Symmetrical Chess

THIS near-symmetrical position arose after 11 moves of my last-round game at Jersey.


Position after 11...Bc5! in Spanton (1851) - Krzyzstov Belzo (2103), Jersey round nine

Here are the moves that got us there:
1.Nf3 c5 2.c4 Nf6 3.Nc3
Easily the most popular move in ChessBase's 2018 Mega database. But also represented by examples in their thousands are 3.g3 and 3.d4.
3...d5 4.d4 
Hugely more popular is 4.cxd5, when the main line involves Black setting up a Maroczy Bind by 4...Nxd5 5.g3 Nc6 6.Bg2 Nc7 7.0-0 e5, with a position that has featured Karpov, Kramnik, Smyslov and Topalov as White, while Black's resources have been championed by Botvinnik, Fine, Reshevsky and Kasparov.
4...cxd4 5.Nxd4?!
This is disliked by my analysis engines, and scores very poorly in Mega18. Usual is 5.Nxd5.
5...Nc6?! 
Stockfish9 reckons Black is almost winning after the aggressive 5...e5.
6.cxd5 Nxd5 7.Nxc6 bxc6 8.e4 
8.Bd2 is the main move.
8...Nxc3 9.Qxd8+ Kxd8 10.bxc3 e5 11.Bc4 Bc5!
Reaching the diagram. Seven games arrived at this position in Mega18, and each was drawn.
My game continued:
12.0-0?!
This is probably too conservative. The king should not be in danger if it took up the more centralised e2 square.
12...Ke7 13.Rb1 Bd7 14.Bd2 Rab8 15.Rb3 Be6 16.Bxe6 Kxe6 17.Rfb1 Rxb3 18.axb3 Rd8 19.Be1
Black's pieces are more active than White's, but he has more pawn islands (1/2-1/2, 49 moves).

Albin Antics

Glyn Pugh (1847) - Spanton (1851), Jersey round eight
1.d4 d5 2.c4 e5 3.dxe5 d4 4.Nf3 Nc6 5.g3 Nge7
Russian GM Alexander Morozevich is credited with making this move popular, his idea being to round up the e5 pawn, but it was played as long ago as 1905 by Austria's Carl Schlecter.
6.Bg2 Ng6 7.0-0 Bf5?
Overwhelmingly most popular is 7...Ngxe5, but the text has been the choice of at least one 2300+ player.
8.e3
Nevertheless, 7...Bf5? is definitely a mistake, as is shown by the reply in my game, and by 8.Qb3, one point being that 8...Qd7 fails to 9.Qxb7 Rb8 10.Nxd4!
8...d3 9.Nc3
9.Qb3 was still strong, but the text is natural and is not bad.
9...Qd7

Position after 9...Qd7

10.e4?I'd planned to meet 10.Nd4 with 10...Nxd4 11.exd4 Qxd4, but White has several good continuations, including the obvious 12.Bxb7.
10...Bg4 11.Qe1?The position has suddenly become tricky for White. Maybe he should have got on with development by playing 11.Be3, but Black has promising compensation after 11...h5, a kingside attack being one of the main ideas of a quick ...Bf5 and ...Qd7.11...Ngxe5Stockfish9 much prefers 11...Bxf3 12.Bxf3 Ncxe5.12.Nd2??12.Nxe5 is unclear, but after the text, Black is winning.12...Nd4 13.f3 Bc5 14.Kh1 Nc2 15.Qd1 Ne3 0-1 (25 moves).

Pretty - But Flawed - Finish

MY round seven game at Jersey had a pretty-looking conclusion.

Black has just played 26...Qb4xb2 in Spanton (1851) - Nigel Livesey (1753)

The game finished 27.Rh5 Kg7 28.Rxh6 Kxh6 29.Qh3+ Kg5 30.Nxh7#.
In fact, my 27th was a mistake - I should have preferred 27.Re2, and if, say, 27...Qb4, then 28.Qh3 wins.
So, the question is, how could Black have saved himself after the move in the game, 27.Rh5?
Analysis engines have no trouble finding 27...Rd6! The point is that 28.Rxh6 is met by 28...Rxf6, when 29.Rxf6 runs into 29...Qc1+, picking up the rook on h6.

Snatching Defeat From The Jaws Of Victory

IF one lazy move cost me the game in Jersey round five, it was a series of endgame mistakes that turned a win into a loss in round six.

We reached this ending after just 22 moves in Alek Safarian (2020) - Spanton (1851)

Black is a pawn up and has a 3-1 farside majority.
But after 23.Rd7 it is clear White has the more active rook and king. Even so, Black should win with careful play.
However, AS soon felt justified in offering a draw.

White offered a draw after playing 32.Ke1-f1

Black is still better, but not by as much as I felt in the game. Indeed, I now think the position is almost certainly drawn.
I could find no way to get my king safely over to help promote my a pawn, so I eventually gave up the pawn to win White's h pawn, thinking my passed h pawn would give me an edge.
But soon the position was dead drawn - except that it was easier for White to find good moves.

Black has just played 41...Rb3-b6

The game finished:
42.f5 gxf5+
This is OK, but an even simpler draw is to be had by 42...h5+ 43.Kg5 gxf5.
43.Kxf5 h5 44.Kg5 Rh6? 
The simplest way to draw is 44...h4! 45.Kxh4 Kg6 eg 46.Kg4 f6 47.f4 fxe5 48.fxe5 Rb4+ 49.Kf3 Kf5.
45.f4 h4??
Black seems to be still drawing after 45...Rg6+ 46.Kxh5 Rg1 eg 47.f5 Rh1+ 48.Kg5 Rg1+ 49.Kf4 Rf1+ 50.Ke4 Re1+ 51.Kd5 Rf1 52.f6+ Kg6, as there seems to be no way White can make progress, eg 53.Ra3 Rb1 54.Rg3+ Kf5 (analysis with Komodo9 and Stockfish9).
46.f5
Black is completely busted.
The remaining moves were:
46...h3 47.f6+ Kh7 48.Rxf7+ Kg8 49.Rg7+ Kf8 50.e6 h2 18mins less 51.e7+ Ke8 52.Rg8+ Kd7 53.e8Q+ Kd6 54.Qe7+ Kc6 55.Rc8+ 1-0

Natural, or Lazy?

MY round five game at Jersey was heading for a draw until I played a "natural" move in the following position. Can you work out what it was, and why it lost material?

Black has just played 31...Ba6-c8 in Spanton (1851) - Richard Bryant (1932)

I lazily played 32.Ke2? (32.Kd3? is just as bad), losing a pawn, and eventually the game, after 32...Bf4.
Correct was 32.g3, after which neither player can realistically make progress.

Win, Lose or Draw?

IT is Black to move in this position from round four at Jersey. With best play, should Black win, lose or draw?

White has just played 43.Nh5-g7+ in Spanton (1851) - Sheila Jackson (2108)

The game saw:
43...Kg6 44.Ne6
Forced.
44...Kxf7
Forced.
45.Nxg5+
Forced.
45...Kg6
45...Kf6 46.Ne4+ Ke6 47.Nxd6 Kxd6 48.Ke3 is a drawn pawn ending.
46.Ne4 Bf8 47.a4 bxa4 48.Nd2
... and the game was drawn.

 43...Kf6?? loses trivially to 44.Ne8+.

43...Ke4?? also loses to 44.Ne8, eg 44...Be7 45.Nf6+ Kf5 46.Nd7 etc.
But 44.Ne6? seems to only draw after 44...g4 eg 45.f8Q Bxf8 46.Nxf8 g3 47.Ne6 g2 48.Ng5+ Kf4 49.Nf3 Ke4 50.Nd2+ Kf4 51.Kf2 a4 52.Kxg2 Ke3 53.Nf1+ (other moves lose) Kd3 54.Kf2 Kc2 55.Ke2 Kxb2 56.Kd2 Kxa3 57.Kc2 b4 58.Nd2 Ka2 (if 58...b3+ then 59.Kb1 b2 60.Nxc4+ Kb3 61.Nxb2 a3 62.Nd1 a2+ 63.Ka1=) 59.Nxc4 b3+ 60.Kc1 a3 61.Nd2 b2+ 62.Kc2 Ka1 63.Nb3+ Ka2 64.Nd2 c4 65.Nb1 Ka1 66.Nxa3 Ka2 67.Nb1 Ka1.

Black seems to be winning after my analysis engines' suggestion of 43...Ke5!
The main line runs 44.Kf3 Bf8 45.Nh5 Be7 46.Kg4 Ke6 47.Ng3 Kxf7.
Or 44.Ne8 Be7 45.Kf3 b4 46.Kg4 Ke6 47.Nc7+ Kxf7 48.Nd5 bxc3 49.bxc3 Bd8 50.Kf5 Kg7 51.Ne3 Kh6 52.Nxc4 Kh5 53.Ne5 Bc7 54.Nd7 c4 55.a4 Kh4 56.Nf6 Bd6 57.Ng4 Bf4 58.Nf6 Bc1 59.Ng4 Bf4 60.Nf6 Bd2 61.Ne4 Bc1 62.Nf2 Bb2.

So the answer to the question seems to be: Black should win (with the caveat that one of the winning lines is rather long, so there may be mistakes in analysis).

Oppo Bishops In The Middlegame

IN round three at Jersey, I again had opposite-coloured bishops, but this time in a late middlegame.

White offered a draw after giving check in Aditya Verma (2002) - Spanton (1851)

27...Kh8 28.Bb3 Bxb4?
Clearly better is 28...Nxb4, even though, after 29.Bxf7, White gets an outpost for the bishop at e6, eg 29...Bc5 30.Be6 Rd1+ 31.Rxd1 Rxd1+ 32.Kh2 Rd8. Black has a dangerous passed pawn, and a target at f2, but thanks to a pair of rooks having come off, Black's king is not in serious danger. 29.Ra6 Nd4 30.Nxd4 exd4 3mins more 31.Rxf6 Bc3 32.Rh6 
Probably best.
The trouble with 32.Rxf7 is that after 32...Rxf7 33.Bxf7 d3, White is a pawn up but Black's passers are quicker. eg 34.Bb3 d2 35.Bd1 Re8 36.Kh2 b4 with the better chances.
32...d3??  3.f6
White threatens to mate, and Black can only avoid it by swopping off into a probably-lost ending.
33...Bxf6 34.Rxf6 d2 35.Kh2 d1Q 36.Bxd1 Rxd1 37.Rxf7 (1-0, 44moves).

Oppo Bishops Case Study

OPPOSITE-coloured bishops are notoriously drawish in endings (but not in middlegames).
Sometimes it is possible to hold such an endgame when two pawns down.
At other times, however, even equal pawns do not guarantee a draw.
Often the best way to win such an endgame is to create a passed pawn on each wing, even if that allows the opponent a passer, or passers, elsewhere.

Position after 36 moves in Spanton (1851) - Glenn House (2188), Jersey round two

Material is equal - in numbers, that is, not in quality.
Black's bishop is much more active than White's, and his king is more central. My b2 pawn is en prise and my g5 pawn is vulnerable to ...Bf4, when Black would be simultaneously protecting his e3 passer and tying my rook down.
The only way to free the rook would be to play h2-h4, but then the h pawn would be a new weakness.
I decided my best chance was to activate my rook on the open file, and so played ...
37.Be2 Rd8!?
My analysis engines slightly prefer 37...h4, but the text is their second choice.
38.Rd1 Rxd1+!? 39.Bxd1 Bxb2
Black has won a pawn and left me with two isolated queenside pawns, but I felt I had some reasonable drawing chances.
40.f4 
Activating the king with 40.Kg2 is met by 40...Be5, when ...Bf4 will force White to give up the g5 pawn or play h4, when the king would be tied to the kingside.
40...e2! 41.Bxe2 Bc1 42.f5 Bxg5 43.fxg6 fxg6
Black is 'only' one pawn up, but he has chances to create a passer on both flanks, and White has four isolanis. The game continued ...
44.Kg2 Kf6 45.Kf3 Ke5 46.Bd3 Bc1 47.h3 g5 48.a4 Ba3 49.Ke3 Bc5+ 50.Kd2 Kf4 11mins less 51.Be2 g4 52.hxg4 hxg4
One passer created.
53.Ke1 g3 54.Kf1 Kxe4 55.Kg2 Bd6 56.Bf1 Ke3 57.Kh3 Kd2 58.c5 Bc7 59.Kg2 Kc3 60.Be2 Kb4
I finally resigned.
Doubtless neither of us played perfectly, but I suspect this was an opposite-coloured bishop ending that could not be held.

Lucky Escape

IN round one of this year's Jersey Open, I was under the cosh for most of the game.

Position after 34...Kh8-h7 in Kim Le Quang (FM2267) - Spanton (1851)

Black's pawn weaknesses (e5, b6) mean White is more-or-less positionally winning after the precautionary 35.Be2 or, even better according to analysis engines, 35.Nf2.
Instead, KLQ jumped in with 35.Nf6+? After 35...Bxf6 36.Bxf6 Qxd3, he had no choice but to accept the perpetual that comes with 37.Qf8 Qxe3+ 38.Kg2 Qd2+ etc.

Marching On

MARCH has been my busiest ever month, as far as I can recall, for team chess.
For Battersea I lost to a 174, drew with a 169, drew with a 159 and beat a 165.
For Sussex I lost to a 173 and beat a 171.
For Hastings & St Leonards I beat a 148 and drew with a 152.

My updated first-season Battersea stats (CLL is Central London League; LL is London League):
Event..............Colour...Grade...Opponent's Grade...Result
CLL................White.....169.........183............................L
CLL................White.....169.........197............................L
LL...................Black.....169.........158............................W
CLL................White.....169.........158............................W
LL....................Black.....169........204............................L
CLL................White....169.........203.............................L
CLL..................Black.....169........180............................L
Eastman Cup...Black.....169........199............................D
CLL.................Black.....163.........172*...........................L
CLL.................White.....163.........153...........................W
LL...................White.....163.........188............................D
CLL.................Black......163.........166...........................L
LL...................White.....163.........150............................D
CLL.................Black.....163.........175............................D
CLL.................White.....163.........174............................L
LL....................White.....163.........169............................D
CLL.................White......163........159............................D
LL....................Black......163........165............................W
*Opponent has no official grade. Last published grade was 172 in 1997, which was pre-recalibration, and he was in the 180s before then.
Overall for Battersea I am +4=6-8 for a grading performance of 164.

Overall for Sussex this season I have lost to a 172, beaten a 169, lost to a 173 and beaten a 171, for a grading performance of 171.

Overall for Hastings & St Leonards this season I have beaten a 156, beaten a 148 and drawn with a 152, for a grading performance of 185.

It is said you can prove anything with statistics. That is an exaggeration but, despite my 185 grading performance for Hastings, there is no way I would rate my results there as better than my results for Sussex.
Indeed, it could be argued that my results for Battersea (no losses against lower-graded opponents, but a win against a higher-graded opponent, and with four of my six draws coming against higher-graded opponents) are better than for either Hastings or Sussex. I guess it is just a quirk of the English Chess Federation grading system.