Fischer’s Last American Tournament

    Bobby Fischer's last game was the 30th game of his 1992 rematch against Boris Spassky who resigned on his 27th move. I am not 100% positive, but I believe Fischer’s last America tournament was a double round rapid tournament at the Manhattan Chess Club in August of 1971. He won it with the incredible score of 21.5-0.5; he got nicked for a draw by Walter Shipman. 

    At the time, Fischer had just returned from winning candidates matches against Mark Taimanov and Bent Larsen. His match against Larsen, played in Denver, Colorado, had just concluded and Fischer, himself, called the club and suggested they arranged a 5-minute double round -robin invitational tournament and he would participate/ 

    Fischer wasn't known for playing in such events although he had played in one in Herceg -Novi, Yugoslavia, where he won easily against top level competition. In this tournament everybody was certain Fischer would win and the question was, would he make a perfect score? He had some close calls, but the only real danger came in his games against Andrew Soltis and Walter Shipman. 

    Against Soltis, who at the time lacked an international title, Fischer had a Rook and some Pawns against a Queen and Pawns. For young reader who aren’t familiar with pre-digital age chess clocks, they had little flags that the minute hand raised and the flag dropped at 12. With both flags hanging and the players moving at lightening speed, Soltis blundered into a lost position. He could have played on and possibly won on time, but Soltis is a class act and so he resigned. 

    Against Walter Shipman, Fischer tried hard to to win a drawn Rook and Pawn endgame, Fischer blundered away his Rook but his connected, passed Pawns enabled him to secure the draw. 

 

 

    In the following game Fischer crushed GM Robert Byrne. On the March 1971 USCF rating list Fischer was #1 at 2771 and Byrne was ranked #7 at 2527. Note that ratings are a reflection of results, not strength although it’s obvious that the strongest players will have the best results. Ratings across decades do not compare to each other. For example, on the latest USCF rating list Fabiano Caruana is #1 at 2876 and there are 3 other players rated over 2800. Today a rating in the 2500s will only get you ranked below 35th place.

[Event "Manhattan CC 5-minute Tmt"] [Site ""] [Date "1971.08.08"] [Round "1.1"] [White "Bobby Fischer"] [Black "Robert Byrne"] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "B57"] [Annotator "Stockhish 171."] [PlyCount "51"] [EventDate "1971.??.??"] [EventType ""] {B57: Sicilian: Sozin Attack} 1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Nc3 d6 4. d4 cxd4 5. Nxd4 Nf6 6. Bc4 {A Fischer favorite. The Sozin Attack is white's most aggressive lines. Ot pften leds to direct play against black's K and sacrifies are frequently seen.} Qb6 {Sharp. 6...Bd6 is mre frequently seen.} 7. Nxc6 bxc6 8. O-O e6 9. Bf4 Qxb2 {Risky at best. More prudent is 9...Qc5} 10. Qd3 Qb4 11. Rab1 Qc5 {Black has lost a lot of time with his Q for the dake of picking up a P. How big is the price tag going to be?} 12. Rfd1 {A sly move. The threat is 13.Na4 forcing the Q away from defending the d-Pawn} e5 (12... Be7 13. Na4 Qa5 14. Bxd6 {and white is practically winning.}) 13. Bg5 Be7 14. Bxf6 {Forcing black to weaken his K-side.} (14. Na4 {is not as efficient as the text.} Qa5 15. Bxf6 gxf6 16. Nc3 {is roughly equal.}) 14... gxf6 15. Ne2 {Even in a 5-minute game it's surprising that Fischer missed the tactical shot 15.Nd5!} ( 15. Nd5 Bd8 (15... cxd5 16. Bxd5 {snags the R on a8.}) 16. Ne3 Bc7 {Black has a solid, but camped position that offers few real prospects.}) 15... Be6 { [%mdl 8192] This results in more weaknesses around his K. A neutral move like 15,,,a4 and waiting for defe,opments seems like his best choice.} 16. Bxe6 fxe6 17. Rb7 {Clearly this leaves black in a difficult position, but there was an even better move,} (17. Qh3 Kf7 18. Qh5+ Kg7 19. Rb7 d5 20. Rd3 {and there is no defense against Rg3}) 17... Kf7 18. Rdb1 {[%mdl 1024]} d5 19. Ng3 h5 20. h4 {Very good. He doesn't wan the N driven off...it's going to leap into action from g3.} a5 21. Qf3 Kg6 (21... Qxc2 {would not have worked any. better.} 22. exd5 cxd5 23. Nxh5 {and white is winning.}) 22. R1b3 a4 23. Rc3 Qd6 24. Nxh5 { [%mdl 512] The finishing blow.} f5 (24... Rxh5 25. Qg4+ Kh6 26. Rg3 Rg5 27. hxg5+ fxg5 28. Rh3+ Kg7 29. Qxg5+ Kf7 30. Rh7+ Kf8 31. Qg6 {mate next move.}) 25. exf5+ exf5 26. Rxe7 {[%mdl 512] A beautiful finish.} (26. Rxe7 Qxe7 27. Rxc6+ Kf7 28. Qxf5+ {Black is hopeless.}) 1-0

Marshall vs. Pillsbury, a Titanic Struggle

    By1906, when a King’s Gambit Accepted theme tournament was held in Vienna the enthusiasm for romantic gambit play had all but disappeared. In an attempt to revive interest, the Vienna Chess Club sponsored a King's Gambit tournament. 

    With the financial support of Albert Rothschild, an Austrian banker, and Leopold Trebitsch, an Austrian industrialist and chess patron, the Vienna Chess Club invited ten masters who played a double-round event. 

    The positional players (Schlechter, Maroczy and Teichmann) found it tough going; the wild tactical positions resulting from the King’s Gambit were anathema to them! 

 

     Thee Russian Chigorin, known as King of the Gambiteers, was in his element as was Marshall. He got lucky in the following game, a titanic struggle, against Pillsbury. This tournament turned out to be Pillsbury’s last European tournament. He died of syphilis in Philadelphia in 1906. The first effective cure for the disease came in 1910, but it was an arsenic-based compound that was toxic and hard to use; the real and safe cure, penicillin, began its widespread use in the 1940s. 

 

[Event "Vienna"] [Site ""] [Date "1903.05.18"] [Round "?"] [White "Frank Marshall"] [Black "Harry Pillsbury"] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "C38"] [Annotator "Stockfish 17.1"] [PlyCount "69"] [EventDate "1903.05.02"] {C38: King's Gambit Accepted} 1. e4 e5 2. f4 {The Kimg's Gambit Acce[ted was obligatory in this tournament.} exf4 3. Nf3 g5 4. Bc4 Bg7 5. h4 h6 6. d4 d6 7. Qd3 g4 {Safer is 7...Nc5. While the the text is risky, danger lurks for both sides.} 8. Ng1 $1 Qf6 $1 (8... Nc6 9. Ne2 Nge7 10. Nbc3 Nb4 11. Bxf7+ Kxf7 12. Qc4+ Be6 13. Qxb4 {with equal chances. Pavlovic,M (2345)-Tukmakov,V (2570) Lugano 1986}) 9. c3 h5 (9... Ne7 10. h5 d5 11. exd5 Bf5 12. Qf1 Nd7 13. Bxf4 O-O-O {with equal chances. Cortlever,N-Euwe,M Amsterdam 1939}) 10. Na3 { The N remains out of play for a long time, so 10.Ne2 was better.} Ne7 11. Ne2 Ng6 {White gains the advantage after this. The aggressive 11..f3! was much better.} (11... f3 12. gxf3 Qxf3 13. Ng3 Be6 {offers equal chances.}) 12. g3 { This move looks very risky, but white is in cotrol.} (12. Nb5 {This is even better. The threat of Nxc7+ forces black into a passive position.} Na6 13. O-O Qxh4 14. Nxf4 {The position is rife with dizzying tactical complications, but they favor white.} g3 (14... d5 15. Nxg6 fxg6 16. exd5 Bf5 17. Rxf5 gxf5 18. Bf4 O-O 19. d6+ Kh8 20. dxc7 Qf6 21. Rf1 {White is winning.}) 15. Bxf7+ Kd8 16. Nh3 Bxh3 17. gxh3 Qxh3 18. Qe2 {White has a decisive advantage.}) 12... fxg3 13. Rf1 {Excellent! This looks questionable because of 13...Qh4+, but Marshall played 13.Rf1 in order to keep his attack alive even at a considerable material cost.} Qxh4 14. Bxf7+ Kd8 {White should now capture on ge (with either piece) which would leave him with a significant advantage. Instead, he plays a nove that leats his opponent right back in the game.} 15. Bxg6 g2+ 16. Rf2 Rf8 {It would have been slightly better to get more pieces into play with 16...Be6} 17. Be3 Bh6 {[%mdl 512] aiming for ...Rf3.} 18. Bxh6 {[%mdl 8192] A miscalculation that lands white in serious trouble.} (18. Bf5 {keeps a slim edge after} Bxf5 19. Bxh6 Re8 20. Be3 Bxe4 21. Qb5 c5 22. O-O-O Bf3 23. Qd3 Qe7 24. Nc2 {The N finally finds somrthing to do.} Qe4 25. Qd2 {and as odd as it may appear, black cannot find a way to utilizr his K-side Ps. However, that's not to say black is totally without hope. In Shootouts white scored +3 -0 =2, so black does have some slight chance of avoiding defeat.} g3) 18... g1=Q+ { [%mdl 512]} 19. Nxg1 Qxf2+ 20. Kd1 Qxg1+ 21. Kc2 Rf2+ {Keeping up the pressure. It's black who has energed from the last few moves with a winning attack.} 22. Bd2 Qxa1 {A fascinating position! Black has an enormous material plus (2Rs+2Ps vs a B and so has a theoretical win. Even so, his position is difficult to play becaise his lack of development tell against him.} 23. Qe3 Rxd2+ {Black still has the upper hand after this, but he missed the sockdolager.} (23... Qf1 24. Qg5+ Rf6 25. Nc4 Nd7 26. Qxh5 c6 27. Ne3 {The N has finally reached a decent square, but black is beginning to get his pieces developed and he still has 2Rs vs. a B.}) 24. Qxd2 Bd7 25. Qg5+ {[%mdl 8192] This juicy looking check should have lost because black can get away.} (25. Qh6 {Threatening Qf8+ is a different story.} Ba4+ 26. b3 Qxa2+ 27. Kd3 c6 28. Qf8+ Kc7 29. Nc4 b5 30. Qxd6+ Kb7 31. Na5+ Kb6 {The line leading to this messy position would be nearly impossible to calculate OTB and this position difficult to play, but the chances are now equal.}) 25... Kc8 $18 26. Bf5 b6 {Pillsbury is rightly playing to win. One old annotation suggested that he should have taken the draw.} (26... Bxf5 27. Qg8+ Kd7 28. Qf7+ Kc6 29. Qd5+ Kd7 30. Qf7+ {draws}) ( 26... Qxa2 {This is also good. It prevents Qg8+ and so white has to try and find some way to keep up the pressure.} 27. Qxh5 Qg8 {It's black's Q that lands on g8 and the g-Pawn cannot be stopped.} 28. e5 g3 29. e6 g2 30. exd7+ Nxd7 31. Be6 g1=Q 32. Bxg8 Qxg8 {Black is a R+P up and has a won game.}) 27. Qg8+ Kb7 28. Bxd7 Nxd7 29. Qd5+ c6 30. Qxd6 Rd8 {It's logical to defend the N, but, ironically, it's one square too far and now the chances are back to equal! } (30... Rc8 31. Qxd7+ Rc7 32. Qe6 (32. Qf5 Qe1 33. Qxh5 Qxe4+ 34. Kd2 Re7 { with a winning position.}) 32... Qe1 33. Nc4 Qf2+ 34. Kb3 Qf8 35. Nd6+ Kb8 36. d5 g3 37. dxc6 g2 38. Qg6 Rg7 {wins}) 31. d5 {This keeps things complicated and, as a result, Pillsbury soon slips up.} Rf8 {[%mdl 8192] This plausible move loses! Stockfish is announcing a mate in 20 for white.} (31... Nc5 { Returning the extra R is more clear than 31...Ka6.} 32. Qxd8 Qxa2 33. dxc6+ Kxc6 34. Qc8+ Kd6 35. Nb5+ Ke7 36. Qc7+ Kf8 {White has to take the draw by keeping up the Q checks otherwise ...Qcb2+ ;eaves b;ack with too many Ps.}) ( 31... Ka6 32. dxc6 Qf1 33. cxd7 Qf2+ 34. Kb3 Qf7+ {After the d-Pawn falls black's K-side Ps will be unstoppable.}) 32. dxc6+ Ka8 33. cxd7 Rf2+ 34. Kb3 Qxb2+ 35. Ka4 {Black resigned. A titanic struggle with a surprising turnaround. } (35. Ka4 b5+ 36. Nxb5 Qxa2+ 37. Na3 Qg8 38. d8=Q+ Qxd8 39. Qxd8+ Kb7 40. Qd7+ Kb8 41. Nb5 Ra2+ 42. Kb3 Ra3+ 43. Kxa3 a5 44. Qc7+ Ka8 45. Qa7#) 1-0

Fine Beats Botvinnik

    Reuben Fine (1914-1993, 73 years old) is mot, or perhaps never was, greatly appreciated as a player. He grew up in New York City and learned to play chess at the age of eight. 

    After winning several strong tournaments in the U.S. he then made a name for himself in international tournaments. He played on three Olympiad teams from 1933 to 1937, winning one gold and one silver individual medal. In 

    1937 he tied with Paul Keres for first at Margate, and at the AVRO tournament in 1938, he again finished tied for first with Keres. Then came World War II and he was employed by the Navy to estimate where enemy submarines might surface. These estimates were essentially educated guesses and often highly inaccurate.

    After World War II, Fine was invited to the World Championship tournament in 1948, but declined because he was working on his Ph.D. in psycholgy and he expressed dissatisfaction with FIDE's organization coupled with a distrust of thr Russian players thinking they would cheat bu helping each other. After that he pretty much faded from view. 

    Mikhail Botvinnik (1011-1995, 83 years old) was a different story. He learned the game early and progressed rapidly, winning the first of six USSR Championships in 1931; the others came in 1933, 1939, 1944, 1945 and 1952. 

    With the death of Alexander Alekhine in 1946, FIDE took control of the World Championship and invited six players to take part and Botvinnik won it. In 1957 Smyslov defeated Botvinnik in a World Championship match, but lost the return match the following year. Then in 1960, he lost to Mikhail Tal, won the rematch in 1961. He lost the title for the last time to Tigran Petrosian in 1963.

 

    In November of1938, a Dutch radio company AVRO organized and sponsored what was up to that time the strongest tournament ever held. Fine finished tied forfirst with Paul Keres who was declared the winner as a result of a better tiebreak score. 

 

[Event "AVRO"] [Site "The Netherlands"] [Date "1938.11.06"] [Round "1"] [White "Reuben Fine"] [Black "Mikhail Botvinnik"] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "C17"] [Annotator "Fine and Stockfish"] [PlyCount "61"] [EventDate "1938.11.06"] {C17: French Defense} 1. e4 {(Notes by Reuben Fine, supplemented by Stockfish). Before this tournament I was known as a d4 player, hence my first move must have come as somewhat of a surprise to Botvinnik.} e6 {Botvinnik does not vary. Against e4 he almost invariably played the French, sometimes he tried the Sicilian.} 2. d4 d5 3. Nc3 Bb4 4. e5 c5 5. dxc5 {This is the prepared move. Unlike Euwe, I make it a rule not to analyze such lines too profoundly before the game because it is most essential to be able to meet whatever surprises come up over the board and not everything can be foreseen.} Ne7 6. Nf3 Nbc6 7. Bd3 d4 {Accepts the complications. On 7...Bxc5 8.O-O, White's game is freer.} 8. a3 Ba5 {This gets a ! from Stockfish as both 8...Bxc3 and 8...dxc3 favor white (Tartajubow)} 9. b4 Nxb4 $1 10. axb4 Bxb4 11. Bb5+ {Another possibility was O-O, but the move played was part of the prepared variation.} (11. O-O Bxc3 12. Rb1 Qc7 13. Ng5 Qxe5 14. Qh5 g6 15. Qh6 Ng8 16. Qh4 Kf8 17. Bf4 Qd5 18. Bd6+ Kg7 19. Nxf7 Kxf7 20. Qd8 e5 21. Qf8+ Ke6 22. f4 e4 23. f5+ {1-0 (23) Hodgson,J (2590)-Kupreichik,V (2500) Germany 1998}) 11... Nc6 (11... Bd7 { and black us slightly better after} 12. Qxd4 Bxc3+ 13. Qxc3 Bxb5 {Slobodjan,R (2490)-Schmidt,R (2370) Germany 2014}) 12. Bxc6+ bxc6 13. Ra4 Bxc3+ 14. Bd2 { Suddenly Black discovers that he is lost. The Bishop is hopelessly shut in, and it is only a question of time before White's superior development make itself felt.} f6 {Desperately trying to free the bishop. (This move gets a ? from the engine. Black shpuld have tried `4...a5 with approximate equality/ Tartajubow)} 15. O-O {[%mdl 2048]} O-O 16. Bxc3 dxc3 17. Qe1 a5 (17... fxe5 { This is his best try.} 18. Nxe5 Qd2 19. Qxd2 cxd2 20. Rd1 Rb8 21. f4 {Making an escape for his K.} (21. Rxa7 Rb2 {and black has equalized.}) 21... Rb5 ( 21... Rb2 22. Rxd2 {wins}) 22. Rxd2 a5 {and black can at least put up a fight (Tartajubow)}) 18. Qxc3 Ba6 19. Rfa1 Bb5 20. Rd4 {Black was hoping for 20.Rxa5 which would bring some freedom to the Black pieces.} (20. Rxa5 Rxa5 21. Qxa5 Qxa5 22. Rxa5 {Black has completely equalized (Tartajubow)}) 20... Qe7 21. Rd6 a4 {To tie the rook down.} 22. Qe3 {Threatens to win a pawn, but not in an obvious way. &uis move gets a ! from both Fine and Stockfish. Tartajubow)} Ra7 23. Nd2 {The point: the poor Bishop will be driven away.} a3 {The pawn goes anyhow.} 24. c4 ({Less strong is} 24. Rxa3 Rfa8 $16) 24... Ba4 25. exf6 Qxf6 26. Rxa3 Re8 27. h3 {After this q - iet move, Black might as well resign. (Stockfish gives white a 4.5 Pawn advantage Tartajubow)} Raa8 28. Nf3 Qb2 29. Ne5 Qb1+ 30. Kh2 Qf5 31. Qg3 {Too many threats. Black can't guard the 7th rank. --Fine (Black does not have a single move, and Rf3 is threatened. A combination of a splendid strategic idea with tactical subtleties.--Botvinnik). } 1-0

Searching for Old Chess Publications

 

       Sunday posts are rare, but after the Alberta Clipper went through this neck of the woods last night and most of the city is moving at a crawl, it's a good time to check out the Hathi site.

     HathiTrust was founded in 2008 as a not-for-profit collaborative of academic and research libraries now preserving 19+ million digitized items. They offer access to the extent allowed by U.S. and international copyright laws. 

    If you sign on HERE and search for "chess' a lot of stuff comes up and a lot of scrolling will be required, but you can find old publications on chess problems or old copies of the British Chess Magazine or if you get really lucky, something like Smyslov’s Best Games. 

    Some other title you might find are Chess News Jan-Nay 1916 or a selection of games played in the international tournament at Bradford, England in 1888. 

    Most of this material won't find anywhere else and it is entertaining browsing. Of course, you must be able to read Descriptive Notation.

Don’t Scratch That Itch!

  

    Not too long ago I got the urge to try my luck again at correspondence play. My last try was a year ago when I played a two game match against a player who is both an OTB IM and ICCF IM. 

    The goal was to test the Berserk engine which I had read was sometimes able to uncover hidden opening resources that might not be found by other engines. It didn’t find any and when we reached the early middlegame it seemed like my position in both games was starting to deteriorate a bit, so I switched back to Stockfish and drew both games. 

    I nearly entered an event that would have required me to play 10 games, but got to thinking that was too many. A lot of players who win top level correspondence tournaments these days find repeating the task too exhausting and they often don’t opt for a repeat performance. I’m not a top level player, but do I really want to put in that kind of effort? The answer is, “No!” and in any case my old laptop which is held together with clamps and duct tape just isn’t packing the gear for such play. 

    These days an important thing in correspondence play is opening preparation. The goal is to find a line that looks good on a cursory engine analysis, but when you go deeper it’s flawed. That takes hours (or days!) of analysis. 

    You also have to use different engines because each has its own strengths and weaknesses. Plus you must be able to guide the engine into lines that it might not prioritize on its own. Engines sometimes misjudge complex positions, especially endings. (I wouldn’t know, but that’s what the good correspondence players say). It’s those critical junctures a human has to recognize. The bottom line is that merely copying an engine's top move will likely lead to a draw or a loss against a strong, engine-assisted opponent. I have neither the gumption nor the skill to do all that. Hence, I avoided temptation. Here’s the way we played correspondence chess in the old days. 

 

[Event "Semi-Finals Golden Knights Postal Tmt"] [Site "CORRESPONDENCE"] [Date "1971.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Tartajubow"] [Black "Mike K."] [Result "0-1"] [ECO "B91"] [Annotator "Stockfosh 17.1"] [PlyCount "70"] [EventDate "1971.??.??"] [WhiteTeamCountry "IND"] [BlackTeamCountry "ENG"] {B91: Sicilian Najdorf} 1. e4 c5 {The only thing I remember about this game is that my opponent was from Canada and he owned a furniture store.} 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 a6 6. g3 {A solid, if unambitious , line. My source was O'Kelly's The Sicilian Flank Game.} e5 7. Nde2 {Again, a bit passive, but also a bit more solid than 7.Nb3. This game was played in the semi-finals of Chess Review's big one, the Golden Knights and I wanted to male sure I qualified for the finals. This loss and one to US Senior Master Arthur Feuerstein meant I failed to qualify.} Be7 8. Bg5 {The main oprion is to delay this for a while and play play Bg2 and O-O.} Be6 9. Bg2 (9. Bxf6 Bxf6 10. Qd3 O-O 11. Bg2 Nc6 12. O-O Rc8 {½-½ (12) Matulovic,M-Bogdanovic,R Sarajevo 1968} ) 9... Nbd7 10. a4 {I am not sure where O'Kelly's book line ended it analysis, but it's possible that it was around here. My database has no games after this move, so we may habe been on our own at this point.} O-O 11. O-O Rc8 12. h3 b6 (12... Nxe4 {at once was a possibility suggesyed by a couple of engines.} 13. Bxe7 Nxc3 14. Qxd6 Nxe2+ 15. Kh2 Qa5 16. Bxf8 Nxf8 17. Bxb7 Rc4 18. b3 Rb4 19. Qxa6 Qc5 20. Qxe2 Rxb7 {White has a R+P vs. B+N and the chances are about equal, but practically speaking it looks very unclear/}) 13. b3 {When I first saw this tiday it looked like an odd (bad?) move, but engines find ni fault with it. Actually, the position is so evenly balanced it's difficult to suggest a good plan of action for rither side.} Nxe4 14. Nxe4 {This leads to a very slight advantage for blkack, but it avoids the complications arising from 14.Bxe7} Bxg5 15. Nxd6 Rc7 16. f4 exf4 17. Nxf4 Nc5 {Remarkably, the last few moves havem't been faulted by Stockfish which now recommends either 18.Nxe6 or 18.Ne4} 18. b4 {This is not really bad, but black is beginning to get a very slightly better position.} Rd7 19. bxc5 bxc5 (19... Bxf4 {was a bit better because it allows black to take advantage of the pin on the N...} 20. gxf4 bxc5 21. Nxf7 Bxf7 22. Qg4 Rd2 23. Rad1 Qd4+ 24. Kh1 Rd8 {with a slight advantage.}) 20. Nxe6 $14 fxe6 21. Rxf8+ Qxf8 22. Qh5 Be3+ 23. Kh2 Rxd6 24. Rf1 {Black has an extra P, but the Bs of opposite color and combined with the beavy pices don; t give him any advantage. However, white's defense is more difficult and any slip could have serious consequences.} Qe7 25. Be4 Rd2+ 26. Kh1 {[%mdl 2048] Stockfish's evaluation is returning 0.00, so you woulf think a draw is going to be the outcome.} h6 {Apparently black did not want a draw.} (26... g6 27. Bxg6 Qb7+ (27... hxg6 28. Qxg6+ Kh8 29. Rf7 {wins}) 28. Qf3 Rd1 29. Qxb7 Rxf1+ 30. Kh2 Rf2+ 31. Kh1 (31. Qg2 Rxg2+ 32. Kxg2 hxg6 {and whote has lost a piece.} ) 31... Rf1+ {draws}) 27. Qg6 (27. Rf3 $16 Rd1+ 28. Kg2 Rd2+ {draws}) 27... Rf2 28. Qh7+ Kf7 29. Rb1 {I was not eschewing the draw here...I thought this was winning. It's not; it only leads to equality.} (29. Rxf2+ Bxf2 30. Bg6+ Kf6 31. Bd3 Qb7+ 32. Kh2 Bd4 {is a draw.}) 29... Qg5 30. g4 {This is a losing blunder that fatally weakens the dark squares around my K.} (30. Rb7+ {looks goodm but loses after} Kf6 {and there is no followup.} 31. Qg8 (31. Qg6+ Qxg6 32. Bxg6 Kxg6) (31. Qxg7+ Qxg7 32. Rxg7 Kxg7) 31... Rf1+ 32. Kg2 Rg1+ 33. Kf3 Qxg3+ 34. Ke2 Re1+ 35. Kd3 Bf2+ 36. Bf3 Qxf3+ {mate next move.}) (30. Qh8 {would draw...} Bd4 (30... Qxg3 31. Rb7+ Kf6 32. Qd8+ Ke5 33. Qb8+ {wins the Q.}) 31. Rb7+ Kf6 32. Qd8+ Ke5 33. Qxg5+ hxg5 34. Bd3 {with a draw.}) 30... Bf4 (30... Kf6 { was much better. White has no good move. However, the consequences of 30...Kf6 would be extremely difficult to calculate. As it is, black;s move is quite satisfactory.} 31. Qg8 Rh2+ 32. Kxh2 Qe5+ 33. Kg2 Qxe4+ 34. Kg3 Qf4+ 35. Kg2 Qf2+ 36. Kh1 Qf3+ 37. Kh2 Bf4+ 38. Kg1 Qg3+ 39. Kf1 Qxh3+ 40. Ke2 Qh2+ 41. Kf1 (41. Kd3 Qd2+ 42. Ke4 Qe3#) 41... Qh3+ 42. Ke1 Qh4+ 43. Kf1 Qh1+) 31. Bg2 { This is the only defense.} (31. Rb7+ {...the move white has been hoping to play since playing 29...Rb1 loses.} Kf6 32. Qg8 Rh2+ 33. Kg1 Be3+ 34. Kf1 Qf4+ {mates in 2}) 31... Be5 {This is a serious slup that should have allowed ne to equalize.} (31... Bc7 {gets the B out of the way of the Q and allows black to gain a winning advantage in the ending despite Bs of opposite color and having Qs on the board. However, the variations would not be easy to calculate, so the outcome would still not be clear.} 32. Qe4 Qd2 33. Qd3 Kf6 34. Rf1 Rxf1+ 35. Qxf1+ Ke7 36. Qc4 Qd1+ 37. Bf1 Qd6 38. Qe2 Qc6+ 39. Kg1 Qxa4) 32. Qh8 { [%mdl 8192] After this the game is over. Centralizing the Q would have probably resulted in a draw.} (32. Qe4 Bc7 33. Re1 Qd5 34. Qxd5 exd5 35. Bxd5+) 32... Qf4 {The aforementioned dark square weakness is now evident.} 33. Rb7+ Kg6 34. Qe8+ {As intended when playing 32.Qh8} Kh7 35. Qxe6 (35. Rxg7+ Bxg7 36. Qxe6 Qc1+ 37. Kh2 Qxc2 38. Qd5 Rxg2+ 39. Qxg2 Qxg2+ 40. Kxg2 {is hopeless.}) 35... Qh2# {With this loss, coupled with my loss to Feuerstein, I failed to qualify for the finals and so was unable to add to my collection of the emblem of th Golden Knight, a sterling silver, gold-plated and enameled lapel button. I did however rceive a prize of $2.50 off the entry fee into another tournament.} 0-1

Fine’s Preposterous Opening

    Reuben Fine (1914-1993) was a formidable player with a solid style. Arnold Denker compared him to Bobby Fischer because both were active positional players who possessed a universal style and were able to win in a variety of ways.

    Fine always aimed for precision without regard for where it lead tactically, positionally or into the ending. Tatrtakower observed that Fine, like Capablaca, was often able to make something out of nothing in his games. Denker even went so far as to claim that Fine was better than Reshevsky because he had a better understanding of the game. According to Denker, Reshevsky had the better record only because Fine lacked the tenacity and singleness of mind that Reshevsky had.

    Today Fine is probably remembered more for writing Basic Chess Endings than anything else. It's hardly entertaining reading because it's like a text book on a boring college subject. It focuses on endings that occur most frequently and offers tried-and-tested rules. Over the years mistakes in analysis were found, but the value of the book has not diminished and a great deal can be learned from it.

    Before he became one of the world's best players, in his college days the teenage Fine sometimes played some pretty bizarre openings as the following game show. The game was played in the 1931/32 Intercollegiate Championship that was won by City College of New York; Fine played board 1. 

    Even when playing an irregular opening the objective must be based on sound opening principles. So, after the move 1.f3 against Rappaport, Fine did not neglect the center. When his opponent failed to take advantage of the opportunity to gain space with 3...d4 Fine was able to gain control of the center himself. 

 

[Event "Intercollegiate Chp 1931/32, New York"] [Site "USA"] [Date "1931.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Reuben Fine"] [Black "J. Rappaport"] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "A00"] [Annotator "Stockfish 17.1"] [PlyCount "55"] [EventDate "1931.??.??"] {Barnes Opening} 1. f3 {Named after Thomas Barnes (1825-1874), an English player who had an impressive eight wins over Paul Morphy, including one game where Barnes answered 1.e4 with 1...f6, known as Barnes Defense. Edmar Mednis called it the worst possible opening because it does not develop a piece, doesn’t open any lines and actually hinders the development of white’s N. If that is not enough, it also weakens the K-side P-structure, opens the e1-h4 diagonal against the uncastled K and opens the g1-a7 diagonal against white’s potential K-side castled position.} d5 2. e4 e5 3. Nc3 c6 {3...d4 would gain space and is best. Evifemtly black wants to keep the position open. However, after 3...c6 Fine manages to trades Qs which greatly reduces black’s attacking chances.} (3... d4 4. Nb5 c5 5. d3 a6 6. Na3 Nc6 {Black has the advantage. Mustiola,N-Velez,E Villa Giardino 2002}) 4. d4 dxe4 5. dxe5 Qxd1+ $1 6. Nxd1 exf3 {Amazingly, this position is equal no matter which way white captures on f3!} 7. gxf3 {Fine intends to support the e-Pawn with a P and perhaps create chances by advancing the e- and f-Ps.} Be6 8. Bh3 Bd5 { After this move, which looks quite reasonable, Fine manages to build up a very strong center formation. Black should have played 8...Bxh3 which has the merit of leaving white's N not so well place.} 9. Ne3 Bc5 {Better was 9...Be6} 10. c4 {It would have been better to play 10.Nxd5 gicing black an isolated d-Pawn which, now that the Qs are off the board, would leave white with a favorable endgame.} Bxe3 {Retreating to e6 was still the best option. White's two Bs will come in handy.} 11. cxd5 Bxc1 (11... Bd4 {is met tactically and was no better.} 12. Ne2 Bxe5 13. f4 Bc7 14. Bc8 Nd7 15. Bxb7 Rb8 16. Bxc6 {White has won a P.}) 12. Rxc1 Nd7 13. f4 {Well polayed!} (13. dxc6 {is not nearly as good because after} bxc6 14. Rxc6 Nxe5 {material is equal and it will be difficult for white to demonstrate any advantage}) 13... cxd5 (13... Ne7 { As bad as this is it's his best chance.} 14. d6 Nd5 15. Ne2 {Even here black can do much except to sit tight.}) 14. Rc7 {The R on the 7th rank spells disaster for black. One is almost left wondering how black has gotten into such a bad position so quickly when white’s opening was one of the worst possible!} Nb6 15. Rxb7 Ne7 16. Ne2 Nc6 17. Rg1 g6 18. Kf2 Ne7 {Castling would have been a bit better.} 19. Rc1 Nc4 {Obviously white cannot be allowed to double Rs on the 7th.} 20. b3 Na5 21. Rxe7+ Kxe7 22. Rc5 {Winning the N so black gets what he can for it} Nxb3 23. axb3 {Materially speaking white has a B+N vs R+P which is of about equal value, but here it's the mobility of white's pieces that is important.} a5 24. Rc7+ {Forcing the K to the back rank and leaving the R on h8 useless.} Ke8 25. Nc3 Rb8 26. Nxd5 Kf8 27. e6 {Black has no defense.} f5 (27... fxe6 28. Bxe6 Rb5 (28... Rxb3 29. Nf6 Rb2+ 30. Ke3 { Black is in a mating net.}) 29. Nf6 {mates}) 28. Nf6 {Black resigned. Mate on f7 can’t be avoided. An amazing demonstration by Fine.} 1-0

King Hunt by Feigins

    Movsas Feigins (or Feigin) was born in what was at the time the Russian Empire, but is now Daugavpils, Latvia. 

    He was a prominent Jewish Latvian master duting the 1930s. He was the Latvian Champion in 1932 and competing in several strong international tournaments before World War II. Between 1930 and 1939 Feigin played for Latvia in five official Olympiads and one unofficial one.

    Chessmetrics estimates his highest ever rating to have been 2581 in 1941 ranking him #49 in the world. Some other players close to his ratings were Soviet GM Grigory Levenfish and American Masters Albert Pinkus and Arnold Denker. Botvinnik was top rated at 2786. 

    In September 1939, when World War II began, Feigins was competing in the Olympiad in Buenos Aires, Argentina. Like many other participants, he chose to stay in Argentina permanently. He remained in South America, living for a time in Paraguay before returning to Buenos Aires, where he died in poverty in 1950. 

 

 

[Event "Hamburg Olympiad"] [Site ""] [Date "1930.07.13"] [Round "?"] [White "Movsa Feigins"] [Black "Einar Thorvaldsson"] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "D01"] [Annotator "Stockfosh 17.1"] [PlyCount "65"] [EventDate "1930.07.13"] {D01: Ricter-Veresov Opening} 1. d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 d5 3. Bg5 {The Richter–Veresov Attack was played by Marshall and Tartakower, but the German player Kurt Richter develop new ideas during the 1930s. Soviet player Gavriil Veresov contributed greatly to its theory in the 1940s and 1850s. While never popular at the top levels, it is a good chioce for players with an attacking style.} Nbd7 4. f3 e6 5. e4 dxe4 6. fxe4 Be7 7. Nf3 h6 {While this os not really bad, there is no good reason to play this move, It slightly weakens the K-side and ultimately cause him serious problems. Either 7...O-O or 7...c5 would have been better.} 8. Be3 (8. Bf4 a6 9. e5 Nd5 10. Nxd5 exd5 11. Qd2 Nf8 12. O-O-O {is equal. Obrusnik,M (2184)-Szczepkowska-Horowska,K (2297) Wroclaw POL 2010}) 8... b6 {This is way too slow. He should try 8...c5} ({Black should try} 8... c5 $14) 9. e5 {Already white has a strong attack.} Nd5 {The N has no entirely satisfactory square.} (9... Ng4 10. Bg1 Bb7 11. Bd3 O-O 12. Qe2 c5 13. O-O-O {with the better game. Steiner,D (2265)-Stajner,S Bled 2001}) 10. Nxd5 exd5 11. Bd3 c5 {This comes too late to do black any good. More importantly, black has either overlooked white's next move or underestimated it. It was imperative that he prevent whote's next move with 11...Nf8 followed by 12...Ne6 } 12. e6 {After this it's evident that black's 7th move was faulty; he now has a fatal weakness on the light squares.} fxe6 13. Bg6+ Kf8 {The K is driven to the pillar; it will soon be driven to the psot.} 14. Ne5 Qc7 15. O-O+ Nf6 16. Qh5 Bd8 17. Rf2 Ke7 {There is no safe haven for the K.} 18. Qh4 cxd4 19. Bxd4 a5 {It really doesn't matter what black plays; he either has to make a move or resign.} 20. Qg3 Rf8 21. Bh5 {[%mdl 512] Very clever!} Nxh5 (21... Rg8 22. Rxf6 gxf6 (22... Kxf6 23. Nc6+ e5 24. Qg6#) 23. Qxg8) 22. Ng6+ (22. Qa3+ {is, if nothing else, clever.} Qd6 23. Ng6+ Kd7 24. Nxf8+ {White has won the exchange and black's K is still in grave danger.}) 22... Kd7 23. Nxf8+ Kc6 24. Qf3 Nf6 25. Re1 Qf7 26. Nh7 Be7 27. c4 {Opening up lines for attack.} Bd7 28. Nxf6 gxf6 {White concludes vigorously.} 29. cxd5+ exd5 30. Rc2+ Kb7 {Feigins now executes a crushing finale.} 31. Rxe7 $1 {[%mdl 512]} Qxe7 32. Qxd5+ Kb8 33. Bf2 {Black resigned.} (33. Bf2 {The threat is Bg3+ and there is nothng black can do about it.} Bf5 (33... Ka7 34. Qxa5+ Kb8 35. Qxb6#) 34. Bg3+ Ka7 35. Rc7+ ) 1-0

Reshevsky Caught in Boden’s Mate

    As promised in the previous post this is the one game a young Sammy Reshevsky lost in a 1921 simultaneous display in St, Louis, Missouri. The game is interesting because Reshevsky got caught in Boden’s Mate. It's a handy pattern to keep in mind though it rarely happens. I can remember pulling it off in an online game only once. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Event "Simul, St, Louis"] [Site "?"] [Date "1921.08.25"] [Round "?"] [White "Samuel Reshevsky"] [Black "Edward D. Duncan"] [Result "0-1"] [Annotator "James Massie"] [PlyCount "34"] [EventDate "1921.??.??"] [SourceVersionDate "2025.12.06"] {C40: Elephant Gambits} 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 d5 {This rarely played move is gemerally called the Elephant Gambit, but it has also been known by several different names. At the time this game was played it was called the Center Gambit. Whatever you call it, it is generally considered unsound because black is usually unable to gain compensation for the sacrificed Pawn.} 3. exd5 (3. Nxe5 {This is also good and statistically the results strongly favore white as they do after 3.exd5.} Nf6 4. exd5 Qxd5 5. Qe2 {This is a bit better that the ogten played 5.d4. White is a Pawn up with no difficulties.}) 3... e4 4. Qe2 Nf6 5. Nc3 Bc5 {This is a mistake. The safest move is 5...Be7} (5... Be7 6. Nxe4 Nxd5 7. Nc3 {However, even here black has no compensation for the P.}) 6. Nxe4 {The attack on the B and the threatened discovered check give whiye what should amount to a winning advantaget} O-O {This is his best move. Black has the forlorn hope that white will take the B/} (6... Nxe4 7. Qxe4+ Be7 8. Bc4 { White is teo Ps up with a dominating position.}) 7. Nxf6+ (7. Nxc5 {is too inclear as the position becomes bery complicated. The best line seems to be} Re8 {This pin is bery difficult to meet and requires precise play.} 8. Ne6 Bxe6 9. dxe6 Rxe6 10. Ne5 Nc6 11. f4 Qe7 12. d4 Nxd4 13. Qd3 Ng4 14. Qxd4 Rd8 15. Qc3 Nxe5 16. fxe5 Rxe5+ 17. Kf2 Qf6+ 18. Kg3 Qg6+ 19. Kf2 Qf6+) 7... Qxf6 8. c3 Bd7 (8... Bg4 {is no better. Black still has a bad game.} 9. d4 Nd7 {White can capture the B with impunity. The fact that he doesn't shows how good his position is.} 10. h3 Bh5 11. g4 Rfe8 12. Be3 Bg6 {White soon won. Dimitrov,V (2471)-Galvao,H (2187) Figueira da Foz POR 2007}) 9. d4 Bd6 10. Be3 Bf5 11. Nd2 Nd7 12. g3 {White could have gotten a strong attack with 12.g4 and 13.h4} Rfe8 13. Bg2 Qg6 14. O-O-O {Safer was 14.Nf3. After the text move white's advantage is diminished a bit.} c5 {Black equalizes with 14...Bd3, but this sneaky move catches Reshevsky off guard/} 15. dxc6 bxc6 {Now white should play 16.Rhe1 and he would have been a P up with a solid position.} 16. Bxc6 {[%mdl 8192] Black looks to be in trouble with both his R and N attacked.} Rac8 {The tables have turned and now it's white that is in serious trouble.} 17. Bxd7 {After this black has a mate in 2 by what is known as Boden;s Mate, a pattern in which two Bs deliver mate via intersecting diagonals. For this mate to happen the K's escapr squares must be blocked.} (17. Nf3 {at least avoids immendiate disaster. } Rxc6 18. Nh4 Qe6 19. Nxf5 Qxf5 {White has to offer an exchange of Qs with either 20. Qc2 or 20.Qc3, but after 20...Qa5 black's onslaught would be irresistible.} 20. Rhe1 {This routine move loses...} Rxc3+ 21. bxc3 Ba3+ 22. Kd2 Rb8 23. Rb1 Rxb1 24. Rxb1 Qxb1 {with an extra piece.}) 17... Rxc3+ { [%mdl 512] White resigned.} (17... Rxc3+ 18. bxc3 Ba3# {Boden's Mate}) 0-1

Reshevsky Butchers Bruckstein

    Samuel Reshevsky (1911-1992) has always been one of my favorite players; the other was Mikhail Botvinnik (1911-1995). His 100 Selected Games had the cover worn off it from excessive use. I don't know what happened to the book as it got lost somewhere. I do have Mikhail Botvinnik by Andy Soltis though. 

    The same goes for my copy of Reshevsky's Best Games which I think was a republication of Reshevsky On Chess that was published by Chess Review in 1948. Rumor has it that the book was ghost written by Fred Reinfeld. At some point I managed to procure a copy of the book in Spanish...Reshevsky Frente al Tablero that was translated by Enrico Falcon that was published in Buenos Aires in 1954.

    When downloading the following game I discovered there was some confusion concerning it. A reader on the download site pointed out that the original source for the game was the American Chess Bulletin, but noted that the St. Louis Star's newspaper report on the simultaneous listed Reshevsky's opponents and Bruckstein was not one of them. Reshevsky's book doen't help. He simply said that it was played as "part of exhibitions held during my tour of various locations in the United States." 

    However, a check of the American Chess Bulletin clears up the problem. Reshevsky was on the road under the care of his manager and he paid two visits to the city. His game against Bruckstein was played on the second visit. In all, he played 40 games, scoring 38 wins and a loss with one game apparently unfinished. We will take a look at the game he lost in the next post. 

    After his visit a committee of St. Louis citizens made an offer, including special educational advantages for Reshevsky if his family would take up permanent residence in St. Louis. 

    Nothing is known of Reshevsky’s opponent, but I did locate a bit of information on one of those ancestry sites. Max Bruckstein, a baker by profession, was born in 1880, in the Russian Empire. He married Helena Bruckstein on October 27, 1903, in St. Louis, Missouri. They were the parents of at least one son and one daughter. He died in 1946, at the age of 66. In this game Bruckstein butchered the opening and Reshevsky dispacted him with deadly accurate play. 

 

[Event "Simul, St. Louis"] [Site "Nugent's Dept. Store, St Louis"] [Date "1921.08.26"] [Round "?"] [White "Samuel Reshevsky"] [Black "Max Bruckstein"] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "C34"] [Annotator "Stockfish 17.1"] [PlyCount "47"] [EventDate "1921.??.??"] {C34: King's Gambit Accepted} 1. e4 e5 2. f4 exf4 3. Nf3 d6 {While this move is often played, Reshevsky disapproved of it because it hinders black's position by preventing the free development of his pieces. This point quickly becomes evident. He recommended 3...d4, but far more often black plays 3...g5} 4. d4 Bg4 {Another move that drew Reshevsky's disapproval for being pointless. 4...g5 is still preferable.} 5. Bxf4 Qf6 {Yet another bad move, This premature development of the Q can only result in future wasted time.} (5... Be7 6. Bc4 Nf6 7. Nbd2 O-O 8. O-O Nc6 {White's position is the more active. Zamarreno Cuerda,E (1839)-Palacios Diaz de la Espin,J Madrid 2008}) 6. Bg3 Bxf3 {Another not so good choice because it opens lines for the white pieces and strengthens his center. Developing with 6...Nc6 would have beennbetter.} 7. gxf3 $18 a6 { This pointless move wastes time. Again, 7...Nc6 was the best he had.} (7... Qd8 8. Bc4 c6 9. Nc3 Be7 10. Qe2 Nh6 11. O-O-O O-O 12. Rhg1 Kh8 13. Bf4 Ng8 14. e5 d5 15. Rxg7 Kxg7 16. Qg2+ Kh8 17. Rg1 {1-0 Boege,W-Rosinus,K Badenweiler 1990}) 8. Nc3 {White is clearly better.} Nc6 9. Nd5 Qd8 {The waste of time mentioned at move 5. Because of all his previous inferior moves black's game is now lost. } (9... Qxd4 {loses the exchange.} 10. Nxc7+ Kd8 11. Nxa8) 10. Qd2 Nge7 11. Bc4 b5 (11... Nxd5 12. Bxd5 g6 13. O-O-O Bg7 14. e5 O-O 15. Rhe1 {and at least black is hanginbg on.}) 12. Bb3 a5 13. a4 b4 14. Qd3 Qd7 15. O-O-O Rc8 { Castling was no better.} (15... O-O-O 16. Qa6+ Kb8 17. Nxe7 Nxe7 18. d5 Qc8 19. Qxa5 Qb7 20. Rd4 {with an easy win.}) 16. Qc4 Nxd5 17. Qxd5 g6 {Hoping to get castled, but Reshevsky makes a few hsrd blows that ends the game.} 18. e5 Nd8 19. Rhe1 Ne6 20. Qe4 Ng5 {A pointless attack on the Q.} (20... Be7 {was necessary. White would not have an immediate, forced win, but his position is so strong that the outcome would not be in doubt.} 21. exd6 cxd6 22. Kb1 Kf8 ( 22... O-O 23. d5 Ng7 24. Qxe7) 23. Rd3 Rd8 24. Qd5 Kg7 25. f4 Bf6 26. f5 Nc7 27. Qxa5) 21. exd6+ {A clever finish.} Nxe4 22. Rxe4+ {Maybe 22...Be7 would have presented white more of a challenge.} Qe6 {[%mdl 512]} (22... Be7 23. Rxe7+ Qxe7 24. dxe7 Kxe7 25. Re1+ {Black has a R vs, two Bs, but the game is over.} Kf8 26. Re5 Ra8 27. Rc5 Ra7 28. Bxc7 Ke7 29. Bxa5 Rb8 {White has picked up teo Ps and the win is a matter of technique.}) 23. Rxe6+ Kd7 24. Rf6 { Black resigned} (24. Rf6 Bxd6 25. Be5 Rhf8 26. Bc4 Rb8 27. Bxd6 cxd6 28. Re1 { White's extra piece assures the win.}) 1-0

Elmer E. Southard

    Elmer E. Southard (July 28,1876 0 February 7, 1920, 43 years old) was a neuropsychiatrist, neuropathologist, professor, author and chess player. He was born in Boston, Massachusetts and lived there most of his life. 

    Southard’s professional accomplishments were legion, but nor a lot is known of his chess. He was a member of two local chess clubs and was described in his New York Times obituary as "one of the foremost amateur chess players in America. He was able to play up to six blindfold games simultaneously. It was Southard who introduced what he called the Danvers Openign, but to day ot;s known by a few other names: 1.e4 e5 2.Qg5. The Danvers State Hospital was formerly a psychiatric hospital in Danvers, Massachusetts, 

    At the age of 43, Southard died of pneumonia in 1920 during a trip to New York City to deliver lectures to two medical societies. 

    After his death a study was done on his brain anf, a;sp, the brains of his parents. Ithe study was conducted to determine hereditary links in brain structure. His brain had a prominent frontal lobe, which was believed to be associated with his planning ability. 

    It was also noted that he had small olfactory tracts and that’s why he had difficulty detecting certain smells. It was a;so noted that the arteries at the base of his brain were small, but the significance of them was unclear. None of these features were apparent in his parents. 

    The report mentioned that during the last years of his life Southard experienced considerable mental discomfort and he sensed his impending death. As a result he felt pressure to complete his research tasks. 

    His opponent in the following game was Dr. Robert P. Elmer (1877-1951, 73 years old). He was bon in Bridgeport, New Jersey and passed away in Bryn Mawr, Pennsylvania. The game was played in the fourth annual intercollegiate tournament which was held at Harvard University Cambridge, Massachusetts. Southard went on to win the tournament the following two years. 

 

    The winner of the tournament was Arthur Ryder (1877-1938), a professor of Sanskrit at the University of California, Berkeley who became known best known for translating a number of Sanskrit works into English. He finished second to Southard in the event the following year.

 

[Event "4th Intercollegiate Cup, New York 1895/9"] [Site "New York, NY USA"] [Date "1895.12.31"] [Round "?"] [White "Elmer E. Southard"] [Black "Robert P. Elmer"] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "C25"] [Annotator "Stockfish 17.1"] [PlyCount "75"] [EventDate "1895.12.26"] [Source "The Sun. New Yor"] [WhiteTeam "Harvard"] [BlackTeam "Princeton"] {C30: King's Gambit Declined} 1. e4 e5 2. Nc3 Bc5 3. f4 d6 4. Nf3 Nf6 5. Bc4 Nc6 6. d3 Be6 7. Nd5 Nb4 {Dubious.} (7... Bxd5 8. exd5 Na5 9. fxe5 dxe5 10. c3 (10. Bb3 $2 O-O 11. Bg5 Re8 {Because white'sK os cought in the center black has an excellent game.}) 10... Nxc4 11. dxc4 {with equal chances.}) 8. Nxf6+ { As distasteful as it is black must play 6...gxf6 adter whicj white has the better position. Instead, both playerts overlook a tactic.} Qxf6 {[%mdl 8192]} 9. Bb3 $2 (9. f5 {loses a piece otherwise white plays Bg5 trapping the Q.} Bxf5 10. Bg5 Qg6 11. exf5 Qxf5 12. c3 {Black has two Ps for the B, but that is not suffucuent compensation.}) 9... exf4 {White's next move looks logical, but, again, both players overlook a tactics. White shoyld play 19,c3 to support the advance of his d-Pawn.} 10. d4 Bb6 (10... Bxb3 11. axb3 Bxd4 12. c3 Bxc3+ 13. bxc3 Qxc3+ 14. Bd2 Nc2+ 15. Ke2 Qxa1 16. Qxa1 Nxa1 17. Rxa1 {The material imbalance is unusual, but black's R+4Ps are superior to the B ans N.}) 11. c3 Na6 {The N is misplaced here. Better would have been 11...Bxb3 and 12...Nc6} 12. Ba4+ (12. a4 {gaining space was a better option.} c6 13. a5 Bc7 14. d5 cxd5 15. exd5 Bg4 16. O-O {with a good game.}) 12... c6 13. Qe2 O-O 14. O-O { Black has emerged from the opening with a small advantage and he could develop a K0side attack with 14...g5, Instead he switches over to passive play.} Qd8 15. Bxf4 h6 {All this does is weaken his K-side. Getting the N back into play with 15...Nc7 was worth a try.} 16. Bc2 Qd7 17. e5 d5 {Getting rid of light squared Bs with 17...Bf5 was his best option. After the text his position is beyond salvaging.} 18. Be3 Bf5 {This comes to late to be of any help.} 19. Bxf5 Qxf5 20. Nh4 Qe6 21. Nf5 {Black's K-side is dangerously denuded of pieces.} Nb8 22. Rf3 {Adding the R to the attack.} h5 23. Raf1 g6 24. Rg3 Kh7 25. Nh4 Nd7 26. Nf3 {The obvious threat is a N fork ong5.} Bd8 27. Bg5 {Threatening Bxd8. when tje fork is back on.} Kh8 28. Rh3 {Missing a golden opportunity andm at the same time, easing black''s defense.} (28. Bxd8 $18 {and White stays clearly on top.} Raxd8 29. Qe3 {Threatening Qh6+ and Ng5.} Kg7 30. Nh4 { Black has no meaningful moves.} Rh8 31. Nf5+ Kg8 32. Nh6+ {with a decisive attack. For example, if} Kf8 (32... Rxh6 33. Qxh6 Rf8 34. Qxh5 {White is winning.}) 33. Rxf7+ Ke8 34. Rg7) 28... f6 29. Bd2 {This retreat is a bit too far, Stopping at f4 was abetter. At this point black hasm thanks to some imprecise play by white, managed to equalize.} Be7 (29... fxe5 {was the correct defense because it leads to exchanges.} 30. Nxe5 Rxf1+ 31. Qxf1 Nxe5 32. dxe5 {Taking the ehe e-Pawn would be fatal.} Bb6+ (32... Qxe5 33. Qf8+ Kh7 34. Qh6+ Kg8 35. Qxg6+ Kf8 36. Rxh5 {wins.}) 33. Be3 Qxe5 34. Bxb6 axb6 { and the position is completely equal.}) 30. Qe3 Qg8 31. e6 {This neat little move prevents ...Rf7} Nb6 {This poor N has neve found a useful square.} 32. Nh4 Nc4 {After this white has a mate. Black could have avoided the mate with 32... Qh7, but he would still have been lost.} 33. Qh6+ Qh7 34. Nxg6+ Kg8 35. Nxe7+ Kh8 36. Qxh7+ Kxh7 37. Rxh5+ Kg7 38. Bh6+ {Black resigned.} 1-0

Razzle-Dazzled by the Irish Gambit

    There is a Chess Hotel in Paris that is located in one of the most prestigious areas of the city, close to the Opera and La Bourse – the Paris stock exchange. If you want to hang out there it will cost you somewhere around $300 a night. If you want to hang out at the other Chess Hotel, the one online, and play chess it’s free.

    When boredom sets in I sign in as a guest at Chess Hotel and play a few 10 minute games. I am not sure, but I think the Chess Hotel website is controlled from Stockholm, Sweden. 

    It’s a good site for a few casual games and you can expect to meet all kinds of opponents ranging from engine users to strong players to beginners. 

    There is a fair share of poor sports...players who get losing positions and then just leave the site, or worse yet, those who just let their time expire without moving. Occasionally you get an opponent who like to swear at you, or as happened to me a while back, a near beginner who quickly got a lost position and then began slinging accusations of engine use. Believe me, it didn't take an engine to beat him! It reminded me of the time at the chess club at Camp Lejeune, North Carolina when I beat some young kid and he said, "Where I come from I hardly ever lose." My reply, "Where I come from I hardly ever win."

    Then there was a recent opponent who asked if I spoke English and after finding out I did, asked where I was from. When he found out he said he was from the Ukraine and proceeded to tell me how much he hates Americans. All I can say is some people are amusing. 

    When playing these games my openings are all the dubious ones I can think of because they are fun to play and the results don’t mean anything. Upon seeing things like 1.h4, 1.g4 or with black 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 c6 3.dxc6 e5 (sort of a Danish Gambit Reversed) it’s surprising how careless some players get. The following game featuring the Irish Gambit (aka the Razzle-Dazzle or Chicago Gambit) is a case in point. 

 

[Event "Chess Hotel"] [Site "?"] [Date "2025.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Tartajubow"] [Black "Guest"] [Result "1-0"] [Annotator "Stockfish 17.1"] [PlyCount "57"] [EventDate "2025.??.??"] {Irish Gambit} 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Nxe5 {Millions of games in my database and there is not a single example of this.} Nxe5 4. d4 Ng6 {An equally good alternative is 4...Nc6} (4... Nc6 5. d5 Nb8 6. Bd3 d6 7. O-O Nd7 8. c4 Be7 9. Nc3 Ne5 10. Be2 f5 11. f4 Nf7 12. Bd3 {was played in D. T. Phillips-Harry Nelson Pillsbury. Chicago, 1899. Black has a winning advantage, but Pillsbury got careless and eventually lost.}) 5. Bc4 {As good as anything else.} (5. c4 { This, building up a broad P-center is the main engine selection.} Bb4+ 6. Bd2 Bxd2+ 7. Qxd2 b5 8. cxb5 d5 9. e5 Nh6 10. Nc3 O-O 11. h4 f6 12. f3 a6 13. O-O-O {White is still a piece down with noting to show for it.}) (5. c4 Bb4+ 6. Nc3 c5 7. a3 cxd4 8. axb4 dxc3 9. h4 h5 10. bxc3 Nf6 11. Bg5 O-O 12. Be2 Qe7 13. O-O {This is PlentyChess' line which is a bit more human looking. White still has no compensation for the piece.}) (5. h4 {Is an interesting offer of another P. Engines recommend either 5...d5 or 5...h5, but most hu,ams would probably take the P.} Nxh4 6. c4 Bb4+ 7. Nc3 Bxc3+ 8. bxc3 {White is still a piece down with no compensation.} d6) 5... d5 {Not a bad idea...black returns a P to open up line for development.} 6. exd5 (6. Bxd5 {is strongly met by} Nf6 7. Bb3 Nxe4 8. Qe2 Qe7 9. O-O Nd6) (6. Bxd5 Nf6 7. Nc3 Nxd5 8. Nxd5 f5 { Undermining the N.} 9. Qe2 Be7 {Nlack has the far superior position.}) 6... Bd6 7. Kf1 {This was not a mouse slip and the reason I played it and not 7.O-O escapes me.} N8e7 {Of course 7...Nf6 was better.} 8. h4 {Black should now play 8...h5, but je underestimated the consequences of my next move.} Bd7 $2 9. h5 { Up to this point black had been moving fairly quickly, but this move caused him to pause.} Nf8 (9... Nf4 {is probably what he originally intended, but now realized that after} 10. Qf3 {the N has no retreat.}) 10. h6 {This weakens his K-side and as a result of 8...Bd7 white jas improved his position considerably. } Nf5 (10... gxh6 {was perfectly satisfactory/} 11. Bxh6 Nf5 12. Bxf8 Kxf8 { Black is still much better.}) 11. hxg7 Nxg7 {Material-wise black has a B vs. two Ps and his engine evaluation has dropped from 4Ps to 2Ps. Appearance-wise his position looks "confused."} 12. Nc3 Qf6 {This seems to make sense as black wants to play O-O-O. but he never geys the chance and white now equalizes. Correct was 12...Ng6} (12... Ng6 13. Bh6 O-O {and black ia safe.}) 13. Ne4 { Suddenly black's K has found itself exposed in the center and white has more than enough compensation for the N.} Qg6 {This is just bad.} (13... Qe7 14. Bd3 O-O-O 15. Bg5 f6 16. Bxf6 Qf7 17. Bxd8 Kxd8 {Technically white's R+3Ps outweigh blacks B+N, but practically...?}) 14. Qe2 $16 {Black is on the road to losing evan though he accomplishes his gioal of castling Q-side.} O-O-O ( 14... Be7 {is met by} 15. Rh6 Qf5 16. d6 {Would I have seen this? Probably not. } (16. Ng3 Qg4 17. Qxg4 Bxg4 {and black is better.}) 16... O-O-O (16... cxd6 17. Nxd6+ {wins}) 17. dxe7 {White is winning.}) 15. Rh6 {[%mdl 96] This is my best move of the game...it attacks d6 and sets up a N forl on the K and Q.} Qf5 {The only safe square, but...} 16. Rxd6 Ng6 {It's disappointing that he wouldn; t take the R! Now what?!} (16... cxd6 17. Nxd6+ Kb8 18. Nxf5 Bxf5 (18... Nxf5 19. Qe5+) 19. Qe5+) 17. Rf6 Qg4 18. Qxg4 {I really did not want to trade Qs, but after some thought realized that if I didn't black might actually get some counterplay. Engine analysis of the position after avoiding the exchange with18.Qd3 turns up some real complications!} (18. Qd3 Nh4 19. Ng3 Rde8 20. Bf4 (20. Bh6 Nh5 {The heretofore badly place N finally finds something to do.} 21. Rxf7 Rhg8 22. Re1 {Watch this!} Nxg2 23. Rxe8+ (23. Kxg2 Qh3+ 24. Kg1 Rxe1+ 25. Qf1 Nxg3 {Black mates.}) 23... Rxe8 24. Ne2 Nh4 25. Bb5 Bxb5 26. Qxb5 Rd8 27. Qb3 {With carefukl plat white's two P advantage should prove enough.}) 20... Nh5 {White still has the advantage, but must watch his step.}) 18... Bxg4 19. Rxf7 {The complications are over and white has a winning two P advantage.} Nh5 {The wrechedly placed N finally gets into the game, but with no effect.} 20. Bg5 Rdf8 21. Rxf8+ Rxf8 22. f3 Bf5 23. Bd3 Bxe4 24. Bxe4 Ng3+ 25. Kg1 Ne2+ 26. Kf2 Nxd4 27. Rh1 h6 28. Rxh6 Ne5 29. Bf6 {Black resigned.} 1-0

Morphy At His Worst

    Yesterday dawned gray (in American English) or grey (in British English), but either way it was a dreary day as a huge winter storm brought cold and snow, or rain and chill, depending on your location. 

    After digging out, it was time to settle in and look at some chess games. The following caught my interest. In 1858, before Morphy left Paris he finally met an opponent who, while not his equal, was at least able to put up a fight. 

    The fact that Morphy got off to a bad start though wasn’t due to his opponents great play. According to Morphy’s secretary it was lack of sleep and fatique due to his having been enjoying Paris’ night life. 

     Daniel Harrwitz (1821-1884) was one of the stringest players of the day. He had a minus score against Morphy, but was one of a few who could occasionally beat him.  

    Harrwitz lived in England from 1849 and founded the British Chess Review. In 1856, he moved to Paris. In hos match against Mor[hy he won the first two games, but then Morphy got his act together and after the score was 5.5-2.5 in Morphy’s favor Harrwitz withdrew vlaomomg health problems. After that he retired to the Austro-Hungarian Empire. 

 

[Event "Match, Paris"] [Site ""] [Date "1858.09.07"] [Round "1"] [White "Daniel Harrwitz"] [Black "Paul Morphy"] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "D35"] [Annotator "Stockfish 17.1"] [PlyCount "109"] [EventDate "1858.09.??"] [Source "Illustrated Lond"] {D35: Queen's Gambit Declined} 1. d4 {Harrwitz almost always played 1.d4} e6 2. c4 d5 3. Nc3 Nf6 4. Bf4 {At the time it was believed that this move was the most forcful. In fact, Morphy thought it was so good that he avoided it for the rest of the match. Today it's rarely seen even though its success rate is on a par with the more popular 4.Bg5 and 4.cxd4.} a6 5. e3 c5 (5... dxc4 { is more common.} 6. Bxc4 b5 7. Bb3 Bb7 8. Nf3 Bd6 {with full equality. Meyer,H (2305)-Paulsen,D (2360) Germany 1984}) 6. Nf3 Nc6 7. a3 cxd4 8. exd4 {This opening is so modern that it would not be surprising to see this position today.} dxc4 {Often black will delay this capture until white has developed his B, but here he does not want white to play c5.} 9. Bxc4 b5 10. Bd3 { Often in these types of positions white will play Ba2, Rc1, Bb1 and Qd3 setting up a battery aimed at h7, but black can usually engineer a satisfactory defense.} Bb7 11. O-O Be7 12. Be5 O-O (12... Nxe5 13. dxe5 Nd7 14. Be4 Bxe4 15. Nxe4 O-O {is fully equal.}) 13. Qe2 Nd5 14. Bg3 {Black can now keep the position completely equal with, say, 14...Rc8 or 14...Nf6} Kh8 { Morphy played this with the intention of advancing his f-Pawn and so avoids a Q check on e6. After the game Morphy considered that it lost the game and recommended 14...Bf6. Although 14...Kh8 does absolutely nothing, it hardly loses the game. The position is so even that engines evaluate it at almost 0. 00.} 15. Rfe1 Bf6 {Morphy originally intended 15...f5 and only now realized it was a mistake, but so is 15...Bf6} (15... f5 {gets refuted after} 16. Qxe6 Nxc3 17. bxc3 Rf6 18. Qe3 {White is a solid P ip, has the two Bs and is in control of the e-file which should be enpugh to win.}) (15... Nf6 {is completely equal. } 16. Rad1 (16. Qe3 Qb6 17. Rad1 Rad8 18. Bc2 Na5 19. Ne5 Nc4 20. Nxc4 bxc4 { equal}) 16... Nxd4 17. Nxd4 Qxd4 18. Bxb5 Qb6 19. Bc4 Rac8 20. Bd3 {with equal chances.}) 16. Qe4 g6 17. Nxd5 {How should black recapture! There isn't much difference between taking with the P or the Q, but the offer to trade Qs is an indication that Morphy realized his position was not especially good so he goes on the defensive.} Qxd5 18. Qxd5 {A good alternative was keeping the Qs on then continuing to build up his position with Bf4 and Rad1} exd5 19. Ne5 Rad8 20. Nxc6 Bxc6 21. Rac1 {[%mdl 2048] White is a bit more active, but the position is completely equal.} Rc8 22. Bd6 Rg8 (22... Rfe8 {is a tactical blunder.} 23. Rxe8+ Rxe8 24. Rxc6 Re1+ 25. Bf1 Bxd4 26. Rc2 {Bkacj has lost a piece.}) 23. Be5 Kg7 {When this game was first published it was annotated by Johann Lowenthal claimed that "at this point (Morphy) selects a move which actually gives the victory to his opponent. The Bishop should have now been captured, and the game thereby would have been rendered an even one." No and yes. After 23...Kg7 white has the advantage, but it hardly loses the game. But, yes, 23...Bxe5 followed by 24...Bd7 results in complete equality.} 24. f4 Bd7 25. Kf2 h6 {It's starting here that Morphy [lays a few weak moves and allows Harrwitz to establish a very strong ending. The actove 25...b4 would have greatly eased his defense.} (25... b4 26. Bxa6 Bxe5 27. dxe5 Rxc1 28. Rxc1 bxa3 29. bxa3 Ra8 30. Bb7 Rxa3 31. Bxd5 {with a draw.}) 26. Ke3 Rxc1 27. Rxc1 $18 Rc8 28. Rc5 Bxe5 29. fxe5 {[%mdl 4096] This ending is a technical win for white. His R is well plaed and black has weak Ps.} Be6 (29... Rxc5 {Lowenthal was correct when he pointed out that is black plays this with the view of breaking up his adversary's centre Ps, the white K is posted at d4 and victory secured.} 30. dxc5 f5 31. exf6+ Kxf6 32. Kd4 {Hiow does white secure the point? The technique is illustrated in the following line...} Bc6 33. Be2 Kf5 34. Bf3 Ke6 35. Bg4+ Kf7 36. g3 Kf6 37. Bc8 a5 38. b4 a4 39. Bh3 Ke7 40. Bg4 Kf6 41. Be2 Ke6 42. Bf1 g5 43. Bh3+ Ke7 44. Ke5 {and the penetration of whiye's K ends the game.}) 30. a4 {A weak move that throws away his advantage.} (30. Rxc8 {is the winning move. After} Bxc8 31. Kd2 {Heading for the Q-side so as to attack the Ps.} Bd7 32. a4 (32. Kc3 {is not so good because after} a5 { the K cannot incahe on the Q-side.}) 32... bxa4 33. Bxa6 Be6 34. Bb7 Bd7 35. Kc3 h5 36. Kb4 f6 37. exf6+ Kxf6 38. Kc5 {wins the d-Pawn.}) 30... bxa4 31. Bxa6 Rb8 {With the Rs on black has enough play that the position is equal.} 32. Rb5 Rd8 33. Rb6 Ra8 34. Kd2 Bc8 35. Bxc8 Rxc8 {This R+P ending should be a draw.} 36. Rb5 Ra8 {[%mdl 8192] This is a serious error.} (36... Kf8 {and Black is OK.} 37. Rxd5 Rb8 38. Kc3 Rb3+ 39. Kc2 Rb4 {and white;s R in front of the P instead of behind it allows black to hold the game.}) 37. Rxd5 a3 38. bxa3 Rxa3 {Surely Morphy ensiaged this position when he played 36...Ra8 and if so, he totslly misjudhed it. White has a won ending. However, Harrwitz' play is not exactly accurate.} 39. Rc5 Kf8 40. Ke2 Ke7 41. d5 Kd7 {White should now play 42.Rb5! threatening to place his R on the 7th rank.} 42. Rc6 h5 43. Rf6 Ke7 {[%mdl 8192] This is the final game losing mistake. The correct way to defend the P was with 43...Ke8!!} (43... Ke8 44. Rf1 (44. d6 Ra5 {draws.}) 44... Ra2+ {and white cannot make any progress.}) 44. d6+ {Harrwitz concludes brilliantly.} Ke8 45. e6 {White threatens d7+ and mate.} fxe6 46. Rxe6+ Kf7 47. d7 Ra8 48. Rd6 Ke7 49. Rxg6 Kxd7 50. Rg5 Rh8 51. Kf3 Ke6 52. Kg3 h4+ 53. Kg4 h3 {A last hope. The R ending with an h-Pawn would be draw.} 54. g3 Kf6 55. Rh5 { Bkack resigned.} 1-0

An Old Masterpiece

    I recently came across an old book edited by Fred Wilson titled Lesser Known Chess Masterpieces 1906-1915 which contains 165 games that appeared in the old Year Book of Chess. The book was published by Dover Publications in 1978. 

    Fred Wilson is still around and owns Fred Wilson Chess Books in New York City. He has authored a number of chess books and appears to have set some sort of record when, in 2017, at age 71, he finally elevated his rating over 2200 to claim the National Master title. Unless you’re in that age bracket it’s hard to appreciate the accomplishment! 

    The games are all exciting and some of the opening are out of date, but that’s part of their charm. Most of the games, as well as those who played them, have been long forgotten. 

    Today we will take a look at the first game in the book. It was won by Simon Alapin (1856-1923). He was born in Vilnius, Lithuania and later settled in St. Petersburg before finally moving on to Heidelberg, Germany. He has a number of opening variations named after him, most notably the Alapin Variation of the Sicilian (1.e4 c5 2.c3), which has become quite popular in recent times. Chess metrics estimates him to have been one of the world;s top 10 players in 1898. 

 His opponent was the Russian Pyotr Romanovsky (1892-1964) who won the Soviet Championship in 1923 and, jointly, 1927. According to Chessmetrics he was the 12th best player in the world six different time between 1925 and 1935. 

    During the Siege of Leningrad in winter of 1941–42, a rescue party reached Romanovsky’s home where they found him half conscious from starvation and the cold. The rest of his family had frozen to death. All their furniture had been used for firewood. 

    During the winter of the siege temperatures in Leningrad dropped to 40 degrees below zero (F). That winter was considered the coldest of the 20th century in Europe. People ate meager rations of bread and when food ran out, they resorted to eating things like wallpaper paste, leather and in some cases the bodies of the dead. 

    I remember the Andes flight disaster in 1972, where a plane carrying a Uruguayan amateur rugby team crashed in the remote Andes mountains. Only 16 of the 45 on board ultimately survived their 72-day ordeal. They survived by resorting to anthropophagy (eating human flesh). Of that practice, in a documentary one of the survivors stated, “If you had been there you would have done the same thing.” 

 

    After his recovery Romanovsky started a new family and continued to work to promote chess and train players. He was awarded the IM title in 1950 and the International Arbiter title in 1951. In 1954 he Soviets partitioned FIDE to award him the GM title, but lated withdrew it for political reasons that had nothing to do with Romanovsky. 

 

[Event "St. Petersburg"] [Site "?"] [Date "1905.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Simon Alapin"] [Black "Pyotr Romanovsky"] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "C32"] [Annotator "Stockfish 17"] [PlyCount "55"] [EventDate "1905.??.??"] {C32: Falkbeer Counter Gambit} 1. e4 e5 2. f4 d5 {In this, the Falkbeer Counter Gambit, black sacrifices a P in exchange for quick development. In the early days it was considered good for black, but eventually white found ways to combat it.} 3. exd5 (3. fxe5 {loses outright.} Qh4+ 4. g3 Qxe4+) (3. Nf3 { This is a reasonable alternative.} exf4 4. exd5 Nf6 5. c4 c6 {With an interesting game/}) 3... e4 4. d3 Nf6 5. dxe4 Nxe4 {At the time this game was played this move had not been well analyzed, but now it's known to be best.} 6. Nf3 Bc5 7. Qe2 {Black has a wide choice of inferior moves here! In addition to the move he played, 7...f5, 7...o-o, ...Qe7 an d...Qxd5 are all questionable.} Bf2+ {This looks strong...it drives the K onto the same file as black's Q, but there is no way black can take advantage of it.} (7... Bf5 {pretty much equalizes.} 8. Nc3 Qe7 9. Be3 Nxc3 10. Bxc5 Qxe2+ 11. Bxe2 Nd7) 8. Kd1 f5 (8... Qxd5+ {Looks very strong, but watch what happens!} 9. Nfd2 Bg4 10. Qxg4 O-O 11. Bd3 Rd8 12. Nxe4 Qxe4 13. Nd2 Qd4 14. Nf3 Qb6 15. Qh3 Rxd3+ 16. cxd3 Nc6 17. Ne5 Nb4 18. Bd2 Bd4 19. Qd7 Bxe5 20. fxe5 Nxa2 21. Qa4 {1-0 Neuman,P (2428) -Trmal,J (2272) Klatovy 2004}) 9. Nfd2 {The pin on his N is very troublesome for black.} Bh4 $146 (9... Qxd5 {still doesn't work.} 10. Nc3 Qd6 11. Ncxe4 fxe4 12. Qxf2 {winning a piecd.}) 10. Nxe4 fxe4 11. Qxe4+ Kf7 {Only marginally better was 1...Be7} 12. Bd2 Bf6 13. Nc3 g6 14. Bd3 Na6 15. Qf3 Nb4 16. a3 Nxd3 17. cxd3 (17. Qxd3 {is not nearly as good.} Bf5 18. Qc4 Re8 {an black has eased his defensive burden considerab;y.}) 17... Re8 18. Kc2 Bd7 19. Rae1 Rxe1 20. Rxe1 b5 21. Ne4 a5 {White has several ways to win.} 22. g4 (22. Nxf6 Qxf6 23. d6 {Attacking the R.} Re8 24. Rxe8 Kxe8 25. Qa8+ Kf7 26. dxc7 Qf5 27. Qxa5 {with an easy win.}) 22... c5 23. f5 {breaking up the position around black's K.} b4 24. fxg6+ Kxg6 25. Rf1 Ra6 26. g5 Ba4+ 27. Kb1 bxa3 28. Nxf6 {Black resigned. Not a brilliancy so much as it was a crushing attack by Alapin against Romanovsky who made no glaring errors.} 1-0