In New Ideas In Chess Larry Evans basically duplicated Znosko-Borovsky's efforts. What was “new” about Evans book was that he tried to explain what is meant by an advantage and how to convert one element into another by using a collection of diagrams showing game fragments that illustrated the point.
In The Search For Chess Perfection, a collection of C.J.S. Purdy's articles, he discussed Emanuel Lasker's “Law” which was based on Steinitz' tenets that no combinations are possible without a considerable advantage. Purdy argued that that was not always the case because sometimes even if a player has an advantage in all three areas he can still fall victim to a tactic because of some anomaly in the position. Therefore you should always look for tactics first with special attention given to King safety.
Then in a 1979 Chess Life and Review article titled How To Beat Your Opponent Larry D. Evans discussed time in the opening. In the books authors use the term "tempo," but Evans preferred the term "beat."
He wrote, “If you have or will have one more piece out than your opponent has, you have gained one beat. Each subsequent move that your opponent wastes, allowing another of your pieces to enter the battle without adding another of his own, can be added to the tally as another extra beat.”
The other day I "discovered" a November, 2011 issue of Chess Life and Review hidden away on a bookshelf. Evidently I kept it because it was the Samuel Reshevsky centenary issue. What caught my attention was a game played in the 2011 US Open which was held in Orlando, Florida.
The 9-round tournament was somewhat unusual in that of the 367 players there were 18 GMs and only 7 IMs. There was a massive tie among 7 players scoring 7.5 points. They were GMs Hikaru Nakamura, Tamaz Gelashvili, Timur Gareyev, Alejandro Ramirez, Gior Kacheishvili, Aleksandr Lenderman and Alonso Zapata.
With no clear winner and because the tournament qualified one
player for a place in the US Championship, a blitz playoff was held between the two players with the highest tiebreaks. Lenderman got the title by defeating Ramirez.
The game that caught my eye was the last round encounter between Ramirez and GM Julio Sadorra who tied for places 14 to 35. In his notes to the game Ramirez alludes to the elements of space, time and force and it was interesting to get a modern GMs take on them.
Ramirez was born June 21, 1988 in Costa Rica and now lives in the US. He tied for first in the 2013 US Championships which qualified him for the World Cup where he lost to eventual semi-finalist Evgeny Tomashevsky in the 1st round Armageddon tiebreaker. He plays at chess.com HERE. Julio Sadorra (born September 14, 1986) is from the Philippines.
Alejandro Ramirez (2592) - Julio Sadorra (2495)
Result: 1-0
Site: US Open, Orlando, Florida
Date: 2011.08.07
King's Indian: Fianchetto Variation
[...] 1.♘f3 ♘f6 2.g3 g6 3.♗g2 ♗g7 4.O-O O-O 5.c4 d6 6.♘c3 e5 7.d4 The fianchetto variation is one of the most popular lines. It is a method of development completely different than other K-Indian variations in that back's normal plan of attack can hardly succeed because white's K-side is more solidly defended than in most variations. 7...♘bd7 This is the most common reply although 7...Nc6 is sometimes played. Ramirez commented that he was not expecting Sadorra to play the K-Indian. 8.e4 c6 9.h3 ♕a5 It's more usual for the Q to stop one square short of this and land on b6. Statistically there's not much difference in the results. 10.♖e1 exd4 11.♘xd4 ♘e5 White is now faced with the question of how to defend the attacked c-Pawn...with the Q or B? 12.♗f1 Ramirez noted that he had been playing slowly because he had reached this position a few times in recent games and was sure Sadorra had seen those games and had prepared something.
12.♕e2 ♘fd7 13.♗e3 ♘b6 And now white has to advance the P to c5 either at once or after 14.Nb3. In either case, the position is even.
12...♖e8 13.♗e3 c5 Rarely played and unexpected.
13...♗e6 14.♘xe6 ♖xe6 15.♔g2 ♖ae8 16.c5 occurred in a game played earlier in the year by Ramirez against Julio Becerra, but he was not sure exactly how good the P-sac was. He was thinking that Sadorra would play this line and would have an improvement up his sleeve. As a result Ramirez was unsure if he would play the same line again.
14.♘b3 ♕b4 Ramirez makes an interesting comment here" This is basically the only move played in this position, but I'm going to go ahead and question theory. As (will be seen)...the Q must eventually go back to d8... on b4 it encourages a2-a3, which is slightly weakening and then white follows with Nd2, a move that simply helps him. If the Q is going to retreat to d8 after that, why not simply do it in this move?
14...♕d8 Ramirez didn't give any analysis on this move so here is what Komodo came up with: 15.f4 ♘c6 16.♕f3 ♘d7 17.♘b5 ♖e6 18.♖ad1 a6 19.♘c3 a5 20.♘b5 a4 21.♘c1 ♗xb2 22.♕f2 ♗d4 23.♘xd4 cxd4 24.♗xd4 ♘xd4 25.♖xd4 ♕b6 and white is better by about one P.
15.a3 Ramirez confessed that he, oddly, didn't notice that the d-Pawn was hanging, but he wouldn't have taken it anyway.
15.♕xd6 This P grab is almost always bad in th K-Indian. 15...♘f3+ 16.♔h1 ♘xe1 17.♗xc5 ♕xc3 On his DVD GM Bejan Bojkov gives this as the refutation of 15.Qd6. Both Stockfish and Komodo evaluate the game as completely even after 18.bxc3 ♘xe4 19.♕d5 ♗xc3
15...♕b6 16.♘d2 ♘c6 17.♖b1 Ramirez had played all this before in a game against Bojkov and so he was quite surprised that Sadorra was both using so much time and that he had even chose to enter this variation. Bojkov had gotten good play in that game, but he shouldn't have because in reality, black has a bad game. 17...♕d8
17...♘d4 This was the move played in the Ramirez-Bojkov, University of Texas, Dallas GM Invitational in 2011. 18.b4 ♕d8 19.♗xd4 cxd4 20.♘b5 h5 21.♘xd4 h4 22.gxh4 ♘h5 23.♘2f3 ♘f4 24.♘b5 ♗f8 25.e5 ♗f5 26.♘xd6 ♗xd6 27.♕xd6 ♗xb1 28.♖xb1 ♕c8 29.♕d4 ♘xh3+ 30.♔h2 ♕f5 31.♗xh3 ♕xf3 32.♗g2 ♖ad8 33.♗xf3 ♖xd4 34.c5 ♖xe5 35.♗xb7 ♖xh4+ 36.♔g3 ♖c4 37.♖b3 ♔g7 38.♖d3 Draw
18.♗g2 ♗e6 19.f4
19.♘e2 ♘d7 20.♘f4 ♘f8 21.b4 b6 22.bxc5 bxc5 23.e5 ♘xe5 24.♗xa8 ♕xa8 25.♘xe6 ♘xe6 26.♕b3 White is slightly better. Grachev,B (2669)-Nevednichy,V (2604)/London 2013
19...♘d7 20.♘d5 To quote Ramirez' instructive note: I think this is a good time to stop and take a look at the position. A swift glance will reveal nothing more than a normal KID/ Benoni setup with black having a ton of dark squares and white having a nice space advantage. A deeper study reveals that black doesn't have a plethora of dark squares, he has one: d4. This square isn't even heavily controlled by him, as soon as white is able to play b4 and put his N back on b3, he will have full control over d4. White will then have a space advantage on the Q-side, the K-side and the center. Black, unlike most Benonis, has no targets. The d7 N has no squares. He doesn't want to trade on d5 and at the same time he doesn't have a useful move. Houdini might think that this game is about equal. I think black's position is awful. (Stockfish and Komodo agree with Houdini-Tartajubow) 20...♗xd5
20...♘d4 is slightly better. 21.♗f2 b5 22.b4 bxc4 23.♘xc4 ♗xd5 24.exd5 ♕f6 But here, too, white is better. Abramovic,B (2458)-Valles,M (2261)/Albena BUL 2013
21.cxd5 ♘d4 22.b4 b5 This unexpected move merits a question mark, but Ramirez says everything else looked pretty bad so.Sadorra is playing for complications.
22...♘b5 Komodo disagrees and likes this move. After 23.bxc5 ♘c3 24.♕f3 ♘xb1 25.♖xb1 ♘xc5 26.♗xc5 dxc5 27.e5 (27.♖xb7 ♗d4+ 28.♔h2 ♕a5 is equal after either 29.Nc4 or 29.Nb3) 27...b6 is gives white the tiniest edge.
23.bxc5 ♘xc5 Best. (23...dxc5 24.e5 ♖c8 25.♘f3 ♘xf3+ 26.♕xf3 a6 27.♖bd1 and black is losing.) 24.♘f1 Let Ramirez explain: This move is simple and winning. Unfortunately for black, it turns out that the N on d4 is trapped. Not only that, it doesn't have enough protection.
24.♖b4 also wins, but it's more complicated and so Ramirez rejected it. 24...♘d3 25.♖xd4 ♘xe1 26.♕xe1 ♗xd4 27.♗xd4 ♖c8 28.e5 White is winning.
24...♕f6 25.♖b4 ♘db3
25...♘cb3 also loses after 26.♘d2 a5 27.♘xb3 ♘c2 28.♕xc2 axb4 29.axb4 ♕c3 30.♕xc3 ♗xc3 31.♗d2 ♗xd2 32.♘xd2 with a won ending.
26.♖xb3 ♘xb3 27.♕xb3 ♕c3 28.♕xc3 ♗xc3 29.♖b1 ♖eb8
29...a6 This was better as it would, according to Ramirez, make him prove his endgame technique. He would have started by bringing his K to the center. 30.♔f2 ♖ac8 31.♖b3 White is better.
30.e5 a5 Ramirez: Black's Q-side majority isn't as fast as white's central P, so I win more material, but the game isn't over yet.
30...dxe5 loses quickly after 31.d6 exf4 32.gxf4 b4 33.♗xa8 ♖xa8 34.axb4 ♖d8 35.♗c5
31.exd6 b4 32.a4 b3
32...♖d8 is met by 33.g4 ♖xd6 34.♘g3 ♖e8 35.♔f2 with a winning endgame.
33.d7 ♖b4 34.♗c5 ♖c4 (34...♖d8 is met by 35.♗xb4 ♗xb4 36.♖xb3 ♖xd7 37.♘e3) 35.♗e7 b2 36.d8=♕+
36.d6 was a little better...not that it matters. 36...♗d4+ 37.♔h2 ♖b8 38.d8=♕+
36...♖xd8 37.♗xd8 ♖xa4 38.d6 ♖a1 39.♗e4 f5 40.♗d3
40.d7 was even better..also, not that it matters. 40...fxe4 41.♗g5 ♗d4+ 42.♔g2 ♗b6 43.♖xb2 ♖d1 44.♖xb6 ♖xd7 45.♖a6 ♖d5 46.♘e3 with a won ending.
40...♔f7 Here Ramirez said he was a little bit annoyed that there wasn't an obvious win despite the fact that he was up two pieces, so he decided to play it safe and sacrifice one to reach a completely won endgame. 41.♗b6 ♔e6 42.♘e3
42.♗c5 seems even better 42...♗f6 43.g4 fxg4 44.hxg4 with a won game.
42...a4 (42...♔xd6 doesn't help. 43.♗xa5 ♗xa5 44.♘c4+ ♔c5 45.♘xa5) 43.♘d1 ♗f6 44.♘xb2 Nice! 44...♖xb1+ (44...♗xb2 45.♖xa1 ♗xa1 46.♗c5 etc.) 45.♗xb1 ♗xb2 46.♗c5 ♔d7 47.♗c2 ♔c6 48.d7 ♗f6 49.♗a3 After the Ps disappear the endgame is beyond hopeless so Sadorra resigned. Powered by Aquarium
No comments:
Post a Comment