Vintage Kashdan

     In 1927, in the United States it was the dawn of the "talkies" which was what my mother called the movies. That’s what they called them as opposed to the old silent films of her childhood. 

    The dance craze was the Lindy Hop. Babe Ruth of the New York Yankees baseball team hit a record breaking 60 home runs, a record that stood until 1961. Or did it? Roger Maris, also of the Yankees, tied the record in 1961 when he hit his 60th home run in the 158th game. He hit his 61st in the final 162nd game of that season. It took Babe Ruth151 games in a 164 game season to hit 60. Also in sports the famous basketball Harlem Globetrotters began. 

    Charles Lindbergh became a national hero after completing the first solo, non-stop transatlantic flight and Philo T. Farnsworth transmitted the first electronic television image. 

    To add to the excitement of 1927, finishing with a score of 7-3, Albert S. Pinkus of the Manhattan Chess Club captured first in the last round of the Junior Masters tournament played at the Manhattan Chess Club on. 

    The winner of the following game, Isaac Kashdan (1905-1985) was, according to Chess metrics, the world’s second ranked player 20 different months between the November 1932 rating list and the June 1934 rating list. Alekhine named him one of the most likely players to succeed him as World Champion. Kashdan could not make a career out of chess and for financial reasons did not play seriously. His mover to California for his son’s health also distanced him from the country;s center of chess activity in New York. Albert Pinkus (1903-184) was a fascinating man. Read my post on him HERE. 

 

    Nowadays when we think of young masters we think of players in their teens, sometimes 13 or 14 yer olds. In this tournament in 1927, Pinkus was 24, Kashdan 22, Santasiere 23, Tholfsen 23, at age 37 Smirka was hardly young and Bornholz 25. Perhaps the “Junior Master” was used instead of the term “Minor Master.” 

[Event "Junior Masters Tmt., New York"] [Site ""] [Date "1927.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Erling Tholfsen"] [Black "Isaac Kashdan"] [Result "0-1"] [ECO "D48"] [Annotator "Stockfish 17.1"] [PlyCount "72"] [EventDate "1927.??.??"] [Source "Brooklyn Daily E"] {D48: Semi-Slav: Meran System} 1. d4 Nf6 2. Nf3 d5 3. c4 c6 4. Nc3 e6 5. e3 Nbd7 6. Bd3 dxc4 7. Bxc4 b5 8. Bd3 a6 9. Qe2 c5 10. O-O Bb7 11. Rd1 Qb6 12. a4 {[%cal Ra4b5]} c4 13. Bb1 b4 14. Na2 {This is a poor place for the N. White has to play `14.a5} (14. a5 $18 Qc6 15. Na4 Rc8 16. e4 Nxe4 17. d5 exd5 18. Nd4 {equals. Paszek,A (2275)-Hoffmann,J Germany 1995}) 14... Rc8 15. e4 Be7 16. Bg5 O-O 17. d5 exd5 (17... Bc5 {was much better.} 18. a5 (18. e5 Nxd5 {leaves whote poised for a decisive attack.}) 18... Qxa5 19. d6 Ng4 20. Bh4 {White must defend f2} (20. e5 Bxf3 21. gxf3 Nxf2) 20... b3 21. e5 bxa2 {Black has won a N.}) 18. e5 Qe6 {On principle 18...Rfe6 placing the R opposite the Q was better.} 19. Bf4 {[%mdl 8192] This is a tactical mistake, Simplt improving the position of his N with 19.Nc1 keeps things equal.} Nh5 20. Bg5 (20. Bg3 { This looks reasonable, but after} Nxg3 21. hxg3 g6 22. Re1 Bc5 23. Qd2 f6 24. exf6 Qxf6 {white is strategically lost. Even capturing the b-Pawn doesn't help. ..} 25. Nxb4 Qd6 26. Nxd5 Qxd5 27. Qxd5+ Bxd5 28. Be4 {Hoping to simplify jis defemse by exchanges.} Bxe4 29. Rxe4 Nf6 30. Re2 Ng4 31. Rf1 Rb8 {Black is winning.}) 20... Bc5 21. Nd4 Bxd4 22. Bxh7+ {At first glance it appears that white has a stong atytack, but black can defend himself and he still has a decisive advantage,} Kxh7 23. Qxh5+ Kg8 24. Rxd4 f6 25. exf6 Nxf6 26. Qg6 Rce8 {...a mate threat with ...Qe1+} 27. f3 a5 28. Rad1 {Material is equal and white is attacking the d-Pawn plus black has a bad B. All black appears to have is control of the e-file, so how can he be winning. Kashdan will demonstrate how.} Nd7 29. Qh5 Qf7 30. Qh4 Re2 {Here is the key...control of the 2nd rank. Note white's attack on the d-Pawn is pointless and there is no K-side attack.} 31. Nc1 Rxb2 32. Rg4 {This is just aa gesture, but there is nothing better.} Ne5 {A solid move that keeps the win in hamd, but he has missed a nice tactical shot.} (32... Rxg2+ 33. Rxg2 Ne5 {Threatening a fork on the Q and K.} 34. Qf4 Nxf3+ 35. Kf1 Qe6 36. Qg3 Nxh2+ 37. Kg1 Nf3+ 38. Kf1 Nxg5+ {and black is winning.}) 33. Rg3 {Just a bit better would have been 33. Rf4} d4 {[%mdl 512] A solid winning mov, but the old ...Rxg2+ trick was more spectacular.} (33... Rxg2+ 34. Kxg2 Nxf3 35. Qg4 d4 {White has no defense... everything he can try loses.} 36. Rf1 Ne5+) 34. Qxd4 {Kashdan finishes up smartly.} Rxg2+ $1 {[%mdl 512]} 35. Kxg2 Nxf3 36. Qe3 Ne1+ {White resigned. This solid performance by Kashdan shows why he was called der Kleine Capablanca.} 0-1

Unfinished Business

    The 1934 Marshall Chess Club Championship had an interesting game that wasn't finished and didn't count. Samuel Reshevsky’s first round game against Roman Smirka was adjourned and wasn’t resumed because Reshevsky withdrew from the tournament for reasons that weren’t specified. Reshevsky claimed the final position was a draw, but it wasn’t. Smirka had a winning advantage. 

    Roman Smirka (1887-1947, 60 years old) was born in Vienna, Austria and not much else is known about him. He won the New York State championship in 1923 and 1927. He was one of the strongest members of the Marshall Chess Club, winning its championship in 1929-1930 after a play-off with Sidney Bernstein. 

 

 

    Even without Reshevsky, the tournament was a thriller. David Polland started off on a hot streak, but soon faded and was overtaken by Milton Hanauer, the former state champion. Hanauer established what appeared to be a commanding two point lead ahead of another former state champion, Fred Reinfeld. 

    At the halfway point Reinfeld started to gradually catch up with Hanauer. And, after the semi-final round they were tied. The final round was really exciting. Hanauer had outplayed Erling Tholfsen, but overlooked a mate in three and lost! Reinfeld ended a very difficult game with Santasiere by securing a perpetual check and so finished first by a half point. 

 

[Event "Marshall CC Chp, New York"] [Site "?"] [Date "1934.??.??"] [Round "1"] [White "Roman Smirka"] [Black "Samuel Reshevsky"] [Result "*"] [ECO "A48"] [Annotator "Atockfish 17.1 et al"] [PlyCount "75"] [EventDate "1934.??.??"] {A48: Colle Systems} 1. d4 {This game was played in the first round.} Nf6 2. Nf3 c6 {Intending to play the Slav Defense if white plays 3.c4, but Smirka is uncooperative.} 3. e3 g6 4. Be2 Bg7 5. b3 O-O 6. Bb2 d6 7. Nbd2 Qc7 8. c4 Nbd7 9. Qc2 b6 {Fred Reinfeld gave this a ?, calling it a positional blunder that is not easy to forgive when made by a master strength player. He called the move pointless because the B couldn't be considered developed on b7 and it only helps to create a weakness later. He recommended 9...e5 followed by ... Re8. A couple of points to nore are that while Reinfeld was a very strong player, he was known to hold grudges against his fellow masters. Besides that, PlentyChess likes 9...b6 and considers the position equal.} (9... e5 10. O-O Re8 {This position has been reached many times in this opening and white can play several reasonable moves. The position is equal.}) 10. O-O e5 (10... Bb7 11. Rfd1 Rac8 12. e4 e5 13. dxe5 {½-½ Ptaschinski,D (2182)-Blasco,D (2111) Arco ITA 1999}) 11. Rfe1 Re8 12. b4 exd4 13. exd4 Nf8 14. Bd3 Bg4 {Equally good were both 14...Bb7 and 14...Ba6. The fact that black can play just about anything with impunity shows how innocuous white's opening play has been.} 15. h3 {[%mdl 2048]} Bxf3 16. Nxf3 {To quote Reinfeld: The exchange has improved white's game appreciably, but Black was probably glad to get rid of a piece which had so unpromising a future. To quote engines, the position is nearly equal.} Ne6 17. Bf1 Re7 18. g3 Qb7 19. Bg2 {The B's effectiveness is of course greatly heightened by black's 9th move, wrote Reinfeld.} b5 {The idea is to stop the advance of white's b-Pawn, but it's this move that is the cause of black's problem on the Q-side. Better would have been 19...Qc7 getting the Q off the B's diagonal and then ...Nf8 exchanging Rs.} 20. c5 (20. d5 {This sharp move would have given white a substantial advantage.} cxd5 21. cxd5 Nf8 22. Rxe7 Qxe7 23. Nd4 {followed by Nc6}) 20... Nd5 {It is understandable that black wants to obtain a good central square for his pieces; but the text allows a frontal attack on the weak c-Pawn and 20...d5 was therefore preferable. (Reinfeld) He was correct.} 21. cxd6 Rd7 22. Ne5 Rxd6 23. a3 Ne7 24. Rac1 Rc8 (24... Nxd4 {is a blunder.} 25. Bxd4 Rxd4 26. Nxc6 Nxc6 27. Bxc6 { and white is winning.}) 25. Qe4 Qb6 26. Red1 Qd8 27. Qf3 f6 {This weakens the K-side and should have allowed white to seize the advantage with 28.Nd3!} 28. Ng4 (28. Nd3 Nxd4 29. Bxd4 Rxd4 30. Nc5 Rxd1+ 31. Rxd1 Nd5 32. Qb3 Kh8 33. Bxd5 cxd5 34. Rxd5 {White's pieces are all well placed assuring him of a considerable positional advantage.}) 28... Kh8 29. d5 (29. Nxf6 {would be very bad.} Ng5 {and the N is hanging.}) 29... Ng5 30. Qb3 cxd5 31. Bd4 h5 {It's a good possibility that Reshevsky was in time trouble hereabouts.} 32. Ne3 Rxc1 33. Rxc1 {Starting with 28.Ng4 white's position has slipped to equality.} Ne4 ( 33... f5 {keeps the balance.} 34. Bxa7 d4 {and in the complications the chamces would be equal.}) 34. Bxa7 (34. Bc5 {is more difficult to meet.} Rd7 35. Bxe7 Qxe7 36. Nxd5 {White has a decisive positional advantage, For exanple. ..} Qe5 37. Qc2 Nxg3 (37... Ng5 38. Qc8+) 38. Rd1 (38. fxg3 Qxg3 39. Qc8+) 38... Ne2+ 39. Kf1 Nf4 40. Qc8+) 34... f5 35. Bxe4 fxe4 36. Bc5 Rc6 {This causes problems because it allows wite's Q to invade with a strong effect.. 36. ..Rd7 leaves black safe.} (36... Rd7 37. Rd1 d4 38. Qe6 Qc7 39. Ng2 {Black's center Ps assure him of at least equality.}) 37. Rd1 d4 {The game was adjourned here and Smirka sealed his bext move.} 38. Qf7 {This game was not completed because Reshevsky withdrew from the tournamment for unknown reasons. He claimed the position is drawm but although white still has some work to do, that is not the case. In Shootouts white scored 5-0. Accuracy: White = 42%, Black = 31%.} (38. Qf7 {A continuation might be...} Ng8 39. Qb7 Re6 40. Nd5 d3 41. Nf4 Re8 42. Be3 g5 43. Nxh5 Bd4 44. Rc1 Bb2 45. Qxb5 Re5 46. Qb7 Re7 47. Rc8) *

A Top Corrspondence Player Reveals His Secrets

    Engine use in online games is always a concern, but nowadays it’s the norm for correspondence players. In these days of super-strong engines watching my engine play my opponent’s engine was no fun and so after decades of postal/e-mail play I gave it up. 

    Like most correspondence sites, the International Correspondence Chess Federation allows engine use. Players at the top of the correspondence heap don’t just play whatever their engine’s top choice happens to be. Their play is a combination of engines guided by humans. 

    How do you get to the top in a world full of engine users? American Correspondence GM Jon Edwards, who won the 2020-2022 World Correspondence title, said he did it by emulating former over the board World Champion Tigran Petrosian who was known for his super-boring defensive play. In his games, Edwards tries to create a small advantage then keep milking it and, hopefully, making it grow. 

    You can read the story about how he won the title and play over one of his annitated games in the Chess Life article HERE. 

    Still, the majority of correspondence games end in a draw because it is nearly impossible to beat an engine. Within the last year I wanted to test an engine and even I was able to draw two games against a player who is an IM in both OTB and correspondence play. Out of the 136 games played in the 32nd World Correspondence Championship, 119 were draws (87.5%). Even then a few of the decisive games were due to human, not engine, errors. In spite of all the draws, Edwards doesn’t think correspondence chess is dead. Some players still enjoy the challenge of trying to outwit an engine I guess. 

    ChessBase had a 2022 interview with Edwards in which he revealed his secrets of how he won the World Championship. Here is a brief synopsis of how he did it.

    Hardware makes a difference...the better the hardware, the better the engine output. Edwards said you can run analysis on chess.com or lichess, or your own specialized equipment if you’re computer savvy enough. 

 One thing he made clear was not to use the engine’s default parameters. The number of threads and the hash table size need to be as large as your computer can handle. The same goes for endgame tablebases...use the largest your computer can handle. Endgame tablebases are important because sometimes they will help the engine make a better middlegame evaluation. 

    Edwards advised that you spend more time on games where engine evaluations are in your favor. In those games search for dozens (yes, dozens!) of lines to see if the evaluation improves. And, don’t waste any time looking at positions that are 0.00. 

    Of course, there is more. For example having a large database of top level correspondence games and conducting a search for opening novelties is an important factor. 

 It’s clear that if you wish to excel in correspondence chess these days you need not only good hardware and software, but a lot of patience and you need to put in a lot of time. 

    My laptop is pretty old and it’s held together with a couple of large clamps and duct tape, but at least it has a SSD. I ran a 4-minute tournament and invited my top 8 engines to play and was shocked by the result! Berserk won.

 

 

    Here is one of the more interesting games. The first thing I noticed was that a full tactical analysis with PlentyChess returned an Accuracy Rating of 100% for white and 70% for black. Analysis with Berserk was a different story. White still scored 100%, but black’s dropped to 53%! Apparently Berserk found more improvements for black than PlentyChess did. 

 

[Event "Blitz G/4 min"] [Site ""] [Date "2025.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Dragon by Komodo"] [Black "Deep Fritz 14"] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "C65"] [Annotator "Multiple engines"] [PlyCount "53"] [EventDate "2025.11.17"] [EventType "tourn"] [SourceTitle "Fritz Engine Tournament"] [Source "Doe"] {C65: Ruy Lopez: Berlin Defense (3...Nf6), unusual lines} 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 Nf6 {The Berlin Defense has long had a reputation for being solid and drawish. It was played in the late 1800s and early 1900s by Emanuel Lasker and others. In modern times it was a favorite of Arthur Bisguier and it has been used by Vladimir Kramnik, Alexei Shirov, Veselin Topalov, Hikaru Nakamura, Gary Kasparov, Magnus Carlsen and Viswanathan Anand...all players with agressive styles.} 4. O-O {This and 4.d3 are the two main choices.} Bd6 { Usual are 4...Nxe4 and 4...Bc5. The text is highly unusual and is inferior as it greatly hinders black's development. To be fair I let Deep Fritz cogitate on the position after 4.O-O and it actually liked 4...Bd6 fir a bit, but then settled on the better 4...Be7 or 4...Bc5} 5. d4 Qe7 6. Re1 O-O 7. c3 (7. Bg5 h6 8. Bh4 a6 9. Ba4 b5 10. Bb3 Na5 11. Bg3 Nc6 12. Bd5 {White stands very well. Zilka,S (2602)-Taran,S (1932) Braila ROU 2022}) 7... Re8 8. Bg5 a6 9. Bd3 h6 10. Bh4 Rb8 11. Nbd2 {[%mdl 32]} b5 12. Nf1 Qd8 13. Ne3 {Strategically white has a won position thanks to black's atrocious 4th move, but black's next move is a serious blunder, especially coming from an engine. Retreating the B to e7 was the best try. However, again to be fair, Deep Fritz was allowed to examine this position for a few minutes, but still lked 13...g5 giving white only about a half P advantage. Stockfish knows better. White's advantage is almost 2.5 Ps.} g5 14. Nxg5 {[%mdl 512] Deep Fritz still refuses to change its evaluation of the position. Stockfish thinks white's advantage is 3-plus Ps.} hxg5 15. Bxg5 Be7 {After this Deep Fritz finally realizes that white os better. ..by a P and a half.} 16. Nf5 Nh7 17. Bh6 exd4 18. Qg4+ Bg5 19. f4 dxc3 20. bxc3 d6 21. Qg3 Kh8 22. Bxg5 Nxg5 23. fxg5 Ne5 (23... Re6 24. e5 Nxe5 25. Qh4+ Kg8 26. Re3 {This R lift brings about a quick decision.} Rg6 27. Nh6+ Kf8 28. Nxf7 Kxf7 29. Qh7+ Ke6 30. Qxg6+ Kd7 31. Rxe5 dxe5 32. Bf5+ Ke7 33. Qf6+ Ke8 34. Bg6+ Kd7 35. Rd1#) 24. Qh4+ Kg8 25. Re3 Ng6 26. Qh6 Bxf5 27. exf5 {Black resigned.} (27. exf5 Rxe3 28. fxg6 Qe8 29. Qh7+ Kf8 30. Rf1 {is hopeless for black.}) 1-0

Vladimir Nenarokov

    Vladimir Nenarokov (1880 – 1953) is hardly remembered these days. Although he was 70 years old, in recognition of his past performances he was on the first list of players to be awarded the IM title in 1950. Chessmetrics assigns him a high rating of 2546 in 1901, placing him at number 38 in the world. Topping the list were Lasker and Pillsbury. He authored many chess books, mostly on openings as well as a few books for beginners. He was a positional player with superb defensive skill and conducted the endgame with precision. 

     Nenarokov was among the Masters who came to the fore in the days before the Russian Revolution. Others were Grigoriev, Duz-Chotimirsy, Ilyin-Zhenevsky, I, and A. Rabinowicz and Romanovsky. 

    He began playing at the age of 14, but even though he was born in Moscow he did not have the opportunity to face strong opposition and so he hooned his skill by analyzed the games of masters and studying theory. 

 He first appeared in the Moscow Chess Club in 1898. He wanted to enter a tournament for the club championship, but being an unknown, he asked the club managers if they would evaluate his strength. He ended up defeating Third (Elo 1750-1875), Second (Elo 1875-2000) and First (Elo 2000-2150) Category players. Then a well known local Master gave Nenarokov an f-Pawn handicap and Nenarokov won that game, too. 

    In September of 1899, he made his debut in a major event, the First All-Russian Tournament, held in Moscow. Chigorin won the event and Nenarokov tied for 6th-7th. He continued to make rapid progress and played in the Second All-Russian Tournament in 1900-1901 and did quite well. The top finishers were Chigorin, Shiffers, Janowsky, Goncharov and Nenarokov. 

    In 1908 the 16 year old Alekhine challenged Nenarokov, then city champion, to a match, but Alekhine was not ready to meet such a strong player and after losing three games in a row, he abandoned the match. Since 1959 there has been a spurious game, Alekhine-Nenarokov, floating around that first made print in a letter to the editor in Chess Review. Edward Winter's site has complete details on the hoax HERE. 

    Nenarokov played in many other big tournaments held in Russia before the Revolution and scored excellent results. He competed in USSR Championships in 1923, 1924 and 1927. 

    He played in the great tournament at St. Petersburg in 1909, or rather he started to play. There were actually 22 players at the start of the tournament, but a player named Goldfarb withdrew because of illness and another named Rozanov withdrew because urgent family matters forced him to return to his home in Moscow. For unknown reasons. Nenarokov withdrew without informing the tournament director. The games of all three were not counted. 

    The following game was played in the 1924 USSR Championship which was a great success for Bogoljubow. The tournament started out as a real horse race when Bogoljubow won his first eight games and Romanovsky, the defending champion, scored 7.5 in his first eight game. Romanovsky kept pace with Bogoljubow until round 13, but then he began to fade. 

    Nenarokov spent the last years of his life living in Ashkhabad, the capital city of the Soviet Republic of Turkmenistan on the Eastern coast of the Caspian Sea. During that time he was active with the local chess organization. 

 

     About the Stonewall: I have a book on the Stonewall by an author who shall remain nameless. One reviewer described this author's books as notoriously rife with factual errors, junk, filled with inane comments, dull and worthless, filled with useless trivia, wasted ink, atrocious, a very poor writer and ridiculous...and that describes just one of his books! That's a bit harsh; the poor guy's books aren't THAT bad. I have a couple and actually kind of enjoy them. 

    At the beginning of his book on the Stonewall he says it is one of the easiest openings to play and yet it's also one of the rarest at the Master level and while it was once popular, it doesn't enjoy a very good reputation these days. 

    There's a reason you don't see top level GMs playing the Stonewall. The author tries to prove the Stonewall is worth playing, but I noticed he put the best defense at the end of the book and didn't devote nearly as much time to them as he did the variations where black cooperates by allowing white his typical Stonewall setup.

    When black fianchettoes on the K-side and white proceeds with the standard setup he will get nothing because the standard attacking ideas are no longer feasible. Therefore, if black fianchettoes white is advised to abandon the Stonewall and choose another strategy. 

    Among amateurs the Stonewall is no better or no worse than, say, the Najdorf Sicilian, because we amateurs play crappy chess no matter what the opening is. The truth is we rating challenged masses can play the Stonewall, but don't expect it, or any opening, to automatically chalk up a lot of wins. To do that you have to play better than your opponent in more areas than just the opening. 

 

 

[Event "USSR Championship, Moscow"] [Site ""] [Date "1924.09.??"] [Round "8"] [White "Vladimir Nenarokov"] [Black "Andrey Smorodsky"] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "D00"] [Annotator "PlentyChess"] [PlyCount "61"] [EventDate "1924.??.??"] {D00: 1 d4 d5: Unusual lines} 1. d4 d5 2. e3 Nf6 3. Bd3 Nbd7 4. f4 c5 {Along with 4...e5 this is the most popular, but not the best line. 4...g6 is the counter-Stonewall!} 5. c3 e6 6. Nd2 {This prevents the black N from going to e4.} Bd6 7. Qf3 {A playable alternative is 7.Nh3 hoping to get in Ng5} (7. Ngf3 cxd4 8. cxd4 O-O 9. O-O b6 10. Ne5 Bb7 11. Qf3 {is equal. Bendana,G (2090) -Binks,M (2100) Elista 1998}) 7... Qc7 8. Nh3 {8.g4 looks more dangerous than it really is because black can adequately defend himself. This advance is more likely to succeed if black has already castled.} Nb6 (8... h6 9. g4 Nb6 10. g5 hxg5 11. Nxg5 {favors black; he will simply castle Q-side.}) 9. a4 Bd7 10. a5 Nc8 {Smorodsky is going to waste a lot of time with this N, but as proof that white does not have any real attacking prospects, the time consuming N maneuver does not hurt his position in the least.} 11. O-O Ne7 12. Kh1 h5 13. Ng5 Nc6 {Black has taken 5 moves to get this N where it could have been in one, but it is one N move too many. On e7 the N serves the dunction of defending the K-side. A better plan was ...a6, ...cxd4 and ...O-O.} 14. dxc5 {Here or on the next move white could have played e3-e4.} Bxc5 15. b4 Be7 16. e4 {In spite of all the fiddling around on black''s part, white’s position has not yet reached the place where it’s overwhelming. However, black has a problem finding a completely safe safe haven for his K.} e5 {This move, opening up the position with his K in the center is a serios mistake. The ...a6 idea was still his best option.} 17. f5 {While not bad, this keeps the position closed, but now was a good time to rip it open with 17.exd5} (17. exd5 Bg4 18. Qf2 Nxd5 19. Bc4 Bxg5 20. fxg5 Be6 21. Ne4 {Black's K is in daner no mater where it gores.}) 17... d4 18. b5 Nxa5 19. cxd4 Ng4 20. b6 (20. Nxf7 {was quite playable, but itt would be difficult to calculate the consequences.} Kxf7 21. Qg3 Rac8 22. Nf3 Nc4 23. h3 Kg8 (23... Nh6 24. Bxc4+ Qxc4 25. Nxe5+) 24. dxe5 Ncxe5 25. Bf4 Bf6 26. Rac1 Qd6 {with unclear complications.}) 20... Qxb6 $11 21. Nc4 Nxc4 22. Bxc4 Bxg5 23. Bxg5 {It’s surprising, but in this position black’s defenses are adequate and there is no forcing win for white if black now plays the seemingly weakening 23...f6.} Rc8 (23... f6 24. Bh4 exd4 { White has no attack and the chances are even.}) 24. Bd5 exd4 25. Rfb1 {As almost always this is the wrong R} (25. Rab1 Qc7 {Threatening mate on h2} 26. Bf4 Qc3 27. Rxb7 {and white is clearly better.}) 25... Bb5 {This loses.} (25... Qc7 26. Bf4 Qc3 {White cannot capture the b-Pawn because the R on a1 is undefended.} 27. Rxa7 Ne3 28. Bxe3 {The N is too well placed and must therefore be eliminated.} (28. Raxb7 Qc1+ 29. Qf1 Qxf1+ 30. Rxf1 Nxf1 {Black is a R up.}) 28... Qxe3 29. Qxe3 dxe3 30. Raxb7 {with complete equality.}) 26. Qb3 {[%mdl 128] White now has a won position and finisdhes up forcefully. actical blows.} a6 27. Bxf7+ Kf8 28. Bg6 Qc7 29. Bf4 {[%mdl 512]} Qc4 (29... Qe7 30. Bd6 Bc4 31. Bxe7+ Kxe7 32. Qxb7+) 30. Rc1 {[%mdl 512]} Qxb3 {[%mdl 8192] This allows a mate in three, but he was lost in any case.} 31. Bd6+ { Black resigned.} (31. Bd6+ Kg8 32. Rxc8+ Be8 33. Rxe8#) 1-0

I played Paul Morphy

    A couple of weeks ago there was a water main break in my neighbor’s tree lawn. In the process of making repairs the city dug up a 4-inch plastic pipe that drains water out of my backyard and downspouts. To keep the line from freezing there is an electric heating cable running through the pipe that was severed. 

    The Water Department supervisor told me not to worry...he would be back the next day and install a new cable and repair the drain. The next day he showed up and gave me excuses about why he couldn’t get to it for another day or two and assured me he was not blowing me off. I suspected that was exactly what he was doing and I have not seen hide nor hair of him since. 

    Consequently, Friday was spent making repairs myself; I had the pipe, but a new cable was about $90. Filling in the trench with dirt was back breaking, so the afternoon was spent in the recliner tinkering with Fritz 20. 

    After a couple of games against beginners I decided to test myself against the Paul Morphy personality set at the Grandmaster level. As expected, I lost quickly. The quick slaughter looks pretty realistic. You can learn more about Fritz 20 and its personalities on a YouTube video HERE. If you enjoy playing against engines or are looking for a training program then Fritz 20 is worth the $100. 

 

 

 

[Event "Grandmaster Level"] [Site "?"] [Date "2025.11.14"] [Round "?"] [White "Tartajubow"] [Black "Paul Morphy Personality"] [Result "0-1"] [ECO "C24"] [Annotator "PlentyChess"] [PlyCount "40"] [EventDate "2025.11.14"] {Urusov Gambit} 1. e4 e5 2. Bc4 {The Bishop's Opening allows for a lot of transpositions.} Nf6 {White may or may not defend the P. 3.Nc3 transposes into the Vienna Game, 3.d3 is flexible if somewhat slow, 3.Nf3 transposes into the Petrov Defense or 3 f4 with further transpositions possible.} 3. d4 {The fun, but risky, Urusov Gambit. Back in the 1920s the Dimock Theme tournaments which had some strong player (like Marshall and Torre) were held to test the gambit and white did not score well. It's probably not good choice against Morphy!} exd4 {This is the most natural response. White doesn’t want to recapture with 4.Qxd4 exposing the Q, so 4.Nf3 sacrificing a P is the only real option.} (3... Nxe4 {allows white to gain a slight advantage after} 4. dxe5 {Black is going to lose time with his N.} c6 {This is most popular and considered best.} 5. Qe2 Nc5 6. a3 Be7 7. Nf3 O-O 8. Nc3 d5 9. exd6 Qxd6 10. b4 Ne6 11. O-O {White is just slightly better.}) 4. e5 {Usual is 4.Nf3. Alekhine wrote that after 4.Nf3 Nxe4 5.0xd4 white has a very strong attack. He added that he avoided such material gains in the opening on principle because they lead only to loss of time and delay of development. Engines do not like 4.e5 and give black about a one P advantage. This is not a good situation against a very strong opponent!} d5 5. exf6 {A weak move from which white never recovers. I should have listened to the voice in my head saying it's a bad move.} (5. Bb3 {is the best reply, but after} Ne4 6. Nf3 Bc5 7. O-O Bg4 8. Bf4 g5 {Black soon won in Cokan,M (2003)-Korneev,O (2573) Kranj op 1st 2004}) 5... dxc4 6. Qe2+ { Another very weak move. Best is 6.Ne2} (6. Nf3 Qxf6 7. Qxd4 Qxd4 8. Nxd4 Bd6 9. O-O O-O {Black is better. Felix Vega,A-Tandogan,B Wch U10 Girls Kemer 2007}) 6... Be6 $19 7. fxg7 Bxg7 8. Nf3 Nc6 9. O-O Qd5 10. Bf4 O-O-O 11. Re1 Qf5 { It's obvious that blacl has a crushing position. I was hoping an exchange of Qs would ease my defense.} 12. Qe4 Qxe4 13. Rxe4 Bf5 14. Re2 b5 15. Na3 { This attack on the b-Pawn comes to nothing.} c3 (15... d3 {was even stronger.} 16. cxd3 Bxd3 17. Rd2 b4 18. Nb5 c3 {attacking the N and R.}) 16. bxc3 b4 17. cxb4 d3 {[%mdl 64] Attacking both Rs.} 18. cxd3 Bxa1 19. b5 Rxd3 $2 20. bxc6 Rxa3 {White resigned} 0-1

Reuben Fine's Luck

    It seems if it wasn't for bad luck Reuben Fine (1914-1983) wouldn't have had any luck at all. Fine was one of the strongest players in the world from the mid-1930s into the early 1950s, but he was never able to win the US Championship. Once when asked why that was so, Samuel Reshevsky said, “It was because I was playing.” 

 In the first modern US Championship in 1936, the 21-year old Fine was, along with Reshevsky and Kashdan, the elite of US chess. That tournament didn't go well for Fine. His 7 wins and 7 draws showed his play was too timid and his loss to Albert Simonson, who was playing incredibly well, meant that Fine could do no better than tie George Treysman for third behind Reshevsky and Simonson. 

    Simonson, the youngest player in the tournament, was an unknown and was recognized as one of the better bridge and backgammon players. His only previous claim to fame had been his mediocre performance on one of the US Olympiad teams, but he made a remarkable late surge to finish a half point behind Reshevsky. 

    Treysman, at 55 was an old man, who had never played in a tournament before but was a professional coffeehouse player, earning dimes at speed and offhand games at some of the seedy clubs around New York. 

    In the 1938 Championship Fine finished second behind Reshevsky by a half point. He might have won, but losses to Anthony Santasiere (who tied Treysman for places 10-11) and Milton Hanauer (tied for places 12-14 with S. Cohen and Fred Reinfeld) proved disastrous. 

    Then again in 1940, Fine finished a half point behind Reshevsky. This time it was a loss to the super-solid Abraham Kupchik who finished tied with Arnold Denker for sixth place. Fine sat out the 1942 event but in the 1944 Championship Reshevsky wasn't playing, so it looked like this was Fine's chance. 

    This time he lost one game. When he met Denker in the seventh round it was Denker who prevailed. This was the tournament of Denker's life as he scored an amazing +14 -0 =3 and finished ahead of Fine who's score was almost as good, +13 -1 =3. 

 Fine did much better in the US Open though. At 17, he won his first of seven US Open Championships (then known as the Western Open) at Minneapolis in 1932 where he finished a half point ahead of Reshevsky. 

 Against high class opposition Fine often played brilliantly, but in domestic tournaments he often made tactical errors against lesser opposition. Who knows why? 

    The following game is from the US Open held in Dallas, Texas in 1940. In those days Dallas was out of the way, there was a war going on which made travel difficult, plus the New York State Chess Association championship was being held. As a result, the turnout was a dismal 27 entrants.  

     The field was split into three preliminary sections, with pre-tournament favorites Fine, Herman Steiner, and Weaver Adams seeded into different groups with the top three from each preliminary qualifying for the finals. 

    As expected Adams was undefeated in his section, finishing ahead of Erich Marchand. Steiner was also undefeated in his section, finishing ahead of Harold Burge. Fine was also undefeated, but J.C. Thompson tied him for first. 

    Fine's opponent in this game was the unheralded Albert Roddy from Oklahoma. Arnold Denker called Roddy a “non-master”, but I don't think that is necessarily the case.

 

    In the 1947 Southwest Open held in Fort Worth, Texas, Roddy tied for first with J.C. Thompson, Robert G. Wade and Blake W. Stevens. At the time Wade was touring the United States and Canada by Greyhound bus and playing in a number of tournaments. Blake Stevens (1927 – 1993) was from San Antonio, Texas and won the city championship several times. On the 1955 USCF rating list he was rated 2140. J.C. Thompson was a Master long before there was an official rating list. 

     I attempted to discover more information on Albert Roddy, but was unable to do so. There was an Albert Roddy (1900-1966) who is listed as registering for the draft in the September 26, 1918 issue of the Ada (Oklahoma) Weekly News. There was also an Army Second Lieutenant Albert H. Roddy during World War II who was captured by the Nazis while serving in Germany and was sent to Stalag Luft 3 near Sagan, Germany. He was freed in 1945. 

    Whomever this Albert Roddy was, this game was his 15 minutes of fame. The game was played in the preliminary section of the 1940 US Open held in Dallas, Texas. Fine went on to score 8-0 in the finals while Roddy tied for places 3-5 with a 4-3 score in the consolation tournament. 

 

[Event "US Open. Prelim 2, Dallas"] [Site "Dallas, TX USA"] [Date "1940.08.20"] [Round "3"] [White "Albert Roddy"] [Black "Reuben Fine"] [Result "1/2-1/2"] [ECO "D38"] [Annotator "Stocjfish 17.1"] [PlyCount "60"] [EventDate "1940.??.??"] {D38: Queen's Gambit Declined: Ragozin Variation} 1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 d5 4. Nc3 Bb4 {This sharp defense looks like a mixture of the QGD and the Nimzo-Indian and was introduced into practice by Soviet GM Viacheslav Ragozin.} 5. Qb3 {White has many choices here: 5.Qa4, 5.Qc2, 5.e3, 5. a3, 5.Bg5 and 5. cxd5.} c5 {Black blocks the c-Pawn after 5...Nc6, but it’s also a good move that results in lots of piece play.} 6. Bg5 Nc6 7. dxc5 O-O 8. e3 h6 9. Bh4 { This move does not seem to be inferior to 9.Bxf6 which has also been played.} g5 10. Bg3 Ne4 11. Be2 Qf6 {11... Nxg3 cannot be recommended because black’s K has been weakened by the advance of the Ps, plus the open h-file would be too dangerous for him.} (11... Nxg3 12. hxg3 Qf6 13. cxd5 exd5 {and after 14. O-O white has the advantage, but not} 14. Qxd5 Bxc3+ {and black wins.}) 12. Rc1 h5 {Risky. Fine is taking liberties against his unknown opponent. 11... Nxg3 cannot be recommended because black’s K has been weakened by the advance of the Ps, plus the open h-file would be too dangerous for him.n Simply 12... Nxc4 with equal chances is correct.} 13. h4 {This is not a good choice as it weakens his K's position. White has a good position after 13.cxd5} g4 {[%mdl 2048] 13... Nxg3 looks good, but appearances are deceptive.} (13... Nxg3 14. hxg5 Qg6 15. fxg3 Rd8 16. Rd1 Bxc5 17. Bd3 Qg7 18. Rxh5 {and white has a very strong attack.}) 14. Nd4 {White is faced with a difficult decision. Play this or 14.cxd5.} (14. cxd5 Nxc5 15. Qd1 gxf3 16. gxf3 Rd8 {Black is better.}) 14... Nxd4 {14... Nxg3 is a little better, but because the move wasn’t good last move, he probably rejected it without much thought.} (14... Nxg3 15. fxg3 Bxc5 {This was previously unavaliable.} 16. cxd5 Nxd4 17. exd4 Bxd4 {with n excellent position.}) 15. Qxb4 Nxg3 16. fxg3 {At this point Fine's advantage is only marginal} Nf5 17. cxd5 Nxg3 18. Rg1 exd5 19. Nxd5 Qxh4 20. Qf4 Be6 21. Ne7+ {[%mdl 8192] After this black is winning. It was better to leaving the N where it is and play 19.Bc4 or even 19,Rd1.} Kh7 22. Bd3+ f5 23. Kd2 Rae8 { One square too far. Black is still better after this, but on d8 he would be winning.} (23... Rad8 24. Rgd1 Ne4+ 25. Ke2 Qxe7 26. Bxe4 fxe4 27. Qxe4+ Kg7 { Black has won a piece.}) 24. Rh1 {Roddy has a brilliant concept in mind.} Nxh1 {Apparently Fine is unaware of what is about to happen. He would have been slightly better after 24...Qxe7} 25. Rxh1 {[%mdl 512]} Qxh1 26. Qg5 {This forces black to take the draw. The threat is Qg6 and Qh6 mate} Qxg2+ 27. Kc3 Rxe7 {[%mdl 512]} 28. Qxe7+ Rf7 29. Qxe6 Kg7 30. Bc4 Rf6 {Draw agreed.} (30... Rf6 31. Qg8+ Kh6 32. Qh8+ Kg5 33. Qg7+ Rg6 34. Qe7+ Kh6 35. Qf8+ {etc.}) 1/2-1/2

PlentyChess Engine

    The other day while browsing the CCLR chess engine rating list I noticed that the engine in second place behind Stockfish was PlentyChess which I had never heard of. Also, I discovered that in one engine tournamet it had actually defeated Stockfish! When I checked its results it had not lost a game to any of the top engines (all draws) so it’s certainly worth checking out. 

    PlentyChess is a UCI engine with a neural network based evaluation meaning it plays in a more human-like style. The network was trained on 4.8 billion self-generated positions. Its playing style is noted for being similar to Stockfish and for exhibiting incredible tactics. 

    A test analysis of a couple of games to compare the results of Stockfish and PlentyChess yielded almost identical results with only slightly different centipawn scores. Bottom line: there does not seem to be much difference in the two engines, but it's worth keeping an eye on PlentyChess.

    You can download it HERE. I has some trouble figuring out what to download, but at the bottom of the page you will see PlentyChess-7.0.0-windows-generic.exe. That is the one I downloaded and then added the engine to Fritz with no problems.

 

 

Ladislas Maczuski, An Obscure Genius

`The odds are you never heard of Ladislas Maczuski (July 23, 1837 - August 22, 1898, 61 years old).  He was described in the French chess magazine L'Echiquier de Paris as "a most curious type. He was born in Poland, but finally settled in France and from the moment of his arrival this gifted man took a prominent place among the chess amateurs.” 

    How good was he? It is hard to say owing to the very small number of his games that have survived. 

    What is known is that in March of1865, the founder of the relatively new magazine Palamede Francais left and Maczuski took over, but the magazine disappeared in December of 1865. It was a well put together 48 page brochure design that covered chess, checkers, whist and billiards. 

    Maczuski was last seen attired in an old overcoat giving “lessons” in cafes in Paris for two francs a lesson. As near as I can calculate that’s about $12 in today's purchasing power. By comparison, I’m told chess hustlers in New York City typically charge $5 a game these days, 

     In the following remarkable game from a 4-board blindfold simultaneous exhibition in 1876, he announced a mate in eleven moves! His opponent was a well known French amateur.  

 

[Event "Blindfold Simul"] [Site "Ferrara ITA"] [Date "1876.05.31"] [Round "?"] [White "Ladislas Maczuski"] [Black "A. Mazzolani"] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "C21"] [Annotator "Stockfish 17.1"] [PlyCount "34"] [EventDate "1876.??.??"] {C21: Danish Gambit} 1. e4 e5 2. d4 exd4 3. c3 {White intends to sacrifice a P or two for whick development and the attack. However, if he is careful black can safely accept them. The Danish used to be a favorite of Frank Marshall in his simuls, but his opponents started getting booked up on it and he had to give it up.} Bc5 {Raely played, but not at al bad.} 4. Bc4 Qf6 {Pointless. Correct was 4...d5!} 5. Nf3 h6 {Black is going to pay a price for ignoring his development and making anti-positional moves.} 6. cxd4 Bb6 7. Nc3 Ne7 8. e5 { White already has what can be considered a decisive advantage.} Qg6 9. Bd3 { It would have been better to not allow ...Qxg2 by playing 9.Nh4, but black was afraid to make the capture.} f5 (9... Qxg2 {is a better defense, but white is still better after} 10. Rg1 Qh3 11. d5 d6 12. exd6 cxd6 13. Rxg7 Rg8 14. Rxg8+ Nxg8 15. Qe2+) 10. exf6 {Castling was a good alternative.} Qxf6 $16 11. Ne4 { Again, castling was better. Now after 11...Qe6 black would have hopes of defending himself.} Qf7 $2 (11... Qe6 12. O-O d5 13. Ng3 Nbc6 {With some pieces in play black is getting untangled.}) 12. Ne5 Qe6 13. Qh5+ {Setting up the final attack. Black no longer has any escape.} g6 14. Qh4 {The game is not over until it's over! White missed win and after the text move he has only a slight advantage against the correct defense.} (14. Nxg6 Nxg6 15. d5 {This little move is what makes his 14th move hard to spot.} Qe7 16. O-O Qg7 17. Ng3 {with a winning attack against black's K. Just one variation...} O-O 18. Bxg6 d6 19. Bxh6) 14... Nf5 {[%mdl 8192] ...losing outright.} (14... Bxd4 { equalizes. For example...} 15. Nf3 Bg7 16. O-O d5 17. Ng3 Nbc6 18. Re1 Qf7 { and black's defense should hold.}) 15. Nf6+ {Back on track. White finished up brilliantly.} Kf8 16. Bxf5 $1 Ba5+ {A spite check.} 17. Kf1 Qxf5 {Maczuski announced mate in 11 moves. Can you see it?} (17... Qxf5 18. Bxh6+ Ke7 19. Ng8+ Kd6 20. Qe7+ Kd5 21. Qc5+ Ke6 22. d5+ Kxe5 23. Bg7+ Kf4 24. Qe3+ Kg4 25. Qg3+ Kh5 26. Nf6+ Qxf6 27. Bxf6 Rg8 28. Qh4#) 1-0

S. Lipschutz, One of the World’s Best Players!

    Was it Samuel or Salomon Lipschutz? His first name is uncertain and in n published articles and tournament of the day he was often listed as simply S. Lipschutz. Suffering from a disease of the lungs he went to Hamburg for treatment where he died after an operation. His death certificate gives his name as Salomon Lipschütz. 

 According to Chessmetrics the unheralded S. Lipschitz (1863-1905) had a high rating of 2742 on the January, 1901 list which placed him at #4 in the world behind Emanuel Lasker (2659), Harry Pillsbury (2811) and Geza Maroczy (2768).

    Lipschutz played Emanuel Lasker twice and drew both games. He was the US champion from 1892 to 1894 after defeating Jackson W. Showalter in a match.

    Lipschitz was born in the part of the Austria-Hungary Empire that is now in the Ukraine. He emigrated to New York City in 1880 at the age of seventeen and soon became well known in New York chess circles. 

    The English Master and writer William Ewart Napier wrote that Lipschutz was a "frail little man, with a gentlemanly mien and manners and an extravagantly long, pointed nose—the Cyrano of Chess". According to Andrew Soltis, "He was a methodical attacker with some strikingly good positional ideas—and some terrible ones."  

 

 

[Event "American Congress, New York"] [Site ""] [Date "1889.03.25"] [Round "1"] [White "S. Lipschutz"] [Black "W.H.K. Pollock"] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "C29"] [Annotator "Stockfish 17.1"] [PlyCount "59"] [EventDate "1889.03.25"] {C29: Vienna Game} 1. e4 e5 2. Nc3 Nf6 3. f4 {This is the sharp line Falkbeer Variation} d5 {If black wants to try and play it safe he can continue with the timid 3...d6, but he will get better results by counterattackingin the center with the text.} (3... exf4 {This is simply too risky.} 4. e5 Ng8 (4... Qe7 5. Qe2 Ng8 6. d4 {strongly favors white as black will have problems completing his development/}) 5. Nf3 {White is better.}) 4. fxe5 Nxe4 5. Qf3 Nxc3 6. bxc3 Be6 7. d4 c5 8. Rb1 Qc7 {Black should ignore the attack on his b-Pawn and concentrate on development with 8...Nc6} (8... Nc6 9. Bb5 (9. Rxb7 cxd4 { completely equalizes.}) 9... Be7 10. Ne2 O-O 11. O-O {is equal, but from white's perspective the position is more dynamic than after the capture of the b-Pawn.}) 9. Bb5+ Nc6 10. Ne2 O-O-O 11. O-O Be7 12. Be3 h5 {Black is hoping to launch a K-side attack with this move to be followed by ...g5. That said, black's plan is probably as good as any as white has an excellent position.} 13. Nf4 Bg5 (13... g5 {cannot be played because of} 14. Nxe6 fxe6 15. Qf7 Qd7 16. Bxc6 bxc6 17. Rb2 {followed by doubling Rs on the b-file with a devastatong effect.}) 14. Nxe6 Bxe3+ 15. Qxe3 fxe6 16. Bxc6 {This is a subtle positiona; error that allows black equalizing counterplay on the c-file. The correct plam was 16.Qh3 and attacking the K-side Ps.} Qxc6 $14 17. Rf7 Rd7 18. Rbf1 Rhd8 19. Qg5 cxd4 20. cxd4 Rxf7 21. Rxf7 Qxc2 {[%mdl 4096] This is the obvious move, but it's one P capture too many!} (21... Qc3 {This is the equalizer; it threatens ...Qe1# and attacks the more important d-Pawn.} 22. h3 Qxd4+ 23. Kh2 Qe4 24. Qxg7 d4 {with equal chances.}) 22. Rf1 {Threatening 23. Rc1} Qh7 {This is a horribly passive defense that leaves white's Q and R in a dominating position plus white's control of the c-file will prove fatal.} ( 22... Kd7 {getting the off the c-file was better. Neverthelessm after} 23. Qxg7+ Kc8 24. Qf7 Kb8 25. Qxe6 Qe4 26. Rd1 Qe2 27. Rf1 Qe4 28. Kh1 {White holds all the cards.}) 23. Qe7 {[%mdl 128]} (23. Rc1+ {immediately is not effective because after} Kd7 {black can defend himself.}) 23... Qh6 24. h3 { This gives the K an escape square and threaens Rf7} h4 25. Kh2 Qe3 {This covers c1, but the R has an equally effective square as will be seen.} 26. Qxe6+ Rd7 27. Rf3 Qe1 {Covering c3 so now white has to find another way.} 28. Qf5 {Threatens to win with 29.e6} Kc7 29. Qc2+ (29. e6 Re7 30. Qxd5 Rxe6 31. Qc5+ {is winng, but it will take a bit more effort.}) 29... Kd8 30. Qc5 { Black resigned. The threat of Rf8# cannot be answered.} 1-0

Virginia Wigren

    Not much is known of Virginia (known as “Pic”) Wigren except that she has the distinction of being the first female editor of the Correspondence Chess League of Anerica’s Chess Correspondent, a post she held from 1953 to 1956. She also served the CCLA as a rating statistician and as a member of the board of directors. 

    She was from Chicago and had a journalism major from Northwestern University and had been a magazine editor, fashion copywriter and an advertising manager.

    Wigren had been a top female postal player at Al Horowitz’ Chess Review before joining the CCLA. It was Wigren who apparently began the CCLA’s Women’s Championship, winning the first two events in 1949 and 1950. She won the latter with a perfect 11-0. It was probably an exaggeration, but one of her assistants called her, “the most dangerous correspondence player in the United States.” 

    Unfortunately she never kept her game scores and seems to have just disappeared from the chess scene. A Google search of her name and chess turned up almost nothing. Below is the one game of hers I was able to locate. From the looks of it, it's too bad there aren't more. 

[Event "CCLA Womens Championship"] [Site "] [Date "1950.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Clayton"] [Black "Virginia Wigren"] [Result "0-1"] [Annotator "Stockfish 17.1"] [PlyCount "46"] [EventDate "1950.??.??"] {E37: Nimzo-Indian} 1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 Bb4 4. Qc2 d5 5. a3 Bxc3+ 6. Qxc3 Ne4 7. Qc2 O-O 8. e3 b6 9. b4 {Usual are either 9.Nf3 or 9.Bd3, but the text which is equally good demonstrates the flexibility of white's posirion.} Nd7 { [%mdl 32] It's too soon to tell, but this is the beginning of an amazing journey for this N.} 10. cxd5 exd5 11. Bb5 Ndf6 12. Bc6 Bf5 {Of course white cannot take the R.} 13. Qb3 (13. Bxa8 Ng3 14. Qc6 Nxh1 {Given the opportunity black will play ...Nxf2} 15. f3 (15. Bd2 Nxf2 16. Kxf2 Ne4+ 17. Ke1 Qh4+ 18. Kd1 Qf2 19. Ne2 Bg4 {and white is winning.}) 15... Bd7 16. Qc2 Qxa8 {Even though the N cannot be extracted black is winning.}) 13... Nxf2 {This is temptingm but it is a tactical error. Correct was 13...Ng4 or even 13...Qxa8 with equal chances.} (13... Ng4 14. Nh3 Qh4 15. O-O Rad8 16. Bxd5 {White has survived the attack on f2 and the chances are equal.}) 14. Kxf2 Ne4+ {If white replies correctly black does not have nearly enough compensation.} 15. Ke2 { [%mdl 8192]} (15. Ke1 {was the only winning move.} Qh4+ 16. g3 Nxg3 17. Nf3 { followed by 18.Rg1 and white has beaten off the attack.}) 15... Qh4 {While black has a slight edge after this, 15...Qg5 was far stronger.} (15... Qg5 16. g3 Qf6 {attacking botj the B and the R while f2 remains vulnerable; white is helpless.}) 16. Nh3 {The only move as f2 must be defended.} Bg4+ {Tempting, but white's K can find a safe have on d3 after which black's advantage consists of the initiative and little else.} 17. Kf1 {[%mdl 8192] But here the K is exposed to a crushing attack and Wigren neatly wraps up the game.} (17. Kd3 {The discovered check is scary looking, but white can deal with it.} Bf5 18. Qxd5 (18. Qa2 {This move doesn;t leave black with anything substantial, but humanly speaking the complications are beyomd calculating.} Nf2+ 19. Kd2 Nxh1 20. Qxd5 Bxh3 21. gxh3 Qf2+ 22. Kc3 Qe1+ 23. Kb3 Qd1+ 24. Ka2 Qc2+ 25. Bb2 Rad8 26. Qxh1 {White has 2Bs vs a R and the chgances are equal. This is just a sample line...there are several equally complicated alternatives after 18.Qa2}) 18... Nf2+ 19. Ke2 Bd3+ {This looks really bad for white!} 20. Ke1 Ne4+ 21. g3 Qxh3 22. Qb3 {and white has wriggled ourt of her difficulties.}) 17... Bxh3 $19 18. Ra2 Bf5 19. Bxa8 Ng3+ 20. Kg1 (20. hxg3 Qxh1+ 21. Kf2 Be4 22. Bc6 Rd8 23. Bb5 Rd6 {The addition of the R to the attack ends the game. For example} 24. Ke2 Rf6 25. Kd2 Rf2+ 26. Be2 Qxg2 {followed by the advance of the h-Pawn.}) 20... Nxh1 21. g3 Nxg3 22. Bxd5 Ne4 23. Qd3 Bh3 {There might have been a few lapses along the way, but still a ferocious attack by Wigren.} 0-1

Arthur Dunkelblum

    Arthur Dunkelblum (April 3, 1906 - January 27,1979) was born in Cracow in Austria-Hungary, Being Jewish, he fled to Antwerp and won the Belgian championship in 1949. He was awarded the IM title in 1957. He played in11 Olympiads (1928, 1933, 1937, 1950, 1954, 1956, 1958, 1960, 1962, 1966, and 1968.

    His best tournament result was probably at Gijon, Spain, in 1950 where he finished 2nd-3rd with Roman Toran, behind Nicolas Rossolimo. His opponent was thr Spanish Mster Antonio Rico González (1908-1988). International tournaments in Gijon, Spaom from 1944 to 1965. According to Chess metrics Dunkelblum’s highest rating was 2515 in 1951.

 

  

Weinstein Upsets Shamkovich

    It doesn’t seem that long ago, but 1975 was 50 years ago. I wasn’t into music, but the disco craze was in full swing, mood rings became a popular fad and at the age of 19, Bill Gates co-founded Microsoft. 

    The world’s top rated players were 1) Bobby Fischer (2780), 2) Anatoly Karpov (2705), Vikto Korchnoi (2665), 4-6) Tigran Petrosian, Lev Poligayevsky (2645), and Mikhail Tal (2645), 7) Lajos Portisch (2635), 8-9) Bent Larsen and Boris Spassky (2625), Robert Huebner and Ljubomir Ljubojevi (2615).

    Bobby Fischer and FIDE failed to agree on the terms, some of which were quite radical, for Fischer’s defense of his world title. It’s just my opinion, but I believe he had a fear of losing to Karpov. 

    Fischer did not play from 1973 to 1991. He re-emerged to play a match against Boris Spassky in 1992, making the ridiculous claim he was still the World Champion and he was defending his title. He then retired from chess permanently. By that time chess had moved on, Fischer was a washed up champion and it was no great loss. 

 A number of players died that year. The best known being Paul Keres, Friedrich Samisch, Lajos Steiner, Nicolas Rossolimo, Karel Opocensky, Hans Johner, Vladimir Vukovic, Georg Kieninger, Abraham Baratz, Norman T/ Whitaker and John Morrison. 

    In US chess news, the US Championship and World Championship Zonal tournament took place in the small college town of Oberlin, Ohio. Walter Browne won with a score of 8.5-4.5. Also qualifying for the Interzonal was Kenneth Rogoff. Local favorite, Dr. Milan Vukcevich of Mentor, Ohio, just missed qualifying; he finished 3rd with 7.5-5.5, a half point behind Rogoff. 

    Today’s game comes from the Louis D. Statham Masters-Plus Championship (aka Lome Pine) that was won by Vladimir Liberzon. This was the fifth annual Lone Pine tournament and it set a world record in the number of International Grandmasters participating. . 

    Statham had invited literally every Grandmaster in the world to compete and guaranteed them that their air fare would be paid even if they failed to win a prize. It was unfortunate that the number of GMs was reduced due to politics. For example, three string Czech players were forced to withdraw: Jan Smejkal, Vastimil Jansa and Miroslav Filip. The reason? Their federation could not be given a guarantee that dissident Czech GM Ludek Pachman, who at the time was Stateless, would not be playing. 

    For those not familiar with Jansa, he had won the strong Atlantic Open on tiebreaks ahead of Matanovic, Bisguier. Zuckerman and 8almazi in New York City the previous November and his 2540 rating tied him for places 36-41 in the world. As for Pachman, he did not play at Lone Pine. 

    The surprise winner of this game was Norman Weinstein (born in 1950) who was awarded the IM title in 1973, the same year he won the US Open Championship. His opponent was GM Leonid Shamkovich ( 1923-2005) who was originally a Soviet player, but in 1965 he emigrated to the US by way of Israel and Canada. He lived in Brooklyn. 

 

[Event "Lone Pine"] [Site ""] [Date "1975.04.13"] [Round "1.11"] [White "Norman Weinstein"] [Black "Leonid Shamkovic"] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "B56"] [Annotator "Stickfish 17.1"] [PlyCount "66"] [EventDate "1975.04.13"] {B71: Sicilian Dragon} 1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 d6 6. f4 g6 7. Nxc6 bxc6 8. e5 Nd7 9. exd6 exd6 10. Be3 Be7 {Best. At the time 10... Qe7 had often been played, but it was eventually realized that white obtained a lasting advantage after 11.Qd4 Bg7 12.Qxg7 Qxe3+} 11. Qd2 O-O 12. O-O-O Nf6 { One annotator gave this a question mark amd called it a fatal mistake, but that is hardly the case. The most precise is 12...d5 with good play.} 13. h3 Be6 14. Kb1 {Also good was 14.g4 at once, but Weinstein plays to limit black's opportinity counterplay before commencing his own attack.} Qa5 {In a later round Austrian GM Karl Robatsch played the equally good 14...d5, but black lost that game also.} (14... d5 15. g4 Bb4 16. Bg2 Qa5 17. a3 Ne4 18. Bxe4 Bxc3 19. Qxc3 Qxc3 20. bxc3 dxe4 {Weinstein,N (2465)-Robatsch,K (2455) Lone Pine 1975. The position is equal, but black lost in the ending.}) 15. b3 Qa3 { After this move black begins experiencing difficulties. Better was 15...d5 with equal chances} 16. g4 {White now launches a very strong attack. Another good plan was supporting the advance of the f-Pawn with 16.Bd3} Rab8 17. f5 { [%mdl 512]} gxf5 {This loses quickly, but even a better move, say 17...Bd5 would, not have helped much.} 18. Bd4 Nd7 19. Qh6 {White is clearly winning.} Ne5 20. Bd3 Kh8 21. gxf5 Bxb3 22. cxb3 {Threatening mate with f6.} f6 23. Rhg1 Rf7 24. Rg2 Qb4 25. Qe3 Rff8 26. Rdg1 Rg8 27. Kb2 Qa5 {At forst glance it may appear that black has been able to consolidate his position a bit, but Weinstein finisjes him off in an efficient manner.} 28. Rxg8+ Rxg8 29. Rxg8+ Kxg8 30. Bxe5 dxe5 31. Bc4+ Kf8 32. Qg3 Ke8 {Black could have prolonged the game a bit with 32...Ba3+, but the outcome would have been the same.} 33. Qg8+ {Putting vlack out of his misery.} Bf8 {Black lost on time.} (33... Bf8 34. Qf7+ Kd8 35. Qxf8+ {White mates...} Kc7 36. b4 Qb6 37. Be6 Qf2+ 38. Kb3 Qb2+ 39. Kxb2 e4 40. Qc8+ Kd6 41. Qd7+ Ke5 42. Ne2 e3 43. Qd4#) 1-0

Miniature by John W. Brunnemer

    Back in 1948, Fred Reinfeld published one of his potboilers, Relax With Chess and Win in Twenty Moves. An original hardback edition will cost you $40-50, but the 2011 papercback edition is available for about $10-25. In either case, save your money. 

    The book is aimed at beginners and intermediate players and allegedly will improve their chess skills with the focus on strategies that can lead to a quick win. Hogwash! 

     One of the brilliant miniatures in the book was played by a couple of unknown players. The loser is known only as Falling who fell hard. A bit more is known about the winner. It's a correspondence game played in 1920 by by John W. Brunnemer of South Nyack, New York. 

    He was born in Brooklyn in 1895 and passed away on December 24, 1948. He was a rabid fan of baseball’s Brooklyn Dodgers; the team moved to Los Angeles in 1958. They play Toronto tonight in game 7 to determine the winner of the World Series. He played for the old Brooklyn Chess Club in its heyday, won the American Correspondence Championship in 1919. 

    While living in New Jersey hrwas President of the North Jersey Chess League. He also held the state championship there from 1921 to1932. At one stretch during those championship years he went five years without losing a game. 

    He was a notable postalite (as they were called) with Chess Review where he had a Postal Master rating. Brunnemer had a classical style and prferred 1.e4 and was well versed in opening theory at a time when Hypermodern opening were all the rage.

 

[Event "Correspondence"] [Site "?"] [Date "1920.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "John W. Brunnemer"] [Black "Falling"] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "B45"] [Annotator "Stockfish 17.1"] [PlyCount "35"] [EventDate "1920.??.??"] {B45: Sicilian Four Knights} 1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 e6 6. Be2 Bb4 7. O-O Bxc3 8. bxc3 Nxe4 {This whole line is not without its dangers for black.} 9. Bf3 {This move has not goven white good results. He does better with 9.Bd3 or 9.Nxc6} Nxc3 {The annotator in Chess Review gave this a question mark commentig that it was not the best. Actually, it is the best...engines say so. Equally good, and more popular, is 9...d5} 10. Qd3 { According to a note in Chess Review this line has accounted for a lot of brilliancies on white's part as shown in Reinfeld's book. That may be the case, but if black plays correctly (10...Qf6!) the position offers equal chances.} Nd5 {[%mdl 8192] This loses.} (10... Nxd4 {While this does not lose, it leaves white with a condiserable advantage.} 11. Qxd4 Qf6 12. Qxf6 gxf6 13. Bb2 Na4 14. Bxf6 Rg8 15. Be4 {White is better. Zelcic,R (2495)-Bennett,J (2190) Geneve 1996}) (10... Qf6 {This is the coorect move as it maintains equal chances.} 11. Be3 Nd5 12. Nxc6 bxc6 {White can try either 13.Bd4 or 13.Bc5 with equality.}) 11. Bxd5 {The refuration of black's last move.} exd5 12. Re1+ {This forces black's K to run, but some ingenuity in white's part will be required.} Kf8 13. Nf5 d6 {There is no way of saving the game.} 14. Nxg7 {[%mdl 512] The N cannot be taken.} Ne5 (14... Kxg7 15. Qg3+ {Black can only delay mate by surrendering a lot of material.} Kf8 (15... Kf6 16. Qg5#) 16. Bh6#) 15. Nh5 {Threatens to win with Rxe5!} Be6 (15... a6 {A pass ti show the threat.} 16. Rxe5 dxe5 17. Ba3+ Ke8 (17... Kg8 18. Qg3+ {wins}) 18. Ng7+ Kd7 19. Qxd5+ Kc7 20. Qxe5+ Kc6 21. Qc5+ Kd7 22. Qd6#) 16. Rxe5 {[%mdl 512]} dxe5 17. Bh6+ Ke8 18. Qb5+ { Bkack resigned} (18. Qb5+ Bd7 {This avoids mate, but requires white to demonstrate some clever play.} 19. Ng7+ Kf8 (19... Ke7 20. Qb4+ Kf6 21. Qh4+ Kg6 22. Qh5+ Kf6 23. Qg5#) 20. Qxb7 Rb8 21. Qxd5 Qf6 22. Nf5+ Ke8 23. Nd6+ Ke7 24. Ne4 Qxh6 25. Qc5+ Kd8 26. Qxe5 {picks up one of the Rs.}) 1-0