Showing posts with label Spanish Closed. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Spanish Closed. Show all posts

Wednesday, 9 September 2020

Champion Of Champions (part 12)

HERE is the tournament bracket after three quarter-finals.

Round of 16               Quarter-Finals          Semi-Finals
1. Steinitz
v----------------------------Carlsen
16. Carlsen (+102.5)
                                    v................................Tal
8.Tal (+8.5)
v----------------------------Tal (+79.5)
9.Petrosian

6. Botvinnik (+66)
v----------------------------Botvinnik (+18.5)
11. Fischer
                                    v.................................Botvinnik
13. Kasparov
v----------------------------Alekhine
4. Alekhine (+21.5)

3. Capablanca
v----------------------------Kramnik (+118)
14. Kramnik (+12)
                                     v................................Kramnik
5. Euwe
v----------------------------Karpov
12. Karpov (+11.5)

7. Smyslov (+18)
v----------------------------Smyslov
10. Spassky
                                     v................................
15. Anand
v----------------------------Lasker
2. Lasker (+50.5)

Quarter-Finals
Match Four: Smyslov v Lasker
Game One
Vasily Smyslov - Emanuel Lasker
Spanish Berlin
1.e4
As noted before, 1.e4 was played in 454 of the games in ChessBase's 2020 Mega database in which Smyslov had white, compared with 425 games for 1.d4.
1...e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 Nf6 4.0-0 Nxe4 5.Re1
Very modern!
5...Nd6 6.Nxe5 Be7
Smyslov did not face 5...Be7, so this is as far as we can get
The analysis engines Stockfish11 and Komodo11.01 give White an averaged advantage of +34.5.

Game Two
Emanual Lasker - Vasily Smyslov
Spanish Closed
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4
Lasker played the text almost three times as frequently as the move often associated with him, 3.Bxc6.
4...Nf6 5.0-0 Be7 6.Re1 b5 7.Bb3 0-0 8.c3 d6 9.d4!?
Lasker played this four times, compared with two for 9.h3.
9...Bg4 10.Be3 exd4 11.cxd4 Na5 12.Bc2 c5
Smyslov played the text and 12...Nc4 twice each, scoring a win and a loss with the latter but a win and a draw with 12...c5, which is therefore chosen on tiebreak.
As far as we can go - Lasker did not face 12...c5
The engines give Lasker an averaged advantage of +23 - not enough to overcome Smyslov's score from game one.
Here is the updated tournament bracket.

Round of 16               Quarter-Finals          Semi-Finals
1. Steinitz
v----------------------------Carlsen
16. Carlsen (+102.5)
                                    v................................Tal
8.Tal (+8.5)
v----------------------------Tal (+79.5)
9.Petrosian

6. Botvinnik (+66)
v----------------------------Botvinnik (+18.5)
11. Fischer
                                    v.................................Botvinnik
13. Kasparov
v----------------------------Alekhine
4. Alekhine (+21.5)

3. Capablanca
v----------------------------Kramnik (+118)
14. Kramnik (+12)
                                     v................................Kramnik
5. Euwe
v----------------------------Karpov
12. Karpov (+11.5)

7. Smyslov (+18)
v----------------------------Smyslov (+11.5)
10. Spassky
                                     v................................Smyslov
15. Anand
v----------------------------Lasker
2. Lasker (+50.5)

So the semi-finals can be thought of as an all-Soviet affair, although Kramnik might argue with that description.

Sunday, 6 September 2020

Champion Of Champions (part nine)

HERE is the tournament bracket after the round of 16.

Round of 16               Quarter-Finals            Semi-Finals
1. Steinitz
v----------------------------Carlsen
16. Carlsen (+102.5)
                                    v................................
8.Tal (+8.5)
v----------------------------Tal
9.Petrosian

6. Botvinnik (+66)
v----------------------------Botvinnik
11. Fischer
                                    v.................................
13. Kasparov
v----------------------------Alekhine
4. Alekhine (+21.5)

3. Capablanca
v----------------------------Kramnik
14. Kramnik (+12)
                                     v................................
5. Euwe
v----------------------------Karpov
12. Karpov (+11.5)

7. Smyslov (+18)
v----------------------------Smyslov
10. Spassky
                                     v................................
15. Anand
v----------------------------Lasker
2. Lasker (+50.5)

Quarter-Finals
Match One: Carlsen v Tal
Game One
Magnus Carlsen - Mikhail Tal
Sicilian Najdorf/Scheveningen
1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6
Tal has 144 games with 2...d6 in ChessBase's 2020 Mega database, compared with 99 for 2...e6 and 66 for 2...Nc6.
3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6
Tal played the text 68 times in Mega20 compared with 50 for 5...Nc6 and 30 for 5...e6.
6.Be3
Carlsen has played eight other moves here but 6.Be3 has been his favourite.
6...e6 7.f3
Carlsen has played the text and 7.g4 twice each, winning both times with 7.f3 but scoring just a draw with 7.g4.
As far as we can get - Tal did not face 7.f3
Komodo11.01 gives Carlsen a minuscule edge but Stockfish11 prefers Black, and the evaluations average out to an advantage for Tal of +19.5.

Game Two
Mikhail Tal - Magnus Carlsen
Spanish Closed
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.0-0 Be7 6.Re1 b5 7.Bb3 0-0 8.c3 d6 9.h3 Nb8 10.d4 Nbd7 11.Nbd2 Bb7 12.Bc2 Re8 13.Nf1 Bf8 14.Ng3 g6 15.a4 Nb6
We have a new record for getting deep into a 'game'. Carlsen has played the text and 15...c5 once each, drawing with the former and losing with the latter, so 15...Nb6 wins on tiebreak. It is not a move Tal faced.
A new record for depth in this tournament
The engines give Tal an averaged advantage of +60, making him a runaway winner of the first quarter-final.
Here is the updated bracket.

Round of 16               Quarter-Finals              Semi-Finals
1. Steinitz
v----------------------------Carlsen
16. Carlsen (+102.5)
                                       v................................Tal
8.Tal (+8.5)
v----------------------------Tal (+79.5)
9.Petrosian

6. Botvinnik (+66)
v----------------------------Botvinnik
11. Fischer
                                       v.................................
13. Kasparov
v----------------------------Alekhine
4. Alekhine (+21.5)

3. Capablanca
v----------------------------Kramnik
14. Kramnik (+12)
                                        v................................
5. Euwe
v----------------------------Karpov
12. Karpov (+11.5)

7. Smyslov (+18)
v----------------------------Smyslov
10. Spassky
                                        v................................
15. Anand
v----------------------------Lasker
2. Lasker (+50.5)

Friday, 4 September 2020

Champion Of Champions (part seven)

HERE is the tournament bracket after six 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----------------------------Alekhine
4. Alekhine (+21.5)

3. Capablanca
v----------------------------Kramnik
14. Kramnik (+12)

5. Euwe
v----------------------------Karpov
12. Karpov (+11.5)

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

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

Round of 16
Match Seven: Smyslov v Spassky
Game One
Vasily Smyslov - Boris Spassky
Spanish Closed
1.e4
Preferred by Smyslov over 1.d4 in ChessBase's 2020 Mega database by 454 games to 425.
1...e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.0-0 Be7
Spassky did not highly rate the Open Variation: 5...Nxe4.
6.Re1 b5 7.Bb3 d6 8.c3 0-0 9.h3 Nb8
As far as we can get as Smyslov, somewhat surprisingly, did not face Breyer's System
Stockfish11 and Komodo11.01 give Smyslov an averaged advantage of +57, which will be hard to overturn.

Game Two
Boris Spassky - Vasily Smyslov
Spanish Closed
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.0-0 Be7 6.Re1 b5 7.Bb3 0-0
Another heavyweight Spanish, and this time Black leaves open the possibility of playing the Marshall Attack ...
8.c3 d6
... but there are no Smyslov games with 8...d5.
9.h3 Na5 10.Bc2 c5 11.d4 Qc7 12.Nbd2 Nc6 13.d5 Nd8 14.Nf1
Spassky reached the position after 13...Nd8 three times as White, winning with the text but drawing with 14.a4 and 14.c4, so the text is chosen on tiebreak. It turns out not to have been faced by Symslov.
The deepest into a 'game' we have reached in the tournament before running out of played moves for one champion
The engines give Spassky an averaged advantage of +39 - good, but not enough to overturn Smyslov's advantage from game one.
Here is the updated bracket after seven 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----------------------------Alekhine
4. Alekhine (+21.5)

3. Capablanca
v----------------------------Kramnik
14. Kramnik (+12)

5. Euwe
v----------------------------Karpov
12. Karpov (+11.5)

7. Smyslov (+18)
v----------------------------Smyslov
10. Spassky

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

Friday, 17 July 2020

Champion Repertoire (part seven)

VASILY Smyslov tied a world championship match 12-12 against Botvinnik in 1954, beat him 12.5-9.5 in 1957 and lost the title back to Botvinnik the following year 10.5-12.5.
Although Smyslov was 'only' world champion for a year, his score in the three matches against Botvinnik was +18=34-17, a close-run mini-precedent for the Karpov-Kasparov marathon of 1984-90.
A repertoire based on Smyslov's games emphasises positional play.
White
Smyslov played 1.e4 and 1.d4 almost equally often, scoring 64% with both moves in ChessBase's 2020 Mega database.
But add in the games in which he began 1.c4, but quickly transposed to a 1.d4 opening, and you get a preponderance of closed games over open ones.
So start with 1.c4, with which Smyslov scored 72%, but if Black replies 1...Nf6 follow up with 2.d4. Most of his games continued 2...e6, with Smyslov generally avoiding the Nimzo-Indian in favour of 3.Nf3.
He liked to meet the Queen's Indian: 3...b6 with the counter-fianchetto 4.g3. In the mainline 4...Bb7 5.Bg2 Be7 6.0-0 0-0 7.Nc3 Ne4 he normally played the somewhat unusual 8.Nxe4!? Bxe4 9.Ne1 Bxg2 10.Nxg2, a line that English readers may not be surprised to learn became a favourite of grandmaster Keith Arkell. Against 4...Ba6 Smyslov scored 60% with 5.b3, meeting 5...Bb4+ with 6.Bd2.
He only met the Bogo-Indian: 3...Bb4+ three times, always playing 4.Bd2.
In the Queen's Gambit Declined: 3...d5 he scored 58% with 4.Nc3 but a much-more impressive 70% by making it a Catalan: 4.g3. In the latter he met 4...dxc4 with 5.Qa4+. But the main line in his games, reached by various move-orders, went 4...Be7 5.Bg2 0-0 6.0-0 dxc4, against which he always played 7.Qc2, scoring 69%, rising to 80% in the main line 7...a6 8.a4.
When Black kept the position closed with 6...c6 he scored 80% with 7.Qc2, rising to 100% when he met the main move 7...Nbd2 with 8.b3.
Against the Grünfeld: 2...g6 3.Nc3 d5 Smyslov generally continued 4.Nf3 Bg2 5.Qb3 (he also liked 5.cxd5 but did not score so well with it), meeting the main line 5...dxc4 6.Qxc4 0-0 with 7.e4. If Black kept the position closed with 5...c6, Smyslov continued 6.cxd5 Nxd5 (he did not face 6...cxd5, at least in Mega20) 7.e4.
Against the King's Indian: 3...Bg7 Smyslov scored 79% with 4.e4, rising to 88% when he met 4...d6 with 5.Nf3 0-0 6.Be2. If Black continued with the main move 6...e5, Smyslov's score rose to an amazing 94% with 7.d5.
Against 2...c5 Smyslov generally switched back to English lines with 3.Nf3 cxd4 4.Nxd4. He also reached this position from the English Symmetrical move-order 1.c4 c5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.d4 exd4 4.Nxd4. He did not face the modern favourite 4...e5, Smyslov's opponents almost invariably continuing 4...e6 or 4...Nc6. Smyslov was happy to reach the same position against both moves, ie by 4...e6 5.Nc3 Nc6 or 4...Nc6 5.Nc3 e6. He then scored 90% by continuing 6.g3. If in the 4...e6 line Black met 5.Nc3 with 5...Bb4, Smyslov generally played 6.Bd2.
After 1.c4 g6 Smyslov scored 73% with 2.d4, the games almost always transposing to lines covered above.
After 1.c4 e6 he overwhelmingly preferred an immediate fianchetto with 2.g3, aiming for lines covered above. If Black went for a Dutch formation with 2...f5, Smyslov usually held off playing d4, instead going for a set-up involving Bg2, Nf3, 0-0 and b3, albeit from a small sample size.
However, against an immediate Dutch set-up, 1.c4 f5, Smyslov was happy to continue with 2.d4 and 3.Nc3, albeit again from a small sample size.
Black v 1.e4
Smyslov was happy to go down the mainline Closed Spanish: 1...e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.0-0 Be7 6.Re1 b5 7.Bb3, feinting at, but never playing, a Marshall Attack with 7...0-0 8.c3 d6 (8...d5 would be a Marshall Attack9.h3. There are more than 35,000 games with this position in Mega20. Smyslov generally continued down the main line with 9...Na5 10.Bc2 Qc7 11.d4 Qc7 12.Nbd2, but here varied his play, scoring best (64%) with 12...Bd7 (see below for Smyslov using this system to score an important win at the 1953 Interzonal).
Clearly White has many deviations along the way. Important ones include the Modern Exchange: 4.Bxc6 dxc6 5.0-0, against which Smyslov scored 60% with 5...f6 6.d4 Bg4 7.dxe5 Qxd1 8.Rxd1 Bxf3 9.gxf3 fxe5.
Against the Anti-Marshall: 8.a4 he always pushed past with 8...b4.
If White omitted 9.h3 in the main line, Smyslov scored 62% with 9...Bg4.
Against the Italian Game: 3.Bc4 Smyslov scored 80% with 3...Bc5, rising to 83% when he met 4.c3 with a closed system starting with 4...Qe7.
He also liked ...Bc5 against the Scotch: 3.d4 exd4 4.Nxd4, but against the Scotch Gambit: 4.Bc4 he continued 4...Nf6.
In the Scotch Four Knights: 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.d4 exd4 5.Nxd4 he went down the main line with 5...Bb4 6.Nxc6 bxc6 7.Bd3 d5  8.exd5 cxd5 9.0-0 0-0 10.Bg5 but then generally continued 10...Be6.
In the Spanish Four Knights: 4.Bb5 he usually continued 4...Bb4 5.0-0 0-0, and after 6.d3 he won the two times he played the conventional 6...d6 but drew in the two games he played the less-popular 6...Bxc3.
Against the Vienna: 2.Nc3 Nf6 with both 3.f4 and 3.g3 he played 3...d5.
Against the Bishop's Opening: 2.Bc4 he scored 60% with 2...Nf6, and he declined both times he faced the King's Gambit: 2.f4, drawing with 2...d5 and winning with 2...Bc5.
Black v 1.d4 and Others
Smyslov usually aimed for a Nimzo-Indian: 1...Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 Bb4, scoring 62% when he met 4.e3 with 4...0-0. Against the main continuation 5.Bd3 he liked 5...c5, with most games continuing, as they still do, 6.Nf3 d5 7.0-0. Smyslov usually proceeded 7...dxc4, scoring 64% when he met 8.Bxc4 with the unusual 8...Qe7!? Against 5.Nge2, which is popular at club level because it avoids doubled c pawns, Smyslov scored 67% with 5...d5 6.a3 Be7.
Smyslov varied against 4.Qc2 but most common was the unusual, although it has been played by Carlsen, 4...d6. The main reply is 5.Nf3, which Smyslov twice met with 5...0-0 and twice with 5...Nbd7, scoring a win and a draw with each move.
Against 4.a3 Bxc3+ 5.bxc3 he scored 67% with 5...c5, and against 4.Nf3 he scored 60% with 4...b6.
He met 4.f3 with 4...d5, and 4.Bg5 with 4...h6 5.Bh4 c5.
Smyslov played both the Queen's Indian: 3...b6 and the Bogo-Indian: 3...Bb4+ against 3.Nf3, scoring much better with the latter.
After 3...Bb4+ 4.Bd2 he scored 64% with 4...a5.
Against 4.Nbd2 he usually played 4...c5 5.a3 Bxd2+.
Against 4.Nc3 he scored 60% with 4...b6.
After 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nf3 Smyslov scored 85% with 2...g6, generally meeting 3.c4 Bg7 4.Nc3 with 4...d5. This requires learning a lot about the Grünfeld, although some time is saved as the Grünfeld is part of the white repertoire presented here. However a more-practical approach for club players might be to play 2...e6, with which Smyslov scored a very respectable - to say the least - 72%. Virtually all Smyslov's opponents continued 3.c4, after which 3...Bb4+ is a Bogo-Indian.
He faced the Veresov: 2.Nc3 d5 3.Bg5 three times, scoring a win and two draws with 3...Nbd7.
Smyslov varied against the English: 1.c4 but scored best (72%) with his favourite reply 1...e5.
The commonest continuation was 2.Nc3 Nf6 3.Nf3 Nc6 4.g3, whereupon he scored 62% with 4...Bb4.
Against 2.g3, which today is very popular at club level, Smyslov scored 67% with 2...f5 3.Bg2 Nf6 4.Nc3 Bb4
The move 2.Nf3 always transposed to 2.Nc3 lines by 2...Nc6 3.Nc3.
Against 1.Nf3 Smyslov generally played 1...Nf6, when 2.d4 can be met by 2...e6 or 2...g6 depending on your choice in the move-order 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nf3. If White transposed to an English with 2.c4, Smyslov usually replied 2...b6, aiming for a Queen's Indian set-up. If White continued 2.g3, Smyslov scored 67% with 2...d5 3.Bg2 c6 4.0-0 Bf5.

Here is Smyslov using his pet system in the Spanish.
Zdravko Milev - Smyslov
Interzonal (Bucharest) 1953
Spanish Closed
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.0-0 Be7 6.Re1 b5 7.Bb3 d6 8.c3 0-0
Smyslov usually reversed Black's last two moves.
9.h3 Na5 10.Bb3 c5 11.d4 Qc7 12.Nbd2
Considering how massively popular this position became, it is perhaps surprising that its first appearance in Mega20 is in a 1905 game.
12...Bd7
The main line continues 12...cxd4 13.cxd4 Nc6 14.Nb3 a5 15.Be3 a4 16.Nbd2 Bd7, which occurs 777 times in Mega20, with White scoring 58%.
13.Nf1 Rfe8!?
Smyslov scored two wins and two draws with this move. Black has major alternatives in 13...cxd4, 13...Nc4 and 13...Rac8.
14.dxe5
Ľubomír Ftáčnik in Mega20 likes 14.b3!?
14...dxe5 15.Nh2
More popular today is 15.Ne3 but the text had appeared in two previous Smyslov games.
15...Rad8 16.Qf3 Be6 17.Ne3
The previous year, in round eight of the USSR Championship, Smyslov lost to Vasily Byvshev after 17.Ng4 Nxg4 18.Nxg4 h6!? 19.Ne3 Bg5 20.Nd5 Bxd5 21.Bxg5 hxg5, when Black was perhaps a little weak on the light squares (1-0, 64 moves).
Smyslov must have had an improvement in mind - perhaps 18...Nc4 or 18...Nc6 instead of the somewhat weakening 18...h6!? - as six rounds later he was happy to again reach the position after 16...Be6 (but more about that after the diagram).
17...Nc4 18.Nf5!?
It was probably safer to swop off the aggressively placed black knight,
18..Bxf5 19.exf5 e4!?
How should White proceed?
*****
*****
*****
*****
*****
20.Qe2
This seems best.
In round 14 of the 1952 USSR Championship the game Lev Aronin - Smyslov went 20.Bxe4?! Ne5 21.Qg3 Bd6 22.f4 c4 23.Nf3 Nxf3+ 24.Bxf3 when the analysis engines Stockfish11 and Komodo11.01 reckon Black gets a winning attack with 24...Bc5+ 25.Kh2 Qb6 26.Re2 (Black threatened 26...Bf2) Rxe2 27.Bxe2 h5. The game saw 24...Rxe1+ 25.Qxe1 Bxf4 26.Bxf4 Qxf4 27.Rd1 Re8?! (the engines much prefer 27...Rxd1 28.Qxd1 h6) 28.Qf2 Qxf5, when Black had won a pawn but White got very active with 29.Bc6 Qxf2+ 30.Kxf2 Rb8 31.Rd6 (½–½, 55 moves).
20...Bd6 21.Ng4 Nd5 22.f6?!
Ftáčnik points out that 22.Bxe4? (my punctuation) is more-or-less refuted by 22...h5 as White's attack following 23.Nh6+ gxh6 24.Qxh5 runs into 24...Nf6 25.Qxh6 Nxe4. However the engines reckon 22.Bb3 keeps Black's advantage to a minimum.
22...h5 23.Ne3 Ndxe3 24.Bxe3 Nxe3 25.fxe3 g6 26.a4 c4!
As Ftáčnik explains, the text highlights the weakness of f6 and makes it very difficult for White to activate his bishop.
27.axb5 axb5 28.Rad1 Qc5 29.Rf1 Qg5 30.Rd4?
White had to keep the black queen out of g3, either by the engines' 30.Qe1 or Ftáčnik's 30.Qf2.
30...Qg3 31.Rxe4
The consistent follow-up to Black's last move, but Smyslov has seen his way through to victory.
31...Qh2+ 32.Kf2 Bg3+ 33.Kf3 Be5 34.Qf2 Re6 35.Rxe5!?
Desperation, but White's game cannot be saved, eg 35.Kf2 Rxf6 36.Qg1 Qxg1 37.Rxg1 Bg3 38.Rf1 Rxf1 39.Kxf1 Rd2.
35...Qxe5 36.Ke2 Red6 0-1