Random Posts

Monday, August 31, 2020

Seeing Ahead

     In 1938 Dutch psychologist and master Adriaan de Groot questioned several players including Alekhine, Euwe, Fine, Flohr, Keres and Tartakower about their thinking process and compared the results to those of weaker players. What de Groot found was that when deciding on a move the GMs did not calculate any deeper than the weaker players.
    De Groot also discovered that unlike Kotov, who recommended a systematic evaluation thinking process and said you should examine each variation only once, players of all strengths just don’t think like that. They do not make a short, neat mental list of candidate moves then consider them one at a time; their thinking was as haphazard as anybody else's. 
     Most of the time all that is necessary is to see tactics only two or three moves deep. After Botvinnik was defeated by Reshevsky in the 1954 USSR vs. USA match, Botvinnik wrote that his loss showed that he needed to perfect his play in two move variations. If visualization isn’t the answer, what is? 
     Studies have shown masters use different parts of their brains than amateurs, maximizing intuition, goal-seeking and pattern-recognition. Researchers used magnetic resonance imaging scans to compare the brain activity of amateurs and professionals Shogi players and they found that certain regions of the expert’s brains lit up while the amateurs' did not. Experts' brains showed more activity in the area associated with visualizing images and episodic memory (i.e. memory consisting of a series of loosely connected parts or events) what is known as the precuneus area of the parietal lobe. 
     When pressed to come up with a move quickly, activity surged in a region of the brain where goal-directed behavior is rooted. This did not occur in the amateurs or when either group took their time in planning their next move. Researchers believe that Shogi experts have, or are, perfecting a circuit between the two regions that helps them quickly recognize the state of the game and choose the next move. This results in their being intuitive with the result that the candidate moves are generated quickly and automatically without conscious search. Like pattern recognition in chess masters. 
     Of his game against Pilz at Warsaw in 1934, Najdorf wrote, "This game was awarded the first brilliancy prize and nobody was more surprised than me since I can remember at no time seeing more than two moves ahead." 
     Nunn wrote of his game against Tal at Wijk aan Zee, 1982, "So far as I can remember, I hardly calculated a single variation more than a couple of moves deep during the entire course of the game." That game is pretty well known...you can view it HERE.  
     Let’s take a look at Najdorf’s game against the mysterious Pilz. I was unable to identify who Pilz was and what the event was. My first thought was that it was played in the Olympiad that was held in Warsaw that year, but Pilz’ name doesn’t appear on any of the twenty teams. Perhaps it was the 3rd Championship of Poland at Warsaw in 1935. If that was the tournament, it was won by Tartakower.
     Concerning this game Najdorf wrote, “At that time I was barely 24 years old; I was a chess lover who played without knowing theory. But, I had a great teacher, known to all of you: Master Tartakover, Lord of the Board, who always said to me, “Learn to reason...the first thing is to reason.” 
    Of his fourth move he wrote, “And so without delving into what the correct move was, I tried to prevent Black from doubling the Pawns and that's why I played: 4.Qc2." 
    If you know Spanish you can read Najdorf’s own comments to this game HERE. The pdf scan, a selection of games with his comments, is a gold mine; the Pilz game is on page 4.

Najdorf - Pilz
Result: 1-0
Site: Warsaw
Date: 1935

[...] 1.d4 ♘f6 2.c4 e6 3.♘c3 ♗b4 4.♕c2 This is the Classical (or Capablanca) Variation which ranks in popularity right behind the Rubinstein Variation (4,e3). In those days it didn't have a name. White intends to acquire the two Bs without compromising his P-structure. The disadvantage is that the Q will have to move again and white's K-side B pair back should try to open the game quickly to exploit his lead in development. 4...c5 Black has three common replies: 4...0-0, 4...c5 and 4...d5. On occasion he has also played 4...Nc6. 5.dxc5 ♗xc5 Nowadays it's known that the immediate 5...O-O is somewhat better. 6.♘f3 d5 7.♗g5 dxc4 8.e3 O-O
8...h6 9.♗h4 ♗e7 10.♗xc4 a6 11.O-O ♕c7 12.♗b3 ♘c6 turned out better for white in Pekarek,A (2455)-Mrva, M (2345)/Czechoslovakia 1992
8...♗e7 9.♗xc4 ♘c6 10.O-O a6 11.♖fd1 ♕a5 12.♗xf6 ♗xf6 13.♘e4 ♗e7 14.♘d6 ♗xd6 15.♖xd6 O-O ans white was much better. Atalik,S (2585)-Ulker,A (2147)/Izmir 2008
9.♗xc4 ♘bd7 Najdorf was critical of this and recommended 9..Nc6 as leading to smoother development. 10.O-O h6
10...a6 11.♖fd1 ♕c7 12.♖ac1 b6 13.♘e4 ♘xe4 14.♕xe4 ♗b7 favors white. Rother,C (2279)-Tran,P (2271)/Bayern 2006
11.♗h4 ♕a5 Najdorf called this a strange move, but it's not without a resonable strategic idea. Pilz wanted to play ... Be7 and ... Ne5 which, according to Najdorf frees him up a bit. Therefore Najdorf tried to evict the Q from a5. (11...♗e7 12.♖fd1 and ...Ne5 isn't playable.) 12.a3 ♗e7 13.b4 ♕b6 14.♖fd1 Wrong would be 14.Rad1 because this R must be reserved to occupy other free files. Najdorf comments that white does not make any extraordinary moves; he just develops according to sound principles. He wrote: To win a game you need two things: one that plays well and one that plays poorly, or one that plays poorly and another worse. After completing the development of my minor pieces, I finish the opening by mobilizing my major pieces. 14...a5 15.♖ab1 axb4 16.axb4 While this position favors white because of the greater activity of his pieces, black is not without defensive resources. However his next move turns out to be a serious mistake because it allows white to gain control over the squares on the b8-h2 diagonal. 16...♔h8
16...♖d8 17.♘b5 ♘f8 would have the effect of nullifying white's control on the diagonal.
16...♖d8 17.♗d3 This allows white to keep up the pressure after 17...♘f8 18.♘e5 ♗d7 19.♘c4 ♕a7 20.b5 b6 21.♗g3
17.♘b5 ♘b8 18.♗g3 ♘a6 19.♗d6 Black's next move loses immediately. Better chances were offered by playing 9...Nd5 blocking the d-file. 19...♘g8
19...♘d5 20.♗xe7 ♘xe7 21.♖d6 ♘c6 22.♕d2 and white is better, but there is no immediate forced win.
20.♘e5 For the remainder of the game, Najdorf played "obvious" moves that required little calculation. 20...g6 21.♗xe7
21.♘xg6 fxg6 22.♕xg6 ♗xd6 23.♖xd6 ♖f6 24.♕g3 also wins as black's Q is trapped.
21...♘xe7 22.♖d6 ♘c6 White's position is so good that he has two winning sacrifices! 23.♘xg6
23.♘xf7 is less forceful, but it also wins. 23...♖xf7 24.♕xg6 ♖e7 25.♘d4 ♕c7 26.♕xh6 ♔g8 27.♖xe6 ♗xe6 28.♘xe6 ♕d7 29.♕g6 ♔h8 30.♘f8 ♖xf8 31.♕h6 ♖h7 32.♕xf8#
23...fxg6 24.♕xg6 ♘axb4 The capture of this P is of no consequence.
24...♘e7 does not help. 25.♕xh6 ♔g8 26.♗xe6 ♗xe6 27.♕xe6 ♖f7 28.♖xb6
25.♕xh6 White has a mate in 7 moves. 25...♔g8 26.♖xe6 ♗xe6 27.♗xe6 ♖f7 28.♕g6 (28.♘d6 ♕c7 29.♘xf7 ♕xf7 30.♕g6 ♔h8 31.♗xf7 b6 32.♕h6#) 28...♔h8 29.♗xf7
29.♗xf7 ♘e7 30.♕xb6 ♘bc6 31.♘d6 ♔h7 32.♕b2 ♖d8 33.♕f6 ♖xd6 34.♕xd6 b5 35.♖xb5 ♔g7 36.♖b7 ♔xf7 37.♕xc6 ♔f8 38.♕f6 ♔g8 39.♕xe7 ♔h8 40.♕h7#
Powered by Aquarium

Sunday, August 30, 2020

Game Viewer Frustration

     As you may know, as of December, 2020, Flash Player will no longer work. For years I was posting games using Glen Wilson’s excellent KnightVision program, but a while back ran into some problems with it because it uses Adobe Flash and will stop working when Flash stops working. Also, there were some other problems with KnightVision that cropped up so I switched to the very nice Caissa’s Web viewer, but disliked the fact that variations can only appear in the notes, so you can’t play through them in the viewer. 
     Chessbase also has a really nice game viewer, but it, too, had issues, the worst being that sometimes the text “bled” into the posts below the one in which the game appeared. 
     Eventually, I switched to ChessOK Aquarium 2014 for publishing. I really like the layout and appearance of the “Web Export for Blog” option, but ran into two huge problems. First, the code is 85 pages long in my Word document which is about 3,000 lines of code on Blogger! Second, all the squares with pieces on them show up as white. However, Aquarium’s publish “iBookHTML for Blog” option uses 16-18 Word pages and translates to 50-60 lines of code. 
     I really liked the layout of pgn4web and downloaded the program from SourceForge, but for some reason it would not work on my laptop. That was only a minor problem because for the last two posts I simply embedded the games directly off their website and everything seemed fine. Then, while checking my e-mail Sunday I had a message that the games didn’t show up...something about a DNS server couldn’t be found. Fortunately I had not deleted the annotated games from my “Junk Games” folder as I call it and was able to re-post them using Aquarium. 
     My workhorse remains the old Fritz 12 which I purchased years ago at Office Max for $20. However, using Aquarium to embed games in Blogger isn’t all bad because for the first time since purchasing it, I have found a use for it. Now if I could only find a use for Chess Assistant 18 that sits unused on both of my laptops. Any suggestions?!

Friday, August 28, 2020

Genrikh Kasparyan

     When one thinks of Genrikh Kasparyan (February 27, 1910 - December 27, 1995) they probably think of the man who is considered to have been one of the greatest composers of endgame studies of all time. He was awarded the title of International Judge of Chess Compositions in 1956 and International Grandmaster of Chess Composition in 1972, the first composer to receive this title from FIDE.
     Kasparyan started with chess problems, mainly three-movers, but soon discovered that his best field was endgame studies. He wrote several books and collections and composed about 600 studies, many on the theme of domination, winning 57 first prizes. He won the USSR Composing Championship several times.
     He was more than a composer, he was also a Soviet master and he became an IM in 1950. A civil engineer by profession, Kasparyan won the 1931 championship of Tibilisi which qualified him for the 1931 USSR Championship. He finished first in the semi-final, but failed to score enough points to get promoted to Master. Back in the days when there wasn’t any Elo system the only way you could achieve the title in the Soviet Union was to defeat an established master in a match or score enough points in tournament play. 
     Kasparyan was awarded the Soviet master title in 1936 when he defeated the redoubtable Vitaly Chekhover who was no garden variety master. Chessmetrics assigns Chekhover a rating at that time in the mid-2500s placing him in in the top 60 or 70 players in the world. 
    It would be difficult to name another Soviet master whose playing style was as original...he was able to combine great attacking ability with, as might be expected, a deep positional understanding of endings. As for openings, he paid little attention to them, often selecting little studied openings. 
     Kasparyan worked very hard to sharpen his tactical abilities which according to Botvinnik marked him as a player of high caliber. His weakness was in positions where he had to defend himself or faced positional pressure. It was suggested that this lack of balance prevented him from obtaining steady tournament results.
     In the following years he excelled in tournament play winning the Armenian championship ten times from 1934 to 1956 and the Tiflis championship three times (1931, 1937, 1945). He reached the USSR Championship finals four times (1931, 1937, 1947, 1952), but never finished higher than tenth place. By the late 1940s, Chessmetrics assigns Kasparyan a rating of 2600+ placing him in the world’s top 30, so he could clearly do more than compose endings! 
     The following win over Chekhover in their 1936 match gives an example of Kasparyan’s play.

Vitaly Chekhover - Genrikh Kasparian

Result: 0-1

Site: Moscow City Championship

Date: 1936.12.12

E67: King's Indian: Fianchetto

[...] 1.d4 ♘f6 2.c4 d6 3.♘f3 g6 4.g3 ♗g7 5.♗g2 O-O 6.O-O ♘bd7 This defense was played at a time when the K-Indian was classified as Irregular, but thanks to Soviet players, it became a mainstay in modern play. 7.♘c3 e5 8.dxe5 This isn't very promising. Better was 7.e4 which is standard today. 8...dxe5 9.♕c2 ♖e8 White now has a couple of promising moves here. 10.h3 followed by 11.Be3 or 10.Rd1. Instead, he plays a move that gives black an opportunity to launch promising complications and Kasparyan jumps at the chance. 10.b3 e4 11.♘d4 This questionable, but the other main alternative, 14.Ng5, leads to complications acceptable fo black.
11.♘g5 h6
11...e3 Not this which was recommended by Kotov. 12.♗xe3 ♖xe3 13.fxe3 ♘g4 14.♘xf7 Overlooked by Kotov. White is better.
12.♘h3 ♘e5 with a promising position. White should now play 13.Bb2 and not take the P. 13.♘xe4 ♘xe4 14.♕xe4 ♘g4 attacking the Q and R.
11.♘e1 This is the best defense, but who wants to retreat like this? 11...c6 12.♗b2 ♕e7 13.♖d1 with about equal chances.
11...e3 A promising, if not quite perfect, P sacrifice. 12.f4
12.♗xe3 allows black to get a promising position after 12...♘g4 13.♕d2 ♘xe3 14.fxe3 c6
12...c6 13.♗b2 ♕a5 The idea of this move is to transfer the Q to the K-side, but better was 13...Ng4. (13...♘g4 14.♘f3 ♘df6 with a nice position.) 14.♘f3
14.f5 Both players missed this excellent move which allows white to seize the initiative. 14...♘e5 15.♘e4
14...♕h5 15.♘d1 This is a solid, but passive, defense.
15.♘h4 ♘f8 It's either this or admit the whole Q maneuver was a bad idea and retreat it to a5 which amounts to a huge loss of time than can only benefit white. 16.♖ad1 ♗f5 17.♘xf5 gxf5 is good for white.
15...♘c5 16.♗e5 One square too far. 16.Bd4 was better as black would have to prove that he has anything worth crowing about. 16...♗f5 17.♕b2 This move meets a surprising refutation. The Q should have retreated to c1.
17.♕c1 ♖xe5 fails after 18.fxe5 ♘g4 19.♘xe3 Eliminating the P on e3 which is the fly in the ointment.
17...♖xe5 18.fxe5 ♘g4 19.h3 This only further weakens his K's position. (19.♘c3 ♘e6 20.♕c1 ♘xe5 isn't especially promising for white either.) 19...♘xe5 20.♘xe5 ♗xh3 21.♖c1 (21.♗xh3 runs into 21...♕xh3 22.♖f3 ♘d7 23.♖xe3 ♗xe5) 21...♗xe5 22.♕c2 There was not anything better. All that's left is for black to concoct a mating attack. 22...♗xg3 23.♘xe3 ♗xg2 24.♔xg2 ♕h2 25.♔f3 ♗h4 26.♖g1 ♕h3 27.♔f4 ♖e8 (27...g5 28.♖xg5 ♗xg5 29.♔xg5 ♘e6 30.♔f6 ♕h4 mate next move.) 28.♘g4 ♘e6 (28...♔f8 29.♕f5 gxf5 30.♖c3 ♖e4 31.♔xf5 ♗g3 32.a3 ♕xg4 mate next move.) 29.♔e5 ♘g5 (29...♗g3 30.♖xg3 ♕xg3 31.♔f6 ♕f4 mate next move.) 30.♔d6 The K has no choice but to continue on this dangerous journey. 30...♗g3
30...♘e4 also leads to mate. 31.♕xe4 ♖xe4 32.♖cd1 ♗g3 33.♔c5 ♕xg4 34.e3 ♕g5 35.♔b4 a5 36.♔a3 ♕xe3 37.♖xg3 ♕c5 38.♔b2 ♖e2 39.♔c3 ♕e5 40.♖d4 ♕xg3 41.♖d3 ♕e1 42.♔d4 ♕g1 43.♔c3 ♕a1#
31.♖xg3 ♕xg3 32.♔d7
32.♔c5 holds out longer, but still loses. 32...♕xg4 33.♖d1 ♖xe2 34.♕d3 ♘e6 etc.
32...♕xg4 (32...♔f8 mates in 3. 33.♕e4 ♘xe4 34.c5 ♕xg4 35.♔c7 ♕c8#) 33.♔xe8 Now the K is quickly mated. 33...♕c8 34.♔e7 ♕c7 35.♔e8 ♘e6 36.♖d1 ♘g7# Combative play by Kasparyan!
Powered by Aquarium

Thursday, August 27, 2020

Wednesday, August 26, 2020

Samuel R. Calthrop

     Samuel R. Calthrop (1829-1917) was a most unique man. He was born on October 9, 1829, at Swineshead Abbey, Lincolnshire, the family home of the Calthrops for many generations. He was a preacher, a teacher, a scientist, a soldier, an inventor, a writer, an athlete and a chess master and he was interested in gardening, astronomy, the weather, philosophy and poetry. 
     He began his education at home, where he was at first taught by his older sister, Elizabeth. He mastered Latin early and read classic literature. At the age of nine, he attended St. Paul’s School in London, where he excelled in the classroom and was given the title of “Captain of the School.” 
     He wanted to join the priesthood and at 19, he attended Trinity College at Cambridge. Despite being an honors student, he didn’t graduate because he refused to sign the Thirty-nine Articles of the Church of England (doctrines and practices of the Church of England) because he believed they were at that time very narrow. At that time he became a Unitarian. 
     In 1853, at the age of 24, he sailed for the United States and when he arrived in New York City he found a job preaching in a small town on Long Island. He asked only that the church pay for his room and board which was about three dollars a week. 
     Later he started his work in educating and preparing young men for life by founding a boys’ school in Bridgeport, Connecticut in which he taught them Latin, Greek and mathematics and introduced them to cricket, hockey and boating.
     Calthrop was married in 1857. He and his wife, Elizabeth, were married more than 60 years and had five children. In 1860, he became an ordained Unitarian minster and preached in Boston and Marblehead, Massachusetts. 
     An inventor, in 1865, he designed a passenger train car in which all side doors and windows to be kept closed and it would be kept cool in the summer with redirected air carried into car by a series of tubes. He also had plans for a bullet-nosed train, but they never got beyond the planning stage. 
     Calthrop arrived in Syracuse, New York in 1868 to preach at the Unitarian Church, a position he would keep for the next 43 years. It was a job that he placed his highest priorities. He wrote, “There are two professions which no man should even think of entering whose only thought is to get on, and they are the ministry and medicine,” he said. “No self-seeker should enter those sacred doors, only those who are filled with an enthusiasm for humanity.” 
     Once at a Catholic fair, Calthrop was voted the most popular man in the city and he was often invited to speak at Jewish celebrations. His home a gathering place of hundreds of city residents and was the clearing house for their interests and ideas. The local paper spoke of his moral influence and high character. 
     He was a member of the Citizens Club, the organizer of the city’s Boy’s Club, instrumental in the construction of Syracuse’s first playground and was a director of the Syracuse Museum of Fine Arts. 
     During the Depression of 1893, Calthrop was called upon to help needy citizens and formed a plan to aid them by enlisting the help of clergymen, teachers and doctors. 
     According to an article in the Harvard Square Library, Calthrop was an impressive figure of a man, over six-foot tall, broad-shouldered and had vigor written in every line of his figure. He participated in billiards, rugby, crew, tennis, boxing and cricket. He served as crew coach at Harvard, Yale, Syracuse and Cornell, and coached the cricket team at West Point. He also helped introduce tennis to Central New York and at his home e maintained courts and was always willing to teach anyone who was interested. In his old age he would swim in the ice-cold water of the St. Lawrence River. One time he even knocked out a prowler in his house. 
     Calthrop was interested in astronomy and from his personal observatory at his home, he became one of the first to explore the idea that sunspots affect the weather on Earth. Syracuse newspapers began to rely on him to make weather forecasts. 
     He was an ardent botanist and maintained a large garden in which he grew the first tomatoes that were ever shown at the New York State Fair. He conducted excursions of his congregation into fields and woods to study vegetation. Some of the ferns they collected were kept at the Museum of Natural History in New York City. 
     At the time it was especially controversial for a minister to to support Charles Darwin’s Origin of Species, but Calthrop did it anyway, declaring that he must speak the truth as “God gave it to him to speak.” 
     Two years after this death, in 1919, a book of poetry by Calthrop was published, The Heaven of the Moon. Calthrop was also a prolific writer in other areas an published works including many on his faith, collections of his sermons sermons, science and current events. 
     Calthrop had played chess since he was a teenager and 1857, he was one of the 16 players to the first American Chess Congress in New York City and he founded a chess club at his church. The first American Chess Congress was knock out event and was held in New York City and the 16 best American masters were invited, including Paul Morphy and Louis Paulsen. Morphy dominated and defeated Paulsen in the final match. Calthrop was knocked out by Paulsen 3-0 in the first round. 
     Calthrop won the New York championships in 1880 and 1883. Locally, he would take on all comers, often playing several opponents at once and was able to play blindfolded. He often gave local player a handicap which he called a “twenty-eighter” in which his opponent had to avoid getting checkmated for 28 moves. If his opponent succeeded it was was considered a win. 
     Calthrop died quietly after a battle with pneumonia on May 11, 1917. He was 87 years old. Almost none of his games are available. Chessgames.com has only the three he lost to Paulsen and a check of the Brooklyn Daily Eagle newspaper did not turn up anything on him except a short article on one of his religious lectures, not even a mention ofr the New York State championships that he won!

     However, I did locate a game of his that was annotated by Lowenthal that appeared in The Chess Player's Magazine in 1865. Calthrop’s opponent in this game was Hugh Alexander Kennedy (August 22, 1809 - October 22, 1878), an English master and writer. He was born in Madras, British India in 1809 and was a British army captain and leading London player. He established the first chess club in Brighton in 1842 and in1844, he lost a match to Howard Staunton (3–8). He also lost a match to Elijah Williams (+2 –4 =0) in 1846 and lost a match to Edward Lowe (+6 –7 =1) in 1849. Kennedy played in the great international London 1851 tournament where he finished in sixth place (out of 16). He knocked out Carl Mayet in round 1 and then lost to Marmaduke Wyvill in round 2. 

Hugh A. Kennedy - Samuel Calthrop

Result: 0-1

Site: ?

Date: 1864

Sicilian Smith-Mora Gambit

[...] 1.e4 c5 2.♘f3 ♘c6 3.d4 cxd4 4.♗c4 e6 5.c3 When annotating this game in The Chess Player's Magazine, Lowenthal believed this move was not so good here. 5...dxc3 6.♘xc3 ♗c5 These days black usually plays 6...d6 although 6...a6 is also playable. 7.O-O
7.a3 a5 8.O-O ♘ge7 9.♕e2 O-O 10.♖d1 ♘g6 11.♗g5 with about equal chances. Hedke,F (2380)-Sleisz,T (2280)/Budapest 1996.
7...d6 8.♗e3
8.♕e2 a6 9.♖d1 ♕c7 10.♗g5 ♘ge7 11.♖ac1 O-O 12.a3 with equal chances. Lauda,A (2010)-Sarwary,H/Instanbul 2005
8...♘f6 Exchanging Bs would have considerably weakened the d-Pawn, which could not be maintained against the attacking forces white could bring to bear. - Lowenthal. 9.♗xc5
9.e5 was suggested by Lowenthal as leading to some interesting attacking variations. However, black gains a clear advantage after 9...♗xe3 10.exf6
10.fxe3 fails against 10...♘g4 11.♕xd6 ♕xd6 12.exd6 ♘xe3 13.♘b5 O-O 14.♖fc1 ♖d8
10...♗h6 11.fxg7 ♗xg7
9...dxc5 10.♕c2 O-O 11.e5 ♘g4 More accurate was 11...Nd5 12.♖ad1 ♕e7 13.♖fe1 a6 14.h3 ♘h6 15.♘e4 b5 16.♘fg5 Threatening mate in 3 with Nf6+ 16...♘f5 (16...bxc4 17.♘f6 and 18.Qxh7 mate) 17.♗d3 With this move it is obvious white is making threats against h7, but they come to nothing after 17...c4.
17.♗f1 was best then after 17...c4 18.g4 black gains the initiative after 18...♘b4 19.♕b1 h6 20.♘f3 ♘h4 with good attacking chances.
17...c4 was even stronger. 18.♗f1 ♘xe5 19.♘d6 ♘f3 20.♘xf3 ♘xd6
18.f4 After this white's position rapidly falls apart. His best chance was to play 18.Qxc5.
18.♕xc5 ♘xd3 19.♖xd3 h6 20.♘f3 ♗b7 21.♕xe7 ♘xe7 22.♖d7 ♗xe4 23.♖xe4 ♘d5 Whits has hopes of survival.
18...♘xd3 19.♕xd3
19.♖xd3 Also allows black a very strong attack after 19...c4 20.♖d2 h6 21.♘f3 ♗b7 22.♘e5 ♖ad8
19...c4 20.♕c2 g6
20...h6 was much more effective. 21.g4 ♕c7 22.gxf5 exf5 23.♘d6 hxg5 24.fxg5 ♗e6 with a won position.
21.g4 ♘g7 22.♕f2 h6 23.♕h4 h5
23...hxg5 Lowenthal incorrectly asserted that this would result in the immediate loss of the game. It would not, but it would still be a serious mistake because after 24.♘xg5 ♘h5 25.gxh5 after 26.Kh2 white has some excellent attacking chances.
24.gxh5 ♘xh5 25.♘g3 ♕c5 26.♔f1 ♘xg3 27.♕xg3 ♔g7 28.♕c3 ♔g8 29.♘e4 b4 Forcing white to abandon the diagonal, commanded by his Q and going over to the attack. 30.♘f6 ♔h8 31.♕g3 ♔g7 32.♖e5 ♕e7 33.♘h5 ♔h6 34.f5 To quote Lowenthal - White has exhausted all his resources. Not quite as there is a devilish trap that black could fall into.
34.♖d2 Hoping for a miracle was worth a try. Black should play 34...c3 and not 34...gxh5 35.♖xh5 ♔xh5 36.♕g7 and mates in 8!! 36...f6 37.♕xe7 ♖a7 38.♕xa7 ♔g6 39.♖g2 ♔f5 40.♕h7 ♔xf4 41.♖g4 ♔e5 42.♕c7 ♔d5 43.♖xc4 and mates next move.
34...gxh5 Black avoids the trap.
34...♔xh5?? would be a horrible blunder. 35.f6 mates next move.
35.h4 ♕f6 The tactics are over and black has a strategically won game. Even so, as is often the case, he has to prove it. 36.♕f4 ♔h7 37.♖d2
37.♖d4 exf5 38.♖xc4 ♖g8 39.♖xc8 ♖axc8 40.♕xf5 ♖g6 41.♕xf6 ♖xf6 with a won ending.
37...exf5 38.♖g2 ♖g8 Even better was 38...Be6. 39.♖xg8 ♔xg8 40.♖e8 ♔g7 41.♕g3 ♔h7 42.♕f3 Black is going to lose his T, but in the process he picks up a sufficient number of Ps. 42...♕xh4
42...♖b8 falls into a mating trap. 43.♕xh5 ♕h6 44.♕xf7 ♕g7 45.♕h5 ♕h6 46.♖e7 ♔h8 47.♕xh6 mate next move.
42...♗b7 is a viable possibility. 43.♕xh5 ♔g7 44.♕h8 ♔g6 45.♖xa8 ♗xa8 46.♕xa8 and white wins.
43.♕xa8 ♕f4 44.♔g1 ♕c1 45.♔f2 White's extra material is helpless against all the Ps. 45...♕xb2 46.♖e2 ♕d4 47.♔f1 ♕d1 48.♖e1 ♕d3 49.♖e2 ♗e6 50.♕xa6 f4 51.♕c6 f3 52.♕e4 ♗f5 53.♕xd3 ♗xd3 White resigned.
Powered by Aquarium