Tahl vs. Larsen 1965

     Starting in the mid-1960s, Larsen and Fischer were the two strongest players outside the Soviet Union and of the two, Larsen was the more active, playing in many strong events in which he repeatedly finished ahead of the top Soviet players. 
     In those days it was unusual for a top GM to play in Open Swiss tournaments, but Larsen entered, and won, many of them. 
     After Larsen won the Monte Carlo 1968 tournament ahead of Botvinnik, Smyslov, Hort, Robert Byrne, Portisch, and Pal Benko, he had racked up an incredible string of five consecutive first place finished in major tournaments. 
     This game, which made the cut in the book The World's Greatest Chess Games as one of the one hundred best games of all time, was played in the semifinal candidates match, Bled, 1965 and features an intense tactical battle. 
     The match was tied at two wins apiece with five draws and the winner would face Boris Spassky in the final candidates match to determine the challenger for World Champion Tigran Petrosian. 
     In the book, the game was rated by Graham Burgess as a 10 out of 15; the lowest score making the cut was 9. The games were rated on quality and brilliance of play by both players, instructional value and historical significance. It's amazing neither of their heads explode while calculating the variations in this game!! 
     The game is a good one to actually set up a board and play through so you can practice your powers of visualization. I have made a link to a pdf file in Dropbox you can download and printout HERE. 
 

Sometimes Even An Engine Is No Help

     The position below is a position from the game Shirov vs. Piket, Amsterdam 1995, that was first published in New in Chess and later in his book, Fire On Board. Shirov wrote that sometimes analyzing a game gives more pleasure than than the game itself. That's what he felt uncovering the mysteries of 23...Qc5 24.Bg5! Since Shirov mentioned that he was using Fritz in his analysis, when I first read the book and came to this game, I analyzed it with the Xtreme Chess engine and it was unable to find Shirov's suggested 24.Bg5. 
     When I came across the game again the other day I was curious to see if his statement that no engine would find 24.Bg5 is still true, so checked it out with Komodo 8 and Stockfish 6. Neither engine found it! ...at least not after 15-20 minutes or so. In fact, Komodo 8 dropped its evaluation from slightly over a Pawn to a little more than half a Pawn when I actually played the move.
     After spending a couple of hours looking at this position with Stockfish and Komodo I was unable to come to a clear conclusion about Shirov's 24.Bg5 even using engines that are much strong than whatever version of Fritz he was using back in 1997.
 

The Universal Opening/Defense

     About 15 years ago a book called The Beginners Game came out.  The author was someone named Pafu.  He advocated the opening moves for white, in just about any move order: b3, d3, e3, g3, Bb2, Bg2, Nd2, and Ne2. Black can adapt the same setup as a defense. Of course there will be circumstances where all the moves can't be played. The problem with this formation is that the most that can be achieved is equality because the setup does not place the pieces in attacking positions and the opponent is granted free reign in the center and a substantial advantage in space. At one time the book was a free download, but it's no longer available. 
     I run into this opening/defense a lot in online games because, apparently, many players think they can automatically play the moves without giving any consideration to what their opponent does and then, after the setup is complete, make an appropriate P-break. While it is true you can play it against just about anything, the resulting positions are generally not very promising. The first time I ran into it was in a CCLA game about 12-15 years ago. A long time correspondence master played it against me and lost. In Internet games I like to set up a BIG P-center and then make a Pawn thrust that cracks open my opponent's position. Against the guy I played in this game, who was rated in the mid-1600's, he tried it in all three 15-minute games we played, including one as black against my Grob Attack; he lost all three games. My advice...don't play it!

 

Pistyan 1922

    Bad Pistyan, a health resort, was noted for its hot mineral springs and was a favorite of many well known European celebrities. One of the landmarks was a young man breaking his crutch in half, supposedly because after visiting the springs, he didn't need it.
     The tournament place was held at the Grand Hotel Royal which was situated in the spa gardens and was played according to the usual tournament rules, but with a new time control introduced by the TD, Dr. Vécsey: 25 moves per hour then 15 moves per hour. This was slower than usual because modern masters were introducing a lot of new moves in the openings and so more thinking time was needed. 
    The organizers had hoped the “new” hypermodern players would strut their stuff, but were disappointed when from the beginning the tournament was dominated three attacking players, Alekhine, Bogolyubow and Spielmann! They set a furious pace and dominated the event. 
     Bad Pistyan was the first major chess tournament after World War One and signaled a revival of chess life in Europe. In the same year major tournaments were played in London, Hastings, Vienna and Teplice. In Bad Pistyan Spielmann showed that he was, after the war, one of the the best players in the world, which he confirmed in the next few years by numerous good results. 
    Gyula Breyer died of heart failure at the age of 28 in November 1921 and shortly before his death he had written to his friend Dr Zoltan Vecsey, then Secretary of the Kosice Chess Club, suggesting that a strong international tournament should be arranged in Pistyan. The idea was that this tournament would continue the tradition started in 1912 when the town had hosted a strong international tournament. The Kosice Chess Club decided to honor Breyer's memory by designating the event as the Gyula Breyer Memorial Tournament. The first tournament took was won by Akiba Rubinstein ahead of Rudolf Spielmann and Frank Marshall.

    

Alekhine playing Marco

Niniteen players accepted. Oldrich Duras, Emanuel Lasker, Aron Nimzowitsch and Richard Teichmann did not reply. Akiba Rubinstein accepted, but had to withdraw before the tournament began because of stomach problems. The world champion, Capablanca, was missing for unknown reasons while Géza Maróczy, Milan Vidmar and Jacques Mieses said they lacked the time. There were two tournaments: the main event designated the "A" tournament and a long forgotten "B" tournament with twelve players. The final result was still in doubt until the last round. At the end of the penultimate round Alekhine and Bogoljubov were tied with 14 points. In the final round Alekhine could only manage to draw with Reti while Bogoljubow defeated Euwe, winning the tournament. 
     Bogoljubow lost only one game, to Tartakower. Alekhine, who greatly enhanced his reputation in this event, lost only one game, also to Tartakower and drew with Bogoljubov and Spielmann. The only undefeated player was Spielmann; considering his risky style, that is rather surprising. The fourth place finisher, Gruenfeld, lost to Bogoljubow, Spielmann, Alekhine and Reti. Three special brilliancy prizes were awarded and one of the most instructive games was the one given below. 

Bad Pistyan, Czechoslovakia, 7-28 April 1922 
1) Bogoljubow 15.0 
2-3) Spielmann 14.5 
2-3) Alekhine 14.5 
4) Grünfeld 11.0 
5) Réti 10.5 
6-7) Sämisch 9.5 
6-7) Wolf 9.5 
8) Tartakower 9.0 
9-11) Tarrasch 8.5 
9-11) Euwe 8.5 
9-11) Johner 8.5 
12-13) von Balla 8.0 
12-13) Treybal 8.0 
14-15) Selezniev 7.0 
14-15) Hromadka 7.0 
16-17) Prokes 6.0 
16-17) Przepiorka 6.0 
18) Marco 5.5 
19) Opocensky 4.5
 

What's the solution?

Las Vegas - October 8-12, 2015 - $1,000,000 PRIZE GUARANTEED 

     Nakamura won a hundred thousand dollars after a controversy involving his 9-move draw in the last regulation time control game against Luke McShane. It was against the Millionaire rules, but after 97 minutes and consultation with FIDE arbiters all over the world, the draw was allowed to stand because the rule of three fold repetition takes precedence over the tournament rules. 
     Organizer GM Maurice Ashley made the rule out of "respect to the viewing public" and all the participants agreed to it before the tournament started, but "Who cares?" is the question I guess. Ashley, of course, was in a snit saying, "If we're ever going to be a televised game we cannot have games like this...I consider it a stain on our game." 
     What's the solution? First, quit trying to make chess a spectator sport...it never has been except for a handful of diehard individuals. Second, quit offering tens of thousands in prizes.
     When a top level GM can make a comfortable living by playing chess, the money is going to be their main consideration, not chess. Who's going to risk tens of thousands of dollars just for the benefit of the organizers and spectators? I wouldn't. If I could win a hundred thousand by taking a nine move draw, guess what? I'm taking it! So, the solution is simple...go back to the days when players played for pride and prestige and keep prizes and entry fees low. OK, so a lot of players would quit playing. Who cares? Most of the old time players had jobs just like the rest of us and they never complained. As for the organizers, in the old days they did it for love of the game too, not so they could make money.

This was NOT a Queen Sacrifice...

… according to Bent Larsen. 

     In his book The Art of Sacrifice in Chess Rudolf Spielmann distinguished between real and sham sacrifices. A sham sacrifice leads to a forced and immediate benefit for the one making it, usually in the form of a quick checkmate or regaining the sacrificed material after a forced line. Since any amount of material can be sacrificed as long as checkmate will be achieved, the Q is not above being sacrificed as part of a combination. Possible reasons for a sham queen sacrifice include:

• forced checkmate 
• more than adequate material compensation 
• clearing the way for a P's promotion 
• subsequent capture of the opponent's Q that results a positional or material gain 

     Real sacrifices, according to Spielmann, are those where the compensation is not immediate, but more of a positional nature. Positional sacrifices of the Q almost always entail some partial material compensation. An opportunity may arise where a player trades off his Q for other pieces which may together be of equal or greater value than the Q. 
     Bent Larsen wrote that giving up the Q for a R and two minor pieces is sometimes called a "queen sacrifice", but since a Rook plus two minor pieces is more valuable than the Q, he said it should not be considered a sacrifice. 
     In this game white exchanges his Q for adequate material plus he got an overwhelming attack. We still like to call it a Q-sacrifice though, even if, technically when we apply Larsen's definition, it wasn't.
 

Charles S. Stratton and Chess

    Charles Sherwood Stratton, aka General Tom Thumb, (1838-1883) was the most famous midget in history. See the Tom Thumb Exhibit at the Lost Museum HERE. 
     According to his contemporaries, he was “an excellent chess player for his size.” It was said that was because his opponents couldn’t distinguish between him and the pieces.  Problemist Sam Loyd claimed to have been his opponent in the only known game that he (Stratton) played. The game appeared in the book Brevity and Brilliancy in Chess by Miron J. Hazeltine. The game also appeared in The Philadelphia Times. 

What is known for sure is that Stratton did play chess. The following article appeared in the Brooklyn Daily Eagle, Sunday, December 29, 1878:

Tom Thumb is a big man in a small way, or it may be a small man in a big way. Our readers who feel interested in this phenomenal personage will be entertained by the article on the first page giving an account of an Eagle reporter's interview with him. The General may be cited as a fine illustration of the remarkably small compass in which a great deal of human nature may be packed. Among of other pieces of information communicated to the reporter is the statement that he, the General, stopped playing chess when his wife learned to beat him at the game. There is so much uncertainty as to his age that his lady friends who are curious as to such matters will be pleased to learn that he was born in the year 1838, and is consequently in the forty-first year of his age. 

The interview referred to can be read HERE. 

Aftermath of the Newhall House fire

Also of interest is the Newhall House fire in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. It was the original home of the Milwaukee Chess Club until the fire. The fire of the uninsured six-story wood frame building occurred January 10, 1883. The lives of 71 of the 300 people in the hotel were claimed. The fire started on the first floor and spread up the elevator shaft to all floors. Guests at the hotel at the time were Tom Thumb and his wife, both of whom escaped unhurt.
 

The Rarest of All Chessplayers

     Leon Stolzenberg (18 October 1895 in Austria – 25 October 1974) was an American master. Stolzenberg had been a medic in the hospital at Tarnopol in World War I. He came to the United States after World War I and settled in Detroit, Michigan where he was a pharmacist and became one of the US's leading correspondence players. He was also an OTB master, winning the US Open in 1926 and 1928. He won the championship of Michigan a record 13 times (1933, 1934, 1935, 1936, 1937, 1942, 1944, 1945, 1947, 1950, 1951, 1953 and 1962). He won Al Horowitz' popular Chess Review magazine's sponsored US Open Postal Chess Championship three times. I played in many of these events, qualifying for the finals 3 or 4 times, and they were very strong.  Not only were some of the best correspondence players in the country playing, it was not at all unusual to run into OTB masters and there were even a few who had qualified for the US Championship... I lost twice to one of them. Stolzenberg also won the championship of the Correspondence Chess League of America twice. 
     Stolzenberg cleared up a mystery. Alekhine wrote that in 1916 he suffered a contusion of his spine and for months was confined to bed in the hospital at Tarnopol and playing blindfold chess proved to be a real salvation for him. At his request local players often visited him and he had the opportunity of playing many blindfold games. One of his opponents was named “Feldt.” Walter Korn, writing in American Chess Heritage, states that Stolzenberg claimed that “Feldt” was actually an intern at the hospital named Dr. Martin Fischer.
     What was so rare about the Stolzenberg? When he died people found a large record collection in his home, but not a single chess book and he apparently never saved his scoresheets. How rare is that for a chessplayer??!! 
     In this game black played the K-Indian which at the time was only beginning to become popular. The history of the K-Indian is fascinating. At one time the QGD was was the “normal” defense and it had been analyzed nearly to death. In the 1948 World Championship match-tournament the K-Indian was only played twice! By the time the great Zurich 1953 event was played one third of the QP openings was a K-Indian. This game is very instructive and I encourage you to make sure you play through it. It offers some good basic instruction on the K-Indian Defense.
 

Fred Reinfeld Could Play Chess!

Reinfeld

    Like comedian Rodney Dangerfield, Reinfeld could have easily used the phrase, “I don't get no respect!” In addition to his writing on a wide range of subjects (chess, checkers, coin collecting, stamp collecting, geology, history, medicine, physics, political science and law under his own name, Reinfeld also wrote books under the pseudonyms Robert V. Masters and Edward Young. 
    Most of his chess books were of low quality and appealed to beginners who didn't know any better than to buy them, but many of his early works were superb as were some of the chess books he ghosted. It didn't take him long to figure out that bad books sold better than good ones and were a lot easier to write! 
     But, Reinfeld was a very strong player.  From the early 1930s to the early 1940s, after which he withdrew from competition, he was one of the country's best players. Mostly, his games were boring positional affairs, but like all strong masters, he could, as he does in this game, unleash a tactical barrage when presented with the opportunity. This game was played in the Metropolitan Chess League. Batgirl has a fascinating history of the league at Edo Chess.
 

Hannibal Engine

     I have never paid much attention to this engine but decided to try it out after seeing the reading about its playing style on the engine's site. It says: Hannibal is a strategic player and relies on its very selective search, good endgame knowledge and an understanding of material imbalances. Hannibal is also an aggressive king attacker and is willing to sacrifice material for the initiative on king attacks. It also has understanding of fortresses and trapped pieces along with other standard chess engine knowledge like mobility, pawn structure, and passed pawns. 
     On the CCLR 40/40 rating list Hannibal does not fare too well, ranking number 13 at 3114 and on the CEGT 40/120 list rated number 27 at 2694. On the IPON list Hannibal can't be tested as it crashes too often in the Shredder Classic GUI used by the site for testing. 
     I decided to run my own test though it was not very scientific because I held a G4 tournament with Hannibal, Houdini 1.5, Stockfish 6, Komodo 8, Fritz 12 and Gull 3. Hannibal lost all it's games. Of course, engines are designed to score well at blitz because that's how engine rating lists are complied and they may do better at slower time controls, or so I have been told. Even so, I doubt Hannibal would stand a chance against Stockfish or Komosd at any time control. 
     In this game against Houdini 1.5 it took a risk at move 29, the kind a human tactician might, and the resulting position were, as Jeremy Silman would say, unbalanced...big time. Stockfish and Komodo managed to thread there way through the resulting complications without much trouble. For humans, the problems may not have been so easily solved. That said, the point that Hannibal is willing to sacrifice material for a K-side attack makes it a good engine to practice against or search openings for tricky stuff you can play OTB, so while it may not be good for correspondence players, OTB players may find it useful. Whether you consider it tricky or weak depends on what you're using it for.