Appearing at about the same time was the Gottingen Manuscript which includes openings now known as Damiano's Defence, Philidor's Defense, the Giuoco Piano, Petrov's Defense, the Bishop's Opening, the Ruy Lopez, the Ponziani Opening, the Queen's Gambit Accepted, a form of the London System, Bird's Opening and the English.
The first author to attempt a comprehensive survey of the openings was Aaron Alexandre in 1837. The Russian player CarlJaenisch produced the first openings analysis on modern openings in 1842.
In 1843, Paul von Bilguer published the German Handbuch des Schachspiels, which which went through several editions, the last being published in 1916 It was one of the most important opening references for years.
In 1911, R. C. Griffith and J. H. White published the first edition of Modern Chess Openings. It was the standard reference for decades and sometime annotated games included the location in MCO where the line could be found. MCO-11 was the opening book I grew up with!
In 1943, Reuben Fine published Ideas Behind the Chess Openings which sought to explain the principles underlying the openings. In 1948, he published Practical Chess Openings, a competitor to MCO.
In 1964, I.A. Horowitz published Chess Openings: Theory and Practice, which in addition to opening analysis includes a large number of illustrative games. Neither Fine’s nor Horowitz’ opening books succeeded in taking the place of MCO.
A major advance in opening theory came in the days of Nimzovich and the Hypermoderns who claimed control of the center from the flanks, rather than its occupation, was effective.
Alekhine et al also contributed to opening theory. Their idea idea was that it was necessary to take into account a11 the features of the position and look at all its characteristics. Only then was it possible to select the best move. As a result, sometimes it was possible to establish a winning position right in the opening and that is exactly what Kotov accomplished in the following game. The game lasted 33 moves, but white was lost at move 8!
Alexander Kotov was born in Tula. He was a Soviet Champions and two time participant in the Candidate tournaments. A prolific author, he is probably best remembered for his book Think Like A Grand master.
His opponent, Bukhuti Gurgenidze (1933-2008, 74 yeas old) was awarded the IM title in 1968 and the GM title in 1970. He won the Georgian Championship twelve times between 1955 and 1973.
This game was played in 1954 in the Semi-Finals of the USSR Championship which was won by Vladimir Antoshin ahead of Kotov. Gurgenidze finished tenth (out of 16)
.
Bukhuti Gurgenidze–Alexander Kotov0–1B23Semi-Finals USSR Chp, YerevanYerevan URS1954Stockfish 17
B23: Closed Sicilian 1.e4 c5 2.c3 In this, the the Closed Variation,
white doesn’t open the center with an early d2-d4. Instead, he often
fianchettos the light B and plans to slowly build up on the K-side. c6 3.ge2 The setup white adopts in this game has not neem very successful and the
N pn e2 is not especially well placed. f6 4.g3 This move, also, is not
very highly recommended because, as Kotov explained, the white squares οn the
K-side are weakened ίη that brief moment when the B is still onm f1. Kotov's
mext coi[le pf moves demonstrate the concept quite clearly! d5 Kotov,
realizing he has no time to lose, acts with great energy. If he doesn't act
immediately then in a couple of moves white will placed his B on g2 and castle
when his position would be solid. 5.exd5 d4 By threatening ...Nf3 black
exploits the momentary weakness of the white squares. 6.g2 6.xd4
is not satisfactory because of... cxd4 7.b5 to which Kotov intended to
answer with 7...Qb3, but has better with... e5 White has no really
satisfactory reply. 8.dxe6 xe6 9.g2 c4 The N is trapped because if 10.a4 e7+ 11.e4 xe4+ 12.e2 xe2# 6...g4 7.d3 A natural move, but is is
also where white starts to go wrong. In this case it's a simple one move delay
in castling. 7.h3 f3 8.xf3 xf3+ 9.f1 has been seen in a few games
and while theoretically the position is equal white has not done especially
well indicating that practically speaking black has good chances. 7.0-0
is, as might be expected, his best continuation. f3 7...xd5 8.f3 f5 9.xd4 cxd4 10.xd5 xd5 Here, too, black appears to have something of an
advantage, but it's probably not enough that he can demonstrate a clear
superiority. 8.xf3 xf3+ 9.g2 d4 White's kight squares on the K-side
are weakened and the d-Pawn is a goner, but b;ack, who is lagging in
development, probablt cannot untilize those factors. 7...xd5 8.xd5
This loses! Gurgenidze did not realize how effective the Q will be
on d5. 8.d2 was necessary, but black has the edge after f3+ 9.xf3 xf3 10.g1 e6 8...xd5 Simple and decisive. 9.f3 It was probably here that
Gurgenidze realized he can't take the Q. 9.xd5 leads to mate. f3+ 10.f1 h3# 9...xf3 The game is already decided, but white can hardly resign
after only 9 moves; it would just be too embarrassing. 10.f1 g2 11.e3 f3+ Things can't get much worse for white. 12.xf3 xf3 13.xc5 White
has a N+P vs. a R, but worse than the material deficit is his miserable
position. h5 Planning to rip white's K-side to shreds. 14.d2 g6 15.e3 h4 16.g1 hxg3 17.hxg3 h3 Mission accomplished. The next step is an invasion
on the K-side. 18.b5 c8 19.e1 a6 20.bd4 g2 21.xg2 xg2 22.f4 h1 23.g1 g7 24.c4 d8 25.c2 e5 26.d4 f8 27.e2 White cannot claim to
have even one well placed piece. exd4 28.cxd4 f3 29.e3 g4 30.f4 xe2 31.xe2 d2 Not only are white's three pieces useless his K is exposed. 32.c3 h5 33.d5 d4 White resigned. His opening lead to a catastrophic
debacle in a nearly flawlessly played game by Kotov! 0–1
No comments:
Post a Comment