Two Who Gave Up Chess

    The following game was played by two great, but relatively unknown, players from a bygone era, both of who, gave up chess. The game was played in the 1955 Gothenburg Interzonal.The top nine players qualifying for the Amsterdam Candidates that was held the following year, 

    From 1955 until 1962 Dr. Miroslav Filip (1928-2009) qualified for the candidate tournaments twice. Filip's play was characterized as serious, solid and deep. Outside of chess he had no problem with the Soviet invasion of his country in 1968 and remained loyal to the authorities and managed to do very well. 

    Filip did not have a fanatical enthusiasm for chess and in 2002 he was invited to attend festivities for the 40th anniversary of the 1962 Candidates Tournament (im which Filip had finished last) that was held in Curacao, but he declined, saying he had pretty much lost interest in chess. 

    After a promising beginning his opponent in this game, Andrija Fuderer (1931-2011), ended up abandoning the game for his real passion, chemical engineering. His swansong was the 1959 Soviet Union vs. Yugoslavia team match where, at the age of 28 he showed what might have been by beating Bronstein, the victor at Gothenburg, by a score of 3-1. 

 

    In the late 1960s Fuderer left Yugoslavia for good, living in Spain and working as a chemical engineer in Antwerp. He only played in tournaments outside Yugoslavia in order to acquire consumer goods that he could sell when he returned home and use the profit to finance his university studies. 

A Fischer vs Geller Encounter

    Yefim Geller (1925-1998) was born in Odessa, Ukraine and died in Moscow. From the end of the Second World War until the early 1970s Geller was among the elite group who missed out on the world championship despite the fact that he was undoubtedly among the world's top ten players for over 20 years. 

    Take a look at his record against the world's leading players: Mikhail Botvinnik (+4 -1 =7), David Bronstein (+5 -4 =12), Tigran Petrosian, (+5 -3 =32), Vasily Smyslov (+11 -8 =37). 

    Against Mikhail Tal his record was +6 -6 =23.The only players against whom he did not fare well were Viktor Korchnoi (minus 5), Boris Spassky (minus 4) and Lajos Portisch (minus 2). Among his most interesting encounters were those against Bobby Fischer. Geller scored 5 wins, three losses and only two were drawn. 

    At Skopje, 1967, Fischer lost his third game in a row to Geller prompting Yugoslav GM Bojan Kurajica to write that Fischer just couldn't play against Geller. Yugoslav, GM and journalist Dr. Petar Trifunovic opined that Geller was in no way inferior to Fischer when it came to opening preparation and Fischer chose to play sharp opening variations because he was always playing to win. 

    In this game Fischer succeeded in outplaying Geller in the opening, but his play was tactically flawed and Geller, who was a superb tactician, was quick to take advantage of it. 

    Fischer had just recently come out of hiding and Skopje was an important warm-up for his participation in the Sousse Interzonal later in the year. As it turned out, Sousse was to become famous because of the Fischer Affair. 

    The tournament schedule was modified to fit Fischer and Reshevsky's religious obligations. After a dispute with the organizers over scheduling Fischer walked out while he was leading. 

    After nine rounds at Skopje he was tied for first with Russia’s Ratmir Kholmov. It was at that point Fischer once again revealed himself to be the loathsome snot face he really was. He announced he would withdraw from the tournament unless the chess sets were vhanges and the spectators were removed from further rounds. 

    The organizers could not meet the second demand so Fischer forfeited his tenth round game against Yugoslav master Milorad Knezevic who then showed he was quite a sportsman when he didn't want to accept a free point and allowed the game to be re-scheduled. After that, Fischer found his form and went on to finish first by a half point ahead of Geller and Milan Matulovic. 

 

A Real Humdinger by Spassky

    Humdinger: an informal, colloquial American slang term used to describe a person, object, action or event that is remarkably excellent, extraordinary or stands out above the rest. This game was a humdinger. 

    Bobby Fischer called this game one of the ten greatest of all time. Czech GM LudekPachman called it a modern masterpiece. GM Andy Soitis ranks it number 32 on his top 100 list. A poll of readers by the Russian chess magazine Shakmatny Bulletin ranked it as one of the very best games of the 1960s. In his book on Spassky, Bernard Cafferty called it one of the finest games he had ever had the pleasure to review or to analyze. Everybody agrees that it is one of the most amazing games ever played and one of the more famous games of the modern era.

    The game is Spassky vs. Bronstein from the 1960 USSR Championship. It's the game that was featured in the classic James Bond movie "From Russia, With Love" as being played by Kronstein against McAdams. I never saw the movie because I am not James Bond fan and rarely watch movies. The game may not be perfect, but as Soltis pointed out, chess isn't always about finding perfect moves. (That is unless you're a modern correspondence player seeking perfection by using a n engine and a powerful computer). In OTB play chess is about making pragmatic choices. In this game Bronstein was short on time and the complications as a result of Spassky's sacrifice resulted in, as Botvinnik used to put it, head whirling complications. 

    If you haven't seen this game, you'll enjoy it. If you have seen it before, enjoy it again! If you want to play over the game on your own software you can download it HERE.

 

 

Tolush and Konstantinopolsky Slug It Out

    Alexander Konstantinopolsky (1910-1990) was a Soviet player and David Bronstein’s traimer from a young age. He was awarded the IM title in 1950. He won the first Soviet Correspondence Championship in 1951, earned the Correspondence IM title in 1966, and was awarded the Russian title ofHonorary Grandmaster in 1983. 

    Konstantinopolsky was nearly 20 when he learned chess and at the beginning of his career hewon the Kiev championships five consecutive times from 1932 to 1936. 

    During the late 1930s, Konstantinopolsky trained young players and amateurs in Kiev, at the Palace of Young Pioneers. He was widely regarded as a friendly and kindly man. During the 1930s he, along with Bronstein and Isaac Boleslavsky, were the Ukrainian pioneers who developed the King's Indian Defense. He was also an early advocate of the Yugoslav Attack against the Dragon Variation of the Sicilian Defense, a line which would become very popular about 20 years.

    His opponent in this wild tactical game was the attacking genius Alexander Tolush (1910-1969) who was born in St. Petersburg. He was warded the IM title at its inception in 1950, the GM title in 1953 and the Correspondence IM title in 1965.

 

 

[Event "USSR Championship, Moscow"] [Site ""] [Date "1950.11.20"] [Round "?"] [White "Alexander Konstantinopolsky"] [Black "Alexander Tolush"] [Result "0-1"] [ECO "A15"] [Annotator "Swordfish"] [PlyCount "58"] [EventDate "1950.??.??"] {A13: English Opening} 1. Nf3 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. b3 {A slow start, but the fireworks come later.} Be7 4. Bb2 O-O 5. e3 c5 6. Be2 Nc6 7. O-O d5 8. d4 cxd4 9. exd4 b6 10. Nbd2 Ba6 {A novel idea apparently to put pressure on c4. To be expected was 10...Bb7} (10... Bb7 11. Rc1 Rc8 12. Bd3 Re8 {with equal chances. Grigoryan,K (2617)-Sarana,A (2662) Santiago de Compostela 2022}) 11. Rc1 Rc8 12. Re1 Na5 {Pressuring c4,} 13. Bd3 Bb4 (13... dxc4 14. bxc4 {White has Hanging Pawns which requires a strategy unto itself.} Nxc4) 14. Re3 {Evidently the plan is to play Ne5 and shift the R into position on the 3rd rank to attack black's K.} Qe7 {He could drive the R back with 14...Ng4, but then his N would have to retreat, so there was nothing to be gained. Still, that was probably the safest course.} 15. Ne5 Ba3 {Eliminating the dark squared B is a far reaching strategy because it's hard to see the long diagonal being opened, but it will be.} 16. Bxa3 Qxa3 17. Rh3 {White's attack is looking dangerous.} h6 18. g4 Rfd8 {Tolush has underestimated the force of white's attack. He should have played 18...Nc6 to eliminate the N on e5.} 19. Rc2 {White does not have time for this rather pointless move, Pressing on with the attack with 19. g5 was much better. Now the advantage shifts to black.} Nc6 {[%mdl 2080] Watch this N. White should eliminate it with 20.Nxc6 and then play 21.Rg3 when he can hope to get some counterplay.} 20. f4 {White has overestimated the force of his attack!} Nxd4 21. g5 {White offers the exchange, but Tolush isn't going to take ther bait. Instead, he opens up the position.} dxc4 {White has no good move!} (21... Nxc2 22. gxf6 Qc5+ 23. Kh1 {and black is at a loss for a game saving move. The best line is} Bb7 24. Qh5 dxc4+ 25. Be4 g6 26. Rg3 Rc7 27. Bxb7 Rxb7 28. Qxh6 {and white has a winning attack.}) 22. Rxc4 (22. gxf6 cxd3 23. Rxc8 Rxc8 24. Qh5 Qc1+ 25. Nf1 Rc7 26. fxg7 d2 27. Qxh6 Qxf1#) (22. gxh6 Qc5 23. Kg2 g6 24. Bxc4 Bb7+ 25. Kf1 Nxc2 26. Qxc2 Qd4 27. Ndf3 Bxf3 28. Rxf3 b5 {Black is winning.}) 22... Bxc4 23. bxc4 {Black still can't afford to get careless!} Qc5 (23... Qxa2 24. gxf6 Nf5 (24... gxf6 25. Qh5 {and white wins.}) 25. fxg7 {and it's now white who has a significant advantage.}) 24. gxf6 { Black now delivers the finishing blow.} Ne2+ 25. Kh1 Nxf4 26. Qg4 g5 27. Ndf3 { Black has an array of plausible captures but chooses the right one.} Rxd3 28. Nxd3 Nxd3 29. Qh5 {White has a mate, but there is no time to execute it.} Qf2 { White resigned} (29... Qf2 30. Ng1 (30. Qxh6 Qf1+ 31. Ng1 Nf2#) 30... Nf4 { Threatening mate on g2, so} 31. Qg4 Nxh3 32. Nxh3 Qf1+ 33. Ng1 Qxf6 {with an easy win.}) 0-1

41,573

    The number 41,573 refers to the LEGO Mixels Sweepz Building Kit available on Amazon for about $69. Or, it could refer to a 41573-84 Harley-Davidson OEM Rear Axle Adjuster for 1984–1996 FLT model motorcycles. You can get one for about $25 on e-bay. Or, it could refer to game number 41,573 in my games database. You can get it here and it’s free. 

    For the past few days I have been cleaning up the hard drive on my laptop because it was running out of space. The process involved deleting old files and programs and transferring files to a hard drive salvaged from an old laptop. 

    In the process ChessBase 16 came in handy for combining several databases into one, especially since some of them were in pgn format. ChessBase's proprietary CBH (ChessBase Header) files are significantly more efficient than pgn (Portable Game Notation) files because they use a lot less space. For example, a 1GB pgn database file could possibly be reduced to under 150-200MB. CBH files also allow faster searches and they support embedded multimedia (e.g. sounds, videos, colored arrows, training questions) that pgn can’t. 

    The game number was selected because when I checked the Blog there had been 6,042,573 visitors. The game was played in the Olympiad that took place in Moscow in 1956. It was won by the Soviet team (Botvinnik, Smyslov, Keres, Bronstein, Taimanov and Geller) ahead of Yugoslavia and Hungary.. The US did not send a team, 

    Toivo Salo (1909-1981) was a hree-time FinnisChampion (1938, 1949 and 1956). From the late 1930s to the early 1960s he was one of Finland's leading players. Ingi Johannsson (1936-2010) won the championship of Iceland four times (1956, 1958, 1959 and1963). From the mid-1950s to mid-1980s he was also one of the leading Icelandic players. 

    Salo was doing pretty good conducting a K-side attack, but misplayed it and allowed Johannsson to equalized. But then on move 28 Johannsson made a huge tactical blunder and it was all over.

     

A Lesson On the Initiative

Belavenets

    The Russians Play Chess by Irving Chermev is a collection of 50 great attacking games from the years 1925-1945 (in my 2nd edition there are 6 games additional games by Bronstein, Smyslov, Tal and Petrosian, from 1951-60). 

    Most of the games are short sacrificial affairs and many are by lesser-known, or long forgotten, players of a bygone era. The real problem is that Chernev was not a Master and his motes are superficial at best. Another annoying habit, like his contemporary author Fred Reinfeld, is that the events and dates are not given. For example, in today’s game the event and location were not given, but I was able to locate that information. Unfortunately all of the games and the final standings are not available. 

    There is a diagram every few moves, so you can read it without a board. This means you could use the book for an unsystematic book on tactics, but the best thing is just playing over he games for enjoyment. 

    Although his analysis is frequently wrong, Chernev makes frequent comments so you aren't left in the dark about what's going on for long stretches of the game. Chernev tends to focus on threats more than anything else which helps in making it a good way to study tactics. 

     One review complained that the games are not of the same quality as those of better players, say Alekhine, Tal or Fischer. Maybe not, but that's the beauty of them! We see the mistakes, sometimes crude ones, that we will run into or make ourselves. 

    Here is one game I especially enjoyed. The winner, Sergey Belavenets (1910-942) was a Soviet master, theoretician, and chess journalist. He was born in Smolensk to a noble family. He and Mikhail Yudovich, known as the Smolensk twins, had been close friends since meeting in a school match in 1925. 

    Over the next few years they studied with Belavenets's uncle, Konstantin Vygodchikov, a master who enjoyed success in many very strong local Soviet tournaments. He was awarded the Soviet Master title in 1929 after tying with Botvinnik in the preliminary round of the USSR Championship. 

    Belavenets was in the Soviet Army and was killed in action while fighting at Staraya in 1942. His daughter Liudmila (born 1940) held the title of women's world correspondence champion from 1984 to 1992. 

    In this game white chose an opening line that allowed black to seize the initiative. Defining the initiative is sometimes a little slippery. It's usually defined as an advantage belonging to the player who can make threats that cannot be ignored.   

    Having the initiative puts the opponent in the position of having to use his moves to respond to threats rather than executing his own plans. The one who possesses the initiative can maneuver his pieces into more and more aggressive positions which will ultimately result in a strong attack. 

    Evgeny Zagoryansky (1910-1961) was born in Yerevan, Armenia. He frequently competed in the Moscow Championships. He authored The Story of Morphy, the life and fate of a chess genius. 

 

[Event "Trade Union Champ, Moscow"] [Site "?"] [Date "1936.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Evgeny Zagoryansky"] [Black "Sergey Belavenets"] [Result "0-1"] [ECO "D81"] [Annotator "Stockfish 18"] [PlyCount "46"] [EventDate "1936.??.??"] { D81: Gruenfeld Defense} 1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. Nc3 d5 4. Qb3 {At one time this move, known as the Accelerated Russian System, was very popular, but it has all but disappeared today. It's a solid, positional approach for aimed at challenging black’s center immediately. It often leads to complex, forcing lines.} c6 {At one time this was very popular, but it has all but disappeared today in favor of 4... dxc4} 5. Bg5 {This looks aggressive, but as will soon be seen, it allows black to get an advantage. Best ws 5.Nf3} dxc4 6. Qxc4 b5 {Well played! White now loses time with his Q.} 7. Qd3 Bf5 {Black has easily equalized. This develops with a gain of time by forcing white to move his Q again. White also has the option of playing 8.e4 which gives black an esy game.} 8. Qd1 {This is white's least favorable move. Black now gains even more time by attacking the N.} (8. e4 Nxe4 9. Nxe4 Qd5 10. f3 Bxe4 {This is the only good move black has.} 11. fxe4 Qxg5 12. h4 {with equal chances.}) 8... b4 9. Na4 {Retreating to b1 is no better.} Ne4 {Another good move.} 10. Nf3 {He can't afford to lose more time retreating to h} Bg7 { [%mdl 2048]} 11. Bd2 Qa5 (11... c5 $142 12. Nxc5 Nxc5 13. dxc5 Bxb2) (11... Bxd4 12. Nxd4 Qxd4 13. Be3 Qxd1+ 14. Rxd1 {White has sufficient compensation because of black's backward c-Pawn.}) 12. e3 c5 {Another forceful move. It should be pointed out that white's position gas no real weaknesses and black's only advanbtage is in the form of the initiative. After this white's position rapidly deteriorates.} 13. a3 (13. Rc1 cxd4 14. Nxd4 Bd7 15. Qc2 Nxd2 16. Qxd2 Bxd4 17. Qxd4 O-O 18. Nc5 {and white has all but equalized.}) 13... Nxd2 14. Nxd2 cxd4 {As a result of his inferior 13th move whiye is now in difficulty and this is the critical position.} 15. Qf3 {After this white loses quickly. The attacl on black's R is immaterial. His best chance was 15.axb4} (15. exd4 Nc6 16. Nc4 Qc7 {Black picks up the d-Pawn.} 17. Bd3) (15. axb4 Qxb4 16. Qb3 Qxb3 17. Nxb3 dxe3 {Black maintains a promising position.}) 15... dxe3 { [%mdl 512]} (15... Qxa4 16. Qxa8 O-O 17. e4 d3 18. exf5 Nc6 19. Qb7 Rb8 20. Qc7 Be5 {and even after the best nove} 21. b3 Qb5 22. Qd7 Bxa1 {Black is winning.}) 16. Nc4 (16. Qxa8 exd2+ 17. Kxd2 O-O 18. Bc4 bxa3+ 19. Ke2 axb2 20. Nxb2 Qe5+ 21. Kf1 Qxb2 22. Qxa7 Qxa1+ 23. Qxa1 Bxa1 {Black will eventually win.}) 16... exf2+ 17. Kxf2 Bd4+ 18. Ke1 Qxa4 19. Qxa8 O-O 20. Qf3 bxa3 21. Rxa3 Qb4+ 22. Kd1 Rd8 23. Nd2 Bxb2 {White resigned. A good lesson on the advantage of the initiative.} 0-1

The Immortal Losing Game

 

    Bogdan Sliwa (1922-2003) of Poland was awarded the International Master title in 1953, and the Honorary Grandmaster title in 1987. He won the championship of Poland six times. In 1946, he won the first Polish Chess Championship after World War II. He also won it in 1951, 1952, 1953, 1954 and 1960. His last name is pronounced Shlee- (rhymes with plea), vah (rhymes with spa). 

    In the following game Sliwa defeated David Bronstein, who at the time was (along with Smyslov, Keres and Botvinnik) one of the best players in the world. At the time of the game Sliwa was way, way down the list...not even in the top 150 according to Chessmetrics. 

    The game came to be known as The Immortal Losing Game. It likely got that moniker because of the rating difference and not because Bronstein even came close to getting a better position let alone winning. Instead, Bronstein found himself in a hopeless position, but managed to lay some elementary traps, but the alert Sliwas avoided them and emerged victorious. 

 

[Event "Gotha"] [Site ""] [Date "1957.09.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Bogdan Sliwa"] [Black "David Bronstein"] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "A81"] [Annotator "Stockfish 18"] [PlyCount "57"] [EventDate "1957.??.??"] {A81: Dutch Defense} 1. d4 f5 2. g3 g6 {The Leningrad Variation. From g7 thr B will not only be a good defender of the K, but also pt wil;l be active on the an long diagonal.} 3. Bg2 Bg7 4. Nc3 Nf6 5. Bg5 Nc6 6. Qd2 d6 7. h4 {Because white plans to castle Q-side, this immediate attack on the K-side is not a damgerous wealening.} e6 (7... h6 8. Bxf6 Bxf6 9. Nf3 e6 10. O-O-O d5 {White is just a bit better. Karl,H (2251)-De Laubadere,P (2003) Hockenheim 2007}) 8. O-O-O {White is better.} h6 9. Bf4 Bd7 10. e4 fxe4 {With this capture black opens the f-file, which is one of the ideas behind the Dutch.} 11. Nxe4 Nd5 { While this can hardly be called bad black should probably finish his development by11…Qe7 and ...O-O-O.} 12. Ne2 Qe7 13. c4 Nb6 {It would have been better to plat 13...Nxf4 because the B strenthens white's attack.} (13... Nxf4 $142 14. Nxf4 Qf7 15. h5 {with the initiative.}) 14. c5 {This sharp tactical blow was apparently overlooked by Bronstein,} dxc5 15. Bxc7 O-O { Was Bronstein aware of the lurking danger and knew he was castling into a winning attack or did he believe castling was simply his best option?} (15... Nxd4 16. Nd6+ Kf8 17. Nf4 {is better, but white still has a considewrable advantage.}) 16. Bd6 Qf7 17. Bxf8 Rxf8 18. dxc5 {White has a material advantage amd a won game, but the wily Bronsteien manages to lay a few traps.} Nd5 19. f4 Rd8 20. N2c3 Ndb4 21. Nd6 {[%mdl 32]} Qf8 22. Nxb7 {Sacrificing the second R gives b;acl the opportunity to set a few elementary traps. They are certainly not very deep or profound, but you never know...} Nd4 {Black is the exchange down with zero compensation so his position is lost. Thus he has nothing to lose by sacrificing another R for a few traps.} 23. Nxd8 Bb5 24. Nxe6 Bd3 {Daring Sliwa to grab the Q.} 25. Bd5 (25. Nxf8 Nxa2+ 26. Nxa2 Nb3#) 25... Qf5 26. Nxd4+ Qxd5 {Offering the Q again.} 27. Nc2 (27. Nxd5 Nxa2#) 27... Bxc3 28. bxc3 {[%mdl 32]} Qxa2 {His last hope.} 29. cxb4 {Black resigned.} (29. Nxb4 Qb1#) 1-0

The Aggressive f-Pawn Advance

    Ludek Pachman (1924-2003) won the 1957 Czechoslovak Championship that was held in Prague. Pachman was a dominant figure in Czechoslovak chess during this era and was known for his strong international performance, including victory in the 1957 Dublin Zonal tournament. 

    Few people realize how strong Pachman was during the late 1950s. (n their December 1959 rating list Chess metrics rates him at 2695 placing him at #15 in the world. That put him in a group with names like David Bronstein, Bobby Fischer, Lazslo Szabo, Miguel Najdorf and Samuel Reshevsky. Mikhail Botvinnik (2797) and Pail Keres (2772) lead the list. 

    Remember these ratings do not compare to those of today! Ratings measure statistical performance against opponents, not absolute strength. A good example of this point was made in the 1970s by  Claude F. Bloodgoo III (1937-2001), a petty criminal who was serving a life sentence in the Virginia State Penitentiary for murdering his mother. 

    Bloodgood was of about Expert (200-2199) strength, but he pumped up his rating to over 2700 when he manipulated the rating system by creating a rated pool of fellow prisoners and submitted fake tournaments. 

    In the process of winning the ‘57 Czech Championship Pachman played the following instructive game that illustrates the motif of advancing the f-Pawn which can be either a high-risk or a high-reward tactical and positional idea that is used to break open the center or launch a K-side attack. 

     In the King's Indian Defense the advance of the f-Pawn is a common aggressive strategy that initiates a Pawn storm against the opponent's castled King.  

[Event "Czech Champ, Prague"] [Site ""] [Date "1957.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Ludek Pachman"] [Black "Jiri Kopriva"] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "E94"] [Annotator "Stockfish 18"] [PlyCount "77"] [EventDate "1957.??.??"] {E94: King's Indian: Classical} 1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. Nc3 Bg7 4. e4 d6 5. Be2 O-O 6. Nf3 e5 7. O-O {This is the classical system.} c6 {Black has multiple options here. Besides the text he can also play 7...Nbd7 or the interesting 7.. .Na6.} 8. Re1 {An old move. Other options are 8.Be3 and 8.d5} Qe7 {Frequently seen is 8...Nbd7} 9. Bf1 {Another old move which really serves to purpose.} Bg4 10. d5 $1 c5 11. h3 {Emphasizing the point that black's 9th move was harmless and he should have played 9...Nbd7. Of course he does not want to trade it foe the N so he has to undevelop it woth 11...Bc8 or go back to d7 where it takes that square away fron the N. As a result of black's less than accurate opening play white already has a considerable advantage.} Bd7 12. a3 a5 13. Bd2 Na6 14. Rb1 b6 15. g3 {Over the last several moves operations on the Q-side have come to a standoff. Consequently, both sides turn their attention to the other side and utilize the motif of advancing their f-Pawn. This advance proves to be more difficult for black. Where is black's N on a3 going to find employment?} h6 (15... Ne8 {Clearing the way for the advance of the f-Pawn.} 16. g4 f5 17. exf5 gxf5 18. Bd3 fxg4 19. Ng5 Nf6 20. hxg4 {White's pieces are aggressively placed agaosnt and the shaky position of black's K.}) 16. Nh4 Kh7 17. Kh2 $18 Ng8 18. Bd3 {This is additional preparation for the advance of the f-Pawn. Pachman judged its immediate advance to be premature.} f6 (18... Rab8 {This attept to generaye play on the Q-side can be ignored by white.} 19. Rg1 Nc7 20. a4 {Black is stopped cold.}) 19. f4 {After this a casual glance at the position may give the impression that black s defenses on the K-side will hold, but, in fact, white is winning.} Qd8 20. f5 g5 {With the P-formation locked up it may look like black has succeeded in defending himself, but watch how Packman opens up the position.} 21. Ng6 Rf7 22. h4 Be8 23. Rh1 Rb7 {Black's pieces are horribly limitde in mobility.} 24. Kg2 {Preparing to open the h-file.} Bxg6 25. fxg6+ Kxg6 26. hxg5 fxg5 {Now the obvious way to continue the attack is 27.Qh5+. In his analysis Pachman concluded that black would get some very good defensive possibilities. After a 30 minute analysis by Stockfish white had a decisive advantage, but there was no forced win, so in principle Pachman was correct.} 27. Be2 {This is a surprising move because it blocks the Qs path to the K-side, but even though it leads to a winning position because 17.Qh5+ gets complicated the text is a bit more clear. As played in the game the B comes into play and the position of black;s K remains very unsafe.} Kh7 (27... Nf6 {prevents Bh6+ but white has} 28. Bg4 {Od courde black will not willing exchange his N which aids in the defense.} Nc7 { Prevents Be6} 29. Qf3 Kf7 (29... Qe7 30. Bxg5 Kf7 (30... hxg5 {30...Kf7 4.96} 31. Bh5+ Nxh5 32. Qxh5+ {mate next move.}) 31. Bxh6 {White has a winning attack against the nude black K.}) 30. Rbf1 Qe7 31. Be6+ Nxe6 32. dxe6+ Qxe6 33. Nd5 {wins the N.}) 28. Bg4 Nc7 {Even though this N aids the defense by covering e6 white's pieces are so well coordinated that black no longer has any defense.} 29. Bf5+ Kh8 30. Qh5 Ne8 31. Rh2 (31. Bxg5 {Pachman saw this, but concluded that his way was even stronger. Technically there is not that much difference between the two moves, but practically speaking Pachman was correct.} Nef6 32. Qh4 Qe7 33. Rbf1 Rf8 {Strategically white is winning, but there is no clear path to a breakthrough/}) 31... Bf6 32. Qg6 Rg7 (32... Raa7 { was a smidgen better.} 33. Rxh6+ Nxh6 34. Qxh6+ Kg8 35. Be6+ Rf7 36. Rf1 Bg7 37. Qg6 {White has a decisive advantage.}) 33. Rxh6+ Nxh6 34. Qxh6+ Kg8 35. Be6+ Kf8 36. Rf1 {This pin concludes the game. White wants to mate with Bxg5.} Raa7 37. Bxg5 Raf7 38. Nb5 {Well played! Of course he could have played 38. Bxf6, but black is now out of reasonable moves.} Ke7 39. Rxf6 {Black resigned. The pim decides the game. A very strong performance by Pachman.} (39. Rxf6 Nxf6 40. Bxf6+ Rxf6 41. Qxg7+ Ke8 42. Nc7+) 1-0

Unlawful Upsetting of the Balance

    According to Chess metrics calculation, on the September 1950 rating list Soviet GM Alexander Kotov (1913-1981) was tanked #3 in the world behind David Bronstein and Vassily Smyslov. 

    His best result came at the 1952 Saltsjibaden Interzonal where he finished an undefeated first hree clear points ahead of Tigran Petrosian and Mark Taimanov. In the Candidates Tournament in Zurich in 1953 he tied for 8th place out of 15. 

    Kotov wrote several books, but he is probably most famous for Think Like a Grand master (1971) and Play Like a Grandmaster (1973). Both are heavy reading. In Think Like a Grandmaster he teaches amateurs how Grandmasters think. His main focus is on the what he calls the tree of analysis, candidate moves and the decision-making process. In Play Like a Grandmaster, Kotov gives a practical guide that focuses on things like positional judgment, planning and calculation. 

 

 

    In describing the following game Kotov observed how sometimes in the opening one of the players “flagrant1y violates the genera1 princip1es” of the opening and “his moves are not ίn accordance with the requirements οf the position, presenting themse1ves either as a loss of time or cutting across the genera1 harmonious setup of the pieces. 

    Kotov wrote that when that happens, the opponent “have the right and are obliged to punish the opponent for such a disregard of general chess princip1es.” He added that such punishment is often carried out “quickly with maximum energy from the attacking pieces.” 

    That’s what happened to Wade in this game. His first few opening moves do not seem as bad as Kotov claimed or were they? Stockfish doesn’t show black’s position to be losing after 5...f6, but only that white is better by a little less that a P. In practice though black’s survival chances are slim. Engines are tactical monsters, but are GMs better at evaluating long term strategic advantages? Also, take a look at the position after 7.c5. How many humans would play 7...g5 which appears to seriously weaken black’s K-side and leaves him with most of his Ps on dark squares? Yet, Stockfish fails to demonstrate any advantage for white. 

 

[Event "Saltsjobaden Interzonal"] [Site ""] [Date "1952.10.02"] [Round "?"] [White "Alexander Kotov"] [Black "Robert Wade"] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "A41"] [Annotator "Stockfish 17.1"] [PlyCount "41"] [EventDate "1952.09.15"] {A41: Modern Defense} 1. d4 d6 {Αt the time this games was played this move had become popular and it often transposed into the King's Indian Defense.} 2. c4 e5 {In annotating this game Kotov claimed that with this move Wade displayed an unfamiliarity ith the ideas of this νariation and claimed that 2. ..e5 was premature because it leads to a significant weakening of the K-side which white subsequently exploits. That claim seems a bit outlandish. In my database this move has been played over 6,000 times and black has won 39% compared to white's 28%. What's more, engines give white no advantage beyond that of the first move.} 3. Nf3 Nd7 {This, however, is where black starts drifting into an inferior position. He should either play 3...exd4, or play aggressively with 3...e4} (3... e4 4. Ng5 f5 5. Nc3 c6 {with a lot of possibilities for both sides.}) 4. e4 g6 {Kotov pronounced this bad and recommended 4...Nf6. He quoted Alekhine who used the term "unlawful upsetting of the balance" ίn the opening. i.e. that happens when one side deνiates greatly from the positional foundations. When that happens the other side must immediately take steps to punish the offender by using energetic tactics. Kotov write, "Wade carelessly weakens the black squares οη his K's flank, induced by P moνes which will be particularly noticeable after the important exchange dxe5." Exactly how horrible was Wade's move? White's advantage has increased a bit to 3/4 of a P.} 5. Bg5 {Kotov claims this punishes black for weakening the dark squares around his K and that the best move is 5...Be7, but that results in the exchange pf hos valuable dark squared B.} f6 {This move (which cannot be good) has been played 5 times in my database and black has lost 4 of them, so it is clearly not good. For whatever reason Kotov neglects to mention the possinility of 5...Ngf6 after which it is unclear how white has any significant advantage.} (5... Ngf6 {And bow Stockfish says the position is equal after 6.Nc3 Bg7. There is another possibility thatis equally good and a bit more inetersting...} 6. Nxe5 dxe5 7. dxe5 Bb4+ (7... Nxe5 8. Qxd8+ Kxd8 9. Bxf6+) 8. Nc3 Qe7 9. exf6 Qxe4+ 10. Qe2 Nc5 {White's advantage is minimal.}) 6. Bh4 Bg7 {He could have remained equal after 6...c5!} (6... c5 7. d5 Be7 8. Nc3 f5) 7. c5 {Here Kotov babbles on about how black has "unlawfully upset the balance and therefore (white) takes immediate measures to punish him." Kotov was pretty harsh on the next move stating the "continuation chosen by Wade merits censure ίη eνery possible way."} dxc5 (7... g5 {looks really bad at first glance and it's not likely to suggest itself to a human player but after} 8. Bg3 h5 9. h3 h4 10. Bh2 dxc5 {neither side can demonstrate any advantage!}) 8. dxe5 Qe7 9. Nc3 Nxe5 {This careless move loses instantly. Even after the better 9...c6 white has an excellent position} (9... c6 $16 {was called for.} 10. Qb3 {Black's best chance is to mix things up with} g5 11. exf6 Bxf6 (11... Ngxf6 12. Bxg5 {White is much better.}) 12. Bg3 g4 13. Nd2 Ne5 {and at least black can play on.}) 10. Nxe5 Qxe5 {The exposed position of his Q results in black's losing the game/} 11. Bg3 Qe6 {Resigns was the only other alternative.} 12. Nd5 {Kotov is after more than 12.Bxc7 has to offer.} Kf7 13. Nxc7 Qxe4+ 14. Be2 Bh3 15. Nxa8 {There were other ways to win, but white decided to win by picking up material.} Bxg2 16. Rg1 Bh6 17. Qb3+ Kg7 18. f3 Qd4 19. Rxg2 Bd2+ 20. Kf1 Ne7 21. Nc7 {Black resigned, Poor Wadw never had a chance. The auto-analysis feature of Fritz assigned hin an Accuracy rating of a miserable 22%. In the book Kotov was equally harsh on Wade's play. But, let's not fprget Wade was was New Zealand champion three times and British champion twice} 1-0

Troianescu Crushes His Opponent

    Today where I live the temperature is in the single digits and there is 6-8 inches of snow on the ground. Things were different on this date in 1951. It was mild with a high temperature of 62 degrees (F) and a low of 36. There was light precipitation that day measuring 0.08 of an inch. 

    Chess in 1951 was dominated by the Botvinnik-Bronstein World Championship match which ended in a 12-12 tie and so Botvinnik retained his title. Rumor has it that Bronstein was ordered not to win. 

    It was also the year 7-year-old Bobby Fischer lost a simultaneous game to US Senior Master and US Speed Champion Max Pavey. The loss resulted in Fischer subsequently being invited to join the Brooklyn Chess Club and you know the rest of the story. By the way, on January 17, 2008, Bobby Fischer died at the age of 64 in Reykjavik, Iceland. 

    1951 saw the development of the first operational computer chess program by Dr. Dietrich Prinz in England. It ran on a computer at the University of Manchester. The program was not capable of playing a full game. Instead, it was designed to find the best move to win within two turns. 

    In Romania in 1951, the communist regime intensified political repression which included the torture of political prisoners, the launching of forced agricultural collectivization and rapid industrialization. 

 

 

    That was the world of Octav Troianescu (1916-1980), an International Master (title awarded the previous year). From the mid-1940s to the end of the 1970s he was one of the strongest Romanian players winning the Romanian Championship in 1946, 1954, 1956, 1957 and 1968. His highest rating was 2320 in 1971. Here is one of his games to enjoy. 

[Event "Bucharest"] [Site ""] [Date "1950.08.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Kazimierz Makarczyk"] [Black "Octavio Troianescu"] [Result "0-1"] [ECO "E39"] [Annotator "Stockfish 17.1"] [PlyCount "50"] [EventDate "1951.??.??"] {[%evp 19,50,-25,-19,-12,-8,-8,-1,-134,4,-31,-24,-34,-59,-33,13,-45,-39,-245, -243,-243,-263,-255,-248,-370,-382,-501,-499,-451,-346,-472,-425,-512,-492] E39: Nimzo-Indian: Classical} 1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 Bb4 4. Qc2 c5 5. dxc5 O-O 6. Nf3 Na6 7. a3 Bxc3+ 8. Qxc3 Nxc5 9. g3 b6 10. Bg2 Ba6 11. Nd2 {In the heavily analyzed Nimzo-Indian all this has been played many time before. The text is necessary to prevent black from playing 12...Nce4} (11. Nd4 Nce4 12. Qe3 (12. Bxe4 Nxe4 13. Qc2 d5 {gains the advantage after} 14. cxd5 Nf6 15. Nc6 Qd7 16. Nb4 Bb7) 12... Bxc4 {with the advantage. White should not castle and avoid} 13. Bxe4 Nxe4 14. Qxe4 Bd5) 11... Rc8 12. b4 Bb7 13. f3 {Castling was better.} Na6 {It looks like this N has no future on a6, but as luck would have it, it's sson to play an important role/} 14. Qd3 d5 15. cxd5 Nxd5 16. Bb2 Qe7 17. Qd4 {Not bad, but the obvious mate on g7 is easily met. Instead of exposing his Q 17.Rc1 would have been safer.} f6 {Equally good would have been 17...Nf6, but Troianescu likes his N on d5. Now with the routine 18.Rc1 that position remains equal...and boring!} 18. b5 {A tactical mistake that results in the sudden collapse of his position...black takes advantage of the Q's exposed position.} e5 19. Qf2 {Where else?} (19. Qe4 Nf4 20. Qf5 Nxg2+) (19. Qa4 Nc5 20. Qc4 Kh8 21. Bh3 f5 22. Qh4 g5 {White has no reasonable continuation.}) 19... Nc5 20. O-O {The K has reached safety, but black has a couple of quick blows that end the game.} Na4 21. Rfb1 Rc2 22. Bc1 Ndc3 23. Rb4 Qd6 24. Qe3 Nd5 25. Qb3 Qc5+ {White had to resign because he is going to lose a piece.} (25... Qc5+ 26. e3 Rxc1+ 27. Rxc1 Qxc1+ 28. Nf1 Nc5 {Black is a piece up.}) 0-1

Averbakh’s 1950 Brilliancy

 

    When Soviet Grand master Yuri Averbakhpassed away in Moscow on May 7, 2022 at the age of 100 the chess world lost a rare, if underappreciated gem. Chess metrics estimates his highest ever rating to have been 2715 in 1952, placing him at #8 in the world (Smyslov was #1 at 2783). Douglas Griffin has written an excellent biography on Averbakh HERE. 

    The year 1950 saw a lot of brilliant games played. For example, the inaugural Candidates Tournament that was played in Budapest was made up up of a group (Bronstein, Boleslavsjy, Smyslov, Keres, Najdorf, Kotov, Stahlberg, Szabo, Flohr and Lilientahl) of the best players in the world, so you know they played some brilliant games. 

    Today’s game was played in the 1950 USSR Championship and you just know that group must also have played some great games and Yuri Averbakh's victory over Alexey Suetin was one of them. The game is notable for its brilliant concluding sequence where Averbakh’s pieces overwhelm his opponent. 

Averbakh was born in Kaluga, a city in western Russia. He was awarded the GM title in 1952. and played in the Zurich Candidates (1953). Averbakh won the USSR Championship in 1954 and tied for first first in the 1956 championship, but lost in the playoff. He published more than 100 endgame studies and was known as an opening and endgame theorist. In the late 1950s and early 1960s, he co-edited a five-volume anthology on the endgame, Shakhmatnye okonchaniya. In addition to authoring numerous chess books he also edited a couple of major Soviet chess magazines.

 

    Alexey Suetin (1926-2001, 74 years old) was awarded the GM the in 1965 and became World Senior Champion in 1996. His best tournament results were in the mid-1960's. He was also an author of note. 

 

[Event "USSR Championship, Moscow"] [Site ""] [Date "1950.11.13"] [Round "?"] [White "Yuri Averbakh"] [Black "Alexey Suetin"] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "B62"] [Annotator "Stockffish 17.1"] [PlyCount "65"] [EventDate "1950.??.??"] {B66: Sicilian: Richter-Rauzer: 7...a6 8 0-0-0 h6} 1. e4 c5 2. Ne2 Nc6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 d6 6. Bg5 e6 7. Qd2 a6 8. O-O-O h6 9. Bf4 Bd7 10. Bg3 Be7 11. Be2 b5 {So far all of these moves have been played many times and it's possible that Averbalh's move may have been a novelty at the time.} 12. Bxd6 { Excellent! White wins the d-Pawn and establishes control of the file.} (12. Nxc6 Bxc6 13. Bf3 b4 14. Ne2 Bxe4 15. Bxd6 Bxf3 16. gxf3 Bxd6 17. Qxd6 Qxd6 18. Rxd6 {Gioscio,M-Dimuro,M (2248) Mar del Plata 2009. Black is slightly better/}) 12... b4 {A well played counter.} (12... Bxd6 13. Nxc6 Bxc6 14. Qxd6 Qxd6 15. Rxd6 Rc8 16. f3 {and white has the advantage.}) 13. Nxc6 Bxc6 14. Bxe7 Qxe7 15. Qd6 Qb7 {It's advantageous to black to keep the Qs on otherwise his position would be too passive.} 16. Nd5 {[%mdl 128] This move sets a clever trap.} exd5 17. exd5 Bd7 {Suetin avoids the trap.} (17... Nxd5 {This loses outright.} 18. Rhe1 Ne7 19. Bxa6 {The B cannot be captured because of mate on either d8 or e7. } O-O 20. Bxb7 {and wins}) 18. Rhe1 {The Bxa6 idea is still a threat.} Kd8 { nother well played defensive move that gets the K off the e-file. Amazingly black's K is safe in the center.} 19. Bf3 {Threatens to win with Qe7+.} Re8 { ...meeting the threat of Qe7+} (19... a5 {A pass to demonstrate white's threat/ } 20. Qe7+ Kc8 21. d6 Qa6 22. Qxf7 Ra7 23. Qxg7 Re8 24. Qxf6 {White is four Ps up.}) 20. Qg3 g5 {[%mdl 8192] This saves the P, but loses the game...an unfortunate happening after such a fine defensive effort.} (20... Rxe1 { keeps black in the game after} 21. Rxe1 b3 22. Qxg7 {Black looks to be in serious trouble, but he has a surprising defense.} Ne8 23. Qxf7 Qb4 {and the tables have turned and it's white who who is on the defensive and must choose his moves carefully,} 24. Rxe8+ Bxe8 25. Qf6+ Kc7 26. Qg7+ Bd7 27. d6+ Qxd6 28. Bxa8 bxa2 29. b4 Qf4+ 30. Kb2 a1=Q+ 31. Kxa1 Qc1+ 32. Ka2 Qxc2+ 33. Ka3 Qd3+ 34. Kb2 Qd2+ {draw.}) 21. Qd6 {It's surprising that the Q's immediate return to where it just came from is even stroinger than taling the R.} (21. Rxe8+ Nxe8 22. d6 Bc6 23. Qe5 Bxf3 24. d7 Qxd7 25. Rxd7+ Kxd7 26. Qf5+ Kd6 27. Qxf3) 21... Ng8 {Averbakh wraps thingds up in a forceful manner.} 22. Rxe8+ Kxe8 23. Re1+ Kd8 24. Qf8+ Kc7 25. d6+ Kb6 26. Qxa8 Qxa8 27. Bxa8 {[%mdl 4096] The ending is a routine win for white.} Kc5 28. Bb7 a5 29. Re5+ Kb6 30. Bd5 Nf6 31. Bxf7 Ng4 32. Re7 Kc6 33. Be6 {Black resigned. Both players deserve credit for theor resourceful play. Black lost only because of his mistake at move 20.} 1-0

Role Reversal

    The game in the previous post was one in which Miguel Najdorf won using his then new variation and Fred Reinfeld was highly critical of white’s 10.f5 saying that the Pawns on light squares meant that white’s Bishop was bad as a result. Also, the move releases pressure on the center and so left open the possibility of a Pawn break with ...d5 by black. 

     Is the move really that bad? Just to be fair I wanted to look at a game that white won and found several in my database. I wanted the players to be GMs and found a couple games in which former World Champion Anatoly Karpov played 10.f5 and won. I also found the following game in which Najdoff was playing black again. 

    A casual look at some of the games seem to show some commonality. Unless black played badly, white’s wins were lengthy and they were not obtained by direct K-side attacks. Bronstein’s notes to this instructive game explain the real purpose of 10.f5

 

 

[Event "Candidates Tournament, Zurich"] [Site ""] [Date "1953.09.22"] [Round "13"] [White "Efim Geller"] [Black "Miguel Najdorf"] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "B92"] [Annotator "Bronstein/Stockfish"] [PlyCount "113"] [EventDate "1953.08.30"] [EventType "tourn"] [EventRounds "30"] [EventCountry "SUI"] [SourceTitle "Candidates"] [Source "ChessBase"] [SourceVersion "2"] [SourceQuality "1"] {B92: Sicilian Najdorf} 1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 a6 6. Be2 e5 7. Nb3 Be6 8. O-O Nbd7 9. f4 Qc7 10. f5 {Once again, engines find no fault with this move which was so harshly criticized by Reinfeld. One claim that he made was that this move leaves white with a bad B, but that argument is wrong for reasons explained by Bromdtein in the note to the next move.} Bc4 11. a4 {Bronstein gives this a "!" His explanation: Against this system, a frequently used one by Najdorf, Geller has prepared a plan to occupy the light squares in the center and on the (K-side). By (playing 10.f5) he has driven the B to c4, where it will shortly be traded off. Now he plays 11 a4 in order to restrict black's Q-side play.It should be added that 10.f5 forces the trafe of white's bad B for black's good B.} (11. Bd3 {Thus was played in the game featured in the previous post.} b5 12. Be3 Be7 13. Qe2 Rc8 14. Rac1 O-O 15. Nd2 d5 16. Bxc4 dxc4 17. a3 {Black is slightly bette. Antoniq Ric-Najdorf, Radio Match Spain vs. Argentina, 1948}) 11... Rc8 {11...d5 was worth considering.} 12. Be3 (12. Bxc4 Qb6+ 13. Kh1 Rxc4 14. Qe2) (12. a5 Be7 13. Bxc4 Qxc4 14. Ra4 {was soo drawn. Schmid,L-Evans,L Varna 1962}) 12... Be7 13. a5 h5 {Thus is not easpecially good, but as Bronstein observed, Najdorf wass one who was satisfied to play passively; he wanyed counterplay. So, seeing that his Q-se pieces have been hemmed in, he undertakes a K-side diversion against the possibility of white playing g4 and g5. Bronstein also noted that later Nafdorf castles into the wekened K-side, but managed to survive thanks to his tactical skill.} (13... d5 {For whatever reason this counter in the center was not mentioned by any annotators.} 14. Bxc4 d4 15. Bd3 dxc3 16. bxc3 Qxc3 { with complete equality.}) 14. Bxc4 $16 Qxc4 15. Ra4 Qc7 16. h3 h4 17. Rf2 { Najdorf's next move gets the OK from Stockfish.} b5 {Brinstein wrote: Najdorf confidently sacrifices P for a little initiative. His position after the 18th move would indeed have been promising, had Geller taken the a-Pawn; but Geller finds a steadier solution to the problem, as we shall see. Denying himself the material, he acquires a great positional advantage instead by a series of fine moves. And although Najdorf gave his 17.. b5 an exclamation mark, it is possible that 17..Qc6 was better.} (17... Qc6 {attacks the e-Pawn, but it is definitely not better than Nardorf's move!} 18. Nd2 Qc7 19. Qf3 b5 20. axb6 Nxb6 21. Rxa6 {White is better.}) 18. axb6 Nxb6 19. Bxb6 {Bronstein: This exchange is aimed at sub jugating the light squares, especially d5, since white removes one of the pieces which could defend that square. The next links of his plan will be to bring the R from f2 to a1, assail the a- Pawn with his heavy pieces, tie down black's Rs and Q to its defense, and finally to bring his N on b3 to e3, and then to d5. The first part of this plan takes until move 24, the second part from move 25 to move 27, and the third part is concluded with White's 31st move.} Qxb6 20. Qe2 Ra8 21. Kh2 O-O 22. Rf1 { [%mdl 2048]} Ra7 23. Rfa1 Rfa8 24. R1a2 {Geller is playing an orthodox game to a fault. Here, he protects the b-Pawn, in order to free his N on b3, although he could also have played 24.Qd3, followed by 25.Nd2, when the b-Pawn could not have been taken, in view of 26.Rbl. Now white enters the second part of his plan.} (24. Qd3 {does not work out s Bronstein suggested...} Rc7 25. Rxa6 Rxa6 26. Rxa6 Qf2 27. Ra8+ Kh7 28. Qf3 {is only equal afyer black exchanges Qs. } Qxc2 {This loses.} 29. Nd5 Rc8 30. Rxc8 Qxc8 31. Nxe7) 24... Bd8 {The fact that the equalizing advance ...d5 escpaed everynody's attention is because the followup is something that is beyond what a human can see,} (24... d5 25. exd5 e4 26. Nxe4 Rd8 27. Rxa6 Qb8+ 28. Kh1 Rxa6 29. Rxa6 Rxd5 {White is two connected passed Ps up, but both Stockfish and Dragon by Komodo evaluate the position at 0.00.}) 25. Na5 Rc8 26. Nc4 Qc6 27. Ne3 a5 28. Rc4 Qa6 29. b3 Bb6 $2 30. Rxc8+ Qxc8 31. Ned5 Nxd5 32. Nxd5 {The highlight of white's strategy: Geller now has what amounts to a won position.} Qc5 33. Ra1 {One must always br alert. ...Qg1# was threatened.} Qf2 34. Qxf2 {Keeping the Qs on might have been quicker, but Geller wanted to avoio complications and preferred to win the came in positional style.} Bxf2 {[%mdl 4096]} 35. Rf1 Bd4 36. c3 Bc5 37. g4 hxg3+ 38. Kxg3 Rb7 39. Rb1 f6 {Bronstein pointed out that this is a classic endgame, with in-structional value. The Ps are on squares of their own B's color, the N occupies a powerful position in the center and the light squares are accessible to the K. There remains only to create an outside passed P..} 40. Kf3 Kf7 41. Ke2 Rb8 42. b4 g6 43. Kd3 {Bronstein commented that Geller carries his avoidance of tatical play play to extremes and reommended 43.fxg3+ pointing out that it would win in a few moves.} (43. fxg6+ Kxg6 44. bxc5 Rxb1 45. c6 Rb8 (45... Rb5 46. Ne7+ Kf7 47. c7) 46. c7 Rc8 47. Ne7+) 43... gxf5 44. exf5 axb4 45. cxb4 Bd4 46. Rc1 Kg7 47. Rc7+ Kh6 48. Ke4 Kg5 49. Rh7 Bf2 50. Rg7+ Kh4 51. Kf3 Be1 52. Kg2 {Intending Rg4+ and mate.} Rf8 53. b5 Ba5 54. b6 Bxb6 55. Nxb6 Rb8 56. Rg4+ Kh5 57. Nd5 {Black resigned, An instructive game.} ( 57. Nd5 Rf8 58. Kg3 Kh6 59. Rg6+ Kh7 60. Nxf6+ Rxf6 61. Rxf6) 1-0

A Kotov Brilliancy

Alexander Kotov

    The 1952 chess year started with Svetozar Gligoric winning Hastings 1951/52. Mikhail Botvinnik and Mark Taimanov tied for the USSR championship and Botvinnik won the play-off match. Twenty-year old Larry Evans crushed veteran Herman Steiner 10-4 in a US Championship match. Evans also won the US Open that year. 

     In other chess news, Hungarian master Geza Fuster (1910-1990) defected and sought asylum and eventually immigrated to Canada. Samuel Reshevsky defeated Miguel Najdorf 11-7 in a match that was billed as being for the Championship of the Free World. Svetozar Gligoric took first on tiebreak over Oscar Pomar in the Hollywood International. 

    The USSR team (Keres, Smyslov, Bronstein, Geller, Boleslavsky, and Kotov) won the Helsinki Olympiad. The US team (Reshevskym Evans, R. Byrne, Bisguier. Koltanowski and Berliner) finished fifth. 

    The following players were lost that year: Robert F, Combe (born 1912), former British champion, died in Aberdeen, Scotland. French problem composer Henri Rinck (born1870) died in Barcelona. Talented Czecg IM Jan Foltys died at the age of 43. Efim Bogoljubov died at the age of 63 in Triberg, Germany. British player William Napier (born in 1881) died in Washington DC at the age of 71. British chess author Philip W. Sergeant (born 1872) died in England at the age of 80. 

    In the following game played in the 1952 Stockholm Interzonal. Alexander Kotov’s victory over Gedeon Barcza, an eight time Hungarian champion, is remembered for his attacking play, particularly his Knight sacrifice on f5. His win was the culmination of his strong opening play against Barcza’s less than optimal handling of that phase of the game.

 

    This event was the highlight of Kotov’s career; he finished first with a dominant score of 16.5-3.5. He finished a full three points ahead of Taimanov and Petrosian. In the 1953 Candidates Tournament in Zurich, he was dar less successful posting a 14-14 score and tying with Taimanov for 8th place (out of 15). 

 

[Event "Stockholm Interzonal"] [Site ""] [Date "1952.10.16"] [Round "?"] [White "Alexander Kotov"] [Black "Gedeon Barcza"] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "E72"] [Annotator "Stockfish 17.1"] [PlyCount "61"] [EventDate "1952.09.15"] {E72: King's Indian Defense} 1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. Nc3 Bg7 4. e4 d6 5. g3 { Not often played, but it's a solid and flexible variation.} O-O 6. Bg2 e5 { Black has several good replies, but this is the most popular.} 7. Nge2 exd4 8. Nxd4 Nc6 9. Nc2 {White usually castles here, but the text and 9.Nxc6 are also good alternative.} (9. Nxc6 bxc6 10. O-O Nd7 {gives black good play on the long diagona; and he will play ...Ne5 after which he is prepared to begin operations on the Q-side.}) 9... Be6 {The plan Baecza is following does not offer him very active play. A more active plan is ...Nd7-c5 pressuring the e-Pawn followed by preparing the advance of his Q-side Ps.} 10. b3 Qd7 { Barcza,s rather simplistic plan to to exchange light squared Bs, but it's not a very effective one because his chances are on the Q-side.} 11. O-O Bh3 12. f3 Bxg2 13. Kxg2 a6 {Barczas move intemds to commence play on the Q-side.} (13... Nh5 {This K-side demonstration as played by Yudovich against Botvinnik is solid and ended in a draw.} 14. Bb2 f5 15. exf5 Qxf5 16. Ne3 Qf7 17. Qd5 Rae8 18. Rae1 Nf6 19. Qd2 a6 20. f4 Ne7 21. Rf2 Nf5 22. Rfe2 Nxe3+ 23. Rxe3 Rxe3 24. Rxe3 Re8 {½-½ Botvinnik,M-Yudovich,M Leningrad 1939}) 14. Bb2 Na7 {This prepares the immediate advance ...b5, but it leaves the N artificially placed. There were better alternatives. 14...Rab8 preparing ...b5 and the 14...Nh5 idea is still feasible.} 15. Qd2 $16 b5 16. Ne3 c6 17. Rad1 Rad8 {Black has not played the opening very actively (14...Na7 being the culprit) the result has been a weakening of his position: the N is misplaced and his d-Pawn is weak. Kotov now carries out an instructive maneuver culminating in a briilliant tactic in which his B makes itself felt.} 18. Ne2 {[%mdl 32] A powerful move! The idea is to maneuver the N to f5, but there is also a very strong positional threat, namely Qa5 attacking the a-Pawn and Barcza's next move meets that threat. but not very well!} Qc7 (18... bxc4 {was the best try, but afterter} 19. bxc4 c5 {Prevents a potential c5 by white plus it makes room to get the N back into play.} 20. g4 Nc6 21. h4 {white has a strong attack in progress.}) 19. Bc3 Qe7 {There is no better choice than to return, If 19...Rd7 white has more than one way to skin the cat: 20.Qb2, 20.g4 ar 20.h4, all good moves.} 20. Nd4 {Preparing the crusher. Black is now quite lost.} Ne8 {This seemingly parries the threat of 21.Ndf5} 21. Ndf5 {This brillaint tactic is based on the power of white's B and after the elimination of black's B there is another surprising point which will be seen on move 24.} gxf5 22. Nxf5 Qc7 23. Nxg7 Nxg7 24. Bf6 {This quiet move is the point of Kotov's tactical display...the defense by advancing his f-Pawn is prevented and white threatens Qg5 threatening mate.} Kh8 25. Qg5 Rg8 26. h4 Rde8 {Black's only hope is to eliminate white's B even if it costs the exchange, but even that is grasping at straws.} 27. h5 Re5 (27... Re6 28. h6 Rxf6 29. Qxf6 Nc8 30. c5 Qd7 31. Rh1 Qe7 32. hxg7+ Rxg7 33. Qxe7 Nxe7 34. cxd6 {wins}) 28. Bxe5 dxe5 29. Qf6 Nc8 30. h6 Ne7 31. Rd2 {Black resigned. A great game that was nearly perfectly played by Kotov.} 1-0

A Chess Hors d'oeuvre

    In 1947, the major chess activity in California included ia match between Reuben Fine and Herman Steiner who played six game at the homes of sponsors and the Hollywood Chess Group headquarters. Fine won 5-1.George Koltanowski, a chess journalist, moved to Santa Rosa and established the California Chess News magazine. That was the major news coming out of California that year. Today’s game, just an hors d'oeuvre, was played in the finals of the Capitol City Chess Club in Sacramento. 

 

 

[Event "Capitol City CCC, Sacramento"] [Site "?"] [Date "1947.04.??"] [Round "?"] [White "J.T. Marianos"] [Black "S.W. Applegate"] [Result "0-1"] [ECO "B01"] [Annotator "Stickfish 17.1"] [PlyCount "34"] [EventDate "1947.??.??"] {B01: Scandinavian Defense} 1. e4 d5 {One of the oldest defenses, it was deemed playable in the late 19th century and has been used by such players as Tarrasch, Spielmann, Tartakower and Alekhine.A regular user in the 1950s was Yugoslav IM Nikola Karaklajic and in the 1960s it ws used by Bronstein, women's world champion Nona Gaprindashvili, Larsen, Danish GM Curt Hansen, Australian GM Ian Rogers and even Viswanathan Anand. Magnus Carlsen has also given it a try.} 2. exd5 {This is the usual reply. Black has two main replies: 2...Qxd5 (Mieses–Kotrc Variation) and 2...Nf6 (Modern Vriation). The rare 2.. .c6 (Blackburne–Kloosterboer Gambit is thought to be (perhaps wrongly) unsound and is almost never seen.} Nf6 (2... c6 {Black does get some slight compensation for the P.} 3. dxc6 Nxc6 4. Nf3 e5 5. Nc3 Nf6 {White 's position is evaluated as slightly better.}) 3. c4 {This has been played frequently, but white would do better with 3.d4} c6 {It's odd, but while 2...c6 is evaluated as slightly better for white, jere it's the recommended move ny engines. Why? White's last move left him with a poor P-structure; the d-Pawn never moves.} 4. dxc6 Nxc6 {[%mdl 32]} 5. Nf3 e5 6. Nc3 Bc5 (6... e4 {At once was much better.} 7. Ng5 Bf5 {Black has an excellent position.}) 7. h3 (7. d3 O-O 8. Bg5 Qb6 9. Qd2 Nh5 10. Na4 Bb4 11. Nxb6 Bxd2+ 12. Kxd2 axb6 {Black is better and eventually won in Matschewsky,J (1235)-Plotkin,A (1060) Willingen 2005}) (7. Be2 O-O 8. d3 Bf5 9. O-O Nb4 10. Nxe5 Re8 11. Bf4 Qd4 12. a3 Nxd3 13. Nxd3 Bxd3 14. Qxd3 Qxf4 15. Qf3 Qd2 16. Rab1 b6 {½-½ Sieberg,R-Ueffing,H Dortmund 1987} ) 7... e4 (7... Qb6 {attacking f2 is not so effective. After} 8. Na4 Bxf2+ 9. Ke2 Nd4+ 10. Kxf2 Ne4+ 11. Ke1 Qg6 {an interesting position has been reached. It's tricky because white has only one move that keeps the chances equal!} 12. g4 (12. Nxd4 {is met by} Qg3+ 13. Ke2 exd4 14. Qe1 O-O {and white has to trade Qs allowing the fork.} 15. Kd1 {runs into} Nf2+ 16. Kc2 Bf5+ 17. d3 Bxd3+ 18. Kb3 Bxf1+ 19. Nc3 Bxc4+ 20. Kxc4 Rfe8 {which is just awful for white.}) 12... O-O 13. d3 {with equal chances.}) 8. Qe2 {[%mdl 8192] Thius plausible looking move loses.} (8. d4 {An absolute must! At keast now black's advantage is only a modest one.} Bb6 9. c5 exf3 10. cxb6 Qxb6 11. Qxf3 O-O {with sufficient compensation for the P.}) 8... O-O $19 9. Nh2 {Black is clearly winning.} Nb4 10. Qd1 Re8 {It's surprising how quickly white's position has collapsed after his 8th move.} 11. Be2 Nd3+ 12. Bxd3 exd3+ 13. Kf1 Qd4 14. Qf3 Bd7 {aiming for ...Bc6.} 15. Nb5 Bxb5 16. cxb5 Re2 17. Qxb7 Qxf2# 0-1

Same Story, Different Setting

    The international tournament that was held in Venice in 1948 ended up in forgotten event category. Chess Life of the day didn’t mention it and Chess Review had a blurb on it, but had some unflattering remarks about Najdorf and Euwe. 

    The magazine noted that after his tie for sixth place at the tough Saltsjobaden Interzonal Najdorf must have found winning the Venice tournament a breeze, adding that he celebrated the absence of Soviet opposition and that’s what resulted in a “handsome lead” over the opposition. The 20 player Saltsjobaden tournament was won by David Bronstein, who along with seven other players advanced to the 1950 Candidates Tournament. 

     The short article added that former World Champion Max Euwe was unable to shake off a poor start. His two losses (against Canal and Castaldi) combined with difficulty in defeating the tailenders resulted in him being “just another chessplayer.” 

    Venice consisted of twelve players, six Italians, two South Americans and four from Europe, including former World Champion Euwe. Not only did Venice have competition form the goings on at Saltsjobaden, but it was just one of many tournaments that year that fell under the shadow of the 1948 World Championship tournament held to determine the new Champion following the death of Alekhine in 1946. This tournament (won by Botvinnik ahead of Smyslov, Jeresm Reshevsky and Euwe) marked a significant shift in the international chess scene as the FIDE took control of the world championship title and the cycle of tournaments leading up to it. 

    The winner of this game, Giuseppe Primavera (1917-1998) was Italian Chess Champion in1948, 1953, 1954 and1970. He was one of the founders of the organization Association of Chess Masters of Italy and in 1973-1974, he published the chess magazine Tutto Schacchi. IM Henri Grob (1904-1974) was Swiss champion in 1939 and 1951 who is best known for popularizing the Grob Attack (1.g4). 

 

 

    Their brief encounter at Venice has the same plot as the game between Koenig and Weinberger in the previous post. In this game Primavera erred in the opening and Castaldi got an overwhelming attack, b

[Event "Venice"] [Site "Venice ITA"] [Date "1948.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Giuseppe Primavera"] [Black "Henri Grob"] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "D45"] [Annotator "Stockfish 17"] [PlyCount "51"] [EventDate "1948.10.03"] {D46: Semi-Slav Defense} 1. d4 Nf6 2. Nf3 d5 3. c4 c6 {Black is threatening to capture on c4 and hold it with ...b7–b5. White can avoid this in a number of different way, but at the dame time doing so is not really necessary. Either way some very sharp positions can arise/} 4. Nc3 e6 (4... dxc4 {is the thematic move, but it's super sharp.} 5. e4 b5 6. e5 Nd5 7. a4 e6 8. axb5 Nxc3 9. bxc3 cxb5 10. Ng5 Bb7 11. Qh5 g6 12. Qg4 Be7 {favors black.}) 5. e3 Bb4 6. Bd2 O-O 7. Bd3 Nbd7 8. O-O Qe7 9. Re1 dxc4 10. Bxc4 e5 11. e4 exd4 12. Nxd4 { Up to here the moves have all been seen many times. White can try the text or 12.Ne2, but the aggressive 12.e5 is no doubt best. The text is faulty, but both players missed its refutation.} Ne5 {While not as good as 12...Qc5 after this black still has an advantage.} (12... Qc5 {attacking two pieces results in a sizable advantage for black after} 13. e5 Nxe5 14. Nb3 Qxc4 15. Rxe5 Rd8) 13. Bb3 {Primavera's faulty opening play has left his opponent with a clearly better position. Grob's next move plunging his N into the guts of white's position is by no means bad, but there was an even better one.} (13. Nf5 { is a btter alternative. After} Bxf5 14. exf5 Bc5 15. Be2 {To stop ...N6g4} Rfd8 {Black has an active position.}) 13... Nd3 (13... Bc5 {is a tough move to meet. After 15 minutes this is Stockfish's top line...} 14. Nf5 Bxf5 15. exf5 Nfg4 16. Rxe5 Nxe5 17. f6 gxf6 18. Ne4 Rad8 19. Qh5 Nd3 20. Qg4+ Kh8 21. Nxc5 Qxc5 22. Qf3 Qxf2+ 23. Qxf2 Nxf2 {with a clear advantage.}) 14. Re3 {Primavera has underestimated the strength of the attack on his g2 or else he would have reinforced it with 14.Re1} Nxf2 {[%mdl 512]} 15. Kxf2 Ng4+ 16. Kf1 Rd8 { A major slip that should have cost most of his advantage.} ({is also a path to nowhere.} 16... Qh4 17. Qe1 Nxe3+ 18. Bxe3 Qxh2 19. Nf3 {and white has equalized.}) (16... Bc5 {leaves white in dore straits.} 17. Nce2 Qh4 {Now this is really good.} 18. Rg3 Nxh2+ 19. Kg1 Bxd4+ 20. Nxd4 {and black is winning.} Qxg3) 17. Rf3 {[%mdl 8192]} (17. h3 {keeps white in the game after} Nxe3+ 18. Bxe3 Bc5 19. Nce2 Bxd4 20. Nxd4 c5 21. Qc1 cxd4 22. Bg5 Qd7 23. Bxd8 Qxd8 { Black is better, but that's not to say white is going to lose.}) 17... Nxh2+ 18. Kg1 {Black now plays what was the winning move in previous variations, but now it's not...it's a gross blunder that loses!} Bc5 {[%mdl 8192] Grob has overlooked his opponent's reply.} (18... Nxf3+ {wins...} 19. Nxf3 Bc5+ 20. Kf1 Bg4 21. Qe1 Bxf3 22. gxf3 Qd7 23. Be3 Bxe3 24. Qxe3 Qh3+ 25. Kf2 Qh2+ 26. Kf1 Rd2 27. Nd1 Qh1+ 28. Qg1 Qxf3+ 29. Nf2 Qe2+ 30. Kg2 Qxe4+ 31. Kh3 Qf3+ 32. Qg3 Rxf2) 19. Rxf7 {Stunning! Amazing! Startling! Shocking!} Bxd4+ (19... Qxf7 20. Bxf7+ Kxf7 21. Qh5+ Kg8 22. Qxc5) 20. Kh1 (20. Kxh2 Qh4#) 20... Qe5 {A casual glance may give the impression that black still has an attack, but all he can do is play on a bit on inertia.} (20... Qxf7 21. Bxf7+ Kxf7 22. Kxh2 Be6 23. Qh5+ {White is winning.}) 21. Rf5+ Kh8 22. Rxe5 Bxe5 23. Qh5 Ng4 24. Bg5 Nf2+ 25. Kg1 Bg4 26. Qh4 {Black resigned} (26. Qh4 Rf8 27. Be3 {Black loses more material.} Rf6 28. Bxf2 h5 29. Bd1 Rh6 30. Bxg4 hxg4 31. Qxg4 Rf8 32. Rd1 Bf6 33. Bc5 Rg8 {White wins at will.}) 1-0

ut misplayed it and lost.