IECC Jottings #6 Feburary 2, 1997 Editor: Gordon Lee Publisher: Lisa Powell Contributors: Conrad Goodman Erwin Ooerbeek Bill Wall If you want to subscribe to Jottings, please write to Gordon Lee Subscription is FREE. I have made a fasinating discovery when I was browsing the net the other day. Go to and search for your own name. You will surprise yourself how many people share your name. I am going to write to the other four "Gordon Lee"'s who all live in the UK and all do Maths and play chess! (well not necessary play chess, but they all certainly do Maths!) If you do decide to do it. Tell me how you get on! This issue is packed to the brim with great stuff and could be one of the most important event this Feburary, rather dramatic.... But anyway. ENJOY! Next issue will be in your hot little mail box in 26th Feb. Why the delay? That's because I will be in Hong Kong visiting relatives...etc. for a fortnight. I mean, it will be ready WAY before then. Don't worry, I will make up for it when I get back by having #8 to send to you by 4th March. ------------------------------------------ Discussion ========== Jottings is written for you after all. You should decide what you want in Jottings! So this bit of Jottings is especially written for you. It can be anything to do with the IECC: Time control PGN Format Tournaments Recent games or just chess in general! Write to me I am forseeing this as some kind of bulletin board for messages and moderated discussion. If it is popular, they will be posted regularly (once a week instead of bi-weekly) Let me just start you off. Some of the most exciting games that makes you think is when you make your opponent to come out of the book as soon as you can. One way of doing this is: 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.d5!? Now Black can either choose to respond with a gambit 3...b5!? Which White should decline. Accepting it would lead to a sort of Benko. Or Black could transpose it into Benoni. Anybody have had any experience with this? I have only just started experimenting with it. ------------------------------------------ A group of chess enthusiasts had checked into a hotel, and were standing in the lobby discussing their recent tournament victories. After about an hour, the manager came out of the office and asked them to disperse. "But why?", they asked, as they moved off. "Because," he said "I can't stand chess nuts boasting in an open foyer." Alan Coffield ------------------------------------------ Improving Your Chess Instinct ============================= by IM Conrad Goodman with notes by Gordon Lee Chess Masters usually have these 'EMI' skills in common: Experience to find lines that work - through trial & error; Memory to recall similar positions once experienced - deja vu; Instinct to navigate on own - when experience & memory leave off. AVOID DEPENDENCY ---------------- Generally speaking {but not always the case}, book and software dependent players often fear an opponent's arsenal is more current, stronger & more extensive. And realistically speaking, with all those data bases & books so readily available .. it's always wise to enter a new game suspecting your opponent's opening arsenal is really quite capable of beating you. Editor: In preparing for a strong 'book' expert, try to get him/her out of the book as soon as you can. Well, not necessary out of all theory. For example, playing a Blackmer-Diemer Gambit, Budapest Gambit, etc might come as a nasty surprise to players who rely on computers or books, it could at least lead to an interesting encounter. SINCE IT'S NOT TOUCH MOVE UNTIL YOU'VE SENT IT BY EMAIL ------------------------------------------------------- Whether you push wooden, plastic, magnetized or computerized pieces. Use your imagination on 'what-if' continuations and periodically rotate the board to the opponent's point of view, which often allows you to see his/her plan much more clearly. NEUTRALIZE THE OTHER ARSENAL ---------------------------- Once you feel comfortable with an opening, try transposing the opening move sequence. The earlier you get an opposing arsenal into uncharted waters, the faster you can navigate to an advantage. Let your Instinct and imagination come to play in the opening and middle game, then maintain slight advantages with end-game Experience plus Memory. Editor: This point had been demonstrated in Jottings #3, where a prepared opening surprise turned against the player. Is it wise to actually get your opponent out of the book as soon as you can? Well, if you have Conrad's EMI , then yes. However, for most players, irregular openings are more of a psychological ploy, rather than playing for position. But then again, since you are playing a human opponent, not a computer. It certainly does have its merits. FOLLOW YOUR INSTINCT -------------------- Is the incoming move one that you expected? Is it stronger or weaker than expected? Does it threaten a piece? Does it interfere with your plan. Make notes, then put that game aside and look at it later with a fresh point of view. Even if you can't find a better move on your own, it's unwise to blindly follow book and computer suggestions, unless you understand & feel totally comfortable with the resulting position. Editor: An interesting point here, ome people asked GMs how many moves they usually look ahead. The answer would be surprising - one or two, why? Because their instinct is so sharp that they FEEL it's the right move. Obviously, careful calculation is still very important. But it really shows you how important instinct is, and the only way to sharpen your instinct is to practice a lot. Future articles will contain tips on sacrifice, playing for draws, how much time should one study a position. How to avoid recording errors, spatial advantage, playing the person {not the position}, the advantage of playing 2 games with an opponent plus other topics and selected games like these for your playing enjoyment: [Event "IECC"] [Site "M-526a"] [Date "1996.12.08"] [Round "1"] [White "Goodman,Conrad"] [Black "Braakhuis,Wilfried"] [Result "1-0"] [WhiteRating "2512"] [BlackRating "2435"] 1.d4 d5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.e3 e6 4.Nbd2 c5 5.c3 Nc6 6.Ne5 Nxe5 7.dxe5 Nd7 8.f4 f5 9.Be2 Be7 10.O-O O-O 11.b3 b6 12.c4 Bb7 13.Bb2 Nb8 14.cxd5 exd5 15.Qc2 Nc6 16.Nf3 Qd7 17.a3 Qe6 18.h3 a6 19.Kh2 b5 20.Rg1 h5 21.g3 Rac8 22.Nh4 g6 23.Nxg6! Qxg6 24.g4 Kh8 25.gxf5 Qh7 26.Qd2 Bh4 27.f6 Rg8 28.Bd3 Qh6 29.f7 Bg3+ 30.Rxg3 Rxg3 31.Kxg3 d4 32.Kh2 Kg7 33.Bf5 Rd8 34.e6 Kf8 35.Rg1 Ne7 36.Qa5 1-0 Comment: sacrfice to punch a hole in the position. [Event "IECC"] [Site "M-526a"] [Date "1996.12.8"] [Round "2] [White "Braakhuis,Wilfried"] [Black "Goodman,Conrad"] [Result "1/2-1/2"] [WhiteRating "2435"] [BlackRating "2512"] 1.e4 g6 2.d4 Bg7 3.c4 d6 4.Nc3 Nh6 5.Be2 O-O 6.Be3 f5 7.Qd2 Nf7 8.h4 e5 9.f4 exd4 10.Bxd4 Bxd4 11.Qxd4 Nc6 12.Qe3 fxe4 13.g4 Bd7 14.O-O-O Re8 15.h5 g5 16.Nh3 gxf4 17.Qxf4 Nfe5 18.Nxe4 Rf8 19.Qg3 Be6 20.b3 Qe7 21.Nf4 Kh8 22.Nxe6 Qxe6 23.g5 Qe7 24.g6 Rg8 25.Qe3 Raf8 26. Rdf1 Rxf1+ 27.Rxf1 Rf8 28.Rxf8+ Qxf8 29.gxh7 Kxh7 30.Ng5+ Kg8 31.Ne6 Qe7 32.Qh6 Nd8 33.Nxd8 Qxd8 34.Bg4 Nxg4 35.Qg6+ Kh8 36.Qxg4 Qf6 37.Qc8+ Kh7 38.Qxc7+ Kh6 39.Qa5 b6 40.Qxa7 Qc3+ 41.Kb1 Qd3+ 42.Kb2 1/2-1/2 Comment: always look for the draw exit. My thanks to Lisa Powell and especially Gordon Lee for granting this space. Editor: I recommend you to read "Chess for Tigers" by IM Simon Webb, in follow-up to some of these topics. ------------------------------------------ Blackmer Diemer Gambit - Part II ================================ by Erwin Ooerbeek [Event "TH-Trio 34"] [Site "IECC"] [Date "1996.10.17"] [Round "1"] [White "Malmstrom,Jan"] [Black "Oorebeek,Erwin"] [Result "1-0"] 1. d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.f3 exf3 5 Nxf3 e6 [The Euwe Defence, passive but solid.] 6. Bg5 Be7 [The "French" move 6. ... Bb4 is dubious here, though often played. Because of the open f-file the threats against the knight on f6 are simply too strong. E.g: 7.Bd3 Nbd7 8.Qd2 O-O 9.Ne5 and due to the threat of Rf1 and Ng4 black played 9. ... Be7 in Cole-Seale, Truro 1994, admitting 6. ... Bb4 to be wrong. The game continued: 10.O-O-O h6 11.h4! c6 (11. ... hxg5 12.hxg5 Ne8 13.Bh7+ Kh8 14.Bg6+ Kg8 15.Bxf7+ Rxf7 16.Rh8+ Kxh8 17.Nxf7+ Kg8 18.Nxd8 Bxd8 19.Rh1 when the white queen will soon infiltrate the kingside, Lane) 12.g4 (12.Bxh6! gxh6 13.Qxh6 followed by Rh3-g3 wins quicker, Lane) 12. ... Nd5 13.Bxh6 Bxh4 14.Ne4 Nxe5 15.dxe5 Be7 16.Nf6+ gxf6 17.Bh7+ Kh8 18.Bxg7+ Kxg7 19.Qh6+ 1-0 If black goes on in the "french" way by taking the knight on c3, which is the most common continuation, here's an example of what could happen to him: 7.Bd3 Bxc3+ 8.bxc3 h6 9.Bh4 Nbd7 10.O-O O-O 11.Ne5 c6 12.Qd2 Qa5 13.Bxf6 Nxf6 14.Rxf6! gxf6 15.Qxh6 f5 16.Ng4! f6 17.Qg6+ Kh8 18.Rf1 Qxc3 19.Rf3 Qe1+ 20.Bf1 fxg4 21.Qxg4 Rf7 22.Qg6 1-0, Kauffmann-Lafferty, Corr.1985] 7.Bd3 [Targeting the most vulnerable square h7.] 7. ... Nbd7 [Gives the knight on f6 extra protection, though 7. ... Nc6 is a major alternative at this point, which looks more active. An example: 8.a3 (to prevent Nb4, though 8.Qd2 might be better) h6 9.Bd2 (9.Bf4!? g5 10.Be5 g4 11.Nd2! (Lane), 11.Nh4?! Rg8 is better for black (Diemer)) 9. ... O-O 10.O-O Nxd4 11.Qe1 b6 12.Qh4 Bc5 13.Kh1 Bb7 14.Bxh6 Nxf3 15.gxf3 Qd4 16.Be4 Nxe4 17.fxe4 f5 18.Rg1 Rf7 19.Rg2 fxe4 0-1 Sawyer-O'Connell, Corr.1989] 8.Qe2! [This might be better than the more usual 8.O-O, after which 8. ... c5 is stronger than in the game. E.g.: 9.dxc5 Nxc5! 10.Bb5+ Bd7 11.Bxf6 Bxf6 12.Qe2 = (Leisebein). Instead of 9. ... Nxc5 the game Leisebein-Fridrich, corr. 1990 continued: 9. ... Bxc5+?! 10.Kh1 h6 11.Bh4 O-O 12.Qe2 Be7 13.Rad1 Qa5 14.Ne4 Qxa2 15.g4 Qxb2 16.g5 hxg5 17.Nfxg5 e5 18.Nxf6+ Nxf6 19.Rxf6 Be6 20.Qh5 1-0] 8. ... c5 9.O-O-O [9.dxc5 might be better, since now 9. ... Nxc5 looks very dangerous: 10.Bb5+ Bd7 11.O-O-O Qc7 12.Ne5 Rd8 13.Nxd7 Ncxd7 14.Bxf6 Bxf6 15.Rxd7 Rxd7 16.Rd1 1-0, Borsdorff-Zenhausern, Corr. On 11. ... Qb6 instead of 11. ... Qc7, as given by Jan, wouldn't 12.Rxd7 be possible? 12. ... Ncxd7 (12. ... Nfxd7? 13.Bxe7 as Kxe7 fails to Nd5+) 13.Ne5 Rd8 (13. ... O-O-O 14.Nxf7) 14.Nxd7 Rxd7 15.Rd1 with Bxf6 to come, while 15. ... Bd6 doesn't help, because of 16.Bxf6 gxf6 17.Bxd7+ Kxd7 18.Ne4 Anyway, since I didn't trust 9. ... Nxc5 at all, I would have followed Lane's suggestion 9. ... Qa5] 9. ... cxd4 10.Nxd4 [Here I didn't like the black position much. Solid though it may be, it's also very cramped.] 10. ... Qa5 11.h4 Qe5 12.Qxe5 Nxe5 [The queens are off the board, but there's absolutely not time to sit back and relax.] 13.Bb5+ Ned7?! [On 13. ... Bd7 14.Rhe1 I only thought of 14. ... Ng4, after which 15.Bxd7+ Nxd7 16.Bxe7 Kxe7 17.Nf5+ at least wins back a pawn. In fact, even 15.Nxe6 would have been possible: 15. ... fxe6 16.Bxd7+ Nxd7 17.Rxe6 Ngf6 18.Rde1. Jan's 14. ... a6 is much better: 15.Rxe5 axb5 16.Ndxb5 O-O is about equal.] 14.Rhe1 a6 [Probably 14. ... O-O would have been better, though I didn't like the triple pawn after 15.Bxd7 (15.Nxe6 fxe6 16.Bxf6 Bxf6 17.Rxd7 doesn't seem to achieve much, eg. 17. ... Bxh4) 15. ... Bxd7 16.Nf5 exf5 17.Rxe7 Bc6 18.Bxf6 gxf6. But instead of 16. ... exf5 16. ... Bd8 would have been interesting, when white's best option seems to be: 17.Nxg7 Kxg7 18.Bxf6+ Bxf6 19.Rxd7 which is equal.] 15.Bxd7 Bxd7 16.Nf5 Bc6? [I thought this was forced and even strong! But white's 18th move, which I had totally overlooked, shows that I'm hallucinating. In fact, 16. ... exf5 was the only move, after which 17.Bxf6 gxf6 18.Nd5 Kf8 would lead to a better position for white, both after 19.Rxe7 and 19.Nb6, but black would still have been able to fight on.] 17.Nxg7+ Kf8 18.Bh6! [This was what I had missed. Suddenly, it's all over.] 18. ... Kg8 [18. ... Ng4 wouldn't have helped much: 19.Nxe6++ Kg8 20.Nc7] 19.Rd3! [The threat of Rg3 etc. makes black's next move forced.] 19. ... Ng4 20.Rg3 1-0 [But it's played anyway and black resigns. After 20. ... f5 21.Nxf5 there's nothing he can do: 1) 21. ... exf5 22.Rxe7 with 23.Rg7+ Kf8 24.R7xg4+ to follow; 2) 21. ... Kf7 22.Rxg4 exf5 23.Rg7+; 3) (JM) 21. .... Bg5+ 22.Bxg5 exf5 23.Bf6] ------------------------------------------ Traps in the Two Knights Defense ================================ by Bill Wall The Two Knights Defense (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6) is one of the more popular openings among non-masters. A common trap is the Fried Liver Attack. It starts out 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Ng5 [threatening 5.Nxf7 and forking Queen and Rook. Best for Black to stop this attack is] 4...d5 [White continues with] 5.exd5. [At this point, most amateurs play] 5...Nxd5. [A better move is 5...Na5, which we will look at later. Now White sacrifices the knight with] 6.Nxf7 Kxf7 7.Qf3+ [Black's only move to save the knight is] 7...Ke6 [otherwise White simply plays 8.Bxd5. After 7...Ke6, best for White is] 8.Nc3 [putting another piece on the d5 square. Now Black must play 8...Ne7 or 8...Nb4. If 8...Nd4? 9.Bxd5+ Ke7 10.Qf7+ Kd6 11.Ne4 mate (Weir-Messenger, England 1951) One of the oldest games with this opening is the following: Polerio-Domenico, Rome 1600 continued] 8...Ne7 9.d4 c6 10.Bg5 h6 11.Bxe7 Bxe7 12.O-O-O Rf8 13.Qe4 Rxf2+ 14.dxe5 Bg5+ 15.Kb1 Rd2 16.h4 Rxd1+ 17.Rxd1 Bxh4? 18.Nxd5 cxd5 19.Rxd5 Qg5 20.Rd6+ Ke7 21.Rg6 0-1 [A more modern trap occurs after 8...Nb4. White continued 9.d4 Nxc2+ 10.Kd1 Nxa1 11.Bxd5+ Kd6 12.Nb5+ Kd7 13.Qf5+ and 14.Qf7 mate (Balkany-Longuski, Michigan 1973). Another idea after 8...Nb4 is 9.Qe4. Another quick game continued 9...c6 10.d4 Qd6 11.f4 b5 12.Bb3 Be7 13.fxe5 Qd8 14.O-O, threatening Qg4 mate (Robinnette-Randell, Ohio 1980).] If you do not wish to play the Fried Liver Attack with 6.Nxf7, then the safer move is 6.d4. Bobby Fischer played the Two Knights Defense when he gave simultaneous exhibitions and used this 6.d4 variation. One of his games went 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Ng5 d5 5.exd5 Nxd5 6.d4 f6 7.dxe5 Nxe5 8.Bxd5 fxg5 9.O-O Bd7 10.Re1 Qf6 11.Qh5+ Qg6 12.Rxe5+ 1-0 winning a piece (Fischer-Kuhn, Chicago simul 1964) 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Ng5 Nxe4?! [White can continue with..] 5.Bxf7+ Ke7 6.Nxe4 Kxf7 7.Qf3 Kg8?? 8.Ng5 Qe8 9.Qd5+ Qf7 10.Qxf7 mate (Wall-Bubar, Washington 1968) More conservative than 4.Ng5 is 4.d3. Here is one quick trap. 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.d3 d5 5.exd5 Nxd5 6.O-O Bg4 7.Re1 f6 8.Nxe5! [If 8...Bxd1 9.Nxc6+ and 10.Nxd8] (Armas-Hartung, Dortmund 1988) Another idea is 4.d4 and a quick trap for Black to avoid. 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.d4 Nxe4 5.dxe5 Bc5?? 6.Qd5, threatening 7.Qxf7 mate and the Bishop at c5 or Knight at e4. (Snyder-Ellis, Los Angeles 1972) 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 f6? doesn't work too well. One quick trap after 3...f6 is 4.Nh4 g5?? 5.Qh5+ Ke7 6.Nf5 mate (Hartlaub-Rosenbaum, Frieberg 1892). 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nh6? is also bad. White can play 4.d4 Bd6 5.Bg5 f6 6.Bxh6 gxh6 7.Nxe5 fxe5 8.Qh5+ Kf8 9.Qf7 mate (Wall-Kerazag, Internet 1996). ------------------------------------------ World Champions - What They were REALLY like... =============================================== FISHER, Robert James (1943) There is no doubt whatsoever that Bobby Fischer is the greatest of all. Anyone pretending to hold the opposite views should be treated with extreme condescension. On no account should one indulge in arguement with such illiterates for they will always be impervious to reason. When talking of Fischer, one should also steer clear the delicate question of his sanity. Such problems as he may have clearly subordinate to his enormous creative achievements, and should be limited to the words, "Aah, Fischer", follow by a wistful, slightly demented look into the far distance. Owing to his special position, Fischer's games should not be treated in the same manner as those of other players. As with the works of Mozart, the only human with whom Fischer may be sensibly be compared, a catalogue has been prepared of the great games of the grear American. Just as Kochel did the job for Wolfgang Amadeus, Wade and O'Connell collected all Bobby's masterpieces. Thus one does not need to go to the length of describing a game as, for example, Fischer-Spassky, sixth match game, Reykjavik, 1972. One simply says O'C 755 and everybody knows that you are referring to the game of that number in the said catalogue. A typical conversation between two Fischerphiles ought to run something along the following lines. "Just came back from a play-through of O'C 444. The Ruy Lopez, do you know it?" "Ah, yes. Typically earlier Fischer; you recongnized, of course, the quotation of thematic material from O'C 72." "How true. And doesn't he give us a tantalizing foretaste of O'C 702, the first great Ruy Lopez from his late period?" "Poor Stein never stood a chance." "Aah, Fischer." "Aah, Fischer." And both end the conversation staring blissfully through each other in trances of Fischerian ecstasy.