Believe it or not, there were actually some positive things about my play in this tournament. I got good positions out of the opening in 3 out of 4 games. “Cailen’s Variation” in the Slav (1. d4 d5 2. c4 c6 3. Nf3 Nf6 4. cd cd 5. Nc3 Nc6 6. Qb3 continued to work like a charm, and my innovation in the Grunfeld (1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. Nc3 d5 4. h4!?) was quite successful in its debut against a 2400 player (Dmitry Zilberstein), although I screwed up the game later. I’m getting more and more happy about my 1. d4 openings. In rounds 3 and 4 I managed the clock very well. (In rounds 1 and 2, though, my clock management was horrific.)

To give you an idea of the negatives, I will show you here my “best game” of the tournament. I call it that because it was the only game I didn’t lose. For both me and my opponent, this game was the chess equivalent of stepping in a pile of dog poop. I made almost every kind of mistake possible: positional misjudgement, failing to look at killer candidate moves, hallucinating that my opponent could play an illegal move, and touching the wrong piece so that I had to make a move I hadn’t planned to. The only thing I didn’t do was leave a piece en prise (but I did that in the next round …)

Dana Mackenzie - Philipp Perepelitsky

1. d4 d5 2. c4 c6 3. Nf3 Nf6 4. cd cd 5. Nc3 Nc6 6. Qb3 …

Cailen Melville’s invention. So far my record with it is one win, five draws, and no losses. But that hides the fact that in five out of six games I have gotten serious advantages as White. The trouble is that with the symmetric pawn formation, if you don’t take advantage of your opportunities, it tends to get drawish. This year I’ve been very bad at seizing opportunities. But as long as they continue to be there, I intend to keep playing this line.

For Black, this variation is the perfect punishment for choosing the lame and oh-so-fashionable Slav Defense. Black has no chance of winning, and the question is just whether he will draw after protracted suffering. I noticed that Perepelitsky, in the next round, chose a different defense to 1. d4 as Black.

6. … e6 7. Bg5 Be7 8. e3 O-O 9. Bd3 a6 10. O-O b5 11. Rc1 Na5 12. Qc2 h6 13. Bxf6 Bxf6 14. b3  Bb7 15. Qd2 Nc6 16. Ne2 Qb6 17. Nf4 Rfc8 18. Bb1 g6 (diagram)

White to move.

Forgive my lack of comments, but I wanted to get to the first critical position as quickly as possible. So far the game has been as easy as duck soup for White. Unfortunately, this worked against me on the following move, because I continued playing on “autopilot” instead of thinking about the position. When Black played 18. … g6 I thought, “Okay, my queen isn’t going to need the d3 square now, so I will route my knight through d3 to c5 or e5.” I took only 3 minutes on this move, and did not even look at the correct line for White.

I should have focused on that weak square on g6. I did think about it a little bit, but only long enough to convince myself that sacrificing a piece there would be premature. What I should have asked next was this: “Is there any way to make the g6 square even weaker?” Indeed, there is! 19. h4! would have been a very strong move, and in my analysis this morning I couldn’t find any satisfactory answer for Black. If 19. … h5 (as Black played later in the game), now 20. Nxg6 fg 21. Bxg6 looks good for White, because he will win a third pawn for the piece, the pawn on h5. On the other hand, if Black allows White to play h5 himself, then as Jesse Kraai is fond of saying, “It’s a bad business.” He won’t be able to defend the pawn on g6, and if he replies … g5 then White’s threat to penetrate to h7 with his queen becomes very dangerous. I would venture to say that White is strategically winning.

But instead I unthinkingly played 19. Nd3 a5 and only now it hit me, “Oh wait a minute! I could have played h4!” This is Exhibit A for Bad Chess: seeing the right move one move too late. I decided to play it anyway: 20. h4. It’s still good, but not as good as it could have been with the knight on f4. Now the game continued 20. … h5 21. g3 b4 22. Nc5 Ba6 23. Re1 Na7, bringing us to our next key position (diagram).

White to move.

Here is Exhibit B of Bad Chess. I played the ultra-lame move 24. Nxa6?, exchanging my beautiful knight for Black’s do-nothing bishop. My opponent asked me after the game, “Why did you take that bishop?” The real reason is not that I was afraid of the bishop so much, but I was afraid of the knight and what it could do if it got to c3. (In fact, the knight and the bishop do in fact combine to create threats of Ne2+ if White isn’t careful.) So I took the bishop in order to control the knight, by playing Bd3, where I could either take the knight on b5 or else let it penetrate to c3 and then show that it is only superficially impressive on that square.

Nevertheless, after the text move, 24. Nxa6?, it is clear that White has no claim to an advantage any more, because he has traded his best piece for Black’s worst piece. Any master strategist, from Jeremy Silman to Jesse Kraai, would tell you that I should not even have contemplated such a move.

Instead, 24. Nd7 begs to be played, but I could not convince myself I had an advantage after 24. … Qd8 25. Nxf6+ Qxf6 26. Ne5. Black plays 26. … Nb5 and here comes the knight, to c3 and then maybe e4.

But I should have considered one more possibility: 24. e4!? This is very timely, because both of Black’s last two moves (… Ba6 and … Na7) have removed pieces from the center, so a blow in the center is the natural reaction. In fact I think White has a great game after 24. e4 de?! 25. Bxe4. Probably Black’s best is to continue with his plan: 24. e4 Nb5, but now 25. e5 and White’s position on the kingside is getting more menacing (though I don’t see any clear breakthroughs yet).

Once again, I did not even look at the key move. This is becoming a pattern: not looking at enough candidate moves, even though I had plenty of time.

After 24. Nxa6 the game should just have been even, but I continued in ultra-screw-up mode. After 24. … Qxa6 25. Bd3 Qb6 26. Ne5 Bxe5 27. de Nb5 28. Bxb5 Qxb5 29. Rc2 Rxc2 30. Qxc2 Qb8 (diagram)

White to move.

We have just made it past the time control, and so now I have all the time I need to think. So did I think? No! In less than a minute, I whipped out the appallingly bad move 31. f4?, after which White clearly stands worse. All the king’s horses and all the king’s men should not have persuaded me to make this move, which loosens my kingside in the worst way. Why not simply defend the pawn with 31. Qb2, preparing to sink the queen on d4? White may not be better, but at least he’s not worse.

The reason I didn’t play 31. Qb2 was absolutely absurd. I was still thinking, “I can’t move the queen off the c-file, because Black will claim the file.” That is, I forgot that Black’s queen on b8 interferes with the rook, and so I “thought” that if I played 31. Qb2, Black would play the illegal answer 31. … Rc8.

Exhibit C for Bad Chess, verging on Truly Awful Chess. When you start believing your opponent can make illegal moves, you know that you’re in trouble. (Curiously enough, that happened to me once earlier this summer, too; see this entry.)

And now for the gut-wrenching, nose-holding “climax” of this dismal game. I continued to thrash around, making my position worse and worse: 31. … Qb6 32. Kf2 d4 33. cd Qxd4+ 34. Ke2 Qd5 35. Ke3 Rd8 36. Kf2 (I came to the conclusion here that I had no business playing for a win, so I was just going to mark time.) 36. … Kg7 37. Re4 Qb7 38. Qe2 Rd5 39. Rc4 …

Exhibit D for Truly Awful Chess. I intended to play 39. Qc4, but then I touched the wrong piece. I’m not sure if it really matters, though.

39. … Qd7 40. Rc2 Rd1 41. Qe4 Qa7+ 42. Kg2 Qg1+ 43. Kh3 Qf1+

How unbelievably far White has fallen. His pieces are utterly passive, and his king is nearly in a mating net. After either 44. Rg2? or 44. Kh2? Qh1+ wins. Fortunately, for the only time in this game, I was alert enough, and played the only correct move, 44. Qg2! Qd3 44. Kh2 … (diagram)

And now I did my second smart thing in a row: I offered a draw. The time situation here was that I had about 25 moves left for the rest of the game, and Perepelitsky had about 15 minutes. He sat and stewed for about 9 minutes, but there is no way for Black to break through. White just shuffles his pieces on the second rank. The only way Black could make progress would be to try to bring his king up, but that would almost certainly lead to an instant draw. And Black can never contemplate trading rooks and queens, because the king and pawn endgame is always at least a draw for White, and sometimes even a win.

I could tell that Perepelitsky hated the idea of taking a draw, when he had come back so dramatically and I had screwed up so badly. But with his clock ticking down to 6 minutes, he had to face the inevitable.

After the game, the first thing he said to me was, “You missed so many wins.” Actually, I’m not sure I did. He thought I had lots of chances to sac on e6 or g6, but as far as I can see, the only time when I was really close to winning was when I missed 19. h4. Also, 24. e4 would have been interesting but I don’t see it as an open-and-shut case. What do you think, esteemed readers?

Share This

This will be my first tournament since my epochal disaster at the U.S. Open last month. Two years ago, before the Cal Chess Labor Day Open, I wrote this post called “Psychological Preparation,” where I set five goals for myself. It seemed like a good idea, so I’m going to do it again, with five new goals.

1. Focus on the process, not on the outcome. This is something I lectured about in a ChessLecture, called “Zen in the Art of Chess.”

2. Be glad when the game is difficult, because that means it is worth playing. This is competely the opposite of my normal frame of mind during a game, especially during last month’s U.S. Open. Typically, I start getting scared and nervous when my opponent puts up a good battle, especially if my opponent is rated lower than me. That’s ridiculous. If the purpose of chess is artistry, then I should be happy when my opponent plays the best moves.

3. Tell a story with your moves. Today I was listening to a recent ChessLecture by David Vigorito, called “Return to the US Chess League,” where he talked about not playing a move that was probably the most accurate, because he wanted a more dynamic game with more chances of winning. It suddenly struck me (although this wasn’t really the point David intended to make) that you don’t always have to look for the best move! There’s a certain amount of latitude in chess. Often there are three or four or five moves that are all about equally good. (This becomes especially apparent when you analyze with a computer.) Instead of trying to figure out which one might be 0.1 pawns better than the others, just play the move that suits you the most. Think of the chess game as a story, and tell the story that you want to tell.

4. Don’t seek absolute truth. Cailen Melville has been reading a book by GM Mark Dvoretsky, who says something like this: The purpose of analysis is to identify the best move in the shortest time possible. If you are pretty sure you have identified the best move, then there is really no point in analyzing it to the n-th degree. And similarly, as I just pointed out, if there are several moves that are about equally good, again there is no point in analyzing them to the n-th degree.

A good time for seeking absolute truth is in the analysis later (although Jesse Kraai would tell you that even that is a waste of time).

5. Conserve time in the first 10 or 20 moves that you will need later. My goal, since this tournament has a 40/2 time control, is to make the first 10 moves in 20 minutes and the first 20 moves in an hour. But the actual numbers are not as important as the philosophy, which is to realize that move 29 and move 37 are likely to be just as important as move 6 or move 14, if not more important. So don’t take a ridiculous amount of time on move 6 or move 14, leaving yourself with only seconds for that all-important decision on move 37.

As I wrote two years ago, the most important thing about the tournament will be whether I go 5-0 in achieving these goals, not whether I go 6-0 on the scoreboard.

However, it would also be nice if I did okay on the scoreboard as well …

Share This

Warning: This is a long post! I recommend getting a physical board before you read on, and maybe you might also want to print out the post to avoid getting lost in the variations. For those of you who are Chess Lecture subscribers, I’m also thinking about doing a lecture on this, so you could wait for that if you want.

Do you have your board ready? First, I want you to take a look at the following position. A good, long look. Allow yourself at least five minutes, and ask yourself two questions:

(A) What is the right move for Black?

(B) What is your assessment of the position?

Position 0. Black to move.

Okay, now for some back story. Cailen, John, Thadeus and I were analyzing one of my games in the US Open, but I use the word “analyze” loosely. On move 6 (!) Gjon suggested an improvement for me. We kept on going with Gjon’s suggestion until we reached this position on move 18 (!!). As I have said before, any analysis that goes more than 10 moves past an actual position that occurred in the game qualifies as “fantasy chess.” So we are definitely in fantasy-land here. But it is a very beautiful fantasy, as you will see.

“Hold it!” Gjon said, with insight born of many years of chess teaching. “Why don’t we try Dvoretsky’s exercise here? Let’s each take a piece of paper, analyze this position, and then write down our thoughts. After we’re done, we’ll compare notes. I think this will be a really good position to try Dvoretsky’s idea.”

[Note: Cailen has been reading a book by Russian GM Mark Dvoretsky, and he suggested this as exercise as a way to improve your analysis skills.]

So we analyzed in silence for a little while. Thadeus finished first, Cailen finished second, then Gjon, and finally I stopped — not so much because I was done analyzing, but because I was confident in what I would play.

Then we revealed our notes.

At this point I am going to change the story a little bit, and write our conversation not as it really occurred, but as a Socratic dialogue. I will, however, put each idea into the mouth of the person who really came up with the idea. This “scripted” version of our calculation will allow me to introduce a fifth participant who wasn’t really there: Rybka 3, super-super-grandmaster chess program extraordinaire, who has a couple of cogent points to make later on.

Position 1. White to move.

Thadeus. So of course I looked at 18. … Nxg2. White has to take (otherwise he has just lost a pawn for nothing). So 19. Kxg2 Qh3+. [See Position 1.] Now White has two options: 20. Kg1 or 20. Kh1. I thought the main line was 20. Kh1.

Dana. Isn’t that funny? I thought the main line was 20. Kg1. I think that puts up a tougher fight.

Gjon. I spent most of my time on 20. Kh1, like Thadeus. So let’s see what he has to say.

Thadeus. Now I figured  20. Kh1 Ng4 21. Bxg4 (forced, because there is no other way to defend both … Qxh2 mate and … Nxf2+, forking the king and queen) Bxg4 22. Qb3. [See Position 2.]

Rybka (standing in the background, unheard by any of us). *cough* Stupid human move. *cough*

Position 2. Black to move.

Thadeus. Now, of course, 22. … Re6 …

Dana. Wow! Are y0u serious? The only move that I looked at was 22. … Bf3+. I wonder if the change in the move order makes any difference?

Gjon. 22. … Bf3+ was the move that I looked at, too. Can we go over that first, before we look at Thadeus’ move? After 22. … Bf3+, 23. Nxf3 (of course) Qxf3+.

Cailen. Wait, what about 23. … ef?

Dana. Doesn’t work. If 23. … ef, White plays 24. Rg1 and 25. Rg3 next move. End of attack.

Gjon. Right. So Black has to play 23. … Qxf3+ 24. Kg1. Now Black plays the rook lift 24. … Re6, and here I was thinking about 25. Qd1. [See Position 3.]

Position 3. Black to move.

Dana. I looked at this line, too. I wrote down 25. … Rg6+ 26. Kf1 Qh1+ with either a draw by repetition or maybe sufficient compensation for Black after 27. Ke2 Qxh2.

Gjon. That’s kind of what I thought, too, except I had 26. … Qh3+ 27. Ke2 Qh5+ 28. Kf1.

Dana, Cailen, Thadeus. But wait a minute, why not 27.  Kd2?

Gjon [slaps his forehead]. Oh my god, d2 is free? I am so embarrassed. When I did my analysis I still thought the knight was on d2. Oh well. Never mind me …

Dana. Aha! I see a better way for Black to play here. Instead of 25. … Rg6+, which chases White’s king toward the center, why not 25. … Qh3!, which keeps him locked up in a mating net? Now the threat is 26. … Rg6+ followed by 27. … Qg2 mate. If 26. Kh1, which is White’s only defense, then 26. … Rh6 mates next move! So White is busted in position 3. [Note to reader: To be perfectly honest, I didn’t discover 25. … Qh3 until after I got back home. That’s why this Socratic dialogue is an improved version of reality.]

Gjon. Okay, so 25. Qd1 is out, so White has to play 25. Qxd5. Now the little trick with 25. … Qh3 won’t work any more, because after 26. Kh1 Rh6 White defends the h-pawn with 27. Qe5. So Black has nothing better than a draw by repetition with 26. … Qf3+ 27. Kg1 Qh3 etc.

Dana. And if 25. … Rg6+ 26. Kf1 Rg2 27. Re2 (nothing else works — if 27. Ra2 Rxh2 and White’s king stumbles over his rook on his way to the exits) 27. … Rxh2 28. Ke1 Rh1+ 29. Kd2, and I think that White is surviving! [See Position 4.]

Position 4. White’s King: Free at last! Praise the Lord, I’m free at last!

Dana. Okay, so it looks as Black has nothing better than a draw after 22. … Bf3+. Let’s look at Thadeus’s move [from Position 2], 22. … Re6.

Gjon. You know, I realize now that I did think a little bit about 22. … Re6, but the move that stopped me was 23. Qxd5, just like in the lines that we just analyzed. I think this is a real problem for Black. [See Position 5.]

Position 5. Black to move. Hint: Black to move AND WIN.

Dana. Jeez, I don’t see anything better for Black here than 23. … Bf3+ 24. Nxf3 Qxf3+, which transposes into the line that we just looked at.

Gjon. 23. … Rh6 doesn’t work, because of 24. Qe5.

Dana. 23. … Rae8 looks like a possibility, in order to defend the e5 square, but the problem is that White can just play 24. Qg5, heading for f4, or even better 24. Qd7, which paralyzes the rooks in place. Thadeus, what did you see for Black?

Thadeus. Actually, I didn’t go any farther than this in my analysis. I just thought Black had to be winning, with all those pieces attacking White’s king.

Rybka (stepping forward from backstage). Indeed, you are wise beyond your years, little grasshopper. But none of you have found Black’s brilliant, and only, winning move in Position 5. Do you want to look for it some more, or bow down to the computer’s superior wisdom?

Gjon. I want to look for it some more.

Thadeus, Cailen, Dana. We bow down to the computer’s superior wisdom.

Rybka. Very well, then. I shall enlighten you. In Position 5, Black’s winning move is 23. … Rf6!! Admire, pathetic humans, and weep.

Dana. Oh, my god. It’s like a combination of all of the best features of the lines that didn’t work before. The idea, of course, is to play 24. … Rxf2, with mate on g2 or h2. White’s queen can’t defend both squares at once!

Gjon. If White defends with 24. Rf1, then he takes the flight square away from his king, and so 24. … Bf3+ 25. Nxf3 Qxf3+ 26. Kg1 Rg6+ is mate.

Dana. If White 24. Rg1, in order to defend g2 with his rook and h2 with his queen, as in the previous lines, then he loses to 24. … Rxf2 25. Qe5 Bf3+ 26. Nxf3 Qxf3+ 27. Rg2 Qxg2 mate.

Gjon. Or if White plays 24. Qe5 first, then 24. … Bf3+! (note that 24. … Rxf2 now is not as good because of 25. Qg3!) 25. Nxf3 Qxf3+ 26. Kg1 and another point of … Rf6 is revealed: Black now has 26. … Qxf2+ 27. Kh1 Qf3+ forcing mate.

Cailen. Well, not really forcing mate, but after 28. Kg1 Rg6+ 29. Qg3 Rxg3+ White loses his queen, and the game is as good as won for White.

Thadeus. Also, if 24. Nxe4, to protect the f-pawn, then Black mates in two with 24. … Bf3+!

Gjon. And finally, here is the computer’s last little trick. If 24. Kg1, again with the idea of protecting f2, then Black crashes through with the sacrifice 24. … Rxf2! 25. Kxf2 Qxh2+ 26. Kf1 Bh3 mate.

Dana. What I love about this move 23. … Rf6!! is that you can only appreciate it after you have seen what is wrong about all the other move orders. Also, it is amazing that Black wins by playing two “quiet moves,” 22. … Re6! and 23. … Rf6!!, in a row. And it shows that Thadeus’s intuition was correct. Just on principle, Black should not commit himself to 22. … Bf3+ because he wants to keep more pieces alive for the attack.

Rybka. Rationalize all you want, human, but you will never achieve my level of mastery.

Dana. Okay, well, we’re halfway through now. Black is winning after 20. Kh1. What about the other line, 20. Kg1? [See Position 6.]

Position 6. Black to move.

Cailen. I didn’t think this was very good for White. Black plays 20. … Ng4 and after 21. Bxg4 Bxg4 22. f3 (otherwise it will be mate in two after 22. Q moves Bf3) 22. … ef! and White has to give up a whole rook to stop checkmate.

Dana. That’s right, Cailen, except that in this line (unlike the last one) White doesn’t have to take on g4. A much better defense is 21. Nf1! [See Position 7.]

Position 7. Black to move. Hint: Black to move AND WIN.

Dana. Now did any of you see the move 21. … Nxh2!?

Cailen. Obviously not, because I didn’t look at 21. Nf1.

Gjon. Wow! Another piece sacrifice! But does it work? Let me see this. White has to take, of course: 22. Nxh2. (Otherwise, … Nf3+ would be curtains.) Then what?

Dana. Then I play 22. … Re6 [see Position 8], and he plays 23. Bg4 …

Position 8. White to move.

Gjon. Wait, I don’t doubt you, but first can we look at 23. Bf1?

Dana. Oh. Oops, I didn’t think about that. Then I would play 23. … Rg6+ 24. Kh1 Qh4! With the simple threat of … Rh6 and mate.

Gjon. And if I play 25. f4?

Dana. Then I play 25. … Qf2. You can’t defend both the mate on g1 and the mate on g2.

Gjon. [Long pause] I guess you’re right.

Dana. Just lucky, because I didn’t see any of that when I was analyzing.

Gjon. Okay, so let’s go back to the line that you looked at. White plays 23. Bg4 …

Rybka. *cough* Stupid human move. *cough*

Dana. And now  23. … Rg6, and if 24. f3 (the only move to save the bishop) 24. … ef 25. Qxf3 [see Position 9].

Position 9. Black to move. Hint: Black to move AND WIN.

Dana. And here I was thinking Black would play 25. … Bxg4, but suddenly I’m not so sure. After 26. Qxh3 Bxh3+ 27. Kh1 Bg2+ 28. Kg1 I’m not sure that Black has anything better than 28. … Bh3+ with a draw by repetition.

Gjon. No! There’s a better move in Position 9. Black should play 25. … Rxg4+!

Dana. Of course! What a shot! White can’t take the rook with the knight because his queen falls. Why didn’t I see that? And if 26. Kh1, now 26. … Rg3 27. Qf1 and … hmmm… I’m sure that Black is winning somehow. I mean, if nothing else there is 27. … Rxe3 and Black has three pawns for a piece.

Rybka. Allow me to put the finishing touch on the combination that you humans have stumbled into in such a comical fashion. The correct move after 26. … Rg3 27. Qf1 is 27. … Bf5!! The point is that after 28. Qxh3 Black does not recapture the queen, instead he plays 28. … Be4+! 29. Qg2 Rxg2. [See Position 10.]

Position 10. White to move. “The Mill”

Dana. I bow down before your superior wisdom, Rybka. This is too lovely for words. After two piece sacrifices, an exchange sacrifice (sort of) and a queen sacrifice (sort of), what could be better than ending up in the famous position known as “The Mill”? Black threatens both 30. … Rg6+, which forces White to give up his knight in order to stop mate, and 30. … Rc2+, which wins the loose bishop on c3. Either way, Black wins a full piece and ends up two pawns ahead.

Gjon. This truly was a position worthy of a deep analysis! So our conclusion is that the sacrifice 18. … Nxg2 is sound and winning for Black in all lines.

Rybka. In essence your conclusions are right, pathetic humans, but you have not found the best defense for White in either line. First, just before Position 2, White could have played 22. Qb1 instead of 22. Qb3. The point is to keep the queen on the first rank, which makes the following defense possible: 22. … Re6 23. Rg1 Rh6 24. Rg2 Bf3 25. Qg1!, giving up the exchange but ending all the mate threats. I calculate a 0.33-pawn advantage for Black here.

Dana. I see what you mean. No human would ever consider such an abject defense.

Rybka. But computers have no pride, and will play the most groveling move if it is the best.

Dana. And what is the other improvement?

Rybka. In position 8, you only considered 23. Bf1 and 23. Bg4. As usual, you humans are too proud, and you think that White should try to make threats. Instead, White’s best defense is 23. Bh5!, which threatens nothing but slows down the Black attack by one tempo. First, it prevents 23. … Rg6. Second, after 23. … Rh6 Black has to waste time chopping through the underbrush, and White can use this time to hang on with 24. f4! Rxh5 25. Ra2! Here I calculate a 0.66-pawn advantage for Black.

Gjon. Yes, I would be amazed if a human ever played a move like 23. Bh5. If we leave out “computer moves,” Black is definitely winning, and even if we allow “computer moves,” Black is better. I think we have finally gotten to the bottom of Position 0.

Dana. Now, can we go back to the game?

Share This

So I have to come up with something new to tell you, some different twist on the news. Aha! Here it is! I will explain to you how I finished seventh.

“Seventh?” you ask. According to the US Chess website, the winners were:

1. Alejandro Ramirez (8-1)

2-4. Varuzhan Akobian, Alex Shabalov, Daniel Naroditsky (7½-1½)

5-22. A cast of thousands, none of them named Dana Mackenzie (7-2)

While I tip my hat to these outstanding winners, none of them came close to me  in the all-important category of Most Rating Points Lost. As a result of my epicly bad tournament, which was quite possibly the worst tournament of my life, I lost 47 rating points, from 2136 down to 2089. Here is the list of people with the greatest rating losses, which is dominated by players with provisional ratings (indicated by “P”), which are computed by a different method that allows them to change more rapidly.

1. Ani Azadkhanian (1943P5 → 1619P14; 324 rating points lost)

2. Alton Hacigumus (2004P5 → 1802P11; 202 rating points lost)

3. James Holder (1309 → 1221; 88 rating points lost)

4. Oscar Culbeaux (2328P14 → 2260; 68 rating points lost)

5. John Anderson (1889 → 1822; 67 rating points lost)

6. Raymond De Turenne (1219 → 1168; 51 rating points lost)

7. Dana Mackenzie (2136 → 2089; 47 rating points lost)

To all the six people who finished “ahead” of me, I want to say thank you for making me feel less wretched. To the 467 people who lost fewer rating points than me, or who (god forbid) actually gained rating points — no matter how bad you might feel about your result, it could have been worse!

Okay, no more wallowing in my misery. On to the next tournament!

A brief report on the other friends of mine who attended the tournament. My two companions, Cailen Melville and Thadeus Frei, both scored more points than I did, in the inverse order of their ratings. Cailen had 5 points and tied for second in the B category. Thadeus, a class A player, had 4½ points and didn’t win any money. I had 4 points and won the seventh booby prize.

Cailen’s decision to re-enter the tournament paid off handsomely, but his $300 prize just barely covered his entry fees — $190 for the original entry fee, and $100 for the re-entry. But of course the money was not such a big deal to him. He got the chance to play 12 rated games in one week, and felt that he learned a lot from them.

Dan Burkhard, our fourth Santa Cruz representative, scored 5½ points but actually lost rating points, which surprises me because I would have expected 5½ to be a good score for an expert. I think there are too many underrated juniors out there, making it hard for us older types to even keep our ratings level. Robin Cunningham withdrew after 8 rounds — I’m not sure why, because with 5½ points he was having a decent tournament (but maybe he correctly worked out that he could not win an Under 2400 prize even with a win in the last round). Pablo Pena had 6 points, which I think is a great score for an expert, but he did not collect any prize money. What a tough tournament! Jim Krooskos scored 4 points, which was about par for a player at his rating level.

The first person I saw upon arriving at the tournament on Tuesday was also the last person I saw when departing this morning: Ruth Haring, a USCF Delegate from California. She told me some interesting things about the delegates’ meeting. The most contentious issue has to do with the election for the FIDE presidency. You might not think that the USCF would have anything to do with this, because the candidates are Kirsan Ilyumzhinov and Anatoly Karpov from Russia. As you may know, there has been a huge amount of controversy because presidential candidates must be nominated by their own country’s chess federation, and yet the Russian Chess Federation can’t nominate both Ilyumzhinov and Karpov. Less well known is the fact that the same issue exists for the deputy presidential race: both Ilyumzhinov and Karpov have “running mates” who are American. The USCF has endorsed Karpov’s running mate, Richard Conn Jr., and so there are issues about the legitimacy of Ilyumzhinov’s choice that will probably have to be settled in court.

The reason this issue was controversial at the Delegates Meeting is that many delegates are terrified of having the USCF dragged back into court again after the Truong/Polgar and Sloan lawsuits. Plus, anybody wanting to sue the USCF right now sees the organization as a vulnerable target. However, the good news, according to Haring, is that an attorney experienced in election law has agreed to represent the USCF on a pro bono basis (i.e., for no charge).

Personally, I think that this rule that candidates must be nominated by their home country’s federation sounds like an outdated Cold War relic, which will probably be (and ought to be) tossed out after this election, because of all the ill feelings and unseemly behavior it has provoked.

So there you have it! All the news (and politics) from the US Open that’s fit to print.

P.S. I just thought of one more thing I should say. As the winner of the U.S. Open, Alejandro Ramirez qualifies to play in the next U.S. Championship. However, he is a citizen of Costa Rica (although he is studying in America) and might not be eligible to play. In that case, the qualifier from this tournament would be one of the three people tied for second: Akobian, Shabalov, and Naroditsky. Akobian and Shabalov will almost certainly qualify in other ways. So Daniel Naroditsky may get his first chance to play in the U.S. Championship!

Share This

This is actually the second time an “accident” like this has happened in my favor in this particular opening line. Although you shouldn’t choose your openings based on traps, it’s always nice when there are some traps built into an otherwise good variation.

For fans of the Two Knights Defense, here is the complete game:

Greg Churchill - Dana Mackenzie

1. e4 e5 2. d4 …

Interesting move order. This avoids the currently trendy Petroff Defense.

2. … ed 3. Nf3 Nc6 4. Bc4 Nf6 5. O-O Nxe4 6. Re1 d5 7. Bxd5 Qxd5 8. Nc3 …

All book so far. The double pin (on e4 and d4)  enables White to win back all of his material. Now there are two book moves for Black, 8. … Qh5 and 8. … Qa5. However, the second is considered a bit more reliable and has more theory. Therefore I play the other move. My general principle in all openings is to choose the less popular move, as long as there is no intrinsic reason for its being less popular.

8. … Qh5 9. Nxe4 Be7

Now this is a seriously unusual move. 9. … Be6 is usual, and has been played 600+ times in ChessBase. My move has only been played about 60 times. Nevertheless, I think it is completely sound. I have analyzed it thoroughly at home, although I have to admit that my analysis was all done 20 years ago in the pre-computer era. If you want to check it out on Rybka, be my guest.

10. Bg5 Bg4!

Black refuses to be intimidated.

Now 11. Bxe7 is the correct move. Black must avoid recapturing: if 11. … Nxe7? 12. Qe2 and Black’s king is caught in the center. Notice that it is too late to play 12. … Bxf3? because 13. Nf6+ leads to mate. However, after 11. Bxe7 Bxf3! immediately leaves White with a wrecked pawn formation and equality at best.

However, in last night’s game White took leave of his senses and played

11. Nf6+??

immediately. He must have convinced himself it was going to be mate. But after

11. … gf 12. Bxf6 Bxf3!

the tables are turned on him. He can’t play Qe2 and can’t capture on f3 because of … Rg8+. Basically, White has sacrificed a piece in order to give Black a mating attack. White resigned here.

I used 2 minutes for the whole game, because I was still in my home analysis. My opponent used 12 minutes.  Maybe I should demand a refund for getting to play only 14 minutes of chess all day, but I’m not going to complain.

It was a great day for both of my companions as well. Thadeus won his game quite easily because his opponent blundered a piece on move 20. Cailen won a long endgame with three pawns against a knight, which he said might have been his best endgame ever. So we all have scores of 4-4 going into the last round. As for the other players I know, I think that Dan Burkhard drew and stands at 4½ points. Pablo Pena lost and has 5. Robin Cunningham (my old friend from North Carolina who now lives in California, and is returning to chess after a long absence that included a dalliance with poker) won a really nice game with 20-year-old home preparation. Does that sound familiar? His preparation was deeper than mine, though. I believe he has 5½ points now.

By the way, I met Jim Krooskos, longtime ChessLecture subscriber and reader of this blog. He was happy, too; he said he had just gotten lucky in his game. I believe he is tied with me at 4. I’m starting to get worried about all the people I know at 4 points. The last thing I want to do is play one of them. My tournament is already ruined, and I don’t want to ruin the tournament for a friend!

With my game over so quickly, I had the chance to watch all the action on the top boards. To my surprise, Alejandro Ramirez whipped Alex Shabalov on board one. Who is Alejandro Ramirez? Well, according to this Wikipedia entry, he is a 22-year-old native of Costa Rica who is now studying at the University of Texas at Dallas. According to his bio at chessgames.com, “He is a GM.” That is his entire biography — four words, seven letters total! Well, whoever he is, he is now leading the US Open with 7½ points.

On board two, Max Cornejo (whose game with Thadeus I showed in my previous blog entry) got outplayed in the endgame by Varuzhan Akobian. However, on board three Daniel Naroditsky kept the youth movement going with a victory over Enrico Sevillano. Naroditsky played the Grand Prix Variation of the Sicilian (surprise!) and got nothing out of it. But then on the 20th move IM Sevillano committed a rather surprising oversight.

Black to move.

Here I basically thought that nothing was happening, and after a move like 20. … h5 (threatening 20. … Ng4) I think that the game would probably be drawn. But Sevillano, perhaps also lulled by the apparent harmlessness of the position, played instead 20. … Rc2?? Do you see what is wrong with this?

The answer is that Black has forgotten to leave his knight any places to move. So after 21. e5!, the knight was trapped! Sevillano sacrificed the exchange instead with 21. … Rxf2, but didn’t get any compensation for it and resigned several moves after the time control.

Thus, Naroditsky is in second with 7 points (tied with Akobian and maybe one or two other people) and thus in very good position to win the tournament if he can win in the last round. If so, he would almost certainly be the youngest US Open champion since Bobby Fischer. Fischer won in 1957 at the age of 14 years, 2 months, and Danya would be 14 years, 9 months. In today’s ultra-competitive chess world, I would consider Daniel’s achievement to be more impressive than Fischer’s.

But he has to win first.

Share This

I won my morning game, a nice King’s Gambit (I was White) with Westerinen’s line 1. e4 e5 2. f4 ef 3. Bc4 Nf6 4. Nc3 c6 5. d4 Bb4. I lectured on that once for ChessLecture, so I think I was a little bit better prepared for it than my opponent. I’m pleased to say that I nearly upheld my pledge to make the first 10 moves in 20 minutes and the first 20 moves in 45 minutes. The actual figures I achieved were 10 in 23 and 20 in 57, and by that point I already had a won game.

In round 7, however, I had an epic fail. The one thing I had not done so far this tournament was play an outright blunder, but I did so in this game — walking into a highly unusual fork. As Black, I had a knight on g4 and a rook on b5, both undefended, and my opponent played 18. Qe2! and attacked them both! It was a classic example of the maxim “LPDO” (Loose Pieces Drop Off), which I also once lectured on for ChessLecture. If the truth be told, I was already in a difficult position before I made my howler; the blunder just made the game end 20 or 30 moves quicker.

So through 7 rounds, my score is 3-4, with all the games against players rated below me and quite a few of them substantially below. To put things into perspective, I am now in last place among all players rated 2100 or higher. (Not quite in last place among all experts, though; there is a 2000-rated player who has a score of 2.5-4.5.) The situation has gone beyond disappointing, beyond depressing, all the way to silly.

There’s one other person who is having as bad a week as I am: Tiger Woods. In the first three rounds of the Bridgestone Invitational golf tournament, a tournament he has won seven times, he has shot his worst three rounds ever at that golf course (72, 74, and 75) and he is now in 78th place out of 80 players. However, there is one thing I can be very glad of: when I screw up, nobody cares but me. When Tiger Woods screws up,  everybody in the world finds out about it. Thank God I’m a nobody!

Cailen and Thadeus also have 3-4 scores. I just hope that none of us have to play each other this round.

One other Santa Cruz player is here, Dan Burkhard. We went out for dinner with him last night at an Oriental restaurant, and I ate Dan Dan Noodles in his honor! He is doing a little better than us, at 4-3. Also, Pablo Pena (an expert from the San Jose area) is having a great tournament, at 5-2, although he still has some work to do to win an expert prize. There are experts all the way up to 5.5 points.

As for the big boys, Alejandro Ramirez drew with Varuzhan Akobian in round 7 and leads with 6.5 points, and Alex Shabalov beat Larry Kaufman to tie him at that score. I would assume that Shabalov and Ramirez will be paired with each other in round 8, and I expect we will see a draw. That will give the large crowd of people at 6 points a chance to catch up. One of them is Daniel Naroditsky, whom I mentioned in my last post. Fellow blogger Mark Ginsburg is also at 6 points, as is Max Cornejo, whom Thadeus lost to in the first round.

Because it’s possible, in some far-fetched scenario, that Cornejo might actually take first place, let me show you the way that game ended. It’s a nice combination.

Black to move.

Here Thadeus said his plan was to play … Re8, … Bf8, and … Nf6 in some order, but he didn’t think the order mattered. Except, of course, the rook has to move before the bishop can, so he decided to play 1. … Re8 first. Big mistake! Can you see what White’s answer was? Here’s a hint: Black’s kingside is relatively undefended.

Cornejo played 2. Bh7+! (Full credit also for 2. Rxe6.) The next few moves were forced: 2. … Kh8 3. Rxe6! fe 4. Ne5. Now the threat is 5. Nf7+, which not only forks the king and queen but is also checkmate! (By the way,  if you’re wondering why Black’s king didn’t move to f8 instead of h8, the answer is again 4. Ne5, threatening a nice twin checkmate on g6. Black can’t do anything except 4. … g5, and then 5. Qg6 leads to mate next move.)

Thadeus was forced to move his rook back to f8, and now Cornejo won a pawn with 4. … Rf8 5. Ng6+ Kxh7 6. Nxf8+ Kg8 7. Nxe6. At this point, Thadeus was a little bit shell-schocked and played 7. … Qd6 (I think 7. … Qe8 would have put up better resistance.) Then after 8. Qg6 Thadeus realized that he was going to lose another pawn, and he resigned.

Position after 8. Qg6.

At first I thought Thadeus had given up a little too soon, but he was right. After 8. … Bf6 white can play 9. Nxg7! and if, say, 9. … Ne7 then 10. Qxh6 finishes the liquidation of Black’s kingside. Alternatively, if 8. … Bf8 then simply 9. Bxh6 snags a second pawn. Thadeus can try 9. … Ne7 10. Qg4 Kf7, with a simultaneous threat on both of White’s minor pieces (LPDO!). But in this case, LPDO doesn’t hold because White can play 11. Nxf8 gh 12. Nd7, and the knight escapes unscathed.

By the way, if Thadeus had played 1. … Nf6 in the original position, defending h7, then White’s combination would not work, and Black would have a reasonable position.

Two more games left — one tonight, and one tomorrow afternoon. Will one of the young players, like Cornejo or Naroditsky, win the tournament? Will I manage to put a sugar coating on my debacle by winning my last two games? Stay tuned!

Share This

Now, having said there is no excuse, let me tell you my excuses. I have barely studied chess in the last month, because all of my attention has been on the book that I am finishing (deadline in two weeks!). With such a lack of practice, you can’t expect to play well. My second excuse is that I have not been getting a lot of sleep. One thing I hadn’t anticipated when I went on this trip with Cailen and Thadeus is that teenage boys like to stay up late — midnight, 1 am — but my 50-year-old body is set for waking up around 7. So I’ve been going on about 6 hours of sleep per night, although this morning I forced myself to stay in bed until almost 8.

The other thing — more of a curiosity than a complaint — is that Cailen talks in his sleep. It seems to happen when he wakes up just a little bit, but not all the way. Half of what he says is gibberish, and half is English. The first night, for example, he stirred and shifted around and then blurted out: “Hunt. Hunt. Over here. Kovyhrhr.” The last word ended with sort of a sighing, whimpering exhalation, like a horse whinnying. Last night he spoke several times, but my favorite was when he said, “Cret. Coo!” (The latter word was pronounced with a short “oo”, as in “cook,” not a long “oo” as in “cool.”) The funny thing about his gibberish is that it comes out so naturally and with such conviction. He really said, “Cret. Coo!” with a great deal of satisfaction, as if he had just gotten a nice plate full of cret, and that was coo with him.

Okay, so let’s go back to the chess. Thadeus is also 2-3 and was really disappointed yesterday. He isn’t used to losing so much. In one game he was completely winning and then walked into a three-move combination and lost his queen. I think he and Cailen have been both a little bit surprised by the level and intensity of the opposition. They’re used to getting a break and playing some 1400 and 1500 players, but it hasn’t happened in this tournament. As for Cailen, he started out 1-3 and then decided to pay $100 and re-enter in the 4-day section. So far his score is 1½-1½, so he has already improved a little bit.

I don’t really know yet what is going on among the leaders. There aren’t a whole lot of GMs at the tournament, maybe 10 or so. I have been impressed with Daniel Naroditsky’s games. Although I don’t know what his score is, he has always been near the top boards, and every time I’ve looked at his games, he has always been putting pressure on his opponent. Thadeus, I think, commented, “And he plays on the edge.” He plays sharply but without losing control, and that is a very impressive feat.

Also I was impressed with an endgame by Tim Taylor where he had a queen and pawn against a rook and two pawns. I thought his opponent had an ironclad fortress, but Taylor broke through somehow and forced the rook to move away from the fortress, and then he hunted it down all the way across the board and got one of those typical positions where the rook has 14 moves but every one of them walks into a fork eventually. I hope I can find the game score on MonRoi to see how he did it. (I’m sure that his opponent must have been in time trouble by the end of the 99-move battle, so that may have affected the result.) [Correction: I just went to the MonRoi website and saw that the result of Studen-Taylor was a draw, not a win for Taylor. So my initial impression that the game was a dead draw was correct.]

As for my games, they have actually been good, hard fought games without obvious blunders. I’ve just been making poor decisions and getting into time trouble, which leads to more poor decisions. But also, my opponents have been playing very well. My most recent game was against Alexandra Botez, a high-school aged girl who lives in Oregon but was born in Romania. Although I try not to pay attention to ratings, something happened that really threw me off. She has a FIDE rating around 2000 and a USCF rating of 1885, but I misread her rating on the wall chart and thought she was rated 1585! So here is this expert-strength player (who is, by the way, young, attractive and female) banging out one excellent move after another, and I’m wondering, “When is she going to start playing like a 1585 player?”

By move 30 I was totally busted, and could barely even move my pieces, but then an amazing thing happened.

Black to move.

Hardly any of my pieces can move. Take a look especially at that bishop, stranded at the edge of the board. I played 28. … Qe7, hoping maybe to play … Rc8, … Be8, and … Bf7. But this is a pretty slow plan, and Alexandra stuck right away with 29. f5. In retrospect this may have been a bit of a mistake, but the flaw is very well hidden. Now I played 29. … Qf6, hoping for 30. fg Qxg6! With queens off the board, Black’s bishop on a4 suddenly transforms from a bystander to a very powerful piece, and the pawn at d4 can start to run. She instead played 30. g4, leading to this position:

Black to move.

Here I played 30. … Qe5! I was in very serious time trouble here, with probably about 5 minutes left for 10 moves, and so I couldn’t work out the tactics all the way (and I still haven’t). But I think that after 31. Qxe5 de 32. Nxc5 White would be in grave, grave trouble. The d-pawn is very hard to stop, and she might have to sac a piece for it. At this point she had lots and lots of time left — about 50 minutes — but she reached the same conclusion I did, and retreated 31. Qd3. Now I continued 31. … gf 32. gf and faced my next decision, which should have been easy.

Black to move.

Here my instinct was to play 32. … Kf7, and I should have gone with my instinct! If White plays the obvious 33. Rb7+ Kf6 she is losing! Black’s rook and bishop all get into the attack, while Black’s king is miraculously relatively safe.

Do you want to know why I didn’t play that move? It’s because I got greedy. After 32. … Kf7 I saw that she could play 33. Ng5+ and then I didn’t see anything better than 33. … Kg8 34. Ne3 with a repetition of position. Believe it or not, only four moves after being totally busted, I was now turning up my nose at the possibility of a draw! For shame! I was perhaps influenced here by the fact that I thought her rating was 1585, rather than FIDE 2000.

In fact, it is very unlikely that she would have played 33. Ng5+. In the post mortem I couldn’t even get her to look at the move. “It just looks so terrible,” she said. Having worked hard to get her knight to e6, she was psychologically unable to consider moving it. But every other variation we looked at was either lost or very problematic for White. So for psychological reasons, if I had played 32. … Kf7 I probably would have won the game. Amazing! What an unbelievable turnaround!

But instead I played 32. … Qe3+??, a move that absolutely makes no sense. I shouldn’t even be considering this move, because without even doing any analysis it is clear that Black cannot possibly win — whereas in the other line, Black has very definite winning chances. However, it’s worse than that. 32. … Qe3+ loses by force after 33. Qxe3 de 34. Rb7 Bc2 35. f6 Bg6 (all forced) 36. Rg7+! Kh8.

White to move.

Here I saw her winning combination, but because I was still under the impression that she was a 1585 player (albeit a very underrated one) I still had very faint hopes that she might miss it. Alas, no. She didn’t miss anything this game, except that … Qf6-e5 maneuver on moves 29 and 30, which was very easy to miss.

37. Rxg6! hg 38. f7 …

And here I should have resigned, but I played on another 10 moves because I thought she was a class C player. Sorry, Alexandra! I didn’t mean to disrespect you!

Well, what can you do? The main thing I need to do is not get into time trouble, so debacles like my 32nd move won’t happen. I hereby pledge in public to make my first 10 moves today in 20 minutes, and my second 10 moves in 25 minutes, unless a situation arises that is clearly the critical moment of the game. If I can adhere to this pledge, then I will have 1:15 left for my last 20 moves, and that should be enough to play the middlegame reasonably well.

Cret? Coo!

Share This

I was paired against a class B player named Ken Ivens. Once again — for the fifth time this year! — I found myself on the White side of Cailen’s variation of the Slav (1. d4 d5 2. c4 c6 3. Nf3 Nf6 4. cd cd 5. Qb3 –which I actually did a ChessLecture on). As usual, I got a very comfortable advantage, but I was not able to push it through to a victory. I thought Ivens played a good, patient game, but nevertheless I missed one really good winning chance.

White to move.

How many times have I said it — if only there were someone to tap you on your shoulder during the game and say, “White to move and win”? Here it’s not quite that clear, but I very clearly overlooked the best move. I had about twelve minutes left for fourteen moves, so I was in a bit of time pressure, and I just played the “automatic” move here, 27. Ba2. He played 27. … Kd7 28. b4 Nc6. I think that White still has winning chances here, but I committed another inaccuracy or two in the time scramble and was left with a blocked position where I was unable to make progress.

The move White has to play here is 27. Nc7!  I thought about this move during the game, and I clearly remember thinking, “Oh, that can’t be any good,” and I did not analyze it any further. I think that my reaction was based on two facts: I’m walking into a pin (after 27. … Rc8) and I’m also leaving a piece on prise (27. … Nxb3 or 27. … Nxc7 28. Rxc7+ Kd8). With three serious objections to the move, I think I figured it was not worth the time to figure them all out.

But every one of these lines has a problem for Black! If 27. … Nxb3 28. Nxa8 Nxd4 29. Rd2 and White’s knight escapes via b6. If 27. … Nxc7 28. Rxc7+ Kd8 29. Rxf7! Nxb3 30. Rf8+. And finally, if 27. … Rc8 28. Nxd5+! cd 29. Rxc8 Nxb3 30. Rb8! Nxd4 31. Rxb7+ Ke6 (diagram)

This is the trickiest line to evaluate. Black has two knights for a rook and a pawn, but White’s passed pawns will be dangerous. Here the computer finds a key twist that I almost certainly would not have found in time pressure:

32. a4! …

This makes the position a complete win for White. The point is that Black can’t take on e5 because his wretched knight on e8 is lost after Re7+. The second point is that this gains a tempo over the more obvious line, 32. Rxb6+ Kxe5 33. a4 Nd6!, when Black’s knights are able to organize a defense in time. By playing 32. a4 first, White does not allow the … Nd6 defense.

There are a couple of good morals here. First, you can’t ever play a good move if you let your initial reaction “Oh, that can’t be good” stop you from looking at it. Sometime, it’s true, when you’re in time trouble you have to do some triage and avoid complex lines that you can’t get to the bottom of. Which brings up the second point: don’t get into time trouble! I really had no excuse for it in this game. With a 40/2 (40 moves in 2 hours) time control, I spent 1 hour on just 5 moves, from move 14 to move 18, and that is just ridiculous.

Cailen and Thadeus were both paired up. Thadeus (who is an A player) was paired against Max Cornejo, a 2400-plus player. He got a pretty decent position but made a seemingly innocent transposition of moves, and Cornejo punished it beautifully. I’ll have to show that game in my next post. I think that it shows one of Thadeus’s weaknesses. He has great strategic understanding for a class A player, but he barely looks at tactics. He is always thinking, “I’m going to do this and this and this,” and it scarcely enters his mind to check for tactical tricks that might disrupt his deeply planned machinations. He even disdains them.

Cailen is the exact opposite — he never met a tactic he didn’t like. Unfortunately, in his game he got out-tacticked by his opponent and lost a pawn, and then later he hung a piece and resigned. Not a great game for him, but he was paired against someone 300 rating points higher. I told him, “It’s all right, because you were going to lose a game in this tournament sometime.“

Share This

The third part is quite a bit shorter than the other two, and in some ways I liked it the best. It seemed to me as if Khalifman had relaxed a little bit by the time he got to the third part, and he gave some much more emphatic and revealing answers. Here are a couple of excerpts to whet your interest:

- Alexander Valerievich, do you think that the leading chess players should serve as role models for the upcoming generation? That is, as a model not only in chess, but also in life, in their attitude toward the sport, their family, their friendships, and so on. So that parents would see such chess players and would want to encourage their children to take up chess as a sport.

There is no need to demand anything extra from our chess heroes. They are just the same as any other sportsmen. It is sufficient that they devote their lives to achieving success. The best example for relationships with family and friends should be the parents (alas, in the modern world I cannot rely on teachers). I would say that sports (especially the non-commercial ones, such as chess) are much cleaner than politics. Here is a slogan for you: “Your son can earn a million in politics or in so-called Russian business, but you will be ashamed of him anyway. But if he earns a half million in honest sporting competition, you will have nothing to be ashamed of!”

Why can’t you officially sell titles – GM, IM, etc. – if people want to buy them?

Probably because then the system of titles would lose all of its meaning, and even the game itself. Why should one waste one’s energy moving around some kind of pieces? You can do everything much more simply: have two people sit at a table and pull out their wallets, the judge determines which one is fatter and enters the result on the crosstable. You wouldn’t need to worry about any Najdorf systems or Westphalian variations, everything is as simple as can be…

However, given the existing vector of development of FIDE I would not be at all surprised if it comes to that eventually.

What is the most paradoxical move that you have ever seen in a real chess game?

Hmm, that’s not so easy… to me, the move f2-f4 after 1. e4 e5 is more than paradoxical. After 40 years I am still amazed by it.

P.S. I mean this absolutely seriously.

Until I got to that last question, I had thoroughly enjoyed translating the Khalifman interviews, but if he is going to start trashing my beloved King’s Gambit … I just can’t take it! (sob) 

Oh well, the punishment for those who refuse to play the King’s Gambit as White is that they are condemned to an eternity of playing against the Petroff Defense. I think that is a pretty appropriate punishment.

In other news, Cailen Melville (local player in Santa Cruz whom I have mentioned on many occasions) and I are going to drive to Irvine next week for the U.S. Open. I’ve been looking forward to this for months, although until recently I wasn’t really sure if I would go. The problem is that it’s coming right at a time when I have some intense work pressures. So the state of my preparation for this tournament is going to be simply abysmal. But the U.S. Open doesn’t come to your state every year, even if you live in a big state like California, so you’ve got to take the chance to play in it while you can, right?

Of course I will be blogging from the U.S. Open, so check back here often next week for news.

Share This

To tell you what happened, I will once again present my translation of grandmaster Sergey Shipov’s online commentary. The original Russian commentary can be found here at the Crestbook website. You can also play the game through on an interactive board. For best results, I suggest opening the Crestbook site in one window while keeping this translation open in another one.

Without further ado, I turn the podium over to Sergey Shipov.  — DM

Hello, dear viewers! The tournament in Dortmund is already coming to an end. This is grandmaster Sergey Shipov, commenting on the final round for you. Ponomariov is leading Le and Mamedyarov by a point. The leader, of course, would be happy with a draw, but why not play for a win with White? A great deal will depend on how the opening turns out. If the Vietnamese grandmaster makes an inaccuracy, then the Ukrainian is hardly likely to deny himself the pleasure of a serious battle. In the final analysis, Ruslan is a warrior, not an accountant. He knows how to take risks, keeping a cool head in any kind of complications.

In principle, no matter how today’s game ends, Ponomariov and Le can be considered the stars of the tournament. Ruslan reminded all of his skeptics of his honored past, and proved that he still has a good future. And Le managed in his very first opportunity (which is extremely rare) to achieve an excellent result in a tough round robin tournament.  I think that he will now be invited to the most prestigious competitions. It’s immediately obvious that he is a lad with bright prospects, and also it will be very useful for organizers to embrace the new star from Asia — it will increase the press’s interest in their tournaments.

Ponomariov, R. - Le Quang Liem

Dortmund 2010 (round 10), 7/25/2010

1. e4 …

It is pleasant to see that there are still people who will vary their serve. Ruslan chooses between 1. e4 and 1. d4 depending on the opponent. Such a breadth of openings demands a great deal of work. But it pays off …

1. … c6 2. d4 d5

The Caro-Kann Defense.

3. ed cd 4. Bd3 …

A modest variation that has been known since the end of the 19th century. Alapin, Teichmann, and other classics played this way. The Panov attack, 4. c4, is more aggressive.

4. … Nc6 5. c3 Nf6 6. h3 …

White interferes with the white-squared bishop’s emergence into the world. If 6. Nf3 Bg4! Black doesn’t even have the slightest problem.

6. … Qc7

Le tries to rule out any strategic risk. With the text move he prevents the deployment of the white Bishop to f4.

Objectively speaking, the most logical continuation is 6. … e5 7. de Nxe5, but not everybody likes to play with an isolated pawn. It demands great precision and energy.

7. Nf3 g6

The black-squared bishop finds a way of developing that does not interfere with his white-squared compatriot’s search for employment. 7. … e6 would be positional capitulation.

8. O-O Bf5

The slight weakening of the pawn structure in case of a trade on f5 is a small price to pay for the successful development of the queenside. The idea is far from new. This is the way that Salo Flohr used to play more than half a century ago. And he had many followers. Ruslan undoubtedly is fully up-to-date on the theory of this line. And he probably has a couple of stones up his sleeve — that is, his own innovations. Nevertheless he is taking his time over this move.

9. Re1 …

The simplest, but not the most ambitious continuation. Ponomariov clearly prefers to play with an extra reserve of solidity.

The more principled move is still 9. Bxf5 gf 10. Re1 e6. For starters I will show you the source game:  11. Nbd2 Bd6 12. b3 Rg8 13. c4 Ne4 (here is the advantage of the appearance of a Black pawn on f5) 14. cd Nc3! 15. Qc2 Ne7 16. Nc4 Ncxd5 17. Nfe5 Ng6 18. Nxd6+ Qxd6 19. Nc4 Qc6 20. Qxf5 Nh4 21. Qxh7 O-O-O and Black has a dangerous attack for the sacrificed pawn, A. Tolush - S. Flohr, Kiev 1944.

But here is an example from our days: 9. Bxf5 gf 10. Re1 e6 11. c4 (playing for the initiative) 11. … dc 12. Nc3 O-O-O 13. Qa4 Nd5 14. Qxc4 Kb8 15. Bg5 Be7 16. Nxd5 Rxd5 17. Bxe7 Nxe7 18. Qxc7+ Kxc7 19. Ng5! Rg8 20. Nxf7 Rb7 21. Rac1+ Kb8 22. Ne5 Rxd4 23. Rc4, and White achieved a lasting advantage in the endgame, J. Ehlvest - P. Harikrishna, Merida 2008.

9. … Bxd3 10. Qxd3 Bg7

Having successfully traded the traditional problem bishop, Black completes his development without interference. He should not experience any difficulties.

11. Nbd2 O-O 12. Nb3 …

White still has to find a place for his bishop on c1. The optimal position — on the h2-b8 diagonal — is impossible for the time being.  Meanwhile, what should Black do? For now, breaking in the center is unrealistic, and also risky. He can try to strengthen the e4 square by playing … Nf6-e4 and … f7-f5. Or he could like an old man prepare a minority pawn attack on the queenside. He needs to think … The time is 1:35-1:29.

12. … e6

A useful, generally strengthening move — the analogue of Vitamin C. He will choose a plan later …

In the game V. Ivanchuk - A. Kovchan, Sochi 2010, Black declared his intentions immediately: 12. … Ne4 13. Ng5 Nxg5 14. Bxg5 h6 15. Bh4 e6 16. Bg3 Qd8 17. Re2 Na5 18. Rae1 Nxb3 19. ab Qb6 20. Qc2 a5 with a playable position.

13. a4 …

A novelty — a bland prophylactic move. It’s played so that Black cannot even think about any attacks on the queenside. The bishop will rest for a while on c1, in order to be able to come out in one fell swoop in case of a knight trade on g5.

An earlier game went 13. Be3 Ne4 14. Ng5 Nf6 (at this point, lovers of chess artistry are probably grimacing) 15. Qd2 h6 16. Bf4 Qe7 17. Nf3 Ne4 18. Qd3 Rac8 19. Nfd2 Nd6 20. Bxd6 Qxd6 21. Nf3 Rc7 22. Qe3 b6 23. Ne5 Kh7 24. Kh1 Bxe5 25. de Qe7 and as a result of the virtuoso play of both sides, we have reached a roughly equal position, W. Kruszynski - K. Pytel, Gdynia 1973.

[Translator’s note: Do I need to tell you that Shipov is joking here? — DM]

13. … Rfe8

Another clever, non-juvenile move. Believe it or not, Black is deliberately defending his e6 pawn! After 13. … Ne4 14. Ng5 the move … f5 would be impossible because of 15. Nxe6!

14. g3 …

Here, however, I am forced to abandon my jocular tone. This move was played with juvenile naïvete! Ruslan does after all want very much to bring his bishop out to a promising diagonal. However, I’m afraid that the installation of the knight on e4 will give Black  weighty chances. With the pawn on g2 it was possible to think about poking the knight with f2-f3. But with the pawn on g3 — no way!

It’s true that it’s not so easy for me to find a sane alternative. I was considering the original idea of sending the knight into exile on the side of the board with 14. Nc5 b6 15. Na6! As strange as it may seem, this seems to bring White some benefits: 15. … Qb7 (or 15. … Qd6 Ne5! or 15. … Qe7 16. Ne5! Nxe5? 17. de Ne4 18. Rxe4! or 15. … Qe7 Bg5!) 16. Qb5 Ne4 17. Bf4, and it is extremely difficult for Black to extricate himself from the bind on the queenside.

14. … Ne4

Of ourse.

15. Bf4 …

Both sides are making their secret wishes come true, without doing anything to hinder one another.

15. … Qd8

A careful move, with an underline under the word “careful.”

First of all, a retreat to d7 or e7 would have made sense, not breaking the connection between the rooks. Secondly, at a minimum it would have been worth spending a couple of minutes on the interesting jab 15. … e5, with the idea of a double attack by the queen on b3 and f2. But with precise play White can repel the attack: 16. de! Qb6 17. Qc2 Nxe5 (17. … Rac8 18. a5!) 18. Nxe5 Bxe5 19. Be3! Qc7 20. Rad1. However, I would not venture to say that he has an advantage in this position. The weakness of the pawn on d5 is compensated by Black’s active piece play. The knight on e4 all by itself counts for a lot…

16. h4 …

Ponomariov’s treatment. Apparently he decided that Le put his queen on d8 specifically to drive the White bishop from its beautiful post by means of the move … g6-g5. By the way, it may well be this is correct … But note the fact that one more White pawn has been put on a dark square. With dark-squared bishops on the board, that is a fairly risky strategy … But of course, Ruslan sees further. Besides the static considerations in the position there are also lots of dynamic factors.

If he wanted a guarantee of keeping the bishop on its indicated diagonal, he could have played 16. g4. But not everyone would be willing to weaken the king’s defenses in such a way.

16. … h6

The Vietnamese grandmaster indirectly confirms my suspicions. The resource … g6-g5 is still on the docket!

17. Kg2 …

A very distinct warning to his opponent: Okay, son, let’s stop joking around. Otherwise the Black king will have visitors on the h file.

17. … g5

As you can see, Le is not one of your timid soldiers. He is fighting bravely and with a clear goal in mind. He set himself a goal and he is striving for it without regard for any obstacles.

18. hg …

There is no point in avoiding the trade — 18. Be3 f5!

18. … hg 19. Be3 …

Unsatisfactory was 19. Be5 because of 19. … f6!

19. … f5

Exactly the right time! Black first drove his adversary away from his control of the square e5, and only then carried out his intention of seizing more space. There’s nothing you can say — Black has played very sensibly. Assuming, of course, that White doesn’t catch him in some tactical faux pas. There is plenty of time: 1:07-0:54.

In my opinion, Black has excellent prospects. It is easy and pleasant to play with a knight that cannot be ousted from e4. It is more difficult to play the White side … which is confirmed by the long deliberation of the Ukrainian grandmaster. His strategy has led to a dead-end. Probably he will have to move the knight away from f3 and prepare the nudge f2-f3. Risking the life of his king.

20. Ng1 …

I did not expect that my advice would be carried out so literally. White is now ready to play f2-f3. And it’s even more likely that he is planning a preparatory Ng1-e2, in order to make the sacrifice of the knight on g3 less of an issue. The only remaining question is whether this voluntary abandonment of the center by White’s knight might encourage Black to blow up the position by playing 20. … e5.

I looked at the variation 20. Nfd2 Qf6 21. f3 Nxg3 22. Kxg3 f4+ 23. Kf2 fe+ 24. Rxe3 Ne7 25. Rg1 Ng6 26. Ke1 Nf4 27. Qc2 e5 28. Kd1! and it seems as if White’s king has managed to escape from the inferno on the kingside in time.

Next I took a look at the superficially ugly idea of trading on e4 — 20. Nfd2 Qf6 21. Nxe4 de 22. Qd2 f4 23. gf Qf5 and discovered that besides the perpetual check (after 24. fg) White also has the interesting resource 24. Rg1!? However, Black can also be clever: 24. … Rad8, preparing a total opening of the center. Very complicated variations! Over the board you really can’t grasp everything.

20. … Qf6

Reasonable restraint. It’s better to strike the blow when it is guaranteed to produce the desired effect.

It was not at all easy to analyze the move 20. … e5 to a conclusion. There are too many branches … Here is a small illustration:

21. f3 (21. de Nxe4 22. Qd1 Nc4 etc. does not look good, and risky is 21. Ne2 f4 22. f3, for example 22. … Nd6 23. de Nxe5 24. Qxd5+ Ndf7 25. Qxd8 Nxd8 26. gf Nd3 winning an exchange) 21. … Nxg3 22. Kxg3 f4+ 23. Kg2 fe 24. Rxe3 ed 25. Rxe8+ Qxe8 26. Nd4 and White holds.

21. Ne2

Here 21. f3 was clearly premature because of 21. … Nxg3!

21. … Rad8

Solid grandmaster play. Black brings up his final reserves toward the center. Now he can fight with nothing held back! The time is starting to “squeeze” the players a little bit: 0:44-0:32. One more serious deliberation and time pressure will become a reality.

22. f3 …

It’s time. Otherwise Black would play … e6-e5 with a terrible initiative. After the text move, I am starting to have a sneaking suspicion: does Black really need to move his knight from e4?

22. … Nd6

Le decides not to inquire about the details. He redirects his evicted knight toward c4.

I analyzed the waiting move 22. … Kf7 and found an elegant tactical topping with 23. fe fe 24. Qd2? (24. Bxg5 would put up more resistance) 24. … Qf3+ 25. Kg1 Rh8, and White gets mated.

However, in chess you are not obliged to accept a sacrifice. On 22. … Kf7 23. Rh1! looks perfectly good.

23. Qc2 …

Ponomariov does not object. He could have prevented the incursion on c4 with 23. Nd2, but the position of the knight on d2 is rather passive. For example, in case of … e6-e5 he is no longer able to move to d4.

23. … f4

Every secret is revealed sooner or later. It turns out that the sprightly knight is heading not for c4, but to f5. Closer to the White king.

24. Bf2 …

Modestly but solidly played. In the variation 24. gf Nf5 25. Qd2 Nh4+ 26. Kf2 Black would have played the thunderous move 26. … e5!! with a murderous attack.

24. … Nc4

Every move a surprise. I’ve already stopped trying to guess the moves! I am simply sitting here and looking at the screen, and feeling satisfaction at the brilliant and substantive play of the clever opponents.

Just for the sake of curiosity I analyzed the barbaric continuation 24. … e5 25. de Nxe5 with the intention of reaching the square f3. The play could continue 26. Nbd4! (There were more than enough ways for White to go wrong: 26. g4? Nxg4! or 26. Bd4? Nf5! or 26. Ned4 g4!) 26. … fg 27. Nxg3 g4 28. fg Nxg4 29. Bg1. As you can see, the White king is somehow alive and well even in the wide-open spaces. By the way, his Black colleague is not exactly ensconced in a warm and cozy sanctuary.

25. g4 …

Ruslan probably could not conceal a sigh of relief. He has finally managed to stabilize his king’s pawn shelter.

25. … Kf7

A move with many plans. One of the ideas is a crafty trade of queens on g6. The weakness of the pawn on b2 would be perceptible. Note also that Black always has the sharp break … e6-e5 in reserve, which is capable of sharply changing the character of the game. White still stands worse.

26. Nd2 …

A natural desire to get rid of the terrorist.

26. … Qg6

A strong riposte.

27. Rac1 …

An attempt to defend everything without changing the structure. After 27. Qxg6+ Kxg6 28. Nxc4 dc White’s minor pieces are like prisoners of the Bastille.

27. … e5

A powerful and quite timely blow. Le has once again waited until the precise moment when his adversary moved a minor piece away from a key square, and then, finally, struck his blow. In this case, I’m talking about the knight at b3, which for a long time was guarding the square d4. The Vietnamese grandmaster’s advantage has become noticeable. But at the same time, his disadvantage on the clock is also noteworthy: 0:31 - 0:13. We will now find out which is better from a practical point of view: to play slowly and very powerfully, or to play quickly and … not too badly.

28. Qxg6+ Kxg6 29. Nxc4 dc

The elimination of the hyperactive knight has not come for free. The rook on d8 now enters the game actively. White is cramped and doomed to a passive defense.

30. Red1 …

The most stubborn move. Only a crazy man would trade on e5, allowing the enemy knight into d3.

30. … ed?!

The onset of time trouble has already made itself known. A stronger move was 30. … b6!, really putting the clamps on White. He is simply not in a condition to undertake anything. The cheap seats are full! With the text move Le begins a forced variation which, it seems, makes White’s job easier.

[Translator’s comments: Actually, a chess comment here. I wish Shipov had said a little bit more about what Black’s plan should be. After all, White could just wait with Bf2-g1 or Rc1-c2. It isn’t a complete zugzwang. But still, his overall point that Black does not to be in a hurry here is certainly right on the money.

By the way, I think Shipov’s comment about the “cheap seats” is meant to imply that the White pieces are so badly posted they are like people sitting in the cheap seats in a concert hall. However, I could be wrong about this interpretation. The actual word he used was “parterre.” — DM]

31. Nxd4 Ne5

The idea is understandable — he wants to gallop with his horse into d3. But White’s pieces are also improving their positions.

32. Nf5 …

Could the White knight have dreamed of such a career just a few moves ago?

32. … Nd3

But for the time being, the victory of the Black cavalry is a little bit more significant.

33. Rc2 …

White has managed to defend all of his weaknesses in time.

33. … Bf6

Now the time scramble begins, and Black’s advantage begins to evaporate like smoke. 33. … Re6 was stronger, with the idea of doubling rooks and invading on e2.

34. Rh1 …

Clearly an unanticipated resource. White’s rook threatens to infiltrate the body of the Black army.

34. … Rh8 35. Rxh8 …

Ponomariov is playing very rapidly — clearly trying to drive his opponent into even more serious time pressure. The times is 0:25 - 0:07.

35. … Bxh8 36. Re2 …

Ruslan’s playing strategy is aided by the fact that White’s moves are simple and obvious.

36. … Nxf2

Le is swimming, as they say — he is desperately grasping at all of the obvious possibilities. Once again it would have been hard to imagine a few moves ago that White would manage to trade his utterly passive bishop for the powerful Black knight. On the other hand, in this position 36. … b6 would also not have accomplished anything. In that case White would whip up counterplay with 37. a5! ba 38. Re6+ followed by 39. Ra6.

37. Kxf2 Bf6

The position is roughly equal. It’s hard for either side to undertake anything active without exposing themselves to obvious risks.

38. Re4 …

Pointing out a flaw in the opponent’s position.

38. … Rd2+ 

A symmetric answer. Everybody has his own problems …

39. Re2 Rd3 

If he trades rooks, Black runs the risk of losing the c4 pawn.

40. Re4 Rd2+ 41. Re2 …

The time control is past, and the result of the game has become obvious.

41. … Rd3 42. Re4 ½-½

A draw! Ruslan Ponomariov has become the winner of the Dortmund 2010 tournament. Bravo! It has been a long time since he won such a powerful tournament… However, his second place at the World Cup 2009 was no less weighty a success, maybe even more so. But still, the fact of winning a tournament, and winning it outright, is exceptionally important for the psychology of a chess player. I hope that Ruslan will soon return to his peak form and will once again be in the running for the champion’s title. He deserves it…

All the flattering evaluations that I offered about Le’s play before this game, I can now definitely multiply by two! Today’s game forced me to look at the Vietnamese lad with new eyes. It turns out that he is able as Black to gradually, methodically, and even almost imperceptibly outplay even a strong, elite grandmaster! This is very clear evidence of unusual ability, a subtle understanding of chess and the high level of play that Le has already achieved. I can predict that this player has arrived in the elite for real and for a long time.

Mamedyarov today lost to Kramnik unexpectedly quickly, without even a murmur of protest. Apparently he must have run into some home preparation. But even this spoonful of honey will not sweeten the barrelful of tar that the ex-world champion had to swallow. He gave a poor performance. A result of 50 percent in this group is not worthy of Kramnik. Oh well, even the greats have some dark stripes in their careers. As for the misadventures of Naiditsch and Leko, I think I will not dwell on them in order not to rub salt in their wounds.

And so, the tournament is over. This has been grandmaster Sergey Shipov, the resident expert of the website www.crestbook.com, commenting on it for all the fans and connoisseurs of chess. Thank you for your attention, and until next time…

P.S. I also would like to thank my colleagues Colin McGourty and Dana Mackenzie for their high-quality translations of the online commentaries into English.

[Translator’s note: * blush * — DM]

Share This