Alexander Konstantinopolsky (February 19, 1910 - September 21, 1990) was a Soviet IM and one of the country's most distinguished theorists, coaches and trainers and chess authors.
He was nearly 20 when he learned the game and soon afterwards began playing tournaments in Kiev in 1930. Two years later he won the Kiev championship ahead of many well known masters. In 1933 he was awarded the Soviet Master title for his successes in Ukrainian tournaments. Altogether he was a five-time Kiev champion.
In the following years he scored many impressive victories: he tied for third place with Lilienthal in the Trade Union Championship in 1936, tied for second with Ragozin in the 1937 USSR hampionship and tied with Bondarevsky and Kotov in the 1945 USSR Championship.
In the 1948 USSR Championship where he tied for 6th place with Keres, Bondarevsky and Lisitsyn he did not lose a single game and scored impressive wins over Keres, Lilienthal and Levenfish. In the 1950 Championship he finished in fifth place.
An all around player with an active positional style and superb defensive ability, he played endings with great precision and rarely missed an opportunity to pull off an unexpected tactical blow.
He was appreciated in Soviet circles as an excellent teacher. Widely regarded as a friendly and kindly man, during the late 1930s, Konstantinopolsky trained young players and amateurs in Kiev, at the Palace of Young Pioneers. He and Bronstein were close friends and Konstantinopolsky served as Bronstein's second for the 1950 Candidates' playoff match against Isaac Boleslavsky. Isaac Lipnitsky was also one of his pupils.
He was awarded the IM title in 1950, won the first Soviet Correspondence Chess Championship in 1951, earned the IM title at correspondence in 1966 and was awarded the Soviet title of Honorary Grandmaster title in 1983.
Konstantinopolsky had a wide opening repertoire with both colors. He, along with Boleslavsky and Bronstein, was one of the Ukrainian pioneers who developed the King's Indian Defense into prominence,. The variation had been considered suspect until the mid-1930s. During this time, Konstantinopolsky played one of the earliest games in the Yugoslav Attack against the Dragon Variation of the Sicilian Defense, a line which would become very popular about 20 years later. He also defended the Dutch Defense with success at a time when it was rarely played by top players.
Konstantinopolsky was the author of many valuable studies and articles on opening theory. He also served as a member of the Presidium of the USSR Chess Federation and took an active part in Soviet chess affairs.
He played in the Soviet Team Championship, Riga 1954, scoring 5.5-4.5; this was his last really strong performance and his OTB play seems to have largely stopped about 1955, as he concentrated more on correspondence play and on his job as a trainer and coach. Chessmetrics ranks him as 11th in the world in 1945. In 1948–1951, Konstantinopolsky won the 1st Soviet Correspondence Championship.
It appears that he played in only one tournament outside the Soviet Union. He played in the B section of Amsterdam 1966, when he was well past his prime at age 56. He scored a creditable 5-4.
In the following game, after his ill advised 7th move, Keres never had a chance. It was played in the 16th USSR Championship that was held in Moscow from November 10th to December 13th, 1948. Nineteen of the Soviet Union's top GMs were playing, among them were the participants of the Saltsjobaden Interzonal (1948), David Bronstein, Alexander Kotov, Andor Lilienthal, Igor Bondarevsky, Salo Flohr, Viacheslav Ragozin.
1-2) Bronstein and Kotov 12.0
3) Furman 11.0
4) Flohr 10.5
5) Tolush 10.0
6-9) Bondarevsky, Keres, Konstantinopolsky and Lisitsyn 9.5
10-11) Ilivitsky and Lilienthal 9.0
12) Kholmov 8.5
13-15) Averbakh, Levenfish and Ragozin 8.0
16-17) Alatortsev and Panov 7.5
18-19) Aronin and Taimanov 6.0
[Event "USSR Championship Moscow"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1948.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Paul Keres"]
[Black "Alexander Konstantinopolsky"]
[Result "0-1"]
[WhiteELO "?"]
[BlackELO "?"]
%Created by Caissa's Web PGN Editor
{Caro-Kann: Panov-Botvinnik Attack} 1. e4 c6 2. d4 d5 3. exd5 cxd5 4. c4 {Not
well covered in opening literature enjoying a reputation for lively play, the
fearsome Panov-Botvinnik Attack dates back to at least the early 1900s when it
was first employed at the top level by Alekhine (who, 1932, lost on the black
side against Arthur Dake at Pasadena 1932), but it was Panov and Botvinnik
that first put it on the map. Botvinnik used it to defeat Spielmann in 12
moves at Moscow 1935. It produces a lot of isolated d-Pawn structures, so in
order to play it successfully, it is a must that one be familiar with those
formations.} 4... Nf6 5. Nc3 e6 6. Nf3 Be7 7. a3 {Keres' plan (this move
connected with the advance of his c-Pawn) is not dangerous to black.} 7...
O-O {Hansen,L (2565)-Jobava,B (2601)/Skanderborg 2005 continuted 8.cxd5 exd5
9.Bd3 Bg4 10.h3 Bh5 11.Be3, etc which is the normal sequence.} 8. c5 Ne4 {This
is the best move. It would not be to white's advantage to exchange this N as
black is able to bolster up his center with ...f5.} 9. Qc2 f5 10. Be2 {In
Letelier-Eliskases, Mar del Plata 1958 white tried 10.b4 without success.}
10... Nc6 11. Bb5 {Castling was better.} 11... Bf6 12. Bxc6 bxc6 13. O-O g5
{At first glance this may appear risky, but with a firm grip on the center he
can safely launch this K-side attack.} 14. Ne5 Bxe5 15. dxe5 Nxc3 16. Qxc3 f4
{Excellent! Black plans to transfer his Q to g6 or h5, his a1R (via b8 and b7)
to g7 and his B to a strong position on a6.. It's not easy for white to defend
against this plan because his B has no prospects and the advance of his Q-side
Ps will prove to be difficult. Note that as is often the case, the existence
of opposite colored Bs favors the attacking side.} 17. Bd2 Ba6 18. Rfe1 Rb8
{Keres delays advancing his Q-side Ps, but perhaps now was the time to play b4
and a4.} 19. Qd4 Bc4 20. Bc3 Qe8 21. Qd1 Rb7 22. a4 Qg6 {If white continues
23.b4 then black practically forces the win with 23...f3!} 23. Ra3 g4 {Also
good was 23... f3.} 24. Bd4 Rg7 {Black threatens Rf5. Sooner or later white
will have to play f3 so now he wastes no time and plays it immediately.} 25.
f3 h5 {Now stronger would have been 26.b4 trying to get a passed P even if it
means sacrificing one.} 26. Rc3 Rf5 27. Kh1 Rg5 {Not as strong 27...f3. White
should now try 28. Qc2 hoping to trade Qs.} 28. b3 Ba6 29. Rg1 {After this
white is quite lost. Again his best try was 29.Qc2} 29... gxf3 30. Qxf3 Qe4
31. Qf2 {By this point the exchange of Qs, while marginally better, would be
to late to offer white any chance of saving the game.} 31... Bd3 32. b4 Qf5
33. b5 Be4 34. bxc6 Rxg2 35. Rxg2 Rxg2 36. Qxg2+ Bxg2+ 37. Kxg2 {In his book,
Chess for Match Players, William Winter wrote this ending is a study in the
utilization of passed Ps. Black has won the Q for R and B, but white's c-Pawns
are difficult to stop and it is only by using his own Ps in conjunction with
mating threats that black can win the game. The play is very delicate.} 37...
Qe4+ 38. Kf1 f3 39. Be3 Qg6 40. Ke1 Qb1+ 41. Kd2 Qb2+ 42. Rc2 Qxe5 {With
threats of ...d5 and ...Qxh2+ followed by the advance of the three K-side
Ps.} 43. c7 Qxh2+ 44. Kd1 Qxc7 45. c6 e5 46. Bxa7 { Black could still mess up!
46...Qxa7?? 47.c7 and he will be forced to take a draw by perpetual check as
any attempt at winning will lose the game.} 46... d4 47. Bb6 {The B is still
immune, but instead of his next move (which also wins) 47.. .f2 was even
quicker. However, 47...f2 is engine stuff...black would have to see a long
series of checks, so practically 47...d3 is, in fact, the best move. } 47...
d3 {Now if 48.Bxc7 dxc2+ and aster ...f2 the P queens.} 48. Rc1 Qxb6 49. c7
Qxc7 {Eliminating white's last hope.} 50. Rxc7 f2 {White resigned because he
can't avoid mate in about, say, 17 moves.} 0-1
No comments:
Post a Comment