Buddy Engine Mumbo Jumbo

    During the last couple of months I have spent some time getting acquainted with Widows 11 on the new laptop and tinkering with the ChessBase programs. Fritz 20 has a unique feature I finally got around to looking at...the Buddy Engine. 

    In the past, running a second engine, the Kibbitzer, was available if you wanted a second opinion. Personally, I never saw a need for this because Stockfish is so strong that there isn’t really anything a second engine can add. It’s sort of like Magnus Carlsen asking for my opinion. 

    The Buddy Engine is reported to be a helpful analysis tool. It runs along side the main engine as a secondary “lightweight” engine to “decode complex variations and annotate lines into plain conclusions.”  i.e. deep complicated variations are spelled out as clear, understandable ideas.

    The Buddy Engine only uses one CPU. For example, when analyzing with 4 CPUs when you turn on the Buddy Engine the main engine drops to 3 CPUs. After watching THIS video I guess I don’t understand precisely what the Buddy Engione is telling me and I don't see its practical value. 

    Here is an example from a correspondence game I played over 60 years ago. 

 

 

     In this position my opponent (black) is to play his 17th move.  Running on 4 cores Stockfish 18’s top choice is 17...d5 after which white’s advantage is about half a Pawn. The second option is 17...gxh6 which is evaluated at 7/10 of a Pawn in white’s favor. This looks simple enough, but here is the Buddy Engine’s analysis: 

 

 

 

 

 

Perhaps I am missing something, but honestly I don’t see anything to be gained with the Buddy Engine especially considering that it is running on only one core while the main engie is running on three.  I am a huge fan of ChessBse products, but this looks like nothing more than sales hype.

Tudev Ujtumen At His Best

    America's Golden Boy, Bobby Fischer's decisive win in the Interzonal at Palma de Mallorca Interzonal in 1970 wasn't a big surprise, but the way he won it was incredible; he won by a 3.5 point margin ahead of Robert Huebner, Bent Larsen and Yefim Geller. 

    At the end of round 16 with seven rounds to go, Fischer's score stood at 11.5. Trailing him were Geller and Uhlmann (10.5), Taimanov (10.0), Huebner, Larsen, Gligoric and Portisch (9.5). In the remaining rounds Geller could make no progress while Huebner and Larsen surged to tie him for second place. Fischer? He won seven games in a row. 

    One of the more famous incidents was when Argentina's Oscar Panno refused to play Fischer in the last round, in the last round. With the top six qualifying for the Candidates and a seventh spot available for a reserve. Any of the players with 12.5 had a theoretical chance of qualifying for the reserve spot. That was important because you could never be sure if Fischer was going to participant in the next event. 

    Panno was scheduled to play black against Fischer in the last round. The organizers had scheduled the last round to begin on Saturday at 4:0 PM. But Reshevsky and Fischer couldn't play due to their Sabbath observances so their games were scheduled to start after sundown at 7:00 PM. (Reshevsky was an Orthodox Jew and Fischer was at the time a member of the Worldwide Church of God,)

    Panno protested that all games should start at the same time so nobody would have an unfair advantage. Reshevsky's opponent, Duncan Suttles, had no problem with the arrangement and the two played a 23-move draw. Fischer showed up at 7:00 PM. But Panno was nowhere to be found. Fischer played 1.c4 and not wanting to accept a forfeit, went to Panno's hotel room and tried to talk him into playing, but Panno refused. 

    According to Larry Evans, Panno arrived after the hour was up and he had been forfeited, wrote “Resigns” on his score sheet and left. I am not sure it this is actually what happened; Evans was known to be a little “loose” with his stories. Why would Panno bother to show up after he had been forfeited? Why write “Resigns” on his score sheet? He did not resign, he lost on forfeit. Panno's chance at qualifying were theoretical; he would have had o beat Fischer with the black pieces and the other games would all have to work out in his favor, but who knows what would have happen if he had played? 

    As it was, there was a playoff match between Portisch and Smyslov for the reserve spot was played in Portoroz in 1971. The match was drawn, and Portisch was awarded the spot due to better tiebreaks from the tournament. After this tournament Fischer went on to win the World Championship. 

 

 

    Ujtumen began Palma 1970 with three straight wins and was all alone in first place. Of course that wasn't going to last, but he DID draw Fischer. He ultimately tied for 20th place with a score of 8.5. 

    Tudev Ujtumen was born in Altaj, Mongolia August 27, 1939 and died at the age of 53 in 1993. He became Mongolia's first IM in 1965. In 1969, he won the West Asian zonal tournament in Singapore. In other international tournaments, he took 15th at Sochi 1964, 15th at Sochi 1965, 9th at Havana 1967, tied for 11-13th at Tbilisi 1971 and 9th at Dubna 1973. 

    Ujtumen was a three-time winner of the Mongolian Chess Championship, in 1972, 1978 and 1986. He played six times for Mongolia in Chess Olympiads (1964–1974). He won the individual gold medal on second board (+11 −1 =5) at Tel Aviv 1964 and silver on second board (+12 −3 =3) at Siegen 1970. 

     According to Chessmetrics. Ujtumen's highest rating was achieved in January 1971 at 2565 which placed him 117th in the world. His normal rating was in the low to mid 2400s. Here is his nice third round win over IM Renato Natanja (born 1940) who was Philippine Champi on in 1965. He also played on the Philippine Olympiad teams of 1960, 1964, 1966, 1968, 1970 and 1974. 

 

[Event "Palma de Mallorca Interzonal"] [Site ""] [Date "1970.11.11"] [Round "?"] [White "Tudev Ujtumen"] [Black "Renato Naranja"] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "B06"] [Annotator "Stockfish 18"] [PlyCount "59"] [EventDate "1970.11.09"] {B06: Modern Defense} 1. e4 g6 2. d4 Bg7 3. c3 d6 4. Be3 b6 {Black usually plays 4.Nf6 after which both sides have a plethora op options.} 5. f3 {This off looking, but not bad, move is often played against 4...Nf6.} c5 6. Bc4 (6. dxc5 {is better/ Black has no really satisfactory reply.} dxc5 (6... bxc5 7. Qd5) 7. Bb5+ Nd7 8. Qd5 Rb8 9. Bf4 {winning the exchange.}) 6... e6 {Eliminating the possibility of Qd5} 7. Ne2 Ne7 8. Na3 a6 9. Qd2 O-O 10. Bd3 (10. Bh6 {athis routine move eliminating the dark squared B does not accomplish much. After} d5 11. Bb3 dxe4 12. fxe4 Bb7 13. Bxg7 Kxg7 14. h4 h6 {Black's defense of his K is adequate, so white must turn his attention to the center with} 15. d5 Nd7 (15... exd5 16. exd5 Nf5 17. O-O-O Re8 18. Rdf1 {White is more active, but black's defense should prove adequate.}) 16. Nc4 Nf6 {A dynamic position that offers equal chances.}) 10... Nbc6 11. Rd1 cxd4 12. cxd4 b5 13. Nc2 Bb7 14. O-O Qd7 15. Bh6 Rac8 16. h4 {Over the past few moves white has managed to reach a position that has some real attacking potential.} Nd8 {Black has no time for such slow maneuvering...he must undertake strong countermeasures.} (16... Bxh6 17. Qxh6 Kh8 18. h5 Ng8 19. Qd2 Nf6 20. hxg6 fxg6 21. Ne3 e5) 17. h5 f6 18. hxg6 hxg6 $16 19. Bxg7 Kxg7 20. Ne3 Rh8 {Black has managed to reduce white's advantage to a minimum, but with all of black's pieces sitting on the back two ranks it's clear that danger is lurking.} 21. Ng4 e5 22. Bc2 Qc7 23. Bb3 Qb6 24. Rf2 Rc6 $2 {This runs into serious difficulties. His best option was to try a conter against the center.} (24... Ndc6 {]} 25. Qe3 f5 26. dxe5 Qxe3 27. Nxe3 dxe5 28. exf5 Rcd8 (28... gxf5 29. Rd7 {wins}) 29. fxg6 Rxd1+ 30. Bxd1 Nxg6 31. Ng3 Rd8 {with a fighting chance at survival.}) 25. f4 {[%mdl 32] Black's K is about to get gutted.} exd4 26. Nxd4 Rc5 27. e5 dxe5 28. fxe5 Nec6 29. exf6+ Kf8 30. Ne6+ {Black resigned. stockfish's evaluation of Ujtumen's play...very precise. Actually, Naranja's play was not horrible...(0.60).} (30. Ne6+ Nxe6 31. Qd6+ {is mate in 2}) 1-0

Wallis Whips Thomas

  

Wallis in 1958

 The Southsea 1949, tournament (the Stevenson Memorial and SCCU Championship) took place from April 13 to 23, 1949, at the Milton Training College in Southsea, England, with Savielly Tartakower winning the premier event. 

    Today’s game was playe don that event. The winner was Philip Norman Wallis (1910-1973), who appears to have been an accountant by profession and published a few books on economic management. During his lifetime he lived all over England ans was a frequent competitor in local events. 

    He is credited as being the first to develop the English Defense (1.d4 e6 2.c4 b6) which was played by several strong English players in the 1970s, including Tony Miles, and even Viktor Korchnoi gave it a try. 

 

 

 

 

[Event "Southsea"] [Site ""] [Date "1949.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "P.N. Wallis"] [Black "Sir George Thomas"] [Result "1-0"] [WhiteElo "2440"] [BlackElo "2470"] [Annotator "Stockfish 18"] [PlyCount "53"] [EventDate "2026.08.14"] {D02: QP Opening} 1. Nf3 d5 2. g3 Nf6 3. Bg2 Nbd7 4. d4 Ne4 (4... b5 {An ih.nteresting approach.} 5. O-O e6 6. b3 Bb7 7. Nbd2 b4 8. Bb2 c5 {with equality. Aguero Jimenez,L (2420)-Luther,T (2525) Havana CUB 2010}) 5. O-O e6 6. Nbd2 (6. c4 dxc4 7. Qc2 Nd6 8. Ne5 Nb6 9. Nd2 Be7 {White is a bit better, Lutz,A (2153)-Pohle,D (2206) Meran 2009}) 6... Nxd2 7. Nxd2 f5 {Thomas is going to set up a Stonewall formation. In spite of its sollid looking appearance when played either as white or black it never seems to wotk out well because its just to limiting.} 8. c4 {White is better.} c6 9. cxd5 exd5 {Capturing with the other P was no better.} 10. e4 $6 {A volatile move; instead of playing ir safe with 10.Nf3 Wallis attacks black's center in an attempt to tale advantage of his K in the center.} dxe4 11. f3 $1 {Black shpuld now stymie white's idea with 11...e3 and 12...f4} Nf6 (11... exf3 {is a bit too risky.} 12. Nxf3 Be7 13. Qb3 {Black can't castle and he has development problems. Even so, white's attacking chances are minimal.}) 12. fxe4 {[%mdl 32]} Qxd4+ 13. Kh1 Ng4 $2 {[%mdl 8192] Instead of this premature attack black needed to get castled with ...Be7 and ...O-O.} 14. exf5 $1 Nf2+ {Clearly white must now sacrifice the exchange, but how does he follow it up?} 15. Rxf2 $1 Qxf2 16. Qh5+ {Evidently Thomas underestimated the strength of this riposte which leaves him totally at white's mercy.} g6 (16... Kd8 {isn't a bit better.} 17. Nf3 Bd7 18. Bf4 Qc2 (18... Qxb2 19. Rd1 {is clearly fatal for black.}) 19. Qg5+ Kc8 20. f6 Qf5 (20... gxf6 21. Qxf6 Rg8 22. Qe5 {and wins}) 21. fxg7 {wins}) 17. fxg6 Bg7 18. gxh7+ Qf7 {Thomas may have been counting on this, but white has a strong continuation.} 19. Qe2+ $1 Be6 20. Ne4 {[%mdl 32] The N joins the attack.} ({Not} 20. Bh3 {and black weasels oyt of the pin!} Kd7 21. Qd3+ Kc7 {The K has reached safety and the material is equal and so the chances are abput equal/}) 20... O-O-O 21. Ng5 Qf5 22. Nxe6 Rhe8 {White has a number of good moves available!} 23. Bf4 (23. Qf1 Qxf1+ 24. Bxf1 Rxe6 25. Bh3 Kd7 26. Bg5 Rde8 27. Rd1+) (23. Bh6 Bxh6 24. Nxd8 Rxe2 25. h8=Q) 23... Rxe6 24. Qf1 {While technically not nearly as good as 24...Qxh7 this sets a trap into which Wallis falls and it costs him almost all of his advantage!} Bxb2 (24... Qxh7 {Makes things much more difficult for white and therefore was by far the best practical chance.} 25. h4 Bxb2 26. Bh3 Qe4+ 27. Qg2 Qxg2+ 28. Kxg2 Bxa1 29. Bxe6+ Rd7 30. Be3 (30. Bxd7+ Kxd7 {and white cannot win.}) 30... b6 31. Kf3 {In order to win white must activate his K.} c5 32. Ke4 Kd8 33. Bxd7 Kxd7 34. g4 {with his K centralized white can now win the ending.}) 25. Rb1 $2 (25. Bh3 {keeps a winning advantage.} Qd5+ 26. Qg2 Bxa1 27. Qxd5 Rxd5 28. Bxe6+ Rd7 29. h4 Kd8 30. Bxd7 Kxd7 31. g4 {with a won ending.}) 25... Qc2 {[%mdl 8192] Evidently Thomas was not aware that his last move was a trap!} (25... Bf6 26. h4 Qxh7 27. Bh3 Qe4+ 28. Kh2 Rd7 29. Bxe6 Qxe6 {Material is equal and with careful play blackl should be able to stop the advance of white's Ps. here is a sample line...} 30. Qf2 Rd5 31. Re1 Qd7 32. a4 b5 33. axb5 Rxb5 34. Re2 Kb7 35. Qe3 a5 {with a likely draw.}) 26. Re1 Bc3 27. Bh3 {Black resigned.} (27. Bh3 Rd7 (27... Bxe1 28. Bxe6+ Rd7 29. h8=Q#) 28. Rxe6 Kd8 29. Qe1 {mates shortly/}) 1-0

Sparkling With Life

    ...that’s how Tartakower described the following game played in the 1925 USSR Championship. The winner was Pyotr Romanovsky (1892-1964, 71 years old). He was born in St. Petersburg and passed away in Moscow. He was awarded the IM title at its inception in 1950 and was made an Inte rnational Arbiter in 1951. In 1934, Romanovsky became the first Soviet player to be awarded the title of Honored Master of Sport. 

     He was USSR C and hampion in 1923 and 1927 as well as Leningrad Champion in 192 5. Both of his brothers, Yevgeny and Alexander, were players of some note.

    His opponent was Ilya Rabinovich (1891-1942, 50 years old) who was also born in St. Petersburg. He was joint USSR Champion in 1934 and Leningrad Champion in 1920, 1925 (joint), 1928 and 1940-41. He played in nine USSR Championships during the period 1920-1939, sharing the title with Grigory Levenfish in 1934/5.Primarily a positional player, in 1927, he published the first original book in Russian on the endgame. 

    He starved to death during the siege of Leningrad in 1942. Starving to death is a slow, painful process where the body consumes its own tissues for fuel. It begins with intense physical hunger and stomach pain, transitions into severe fatigue, cold, and mental fog as fat reserves vanish, and ends with the body breaking down its own muscles and vital organs. He was one of approximately 650,000 peoplewho died from starvation, freezing cold weather, disease, and artillery attacks. 

 

[Event "Leningrad"] [Site "] [Date "1925.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Pyotr Romanovsky"] [Black "Ilya Rabinovich"] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "C16"] [Annotator "Stockfish 18"] [PlyCount "51"] [EventDate "1925.??.??"] {C16: French Defense, Winawer Variation} 1. e4 {[%mdl 32]} e6 2. d4 {[%mdl 32]} d5 3. Nc3 Bb4 4. e5 f6 $2 {Theory on the Winawer was sparse at the time and this is a poor move. Better was the usual 4...c5 with a complex game to follow.} 5. Nf3 (5. a3 Bf8 {Very odd.} 6. Bd3 Qd7 {Even odder. 6...b6 looks natural.} 7. Nf3 Nc6 8. O-O fxe5 9. Bb5 Bd6 10. Bxc6 bxc6 11. Nxe5 Bxe5 12. Qh5+ {1-0 (37)}) 5... c5 6. Bb5+ {Usual is 6.a3 when black can play either 6...Bxc3+ or 6...Ba5} Kf8 $2 {Black has completely misplayed the opening! This leaves his K fatally weak. Simply 6...Bd7 was correct.} (6... Bd7 {is a better defense.} 7. O-O Bxc3 8. Bxd7+ Qxd7 9. bxc3 Nc6 {White is better, but not winning.}) 7. dxc5 Qa5 {Putting pressure on the pinned N, but white can ignore it.} 8. Be2 fxe5 (8... Bxc3+ {Triples white's Ps, but it does not work put well after} 9. bxc3 Qxc3+ 10. Bd2 Qxc5 11. O-O Nc6 {Black's position may look OK, but white's big lead in development, two Bs and open lines should prove to be a winning advantage.}) 9. O-O Nc6 {Black has an imposing looking center, but Romanovsky now unleashes an impressive tactical display.} 10. Nxd5 $1 {[%mdl 512]} exd5 {Black's position looks very good. He has a N for a P and what appears to be a formidable P center. However, watch how his position quickly crumbles.} 11. c3 $1 Bxc5 {Hoping for ...Bd6.} 12. b4 Nxb4 13. cxb4 Bxb4 {Black is up two Ps and in exchange white has a won position!} 14. Rb1 Bf5 15. Rxb4 {[%mdl 512]} Qxb4 16. Qxd5 Ne7 (16... Qe4 {Offering a Q trade doesn't work.} 17. Qd6+ Ne7 18. Bg5 {wims}) 17. Qxe5 {Black's center has vanished!} Qe4 18. Qb2 {What a move!} Rc8 {Black has a dangerous looking threat in ...Rc2, but it doesn't amount to anything.} 19. Bh6 Rg8 20. Qf6+ Ke8 21. Bb5+ Rc6 (21... Nc6 22. Bxg7 Qd5 23. Re1+ Be4 24. Ng5 {is equally hopeless for black.}) 22. Bxg7 Bd7 23. Bxc6 Qxc6 24. Re1 Qc5 25. Bh6 Kd8 26. Bf8 {Black resigned. It's no wonder Tartakower called this a sparkling game.} 1-0

A Couple Annoying Fritz 19 Problems Solved

    The Fritz program is now up to version 21, but for those like myself who are running older versions (for me, Fritz 17 and 19) version 19 has some annoying bugs. Common complaints are opening book issues (I use my own book, not the program’s, so I have not experienced any issues) and engine errors resulting in crashes during Tactical Analysis. 

    After getting a new laptop I opted not to use Fritz 20 because it is so bloated with features I never use that it takes up a lot of storage space. I like the appearance of Fritz 19 and it has some features that I do like, but a couple of nasty problems came up that have discouraged me from using it. Consequently, it has been back to Fritz 17. 

    It has taken some rather futile internet research and considerable experimentation, but I have found a solution for the problems, but they are cumbersome and annoying.

    Here is an odd bug I never saw before; it showed up after a Tactical Analysis.

    Obviously 1Rxd8 is some kind of error. Clicking on it resulted in this position:
 

 

    In my opinion, Fritz 19 is “over-engineered”. First, after doing a Tactical Analysis and saving the game the program sometimes changes the names of the players both in the header and the database! There are technical reasons for this that I don’t fully understand, but it seems to have something to do with Fritz’ attempt to standardize players’ names. It’s frustrating to save a game only to find out the program has changed the header and saved the game with white and black showing the same name. 

    The solution to this problem is to do a Save Game As, not just Save. This will save the game with the names unaltered. You will then need to delete the original game in the database. 

    Annoying problem #2 is that when doing a Tactical Analysis and the program inserts alternative opening lines (“Novelties”) from the database into the game. The problem is that the lines are often too long and you’ll want to truncate them by simply using the Delete Remaining Moves command. What you cannot do is edit the game information shown here in red. 

 

    The solution that enables you to edit that information is quite awkward, but here is how it’s done. 

 

1. Create a pgn database 

2. Perform a Tactical Analysis 

3. Save Game As 

4. Select Other 

5. Select pgn files and locate and select the pgn database 

6. Hit OK 

7. Close the game window and re-open it 

8. Select Open Database, Other, select pgn files and open the database 

9. Open the game you just saved 

 

    The red will have disappeared and can be edited. You can the save it to a cbh database if you want by using the Save Game As command. Note that this will result in you having a duplicate game and you must then delete the original. 

    All this is annoying and time consuming, but if you don’t have an older version of Fritz it’s the only way I have discovered of avoiding the two problems. If anyone knows of a better way please let me know!

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. 

King's Indian Four Pawns Attack

    The Four Pawns Attack against the King’s Indian is one of the most aggressive and sharpest variations white can play against the King's Indian Defense. He establishes a daunting four Pawn center hoping to completely restrict black's minor pieces, build an overwhelming space advantage and launch a direct, and blistering attack against black's King. 

    For black’s part, he is betting that white is overextended and he can undermine the center and exploit the resulting structural weaknesses and King exposure. 

    The winner of this game, Karel Opocensky (1893-1975) was Czech champions four times (1927, 1928, 1938 and 1944). When World War II broke out he was playing in the 8th Olympiad in Argentina and chose to return home and during the War he participated in many pf the Nazi sponsored tournaments After the war he played in several international and local Czech tournaments with varying results. He was awarded the IM title in 1950, and became an International Arbiter in 1951. 

     August Haida (1887–1940) was an Austrian-Czech layer active during the early 1900s. The 1925 tournament in Marienbad, Czechoslovakia was important because Nimzovich showcase his Hypermodern ideas. 

 

 

 

[Event "Marienbad"] [Site "Marienbad"] [Date "1925.??.??"] [Round "15"] [White "Karel Opocensky"] [Black "August Haida"] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "E76"] [Annotator "Atockfisg 18"] [PlyCount "55"] [EventDate "1925.??.??"] [EventType "tourn"] [EventRounds "15"] [EventCountry "CSR"] [Source "ChessBase"] [SourceVersion "2"] [SourceQuality "1"] {76: King's Indian: Four Pawns Attack} 1. d4 {[%eval 48,20] [%wdl 120,877,3] [%emt 0:00:02]} Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. Nc3 Bg7 4. e4 d6 5. f4 (5. Bg5 {This was GM Arthur Bisguier's favorite method of entering the Four Ps Attack.} O-O 6. f4 c5 7. d5) 5... Nc6 6. Nf3 {The next two moves are hard to understand, Black allows 7.e5! and white doesn't play it.} (6. e5) 6... O-O 7. Be2 {Most often played is 7.d5, but it's the wrong P push/} (7. e5 $1 dxe5 8. fxe5 {and neither e8 nor h5 is an especially good square for the N.}) 7... Nd7 {The logical followup to his last move was 7...e5!} (7... e5 {Both sides have several options and they are all of about equal worth. The optimal moves for both sides are.} 8. dxe5 (8. fxe5 dxe5 9. d5 {is not as effective as it was in the Alekhine-Yates game in the next note because there white's B on e3 prevents black's next move,} Nd4 {with equak chances.}) 8... dxe5 9. Qxd8 Rxd8 10. fxe5 Ng4 11. Nd5 {with about equal chances/}) 8. e5 {Finally someone has played e5!} (8. Be3 {is also good.} e5 9. fxe5 dxe5 10. d5 Ncb8 11. c5 a5 12. O-O {White has a decisive attack. Alekhine,A-Yates,F New York 1924}) 8... Ncb8 9. O-O {White's strategy is working well!} c5 10. exd6 {White is more active.} exd6 11. d5 {This gains space and prevents ...Nc6 and leaves black horribly cramped.} Re8 12. Bd3 (12. g4 {would appeal to a more aggressive player.} Nf6 13. h3 Na6 14. a3 Bd7 15. Kh2 Rb8 16. f5 {with the initiative, but black might be able to survive.}) 12... Nf8 {A horrible move that only worsens his already miserably cramped position.} (12... f5 {was his only chance.} 13. Qc2 Nf6 {followed by ...Na6 and black would then have real chances of holding his position,}) 13. Bd2 {White is hardly pressing his attack.} (13. f5 $1 {has better winning chances.} Nbd7 14. Bg5 Nf6 15. Qd2 {with excellent attacking chances.}) 13... Bg4 {Once again 13...f5 offered better chances of defending himse;f.} 14. h3 {[%mdl 32]} Bxf3 15. Qxf3 f5 {It's now too late to play this because white has the followup g4 available.} (15... Nbd7 16. g4 a6 17. Kh1 Qc7 {Black is runnng out of good moves. His best chance is now to play ,,,b5 and hope for the best.}) 16. g4 fxg4 17. hxg4 Nbd7 18. Kg2 a6 19. Rae1 Qf6 20. g5 Qf7 21. Ne4 {White is clearly winning, but how does he going land the knockout blow? He doesn;t have to because his opponent commits suicide.} Qe7 {This is a gross blunder.} (21... Rxe4 {This is a bit better than losing the Q; at least black can reach a lost endong} 22. Rxe4 Re8 23. Rxe8 Qxe8 24. Qe2 Qxe2+ 25. Bxe2 Kf7 26. b3) 22. Nf6+ {[%mdl 576]} Bxf6 {[%mdl 32]} 23. Rxe7 Bxe7 24. Bc3 {Opocensky finishes up efficiently.} Bd8 25. Qh3 Re7 26. Qh6 Rf7 27. Re1 Be7 {Now comes ta problem like finish.} 28. Re6 $1 {Black resigned, Not an especially brilliant game, but it shows how dangerous the Fout Pawns Attack can be.} (28. Re6 Bxg5 29. Qxg5 b5 30. f5 Ne5 31. Bxe5 dxe5 32. fxg6 Rg7 33. Re7 Nxg6 34. Rxg7+ Kxg7 35. d6 b4 36. d7 Kf7 37. Bxg6+ hxg6 38. d8=Q) 1-0

Stepping Back in Time

    In the early 800s a lot of chess stars, few of whom are familiar to modern players, arrived on the scene. Players in England like J. K. Sarratt, William Lewis and John Cochrane are not well known today. The one exception is probably Captain W. D. Evans who discovered his gambit in 1824, the same year in which the London vs. Edinburgh postal match was played, giving us the name Scotch Game.  Alexander MacDonnell and the great Howard Staun came to prominence a bit later.. 

    In France, the leading players were Alexander Deschapelles; Pierre de Saint-Amant (who captained the victorious French team in the 1831 postal match with London that gave us the French Defense) and Louis De La Bourdonnais. 

    Many other notable players also arose in Europe including Johann Allgaier, Paul Von Bilguer whose famous Handbuch was published in 1843, Ludwig Bledow who started the magazine Schachzeitung, Bernard Horwitz, Tassilo von der Lasa and Carl Mayet.Other noted masters of the period were Alexander Petrov, Lionel Kieseritzky, Carl Hamppe, Jozsef Szen and Johamm Lowenthal. 

    In 1843 Staunton established himself as the brst player in Europe by defeating Saint-Amant in a match. Staunton's Chessplayers Handbook, published in 1847, became the leading English book on the game. This book, along with the German Handbuch, established the names we now use for most openings. 

    The year 1851 stands out as the beginning of a new age because it was in the year that the first international tournament was held in London. Sixteen players took part in the main tournament, a knockut event. Adolph Anderssen of Berlin took first prize.

    The following is an early example that was played in Paris in 1821. Louis De Labourdonnais (1795-1840)was born on the island of Reunion in the Indian Ocean. He learned chess in 1814 and began to take the game seriously in 1818, regularly playing at the Cafe de la Regence in Paris. He was forced to earn his living as a professional chess player after squandering his fortune on ill-advised land deals. 

    John Cochrane (1798 -1878) was a Scottish lawyer. After a long Royal Navy tour of duty in India, he returned to the Cochran began studying law and became a very strong player and published a book on the game.While studying law, he became a very strong player and beat everyone except Howard Staunton, 

 

[Event "Paris"] [Site ""] [Date "1821.??.??"] [Round ""] [White "Louis De Labourdonnais"] [Black "John Cochrane"] [Result "0-1"] [ECO "C37"] [Annotator "HP"] [PlyCount "60"] [EventDate "1821.??.??"] [EventType "game"] [EventRounds "1"] [EventCountry "FRA"] {C37: King's Gambit Accepted} 1. e4 e5 2. f4 exf4 3. Nf3 g5 {[%mdl 32] This is now known as the Classical Variation. Black threatens ...g4, or else to consolidate with ...Bg7 and ...h6.} 4. Bc4 {Today the main continuation is 4.h4.} g4 {Now white usually plays the sharp Muzio Gambit by playing 5.O-O} 5. Ne5 {This, the Salvio Gambit, is considered better for black due to the insecurity of white's King.} Qh4+ {Besides this black has other choices. He cam play safely with 6...Nh6 (Silberschmidt Variation), or counter-sacrifice with 6...f3 (Cochrane Gambit) or 6...Nc6 (Viennese Variation).} 6. Kf1 f3 {The best move is 6...Nc6 although 6...Nf3 is the most popular. However, black's choice is hardly bad.} 7. g3 {This move already gives black a decisive advantage!} (7. Bxf7+ {would at least give white a fighting chance./} Ke7 8. Bb3 Nc6 9. d4 Nxe5 10. dxe5 {Black is beyter, but white is still in the game.}) 7... Qh3+ 8. Kf2 {This leads to a complete debacle.} (8. Ke1 Nc6 9. Bxf7+ Kd8 10. Nxc6+ bxc6 11. d3 {leaves him with a lost position, but it's still better that what he gets in the game.}) 8... Qg2+ 9. Ke3 Bh6+ 10. Kd3 d5 {Simpler was 10...Nc6} 11. Bxd5 Na6 (11... Nf6 {was much better.} 12. Bxf7+ Ke7 13. Bc4 Rd8+ 14. Kc3 Qf2 {and white is doomed.,,there is no answer to the threatened ...Qd4_}) 12. c3 c6 {Rather pointless. Developing another piece with 12...Nf6 was better.} 13. Bxf7+ Ke7 {This is the best place for the K.} 14. Bb3 Nc5+ 15. Kc2 Nxe4 16. Qf1 Bf5 17. Qxg2 {The game is over. The trade of Qs brings white no relief. Black's pieces swarm all over white's K/} Nf2+ $2 {This hiccup puts white back in the game} (17... fxg2 {leaves black very much better after} 18. Re1 Kf6 19. d3 Nf2 20. Na3 Rd8) 18. d3 fxg2 {[%mdl 128]} 19. Rg1 Rd8 {White now follows the logical course...he exchanges pieces and eliminates the g-Pawn, but the best defense was defending the d-Pawn,} 20. Bxh6 $2 (20. Bc4 $3 Kf6 21. Rxg2 Kxe5 22. Rxf2 b5 23. Na3 $3 bxc4 24. Nxc4+ Ke6 25. Bxh6 Nxh6 26. Re1+ {White has stopped the attack and gotten his pieces into play. Black is left with a small material advantahe of a B for two Ps/}) 20... Nxh6 21. Rxg2 Nxd3 22. Nxd3 Bxd3+ 23. Kc1 Rhf8 24. Nd2 {Prevents ...Rf1+.} Nf5 25. Bd1 Ne3 26. Rg1 Bf1 27. b3 (27. Rxf1 Rxf1 28. Nxf1 Rxd1#) 27... Rf2 28. Rxf1 Nxf1 29. Nxf1 Rxd1+ 30. Kxd1 Rxf1+ {White resigned.} 0-1

Other Engines Close, But Stockfish Still #1

    The Chess Engines Diary site has a recent interesting post giving the results of a 28-engine tournament. As expected, Stockfish was the winner, but only because of its results against the lower scoring engines; the higher standing engines held it to draws. 

    The CCLR rating results show that while several engines are close, none of them have proven superior to Stockfish. 

    It’s unfortunate the Swordfish engine was not included in the tournament. Swordfish is a Stockfish derivative that the developer says can be useful for analyzing sharp positions where Stockfish can overlook some tactics. As I reported back in May, in order to test Swordfish, I participated in a quad correspondence tournament that included one ICCF Master. 

    Where possible I played gambit openings to test its ability to find hidden tactics that Stockfish may have missed. Of course, the assumption was that my opponents were using Stockfish. Swordfish did not find any hidden resources and, in fact, in many cases its moves matched those of Stockfish. 

    A couple of years ago I also tested the highly rated Berserk engine in correspondence play because of its tactical ability and the possibility that it might find some hidden resources in gambit openings. It didn’t and by move 20 my opponent was starting to register a slight advantage of 1/4 to 1/3 of a Pawn and my feeling was that Berserk was starting to lose control, so it was time to switch to Stockfish. The game was drawn in 27 moves. 

    Even though the claim is made that some engines are better than Stockfish in some areas I have not found that to bet he case. That said, let me hasten to add that I am only a casual user and have not done extensive testing. My procedure has been to let the engine run 15 minutes to maybe 3 hours on 10 core. If the evaluation of more than one move was close then they were all examined. 

    The conclusion is that for correspondence play where engine use is permitted, Stockfish is still the absolute strongest.

A World Championship Match...Are You Kidding?!

    Aside from Bobby Fischer himself, nobody took his 1992 match with Boris Spassky seriously and it certainly was not for the World Championship, its billing notwithstanding. 

    One of the world’s top players at the time, Yasser Seirawan, was of the opinion that Fischer's playing strength was "somewhere in the top ten in the world.  Gary Kasparov stated that Fischer’s play was “OK” and probably in the 2600-2650 range and a match between him and Fischer wouldn’t be close. Spassky’s rating at the time was only 2560 which tied for 96th–102nd on the FIDE rating list. 

    The match was played from September to November, 1992 in Sveti Stefan and Belgrade, Yugoslavia and Fischer won 10–5 with 15 draws 

    After defeating Spassky for the World Championship in1972, Fischer was supposed to defend his title in 1975 against the winner of the 1974 Candidates Tournament, Anatoly Karpov. However, Fischer didn’t like the format and ended up forfeiting his title. 

    Personally, I thought he was afraid to play Karpov. The late National Master James R. Schroeder wrote, “Because he (Fischer) had achieved his one goal in life, he could not play any more serious chess because he might lose. It’s amazing that a person who was irrational to the point of being insane could be one of the best players of all time.“ I would not agree with the bombastic Schroeder when he also wrote, “Because of severe life-time mental illness it would have been best if Fischer had died after becoming world champion, as he had no other reason to live.”  Fischer died on January 17, 2008, at the age of 64.

    By the time of the first Karpov-Kasparov match in 1984, chess seemed to have advanced beyond Fischer. He insisted that the games were prearranged and fixed by the Soviets and that computers were used. Clearly he did not understand computers either because at that time chess computers were playing at the 2100-2200 level at best. 

    In the 1992 match there was no one game that everybody agreed was “best”, but the first game comes close.

[Event "Match"] [Site "Sveti Stefan / Belgrade"] [Date "1992.09.02"] [Round "1"] [White "Robert Fischer"] [Black "Boris Spassky"] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "C95"] [Annotator "Stockfish 18"] [PlyCount "99"] [EventDate "1992.09.02"] {C95: Ruy Lopez: Breyer Variation} 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6 {What will Fischer play? He revived the Exchanges Variation 4.Bxc6 in 1966 and played it once against Spassky in their 1972 match.} 4. Ba4 Nf6 5. O-O Be7 6. Re1 b5 7. Bb3 O-O 8. c3 {Will Spassky play the Marshall Attack (8...d5)? It's good for a draw at best which is what he got the one time he played it against Fischer in a previous game.} d6 9. h3 {White could play 9.d4 at once. but prefers not to allow black to undermine white's center with ...Bg4} Nb8 {The Breyer Defense. It looks strange to undevelop a piece, but black wants to free his c-Pawn and deploy the N om d7 to defend the strong point at e5.} 10. d4 Nbd7 11. Nbd2 Bb7 12. Bc2 Re8 13. Nf1 Bf8 14. Ng3 g6 15. Bg5 {This is just a gesture. His real prospects are on the Q-side and so usual is 15.a4} h6 16. Bd2 Bg7 17. a4 c5 18. d5 c4 19. b4 Nh7 {This is a major mistake because after this black is doomed to passivity. Correct was 19.... cxb3!} (19... cxb3 20. Bxb3 Nc5 21. c4 Qd7 {Ponomariov,R (2700)-Gyimesi,Z (2602) Moscow Aeroflot Open 2005. The players soon agreed to a draw.}) 20. Be3 h5 21. Qd2 Rf8 {Intending to play ...f5 at some point.} 22. Ra3 Ndf6 23. Rea1 Qd7 {An interesting position. Black has played passively, but doesn't have any real weaknesses, but this move which aims at contesting the a-file is a poor one. The B on b7 would be better repositioned on d7 at some point.} 24. R1a2 {This makes room for the Q on a1.} Rfc8 25. Qc1 Bf8 26. Qa1 Qe8 27. Nf1 Be7 28. N1d2 Kg7 29. Nb1 Nxe4 {Tired of waiting, Spassky makes an attenpt at breaking free in what is probably his best practical choice.} 30. Bxe4 f5 {The long awaited P break...remember 21...Rf8} 31. Bc2 Bxd5 32. axb5 axb5 33. Ra7 {Fischer's control of the 7th rank pretty much assures him of victory.} Kf6 {It's hard o visualize now, but this leaves his K exposed to a devastating attack.} (33... Rcb8 {All black can really do here is shift pieces and wait.} 34. Nbd2 Rxa7 35. Rxa7 Rb7 {White has a N vs. 2Ps, but at least black has challenged his contro; of the 7th rank. Even so, hos position is lost.}) 34. Nbd2 $18 Rxa7 35. Rxa7 Ra8 {Fischer concludes the game in brillaint fashion.} 36. g4 $3 {Ripping apart the K's position.} hxg4 37. hxg4 Rxa7 38. Qxa7 f4 {Hoping to blockade the K-side. It doesn't work, but them neither would anything else.} 39. Bxf4 (39. Bb6 {is the Stockfish way.} Qa8 40. g5+ Ke6 41. Qxa8 Bxa8 42. Bxg6 Nxg5 43. Nxg5+ Bxg5 44. Be8 {with a won ending, but that would be no fun.}) 39... exf4 (39... Bxf3 {is no better.} 40. Nxf3 exf4 41. Qd4+ Kf7 42. Qxf4+ Kg8 43. Qh6 Bf8 44. Bxg6 Qe1+ 45. Nxe1 Bxh6 46. Be8 d5 47. Bxb5 {White wins the ending in spite of Bs of opposite color.}) 40. Nh4 {[%mdl 32] To quote Larry Evans, "A wonderful follow-up to an inspired sacrifice."} Bf7 41. Qd4+ $1 Ke6 (41... Kg5 42. Qg7 Bf8 43. Nhf3+ Kxg4 44. Qxh7 {mates in 4 at most.} Qe1+ 45. Kg2 Qg1+ 46. Kxg1 Bh6 47. Qxh6 g5 48. Nh2#) 42. Nf5 {Again, to quote Larry Evans, "A flash of the old genius."} Bf8 43. Qxf4 Kd7 44. Nd4 $1 {[%mdl 2048] The brilliant moves keep coming.} Qe1+ 45. Kg2 $1 Bd5+ 46. Be4 {White is clearly winning.} Bxe4+ {Spassky's play has had a touch of cunning...if Fischer does not play the only correct move Spassky will have equalized!} 47. Nxe4 {Found it!} (47. Qxe4 Qxe4+ 48. Nxe4 Bg7 {Black has fully equalized.}) 47... Be7 48. Nxb5 Nf8 49. Nbxd6 $3 {To quote Fritz, " Excellent horsemanship."} Ne6 (49... Bxd6 50. Qxd6+ Ke8 51. Qe5+ Kd8 52. Qd6+ Ke8 53. Qb8+ Kd7 54. Nf6+ Kc6 55. b5+ Kc5 56. Qxf8+ {etc.}) 50. Qe5 {Black resigned.} (50. Qe5 Nf4+ 51. Qxf4 Qe2 52. Nc5+ Kc6 53. Nde4 Bxc5 54. Nxc5 {White has a huge material advantage.}) 1-0

An Amazing Finish by Blackburne

 

    To some early players Wilhelm Steinitz was known as the man who destroyed brilliancy in chess. But, that’s not true because his influence on the game did not destroy tactical chess, it just eliminated the idea that sacrifices should be made simply for the reason of making sacrifices. They should, at least, be sound. 

    In fact, Steinitz himself was a brilliant player. At first Steinitz was a disciple of the attacking school, but he became obsessed with stamping out dashing, but careless play. 

    One of Steinitz’ rivals was Joseph Blackburne (1841-19234). According to Chessmetrics his highest ever rating was 2748 in 1886, ranking him #2 in the world behind Sreinitz (2809). Blackburne’s play was aggressive and tactical and filled with sacrifices and fierce King hunts. 

    He became known as the Black Death after his brilliant performance at the 1873 Vienna tournament. His style and dominance was evidenced in the following game which culminates in a Queen sacrifice, played in Berlin in 1881. 

 

 

[Event "Berlin"] [Site ""] [Date "1881.09.16"] [Round "?"] [White "Joseph H, Blackburne"] [Black "Jacques Schwarz"] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "C01"] [Annotator "Stockfish 18"] [PlyCount "55"] [EventDate "1881.08.29"] { C01: French: Exchange Variation} 1. e4 e6 2. d4 d5 3. exd5 {It's a bit surprising that Blackburne would choose the unassuming Exchange Varoation bercause the position becomes simpler and often a bit drawish, bit not in thisd game.} exd5 4. Nc3 {[%mdl 32]} Nf6 5. Nf3 Bd6 6. Bd3 c6 7. O-O O-O 8. Ne2 Bg4 (8... Re8 9. Bf4 Bg4 10. Ne5 Bh5 11. f3 Bg6 {is equal. Subhayan,K (2349)-Ghosh,D (2568) DINI International 2024 Colombo SRI}) 9. Ng3 Qc7 (9... Nbd7 10. h3 Bxf3 11. Qxf3 Re8 {White is slightly better.} 12. Nf5) 10. Be3 (10. h3 Be6 11. Ng5 Re8 12. Nh5 Nbd7 13. Re1 {White stands well.}) 10... Nbd7 11. Qd2 Rfe8 12. Rae1 {Blackburne has played the opening passively and as a result black has actually gotten the possibility of a promising attack on white's K.} Ne4 13. Qc1 (13. Bxe4 dxe4 {does not look very promising for white either.} 14. Nh4) 13... Bxf3 14. gxf3 Nxg3 15. hxg3 Bxg3 16. Kg2 (16. fxg3 Qxg3+ 17. Kh1 Qh3+ 18. Kg1 Ne5 19. Bf4 (19. Be2 Qg3+ 20. Kh1 Ng4 21. fxg4 Rxe3 {and black wins.}) 19... Nxf3+ {is unappetizing for white.}) 16... Bd6 17. Rh1 {Appearances to the contrary, white's attack can be successfully dealt with leaving black with the advantage.} Nf8 18. Rh3 g6 19. Reh1 Rad8 20. Bg5 Rd7 {Black has succeeded in picking up a P and defending himself against a white K-side attacj and so has every right to be satisfied with his position.} 21. c4 dxc4 (21... f6 {looks like only a move an engine would play. After 22.Bd2 Rf7 black stands better. But not...} 22. Bxf6 Ne6 23. Bxg6 hxg6 24. Rh8+ Kf7 25. Qh6 Rxh8 26. Qxh8 Bf8 {The key defensive move; black's K ,akes its getaway.} 27. Be5 (27. Rh7+ Ke8) 27... Qd8 28. Rh7+ Ke8 {White has no followup and black is winning.}) 22. Bxc4 h5 {[%mdl 8192] This fatally weakens the K-side. Correct was 23,,,b5 followed by ...c5 with the idea od shutting white's B out of the game.} 23. Rh4 {Missing his chance. Both sides are making some serious mistake here, but the complications are enormous and for a human unfathomable!} (23. Bf6 Nh7 24. Qh6 Nxf6 25. Qxg6+ {and white is winning. For example...} Kf8 26. Qxf6 Be5 27. dxe5 Qxe5 28. Qxe5 Rxe5 29. Rxh5 Rxh5 30. Rxh5 {White is a piece up.}) 23... b5 {[%mdl 8192]} (23... Nh7 24. Rxh5 gxh5 25. Rxh5 Be5 $3 26. dxe5 Qxe5 27. Qe3 Qxe3 28. Bxe3 Nf6 {White has 2Bs vs a R; a very, very difficult position to assess, but engines give black a significant advantage.}) 24. Bb3 (24. Rxh5 $3 {wins.} gxh5 25. Bf6 Nh7 26. Rxh5 {Black is lost. The best line is} Re6 27. Qg5+ Kf8 28. Qg7+ Ke8 29. Rxh7 Rde7 30. Bxe6 fxe6 31. Bxe7 Qxe7 32. Qg6+ {and wins.}) 24... Ne6 {Incredibly even though it might look like white is winning the position is now equal!} 25. Bf6 {White threatens Qh6 and mate.} (25. Rxh5 {doesn’t work.} gxh5 26. Rxh5 Bf8 27. Bf6 Bg7 {gums up the works for white and black is left with a won position.}) 25... Nf4+ {[%mdl 8192] The final error. He had to eliminate the B on f6. Blackburne now finished with an incredible problem-like move.} (25... Be7 26. Bxe7 Rexe7 27. Qh6 Qb8 28. Bxe6 Rxe6 29. Rg4 Rd5 30. Rxh5 Rxh5 31. Qxh5 Qd8 {and a draw outcome would not be surprising.}) 26. Qxf4 $3 {[%mdl 512]} Bxf4 {Do tou see the mate in 5?} 27. Rxh5 $3 {[%mdl 576] There is a back rank mate.} gxh5 28. Rxh5 {Black resigned.} (28. Rxh5 Bh6 29. Rxh6 Qg3+ 30. Kxg3 {mate next move.}) 1-0

Coburg 1904

    In 1904 the bi-annual Congresses of the German Chess Federation was held in Coburg, a city located on the Itz river in central Germany and this one was an exciting event with a shocking finish. 

    Rudolf Swiderski, known as a highly eccentric and Hypermodern pioneer, had the greatest success of his career. He was leading in the later rounds, but suffered a breakdown and lost to a tailender in the penultimate round, allowing Schlechter and von Bardeleben to catch him. Rudolph Swiderski (1878-1909, 31years old) was an odd person. Writing in My Fifty Years of Chess, Frank Marshall said, "Of all the chess masters I ever met, 

    Swiderski was the most weird…(he) was a peculiar fellow. He made very few friends, had a gentle but melancholy disposition, was a fine violinist, ate raw meat, committed suicide…” 

    Swiderski took his own life in August 1909. The German chess magazine Deutsche Schachzeitung reported that he had suffered from an illness for which surgery seemed to have been possible; however, instead, he committed suicide shortly after his 31st birthday. Other reports suggested that his suicide was linked to possible legal proceedings involving an allegation of perjury. 

 

    Walter John (1879-1844, 65 years old) was an amateur player of Master strength who only played sporadically. In 1908, John moved from Barmen to Aschersleben, to work as a pharmacist. John was associated with the Nazi 'Kraft durch Freude' (Strength Through Joy) state leisure organization. The organization was created to control workers' free time, boost productivity and build public support. 

 

[Event "Coburg (Meisterturnier)"] [Site ""] [Date "1904.07.30"] [Round "12"] [White "Walter John"] [Black "Rudolf Swiderski"] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "D02"] [Annotator "Stockfish 18"] [PlyCount "73"] [EventDate "1904.07.18"] {Dutch Defense} 1. d4 d5 2. Nf3 e6 3. e3 Nd7 4. Bd3 f5 5. b3 Qf6 6. Bb2 Bd6 7. Ba3 {To be expected was 7.c4, but white has chosen the strategy of exchanging off his bad B for black's bad one.} Bxa3 8. Nxa3 {Enfines inform us that white is slightly better here, but his N is offside and he appears to have few attacking chances.} c6 {Against Nb5} 9. O-O Nh6 {An odd place to put the N, but it was played 90 years later by a GM. 8...e5 was a good choice.} (9... e5 10. Nxe5 Nxe5 11. dxe5 Qxe5 12. c4 {with equal chances.}) 10. c4 O-O (10... b6 11. cxd5 exd5 12. b4 Bb7 13. Qe2 a5 14. b5 c5 {with equal chances. Schulz,K (2420)-Knaak,R (2530) Germany 1994}) 11. Qc2 Ng4 (11... g5 {was a better way to commence an attack.} 12. Rac1 Kh8 13. Nb1 {The N is useless on a3 and needs to find a better position.} g4 14. Ne1 f4 {if white can manage to defens carefully he has a solid position.}) 12. h3 Nh6 {Has 11...Ng4 induced white to weaken his K's position? Not reallt; black has just a few pieces available with which to conduct an attack.} 13. Qc3 g5 {Sharp play! The chances remain equal, but obviously white must use caution.} 14. Ne5 {[%mdl 2048] White is up to the task!} g4 15. f4 Kh8 {Evidently preparing to open the g-file and place a R on it, but it's a move too slow and it is with this move that Swiderski's downhill slide begins.} (15... gxh3 {is the right way.} 16. gxh3 Nxe5 17. dxe5 Qh4 18. Rf3 {and now} Kh8 19. cxd5 Rg8+ 20. Kf1 Ng4 {A double-edged position with equal chances.}) 16. hxg4 $1 fxg4 17. g3 $1 {Putting an end to black's hopes of an attack and now it's white's turn to commence an attack on the h-file.} Nf5 18. Kf2 ({Stronger than} 18. Nxg4 Qg7 19. Bxf5 exf5 {and black still has an attack on the g-file.}) 18... Nxe5 19. dxe5 Qe7 20. Nc2 {At long last this N is going to find employment. It says something for white's position that he has time to reposition this N with impunity.} Bd7 21. Rh1 Kg8 22. Rh2 Rad8 23. Rah1 Rf7 {Black can't do much except shift his pieces around.} 24. Bxf5 exf5 25. c5 b6 26. b4 {[%mdl 32]} Rc8 27. Nd4 {Joining the attack' white has a decisive advantage.} bxc5 28. bxc5 Be8 29. Rh6 Qf8 30. Nxf5 $1 {[%mdl 512] Crushing. Black could take the N, but it would not help.} Rb8 (30... Rxf5 31. Rxh7 Bg6 32. Rh8+) 31. e6 $1 {[%cal Oh6g6] Rg6+! would kill now.} Rfb7 32. e4 {Even more potent wpuld have been 32.Rf6 when black loses his Q and gets mated.} d4 33. Qxd4 Rd8 34. e7 Rxe7 35. Qxd8 Rd7 36. Qg5+ Kh8 37. Qf6+ {Black resigned. An impressive display of very precise play by the amateur John!} (37. Qf6+ Qxf6 38. Rxf6 Kg8 39. Nd6 Bg6 40. f5 {and mate is looming.}) 1-0

Vladimir Simagin’s Last Tournament

    Kislovodsk is a spa city in the North Caucasus region of Russia which is located between the Black and Caspian Seas. The tournament that was held there in 1968 was marred by the premature death at the age of 49 of Sovier GM Vladimir Simagin (1919-1968) when he had to withdraw due to illness and died of a heart attack.

    GM Lubomir Kavalek told the story of how on the night of August 21, 1968 his wife met Simagin pacing back and forth in the lobby of a hotel in Polanica Zdroj, repeating, ”Stupid people, stupid people, stupid people.” Simagin explained to her that Soviet tanks had invaded Czechoslovakia over night. 

    Kavalek described Simagin as a philosopher who believed that violence has no place in our lives and it is best to leave it on the chessboard as was evidenced bu his bold and imaginative style and his tactical ability. In this game he defeats the Yugoslav player Milorad Knezzevic (1936-2005, 68 years old) who was awarded ther GM title in 1976. In this In this game jis passive play lead a winning attack by Simagin. 

 

 

[Event "Kislovodsk"] [Site ""] [Date "1968.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Milorad Knezevic"] [Black "Vladimir Simagin"] [Result "0-1"] [ECO "A03"] [Annotator "Stockfish 18"] [PlyCount "68"] [EventDate "1968.??.??"] {A03: Bird's Opening} 1. g3 d5 2. f4 {Transposing into the ancient Bird, but a variation that resembles the Dutch Defense reversed where black plays 2...d6. In practical play there are few draws.} g6 (2... h5 {Is an adventurous try.} 3. Bg2 (3. Nf3 h4 4. Bg2 (4. Nxh4 {leaves white lost after} e5 5. fxe5 (5. Nf3) 5... Rxh4 6. gxh4 Qxh4#) 4... Nc6 {Black is better.}) 3... h4 {White has a number of reasonable moves.}) 3. Nf3 Bg7 4. d3 Nc6 5. Bg2 {Now you would expect either 5...Nf6 or 5...e5, not Simagin's pecular repley.} Nh6 {Not really bad, but the N is destined to remain here for a long time.} 6. c3 {/} O-O 7. O-O Qd6 8. Kh1 {The reason for this passive mive us not clear.} (8. e4 dxe4 9. dxe4 Qc5+ 10. Kh1 Rd8 11. Qe2 Be6 12. Na3 a6 13. Be3 Qh5 14. e5 {with equal chances. Szymczak,R (2102)-Alvarado,C (2203) Warsaw 2011}) 8... Bg4 9. Na3 {The N does not have much of a future here. A strike in the center with eother 8,d4 or 9.e4 would have been better.} Qd7 10. e4 Rad8 11. exd5 Qxd5 12. d4 {[%mdl 32]} Qh5 $1 {[%cal Og7d4]} 13. Qb3 Na5 14. Qb5 Rd5 15. Qe2 c5 $1 {[%mdl 2048] Black has the initiative.} 16. dxc5 Nc6 17. Qf2 Rfd8 {White should now try to bring his offside N into play with 18.Nc2. Instead...} 18. Nh4 $2 {Simagin is not interested in regaining his P with 18...Rxc5. Instead, he begins an ivasion of white's position.} Rd3 (18... Bf6 {was even stronger. White's best option would be tp allow the weakening of his K-side with ...Bxh4 and get the N on a3 into play with 19.Nc2, but he must avoid taking the R...or should he?! The resulting position os something only ann engine could fathom!} 19. Bxd5 Rxd5 20. Ng2 {which allowa black a crushing attack.} Bf5 {Giving the N access to g4.} 21. Nc4 Ng4 22. Qg1 Rd3 23. Nce3 Nd4 {Black's pieces are swarming!} 24. cxd4 Bxd4 {White has no useful moves.} 25. a4 Be4 26. Ra3 {Exchanges offer no relief.} Rxa3 27. bxa3 Qh3 28. Re1 Bf3 29. Rf1 Bc6 {White is a whole r up, but is dead lost. The main engine line runs} 30. Re1 a5 31. Re2 Kf8 32. Rc2 h6 33. Re2 f6 34. Ra2 f5 35. Rb2 Nxe3 36. Bxe3 Bxb2 37. Qf2 Bxa3 38. Kg1 Qg4 39. Qf1 Bb2 40. Ne1 Qd1 41. Nd3 Qb3 42. Qe2 Bf6 43. Ne5 Bxe5 44. fxe5 g5 45. e6 Qxe6 46. Qd3 Bxa4 {Black is winning.}) 19. Be3 $2 {[%mdl 8192] Again, his best try was getting the N into play with 19,Nc2} Bf6 20. Nf3 Bh3 21. Bxh3 Qxh3 22. Bd4 $2 {This loses quickly. Again 22,Nc2 was his best defense.} Bxd4 23. cxd4 Nxd4 24. Ne5 Ng4 25. Nxg4 Qxg4 26. Nc4 {Ne5 is the strong threat.} f6 27. Ne3 Qe6 28. Rfe1 Qc6+ 29. Qg2 Qxg2+ 30. Kxg2 {The exchange of Qs has not lessened the attack.} Rd2+ 31. Kh3 Nf3 32. Nf1 Ng1+ 33. Kh4 R2d5 34. Nd2 Rh5+ {White resigned. It's mate next move} 0-1

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.