The reason was because at that time email play was declining in popularity making it impossible to put together tournaments. There were other issues, too, like spam and viruses.
IECG's operations were transferred its partner, Lechenicher SchachServer Server (LSS) which was run by Dr. Ortwin Paetzold, one of the IECG founders.
I am not exactly sure when I started playing with the IECG, but it was at my CCLA rating which was somewhere in the Expert class (2000-2199), but I do remember that I was unaware that the rules nowhere prohibited engine use and as a result I only scored two draws out of six games and dropped a class!
Back in 2004 when the following game was played, the top engines were Fritz 8, Chess Tiger, Crafty, Hiarcs, Houdini, Junior, Rybka, Shredder and Zappa. I am not sure how they compared to today's engines, but in 2005 a Fritz 9 prototype drew against the then FIDE World Champion Rustam Kasimdzhanov.
By that time I had discovered that you could use engines on IECG, but they were not playing at the level at which they are today and you could still beat them as Robin Smith demonstrated in his book Modern Chess Analysis which was published in 2004. Naturally the book was quickly outdated because the strength of engines progressed so rapidly.
The original notes to this game proved to be useless when subjected to scrutiny by Stockfish and Komodo! According to the database with my games, the games played in 2004 were analyzed using the by then outdated Fritz 6.
I honestly cannot say if either one of us were using engine assistance during this game, but judging from some of the original notes and black's terrible 19...Be7 it would seem that we were not! At that time only a few correspondence sites allowed engine use and happily almost none of my correspondence opponents in the CCLA where their use was illegal were engine users.
In the previous game Spassky used one of my favorite openings to crush his opponent and in today's games I want to show just how dangerous this opening can be even when used by amateurs.
Tartajubow–Opponent1–0D03IECG email2004Stockfish 15
1.d4 f6 2.f3 e6 3.g5 d5 4.bd2 c5 Black has chosen a classical P setup
and aims to seize control of e4 and he hopes to organize counterplay in the
center. However, in doing this he weakens the e5 square which may become a
base for white's N. 5.e3 In this setup the long-term direction the game
takes depends on the development of the black forces, for which there are two
main plans. One is characterized by the fianchetto of the light-square B and
the deployment of the Non b8 to d7. Black chooses a third way which seems out
of place. b6 6.b1 Safe and solid. I was not interested in taking any
risks. 6.xf6 gxf6 7.c4 cxd4 7...xb2 8.cxd5 exd5 9.b1 xa2 10.b5+ d7 11.dxc5 leaves black with a shattered P formation. 8.exd4 dxc4 9.xc4 c6 10.0-0 leaves white with a slight positional advantage after 10...Be7 xb2 Black should avoid this! 11.e1 e7 12.d5 with the advantage. 6...c6 7.c3 e7 8.d3 0-0 8...d7 9.0-0 a6 10.e5 cxd4 11.exd4 xe5 12.dxe5 g8 13.g4 White is slightly better. Trifunovic-Puc, Novi Sad, 1945 9.e5 c4 10.c2 h6 Here one would expect to see a mild mannered retreat such
as 11.Bf4 or 11.Bh4 or even 11.Bxf6. 11.h4 I changed my mind about playing
it safe, but it's OK because he cannot very well take the B. a5 11...hxg5? 12.hxg5 g6 12...e4 13.h5 13.gxf6 xf6 14.f3± g7 15.h3 d8
and white is winning. 12.xc6 This seemed logical; it puts a whole mess of
black's P's on white squares, but the immediate advance of the g-Pawn was also
playable. bxc6 13.g4 hxg5 13...xa2 is unplayable. 14.xf6 xf6 14...gxf6 15.g5 fxg5 16.h5 g7 17.hxg5 xg5 18.f4 wins 15.g5 and wins. 13...d8 Just like in the Spassky-Osnos game getting the Q back to defend
the K fails. 14.xf6 xf6 15.g5 e7 16.h5 e8 17.g1 f5 18.xe8 xe8 19.gxh6 f6 20.hxg7 e7 21.g6 xg7 22.xf5 xg6 23.xg6 xh4 24.f3
and Stockfish gives white a decisive advantage of about 3 Ps. Komodo 14 puts
it at a little over half of that. Most of white's advantage is due to black's
B on c8 being bad as a result of my 12th move. 14.hxg5 e4 14...d7 15.h7+ h8 16.c2 wins 15.xe4 dxe4 16.xe4 White has the advantage, but
there is no forced win, so care must still be taken. xg5 Risky but a whole
lot of fun would have been 16...Rd8! 16...d8!? 17.xc6 is insufficient.
b8 18.c2 g6 19.f4 f8 and black has at least equalized and may even be
a bit better. 16...d8!? 17.c2 g6 18.xg6 White maintains the
advantage after 18,f4, but this tempting move offers no more than equality. xg5 18...fxg6 19.xg6+ f8 20.h8# 19.e4 e5 with an unclear position. 17.h7+ Surprisingly, the coming discovered check doesn't accomplish
anything. 17.f4 also came into consideration. g6 17...f5 This is not
so good. 18.gxf5 18.fxg5 This loses. fxe4 19.g6 b8 20.c2 g5 21.xe4 e5 22.dxe5 e6 and white is a piece down and therefore lost. 18...f6 18.xc6 b8 19.fxg5 xg5 20.f3 and the position is equal. 17...h8 18.e4+ 18.f4 This is the only viable alternative. h6 19.e4 f5 20.xc6 b8 21.g5 b7 22.xb7 xb7 23.gxh6 g6 Positionally white is better, but making
progress will prove difficult. 18...g8 19.f4 e7 This is a blunder that
loses almost at once. 19...g6 Returning the extra piece allows him enough
play that the position is equal after 20.fxg5 xg5 21.xc6 21.f3 e5 22.dxe5 xg4 23.f4 xf4 24.exf4 fd8 With his B in play and the fact that
white's b-Pawn is a liability, black has equalized. 21...b8 22.f3 e5 23.h3 g7 Back is quite safe. 20.h7+ h8 Even better was 21.Qf3 and 22.Qh3 21.g5 xg5 21...g6 22.xg6+ g7 Black gets mated after 23.h5 22.h5 h6 23.xa5 xh7 Two Bs just aren't enough for the Q. Still, white must
demonstrate the win! In order to get the other R into play. 24.d2 24.c7 is winning, but white has a hard time making progress after c5 25.xc5 b7 26.h2 d5 24...c5 24...f5 leads to a mate in 13. 25.xh6+ gxh6 26.c7+ h8 27.e7 g8 28.h1 g2+ 29.e1 g8 30.xh6 mates in 7 25.xc5 b7 26.h2 d5 27.e7 Played in order to get the Q back to the K-side g8 27...f6 leads to mate in 7 28.g1 g8 29.f7 e4 30.f5 xf5 31.xh6+ xh6 32.h1+ h3 33.xh3+ g5 34.h5# 28.g1 fb8 29.xh6 xb2+ 30.c1
Black resigned. 1–0
No comments:
Post a Comment