Fooling Paul Keres

     The 1964 Chess Olympiad was the first ever to be held in Asia and it also attracted a record number of participants when fifty countries entered. There were 294 players, more than 70 of them titled. 

     The teams were divided into six groups of 7, and one group of 8. Only two top teams of each group were qualified into the main final. There were four final sections, three comprised of 14 teams and the bottom one with just 8 teams. 

     The Soviet Union was the only team to have six GMs and the American team was weakened because Bobby Fischer, William Lombardy and Larry Evans were missing. 

 

     

     In the first round of the Olympiad Dr. Anthony Saidy defeated Poland’s Jacek Bednarski (1939 – 2008), an International Master and a politician who won the Polish Championship in 1963. 

     Anthony Saidy (born in1937) is an International Master, a retired physician and author. He competed eight times in the U.S. Championship. He authored several chess books and a book of "what if" political fiction. 

     The game was published several times in Europe and it was presumed to be a brilliamcy. However, Saidy said of it, “To the average player, or even master, the piece sacrifice looks convincing, for did not the opponent collapse within eight moves?" He then made the observation that there is a pitfall in all tactical games...the first evaluation barely glimpses the ramifications and “...in the heat of the arena (the players) have no full grasp of the complexities.” 

     When the mighty Paul Keres annotated the game in the British Chess Magazine he lauded Saidy’s play and complimented him for a “nicely played game” which, coming from the likes of Paul Keres, was a huge compliment. But, in his analysis Saidy concluded that the game was “flawed.” Was it? Let’s see what Stockfish’s opinion is. 

[Event "Olympiad, Tel Aviv, Qual D"] [Site ""] [Date "1964.11.03"] [Round "?"] [White "Anthony Saidy (USA)"] [Black "Jacek Bednarski (Poland)"] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "E80"] [Annotator "Stockfish 15.1"] [PlyCount "47"] [EventDate "1964.??.??"] {K-Indian: Saemisch} 1. c4 g6 2. Nc3 Bg7 3. d4 Nf6 4. e4 d6 {The Saemisch always gave Bobby Fischer trouble so that he eventually avoided the K-Indian if he believed he would face it. However, when he faced the Saemisch against Spassky in their 1992 rematch, Fischer scored +2 -1 =2} 5. f3 c6 {A rare sideline that has never brought black much success. He usually castles here.} 6. Be3 a6 7. Qd2 b5 8. Bd3 Nbd7 9. Nge2 O-O 10. O-O bxc4 11. Bxc4 Nb6 12. Bb3 a5 {[%mdl 32]} 13. Na4 Ba6 14. Rfc1 Nfd7 {This is black's best move. He has complete equality.} (14... Bb5 15. Nxb6 Qxb6 16. Nc3 a4 17. Bd1 Rfc8 (17... Rfb8 18. b4 a3 19. Rab1 Nd7 20. Nxb5 Qxb5 {Lehikoinen,P (2229)-Seeman,T (2441) Helsinki 2002. White is better.}) (17... Nd7 18. Nxb5 Qxb5 19. Be2 Qb7 20. Rab1 Rfc8 21. Bc4 d5 {Mishra,N (2363)-Suvrajit,S (2335) Nagpur 1999 is fully equal.} ) 18. Rab1 Qa6 19. Nxb5 Qxb5 20. b4 axb3 21. Bxb3 Qa6 {The chances are about even. Adler,J (2274)-Ballmann,M (2375) Switzerland 2014}) 15. Rc2 {Black has achieved complete equality. His c-Pawn is backward, but white would gain nothing by capturing it.} (15. Rxc6 Bb5 16. Nxb6 Nxb6 17. Rcc1 a4 {with full compensation for the P.}) 15... c5 {Writing in the British Chess Magazine the legendary Paul Keres questioned this move, but Saidy disagreed commenting that the move was "impeccable." Stockfish agrees with Saidy.} 16. Nxc5 {[%mdl 8192] As Saidy put it, "... appalled by the disjointed position of my own pieces and the fact that black had so swiftly freed his position" he spent 50 minutes to come up with this move. In his notes Keres awarded this sacrifice a "!" stating, "The combination is original and easily overlooked.". Saidy's reply was, "Perhaps it should have been!" Once again, Saidy is correct...Stockfish says so! It even gives black a decisive advantage.} (16. Nxb6 Nxb6 {and white has the option of keeping thing equal after either 17.Nc3 or 17.dxc5}) 16... dxc5 17. dxc5 a4 {Another fine move. It's better than Keres' suggestion of 17.. .Nc8} (17... Nc8 18. Rd1 Bxe2 19. Qxe2 Qc7 20. Ba4 Ne5 21. c6 Na7 22. f4 Nexc6 23. e5 g5 24. g3 {and white has ample compensation for the N.}) 18. Bxf7+ { This weakening Black's King position is the only PRACTICAL chance white has. By the way, Saidy now had less than a half hour left for 23 moves!} (18. cxb6 axb3 19. axb3 {is Stockfish's coldblooded suggestion, but it leaves white with zero practical chances.}) 18... Rxf7 19. cxb6 Bxe2 {[%mdl 8192] Here Keres wrote, "Certainly black's best practical chance", but, again, Saidy correctly disagreed. The fact is this move costs Bednarski the game.} (19... Ne5 { is correct and after} 20. Qxd8+ Rxd8 21. Rac1 Nd3 22. Rd2 Rff8 23. Rb1 Ne5 24. Rxd8 Rxd8 {Black's advantage is decisive.}) 20. Qxe2 {Remember Saisy was in terrible time pressure and so he played this automatically so as not to waste precious time on the obvious, but after the text black has a slight edge.} (20. b7 {is decisive.} Rb8 21. Rac1 Bxb2 22. Rc8 Bxc1 23. Qxc1 {etc.}) 20... Nxb6 ( 20... a3 {This is plable, but it doesn't lead anywhere after} 21. Rd1 axb2 22. a4 Rxa4 23. Rxb2 Bxb2 24. Qxb2 e5 25. b7 Qa5 26. b8=Q+ Nxb8 27. Qxb8+ Kg7 { and black won't be able to make any progress}) 21. Rd1 Qb8 {The decisive error and the one that was responsible for the acclaimed brilliancy.} (21... Nd7 { This is another story.} 22. Rcd2 e6 23. Qb5 Qb8 24. Qxb8+ Nxb8 25. Rd8+ Rf8 26. Rxf8+ Kxf8 27. Rd8+ Kf7 {In Shootouts from thids position 5 games were drawn}) 22. Qb5 {[%mdl 1024]} Nc8 {This represents complete collapse.} (22... Rf6 { was tougher, but in the long run there is no doubt about the outcome.} 23. Rc6 Rxc6 24. Qxc6 Qc8 25. Qxb6 Rb8 26. Qa7 Bf6 27. Rc1 Qb7 28. Qxa4 Qxb2 {White has a decisive advantage.}) 23. Rd8+ Rf8 24. Qd5+ {Black resigned. Maybe the game was not a brilliancy, but it was exciting plus it was not often that anybody could out-analyzed Paul Keres as Saidy did in this game!} (24. Qd5+ Kh8 25. Rxf8+ Bxf8 26. Bd4+ e5 (26... Bg7 27. Qd8#) 27. Bxe5+) 1-0