IECC Jottings #5 January 18, 1997 Editor: Gordon Lee Publisher: Lisa Powell Contributor: Erwin Oorebeek Jan Malmstrom Eric Konkol !!!!!!! I M P O R T A N T !!!!!!! ======================================================================= This issue of Jottings has been distributed to all members of the IECC. This is a one off mass mailing for Jottings and this will not be mail to you in the future unless you subscribe. If you want to subscribe to Jottings, please give me your name, address and rating to Gordon Lee ======================================================================= So what is Jottings? It is a bi-weekly publication on chess, how to improve your games...etc. Although it is designed for players <1900, it also contains some of the latest games and discussion which will be of great interest to experts and masters. I do hope you subscribe to it, as most people have found it entertaining and useful. What the critics said: IM Conrad Goodman - "Jottings #4 is absolutely outstanding .. readers should tell their friends about it .." Peter Hasse - "Please send more jottings. Very good format!" ....etc. Back issues of Jottings can be found in our web site: http://kerouac.pharm.uky.edu/rgbIECC/IECC.html The next issue of Jottings will be due at 2nd Feb. ------------------------------ Opening Discussion ================== by Erwin Ooerbeek, Gordon Lee and Jan Malmstrom Blackmar-Diemer Gambit This line occurs after 1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4, an excellent surprise weapon for deviating from standard Q-Gambit/KI lines. In a way, this is often called the true queen's gambit as white will not expect a return for material equality soon in the beginning. Although BD Gambit is very rarely seen in OTB master play, because, like the Centre game (1.e4 e5 2.d4), giving away a vital central pawn will poses its own problem. Our focus will be on the recent top class encounter in the BD-Gambit Thematic Trio between the Jan Malmstrom and Erwin Ooerbeek. The two games here can NOT be described as boring! It really gives you an idea of how top players think. Erwin said that he isn't really that great of a player, however, the style of play he has shown here could rival some of the best players in the IECC. There's a lot of material here, it is intended to be an introduction to the complete repertoire of BDG, I have only included one example this week. You can see the other game in the next issue. Erwin had made an excellent job of this and I hope you would find it useful. [Event "TH-Trio 34"] [Site "IECC"] [Date "1996.10.17"] [Round "2"] [White "Oorebeek,Erwin"] [Black "Malmstrom,Jan"] [Result "1-0"] 1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 Nf6 [GL: Here perhaps BCO2 recommendation of 3...e5! then followed by 4.d5 Nf6 5.Bg5 Bb4 6.Bc4 Bf5 7.Ne2 h6 with an advantage to Black would be better. JM: The move order was set up to 4.f3! 3..e5!? 4.dxe5= EO: 4.d5 looks bad; apart from 4.dxe5 there are: Nxe4, Be3, Nge2!? and Qh5!?] 4.f3 exf3 5.Nxf3 g6 6.Bc4 Bg7 7.O-O O-O 8.Qe1 Nc6 9.Qh4 Bf5?! [GL:With the benefit with hindsight, perhaps 9...Ng4 would be better, as now 10.h3 would be met by 10...Bxd4+ EO: 9. ... Bg4 and 9. ... Ng4 are more common. After 9. ... Ng4 there are a lot of possibilities: A, 10.h3!? Bxd4+?! (the marks are from Gary Lane in his book on the BDG published at the end of 1995, but this might not be true; instead 10. ... Nxd4! 11.Ng5 (11.hxg4? Nxf3+ and Qd4+) 11. ... Nh6) 11.Kh1 Nge5!? (11. ... Bf6 12.Ng5! h6 13.Nxf7 Qd4 14.Rxf6 exf6 15.Nxh6++ Kg7 16.Nxg4 Qxc4 17.Bh6+ with a clear advantage in Mallier-Studier, Corr 1960) 12.Nxe5 (12.Ng5 h5 13.Bb3) 12. ... Bxe5! (12. . .... Nxe5?! 13.Nd5 Nc6 14.Bg5 Bc5 15.Rad1 with a strong attack) 13. Bh6 e6! B, 10.Nd5?! Be6! (10. ... Nxd4? 11.Pg5! Nh6 12.Nxf7! or 11.Nxe7+ Kh8 12.Ng5 h6 13.Nxf7+ Rxf7 14.Nxg6+ Kg8 15.Qxd8+ +- Schiller) 11.Ng5 h5 12.Nxe6 fxe6 13.Ne3 Rxf1+ 14.Kxf1 Nxd4 15.Nxg4 Nxc2 16.Bxe6+ Kh7 17.Ke2 Qd6 18.Bc4 Rd8 0-1 Feltmann-Jager, Corr C, 10.Bf4!? (10.d5!?, 10.Ne4?!) Bxd4+ (10. ... Nxd4) 11.Kh1 Bf6 12.Bg5 Ne3 13.Rad1! Nxd1 (13. ... Qe8) 14.Rxd1 Bd7 15.Nd5 Bxg5 16.Nxg5 h5 17.Nf4 Kg7 18.Nxh5+ gxh5 19.Qxh5 e6 20.Rf1 1-0 Schneider-Prins, Corr. 1984-85 Here's an example of what might follow after 9. ... Bg4: 10.Be3 (10.Ne2!?) Bxf3 11.Rxf3 Qd7 (11. ... e5 is the only way to curtail white's initiative, recommended by Brinckmann and Euwe (Lane)) 12.Ne2 (12.Raf1) Qg4 13.Qe1 Rad8 14.Rg3 Qc8 15.c3 Ne4 16.Rh3 Nf6 17.Qh4 Qg4 18.Qe1 e5 19.Rh4 Qc8 20.Rd1 exd4 21.Bxd4 Nxd4 22.Rhxd4 c5 23.Rxd8 Rxd8 24.Rxd8+ Qxd8 25.Qf1 Qd2 26.Qc1 Ne4 27.Qxd2 Nxd2 28.Bd5 b5 0-1 Allford-Hucks, IECC 1996] 10.h3 [EO: Looks slow, but immediately 10.Bh6 is weak because of 10. ... Ng4! (11.Bxg7 Kxg7 12.Rae1 Nxd4); the alternative 10.Be3 is IMHO slower, because it wants to go to g5 or h6 anyway.] 10. ... Nb4?! [GL: If Black is going to grab a pawn, perhaps 10...Bxc2 would be quicker EO: After 10. ... Bxc2 the reply would be the same: 11.Bh6. E.g. 11. ..... Bxh6 (11. ... Qd7 occurred in Jensen-Holwell, Corr. 1992) 12.Qxh6 Nxd4 13.Ng5 Nf5 14.Rxf5 gxf5 (14. ... Bxf5 15.Nd5; 14. ... Qd4+ 15.Kh1 Bxf5 16.Nd5) 15.Nd5 f4 16.Rd1 Qd6 17.Rd3! (so far analysis Jensen, which continues 17. ... Rfd8 18.Nxf6+ with a winning advantage) 17. ... Bxd3 18.Bxd3 Qxd5 19.Bxh7+ Kh8 20.Be4+ Kg8 21.Bxd5 Rad8 22.Qg6+ Kh8 23.Bxf7 +-.] 11.Bh6! Nxc2? [Better would be 11...Bxh6 12.Qxh6 Nxc2 13.Rad1 Qd6 ,white would be two pawns down but the kingside attack could still prove irresistible JM:I agree EO: A continuation could be 14.Ng5 Ne3 15.Ne4! and black can only escape direct execution by 15. ... Qh2+ 16.Kxh2 Nfg4+ 17.hxg4 Nxg4+ 18.Kg3 Nxh6 although white should eventually win. With 11. ... Nxc2 Jan diverts from the game Jensen-T.Larsen, Corr. 1990, which continued: 11. ... c6 11.Rad1 Qb6 (12. ... Nxc2 13. g4 (back in our game!) 13. ... Be4 14 Ng5 with a winning advantage) 13.Ng5 Nbd5 14.Bxd5 cxd5 15.g4 with a clear advantage due to the threat of Bxg7 and Rxf6.] 12.Rad1 c6 13.g4! [GL:Clearing the path, preparing for a sac at f6] 13. ... Bxh6 [EO: The first move that was new to me, whereas Jan was on his own after playing 9. ... Bf5!] 14.Qxh6 Bxg4? [GL:There's an interesting way out for Black here 14...Qc7! 15.gxf5 Qg3+ 16.Kh1 Ne3 17.Bxf7+ Rxf7 18.Qxe3 Qxh3+ 19.Kg1 would lead to a surprising draw. JM: an oversight from me!; also 14..b5 is worth a try EO: 14. ... b5 15.Bb3 b4 16.gxf5 bxc3 17.fxg6 with a clear advantage; after 14 ... Qc7 15.gxf5 would indeed lead to a draw, but there are other possibilities: 15.Rd2! (15.Ne2!?; 15.Ne5!? Be6 16.Bxe6 fxe6) 15. ... Bxg4 16.Ng5 Bf5 17.Rxc2! also with a clear advantage; a third possibility would have been 14. ... Qd6, after which 15.Rd2 Bxg4 16.Ng5 Bf5 17.Rxf5 seems to be the most convincing (17. ... gxf5? 18.Rg2!; 17. ... Qg3+ 18.Kh1 (18.Rg2?? Qxg2+! 19.Kxg2 Ne3+ 20.Kh1 Nxf5 and the white queen is trapped) 18. ... gxf5 19.Rxc2)] 15.Ng5!! [GL: Nicely finishing it off, the knight at f6 must go at all cost] 15. ... Bxd1 [EO: 15. ... Bf5 16.Nce4!; 15. ... Qc7/d6 16.Nce4!] 16.Nd5! 1-0 [GL: The Knight at f6 can't be saved, hence the threat of mate at h7 can't be stopped, therefore black resigned EO/JM: 16.Rxf6? Qxd4+ 17.Kh1 Bf3+ 18.Rxf3 Qg7 EO: 16.Nce4? Qxd4+ 17.Rf2 Qxe4! 18.Nxe4 Nxe4] Recommended Reading The books I've used are: 1) "Blackmar-Diemer Gambit" by IM Gary Lane, Batsford 1995 I think this offers an excellent introduction to the BDG. By commenting on 36 games, all victories for white, with (parts of) many other games in the analysis, you get quite a good overview of the attacking possibilities the BDG offers. However, in a review in the new German magazine "Kaissiber" by Stefan Buecker (well-known for his opening books on unorthodox openings like The Vulture (1.d4 c5 2.d5 Nf6 3.c4 Ne4) and the Nordwalder Variation (1.e4 e5 2.f4 Qf6!?)) it is pointed out that he doesn't really give new ideas on critical variations. Maybe starting from 36 white victories should be a warning to this effect in itself! 2. "Blackmar-Diemer gambit keybook" by Rev. Tim Sawyer, Thinkers' Press 1992, which offers 700 BDG games (in fact, even more through notes in the games). So far, I mainly used this as a reference book (but keep in mind that "so far" hasn't been very long, since the thematic tournament where the games against Jan Malmstrom occurred was my first try-out of the BDG!). ------------------------------ Chess History - The Cultural Era (1561-1726) ============================================ As soon as the game reached Italy, the Renaissance trendies decided to soup it up a little. The queen and bishops were given huge increases in power, pawns were allowed to move two squares in their first go, and castling was thrown in. The volatile Italians savored the newly created violence of the game. Despite this obvious pandering to the popular taste, the upper classes maintained their exclusive rights to the game. To Philip II of Spain we owe the introduction of true culture into the development of chess. He was a keen player, and when asked what he wanted for Christmas 1561, he demanded a chess book. His favorite priest, Ruy Lopez, was consequently dispatched to Italy to buy one. While he was there, Ruy Lopez took time off to beat the leading Italian players and came home with a book called Questo libro e da imparare giocare a scachi et de li partiti. This had been published in 1512 and probably remaindered by the time Ruy Lopez bought it. Anyway, the Spanish priest did not like the book at all, so on his flight home wrote his own book, entitled Libro de la invencion liberal y arte del juego del Axedrez. This came out just in time to put in Philip's II stocking. They really knew how to name books in those days. Why is it that when there were only two or three chess books in the whole world they had titles a yard long, while now, with thousands on the market, they are all called chess or An introduction to chess or some equally undistinguished title? Back in 16th Century Italy, however, they were seething with rage because good old Ruy Lopez had beaten their best players and rewritten their book. After a dozen years training they sent a two-man hit squad of Leonardo da Cutri and Paolo Boi to do for old Lopez. They duly arrived in Madrid and both beat the Spaniard in matches to retrieve their national honor. Soft Pawn - William Hartston ------------------------------ Chess-Quake Safety ================== by Eric Konkol Earthquakes destroy homes and freeways. But, even more devastating, they overturn chess boards, causing catastrophic loss of position and material. But you can protect yourself against such a disaster with this simple plan. Tie the leash of your family dog to the "on/off" switch of a Saturn 5 rocket and strap the rocket to the side of your house. Animals, such as dogs, can sense earthquakes moments before they happen. So when your dog feels an earthquake coming, he leaps up, tugging on his leash, which flips up the "on" switch of the rocket. The rocket engines fire and lift the house off the face of the earth just in time, keeping it safe from the geophysical onslaught that could upset any chess player's carefully constructed position. Just ask Kasparov or Karpov. When's the last time either one of them won a game in an earthquake? When the earthquake is over, the rocket booster is jettisoned and a parachute safely carries your home back to earth, while your neighbors struggle to analyze the difficult, unanticipated complications in their games (rook pinned under the fallen chimney, king smothered under a pile of plaster, etc.). Another advantage of this system is that the jettisoned rocket booster usually falls right on the house of your most annoying neighbor, just in case it wasn't destroyed in the natural disaster. Chess-Quake Safety Kits can be modified for use during tornadoes, hurricanes, floods, and visits by the tax man. Please send $1,000,000 in used bank notes to the following address for your very own kit: Chess-Quake Safety Kit 15 Tremor Avenue Quakerville California PS This is a joke just in case some of you don't get it. If you do decide to send a million bucks to the above address. The editorial will not be responsible for the potential loss of cash through the post. ----------------------------------- Games of the Week ================= Here's some recent master games, they are both exciting. Very typical of the Sicilian. [Site "IECC"] [Date "1996.??.??"] [Round "1"] [White "Barlow John"] [Black "LeRoux Jaun"] [Result "1/2-1/2"] [ECO "B96/01"] 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.Bg5 e6 7.f4 Nc6 8.e5 h6 9.Bh4 g5 10.Bg3 Nxd4 11.Qxd4 dxe5 12.Qxd8+ Kxd8 13.fxe5 Nd7 14.h4 Bg7 15.hxg5 hxg5 16.Rxh8+ Bxh8 17.O-O-O Ke7 18.Ne4 b6 19.Nxg5 Nxe5 20.Re1 Nc6 21.Bd6+ Ke8 22.Be2 Ra7 23.c3 Bg7 24.Bh5 Bh6 25.Bf4 e5 26.Bf3 Ne7 27.Rxe5 f6 28.Bh5+ 1/2-1/2 [Event "CL1-1996.9"] [Site "IECC"] [Date "1996.??.??"] [Round "1"] [White "Schutt, Ray"] [Black "Barlow, John"] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "B78/14"] 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 g6 6.Be3 Bg7 7.f3 O-O 8.Qd2 Nc6 9.h4 h5 10.Bc4 Bd7 11.O-O-O Rc8 12.Bb3 Ne5 13.Bg5 Rc5 14.Kb1 b5 15.Rhe1 a5 16.f4 Nc4 17.Bxc4 Rxc4 18.e5 b4 19.Qd3 Rxc3 20.bxc3 Nd5 21.Nb5 Nxc3+ 22.Nxc3 bxc3 23.Ka1 Bf5 24.Qa6 Bxc2 1-0 This game is one of my new friend in the IECC, IM Conrad Goodman. He doesn't usually stick to normal opening. Look, when was the last time you're faced with 1.d4 d5 2.f4?!? The answer in my case is NEVER! Although White's second move is a blatant violation of the rules of opening (Weakening the King's Position). Watch how Conrad follow other more standard chess tactics like a pawn storm to weaken the Black's fortress. Also the power of a rook lift, watch out for the brilliant knight sacrifice! [Event "G48"] [Site "IECC"] [Date "1997.01.10"] [Round "5"] [White "Goodman,Conrad"] [Black "Malmstrom,Jan"] [Result "1-0"] [White "2505"] [Black "2535"] 1.d4 d5 2.f4?!! Nf6 3.Nf3 c5 4.c3 e6 5.e3 Nc6 6.Bd3 Bd6 7.Ne5 O-O 8.O-O Qc7 9.Nd2 b6 10.Rf3 Bb7 11.Rh3 h6 12.g4 Rfc8 13.Ndf3 Ne4 14.g5 cxd4 15.exd4 f6 16.gxf6 gxf6 17.Rxh6 Bxe5 {a: 17 .. fxe5 18.Bxe4 dxe4 19.Ng5 Nxd4 20.cxd4 Qg7 21.Qh5 wins} {b: 17 .. fxe5 18.Bxe4 dxe4 19.Ng5 Nxd4 20.cxd4 e3 21.Rg6+ wins} {c: 17 .. fxe5 18.Bxe4 dxe4 19.Ng5 Bf8 20.Rg6+ wins} {d: 17 .. fxe5 18.Bxe4 dxe4 19.Ng5 Qf7 20.Qh5 wins {e: 17 .. fxe5 18.Bxe4 Nxd4 19.Nxd4 exd4 20.Qg4+ wins} {f: 17 .. fxe5 18.Bxe4 Nxd4 19.Nxd4 Qg7+ 20.Rg6 wins} {g: 17 .. fxe5 18.Bxe4 Bf8 19.Bh7+! Qxh7 20.Rxh7 Kxh7 21.Ng5+ wins} {h: 17 .. fxe5 18.Bxe4 Bf8 19.Bh7+! Kh8 20.Rh5 Kg7 21.fxe5 wins} {i: 17 .. fxe5 18.Bxe4 Bf8 19.Bh7+! Kf7 20.Ng5+ wins} 18.Nh4 Bxd4+ 19.cxd4 Qf7 20.Qg4+ Kf8 21.Ng6+ Ke8 22.Qh5 1-0 ----------------------------------- Choosing an Opening ================== So I have talked about choosing an opening, how to prepare for an opening. Know your opponent's favourite lines and get ready for them. Now finally, choosing an opening which is best for you! You are playing with your opponent, not with the board. It might be the best position objectively, but it is not necessarily the best position for you! Some strong players when playing weaker ones would take no chances in complication or tactics unless it leads to a CERTAIN win. Instead he would be happy to simplify the position and happy with a pawn or two up or even just a positional advantage and win it in the end game. Richard in this game was probably frustrated by his lack of play and wanted to break out on the Q-side at around move 14, committed himself to unnecessary risk and made blunders as a direct result of it, while Jan was quite happy playing natural moves and consolidate his position. Richard was in no state to attack, Sveshnikov is a difficult beast to handle. My advice to Richard here would be to give up Sveshnikov and go for something which doesn't induce such pawn structure weaknesses. This is not a knock on the soundness of the opening, it is personal style which dictates it. This game demonstrated that Richard is not comfortable with so many holes his pawns. I am the same, I've had some equally nasty experience with Najdorf and Sveshnikov, my opponent took full advantage of the unusually large amount of holes and weaknesses typical of the opening and made my life hell for about two months! Perhaps he should adopt the Richter Rauzer line, or the Schevenigen. Where Black erect a strong pawn shell and gains play by the c-file. Especially if your opponent become over enthusiastic and castled queen side. Well, the reader might ask. How do you know what's your best opening and which opening you should work on? Keep a record of opening played and see if you had an advantage after the opening and the result of the games would be a good way to do this. I did it and it shows me to be weak at Black's side of King's gambit and don't do well with 1.e5 openings. That's why I have switched to 1.d4, I have been getting some good result and I am feeling very comfortable with it. I am also discover Queen's Gambit true power as I always thought that it was rather dull, but after further examination on my own. It is actually quite sharp but allow the White player to keep a more long lasting intiative. I also thought that I was good against Indian's opening, however, a few games brought me down to earth. I have only won one game against it and that's only after suffering an exchange down and somehow managed to create some play with my passed d-pawn. So next time, look yourself in the mirror and see what kind of player you really are. Good Luck! Annotated by Gordon Lee [Event "CL4-1996.17"] [Site "IECC"] [Date "1996.??.??"] [Round "1"] [White "Bouma Jan"] [Black "Fischer Richard"] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "B33/11"] 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 d6 6.Bg5 e5 [Transposing into Sveshnikov, Black accepts a gaping hole in d5 (put into good use by White in this game) and an odd pawn structure in return for the two bishops and wealth of play, another alternative is 6...e6 and continue with the main line of Richter Rauzer attack] 7.Ndb5 a6 8.Bxf6! gxf6 [Natural yet strong, Black must capture with a hole in g7. Because of the Knight fork at c7 if Queen captures instead] 9.Na3 Be6 10.g3 [Passive yet solid, Jan is contempt in keeping his quiet positional advantage, which is very much in his style! Theory suggested 10.Nc4 but after 10...f5 11.exf5 Bxf5 12.Bd3 Be6 13.Qh5 h6, it is unclear, however, I would say that Black stands well as he still has control of the centre. So perhaps 10.g3 is not a bad idea after all.] 10...b5 11.Nd5 Bh6?! [Pointless, It isn't doing much at h6. But I suppose it is developing a piece. What happen if the White Queen decided to visit on h5? It will go to g7. Bg7 protecting the f-pawn and prepare to castle is better 11...Bg7 12.Bg2 Ne7 13.Nxe7 Qxe7 14.Qd2 O-O 15.O-O Rab8 preparing to push the b-pawn and then advance the f-pawn to enhance the scope of his two bishops is a far better plan.] 12.Bg2 Qa5+? [The Queen is needed in the center to guard the center; this move weakens Black's position. Don't check for the sake of checking. Bxd5 gets rid of that annoying knight much better. 12...Bxd5 13.exd5 Ne7 14.Qh5 Bg7 15.O-O f5 16.c4 e4 17.Rfb1 Qb6 = Now Black have Q-side play. and some of White's pieces are tied up.] 13.c3 O-O-O? [Black's king is most definitely not safe in Black's open Q-side. 13...Qd8 getting the Queen back is far better, as we will see later...] 14.O-O b4? [Opening up a side for active play is one thing. But with your king in the thick of it? The text opens up the Q-side which opens the flood gate for white later.] 15.Nc4 Qb5 16.cxb4 Nxb4 [Qxc4?? 17.Nb6+] 17.Qh5! [While Black is tied up on the Q-side, White sends his queen into the opposite flank] 17...Bxd5 18.exd5 Qxc4 19.Qxh6 f5?? 20.Rac1 Nc2 [That blunder loses the knight, however, Black was lost anyway. Black's best was 19...Qd4, still, after that White had got a huge array of killing threats like a3, Qxf6..etc.] 21.Qd2 Qg4 22.Rxc2+ Kd7 23.Qe3 Ra8 24.Rfc1 Ke7 [Now Black's position is quite hopeless. White is pouring down the Q-side (see earlier), using that pawn at d5 - THE weak square in Sveshnikov, as an anchor] 25.Rc7+ Kf6 26.Qb6 Rad8 27.R1c6 Qd1+ 28.Bf1 Qxd5 29.Bc4 Qd1+ 30.Kg2 Rhe8 31.Rxf7+ Kg6 32.Qc7 1-0