*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*

       Published by the International Email Chess Club
      Devoted solely to free E-Mail Correspondence Chess

*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*
Volume 5, Issue 4                         February 15, 1998
Editor: Lisa Powell                       Staff: Tim Nagley
*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*

John Falato
1974      10-9-2     USA

I am a system administrator by profession (computers), and
have been playing chess since I was 14 -- 47 years ago. I
played mostly back in the 1950's. Yes, I did play in several
tournaments that Bobby Fischer played in, though not against
him.

The highest rating I achieved was that of expert. My best
tournament was in 1960 when I tied for 2nd - 3rd in the
U.S. Amateur Open, settling for the 3rd place trophy
(and a book by Reuben Fine), after tie-breakers were applied.
But, in my very next tournament I scored less than 50%, got
disgusted,  and quit chess.

I played in only one other tournament since then, the World
Open, New York, in the 1970's, as I recall. I was shooting
for 4.5 out of 9 and got 5.5. I was happy with that!

When I discovered chess on the Internet, I couldn't resist
the temptation to play again. I have to say that it's
difficult. Are the players stronger today?  Or am I too
rusty? Or just too old? All of the above - I'm sure.

*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*

Analysis by Roy DeVault  2334

[Event "CL2-1998.2"]
[White "Lim,Peter"]
[Black "Avraham,Ben"]

2119  Peter Lim                1-0-0        MAS  +19
2156  Ben Avraham              0-0-1        USA  -14

1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.Nd2

{A little finesse - inviting Black to depart from the usual
with, say, 3...g6}

3...dxe4 4.Nxe4 Nd7 5.Ng5 Ngf6 6.Bd3 e6 7.N1f3 Bd6 8.Qe2 h6
9.Ne4 Nxe4 10.Qxe4 Nf6 11.Qh4

{At first glance, this is an attractive move. Very few
players, myself included, would have foreseen Black's reply}

11...Ke7!?

{A very creative and subtle move. In the first place, I
doubt whether White expected this reply. In the second
place, the nasty threat of ...g5 must be heeded, since
Black's last move connected the h8-Rook with the Queen.
Still, as the game goes, Black's exposed  King turns out to
be, at best, a mixed blessing}

12.Ne5?

{This blunts the ...g5 business, but also prosaically drops
a pawn. Other poor alternatives are: [12 Bd2?? g5 13 Qh3 e5
And Black wins; 12 g3? g5 13 Qh3 g4-+; 12 g4 Only this move
offers White equal, or nearly equal play: 12 ..Qa5+
13 c3 Bd7=}

12...Bxe5 13.dxe5 Qa5+ 14.c3 Qxe5+ 15.Be3 b6!

{The immediate 15...Nd5 allows the disrupting 16 Bc5+}

16.O-O-O g5!?

{16...Re8 intending to normalize his position with a quick
..Kf8, leads only to roughly equal play after 17 Bd4 Qg5+
(17 ..Qd5? leads to a big advantage for White after
18.Be4 Qb5 19.Bxf6+ gxf6 20.Qxh6) 18.Qxg5 hxg5 19.Rhe1 Bb7
20.f3 Rad8 21.h3 Kf8. But this was a safer course, when
Black could scarcely lose. The ambitious game move tries
for more.}

17.Qa4 c5 18.h4

{The correct way to try to exploit Black's "centralized"
King}


18...Bd7 19.Qa3 Nd5 20.Bd4!

{This does not win material, but it forces Black to further
loosen the pawns around his King}

20...Qf4+ 21.Kb1 f6 22.hxg5 hxg5 23.Rhe1

{This is the best try; White keeps working on the exposed
King}

23...Qd6 24.Be3 Nxe3 25.Rxe3 e5

{It's understandable that Black wants to mitigate the
pressure on his King's position with some solid pawns.
Trying to reorganize his pieces doesn't work out well:
25...Qc7 26.Bf5 Rad8 27.Qb3 Qc6 (The best try. 27...Rhe8
28.Rxe6+ Bxe6 29.Qxe6+ Kf8 30.Qxf6+ Qf7 31.Qxd8 Qxf5+
32.Qd3 Qxf2 with advantage to White; the exposed Black
King again.) 28.Rxd7+ Kxd7 29.Rxe6 Qa8 30.Re1+ Kc7
31.Qf7+ Kb8 32.Qxf6 Qd5 33.Qxg5 with an unclear position}

26.g3 Be6 27.f4!

{Resolute and right. White must try to open the center for
the Rooks.}

27...gxf4 28.gxf4 Rh3 29.fxe5 fxe5 30.Rxh3 Bxh3 31.Qa4

{With the threat of Qh4+}

31...Qf6?!

{A better defense is  31...Bg2 32.Qh4+ Qf6 33.Qh7+ Qf7
34.Qh2 (Or 34 Qh4+ Qf6=) 34...Qg7 35.Rg1 Rg8 36.Rxg2 Qxg2
37.Qxe5+ Kd7 38.Bf5+ Kd8 39.Qd6+ Ke8 40.Bd7+ Kf7 41.Be6+ Kg7
42.Qe7+ Kh8 43.Bxg8 Kxg8 44.Qxa7 Qg6+, and the endgame is
very difficult to win for White}

32.Qe4 Rh8 33.Qb7+ Bd7 34.Bb5 Qf5+ 35.Ka1 Rd8 36.Qd5 1-0

{After 36...Qe6 37.Qg2 Qh6 38.Qb7 Qe6 39 Qxa7 White is
winning.}

*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*

Analysis by Andres Valverde   2244

[Event "P-833"]
[White "Smith,Craig"]
[Black "Schipmann,Torsten"]
[Result "1-0"]

2139  Craig Smith              1-0-0        USA  +9
2035  Torsten Schipmann        16-5-1       GER  -12

1.e4 c5 2.d4 cxd4 3.Nf3 d6 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.Bg5 e6
7.f4 Be7 8.Qf3 Qc7 9.O-O-O Nbd7 10.g4 b5 11.Bxf6 Nxf6
12.g5 Nd7 13.f5 Nc5

{Until this move this variant of the Sicilian Najdorf has
been played in thousand of games, 13..Bxg5+ is the usual and
probably the better move. Why not take a pawn with check?-}

14.f6 gxf6

{another imprecision. 14...Bf8 was better.}

15.gxf6 Bf8 16.Rg1

{Now and on the next move 16.a3 seems safer.}

16...Bb7 17.Bh3 b4 18.Nd5

{consistent with the previous moves.}

18...exd5 19.exd5 Nd7 20.Nc6 Bxc6 21.dxc6 Ne5 22.Rge1 Bh6+
23.Kb1 Rd8

{It is not very easy to find a move in this kind of
position.}

24.Rxe5+  1-0

{And Black resigns!! I don't know why, let's see :

24...dxe5 25.Rd7 Qb6 and the threat Qg1+ forces the draw with 25.Re7+
Kf8 26.Rxf7+ and perpetual check.}

*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*

Analysis by Klaus Gawehns   2441

[Event "Swiss 46.3"]
[White "Cassimon,Marc"]
[Black "Henkes,Houston"]
[Result "0-1"]

1492  Marc Cassimon            3-1-4        BEL  -18
1493  Houston Henkes           11-3-1       USA  +18

1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Bd3

{Though this has been tried by Lasker and Tartakower
sometimes, it does not offer many chances for an opening
advantage. White is hoping for 3.Nf6?! 4.e5 Nfd7 5.Nf3 with
a fine game.}

3...dxe4

{The most simple way to equality. Black might also try
3...c5 e.g. 4.Nf3 Nf6 5.Nc3 Nc6 6.exd5 Nxd5 7.Ne2 Be7
8.O-O O-O 9.c3 b6 with equal prospects;
in Lasker - Lilienthal, 1935.}

4.Bxe4 Nf6 5.Bg5


{Tartakower used to play 5.Bd3 which gives white nothing
after 5...c5! 6.Nf3 (6.dxc5?! Bxc5 7.Nf3 Nc6 8.O-O Qc7
9.Nc3 Bd7 11.Bg5 O-O-O 12.Qe2 e5 was fine for black in
Tartakower - Torre, 1925) 6...Nc6 7.c3 Be7 8.dxc5 Bxc5
9.O-O O-O with an equal game in Tartakower-Trifunovic, 1948.
I think the most interesting try is 5.Bf3!? which worked
well in Mohrlok - Smederevac, 1961: 5...c5 6.Ne2 cxd4?!
(better 6...Nc6 or 6... Nbd7) 7.Qxd4 Qxd4?! 8.Nxd4 a6
9.O-O Bc5 10.Nb3 Bb6 11.Na3 Nc6 12.Bf4! with a clear
advantage for white. However, black might consider 5...Nc6!?
6.Ne2 e5! with good counterplay.}

5...Be7 6.Nc3??

{Now a piece will be lost. White should play 6.Bd3, of
course.}

6...Nxe4 7.Nxe4

{Or 7.Bxe7 Nxc3 8.Bxd8 Nxd1 9.Bxc7 Nxb2 and so on...}

7...Bxg5 8.Nf3

{A piece down with nothing to show for it, White could as
well have resigned at this point.}

8...Be7 9.O-O Nc6 10.c3 Qd5 11.Re1 e5 12.Qe2 Bg4 13.h3 Bxf3
14.Qxf3 Rd8 15.dxe5 O-O 16.Ng3 Qxf3 17.gxf3 f6 18.exf6 Bxf6
19.Re4 Bg5 20.Kg2 Rd3 21.Rae1 Rdxf3 22.R1e2 Rd3 23.Rg4 Bf4
24.Nh5 Be5 25.f4 Rf5 26.fxe5 Rxh5 27.e6 Rdxh3 28.Kf1 Rh1+
29.Rg1 Rxg1+ 30.Kxg1 Re5

{Whatever White has been hoping for, it did not happen.}

0-1

*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*

Analysis by Stefaan Six   1935

[Event "P-571"]
[White "Zbinden,Andreas"]
[Black "Assarjo,Ingemar"]
[Result "0-1"]

1675  Andreas Zbinden          5-1-4        SUI  -23
1557  Ingemar Assarsjo         9-2-0        SWE  +23

1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.Bg5

{Somewhat strange; maybe it is playable; I don't know. But
it doesn't look very good, actually.}

3...dxc4

{This move isn't bad, of course, but Black should try to
design a plan with the intention of punishing the `odd' Bg5.
A good try could be: 3...f6 4.Bf4 Qb6 when Black is already
slightly better due to the pressure on b2 and the center
(e5).}

4.Nf3?! Nf6 5.e3 b5 6.Be2 Ne4 7.O-O Nxg5 8.Nxg5 e5

{White has played the opening too tame; here Black has
successfully occupied the center and is preparing for an
attack. Probably better was 4.e4 Qb6 5.Qd2 c5 6.Be3 e5
7.dxe5 Qc6 8.f3 =, or 4.e4 c5 5.Nf3 cxd4 6.Nxd4 Qa5+
7.Bd2 Qe5 8.Qa4+ =
I can imagine many players are wondering now: `How could I
have known that this apparently sound, good-looking
developing move was the start of all White's misery ?' The
answer is: THINK FOR YOURSELF. Don't play 'automatic' moves.
You have to try to capture a kind of meta-knowledge about
what is going on on the board, get `above the moves'. I
remember my first grandmaster-encounter in a tournament very
clearly. I was not playing `just' a grandmaster; I was
playing against my great favourite: 72-years-old
GM Bronstein. Besides that, he's still a strong player. He's
also a friendly man who's always in for a talk. After the
game, he told me the following words: "I'll tell you the
Secret of Chess; it's very easy! You just have to think what
your opponent is thinking!" This may sound simplistic, but
in fact it is true. It's hard to lose with these words in
your mind. The application of this simple sentence helped me
some months later towards achieving a shared 2nd place in an
international (OTB) tournament (5.5 points out of 7),

together with two candidate-masters; T. Lammens (2121, NED)
and O. Dolzhikova (2185, UKR), of which I defeated the first
one. It was my first win ever against a candidate-master.
NOW, IF IT WORKS FOR ME, WHY SHOULDN'T IT WORK FOR YOU ?}

9.Nf3 exd4

{9...e4 was also possible, for example: 10.Nfd2 f5 11.a4 Qa5
12.Nc3 Qb4 13.Qc2 Be7}

10.Nxd4 Bb7 11.b3 cxb3 12.Qxb3 a6

{This is not a mistake, but it wasn't necessary -- and thus
a waste of time. Better was 12...Bd6}

13.Rd1 Nd7 14.Nc3 c5 15.Nf5?

{Virtually losing; slightly better would be 15.Nf3 Qf6
16.Nd5 Bxd5 17.Qxd5 Rd8 =+ but of course White is still
having a hard time here.}

15...Qg5 16.Ng3

{Better was 16.e4!?; e.g. 16...Bxe4 17.Nd6+ Bxd6 18.Nxe4 Bxh2+
19.Kxh2 Qf4+ 20.Ng3 =+}

16...Bc6

{Again not a real mistake, but what's the idea behind it?
16...Rc8! with the intention of pushing a pawn to the other
side is more clear and easier.}

17.Nce4 Qe5 18.f4 Qc7 19.Qc3

{19.Qc2! gives the opportunity to get a Knight alive:
19...Qb7 20.Bf3 Rc8 21.Nf5 Bxe4 22.Bxe4 Qc7 23.Rac1, or
20.Nd6+ Bxd6 21.Rxd6 Rc8 22.Rad1 c4 23.Bg4. In both cases,
Black still has to prove he's having the better position. In
what follows the 'only' thing White had to do is put a Rook
on c1, but look what happens ...}

19...Rd8 20.Ng5?! h6 21.Nf3 Bb7 22.Nf5 Rg8 23.Ne5 Nxe5
24.Rxd8+ Kxd8 25.fxe5 Kc8 26.Bg4 Kb8 27.Rd1 Bc8 28.e4 c4
29.Bf3 b4 30.Qe3??

{Here I can only say: "Oops!"}

30...Bxf5! 31.Qf4 Be6 32.Bg4 Bc5+ 33.Kh1 Rd8 34.Rf1 Bxg4
35.Qxg4 Qxe5 36.h3 Rd2 37.Qh4 g5 38.Qxh6 Bd6 0-1

{And here White finally resigned, being left with nothing
but despair.}

*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*

Analysis by Conrad Goodman   2574

[Event "M-1481.1"]
[White "Bourquin,Don"]
[Black "Harper,Henry"]
[Result "0-1"]

1260  Don Bourquin             0-0-2        USA  -20
1220  Henry Harper             1-0-0        USA  +20

1.e4 e5 2.Nc3 Nc6 3.Nf3 Nf6

{four knights game}

4.Bd3

{restricting white's game; much better is d4 or Be2, Bc4,
Bb5}

4...Bc5 5.O-O d6 6.Nd5 Be6 7.c4 Qd7 8.b3 O-O-O 9.a3

{9.Bb2}

9...Bd4 10.Nc3

{10.Nxd4 Nxd4 11.Bb2}

10...Bg4 11.Ra2

{11.b4}

11...h5 12.Qe2 g5 13.Nd5 Nxd5 14.cxd5 Ne7 15.h3 Bxh3!
16.gxh3 Qxh3 17.Nxg5??

{17.Nxd4 exd4 18.Bc2 g4 19.Qd3 g3 20.fxg3 Rdg8 21.Kf2 f5
22.Rg1 h4 23.Qxd4 hxg3+ 24.Ke1 and maybe white can escape}

17...Rhg8 18.Bb2 Rxg5+  0-1

*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*

Analysis by Phil Hildenbrandt   1979

Sylvain Daigle - Robert Wilson   0-1   M-992.1
1502  Sylvain Daigle           1-0-1        CAN  -21
1421  Robert Wilson            1-0-0        USA  +21

[Event "M-992.1"]
[White "Daigle,Sylvain"]
[Black "Wilson,Bob"]
[Result "0-1"]

1.c4 e5 2.Nf3

{We now have an English opening. White's extremely
provocative 2nd move seems to invite Black to play e4.}

2...Nc6 3.e3?!

{When I first saw this move I thought it was a typo. After
searching through my database, I found that it was a valid
move. Unfortunately there are no White wins after the text.
There are a few transpositional possibilities.}

3...Nf6

{3...f5 4.d4 e4 5.Nfd2 Nf6 6.Nc3 g6 7.h4 d6 8.b4 d5 9.a3 Be6
10.g3 Bg7 11.Nb3 Bf7 12.c5 O-O 13.Bd2 h6 14.Qe2 Qe8

15.Qb5 a6 16.Qe2 g5 17.hxg5 hxg5 18.O-O-O b6 19.f3 exf3
20.Qxf3 Qe6 21.Bd3 Ne4 22.Rdf1 Bg6 23.Bc2 a5 24.b5 Nd8
25.c6 a4 26.Na1 Nf7 27.Bxe4 dxe4 28.Qd1 Nd6 29.Kb1 Qc4
30.Nc2 Nxb5 31.Nxb5 Qxb5+ 32.Nb4 Rad8 33.Bc1 f4 34.gxf4 Rxd4
0-1 Sliwa,B-Kortchnoi,V/Gyula 1965}

4.d4

{4.Nc3 d6 5.d4 Bg4 6.d5 e4 7.dxc6 bxc6 8.h3 Bf5 9.Nd4 Bd7
10.g3 h5 11.Bg2 Qe7 12.Qc2 c5 13.Nde2 Bc6 14.b3 Rg8
15.Bb2 g5 16.h4 1-0 Simon, Ralf-Axel - Kersting, H/It open,
IV (1) 1995}

4...e4

{Since White invited this move after his second, I think
this is Black's entrance. Stylishly late but grand
nonetheless.}

5.d5

{5.Nfd2 was to be preferred.}

5...exf3 6.dxc6 fxg2 7.Bxg2 bxc6

{I would prefer recapturing with the d pawn and opening up
lines for the Queen and Bishop.}

8.O-O Bd6 9.b3?

{9.Bd2 and Black has a slight advantage. After the text
Black's advantage is decisive.}

9...Be5 10.Nc3 Bxc3 11.Rb1 O-O 12.Ba3 Re8 13.Qc2 Be5
14.f4 Ng4

{This allows White to chip away at Black's advantage.
14...Bd6 was much safer.}

15.Bc5?

{The text increases black's advantage again. Much better was
15.fxe5 Qh4
(15...Nxe3 16.Qf2 Nxf1 17.Rxf1 Re7 White's advantage is
about 50% better than it was.) 16.h3 Nxe3 17.Qf2 Qxf2+
18.Rxf2 Rxe5}

15...Bd6 16.Bd4 Nxe3 17.Bxe3 Rxe3 18.Rbe1 Rxe1 19.Rxe1 Bxf4
20.Qe4 Bd6 21.Bh3

{21.Qd8+ would have been no more than a spite check.}

21...Ba6 22.Rf1 g6

{22...Bc5+ was better but the text still wins.}

23.Qg4

{Seems that White still has "threats".}

23...Bc5+ 24.Kh1 d5 25.Rd1 Bc8 26.Qg3 Bxh3 27.Qxh3 Qe8
28.cxd5 cxd5 29.Rxd5

{White has won a pawn, but at an exorbitant cost. Black
can now announce Mate in 3.}

29...Qe4+ 30.Qg2 Qe1+ 0-1

*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*

Analysis by Stefaan Six      1935

[Event "Swiss 32.4"]
[White "Wenger,Joseph"]
[Black "Paetzold,Ortwin"]
[Result "1-0"]
B21

1752  Joseph Wenger            48-17-34     USA  +25
1918  Ortwin Paetzold          39-8-35      GER  -25

{The present game is a rather spectacular one; although no
special sacrifices are made, it carries a great amount of
action in it. The balance of who stands better changes a lot,
but in fact always was very close to equality. However, there
were some possibilities which were missed by both players.
You want to see some action? You also want to see what COULD
have happened ? Want to see some sweat and blood chess ?
Read on. It's a hard world out there. Maybe this will give
you some inspiration.}

1.e4 c5 2.d4 cxd4 3.c3 d3

{This line of the Morra-gambit isn't the very best for Black.
According to Suetin, White can play: 4.Bxd3 Nc6 5.Nf3 d6
6.O-O g6 7.c4 Bg7 8.Nc3 with a lead in development. Taking
the pawn with 3...dxc3 leads to equality in the main line.}

4.c4

{White chooses to walk a different path than Suetin. The
idea is to keep a firm hold on the d5 square, which will
also come under the scope of the Knight jumping to c3.}

4...Nf6 5.Bxd3

{Note that 5.e5 doesn't work because of 5...Qa5+. However,
if the pawn were still on c3 and we had taken the Black one
with 4.Bxd3 then 4...Nf6 would not be the best for Black.
Play could continue: 4.Bxd3 Nf6 5.e5 Nd5 6.f4 Nb6 (White

`threatened' 7.Be4 after which he would have some positional
advantage) 7.Nf3 d5 8.exd6 Qxd6 9.O-O Nc6 10.Be4!? Qc5+
11.Nd4! (keeping things `closed') Nxd4 12..cxd4 Qd6
13.Nc3 with a small advantage in space and development. I
can imagine in OTB play that it's perhaps not so easy to
maintain this advantage (due to the time limit), but in
e-mail chess it should be not too hard to convert it to a
win. It's probably better for Black not to play the 3...d3
line, since it loses a tempo (try for 3...dxc3).}

5...Nc6 6.Nf3 d6 7.O-O e6

{7...g6 looks a bit better, with the intention of adding
pressure with the Bishop aiming at the center (g7/d4).}

8.Nc3 Be7 9.Bg5

{Here White too could improve with 9.b3! making use of the
diagonal Black chose not to occupy.}

9...O-O 10.Qc2 ?!

{In my opinion this is not the strongest conception. It's
still not too late to play 10.b3; for example 10...b6
11.Qe2 h6 12.Bc1 Bb7 13.Bb2 Rc8 14.Rad1, with a White edge.
Why play 10.Qc2 ?! The Queen will have to go to e2 sooner
or later anyway, to take part in an assault on the Black
monarch, since there is no possibility to force something
on the Queenside.}

10...h6 11.Be3 ?!

{11.Bf4 would keep EQUALITY! White is (slightly) worse here!}

11...b6 ?!

{Returning the favor! Black could seize the initiative with
11...Ng4 12.Bf4 f5.}

12.Rad1 Nb4 13.Qe2 Qc7 14.Nb5 Qb8 15.Bb1 a6 16.Nc3 Qc7
17.Nd4 Bb7 18.f4 Nc6 19.Nxc6 Bxc6 20.Bf2 Rac8 21.b3 Rfd8
22.a4 ?!

{At this point the position was about equal; perhaps only a
little bit better for White, who has a space advantage. He
could have opted for 22.f5 e5 23.Nd5 Nxd5 24.cxd5 Bb7
25.Be3 b5 26.Rc1 with indeed a small plus. Instead he plays
22.a4 ?! which turns the balance once again.}

22.Nd7 23.a5 ?! Bf6 ?!

{I guess these two guys must be very good friends; they keep
on returning favors! TAKE IT! NJAM NJAM! IT'S NOT CORRECT!
Seriously though : 23...bxa5 24.Nd5 exd5 25.exd5 Ba8
26.Qxe7 Re8 27.Qh4 a4 !? and what's the problem ?}

24.axb6 Nxb6 25.Qc2 Bxc3 26.Qxc3 Nd7 27.Bh4! Re8 28.Qd4 Qb7
29.Rf3

{Trouble in paradise - or not?}

29...Nc5 30.Rg3 g6 31.e5 Nxb3 32.Qe3 1-0

{Black resigned, but too early, I think!  He could have
tried 32...Rb8, and if 33.Bxg6 fxg6 34.Rxg6+ Kf7
35.Rf6+ Kg8, when his position is not so bad!
Of course he's still worse off, but the major threats are
parried, whereas his opponent still can go wrong somewhere.}

*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*

Analysis by Mike Mathews  2005

[Event "TH-Trio 123.4"]
[White "Kaniak,Andrew"]
[Black "Nowicki,Andrzej"]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO C32]

1871  Andrew Kaniak             2-3-1       CAN  +22
1971  Andrzej Nowicki          10-7-4       POL  -22

1.e4 e5 2.f4 d5

{The King's Gambit is worth playing for the fascinating
positions that frequently come from it, but to play it
in correspondence or email chess, one must be willing to
lose once in a while! I found a reasonably thorough
discussion of the opening played in this game in my copy
of "King's Gambit" by Viktor Korchnoi and Vladimir Zak but
there are several books now available on the King's Gambit.


The Falkbeer Counter Gambit is as good a way as any to play
against the King's Gambit. It has never been proved unsound
and both sides must play very carefully.}

3.exd5 e4

{The basic idea behind Black's strategy is to hamper White's
development with the e-pawn while obtaining rapid development
for his own pieces. Of course this comes at the (usually
temporary) cost of a pawn but, hey, what do gambit players
care about pawns?! (3.Nf3 is also playable but 3.exd5 is
considered to offer White more chances for an advantage)
3...c6 and 3...exf4 are playable, but Black should not try
3... Qxd5 because after 4.Nc3 Qe6 5.fxe5 Qxe5+ 6.Be2 Bg4
7.d4 Qe6 8.Qd3 (Tolush-Alatortsev, Moscow 1948), White has
the usual big lead in development while Black has wasted
time moving his Queen.}

4.d3 Nf6 5.dxe4 Nxe4

{With the threat of Qh4+}

6.Nf3 Bc5

{White has rid himself of the obstructing e-pawn and Black
takes control of the a7-g1 diagonal, trying to take
advantage of the somewhat exposed position of White's King.}

7.Qe2

{This pins the Knight stopping 7...Nf2, and allows a future
Qb5+ should Black's KB become unprotected.}

7...Bf5

(7...Bf2+ 8.Kd1 Qxd5+ 9.Nfd2 leads to an advantage for
White.}

8.Nc3

{attacking the pinned knight again}

8...Qe7 9.Be3 Nxc3

{White decides it's time to contest the diagonal and deal
with the Nf2 nuisance. It is hard to fault Black's play up
to this point because he has followed the moves recommended
by Korchnoi and Zak, but this is one of the strongest lines
for White against the Falkbeer and there are few
opportunities for Black to gain an advantage. Black's last
move marks the pivotal point in the game but it isn't an
obvious error. Black's 9th, is tricky, but not the right way
to capture. Better is 9...Bxe3 10.Qxe3, Nxc3 11.Qxe7+ Kxe7
12.bxc3, with an edge for White. The following exchanges do
not turn out well for Black.}

10.Bxc5 Nxe2 11.Bxe7 Nxf4 12.Ba3! Nd7

{Black has regained his pawn, but with the two Bishops, an
open board, and his pawn structure intact, White has a big
plus. Korchnoi and Zak give "12...Nxd5 13.O-O-O c6 14.Ng5 Nd7
15.Bc4 Be6 16.Rhe1" with the better ending for White as the
lesser evil. 12...Bxc2 seems risky since White can play
13.Rc1, followed by capturing the c7 pawn with many threats
while Black's king is trapped in the center.}

13.O-O-O

{Black's knight and bishop are a bit awkwardly placed. The
knight only has one square available and that is one of the
three squares to which the bishop can move. e.g. 13...O-O-O
14.Rd4 Ng6 15.g5, and the bishop is trapped. A ChessBase
search of my Falkbeer file resulted in several games
resulting in the same position after White's 13th move. All
resulted in a win for White. (Bronstein-Tal, Riga 1968)
continued: 13...Be4 14.Ng5 Bxd5 15.g3 Bxh1 16.gxf4 c5
17.Bc4 Bc6 18.Nxf7 b5 19.Nd6+ Ke7 20.Nxb5 Rhf8 21.Nd4 Bg2
22.Ne6 Rf5 23.Rg1 Be4 24.Nc7 Rd8 25.Rxg7+, and White went
on to win.)}

13...h5 14.g3 Nxd5

{If 14...Ng6 then 15.Re1+ Kd8 16.Nd4 Bg4 17.h3 traps the
bishop while on 14...Nh3 15.Bxh3 Bxh3 16.Ng5 Bg4
17.Rde1+ Kd8 18.Nxf7+ picks up Black's rook (on 16...Bg7,
White plays 17.Rhe1+).}


15.Rxd5 Be4

{As the dust settles, White ends up with two most excellent
bishops vs. Black's rook and pawn.}

16.Rd3 Bxd3 17.Bxd3 O-O-O

{Finally!}

18.b3 f6 19.Bf5 Rhe8 20.Rd1 Re3 21.Nd4

{Moving the knight out of the way and threatening Ne6
followed by Nc5.}

21...Re5 22.Bh3 g5

{Black tries to generate some counterplay with his kingside
pawns but...}

23.Ne6 g4

{If the d8 rook moves, then White follows with the somewhat
annoying Nc5.}

24.Nxd8 gxh3 25.Nf7 Re2

{You never know. The h-pawn is only two squares away from
becoming a Queen.}

26.Rd2 Rg2 27.Kd1

{White can just slowly move his king and rook to the f-file
and drive away Black's rook.}

27...c5

{27... Rg1+ 28.Ke2 Ra1 29.c4 gets Black nowhere.}

28.Nd6+ Kc7 29.Nb5+ Kb6 30.Rxd7 Rxh2

{Maybe White will overlook the threat of 31...Rh1+
32.Kd2?? Rd1+! 33.Kxd1 h2 and the pawn queens.}

31.c4 Rxa2 32.b4! 1-0

{It's mate by Rd6. (32..., cxb4 33.Bxb4 doesn't change
things.)}

***********************************************************

Analysis by Petteri Lemettinen  1949

[Event "P-761"]
[White "Wing,Richard"]
[Black "Evans,Kyle"]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]

Richard Wing - Kyle Evans  1/2-1/2  P-761
1323 Richard Wing          3-3-3    USA -6
1198 Kyle Evans            14-4-33  USA +6

1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.f4

{This is a plausible way to fight for the initiative.
The battle will take place in the centre, where e5 is
already threatened. The weak point of f4 is that e4-pawn
will be a weakness. There are other promising alternatives:
6.Bg5, Bc4 and Be3, which all lead to sharp game.

Black's first priority is to prevent direct e5 with Qc7 or
with Nbd7, intending to play b5, Bb7, Nc5 and Be7 in order
to get a good control over e5 or to play e5 himself creating
a blockade. Black has an opportunity to transpose into the
Scheveningen with e6. A risky chance to transpose into the
Dragon with g6 without the fear of the Yugoslav-attack,
however the drawback is a6, which is not always necessary
in the Dragon.

White must attack in the kingside without any delays.}

6...e5

{The most principled move. Black does not hesitate to take a
backward d-pawn and to weaken his central light squares,
while gaining pressure against e4-pawn with Nbd7, Be7, O-O,
Nc5 and eventually the d5-break should be possible.}

7.Nf3 Nbd7 8.a4

{This move prevents b5, which would have allowed black to
develop his bishop to b7 with a strong pressure against
e4-pawn and the thematic b5-b4 advance will not cause any
trouble for white. Now black has to find out another way to
develop his queenside.}

8...Be7 9.fxe5?!

{This is not in the harmony with the opening ideas. It was
better to play: 9.Bc4 Qa5 10.Qe2 b5 11.Ba2 bxa4 12.O-O O-O
or 9.Bd3 0-0 10.0-0 Nc5 11.kh1 d5 12.Nxe5 Nxe4 13.Bxe4 dxe5
14.Qe2 Qd4 with equal chances.}

9...dxe5 10.Nxe5?

{A blunder. White loses a piece without compensation. Better
was: 10.Bc4 Qa5 11.Qe2 b5. The position resembles the main
lines with an exception: Black does not have the backward
d-pawn, which allowes him to free his bishop behind the
pawnchain. In other words, black has a good game.}


10...Nxe5 11.Bf4 Qc7

{There is no reason not to trade the queens with Qxd1+
12.Rxd1 Ng6 and, if 13.Bg3 then O-O, Be6, Rad8 or simply
13...Bb4 with a idea Nxe4 or Bxc3+ creating more weak pawns.
These manouvers would have simplified the position enough to
make the endgame very pleasent for black.}

12.Qd4 Nf3+! 13.gxf3 Qxf4

{Black has a bishop for a pawn, a pair of bishops and white
can't even castle. White is in deep trouble. Nevertheless,
there exists a chance of a swindle; however black must give
white a hand. 14.Rg1 O-O (Qxf3 15.Rxg7 may seem risky to
black) 15.Nd5 Qd6 16.e5 Qxd5 17.Rxg7+ Kh8 18.Rxh7+ Kxh7
19.Bd3+ Kg8 20.Qe3, intending to play 0-0-0 and Rg1+ with
practical chances.}

14.Bg2

{White hopes that Ne2, f4, e5 pawnstorm would cause trouble
for black, but he has a good reply aginst white's intentions.}

14...Qh4+! 15.Qf2

{What else? Otherwise white's king will not escape from the
center and his position is more hopeless.}

15...Qxf2+ 16.Kxf2 0-0 17.Rad1 Bc5+

{A fine move. Now the bishop is on a very active square,
harassing the king.}

18.Ke2 Be6

{Nh5 was better threatening Nf4+, which seems very
unpleasant for white.}

19.b3 Rad8 20.e5 Rfe8?

{Black sets a trap: if exf6 then Bc4# mates, but...}

21.Rxd8! Rxd8 22.exf6 g6

{Better is gxf6 23.Ne4 Be7 with a idea: f5, f4 and f5
driving the knight away from the centre, keeping white's
bishop passive and leaving f4- and h2-pawn vulnerable in
the future.

Although white has a pawn more than black has, it isn't easy
to convert this position into a won endgame. Black's pair of
bishops and actively placed pieces compensates the little
material deficit.}

23.Ne4 Bb4 24.Rd1

{24.c3 Ba5 25.b4 Bc7 26.h3 Bf4; if 26.Ke3 then Bc4, in both
cases black has the advantage.}

24...Rxd1

{Rc8 25.c4 b5 26.axb5 axb5 27.Rc1 (27.cxb5 Bxb3 or
27.c5 Bxb3 black has good chances.) bxc4 28.bxc4 Bxc4+
29.Kf2 Ba6 30.Rxc8 Bxc8 and white survives.}

25.Kxd1 Kf8 26.Ke2 Ke8 27.Ke3 Kd7 28.Kd4 Bf5 29.Kd5

{29.Bf1 intending to play Bc4 looks better, if 29...Bxe4
30.fxe4 with good chances to white, despite of the opposite
colored bishops.}

29...h5 30.c3 Bxe4+ 31.fxe4 Bxc3 32.Bh3+ Kc7 33.e5 Kd8
34.Kd6 b5 35.axb5 axb5 36.Bd7?

{36...Bxe5+! (37.Kxe5 Kxd7 black wins.) 37.Kc6 Bxf6
38.Bh3 Be5 black wins or 38.Kd6 Be5+! black wins.}

36...Bb4+? 37.Kc6 Bc3 38.e6 Bxf6 39.exf7 Ke7 40.Be8 h4
41.h3 b4 42.f8=Q+ Kxf8 43.Bxg6 Kg7 1/2-1/2

*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*

Wanted: High-rated members to analyze games for
IECC Newsletter.
Also wanted: Members wanted to submit biographies.
Editor Lisa Powell       <drpowell@uoguelph>

*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+
Please note!
              Ceremonies of the Horsemen
        The Journal of the IECC Rank and File

The first issue of the IECC Magazine, aka Ceremonies of the
Horsemen, will be released on February 22nd. In addition to
the copy emailed to you, there will be a web edition.

The contents for the first issue include a reader survey, a
book review, articles on email etiquette and performance
ratings, some instructional pieces, and several game
analyses.


If you would like to know more about this new IECC
publication, or perhaps become a contributor, please write
to:

Mark Brooks, Editor        <chess@life-online.org>
Tim Nagley, Asst. Editor   <timn@globalnet.co.uk>
*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+