The playing hall was too cramped and, again, as usual, the lighting was very dim. Beside that, there was no analysis room which meant that after the games the players had to sit on the floor outside the playing room! Near the end of the tournament Bisguier and Evans managed to procure a table and chairs. Finally, there was no closing banquet and awards ceremony.
During the early 1970s young West Coast masters like Walter Browne, John Grefe and Jim Tarjan had been attracting attention, but Chicago, too, had crop of strong young players: William Martz, Greg DeFotis, Andrew Karklins and Craig Chellstorp. DeFotis gave up chess for contract bridge and Chellstorp gave it up for backgammon.
The 1974 championship was without big guns Fischer (no surprise there), Robert Byrne and Lumbomil Kavalek, but Samuel Reshevsky and Larry Evans were expected to put up stiff resistance against the young players. In the end though it turned out to be the first (and easiest) of Browne's three successive championship victories.
One wonders why Pal Benko, who had been dividing his time between his homes in New Jersey and Budapest, even bothered to play. He was undefeated, but drew most of his games in about 20 moves.
A major turning point in the tournament came in the fifth round when Browne, who had black against Reshevsky, felt his current tournament situation warranted taking a quick draw. He offered Reshevsky a draw, which was refused, at move 15. Reshevsky proceeded to to get an endgame advantage, but both were in time pressure with only seconds left on their clocks when, with five moves to play, Reshevsky lost on time.
Browne also had an adjourned game to play off against Anthony Saidy and it, too, ended in a time scramble where Browne managed to draw when the position was repeated three times. According to the rules in effect at the time, a player had to claim the draw and the claim had to be verified while the player's clock was running. That meant that if Browne was wrong, he might end up forfeiting. In the heat of the moment Browne started shouting at the assistant TD (Tim Redman), "I gotta know now. Is it a draw or isn't it?" It was.
The rest of the tournament was pretty much uneventful and after his last round game was over Browne had the championship sewed up. Meanwhile, Benko finally decided to put an effort into a game and managed to grind down Evans which left the two tied for second place. While that was happening Browne had departed the venue to take in a Kung Fu movie starring Brice Lee.
The usually exciting Bisguier played but one interesting game. His opponent was Chicago legend Andrew Karklins and it featured Bisguier's two Bs against Karklins two Ns.
Bisguier figured that was enough of an imbalance (to use Jeremy Silman's term) that he should win, but he didn't reckon on Karklin's fierce attack.
Karklins went after Bisguier with his Ps, sacrificed a B, doubled Rs on the f-file and then closed in for the kill and even threatened mate in one. But, before he could deliver the mate Bisguier had a B check that won the game!
I analyzed this game with the old Fritz 5.32, Stockfish 12 and Komodo 10 and it contains complications galore.
In his book The Art of Bisguier (1961-2003), Bisguier annotated this game rather poorly. He had only a few comments and little in the way of concrete variations. It's hard to fault him because he was assisted by the old Fritz engine which wasn't quite up to the GM level and the game was enormously complicated. As I looked at the game with the three engines and even ran several Shootouts with Stockfish, some of the positions that occurred weren't all that clear cut. You might want to run your own analysis...have fun and good luck!
Arthur Bisguier - Andrew Karklins
Result: 1-0
Site: US Championship, Chicago
Date: 1974
Nimzo-Indian: Rubinstein
[...] 1.d4 ♘f6 2.c4 e6 3.♘c3 ♗b4 4.♘f3 d6 5.e3 ♘c6 6.♗d2 ♕e7 Karklins was never much on opening theory, but this move doesn't do much to alleviate his cramped position.
21.gxh3 It's interesting that when commenting on this game Bisguier was silent on this move. For his book The Art of Bisguier (1961-2003) he used Fritz (version 5.32?) which evaluates white being better by 1.5 Ps after 21.gxh3. Stockfish 12 disagrees and puts the evaluation at 0.00 after both 21...f3 and 21...Ng5.
24.♕g2 Bisguier commented that instead of a P promoting itself to a Q, his "exhulted royal lady assumes the front line duties of a lowly P." I am not sure what to make of that foolishness. Even the old Fritz recognizes this move as a mistake.
25.d6 This move is important because it opens up a diagonal for the B and nor both of white's Bs working side by side assure him of what amounts to a winning advantage. 25...♕e6 Bisguier commented that this seizes control of the a2-g8 diagonal before his B can.
6...O-O This is the usual move. 7.♕c2 e5 8.d5 ♘e7 9.♗d3 c6 10.dxc6 ♘xc6 with equality. Milov,V (2602) -Yermolinsky,A (2577)/Moscow 2001
6...♗xc3 7.♗xc3 ♘e4 8.♕c2 f5 9.d5 ♘e7 10.♗xg7 ♖g8 11.♗c3 e5 and white went on to win in Sanguinetti, R-Reinhardt, E/Buenos Aires 1955.
7.d5 Forcing black to part with the B. 7...♗xc3 (7...♘b8 8.♕a4 winning the B.) 8.♗xc3 Already Bisguier was happy because he has provoked ...Bxc3 without having to bother playing a3. Additionally, he doesn't have doubled c-Pawns and black is left with a cramped position. 8...♘d8 9.♗d3 e5
9...exd5 This does not win a P. 10.cxd5 ♘xd5 11.♗b5 c6 12.♕xd5 cxb5 13.♕xb5 ♘c6 and white stands well.
10.♕c2 O-O
10...e4 This looks inviting, but white is winning after 11.♗xf6 ♕xf6 12.♗xe4
11.O-O g6 A bad move to have to make (it blunts the scope of white's B) seeing that his dark squared B is missing. It might have been safer to have played 11...h6. (11...h6) 12.♘d2 ♘h5 13.f4 Clever! 13...f5 Another point to 11...g6. Karklins is going all out for a K-side attack.
13...exf4 This is a losing blunder! 14.exf4 ♕e3 15.♔h1 ♘xf4 16.♖f3 wins.
14.fxe5 dxe5 15.e4 f4 16.b4 ♘f7 17.c5 Are the Ns better than the Bs, both of which are limited in scope by the P-formation? 17...g5 18.♘c4 g4 19.♖ad1
19.♕b2 would have forced black to pause and defend his e-Pawn. 19...♖e8 20.♖ad1 ♕g5 21.d6 g3 with a sharp position that should favor white.
19...g3 Karklin's attack look unstoppable, but with the correct defense white should come out of the complications with the better game. 20.h3 The right (only) move. He can't allow the N to land on g3. 20...♗xh3 This looks far more dangerous than it really is, but it's the best practical choice.
20...♗g4 was technically somewhat better. 21.♗e2
21.hxg4 ♕h4 22.♖f3 ♘f6 23.♘xe5 ♕h2 24.♔f1 ♘xe5 25.♗xe5 ♕h1 26.♔e2 ♕xg2 27.♔e1 ♕xf3 and black wins.
21...♗xe2 22.♕xe2 Black's attack is over and white is better. 21.♕e2 and Stockfish likes white by about 2.5 Ps whereas Fritz 5.32 says white is better by a little over a half a Pawn. 21...♕h4 22.gxh3 ♕xh3 23.♕g2 White is winning (Stockfish). White is slightly better (Fritz 5.32). This position is extremely complicated and unbalanced. In Shootouts Stockfish sored +4 -0 =1 for white, but the games involved some very complicated positions which for humans playing OTB would have no doubt been far from being so clear.
21...♘g5 22.♘xe5 f3 In spite of appearances, black is quite lost here. In his book Bisguier makes the inane comment that this looks like a mating attack adding that he must open the diagonals for his Bs. Actually, it takes an engine as powerful as Stockfish or Komodo to recognize than after the correct 22...Nxh3+ the chances would be nearly equal!
22...♘xh3 23.♔g2 f3 24.♔xh3 loses after 24...♕g5 The only move. 25.♘g4 ♖f4 26.♘h6 ♕xh6 27.♖xf3 ♖xf3 28.♔g2 ♖f2 and wins
(22...♘xh3 23.♔g2 f3 24.♘xf3 ♘3f4 25.♔g1 ♘h3 draws)
22...♘xh3 23.♔g2 f3 24.♖xf3 ♘5f4 25.♔xg3 ♕g5 26.♔h2 ♕h4 27.♖df1 ♘f2 28.♔g1 ♘2h3 draws
23.♘xf3 This horrible move allows black to equalize. Even Bisguier's old Fritz engine recognized that, but he makes no comment on it. 23...♖xf3
23...♘xf3 24.♖xf3 ♖xf3 25.♕e2 ♕f7 26.d6 ♖f2 27.♕e3 cxd6 28.cxd6 ♕xa2 29.♕g5 ♔f8 30.♗f1 leaves white with a won ending as the attack is over and the Ps will prove decisive.
23...♘xh3 Fritz 5.32 believes white is winning here, but better engines know better. 24.♔h1 ♖xf3 25.♖xf3 Fritz. This loses.
25.d6 This holds the draw. 25...♘f2 26.♔g2 ♖xd3 27.dxe7 ♘f4 28.♔g1 ♘4h3 draws
25...♕h4 26.♖f5 ♘5f4 27.♖xf4 ♘xf4 28.♔g1 ♘h3 29.♔g2 ♘f2 30.♗f6 ♕xf6 31.♖e1 ♖f8 and black is winning. 24.d6 is the only correct move here. 24...♕f7 25.♗d4 Threatening Bc4 pinning the Q and K. 25...♖f2 26.♖xf2 gxf2 27.♗xf2 ♘xh3 28.♔f1 ♕f3 29.♔e1 ♘5f4 30.♗c4 ♔g7 31.♗d4 ♔h6 32.dxc7 and wins.
24...♖af8 Logical, but wrong. Bisguier pointed out that the best move was 24...Nf4, but he gives a faulty line showing that white wins.
24...♘f4 25.♖xf3 ♘xg2 26.♖xg3 ♘f4 Better than Bisguier's 26...Nh4 which is met by 27.d6!
26...♘h4 27.d6 ♘hf3 28.♔h1 cxd6 (28...♕e6 29.♗e2 cxd6 30.♗xf3 h6 31.h4 wins.) 29.cxd6 ♕f7 30.♖f1 ♔f8 31.♖xg5 ♘xg5 32.♖xf7 ♔xf7 favors white, but the position remains quite complicated.
27.h427.d6 and it's not clear that this is more than a draw after 27...♘fxh3 28.♔h1 ♕e6 29.♖f1 ♕xa2 30.♖f6 cxd6 31.♗f1 ♕b1 32.♔h2 ♕c2 33.♔h1 ♕xe4 34.♗g2 Things are not clear at all. A likely line is 34...♕b1 35.♖f1 ♕xf1 36.♗xf1 ♘f2 37.♔g2 ♘fe4 38.♗c4 ♔f8 39.♖g4 dxc5 40.bxc5 ♖d8 A draw seems a reasonable outcome.
27...♘fh3 28.♔h2 ♖f8 29.d6 (29.hxg5 ♖f2 30.♔h1 ♘f4 favors black.) 29...♖f2 30.♔h1 cxd6 31.cxd6 ♕d7 32.hxg5 with great complications in which both sides have their chances. 25...♕f7 is no help. 26.♗c2 ♘f4 (26...♖xc3 27.♗b3) 27.♗b3 ♕xb3 28.axb3 ♘xg2 29.♖xf3 ♖xf3 30.♔xg2 ♖f2 31.♔xg3 ♘xe4 32.♔h4 ♖f4 33.♔h5 cxd6 34.cxd6 ♖f5 35.♔g4 ♖f8 and white scored 4 wins and a draw in Shootouts from this position.
26.dxc7 ♘xh3 Bisguier gives this a ? and suggests the better move 26...Rf2, but that, too, is insufficient.
26...♖f2 27.♖xf2 ♘xh3 28.♕xh3 gxf2 29.♔h2 ♕xh3 30.♔xh3 ♘f4 31.♔g3 ♘xd3 32.♔g2 and white wins.
27.♕xh3 ♕xh3 White looks to be mated except for... 28.♗c4 which delives mate in four so Karklins resigned. What a game! (28.♗c4 ♕e6 29.♗xe6 ♖3f7 30.♗xf7 ♖xf7 31.♖d8 ♖f8 32.♖fxf8#) Powered by Aquarium
No comments:
Post a Comment