Not a Match, but a Mismatch

 

     Wednesday, 8-23, saw severe thunderstorms, torrential rains, wind gusts that were recorded between 70-90 miles per hour and a couple of tornadoes rip through here. It was, I think, a frontal system associated with the recent hurricane that lashed California. 

     We, along with tens of thousands of others in the area suffered major flooding of our home. A local TV news crew even filmed our house and interviewed my wife. 

     Some parts of the city were without power for nearly two days. Fortunately, we had power. Needless to say, the losses we suffered were substantial, but not nearly so bad as some of out neighbors. 

     We are a long way from returning to normal and as an aside, for anybody who has to deal with an insurance company...good luck! Obviously, blogging has been on hold, but here is a post I had ready before the storm... 

     In 1882, Wilhelm Steinitz played a match in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania against Dion Martinez, but it was actually more of a mismatch! 

     Dion Martinez (June 6, 1837 – March 11, 1928, 90 years old) had emigrated from Cuba somewhere between 1873 and 1875 and settled in Philadelphia. 

     In 1885 he became the first president of the Franklin Chess Club. His son Charles S. Martinez (1868-1941) was also a prominent player. 

     Martinez (Dion) was regarded as one of the strongest players in Philadelphia and he played a short matches against James Mason, losing ine and winning one.

     Besides losing to Steinitz in 1882, he also lost to Steinitz again in 1982 (2.5-3.5) and he took another beating (1-10) in 1883. The following year he was badly whipped by Johannes Zukertort (3.5-9.5). 

     Martinez was 52 years old at the time when the June 16, 1889 edition of the New York Times described him as follows: "Dion Martinez of Philadelphia is rather an elderly gentleman, tall and dignified. He was regarded as one of the strongest chess players in Philadelphia, but has not practiced much for two years past, and financial adversities have tended to detract his mind from the game." 

     In the 1882 match against Steinitz, victory went to the first to score 7 wins, draws not counting. The time control: 30 moves in 2 hours and then 15 moves every 1 hour. The purse was $250 for each player. 

     The match came about when a Mr. D. S. Thompson (a Philadelphia businessman) visited Simpson's Chess Divan in London where he met Steinitz and suggested a visit to Philadelphia. 

     Steinitz agreed based on, among other stipulations, the following terms: 1) seven or nine games, four games each week 2) stakes on each side to be $250 per side plus $500 traveling 3) Steinitz to stay in Philadelphia 45 days and to play only with members of the Philadelphia Chess Club. 

     Steinitz would also give exhibitions of blindfold and simultaneous play, so that all the members of the club would have an opportunity to play him. 

     Martinez was willing to play Steinitz and even put up $100 of his own money towards the $500 necessary. In 1882, $100 had the purchasing power of nearly $3,000 today. 

     Today’s game was the 6th game of the match. It was the shortest in the match and lasting only 21 moves, it was completed in an hour and a half. Martinez played a variation of the Evans Gambit, which he evidently had not studied too closely. It was noted that in the match the only games in which Martinez had a chance were those in which he was compelled to play safely.

 

[Event "Match, Philadelphia"] [Site ""] [Date "1882.11.23"] [Round "6"] [White "Dion M Martinez"] [Black "Wilhelm Steinitz"] [Result "0-1"] [ECO "C51"] [Annotator "Stockfish 16"] [PlyCount "42"] [EventDate "1882.??.??"] {C51: Evans Gambit Accepted} 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Bc5 4. b4 {Popular at the time, Emanuel Lasker dealt a heavy blow to the Evans with a modern defensive idea...returning the P under favorable circumstances. The opening was out of favor for much of the 20th century, although John Nunn and Jan Timman played it in some games in the late 1970s and early 1980s, and in the 1990s, Garry Kasparov used it in a few games which prompted its brief revival.} Bxb4 {No self-respecting player of the day would have dreamed of declining the gambit with 4...Bb6. Due to the loss of a tempo involved, most experts consider declining the gambit to be weaker than accepting it.} 5. c3 Bc5 6. O-O d6 {[%mdl 32]} 7. d4 exd4 8. cxd4 Bb6 9. Bb2 {Even at the time this game was played it was known the best move is 9...d5.} (9. d5 Na5 10. Bb2 Ne7 11. Bd3 O-O 12. Nc3 {and white is doing well.}) 9... Nf6 10. e5 {The NY Times annotator noted that this is a “good play when you give odds, perhaps, but bad play in an even game, and can only be explained on the theory of a mistake. "} (10. Nbd2 O-O 11. e5 Ng4 12. h3 Nh6 13. exd6 cxd6 14. d5 {is at least equal. Felgendreher,H (2223)-L'Hostis,S (2064) FRA 2008}) (10. d5 {is probably white's best.} Ne7 11. Bxf6 gxf6 12. a4 {with a difficult position to evaluate. Black's K-side is badly weakened; white has more space, but his B is bad and it's going to be diffucult to get at black's K.}) 10... dxe5 {Opening up the position while he is uncastled seems risky, but chess is often a game where exceptions to the rule are the rule. Black is actually better here.} 11. Ba3 { Quite logical because it keeps black's K in the center, but in fact, after this move white finds himself in serious trouble.} (11. dxe5 {Shows why black is better.} Qxd1 12. Rxd1 Ne4 13. Rf1 Bg4 14. Bd5 Bxf3 15. gxf3 Nc5 {and thanks to his Q-side P-majority black has a decisive endgame advantage.}) 11... Be6 {What a surprise...black allows doubling of his e-Pawns.} 12. Nbd2 (12. Bxe6 fxe6 13. Qb3 Qd5 14. dxe5 Ne4 {Black's centralizes pieces and Q-side P-majority add up to a decisive advantage.}) 12... e4 {This is even stronher than capturing on d4} 13. Re1 {A totally unsound sacrifice...it's hard to envision what white had in mind here, but it's clear he miscalculated the coming sequence.} (13. Ne5 {hard;y salvages the game though.} Qxd4 14. Nxc6 bxc6 15. Bxe6 fxe6 16. Qb3 {Baiting a trap!} O-O-O {and black is safe.} (16... Qxd2 17. Qxe6+ Kd8 18. Be7+ Ke8 19. Bxf6+ Kf8 20. Qe7+ Kg8 21. Qxg7#)) 13... exf3 14. Qb3 Qxd4 15. Nxf3 Qxf2+ 16. Kh1 O-O-O {White may have overlooked this escape to safety. The remainder of the game is a pathetic display by white.} 17. Rxe6 fxe6 18. Rf1 Ne4 {[%mdl 32] This leads to a pretty finish.} 19. Rxf2 Nxf2+ 20. Kg1 Rd1+ 21. Qxd1 Nxd1+ {[%emt 0:00:00] White resigned.} 0-1

Are You As Smart As a Piss Ant?

     Pisants, also known as piss ants, originally referred to a type of European ant known as the wood ant. In the United States,the term piss ant may refer to any small ant that infests a home. 

     They prefer to build their nests in wooded areas where they use wood as their nesting material, mainly pine. The formic acid their bodies secrete makes their nests take on a distinctly urine-like odor. The same thing happens if you smash one of them...your fingers will smell like urine. 

     They are small, typically not much larger than one quarter of an inch long and can be black, brown, or reddish. Some varieties may even have a bluish-green, iridescent sheen. 

     In our homes ants are attracted to building materials and the foods we eat, especially sweets. Once your home is on their radar, they move in and are challenging to get rid of. They can cause damage and, also, carry bacteria, parasites and infectious diseases that can be transferable to humans. 

     They’re hard to get rid of because insect sprays kill them on contact, but the sprays won’t eliminate a whole colony. Also, over-the-counter products don’t work as well as they used to as more and more species are developing an immunity to pesticides. 

     You might think ants are not intelligent, but nothing could be further from the truth! They are one of the most intelligent and industrious insects in the world.

     Recent studies show that ants are outstanding navigators and highly social. Ants care about their colony and they can pass on knowledge from the elders to the young. 

     They even make their own medicine! They have been known to gather certain foods and certain types of fungus that can be used by their colony as antibiotics.

     Ants are excellent problem solvers and can readily adapt to new situations. They routinely accomplish tasks as a group to do jobs that a single ant could not do. 

     So what does all that have to do with chess? Probably every chess player has heard of the Knight’s Tour where you have to move a Knight to every square on the board only once. does all that have to do with chess? Probably every chess player has heard of the Knight’s Tour Old timers will remember George Koltanowsky was famous for performing it. Chess Life published an article on on the Knight’s Tour HERE

     Ants use a certain algorithm to forage for food and it can be used to solve many types of problems including the Knight’s Tour. Read more…

Lambert Lambastes Puc

  

     The 1950 Olympiad in Dubrovnik was won without difficulty by Yugoslavia (Gligoric, Pirc, Trifunovic, Rabar, Vidmar Jr. and Puc) two points ahead of Argentina (Najdorf, Julio Bolbochan, Guimard, Rossetto and Pilnik). 

     West Germany (Unzicker, Schmid, Pfeiffer, Rellstab and Staudte) were third while the United States (Reshevsky, Steiner, Horowitz, Shainswit, Kramer and Evans) finished fourth. There were 16 teams in the finals. 

     After the event team captain Herman Steiner had some scathing, and according to the Chess Life editor Montgomery Major, ill-advised comments about the US team’s finish. 

     Steiner stated that there was internal dissension among the team members that prevented them from winning first place. Major labeled Steiner’s allegations as being in “poor taste” and an example of “poor sportsmanship” because Steiner was offering an an alibi for what he considered a failure. In Majors’s opinion alibis for failure were unacceptable. No explanation was give as to the nature of the dissensions. 

     Major also took umbrage with Steiner’s labeling of the US team’s performance as poor as being unjustified. According to Major, fourth place in such a strong field was not a poor showing. Additionally, the US team had the distinction of being the only team that lost no matches and with exception of US Champion Herman Steiner all team members ended with plus scores. 

     Major also was of the opinion that in granting the interview (which was given to the New York Times) Steiner violated “the first principle of good publicity.” Feuds and disagreements should not be aired publicly because it was bad for US chess. Instead of the New York Times, Steiner should have, according to Major, saved his words for a chess magazine...that is, Chess Life. 

     The US team probably suffered somewhat because US Open Champion Arthur Bisguier was not on the team. He was absent because when returning from the Open in Detroit (held in mid-July) he and five other players were involved in a car accident in Batavia, New York. 

     Their car overturned on a rain-slick road and four were taken to the hospital. Bisguier suffered a broken rib and a rash on his forehead. Larry Evans was very badly bruised. Walter Shipman had his leg in a cast for an injured ankle. Kit Crittenden of Raleigh, North Carolina suffered a fractured collar bone. Jeremiah Donovan and Eliot Hearst escaped serious injury. All-in-all, not a bad injury report considering that in 1950 airbags and seat belts were safety features of the future.

     Lambaste is a verb that means to assault violently, beat or whip, That describes exactly what Lambert did to Puch in the following game. 

     After World War II Hans Lambert (1928-2020) was one of the leading Austrian players. Yugoslavia’s Stojan Puc (1921-2004) was an IM (awarded in 1950) and an Honorary Grand master (awarded in 1984). 

[Event "Olympiad, Dubrovnik"] [Site ""] [Date "1950.08.30"] [Round "?"] [White "Hans Lambert (Austria)"] [Black "Stojan Puc (Yugoslavia)"] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "B72"] [Annotator "Stockfish 16"] [PlyCount "55"] [EventDate "1950.??.??"] {Sicilian Defense} 1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 g6 6. Be2 Bg7 7. O-O O-O 8. Be3 a6 9. f4 {[%mdl 32] White usually plays the positional 9/ a4 here, but Puc is playing more aggressively There is little hope of launching a successful attack on black's K with pieces alone because the fianchetto is just too strong. So. Puc plans an all out P assault.} Qc7 10. g4 {The beginning of a strong and very dangerous P advance that's not for the faint of heart. Black is not doomed because the P advance also strips white's K of its own defenses.} (10. Nd5 {is a god move and it's preferred by those seeking a less adventurous path.} Nxd5 11. exd5 Nd7 12. c4 Nf6 13. Rc1 { White has a solid, but boring, position. Kindermann,S (2500)-Miles,A (2585) Bath 1983}) 10... e6 (10... Nc6 {serves better.} 11. f5 (11. g5 Ng4 12. Bxg4 Bxg4 13. Qxg4 Bxd4 14. Nd5 Bxe3+ 15. Nxe3 {is completely equal.}) 11... d5 12. exd5 Qe5 13. Bf2 Nxd5 14. Nxd5 Nxd4 15. Bxd4 Qxd4+ 16. Qxd4 Bxd4+ {lead to a quick draw in Klundt,K (2398)-Colovic,A (2414) Mogliano Veneto 2000}) (10... e5 {This is an OK move, too.} 11. Nb3 {Black only has one move jere and that's 11. ..exf4. Watch what happens if he omits it.} Be6 {It's hard to believe that this loses.} 12. f5 Bc4 13. g5 Bxe2 14. Qxe2 Nh5 15. Nd5 Qd8 16. f6 Bh8 17. Ne7+ {1-0 (17) Kerecki,L (2174)-Vulin,M (2092) Belgrade 2008}) 11. g5 Nfd7 12. f5 {White wastes no time in forcing the breakthrough. Continuing the P buld uo with 12.h4 is too slow.} (12. h4 b5 13. a3 Bb7 14. h5 Nc6 {Black has completed his development and the chances are equal.}) 12... Ne5 (12... exf5 $16 { was a better defense. After} 13. exf5 Re8 14. Nd5 Qa5 15. Bc4 Ne5 {Black's position is holding together, but he must defend carefully.}) 13. f6 {A fine move. Opening the f-file by capturing on e6 or g6 would be wrong because black would bw able to use the open f-file in his defense. By playing 13.f6 white intends to attack on the h-file and it will prove impossible for black to defend against it...there will be no way to get his pieces to the defense because of the cramped position his K is caught in.} Bh8 14. Qe1 h6 {Opening up the Ks position is the wirst thing he could have done. Attempting a diversion with 14...b5 was worth a try.} 15. Qh4 (15. gxh6 {is less good because white would then be unable to operate on the h-file.} Kh7 {White is better, but there is no effective way to continue.}) 15... h5 {Puc's thinking was probably now no possible P moves on white's part can open the K-side. In such a case white must sacrifice a piece to achieve the breakthrough.} 16. Rad1 {This over-preparation was not really necessay.} (16. Bxh5 gxh5 17. Qxh5 Nbc6 18. Rf3 {Another sacrifice!} Nxf3+ {Else the R goes to the h-file ending the game.} 19. Nxf3 e5 20. Nh4 Be6 21. Rf1 (21. g6 {and black has a defense in} fxg6 22. Qxg6+ Bg7 23. fxg7 Qxg7 24. Qxg7+ Kxg7 {and here it's black who is better.}) 21... Nd4 {In this situation as soon as white can play Nf5 the game will be over.} 22. Bxd4 exd4 23. Nd5 (23. Nf5 {at once is also playable.} Bxf5 24. Nd5 Qd7 25. Rxf5 Qxf5 26. Ne7#) 23... Bxd5 24. exd5 Qxc2 25. Nf5 {wins}) 16... b5 {Black has no viable defense and suggested improvements would be moot. } 17. Bxh5 {[%mdl 512] Black's unmoved Q-side pieces provide sufficient strategic justification for this sacrifice.} b4 (17... gxh5 18. Qxh5 Re8 19. Rf4 Ng6 20. Rf3 Nd7 21. Rh3 Ndf8 {Black looks to have defended himself rather nicely, but there is nothing he can do except watch white bring up some more pieces.} 22. Nce2 Qc5 23. Rf1 Bd7 24. Qh6 Qc4 25. Nf4 e5 26. Nxg6 {Now the best black has is...} Qxf1+ 27. Kxf1 Bxh3+ 28. Qxh3 fxg6 29. Nf5 gxf5 30. exf5 Rad8 31. Qh5 Rd7 (31... Rc8 32. f7+ Kg7 33. f6#) 32. Qxe8 {and wins}) 18. Nce2 {Another piece will be added to the attack.} gxh5 {This hastens the end, but he no longer hs any defense.} (18... Re8 {This holds out longer, but that is the only thing that can be said for it.} 19. Rf4 Nbd7 20. Rdf1 Nf8 21. Bg4 Nxg4 22. R4f3 Ne5 (22... Nxf6 23. gxf6 e5 24. Nf5 Bxf5 25. exf5 Bxf6 26. Qxf6 Qe7 27. fxg6 Qxf6 28. gxf7+ Qxf7 29. Rxf7 {and white is winning.}) 23. Rh3 { leads to mate}) 19. Qxh5 {The breakthrough has been successful.} Nbc6 20. Rf4 { As soon as this R gets behind the Q it will be all over.} Nxd4 21. Nxd4 Ng6 22. Rf3 e5 23. Nf5 {White mates.} Bxf5 24. exf5 Nf4 25. Bxf4 exf4 26. Rh3 { Success! There is no defense against mate so black throws in a couple of spite checks.} Qc5+ 27. Kf1 Qc4+ 28. Rdd3 {Black resigned} 1-0

Sharp Play by Lodewijk Prins

     The winner of the international tournament in Madrid in 1951 was Lodewijk Prins of Holland. He accomplished it in spite of losing four games, including to the US Champion Herman Steiner and Argentina’s GM Herman Pilnik both of who tied with Ossip Bernstein for second place.

    Both Steiner and Pilnik had 7 draws. Bernstein only had 5 draws, but a critical loss to Prins cost him first place. 

     Prins started off with a bang by going undefeated through the first seven rounds before he wa stopped by Steiner. Thereafter Steiner made a strong bid for first; included among his victories was a last round win against Esteban Canal. His efforts weren’t quite enough to catch Prins though. 

 

     Lodewijk Prins (January 27, 1913 - November 11, 1999) was born in Amsterdam and was awarded the International Master title in 1950, and was made an International Arbiter in 1960. In 1982 FIDE made him an Honorary Grandmaster. Prins co-authored several chess books with Max Euwe as well as several tournament books. 

     Between 1937 and 1968, Prins represented Holland twelve times in the Olympiads. Prins qualified for the 1952 Interzonal and was Dutch Champion in 1965. 

     After the German invasion of Holland in May 1940, Prins was fortunate to survive, but he did not participate in any tournaments because of his Jewish origin. 

     At the 1968 Olympiad in Lugano Prins scored a strong 9-3 and earned a bronze medal, but he was not selected for the Dutch team at the 1970 Olympiad. As a result, he broke from the Dutch Chess Federation and played only on rare occasions, mostly in opens. 

     His last tournament was Cattolica, Italy in 1993, where he finished in the middle of the field. 

     His opponent in the following game was Antonio Medina (1919-2003) an IM who was born in Barcelona. He was Spanish champion in 1944, 1945, 1947, 1949, 1952, 1963 and 1964 and was the 1962 US Open champion. 

     This game is an example of what is known as Damiano's Bishop Mate where the Queen, defended by a Bishop, delivers mate on the edge of the board. 

 

[Event "Madrid"] [Site "Madrid ESP"] [Date "1951.05.28"] [Round "?"] [White "Lodewijk Prins"] [Black "Antonio Medina"] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "C58"] [Annotator "Stockfish 16"] [PlyCount "49"] [EventDate "1951.??.??"] {C58: Two Knights Defense} 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Nf6 4. Ng5 {Once called a "duffers move" and "primitive", it's at least as good as the tame alternative 4.d3. Do they still call weak players duffers? Is that epithet considered offensive? Perhaps "rating challenged" is a better term.} d5 { The only other reasonable move is 4...Bc5 which leads to wild complications.} 5. exd5 {White has little option other than to play this because both the B and the P on e4 are attacked.} Na5 {This is almost always played because other options are bot quite satisfactory. They are: 5... Nxd5 (Pi kus variation), 5.. .Nd4 (Fritz Variation) and 5...Nd4 (Ulvestd Variation)} (5... b5 {This move was made famous in the Yakov Estrin-Hans Berliner, World Correspondence Championship (1965-68).} 6. Bf1 Nd4 7. c3 Nxd5 8. Ne4 Qh4 {The Berliner Varuation. Theoretically white is better, but Berliner won the game.}) 6. Bb5+ {It's long been known that this is white's best move.} c6 {Better than the alternative of 6...Bd7} 7. dxc6 bxc6 {The main line is 8.Be2, but the unusual 8.Bd3 has also been tried. The text was popular back in the 1800s, fell out of favor until it was revived by Bogoljubow.} 8. Qf3 Qc7 9. Bd3 Be7 (9... Bd6 10. Nc3 Bg4 11. Nb5 Bxf3 12. Nxc7+ Bxc7 13. gxf3 Nd5 {was played in Van der Wiel,J (2465) -Beliavsky,A (2590) Vienna 1980. WHite is a little better, but the players soon agreed to a draw.}) 10. Nc3 (10. b3 h6 11. Ne4 Nxe4 12. Bxe4 O-O 13. Bf5 {Bkacj is better. Kardoeus,D (2003)-Hofer,E (2197) Kiel GER 2014}) 10... O-O 11. Bf5 Bb7 {It would have been more prudent to chase the N away with 11...h6} 12. Nce4 {This is slightly stronger that the alternative of 12. Qh3} (12. Qh3 g6 13. Nce4 h5 14. Nxf6+ Bxf6 15. Ne6 {This is not quite correct; he should play 15.d3 with a good position.} fxe6 16. Bxg6 {Black is better. Garner,P-McMahon,D Dublin 1991}) 12... h6 {Now that white can capture on f6 this is bad. 13...g6 was necessary.} (12... g6 {While this is best white is still better after} 13. Qh3 h5 14. Qg3 Nxe4 15. Bxe4 Bxg5 16. Qxg5 {At least the exchanges have allowed black to beat off the direct attack.}) 13. Nxf6+ Bxf6 14. Nh7 {Black likely did not see this unexpected move when he played 12.. .h6} Be7 {Unfortunately giving up the exchange is the ebst option.} (14... Rfd8 15. Nxf6+ gxf6 16. b4 Nc4 17. Qg4+ Kf8 18. Qxc4 {White has won a piece.}) 15. Nxf8 Rxf8 16. d3 c5 17. Qg3 Kh8 18. O-O Nc6 19. c3 {White simply wants to prevent ...Nd4} Bd6 20. Qh3 Kg8 {After this black's hopes plummet to zero.} ( 20... Ne7 {offers a glimmer of hope.} 21. Be4 (21. Bxh6 Nxf5 22. Bd2+ Nh6 23. Bxh6 Bc8 24. Qh4 gxh6 25. Qxh6+ Kg8 26. Rfe1 f6 27. Re3 Qh7 {is unclear, but theoretically white is slightly better.}) 21... Bc8 22. g4 f5 23. gxf5 Bxf5 24. Qh4 Bxe4 25. Qxe4 {White has what should amount to a decisive advantage.}) 21. Bxh6 {This doesn't require much thought.} gxh6 (21... Ne7 {would have beaten off the direct attack, but black would still be left with a losing position.} 22. Bg5 Nxf5 23. Qxf5 Bc8 24. Qf3 f6) 22. Qxh6 Re8 23. Rae1 {White can finish off the game in a number of ways, but this is the quickest.} (23. Qh7+ Kf8 24. Rae1 Ke7 25. Qh4+ f6 26. f4 {also wins or white.}) 23... Ne7 (23... Re6 { is the only way to avoid mate, but what would be the point?!} 24. Bxe6 fxe6 25. Qxe6+) 24. Bh7+ Kh8 25. Bg6+ {Black resigned. Nearly perfect play by Prins+/-} (25. Bg6+ Kg8 26. Qh7+ Kf8 27. Qxf7#) 1-0

Taking Turns Blundering

     The expected winner of the 1948-49 New Zealand Championship was Tom Lepviikmann (1900-1968) who was originally from Estonia, but for many years he lived in The Netherlands before finally settling in New Zealand in 1939. He won the New Zealand Championship twice in 1945/46 and 1946/47. However, for this year’s event he was in very bad form and only on a couple of occasions did he show what he could do. 

     Instead, the winner was Alan Nield who played aggressive, but steady chess. The runner up was David Lynch (1910-2002) who was New Zealand North Island Champion in 1949 and won the New Zealand Championship in 1951. He was also New Zealand Correspondence Champion on three occasions in the 1940's and 1950's. In the 1952 New Zealand Championship he was the player who stopped Ortvin Sarapu from getting a perfect 11-0 when they drew in the last round. 

 

 

     The other favorite was Harold McNabb (1914-1988). In 1934 he spent two years in hospital with an injured spine and during this time studied chess seriously, with the aid of a special board crafted by his brother. 

     He was a strong player, finishing runner-up in the New Zealand Championship at least four times as well as winning numerous other event. He also he played for New Zealand in numerous international team matches. 

     McNabbe lived in Wellington for a period during the 1940s before returning to his place of birth, Nelson, a city on the northern tip of South Island. 

     Robert Wade, an IM originally from New Zealand, wrote that personally he feared McNabb’s play more than anyone else in New Zealand except perhaps twice New Zealand Champion Philipp Allerhand. Wade said that if you gave McNabb “an edge...there will be no more chances.” 

     Although MeNabb played some good games in this championship he was not at his best and failed to win some games that would ordinarily have been easy for him. His game against Nield, is a good example...he should have won, but after trading mistakes the point went to Nield.

     Alan E. Nield (March 4, 1893 – April 2, 1972) also won the 1950 BCF Major Open tournament in Buxton, England with a +9 -1 =2 score. In their game Nield’s courage in playing a tricky line in the Ruy Lopez was matched only by his incredible luck. The game proves that Tartakower was right when he said the game is won by the player making the next to last mistake.

 

[Event "New Zealand Champ. Wanganui"] [Site "Wanganui NZL"] [Date "1949.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Alan Nield"] [Black "Harold McNabb"] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "C80"] [Annotator "Stockfish 16"] [PlyCount "70"] [EventDate "1949.??.??"] {COpen Ruy Lopez} 1. e4 Nc6 {An invitation to play the little explored Nimzovich Defense, but Nield prefers a more classical approach.} 2. Nf3 (2. d4 d5 3. e5 Bf5 {is the Nimzovich's main line.}) 2... e5 3. Bb5 a6 4. Ba4 Nf6 5. O-O Nxe4 {A refreshing change from the usual 5...a6. In the Open variation black tries to make use of the time white will take to regain the pawn to gain a foothold in the center.} 6. d4 {The universal reply.} b5 7. d5 {A surprising move that was likely a prepared variation, but it's known not to be very good. The only good move here is 6.Bb3} Ne7 {When this game appeared in print the annotator mistakenly called it an error and, also, Modern Chess Opening (the opening Bible of the day and for many years to come!) also claimed that the correct move is 7...bxa4. That's wrong! McNabb's move is the correct one and the auto-annotation by Stockfish awards it a "!"} (7... bxa4 8. dxc6 {[%emt 0: 00:00]} d6 (8... dxc6 9. Qxd8+ Kxd8 10. Nxe5 {is good for white.}) 9. Re1 f5 { Black is slightly better.}) 8. Re1 Nf6 {[%mdl 8192] But this retreat is, in a word, horrible. Now is the time to play 8...bxa4 because after the text white gets an overwhelming opening advantage.} (8... bxa4 9. Rxe4 d6 10. c4 g6 11. Nc3 Bg7 12. Nxa4 O-O {Black is better and in Neelotpal,D (2468)-Sorokin,M (2560) Mumbai 2003 he went on to win.}) (8... Nc5 {favors white.} 9. Nxe5 Bb7 10. Bb3 Nxb3 11. axb3 Bxd5 {White is better, but in Nilsson,A (2472)-Welin,M (2436) Stockholm 1994, black soon blundered and lost a miniature.}) (8... f5 { This is also quite playable if black is feeling adventurous.} 9. Bb3 d6 10. c4 Ng6 11. cxb5 axb5 {with the advantage. Balaskas,P (2245)-Skembris,S (2450) Ano Liosia GRE 1997}) 9. Nxe5 {This excellent move probably caught McNabb totally off guard. Whute now has what should be a decisive advantage.} bxa4 {What else? } 10. d6 {A decisive punch!} a5 {There really wasn't anything better.} (10... Bb7 11. Nc3 cxd6 12. Nc4 Qc7 13. Nxd6+ {is hopeless for black.}) (10... cxd6 11. Nc4 Qc7 12. Nxd6+) (10... Ned5 11. Nc6+) 11. Bf4 cxd6 12. Nc4 Ra6 {Things have gone horribly wrong for black, but now it's Nield's turn to start slipping beginning with his next move.} 13. Bxd6 {After this white's advantage is minimal.} (13. Nxd6+ {puts black down.} Rxd6 14. Qxd6 {Black is bound hand and foot and the end is only a matter of time.} Ng4 {So miserable is black's position tht this is the best Stockfish could come up with!} 15. Qc5 f6 16. Qh5+ g6 17. Qxg4 d5 18. Qe2 Kf7 19. Nc3 h5 20. Rad1 {White is clearly winning.} ) 13... Rc6 {White is now only slightly better, but he contrives to throw even that small advantage away and give his opponent what should amount to a winning advantage!} 14. Ne3 {[%mdl 8192]} (14. Qd4 {keeps the pressure on and so white could, perhaps, claim a slight advantage.} Ba6 15. Ne5 Qb6 16. Nxc6 Qxc6 17. Bxe7 Bxe7 18. Qe5 Ng8 {with a difficult position for both sides to play!}) 14... Ne4 {Incredibly black, now a piece up, is winning.} 15. Ba3 d6 { Much safer was 15...Re6 which breaks the pin on his Ns.} 16. Nd5 $17 Nf6 17. Nxf6+ {This looks inviting, but hoping to maintain the N of d5 and playing 17. c4 would have minimized black's advantage.} (17. c4 {was called for.} Nfxd5 18. cxd5 Ra6 19. Nc3 {Black is better, but he still has some difficulties in completing his development.}) 17... gxf6 $19 18. Qf3 Be6 (18... Rxc2 {is a poor choice...there is no time to grab a P.} 19. Nc3 Be6 20. Ne4 {and with the Ps on d6 and f6 under attack black is forced to retreat.} Ng8 21. Nxd6+ Bxd6 22. Rad1 Ne7 23. Rxd6 {White has equalized.}) 19. Nc3 {[%mdl 32]} Bg7 20. Rad1 O-O {It's taken 20 moves, but both sides have completed their development, but white's B sacrifice has failed and black has a decisive advantage.} 21. Nb5 Rxc2 22. Rxd6 Qb8 {A square too far. White now equalizes!} (22... Qc8 {was the correct move. Even then in practical play the outcome would not be perfectly clear. For example...} 23. Nc3 (23. Nd4 Rc1 24. Qe3 Rxe1+ 25. Qxe1 Nf5 26. Nxf5 Bxf5 {Black is a clear piece up.}) 23... Rd8 24. Qd1 Rxd6 25. Bxd6 Rxc3 26. bxc3 Ng6 27. Re4 Qxc3 28. Rxa4 h6 {In this position in Shootouts using Stockfish black won 4 games with one draw. However, the games were long, difficult endings and there is no guarantee that the two players would play up to the engine's standards!]}) 23. Nd4 {The N attacks the R, d6 is attacked 3 times and the N on d7 is undefended...it looks grim for black, but in theory the chances are equal. Black could retreat 23...Rc8, but then white would have just a smidgen of an advantage. Instead, black has two equally good moves.} Rc7 (23... Rd2 24. Nxe6 Rxd6 25. Nxg7 Kxg7 26. Qg3+ Ng6 27. Qxd6 Re8 28. Rd1 { and a draw would not be out of the question.}) (23... Rxb2 {is a bit trickier because white could easily go astray, but then so could black!} 24. Nxe6 (24. Bxb2 Qxd6 25. Nxe6 fxe6 {Black remains a piece up.}) 24... fxe6 25. Rdxe6 Ng6 26. Bxf8 Bxf8 27. Qxf6 Rxa2 {This messy situation is anything but clear!}) 24. Rdxe6 {[%mdl 8192] This move leaves white a R down and what should be a lost game.} (24. Nxe6 $16 {is necessary to keep the advantage.} fxe6 25. Rdxe6 Ng6 26. Bxf8 Nxf8 27. Re7 Rxe7 28. Rxe7 Qxb2 29. Qd5+ Kh8 30. g3 {In Shootouts white scored +3 -0 =2, but the games were long...ovr 100 moves. In OTB play anything could happen.}) 24... fxe6 25. Nxe6 {Black should now play 25...Rfc8, but...} Qc8 {[%mdl 8192] This is a griss blunder that should have lost. Why didn't it? The person annotating the game that I saw claimed that white had "no intention of giving up his Knight for a mere Rook." Both Nield and the annotator were mistaken, but they did not have Stockfish and plenty of time to fiddle around with the position!} (25... Rfc8 26. Nxc7 Qxc7 27. h3 Ng6 { Black still has a LOT of work to do, but he should be able to score the point.} ) 26. h3 {[%mdl 8192] This rates a couple of question marks.} (26. Nxc7 { Taking the mere R is the only winning move.} Qxc7 27. Bxe7 Rf7 28. Qd5 { White's pieces are active while black's are limited in scope and as a result white should be able to win.}) 26... Rc1 {This wraps it up.} 27. Rxc1 Qxc1+ 28. Kh2 Re8 {Black is a whole R up and white has no compensation.} 29. Qh5 Ng6 30. Qd5 {Now all black has to do is move his K out of the discovered check.} Qc8 { [%mdl 8192] This is just awful!} (30... Kh8 31. Qd7 Rg8 32. Qd5 Ne5 {As soon as black gets his pieces untangled he can use his extra R to wrap it up.} 33. Qxa5 Nf3+ 34. Kg3 (34. gxf3 Bh6 {and mate is unstoppable.}) 34... Bh6+ 35. Kxf3 Qc6+ 36. Ke2 {Black could take the NB, but there's a mate in 12...} Qc4+ 37. Kd1 Qf1+ 38. Kc2 Qe2+ 39. Kc3 Bd2+ 40. Kd4 Bxa5 41. Nf8 Rg5 42. Nd7 Qxf2+ 43. Ke4 Qxg2+ 44. Ke3 Qd2+ 45. Ke4 Qd5+ 46. Ke3 Rg3+ 47. Kf2 Qf3#) 31. Ng5+ { White is clearly winning, but the wat the game has been going betting on it would not be a good idea.} Re6 (31... Kh8 {leads to mate.} 32. Nf7+ Kg8 33. Nh6+ Kh8 34. Qg8+ Rxg8 35. Nf7#) 32. Nxe6 Kh8 {A move too late.} 33. f4 h6 34. Kg3 (34. f5 Ne5 35. Qxa5 {is an easily won ending.}) 34... Bf8 35. Qf5 Bxa3 { A last blunder allowing mate in 2 so black resigned at once.} (35... Bg7 36. Nxg7 Qxf5 37. Nxf5 {is hopelessly lost in any case.}) 1-0

Milunka Lazarevic, the Female Tal

     Known as the female Tal, Milunka Lazarevic (December 1, 1932 - December 15, 2018) was a Serbian player and journalist who for many years, she was the strongest female player of Yugoslavia and became a contender for the Women's World Championship. 

     She is remembered for the integrity that she displayed in the last round of the candidate tournament in Sukhumi in 1964. American Gisela Khan Gresser offered her a draw before the game was played. 

     All Lazarevic had to do was agree to play a short draw and she would have become the challenger to the champion Nona Gaprindashvili. But, she refused Gresser’s offer and lost the game. As a result the Soviet players Tatiana Zatulovskaya and Alla Kushnir tied her for first. 

     Lazarevic finished second in the playoff match which was won by Kushnir who went on to lose badly to Gaprindashvili, 4.5-8.5. 

     Born in Santarovac, Yugoslavia, Lazarevic was taught chess by her father at the age of fourteen and quickly became recognized as a talented player.

     She soon became Yugoslavia's leading female player and she won Yugoslavia’s Women's Championship eleven times between 1952 and 1982. During that period her main rival was Vera Nedeljkovic. Her husband, Dr. Srecko Nedeljkovic, an IM, was noted for his significant achievements in the medical field in the cardiovascular field where he collaborated with the world-renowned cardiac surgeon Dr. Michael DeBakey. 

     Lazarevic was known for her exciting and imaginative style, but, as might be expected, there were occasions when he style caused her to overplay the position, particularly against weaker players. According to British player and wuthor Anne Sunnucks, this often robbed Lazarevic of a first prize.

     She played in four zonal tournaments; she tied for third at Herceg Novi in 1954, tied for second at Venice in 1957, tied for first at Vrnjacka Banja in 1960 and finished third at Bad Neuenahr in 1963.mHer best result was the aforementioned tie for first in the Women's World Championship Candidates Tournament in Sukhumi 1964. 

     Lazarevic was awarded her WIM title 1954 and her WGN title in 1976. Additionally, she was awarded the International Arbiter title in 1970. 

    Lazarevic, who Anne Sunnucks described as an attractive redhead, spent many years working as a journalist and wrote articles on Garry Kasparov and Boris Spassky for New In Chess magazine. She semi-retired from chess in the 1980s, did occasionally play in tournaments up intil 2008. She died in Belgrade on December 15, 2018 at the age of 86. You can watch an interview with her on Youtube HERE 

    

     

 

     In the following game from the 1953 Yugoslav Women’s Championship she defeats Lidija Timofejeva (1906-1991), the Yugoslav Women's Champion in 1947, 1948 and 1949. 

[Event "Yugoslav Women's Champ, Opatija"] [Site "Opatija YUG"] [Date "1953.09.17"] [Round "?"] [White "Lidija Timofejeva"] [Black "Milunka Lazarevic"] [Result "0-1"] [ECO "D02"] [Annotator "Stockfish 16"] [PlyCount "70"] [EventDate "1953.??.??"] [Source "Perpetual Check"] {A84: Dutch Stonewall} 1. d4 d5 2. Nf3 e6 3. c4 c6 4. e3 f5 {The Dutch Stonewall enjoyed a resurgence of interest in the 1980s and 1990s when lGMs Artur Yusupov, Sergey Dolmatov, Nigel Short and Simen Agdestein used a system where black plays an earlier ...d5 and places his dark-squared B on d6. Of courdse tis was unknown in 1953 and among those who used the classical Dutch Stonewall were Tarrasch, Alekhine, Botvinnik, -Bronstein, Smyslov, Larsen, Korchnoi and Tal.} 5. Ne5 {Normal moves are 5.Bd3 or 5.Nc3} Nf6 {Originally the Stonewall had a reputation for giving black good attacking prospects, but after white found ways to deal with the attacks attention turned to a more positional approach.} 6. Be2 Bd6 7. f4 (7. g4 {This ambitious moves is interesting, butit didm't work out well for white in Chapliev,A (2314) -Lugovskoy,M (2331) Krasnodar RUS 2011} Ne4 8. Nd2 O-O 9. h4 Nd7 10. f4 Ng3 11. Rh3 Nxe2 12. Qxe2 c5 {A messy position, but black is somewhat better.}) 7... Nbd7 8. O-O O-O 9. Nd2 (9. Nxd7 Bxd7 10. Nd2 Ne4 11. Nf3 Qf6 12. Qe1 {with fully equal chances. Wermuth,F-Uherek,M Znojmo 2004}) 9... Ne4 10. Ndf3 Ndf6 11. Qe1 Bd7 {It's hard to imagine anything terribly exciting being birthed out of this position.} 12. Qh4 {Kudos to white for trying to get some kind of attack going, but black has a rock solid defense.} Be8 13. Ng5 Nxg5 14. Qxg5 ( 14. fxg5 {leads nowhere after} Ne4 15. Nf3 {and the P on g5 is a liability.}) 14... Be7 15. Qg3 Ne4 16. Qh3 {White's attempt at attacking has comer to nought and now the Q should have retreated to e1 becuse on h3 it is exposed to harassment.} Rf6 {[%mdl 32] Get ready for some action!} 17. g4 {White is still dreaming of an attack,. Instead she should have tried moving the Q back to h4 and fleeing to e1.} Rh6 18. Qg2 fxg4 19. Bxg4 {You know that capturing this P with either piece simply cannot be good. White is now on the verge of losing.} (19. Nxg4 Rg6 20. Qh3 c5 {busts open the position and leaves white in a difficult situation.}) (19. cxd5 cxd5 20. Bd3 Bd6 21. Bxe4 dxe4 22. Bd2 { is the best white has, but her position is not very promising.}) 19... Bd6 { Well played! The idea is to eliminate white;s one well placed piece, the N on e5.} 20. Qf3 (20. Kh1 {is a better defense.} Qh4 21. Nf3 Ng3+ 22. Kg1 Qxg4 23. hxg3 {Black is better.}) 20... Qh4 {Launching a deisive attack.} 21. h3 Bh5 22. Bxh5 Rxh5 23. Kh2 Rf8 24. b3 {There is nothing to be done. White's choices are resign or make meaningless moves.} (24. Rg1 Bxe5 25. dxe5 Ng5 {ends the game.}) 24... Bxe5 {With the N gone white is totally helpless.} 25. dxe5 Rg5 {[%mdl 512] A key square that black can utilize because of the pin on white's Q.} 26. Rg1 {Prevents Rg3.} Rxg1 27. Kxg1 {Black isn't done utilizing g5...} Ng5 { [%mdl 512]} 28. Qh1 Nxh3+ 29. Kg2 Qg4+ 30. Kf1 Rf5 {White is, in effect, playing without her R and B.} 31. Bb2 {Black niw has a tactical finish that mates in 8.} Nxf4 {[%mdl 512]} 32. exf4 Rxf4+ 33. Ke1 Re4+ {Good enough.} ( 33... Qg3+ 34. Kd1 Rf2 35. Qf1 Rxf1+ 36. Kc2 Rf2+ 37. Kb1 Qg6+ 38. Kc1 Qg1#) 34. Kd2 Qe2+ 35. Kc1 Rf4 {White resigned. A whirlwind attack by Lazarevic.} 0-1

Donald Byrne Gets Upset

    The weather has finally cleared after the last few days which have been, to use my made up meteorological term, “crappy.” 

     Saturday saw strong thunderstorms and a tornado not far from here. Sunday was OK, but Monday was dark, thundery and rainy all day. It was a good day to continue poking around the post-WW2 years. 

     I found a small tournament in Havana in 1947 that fell through the cracks. Two New Yorkers, 17-year old Donald Byrn e and the 62-year old veteran Edward La sker participated against six locals. 

     Of course Byrne and Lasker were the favorites. The teen-aged Byrne had shared fourth prize in the U. S. Open at Pittsburgh the previous year and Lasker's competitive career began way back in 1910. There was a shock in store for both of them. 

     The unheralded Gilberto Garcia finished first after he started off with a sensational 18 move win over Byrne. Lasker took the early lead by beating Garcia in the third round, but Garcia continued to trail right behind Lasker. Finally, when Lasker stumbled and lost to Byrne and tailender Gonzalez, Garcia passed him to capture first. 

     Byrne got off to a poor start and after four rounds he only had an even score, but by winning his last three games he managed to move into second place. 

     The bad showing of Gonzalez, who had recently returned to Cuba after spending time in New York City, was surprising because he had recently finished 4th in the strong Manhattan Chess Club Championship and he had won the 1946 U.S. Speed Championship.

     Dr. Juan Carlos Gonzalez de Vega was born in 1917 and according to chess historian Bill Wall he died in 1990. Gonzalez was Cuban champion in 1942, 1943, 1951, 1952 and 1955. From Capablanca's death in 1942 until the mid-1950s he was considered the strongest player in Cuba. 

     Before he returned to Cuba, Dr. Gonza;ez was a resident in surgery at Manhattan's West Side Hospital. Whhen he was on call he frequently spent time analyzing openings and playing through games. He emigrated to Florid sometime in the early 1960s. 

 

     Donald Byrne (1930-1976) is pretty well known. He passed away in Philadelphia of complications arising from lupus. He was inducted into the U.S. Chess Hall of Fame in 2003. 

     Here is Byrne’s miniature loss. Not much is known of Byrne’s opponent, Gilberto Garcia except that he was born in 1919 and from the 1940s to the 1960s he was one of the leading Cuban players. 

     In 1963, in Havana, Garcia participated in the Pan American Championship and finished in 12th place. Also in 1963m, he participated in World Chess Championship Central American Zonal tournament and finished in 7th place. His last tournament seems to have been the Havana Radio Rebelde, a 12-player round robin, in 1978 where he finished in 11th place with a 3.5-7.5 score. His rating was 2250. In 2019 there was a Gilberto Garcia in Memoriam tournament held in Havana in his honor.

 

[Event "Havana"] [Site "?"] [Date "1947.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Gilberto Garcia"] [Black "Donald Byrne"] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "B32"] [Annotator "Stockfish 16"] [PlyCount "35"] [SourceVersionDate "2023.08.14"] {Sicilian Defense} 1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 e5 {The Kalashnikov Variation is a close relative of the Sveshnikov Variation (4...Nf6 5.Nc3 e5) and and is also referred to as the Neo-Sveshnikov. The move 4...e5 has had a long history that dates back to de La Bourdonnais in the 1830s.} 5. Nf3 { My database has plenty of examples of this move, but none at the GM level. That's not to say that the following play is bad, but only that there is no theory on anything other than the far more popular 5.Nb5} (5. Nb5 {is the modern way...the threat is 6.Nd6+ gaining the two Bs after 5...Bxd6} d6 6. c4 { Also popular is 6.N1c3} Be7 7. N1c3 a6 8. Na3 Be6 9. Nc2 {etc.}) 5... Nf6 6. Bg5 {The alternative is to defend the e-Pawn with 6.Nc3, but the text is much more interesting!} Qa5+ {Black could also play the equally good 6...Bc5. Instead he moves the Q out of the pin and at the same time threatens the e-Pawn.} 7. Bd2 Qb6 {Things are already interesting as both the e-Pawn and the b-Pawn are attacked. Which P should white let go?} 8. Bc4 {This is risky. Which P should black take?} (8. Nc3 Qxb2 9. Rb1 Qa3 10. Nb5 {is clearly not going to go well for black.}) (8. Nc3 Bc5 9. Qe2 {is equal, but black has a wide choice of moves: 9...Nd4, 9...Qxb2 and 9...d6 are all equally good.}) 8... Qxb2 {While mot really bad, this allows white to gain the initiative...call it risky.} (8... Nxe4 {This is a better choice.} 9. Qe2 Nxd2 10. Nbxd2 Be7 { This sets a nice trap that it would be easy for white to fall into.} 11. O-O-O (11. Nxe5 Qxb2 {forking the R and N} 12. Bxf7+ (12. Rb1 Qxe5) 12... Kf8 13. O-O Qxe5 {Black has a won position.}) 11... Qc7 {with a solid position.}) 9. Nc3 Qb6 {Black has lost time grabbing the b-Pawn...a somewhat questionable course.} 10. O-O Be7 11. Nd5 Qd8 {Another loss of time. Still, his position can hardly be considered inferior.} 12. Ng5 {Black's next move must be the right one or he will be in real trouble!} O-O {Byrne does not fall for white's trick.} ( 12... Nxd5 {is a mistake.} 13. Nxf7 Kxf7 14. exd5 {The threta is 15.d6+} b5 15. Bb3 (15. Bxb5 Nd4 {favors black.}) 15... Nd4 16. d6+ Nxb3 17. dxe7 Qxe7 18. Qf3+ Qf6 19. Qxb3+ (19. Qd5+ Qe6 20. Qf3+ {would draw.}) (19. Qxa8 {only results in equality.} Nxa1 20. Qd5+ Qe6 21. Qf3+ Qf6 {Here a draw by repetition is also possible. If instead...} 22. Qxf6+ gxf6 23. Rxa1 {Even with Bs of opposite color black is better.}) 19... d5 {White is better.}) 13. Nxf6+ Bxf6 14. Qh5 {White's attack looks very dangerous, but black's position is, in spite of all the time he ha lost with his Q maneuvers amazingly resilient.} Bxg5 {The only correct move.} (14... h6 15. Nxf7 Rxf7 16. Bxf7+ {wins.}) 15. Bxg5 Qe8 {This move creates a logjam on the K-side and so a better move would have been 15...Qc7} (15... Qc7 16. f4 d5 17. Bxd5 Nb4 {This is a complicated position in which the chances are equal.}) 16. Rad1 {[%mdl 1024] White has strong pressure for his P.} Na5 {[%mdl 8192] It's understandable that Byrne wants to get rid of the B that's eyeing f7, but this is a fatal mistake because he has overlooked Gacia's surprising riposte.} (16... d5 {is his only hope of staying in the game.} 17. exd5 (17. Bxd5 Nb4 18. Bb3 Be6 {and black has equalized.}) 17... Nd4 18. Bd3 e4 19. Rfe1 exd3 20. Rxe8 Rxe8 21. cxd3 Re5 {and with any luck black may be able to survive, but it's not likely. In Shootouts white scored +3 -0 =2}) 17. Bf6 {[%mdl 512] A nasty surprise!} h6 { A lame defense, but there wasn't anything that was really better.} (17... Qe6 18. Bxe6 fxe6 19. Bxg7 Kxg7 20. Rd3 Rf6 21. Rg3+ Rg6 22. Rh3 {and there is nothing for black to do except resign.}) 18. Qg6 {Black resigned. It's mate next move. A fine game by Garcia.} 1-0

Najdorf Pulverizes Primavera

 

     NOTE: I am not sure if it is a Blogger issue or an issue with my Internet, but it is taking a while for the games to load. This seems to be an issue with all HTML postings, even those in the sidebar.

     The year 1948 saw Indian pacifist and leader Mahatma Gandhi assassinated by Nathuram Godse who approached Gandhai, greeted him, then fired three shots at close range from a small-caliber revolver that he had hidden in his clasped hands. Gandhi was struck in the upper thigh, abdomen and chest. Godse was hanged on November 15, 1949. 

     In other happenings, Israel became a nation as did the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (aka North Korea). The US and UK began the Berlin Airlift to supply West Berlin with food, water and medicine following the Soviet blockade of the city. 

     On a lighter note, the first Polaroid camera went on sale at a department store in Boston and long playing records (33-1/3 rpm) made out of vinyl were introduced. Prior to that time nearly all phonograph records for home use were made of a noisy shellac compound. 

     The big chess news was Mikhail Botvinnik winning The Hague/Moscow match/tournament to become World Champion. Years later, Botvinnik gave an interview in which he stated that Stalin had given orders for Keres and Smyslov to lose to him. 

    On August 15, 1948, David Bronstein won the first Interzonal at Saltjobaden, Sweden. 

    One of those many tournaments that slipped into oblivion in 1948 was the Venice tournament. It attracted twelve players from through out Europe and two from South America. 

     Six contestants from Italy: Vincenzo Castaldi, Mario Monticelli, Eugenio Szabados, Gino Fletzer, Giuseppe Primavera and Alberto Giustolisi. 

    The foreigners were: Miguel Najdorf (Argentina), Gideon Barcza (Hungary), Max Euwe (The Netherlands), Esteban Canal (Peru), Josef Lokvenc (Austria), Savielly Tartakower (France), Henry Grob (Switzerland), and Karel Opocensky (Czechoslovakia). 

     After the tough competition in the 20 player Interzonal at Saltjobaden, Sweden, where he finished tied for sixth place with Bondarevsky with a +6 -4 =9 score, Najdorf must have found winning the Venice tournament a breeze. 

     In a very brief mention of the tournament Chess Review had some snide comments about Najdorf and Euwe. 

     Of Najdorf the comment was that he “celebrated the absence of any Soviet opposition” which resulted in a “handsome lead” over the opposition. Former World Champion Dr. Max Euwe was unable to shake off a poor start. His two losses (against Canal and Castaldi) combined with difficulty in defeating the tailenders caused Chess Review to call him “just another chess player.” 

     Dr. Savielly Tartakover showing was disappointing, but after the war he had begun finding the going much tougher and this tournament was no exception. 

 

     In the following game from Venice, Najdorf (1910-1997) scored a neat win over Italy’s Giuseppe Primavera (1917-1998), a many time participant in the Italian championships. 

[Event "Venice"] [Site "Venice ITA"] [Date "1948.10.??"] [Round "5"] [White "Miguel Najdorf"] [Black "Giuseppe Primavera"] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "D45"] [Annotator "Stockfish 16"] [PlyCount "47"] [EventDate "1948.10.03"] {Semi-Slav} 1. d4 d5 2. c4 c6 3. Nf3 Nf6 4. Nc3 e6 {This position can easily be reached by a number of different move orders. Black's P-formation resemble a mixture of the Orthodox QGD Declined (P on e6) and the Slav Defense (P on c6) . Black is threatening to capture on c4 and then hold it with ...b7–b5. White can avoid this in a number of ways.} 5. e3 {The other less often seen alternative is 5.Bg5} Be7 6. Bd3 O-O 7. b3 Nbd7 8. O-O c5 9. Bb2 b6 10. Qe2 Bb7 11. Rad1 cxd4 12. exd4 dxc4 (12... Re8 13. Ne5 Bf8 14. f4 g6 {is nearly equal. Milov,V (2676)-Vaisser,A (2545) Clichy 2007}) (12... Rc8 {is also playable.} 13. Rfe1 Qc7 14. Ne5 Rfd8 {But not this losing blunder. Correct is 14...a6} 15. cxd5 {This is a counter-blunder that results in equality.} (15. Nb5 Qb8 16. Nxf7 {and wins...} Rc6 (16... Kxf7 17. Qxe6+ Kf8 18. Qxe7+) 17. Nxd8 {with a winning position.}) 15... Nxe5 16. dxe5 Nxd5 {Jiganchine,R (2205)-Omariev,M (2304) chess.com INT 2022}) 13. bxc4 {Black has now tried several moves here, but the best seems to be 13...a6} Qc7 {After this seemingly innocent move black's position starts a downhill slide and before you know it he is lost.} ( 13... Re8 {seems a plausible alternative. It defends the B (see the note to move 14)} 14. Ne5 a6 {preventing b5, The chances are equal.}) 14. d5 {For anybody who is familiar with these types of positions this move comes as no surprise. The P cannot be takes because the B on e7 is undefended.} Nc5 15. d6 {The immediate 15.Nb5 was also good.} Bxd6 16. Nb5 Bxf3 (16... Qb8 17. Nxd6 Qxd6 18. Bxh7+ {snags the Q}) 17. Qxf3 Bxh2+ {There is no way of knowing what black was thinking, but he may very well have been satisfied with his position after this.} 18. Kh1 Qf4 {Black it seems has every right to be satisfied with his position: he's two Ps up and white's K's position is weakened plus the c0Pawn could become a liability.} 19. Bxf6 {[%mdl 128] This uosets the apple cart. White is clearly better.} Nxd3 (19... gxf6 $16 {is a better defense.} 20. Qh3 Nxd3 21. Rxd3 Rfd8 22. Rc3 a6 23. Na3 Rd2 24. Qxh2 {Here, too, white has won a piece.}) (19... Qxf3 20. gxf3 gxf6 21. Kxh2 {and white has won a piece.}) 20. Rxd3 {[%mdl 32]} gxf6 21. Qh3 Rad8 {Bets, but even so, white has a decisive advantage.} (21... Qxc4 22. Kxh2 Qf4+ 23. Kg1 f5 24. Nd6 Qe5 25. Rg3+ Kh8 26. Qh6 {followed by Rh3 wrapping it up.}) (21... Rfd8 22. Rc3 Rac8 23. Qxh2 Rxc4 24. Qxf4 Rxf4 25. Nxa7 {with a won ending.}) 22. Rf3 (22. Rxd8 { Shows the necessity of staying alert even with a won position because after} Rxd8 23. Qxh2 Qxc4 {Black has equalized.}) 22... Qxc4 23. Kxh2 {The threat is Rg3+ and mate.} Qxf1 {This hasty grab of the R allows a forced mate, but the game was beyond saving.} (23... Rd5 24. Nd6 Rxd6 25. Rg3+ Kh8 26. Qh6 {Mate is unavoidable.}) 24. Rg3+ {Black resigned. The way he lost this game almost imperceptible!} 1-0

A Surprise at Norristown, 1973

 

     In 1973 an international tournament, officially known as the Gambone - Leight Invitational, was held in Norristown, Pennasylvania. Norristown is located about six miles from the Philadelphia city limits. 

     In this long forgotten tournament the entry list included two (at the time) National Masters who had won the East Coast and West Coast Qualifying Tournaments: Craig Chellstorp and Kim Commons, both of whom had never had an opportunity to compete for FIDE ratings. 

     US players Edmar Mednis, Andrew Soltis, Kenneth Rogoff and William Martz were USCF Senior Masters (2400+) while Arthur Bisguier was a GM. 

     Of the foreign players, Bruno Parma and Herman Pilnik were GMs. Peter Biyiasas and Enrico Paoli were IMs. Cavit Uzman was a Turkish National Master. 

     A GM norm required an 8.5-2.5 score which nobody achieved. An IM norm was 7.5-3.5 which was achieved by Kenneth Rogoff. 

     Before the tournament started there was an incident involving Herman Pilnik of Argentina. He was met at the airport by a local organizer and on the way to the playing site their car was struck and overturned and it came to rest partially hanging over a steep embankment. 

     The driver and his wife, who was a passenger, were hospitalized while Pilnik emerged with a lot of cuts and bruises, but he still played his first round game as scheduled and defeated Soltis. 

     One wonders if Pilnik, who passed away in Caracas, Venezuela in 1981, ever concluded that visiting the United States was a bad idea. 

     Back in 1945, Pilnik was involved in a car accident on his way to Los Angeles to play in the Pan American tournament in Hollywood. In that accident Pilnik was the driver. 

     He had lost his plane reservation and so rented a car to drive from Dallas, Texas to Los Angeles, a distance of of over 1,400 miles! 

A bandaged Pilnik

     In Arizona, Pilnik struck a parked and unlighted truck at night. In this accident he spent two days in a hospital in Yuma, Arizona and missed his first-round game against Reshevsky. He finally arrived three days late still wearing bandages. 

     I was going to present the game between Commons and Martz which won the brilliancy prize, but decided against it. Martz’ Q-sac was not at all speculative because he got adequate compensation and the resulting position was no more that equal. Additionally, Martz later missed the best continuation and the game dragged on for nearly 30 moves. 

     More exciting was watching GM Arthur Bisguier getting thrashed by a virtually unknown Turkish Master. It’s surprising how quickly the FIDE 2430 rated GM found himself in trouble against Uzman who was unrated with the FIDE. After the event Uzman’s FUDE rating was 2235, Bisguier’s was 2420.

 

     As a matter of record, the top rated FIDE players in 1973 were: World Champion Fischer (2780), Karpov and Tal (2660), Spassky (2655), Korchnoy and Portisch (2650), Petrosian (2640), Botvinnik (2530), Polugayevsky (2635), Larsen (2620), Smyslov (2610), R. Byrnem Geller and Stein who had passed away in July (2605) and Huebner (2600). 

[Event "Norristown International"] [Site "Norristown, PA USA"] [Date "1973.06.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Cavit Uzman"] [Black "Arthur Bisguier"] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "C44"] [Annotator "Stockfish 16"] [PlyCount "75"] [EventDate "1973.06.16"] {C44: Ponziani Opening} 1. e4 {[%mdl 32]} e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. d4 exd4 4. c3 { A gutsy move by the Turkish Master offering a tactician like Bisguier the Goring Gambit where white sacrifices one or two Pawns in return for a lead in development and typically follows up by putting pressure on f7 with Bc4, Qb3 and sometimes another common motif is Ng5, while Nc3–d5.} Nf6 {This one way, transposing into a variation of the Ponziani, black can decline the gambit. 4.. .d5 is also a good reply.} 5. e5 Ne4 6. Qe2 (6. Nxd4 Qh4 7. g3 {A strange error form a Master!} Nxg3 8. fxg3 Qe4+ 9. Qe2 Qxh1 {Black is clearly better. Skytte,R (2392)-Nielsen,P (2662) Denmark DEN 2009}) 6... f5 7. Nxd4 (7. exf6 { is an interesting line that seems to result in equality after} d5 8. Nbd2 Qxf6 9. Nxe4 dxe4 10. Qxe4+ Be7 11. Bg5 $11 {Garsky,V (2253)-Siraj,S (1998) Nova Gorica SLO 2023}) 7... Nxd4 8. cxd4 d5 {Bisguier quickly finds himself in hot water after this move which opens up the position. The proper move was 8...c6} (8... Bb4+ 9. Kd1 b6 10. f3 Ng5 11. Qc2 Ne6 12. Qxf5 {Zaitsev,M (2463)-Bartel, M (2158) Dortmund GER 2007. Black is facing an uphill battle.}) 9. exd6 Bxd6 10. f3 {Fearless...white realized the coming check holds no danger for him.} Qh4+ 11. Kd1 (11. g3 {Believe it or not this move is actully better, but who would actually play it OTB?} Bxg3+ 12. hxg3 Qxh1 13. fxe4 fxe4 14. Bf4 { The engines prefer white by nearly two Ps, but I suspect most players would not want to play this position with either color!}) 11... O-O {Threatens to win with ...Nf2+.} 12. fxe4 fxe4 {Materially black has a P vs Nm and freer development, but whits'K is surprisingly safe.} 13. h3 {Prevents Bg4.} Rf2 14. Qe1 {At first glance things look grim for white. By the way, the text is an excellent defensive move.} (14. Qb5 {meets with a quick refutation...} Bg4+ 15. hxg4 Qxh1 {and wins}) 14... Bg3 15. Nc3 {White simply has to complete his development. It's odd, but there is no good R move with a discovered attack on white's Q.} (15. Be3 {attacking the R is a bit more precise. After} Rxb2 16. Qc3 Qh5+ 17. Kc1 Rb6 18. Bc4+ {Black's attack has come to nothing and white's K is safe, so now his material advantage is the major factor.}) 15... Bf5 { This defends the P, but 15...c5 offered him better chances.} (15... c5 { This leads to complications galore.} 16. Bc4+ Kh8 {Now things gey really tricky.} 17. Rf1 e3 18. Bxe3 Bg4+ 19. hxg4 Rxg2 20. Bf2 Bxf2 21. Qe2 Rh2 22. d5 {White should win...should!}) 16. Ne2 {The tempting 16.Bc4+ only equalizes.} Bg6 (16... a6 {This is a "pass" to demonstrate white's threat.} 17. Nxg3 Qxg3 18. Be3 Rxb2 19. Qxg3) 17. Nxg3 Qxg3 18. Be3 Rxg2 19. Bxg2 Qxg2 {Black is a R down...the rest is meaningless.} 20. Kc1 Rf8 21. a4 Rf3 {Well, maybe not totally meaningless. Black has a threat.} 22. Ra3 (22. a5 {A "pass" to demonstrate the threat.} Rxe3 23. Qxe3 Qxh1+ 24. Kd2 Qxa1 {Black wins.}) 22... Bf7 23. Rc3 c6 24. h4 Qg4 25. Qd2 Rg3 26. Rf1 Rg2 27. Rf2 Rg1+ 28. Kc2 Ra1 29. Rg2 {Prevents ...Qg1} Qxh4 30. Rh2 {Prevents Qh1.} Qe7 31. Rc5 Ba2 32. Qc3 Qf7 33. Rf2 Bb1+ 34. Kd2 Qa2 35. Qb4 {White threatens Rf8+ with mate to follow.} h6 (35... Bd3 36. Rf8+ Kxf8 37. Rf5+ Ke8 38. Re5+ Kf7 39. Qe7+ Kg6 40. Rg5+ Kh6 41. Qxg7#) 36. Qxb7 Bd3 37. Rxc6 Rh1 38. Qc8+ {Black resigned. Very precise play by Uzman!} (38. Qc8+ Kh7 39. Qf5+ Kh8 40. Rc8+ Qg8 41. Rxg8+ Kxg8 42. Qf7+ Kh8 43. Rg2 Rd1+ 44. Kxd1 Bc2+ 45. Rxc2 Kh7 46. Rg2 {mates next move.}) 1-0

A Game by Kim Commons

 

Kim Commons in 1976

     One problem with published games appearing in books and magazine is that they are usually well played or interesting for some particular reason. 

     But, how do masters really play in games that are played in the normal course of a tournament and never get to see the light of day? 

     The following game was played in Lone Pine, 1976. First place was taken by Tigran Petrosian. There was a log jam for second place: Vasily Smyslov, Walter Browne, Larry Christiansen, Kenneth Rogoff, Gyozo Forintos, Oscar Panno, Miquel Najdorf, Anthony Miles and Miguel Quinteros. 

     This game, just picked at random, was won by Kim Commons who scored +3 -2 =2 to finish tied for places 17-23. Also included in that group was Pal Benko. Commons’ opponent finished +2 -4 =1 and was in a group tied for places 42-47. There were 57 players but 3 withdrew early in the event. 

     Kim Commons (July 23, 1951 - June 23, 2015), originally from California, was one of the most promising players in the US in the 1970’s and was good enough to be invited to participate in the US Championship. He was awarded the IM title in 1976. 

     Commons gave up chess because he desired to, as he put it, “become a Grandmaster in real estate.” To that end he became a real estate broker in California and later a successful businessman in Arizona.

     For the second half of his life he lived in Arizona, first in Tempe before moving to Mesa where in 2005 he was the founder and owner of Club Red, a music club. The club was a haven for metal and hip-hop shows. The club closed in 2021. No reason was given for its closure, but at that time music venues across the country closed down because of the COVID-19 pandemic. 

     Commons passed away at the age of 63 on Tuesday, June 23, 2015, after suffering a major stroke two days earlier. He was remembered by his associates at the club as "a very intelligent person...always brimming with ideas and constantly tapping into people's insight on how to make our old venue, as well as our new one, the best possible experience for everyone involved.... He was constantly working on improving the venue and making sure that we could be the best at what we do."

     Commons was also praised for his business acumen and, also, for his modest life style...profits went back into the club, he never “cashed out, took huge trips or bought anything lavish for himself.... “ He was also described as being, kind, honest, selfless and as have never developed a large ego or ever took advantage of bands or anyone else. 

     His opponent was Boris Baczynskyj (1945-2008) who was a Philadelphia chess legend and popular coach. Baczynskyj was known as a very aggressive player. He was Ukrainian by nationality, born in Vienna and raised in Philadelphia. 

     Before he became a full time chess coach (among his students was Philadelphia 76ers (a pro-basketball team) owner Pat Croce) he worked as a stringer for Associated Press in Cambodia during the Khmer Rouge regime, a Communist highly autocratic, totalitarian and repressive government that was responsible for many deaths. They fell in January of 1979 when Vietnamese troops seize the Cambodian capital of Phnom Penh and toppled the brutal regime of Pol Pot.

[Event "Lone Pine"] [Site ""] [Date "1976.03.09"] [Round "?"] [White "Kim Commons"] [Black "Boris Baczynskyj"] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "E14"] [Annotator "Stockfish 16"] [PlyCount "69"] [EventDate "1976.??.??"] {E14: Queen's Indian} 1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 b6 {The Q-Indian is a solid defense with the aim of increases black's control over e4. A rars sideline. Far more usual is 4.g6} 4. e3 Bb7 5. Bd3 Bb4+ 6. Nbd2 O-O 7. O-O d5 8. a3 Be7 9. b4 Nbd7 10. c5 g6 {Evidently played to avoid potential sacrifices on h7 but he soon wishes he hadn’t played it.} (10... a5 11. Bb2 c6 12. Qe2 Qc7 13. Nb3 axb4 14. axb4 Rxa1 15. Rxa1 Ra8 {is about equal. Jovanic,O (2520)-Tratar,M (2479) Nova Gorica SLO 2014}) (10... bxc5 11. bxc5 e5 (11... Bc6 12. Qc2 Rb8 { is slightly in white's favor. Grachev,B (2661)-Fedoseev,V (2662) Vladivostok 2014}) 12. Nxe5 Nxe5 13. dxe5 Nd7 14. Qc2 Nxe5 15. Bxh7+ Kh8 {White is better. Szilagyi,G-Csom,I Hungary 1966}) 11. Qc2 $16 c6 12. Bb2 Nh5 {This is in keeping with Bacynskyj’s reputation as an aggressive player, but he is making the basic mistake of playing on the wrong side of the board.} (12... a5 13. Bc3 Ba6 14. Bxa6 Rxa6 {with equal chances.}) 13. Ne5 f6 {Weakening his K’s position. 13..Nxe5 was better.} 14. Nxd7 Qxd7 15. f4 {Making room for a Rook lift using the f3 square. This is basic strategy often seen in openings like the Stonewall Attack and the Torre Attack.} Rae8 {Defending the g-Pawn with 15...Qe8 would have been better.} 16. Bxg6 {[%mdl 512]} hxg6 17. Qxg6+ { Black's position is critical and it's doubtful that he can hold it.} Ng7 18. Rf3 {[%mdl 3104] Adding the R to the attack.} Bd8 {Passive defense is doomed to fail so the aggressive 18...e5 was his best try.} (18... e5 19. Rg3 Rf7 20. dxe5 fxe5 21. Bxe5 Bh4 22. Rh3 Re6 23. Qd3 {The attack has temporarily been beaten off and perhaps black can organize a defense.}) 19. Rh3 Rf7 20. Rf1 Kf8 21. Rff3 {A slip that should have allowed black to equalize! Adding the N to the attack with 21.Nf3 was the right way to continue.} (21. Nf3 Qc7 22. e4 dxe4 23. Ng5 {Sacrificing the N so the B can join the attack.} fxg5 24. d5 cxd5 25. Bxg7+ Ke7 26. Bf6+ {wins.}) 21... Nf5 {[%mdl 8192] Missing a golden opportunity to equalize.} (21... Ke7 {and surprisingly there is no way to get at black's K!} 22. Rh7 Rg8 23. h4 Bc7 24. h5 Qe8 25. Rg3 (25. h6 {would actually lose...} Nf5 26. Rxf7+ Qxf7 27. Qxf7+ Kxf7 {Black is winning as the h-Pawn presents no danger.}) 25... Nxh5 26. Rxf7+ Qxf7 27. Qxg8 Nxg3 28. Qxg3 Qh7 {and black is pretty much out of the woods.}) 22. e4 {Now it's all over and Commons concludes the game with hammer blows.} dxe4 {Not that it really matters, but 22...Rg7 was a better defense.} 23. Nxe4 Qd5 24. Rh8+ Ke7 25. Rh7 Ref8 26. Nxf6 Qa2 {Now that the Q has been forced from d5 white can add the B to his attack or, if black captures it, the P will become an attacker.} 27. d5 {The crusher.} cxd5 (27... Qxb2 28. Rxf7+ Rxf7 29. d6+ {Black can only delay mate by jettisoning material.}) 28. Ng8+ Ke8 29. Qxe6+ Be7 (29... Ne7 {was a stouter defense, but after} 30. Nxe7 Qb1+ 31. Rf1 Qe4 32. Qxe4 dxe4 33. Rxf7 Kxf7 34. Nf5 {There is no doubt about the outcome.}) 30. c6 {Simply threatening 31.Qd7#} Qb1+ 31. Rf1 Qxf1+ {Black is playing like an engine by sacrificing everything to hold off mate. Here I suspect Commons may have been in time trouble which would explain why Bacynskyj is prolonging the game.} 32. Kxf1 Ba6+ 33. Kg1 Rxh7 34. Qd7+ Kf7 35. Qxf5+ {In this hopeless position black resigned.} (35. Qxf5+ Ke8 36. Qd7+ Kf7 37. Qxe7+ Kg6 38. Qe6+ Kh5 39. Nf6+ Kg6 40. Ne4+ Rf6 41. Qxf6+ Kh5 42. Qg5#) 1-0