...…..B...…...171...………..200...…………..L
LL...…….B...…...171...………..169...…………..L
CLL...…..W...…..171...………..186...…………..D
CLL...…..B...…...171...………..153...…………..D
LL...……W...…...171...………..188...…………..L
LL...……W...…...171...………..159...…………..L
LL...……W...…...171...………..153...…………..L
CLL...…..B...…...171...…….….172...……….....D
LL............B.........171................139..................W
LL...….….B...…..171...…….….214...……....….L
LL...……..B...…..171...………..173...……….….L
LL...…….W...…..171...………..166...…………..L
SL...……..B...…..171...………..167...………….W
LL...…….W...…..171...………..122...………….W
Overall this season for Battersea I have scored +8=12-13 for a grading performance of 164.
In season 2017-18 I scored +10=8-9 for a grading performance of 175.
CLL - Central London League; LL - London League; SL - Summer League