Random Posts

Saturday, June 18, 2022

1946 Australia-France Radio Match

Charles Watson
     With the boom in post-WWII chess activity the radio match played on June 15 and 16, 1942 between Australia and France went largely unnoticed. The match consisted of a team of five players from Sydney against five from Paris and five players from Melbourne against five from Marseilles. In Paris Eugene Znosko-Borosky served as arbitrator. 
     Today's game features one of Australia's top players, Charles G. M. Watson (October 22, 1879 - March 5, 1961, 81 years old). He was born in Buninyong which is not far from Melbourne in SE Australia. 
 
     Watson was Australian Champion in 1922 and 1930-31. His 1922 win ended the run of William S. Viner who had been champion since 1906. The Championship didn't return to Melbourne until 1931, when Watson again won. 
     His only international event seems to have been London 1922 (won by Capablanca ahead of Alekhine) where he tied places 14-15 out of 16. He scored a wins over Morrison (Canada), Davide (Italy), Marotti (Italy), Atkins (England) and, most significantly, Richard Reti (Hungary). Chessmetrics assigns him a high rating of 2456 on the June, 1926 list placing him at number 53 in the world. 
     He started playing chess at the age of 10 with his father and later joined the Melbourne Chess Club, winning the club championships in 1898, 1902, 1904, 1905, 1914, 1921, 1931 and 1936. 
     A tactician who eschewed strategy, Watson was known for his uncanny ability to win lost games. Watson also had a very brief football (i.e. soccer) career; he played 11 games for the Melbourne Demons in the inaugural season of the Victorian Football League Australian Football competition in 1897. Later in life became a big fan of bridge. He passed away in Melbourne in 1961. 
     His opponent in the following game was Barbato Rometti (June 23, 1896 - August 22, 1975) who was born in Italy, but became a naturalized French citizen on September 1, 1929. 
     At the beginning of his career, he played in Nice 1930, in the B tournament. In 1937, also in Nice, he finished 2nd behind Alekhine behind in a quadrangular tournament. 
     Rometti played in many French Championship. His best showing were in 1932 (shared 2nd), 1935 (shared 2nd) and 1945 (3rd). His last appearance was in 1965 where he finished 24th He played for France in 3rd unofficial Chess Olympiad at Munich 1936 and in 8th Chess Olympiad at Buenos Aires and for Monaco at Tel Aviv 1964. A game that I liked (Komodo 14)
[Event "Australia vs France Radio Match"] [Site "?"] [Date "1946.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Charles Watson"] [Black "Barbato Rometti"] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "A15"] [Annotator "Stockfish 15"] [PlyCount "78"] [EventDate "1946.??.??"] {English Opening} 1. c4 Nf6 2. Nf3 e6 3. e3 d5 4. b3 Nbd7 5. Bb2 Be7 6. Be2 { White has also played 6.Nc3, 6.d4 and 6.Qc2 here.} c6 7. O-O O-O 8. Qc2 Ne4 9. d3 Nd6 10. Nbd2 f6 {Black evidently intended to followup with ...e4, but Watson's next move puts the quietus on that idea. Better was 10...b6} 11. Nd4 { Rather awkward, but now 11...e5 is met by the for 12.Ne6} (11. d4 {was a better way if preventing the advance of the e-Pawn.} e5 {His best move was probably 11...f5} 12. dxe5 fxe5 13. cxd5 cxd5 14. Nxe5 Nxe5 15. Bxe5 Be6) 11... Ne5 12. c5 {After this black's pieces are all gummed up, but the closed nature of the position makes it difficult to assign white more than a slight advantage.} Ne8 13. f4 Nf7 14. N4f3 {He still wants to prevent ...e5} Qc7 15. d4 {Still hindering ...e5} f5 16. b4 b6 17. Nb3 Nf6 18. Bd3 Bd7 (18... g5 { aiming for counterplay was the correct strategy} 19. Ne5 gxf4 20. exf4 Ne4 { and the chances are even.}) 19. Qe2 b5 20. Bc3 Ne4 21. Be1 Kh8 22. Ne5 Nxe5 23. dxe5 g5 24. Rc1 Qd8 25. Nd4 Qe8 26. Rf3 (26. Bxe4 {was better. Then after} dxe4 27. Nb3 Qg6 28. Rd1 Be8 29. Rd6 {white has a promising position.} Bxd6 { This is wrong. Better would be 29...Rg8} 30. cxd6 Rg8 31. fxg5 Qxg5 32. Nc5 { with excellent compensation for the exchange.}) 26... Qh5 27. Rc2 (27. fxg5 { can get tricky.} Bxg5 28. Bxe4 fxe4 29. Rxf8+ Rxf8 30. Qxh5 Bxe3+ 31. Bf2 Rxf2 32. Kh1 Bxc1 {Black only has a R and B for his Q, but the position is not at all clear. In Shootouts white scored +3 -0 =2, but the games were quite long, a couple well over 100 moves.}) 27... Rg8 28. Rf1 Qf7 29. Qd1 gxf4 30. exf4 { [%mdl 32]} Bd8 {This passive move makes little sense. Better was 34...Rg6} ( 30... Rg6 31. Kh1 Rag8 32. Bxe4 fxe4 33. Bc3 {but even here white has the better game and scored 5-0 in Shootouts.}) 31. Bxe4 fxe4 32. Bc3 h6 33. f5 Qh7 {It's amazing that black's position has collapsed so quickly, but a somewhat better defense was offered by 36...Qe8} (33... Qe8 34. f6 Qf7 35. Rf4 Rg6 36. Rh4 Kh7 37. Ne2 {Heading for f4. Black's position is badly compromised.}) 34. fxe6 Be8 35. Nf5 {[%cal Oe6e7] Threatening to win with 36.e7} Be7 36. Nd6 Qg6 { This meets with a great refutation but there was nothing better.} 37. Rf6 { [%mdl 512] Of course the R can't be safely taken.} Qg5 (37... Bxf6 38. exf6 Kh7 39. f7 Bxf7 40. exf7 Rg7 41. Bxg7 Qxg7 42. Rf2 Rf8 43. Qd2 d4 44. Rf1 {White is clearly winning.}) 38. Nf7+ Bxf7 39. exf7 ({Less strong is} 39. Rxf7 Rg6 { and white's progress is almost at a standstill.}) 39... Rg6 {Black resigned without waiting for white to reply.} (39... Rg6 40. Rxg6 Qxg6 41. e6+ Kh7 42. Rf2 Rf8 43. Qd4 {Analysis shows that while there is no forced win for white and black can put up some semblance of resistance, in the end he will gradually be outplayed.}) 1-0

Friday, June 17, 2022

The Other Christmas Tournament

     Everybody knows about the annual Hastings Christmas tournament. The first one took place in 1920-21 and was a four player double round-robin of British Champions, won by Frederick Yates ahead of R.H.V. Scott, Henry Atkins and Richard Griffith. It grew in importance and the winner's list became a Who's Who of chess champions. 
     There was another international Christmas tournament in Lucerne, Switzerland, but it only lasted from 1947-48 to 1953-54 and the most prominent winner was former World Champion Max Euwe in 1950-51 who tied with Herman Pilnik of Argentina. 
     Just three weeks before, in the 1950 Amsterdam tournament, Euwe and Pilnik met in round 7; Pilnik won and they ended up sharing sixth place. There were 18 players and Najdorf finished ahead of Reshevsky. 

     At Lucerne they met in the last round, played 25 moves and called it a draw. In the following game, in a good position, the Swiss Master Martin Christoffel strives for more than he should have and his plans were frustrated by two counters by Pilnik...one on the Q-side, the other on the K-side. Black was then left with the better ending and managed to win against demoralized resistance. A game that I liked (Komodo 14)
[Event "Lucerne"] [Site "?"] [Date "1950.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Dr. Martin Christoffel"] [Black "Herman Pilnik"] [Result "0-1"] [ECO "B91"] [Annotator "Stockfish 15"] [PlyCount "92"] [EventDate "1950.??.??"] {Sicilian Najdorf} 1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 a6 6. g3 { This is known as either the Fianchetto Variation or the Zagreb Variation. Despite its quiet appearance black has to play accurately. Spanish GM Javier Moreno Carnero explains, "...in general, theoreticians have not investigated this line deeply enough, probably because they consider it a minor line, and as result underestimate its real value. Many Najdorf specialists have experienced some problems due to this, mainly because they did not really know the dangers hidden in this scheme. This variation is not only strategically complex, but also a bit of transpositional chaos because many lines can be reached through different move orders."} Bg4 {Very seldom played. Black almost always replies with 6...e5} 7. f3 Bd7 8. Bg2 {White continues in a slow, but solid, way. More aggressive is 8. g4, the loss of time being insignificant because clack has also lost time with his B. The initiative is what is important here.} (8. g4 h6 9. Be3 e6 10. Qd2 (10. h4 {This is also good.} Be7 11. Qd2 Nc6 12. O-O-O b5 13. Qg2 Nxd4 14. Bxd4 b4 15. Ne2 {with a sharp position. Popovic,P (2550)-Ljubojevic,L (2635) Belgrade 1989}) 10... Nc6 11. O-O-O Ne5 12. h4 Qc7 13. Rg1 b5 14. Qf2 Rc8 15. g5 {White has a strong attack. Stefansson,H (2585)-Miton,K (2600) Reykjavik 2011}) 8... Nc6 9. Be3 (9. Nb3 g6 10. Be3 Bg7 11. a4 Ne5 12. Nd2 Rc8 13. a5 Nc4 14. Nxc4 Rxc4 15. Bb6 Qc8 16. O-O {Black is slightly better. Hernandez,A (2285) -Gormally,D (2484) Cardiff 2015}) 9... Rc8 10. O-O (10. Nde2 Ne5 11. b3 g6 12. O-O Bg7 13. Nd5 Nxd5 14. exd5 { is equal. Stoyanov,I (1978)-Fedoseev,V (2321) Herceg Novi 2008}) 10... Nxd4 11. Bxd4 e5 12. Be3 Be7 13. Rf2 O-O 14. Rd2 b5 15. a3 Be6 16. Qe2 Rc6 {By transposition the position has reached one very similar to the Boleslavsky Variation. where the entire game centers around one single strategic goal: the control of d5. It's complicated...opposite flank attacks often happen as do breaks in the center and tactics can erupt. So far white has played well and holds a a slight advantage. He ought to now continue with 17.Nd5.} 17. h3 { Christoffel wants to continue with 18.f4 so first guards first against 18... Ng4, but he is aiming for more than the position justifies and black now obtains strong counterplay.} (17. Nd5 Bxd5 {This deprives black of his better B, but it's the best way for black to get counterplay.} (17... Nxd5 {of course loses a piece.} 18. exd5 Rc4 19. dxe6) 18. exd5 Rc4 {with equal chances.}) (17. Nd5 h5 (17... Qd7 18. Nb4) 18. a4 Rc4 19. Nxe7+ Qxe7 20. axb5 axb5 21. Ra6 { Although black is on the defensive with careful play he should have adequate resources.}) (17. f4 {at once is met by} Rxc3 18. bxc3 Qa5 19. f5 Bc4 {and black has fully equalized.}) 17... Qc8 {Sacrificing the exchange with 17... Rxc3 was good here, too.} 18. Kh2 Rxc3 {For the exchange, black seizes the initiative, gets one P and sooner or later he may pick up a second one. Even so, at this point the position is equal.} 19. bxc3 Qxc3 {White has two reasonable, but passive, moves: 20.Rdd1 and 20.Qe1} 20. Rad1 {White still dreams of getting an attack going with the advance of the f-Pawn and so willingly gives up another P...a questionable decision.} Qxa3 21. f4 {This move does not help white's position, but practically speaking, no other move is better.} (21. Qe1 Qc3 22. Rd3 Qc6 {and black remains with the slightly better position.}) (21. Bg5 Qc5 22. Bxf6 Bxf6 (22... gxf6 {is also playable.} 23. f4 a5 {Black is slightly better.}) 23. Rxd6 Ra8 24. f4 {Finally, but blck is better.}) 21... Bg4 {A little tactical trick that works...white plays into an unfavorable endgame.} (21... h5 {keeps the initiative and was a better move as after} 22. Qd3 Qa5 23. Qe2 Qc3 24. Qd3 Rc8 {White has no attacking prospects and all he can do is shift pieces while black further builds up his position. Still, white's game can hardly be considered lost.}) 22. hxg4 Qxe3 23. g5 Qxe2 24. Rxe2 Nd7 25. fxe5 {It's hard to explain this move which completely spoils his P-formation and gives black's pieces good squares.} (25. Red2 {keeps the chances equal. For example...} Ra8 26. Ra1 Nc5 27. Rd5 a5 28. Bf1 b4 29. Bc4 {is doubtful black can make any real progress.}) 25... Nxe5 26. Ra1 Ra8 (26... Bxg5 27. Rxa6 Rd8 28. Rb6 {and white has equalized.}) 27. c3 g6 28. Rea2 Rc8 29. Rxa6 Rxc3 {Black's passed P gives him all the winning chances. Perhaps white can manage to save the game, but the pressure is on him to keep finding the best defense.} 30. Rb1 Bxg5 {Now is the right time to play this. It's instructive to watch how Pilnik is able to conjure up an attack against Christoffel's King.} 31. Rxb5 {Capturing the right P because the b-Pawn is more dangerous than the d-Pawn.} h5 {White is is grave danger from the threta of ...Ng4+} 32. Kh1 (32. Rxd6 Ng4+ 33. Kg1 Rc1+ 34. Bf1 Be3+ 35. Kg2 Rc2+ 36. Be2 Rxe2+ 37. Kf1 Rf2+ 38. Ke1 Rf3 {with a won ending/}) 32... Be7 33. Rb7 Bf6 34. Rxd6 Ng4 (34... Rc1+ {would have been a knockout punch.} 35. Kh2 Ng4+ 36. Kh3 Rc3 37. Rdb6 Be5 38. Rb3 Nf2+ 39. Kh2 Bxg3+ 40. Kg1 Rc1+ 41. Bf1 Nxe4) 35. Bh3 Nf2+ 36. Kh2 Nxe4 37. Ra6 {[%mdl 8192] The final mistake after which white is clearly lost.} (37. Rd5 {keeps him in the game.} Re3 38. Rdd7 { Counterattack! Now there is nothing black can do because of the Rs on the 7th rank.} Re2+ 39. Kg1 Nxg3 40. Rb8+ Kg7 41. Rbb7 {and if} Kh6 42. Rd3 h4 43. Rxf7 {and five Shootouts were all drawn.}) 37... h4 {An interesting situation has arisen and it demonstrates why old pre-engine analysis is so often untrustworthy. In many cases annotations were based on the result and they were also quite superficial. Hans Kmoch gave this move a ! and called it the finishing touch. In fact, it's question mark worthy because it should have allowed white to equalize. Of course, Kmoch didn't have Stockfish.} (37... Be5 {is winning.} 38. Re7 Ng5 39. Kh1 (39. Rxe5 Nf3+) 39... Bxg3) 38. Ra8+ { [%mdl 8192] White misses a chance to equalize. The next few moves are poorly played by both players and it may very likely have been due to time pressure.} (38. Rb4 Re3 39. Rxe4 {By returning the exchange white eliminates all danger to his K.} hxg3+ 40. Kg2 Rxe4 41. Rxf6 Re3 {and white can draw.}) 38... Kg7 39. Rc8 hxg3+ {Better was 39...Rxg3 and ...Ng5} 40. Kg2 Ra3 {After this we are back to equality!} (40... Rd3 41. Rc2 {Or else black has a winning check on d2. } (41. Rcc7 Rd2+ 42. Kf1 Rf2+ 43. Kg1 Bd4 {wins}) 41... Nd6 42. Rd7 Kh6 43. Rc5 Rd2+ 44. Kxg3 Ne4+ 45. Kf3 Rxd7 46. Kxe4 {Black scored five wins in Shootouts.} ) 41. Rcc7 {[%mdl 8192] Logical, doubling Rs on the 7th, but it turns out to be the final mistake that loses the game.} (41. Be6 {This powerful move makes a draw a likely outcome.} Nd6 42. Rcc7 {Now is the time for this.} Nxb7 43. Rxf7+ Kh6 44. Rxb7 {draws}) 41... Ra2+ {Black is now back on track and wraps it up.} 42. Kf3 Ng5+ 43. Kg4 Ra4+ 44. Kxg3 Be5+ 45. Kg2 Bxc7 46. Rxc7 Ra2+ { White resigned} 0-1

Thursday, June 16, 2022

Harkness Rating System, Yankton Int'l, First Move Advantage and William Streeter

     The first modern rating system was used by the Correspondence Chess League of America in 1939, but it wasn't until 1950 that the USCF adopted the Harkness system which was expounded by then tournament organizer Kenneth Harkness. The USCF switched to the Elo rating system in 1960, which was adopted by FIDE in 1970. For a detailed explanation of the Harkness system see Mark Weeks' article The Harkness System Explained HERE.  
     When the system was introduced the USCF took care to emphasize that the system is independent of any international designation of titles. The USCF also warned that some players may have been over-rated or under-rated and it was possible that a number of players were deprived of full recognition merely because the data was not available. 
     On that first list was an inactive Master named William F. Streeter (January 24, 1902 - June 16, 1973, 71 years old.). He was never married and died at St. Vincent Charity Hospital in Cleveland, Ohio. 
     Streeter was a railway post office clerk. He served as Secretary (1927-1929) and President (1929-1930) of the Cleveland Chess and Checker Club and he was President of the Cleveland Chess League in 1930.
     Streeter was the Ohio Champion (Northern section) in 1931. According to a Cleveland Plain Dealer article on October 11, 1931, it was at the suggestion of Cincinnati players that the state championship had been divided into two sections. After Streeter's victory he stated that he was ready to meet the winner of the southern section that was held in Cincinnati, but no reply was ever received. The article added that, "in the meantime William F. Streeter is a fitting state champion.” 
     In 1946, Streeter, at the request of President Elbert Wagner, Jr., and Secretary Paul G. Giers of the United States Chess Association, completed the task of answering the controversial question as to whether or not it was an advantage to have the white pieces. His findings were published in the May 1946 issue of Chess Review under the title Is The First Move An Advantage? Does it actually pay off in terms of successful results? He also examined the length of tournament games to see if they were getting longer, shorter, or remaining about the same. 
     To complete the task he utilized 45 tournament books, covering the period 1851-1932 and embodying 5598 games. His conclusions: 
 
Overall white won 38 percent, black 31 percent, 31 percent were drawn. The percentages by yearly span were:
 
1851-1878, white: 46, black: 40, draws:14 
1881-1914, white: 37, black: 31, draws: 32 
1919-1932, white: 27, black: 26, draws: 37 
 
     His conclusion was that it was becoming increasingly difficult to win with black, but somewhat easier to draw. 
     In 1946, the new South Dakota Chess Association issued the first of its monthly bulletin. Among the Association's planned activities was a State Correspondence Championship tournament to begin on December 1st; it was open to members of the Association who were residents of the state. 
     The Association started off with a burst of activity with events from September 15th to September 22nd at the Hotel Charles Gurney in Yankton. I posted on the event HERE. 
     The Major Open tournament ended in a 3-way tie between L. Gladstone (Boulder City, Colorado), William Streeter (Cleveland, Ohio) and Jack Spence (Omaha, Nebraska). 
     In the following game Streeter defeats Alfred C. Ludwig (1912-1953, 40 years old), the Nebraska Champion in 1943, 1944, 1947, 1948, 1949 and 1950. Ludwig also won the 1945 CCLA Grand National tournament and with it the title of US Correspondence Champion. A game that I liked (Komodo 14)
[Event "Yankton (South Dakota) Major Open"] [Site "Yankton, SD USA"] [Date "1946.09.??"] [Round "?"] [White "William F. Streeter"] [Black "Alfred C. Ludwig"] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "B18"] [Annotator "Stockfish 15"] [PlyCount "71"] [EventDate "1946.09.??"] [Source "Tournament book "] {Caro-Kann} 1. e4 c6 2. d4 d5 3. Nc3 dxe4 4. Nxe4 Bf5 5. Ng3 Bg6 6. Nf3 Nd7 7. Bd3 (7. h4 {is an interesting alternative.} h6 8. h5 Bh7 9. Bd3 Bxd3 10. Qxd3 e6 {White can choose between 11.Bf4 and 11.Bd2 followed by Q-side castling.}) 7... Qc7 8. O-O e6 9. Re1 Ngf6 10. c4 {[%cal Od4d5]} Bb4 (10... Be7 11. b3 O-O 12. Bxg6 hxg6 13. Qc2 Rfe8 14. Bb2 Rad8 {equals. Godena,M (2558)-Sanikidze,T (2426) Dresden 2007}) (10... O-O-O 11. a3 c5 12. Bxg6 hxg6 13. b4 cxd4 14. c5 Nb8 15. Bg5 Rd5 {White is better. Getz,N (2219)-Khenkin,I (2634) Tromsoe 2009}) 11. Re2 {[%cal Od4d5]} O-O (11... Bxd3 12. Qxd3 O-O 13. c5 Ba5 14. Ne5 Qc8 15. Bg5 Bc7 16. Nxd7 Nxd7 {White is better, but black managed to obtain a draw in Tylor,T-Flohr,S Hastings 1932}) (11... O-O-O {This too risky. In Habib,C-Vives, G (2047) Villa Ballester 2004 white had the advantage after} 12. a3 Bd6 13. b4 Bxd3 14. Qxd3 h5 15. Bg5 Bf4 16. Bxf4 Qxf4) 12. c5 Ba5 13. a3 Qd8 (13... Bxd3 14. Qxd3 Qd8 15. Qb3 Qc8 16. Ne4 Nxe4 17. Rxe4 Bd8 18. Qd3 b6 {with equal chances.Asztalos,L-Flohr,S Bled 1931}) 14. Bxg6 hxg6 15. Qb3 Rb8 16. Bg5 Qc8 17. Ne4 {Strongly threatening Nd6.} Bc7 18. Nc3 Re8 19. Ne5 Nxe5 20. dxe5 Nd7 { [%csl Bc5,Be5]} 21. Rae1 {Inviting black to win a P.} Nxe5 (21... Nxc5 { leads to an unclear position after...} 22. Qc4 Nd7 23. Qh4 Bxe5 24. Rxe5 Nxe5 25. Rxe5 Qd7 26. Re1 f6 27. Ne4 Qe7 28. Bd2 {White is better according to Stockfish. In Shootouts white scored +3 -0 =2. However, this is the type of position where the stronger player is likely to win regardless of which side they are playing.}) 22. Ne4 Nd7 23. Qh3 b6 24. Rd2 {Not at all bad, but it might have been better to play 24.Nd6. What's cute about this move is that it sets a nasty little trap.} (24. Nd6 Bxd6 25. cxd6 {and the d-Pawn will prove to be a bone in black's throat.}) 24... f6 (24... Nxc5 {is a self mate.} 25. Nf6+ {[%mdl 512]} gxf6 26. Bxf6 Bxh2+ 27. Qxh2 Kf8 28. Qh8#) 25. Red1 Nf8 { [%mdl 8192] This move, like 25...Nxc5, turns out very badly.} (25... Nxc5 { is still very bad.} 26. Nxf6+ gxf6 27. Bxf6 Kf7 28. Bd4 Rh8 29. Qf3+ Kg8 30. Qf6 Bxh2+ 31. Kf1 Qa6+ 32. Rd3 Rh7 33. Qxg6+ Kf8 34. Bxc5+ bxc5 35. Qxh7 { White is winning.}) (25... Re7 {keeps the chances equal after 26.Be3} 26. Nxf6+ {Unlike before, this now loses.} gxf6 {The f-Pawn is defended so white has no followup.}) 26. Nxf6+ {[%mdl 512] ...and wins.} gxf6 27. Bxf6 Nh7 28. Qh6 Bxh2+ {So that the R on b8 can guard the second rank. It's also a tricky move.} 29. Kh1 {[%csl Gf6][%cal Rh6g7]} (29. Kxh2 {This allows black to spit the hook and get away.} Qc7+ 30. Kg1 Nxf6 {and white is forced to take a perpetual check.} 31. Rd7 (31. Qxg6+ Qg7 {is winning for black.}) 31... Nxd7 32. Qxg6+ Kf8 33. Qh6+ {etc.}) 29... Rb7 30. Qxg6+ Kf8 31. Rd8 {Black could safely resign here.} Rxd8 32. Rxd8+ Qxd8 33. Bxd8 Bb8 34. Qxe6 bxc5 35. Qc8 Rxb2 36. Bf6+ {Kudos to both players for a very well played game! In the Fritz auto-annotation using Stockfish 15, the Weighted Error Values were: White=0.17 (very precise) and Black=0.22 (precise).} 1-0

Wednesday, June 15, 2022

Monkeying With ShashChess

     About four years ago I did a post where I looked at, among other things, the SashChess engine, but wasn't too impressed by it. However, a few days ago while looking at the CCRL 40/15 complete rating list SashChess was prominent. 
     On the complete list the top rated engine is Stockfish 15 at 3541. ShashChess 21.1 (a derivative of Stockfish) is rated at 3535 and against Stockfish it has scored +1 -1 =30. The engine seemed to be worth a closer look.
     ShashChess tries to implement the theory of Alexander Shashin as he explains in his book, published in 2013, Best Play: A New Method for Discovering the Strongest Move. I have not read the book, but supposedly he breaks down the position into some kind of mathematical formula that evaluates material, mobility, safety and space. This should lead to finding the proper plan. 
     The concept of space, time and force is not new. Znosoko-Borovsky's 1955 book, The Middle Game in Chess, focused on those elements as did Larry Evans' hack job, New Ideas In Chess, also published in the 1950s. 
     Then there was Horowitz' Point Count Chess in which he listed positional factors that were worth points and anti-positional factors that were negative points. After all the adding and subtracting was done you knew who was better, but not how to utilize your advantage. The whole idea seems similar to counting cards in Blackjack...something that's probably beyond the capability of most of us. 
     The thing is, one can have an advantage in all three elements (space, time and force) and still have an inferior, or even losing, game due to some tactical anomaly. Purdy pointed that out in his writings a long time go. 
     There is a good discussion on the pros and cons of Shashin's method on the book's review on Amazon which you can read HERE. I will leave it to the reader to form an opinion on the practicality of this concept. 
     One reviewer of ShashChess stated that it draws with Stockfish in head to head engine matches, but significantly outperforms Stockfish in puzzle solving and mate-finding. Further, the reviewer stated that Shashchess' developers (ICCF IM Andrea Manzo is the owner and main developer) created it for correspondence chess and he attested that "it is an interesting and powerful analysis tool." 
     The home page for ShashChess gives some helpful information when analyzing with an engine. First, use all the cores. Unless you have a dedicated computer that's not realistic because if you're like me, while the engine is analyzing you'll want to be doing other things on the laptop. I usually use two of the four cores. 
     Regarding MultiPV, i.e. the number of alternate lines of analysis to display, you should specify only one to get the best line. Specifying more lines slows down the search. 
     I thought about trying ShashChess out in correspondence play on Lechenicher SchachServer where engine use is allowed, but decided against it. Why? As I posted back in 2015, on my laptop engines don't come up with the same moves as the same engines do on dedicated computers. That means I have about as good a chance competing at the highest levels on places like ICCF and Lechenicher SchachServer as I do playing over the board against Carlsen and others of that ilk. 
     Unlike in the pre-engine days when we used post cards and the only "help" was Modern Chess Openings, unless you just want to dabble in correspondence chess or don't care about results (highly unlikely) or ratings (also highly unlikely), then correspondence chess is not for you. That's why I suggested the creation of new correspondence chess classes: Beginning Dabbler, Intermediate Dabbler and Serious Dabbler. 
     Way above us Dabblers are the titled correspondence players...those guys with a couple of thousand dollars to spend on hardware/software and a LOT of patience. 
     The SashChess Homepage alo describes an interesting engine option called GoldDigger. I am not sure about other programs, but with Fritz you can turn this option on as follows: 
 
1) Select Load Engine 
2) Highlight the SashChess engine 
3) Click on Advanced 
4) Click on Engine Parameters 
5) Select GoldDigger 
 

     If GoldDigger is activated, the engine favors depth over the pruning of various selectivity techniques. In this way, it can uncover normally hidden possibilities. In this mode, it solves many more hard positions, although it loses slightly in absolute game strength. 
     You will also notice the names of Tal, Capablanca and Petrosian. Depending on the engine's evaluation it has algorithims based on the style of play of those greats as well as "mixed" ones. 
     The engine plays differently based on the evaluation of the position it is analyzing. That is, it classifies the position with "personalities." Petrosian for negative scores (defensive positions), Capablanca for balanced scores, and Tal for positive scores (attacking positions). Apparently by checking one of the boxes the engine will play with that players style only. 
     All in all, SashChess sounds like an interesting engine to monkey around with. Download HERE

Monday, June 13, 2022

An Al Horowitz Favorite

     A few years back, 1957 it was, my parents and I were in Puerto Rico where we were visiting my brother who was in the Navy and stationed at Roosevelt Roads Naval Station. In 2004, the station was closed and today it operates as Jose Aponte de la Torre Airport, a public use airport. 
     I celebrated my 12th birthday there and my brother bought me a renaissance chess set and a few chess books, one of which was The Golden Treasury of Chess compiled by Al Horowitz and the editors of Chess Review. 
     The book was first copyrighted in 1943 by Horowitz and Kenneth Harkness, a chess organizer and the creator of the Harkness rating system that was used by the USCF from 1950 to 1960. He was also responsible for introducing Swiss system tournaments to the United States. The book was reprinted in 1956, 1961 and 1969. The latest edition has over 300 games, each with a very short introduction and no notes (a few are very lightly annotated). 
     The book was controversial. The controversy arises over the question of who was the true author. Chess historian Edward Winter addressed the controversy in The Horowitz-Wellmuth Affair HERE. 
     The book is packed with games by everyone from obscure players to famous masters and they are all unusual, brilliant or just entertaining. The last edition includes games up to 1966 by players of that era, like Fischer, et al. 
     Horowitz divided the games into chapters of Favorites and periods: Pre-Morphy, Morphy, Steinitz, Modern, Hypermodern and Eclectics, Russian Hegemony. Horowitz wrote how in the course of the decades which he devoted to the preparation of this book he examined thousands of games and those that pleased him the most were included in the book. But even among those games there were some that he enjoyed so much he set them aside in order to attract the reader's attention to them. 
     Off and on over the last several days I played through those favorite games, there are only nine of them, just to see what impressed a great player like Horowitz. 
     Spielmann's opponent in the following game from Carlsbad 1911, was Russian master Fyodor Duz-Chotimirsky (1879-1965) who competed in several notable international tournaments, including St. Petersburg 1909, where he defeated both the first-prize winners, Akiba Rubinstein and World Champion Emanuel Lasker. He continued to compete after World War II. 
     In his autobiography, he claimed to have invented the name Dragon Sicilian after his astronomy courses led him, in 1901, to see a resemblance between the black pawn formation and the pattern of Draco the Dragon. 
     The 1911 Carlsbad tournament was the scene of three events held in the health resort of Carlsbad which is located in present day Czech Republic. Richard Teichmann's result was certainly a surprise. 
     After returning to international play in 1902 (after having lost the use of his right eye to an infection) to 1910 he had finished in 5th place so many thines that he was known as Richard the Fifth. In 1911, he received a small inheritance from his mother that allowed him to afford to become a professional player and this was his greatest international achievement. 
     In the introduction to this game Horowitz wrote: One of the marks of a great master is the ability to conjure up murderous attacks out of seemingly harmless positions. You will like the way that Spielmann commences an unexpected attack at move 22 and drives it home with sledgehammer blows. Every move tells, and black's helplessness becomes ever more apparent. A game that I liked (Komodo 14)
[Event "Carlsbad"] [Site ""] [Date "1911.08.31"] [Round "?"] [White "Rudolf Spielmann"] [Black "Fyodor Duz Chotimirsky"] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "C84"] [Annotator "Stockfish 15"] [PlyCount "61"] [EventDate "1911.08.21"] {Ruy Lopez} 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 {[%cal Bf1b5,Bb5a4,Ba4b3][%mdl 32]} a6 4. Ba4 Nf6 5. O-O Be7 6. Re1 b5 7. Bb3 d6 8. c3 Na5 9. Bc2 c5 10. d3 O-O 11. Nbd2 {[%cal Bb1d2,Bd2f1,Bf1g3][%mdl 32]} Qc7 12. Nf1 Rb8 (12... Kh8 {did not work out well for black in Davletbayeva,M (2289)-Kulon,K (2301) Tromso NOR 2014 } 13. h3 Ng8 14. d4 Bf6 15. Ne3 Be6 16. Ng4 Bxg4 17. hxg4 exd4 18. cxd4 cxd4 19. g5 {with a promising attack.}) (12... g6 {was also tried in Davletbayeva,M (2289)-Kulon,K (2301) Tromso NOR 2014 without success.} 13. Bg5 Nh5 14. Bh6 Re8 15. Ne3 Be6 16. a3 Nb7 {White's position is the more promising.}) (12... Nd7 13. Bg5 f6 14. Bd2 Nb6 15. Ne3 g6 16. b4 Nb7 {Now with 17.a4 white would have had an excellent position. Levenfish,G-Ragozin,V Moscow 1936}) 13. h3 Be6 14. Qe2 b4 15. N3h2 Nd7 {Black begin a counterattack with 15...b3} (15... bxc3 16. bxc3 c4 (16... d5 {is also plausible.} 17. exd5 Nxd5 18. Bd2 Rb2 {with equal chances}) 17. d4 exd4 18. cxd4 d5 19. e5 Ne4 20. Bxe4 dxe4 21. Qxe4 Rfd8 { Black has pressure on the d-Pawn, a passed P and the two Bs so he has adequate compensation for his P minus.}) 16. Ng3 Rfc8 17. Ng4 Rb7 18. Ne3 Bg5 {The defensive 18...Bf8 would have been somewhat better, but it was, perhaps, too passive for Duz-Chotimitsky.} 19. Nd5 Bxd5 20. exd5 Bxc1 21. Raxc1 {[%mdl 32]} Nf6 {After this black's position is very dicey.} (21... g6 {With the dark squared Bs absent this move is not as weakening as it appears.} 22. f4 (22. d4 bxc3 23. bxc3 cxd4 24. cxd4 Rb2 {with equal chances.}) 22... bxc3 23. bxc3 f5 24. fxe5 dxe5 {is completely equal.}) 22. d4 {[%cal Rd4e5]} exd4 {This unmasks white's B and gives his pieces access to the black K. The game is practically over!} (22... g6 23. dxe5 dxe5 24. Rcd1 Qd6 {White is better, but black can still put forth a defensive effort.}) 23. Nh5 Nd7 24. Qg4 {[%csl Gh5][%cal Rg4g7]} g6 25. Re7 {[%cal Og4f4] All five of black's pieces are helpless bystanders.} Kf8 26. Rce1 {[%cal Oe7f7] Threatening mate with Rxf7+ and Qe6} Qd8 27. Qg5 (27. Rxf7+ {was prettier.} Kxf7 28. Bxg6+ {Even better than 28, Qe6+ which should also win. In this position Stockfish announces a mate in 18!} hxg6 29. Qe6+ Kf8 30. Qxd6+ Kf7 31. Qe6+ Kf8 32. Qxg6 Ne5 33. Rxe5 Rf7 34. Qh6+ Kg8 35. Re4 Qd7 36. Qg6+ Kf8 37. Nf6 Rxf6 38. Qxf6+ Kg8 39. Rf4 d3 40. Qg6+ Qg7 41. Qe6+ Kh8 42. Rh4+ Qh7 43. Qf6+ Kg8 44. Rg4+ Qg6 45. Rxg6+ Kh7 46. Qg7#) 27... Ne5 28. Qf6 {[%mdl 512] White mates in 6} Nac4 29. f4 {[%mdl 512]} gxh5 ( 29... Qxe7 30. Qh8#) 30. fxe5 Nxe5 31. R1xe5 {Black resigned; it's mate in 2.} 1-0

Friday, June 10, 2022

Bogo Stomps Grob

     In 1936, Hitler began a military build up along Germany's western boarder in defiance of the prohibitions of the Versailles Treaty. The goal was to produce a diplomatic crisis and while America looked on Europeans wondered if they were headed for another war. 
     That was the backdrop when on June 19, 1936, at Yankee Stadium in the Bronx, the stadium's seats were sold out and 57 million people tuned in on the radio for the scheduled for fifteen round boxing match between Germany's Max Schmeling and the most significant African American athlete of his age, Joe Louis.
     The fight was viewed as a battle between representatives of the United States and Nazi Germany, a struggle between democracy and Nazism. By the twelfth round Schmeling, who was far ahead on points, landed a blow to Louis' body, followed by another one to the jaw, knocking Louis out...something that had never been done before and would not be done again until 15 years later when it was accomplished by an up and coming Rocky Marciano. 
     Writer Langston Hughes was there and described the reaction, "I walked down Seventh Avenue and saw grown men weeping like children, and women sitting on the curbs with their heads in their hands." All across the country people cried when they heard Joe Louis got knocked out. 
     The Germans took a different view. German sportswriter Volker Kluge described Schmeling's role as a Third Reich spokesman: "His assignment was to calm down the American people." 
     The Germans were jubilant. Hitler contacted Schmeling's wife, sending her flowers and a message: "For the wonderful victory of your husband, our Schmeling dutifully told the German press, "...I have to tell Germany, (and) the Fuehrer in particular, that the thoughts of all my countrymen were with me in this fight; that the Fuehrer and his faithful people were thinking of me. This thought gave me the strength to succeed in this fight. It gave me the courage and the endurance to win this victory for Germany's colors." 
     For the record, there was rematch on June 22, 1938, again at a sold-out Yankee Stadium with more than 70,000 fans in attendance and the fight drew gate receipts of just over $1 million ($19.5 million in today's dollars) while 70 million listened on radio in the US and over 100 million around the world. 
     Two minutes and four seconds into the first round Lewis, who had thrown 41 punches to Schmelling's measly 2, won on a technical knockout when Schmelling was was unable to continue. Schmelling was beaten so badly he landed in the hospital for ten days where it was discovered that Louis had cracked several vertebrae in Schmeling's back. 
     This time, while most American rejoiced along with the black community, some Americans revealed their true feelings. Lewis F. Atchison of The Washington Post began his story: "Joe Louis, the lethargic, chicken-eating young colored boy, reverted to his dreaded role of the Brown Bomber tonight." 
     Henry McLemore of United Press called Louis "a jungle man, completely primitive as any savage, out to destroy the thing he hates." 
     Nevertheless, Louis went on to become a major celebrity and when other prominent blacks questioned whether African Americans should serve against the Axis nations in the segregated US Armed Forces, Louis said, "There are a lot of things wrong with America, but Hitler ain't gonna fix them." Louis himself went on to serve in the Army during World War II, mostly visiting soldiers in Europe to provide them with motivational speeches and with boxing exhibitions. 
     After the loss, the Nazi regime ceased promoting Schmeling as a national hero. During the Kristallnacht of November 1938, Schmeling provided sanctuary for two young Jewish boys to safeguard them from the Gestapo. As a way of punishing Schmeling for his public resistance to the Nazi cause, Schmeling was drafted into the paratroopers and served with the German Luftwaffe. 
     He survived and after the war made an unsuccessful comeback attempt in 1947–48 before retiring from professional boxing. He invested his earnings in various post-War businesses and his resistance to the Nazis elevated his status once again to that of a hero in post-war Germany. 
     After the war Schmeling and Louis became friends. Broke and struggling with drug addiction, Louis got a job as a greeter at the Caesars Palace hotel in Las Vegas and Schmeling flew to visit him every year. 
     Louis was supposedly so badly off financially that he took up professional wrestling to make ends meet and Schmeling reportedly sent him money and even covered part of the cost of Louis' funeral at which he was a pallbearer. 
    Chess played a big part in Nazi Germany and Edward Winter has a very informative article in it HERE.  
     In 1936, the German DSB Kongress organized a training tournament to be held in Dresden, Germany from June 7-14. Four German players were pitted against six European masters, including the former world champion Alekhine. 
     The two biggest surprises were the second place finish of Engles and the poor showing of Keres. Ludwig Engels (December 11, 1905 - January 10, 1967) is not well known, but he was one of Germany's top players during the 1930s. On the 1904 rating list Chessmetrics assigns him a rating of over 2600 and places him umber 19 on the world's best list. After the war Engels lived in Sao Paulo, Brazil where he has some success until after 1948 when he confined most of his chess activity to coaching and training at the Clube de Xadrez Sao Paulo. 
     As for Keres (January 7, 1916 - June 5, 1975), his first major international success against top-level competition came at Bad Nauheim 1936, where he tied for first with Alekhine. About his struggle at Dresden he wrote that the setback was a learning experience...he learned that reckless play could backfire! 
     Henri Grob's crushing defeat in the following game shows that the 47-year-old Ewfim Bogoljubow could still pack a punch. At the time of this tournament Chessmetrics assigns him a rating in the mid-2600s and ranks him 14th in the world. 

     During the war he lost a match to Euwe (+2−5=3) and drew a short match with a rapidly declining Alekhine (+2−2=0) at Warsaw in 1943.  He also had some decent success in numerous tournaments held in Germany throughout the war.
     Bogoljubow's political sympathies are open to debate. Writing in Bogoljubow-The Fate of a Chess Player, author Sergei Soloviov claims that Bogoljubow was never a Nazi and that he himself was a victim. 
     In Lessons From My Games, Reuben Fine, who Arnold Denker claimed was a habitual liar, made an unsubstantiated claim that Bogoljubow had some of his rivals put in concentration camps. Chess historian Edward Winter wrote that he had written to Fine to try to find his source for his claim and also had written to Sidney Bernstein (an acquaintance of Fine's) but neither ever responded.
     According to Hans Kmoch, Bogoljubow was sympathetic to the Nazis (e.g. insisting on the use of swastika to identify his nationality even before it was a universally accepted emblem of Germany) and was insensitive towards the plight of his Jewish colleagues whom he openly taunted. 
     And, finally, in his memoirs Fedir Bohatyrchuk claimed that Bogoljubow stopped wearing his Nazi Party badge after a wounded soldier tore it from him during a simul display and that he owned a radio that he secretly used to listen to Allied broadcasts. 
     Bohatyrchuk wrote, “It was not a secret that Bogo did not like the Bolsheviks, but I think only a few people knew that he was treating Hitler's wild ideas with at least equal revulsion and contempt.” The claim has been made that Bohatyrchuk's testimony could not be taken at face value because he was trying to rehabilitate his fellow Russian's image. A game that I liked (Komodo 14)
[Event "Dresden"] [Site "Dresden GER"] [Date "1936.06.13"] [Round "8"] [White "Efim Bogoljubov"] [Black "Henri Grob"] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "E94"] [Annotator "Stockfish 15"] [PlyCount "50"] [EventDate "1936.06.07"] {King's Indian} 1. d4 Nf6 2. Nf3 g6 3. c4 Bg7 {Until the time this game was played, the mid-1930s, the King's Indian was generally regarded as highly suspect, but the analysis and play of three Soviet players, Konstantinopolsky, Boleslavsky and Bronstein, helped to make the defense much more respected and popular.} 4. Nc3 O-O 5. e4 d6 6. Be2 e5 {The Classical Variation.} 7. O-O exd4 {In this line white's extra space is usually of greater value than black's counterplay against the center. This variation was made popular in the mid-1990s by the Soviet GM Igor Glek. New ideas were found for white some of which were later refuted, but white still gets an advantage in most lines. Most common nowadays is 7...Nc6. The seldom played 7...Qe8 has given some promising results, but against correct play it seems white can gain an advantage.} (7... Qe8 8. dxe5 dxe5 9. b4 (9. Be3 b6 10. Nd5 Na6 11. Nd2 Nd7 12. a4 c6 13. Nc3 Qe7 14. a5 Rd8 {with equal chances. Ftacnik,L (2552)-Naiditsch,A (2684) Germany 2017}) 9... Bg4 10. b5 Bxf3 11. Bxf3 Qe6 12. Nd5 Rc8 13. Nxf6+ Qxf6 {Wojtaszek,R (2722)-Rapport,R (2738) Prague 2019. Black has awkward development.}) 8. Nxd4 Qe8 {This seems a bit artificial and 8...Re8 was preferable.} 9. f3 (9. Ndb5 {Doesn't accomplish a lot because after} Qd8 10. Bg5 a6 {white has also lost time with the N.}) 9... a6 10. Be3 Nc6 11. Qd2 (11. Nxc6 bxc6 12. Qd2 a5 {gives black sufficient counterplay on the Q-side.}) 11... h5 {Black's opening has not given him much play either in the center or on the Q-side so Grob resorts to a rather rash attempt at counterplay on the K-side. His safest course was to exchange on d4 then play 12...Be6 and wait to see what happens.} 12. Rac1 Qe5 13. Nb3 {Slightly better was 13.Nb2 because after the text black could have gotten some play on the Q-side with 13...a5} h4 14. Bg5 (14. Nd5 {was better.} h3 (14... Nxd5 15. cxd5 Ne7 16. Bd4 Qh5 17. Bxg7 Kxg7 18. f4 Bg4 19. Bxg4 Qxg4 20. Rxc7 {is winning for white.}) 15. g4 Nxd5 16. cxd5 {and again, Rxc7 gives white an overwhelming position.}) 14... h3 15. g4 { Equally good was 15.f4} Bd7 16. Bf4 Qe6 17. Nd5 Rac8 18. Bh6 Bxh6 19. Qxh6 { This comes too late to do black much good.} a5 20. Rc3 {Aiming for f4 and Rxh3. Black's position is too far gone to savage.} a4 (20... Nh7 {was his best hope.} 21. f4 g5 {Unfortunately for black even trading Qs does not ease his woes.} 22. fxg5 Qxh6 23. gxh6 Rfe8 24. Nd2 Nd4 25. Bd1 b5 26. Rd3 Nc6 27. Rxh3 Ne5 28. Rg3 bxc4 29. g5 Be6 30. h4 {White still has a decisive attack.}) 21. f4 {[%mdl 32] White's position is so good he can ignore the puny threat to his N.} Nh5 (21... axb3 22. Rxh3 Nh5 23. f5 {mates in 5-6 moves. The longest black can hold out is with the pathetic line} Qxd5 24. exd5 Bxf5 25. Rxf5 bxa2 26. Rhxh5 a1=Q+ 27. Kg2 Qg1+ 28. Kxg1 g5 29. Rfxg5#) (21... Nxg4 {is met by} 22. Bxg4 Qxg4+ 23. Rg3 {Now the only way to avoid an immediate mate is to play 23...Qxg3+} Qe6 { mates in 5.} 24. f5 Qe5 25. f6 Qxg3+ 26. hxg3 h2+ 27. Kh1 axb3 28. Qg7#) 22. gxh5 {[%cal Oc3g3]} axb3 23. f5 Nd4 24. f6 {[%csl Gf6][%cal Rh6g7]} Nxe2+ 25. Kf2 Qf5+ {Grob resigned... he gets mated in two. A crushing defeat.} 1-0

Thursday, June 9, 2022

Chess 188 Years Ago!

     In England in 1834 six farms hands from Dorset were sentenced to be sent to a penal colony. Their crime? They formed a trade union. Hanging on chains on a gibbet was abolished as was slavery in most of the British Empire.
     It became law that able-bodied persons could not receive assistance unless they entered a workhouse and authorities would no longer try to identify fathers of illegitimate children in order to try and recover support from them.
      The de la Bourdonnais vs. McDonnell matches were a series of six matches in 1834 between Louis-Charles Mahe de la Bourdonnais of France and Alexander McDonnell of Ireland. de la Bourdonnais was considered the world's leading player starting in 1821 and these matches confirmed that he still was. 
     They were the first matches of importance and the games were annotated and discussed by all over Europe. Both players introduced several opening innovations. 
     After each game, McDonnell would return to his room exhausted while de la Bourdonnais remained downstairs until long after midnight, smoking cigars, drinking punch and gambling. 
     The two were fairly evenly matched in ability, but their styles differed greatly. de la Bourdonnais was known for the rapidity of his play, often replying to his opponent's moves within seconds, whereas McDonnell sometimes took two hours to make a move. Even so, his play was usually reckless and he often made wild, ill-considered attacks whereas de la Bourdonnais' play was cautious. 
     Their personalities also differed. de la Bourdonnais was friendly and outgoing; he was talkative and affable when winning, but when losing he "swore tolerably round oaths in a pretty audible voice." Winning or losing, McDonnell was taciturn and imperturbable and betrayed little emotion at the board. 
     In the first match of the series McDonnell's lack match experience told against him and he was heavily defeated, but recovered and won the second match. de la Bourdonnais won the third, fourth and fifth matches. The final match was abandoned under obscure circumstances with McDonnell leading 5-4. Apparently de la Bourdonnais was forced to return to France to deal with his creditors.

     According to British writer Harry Golombek the games were generally of low quality, but there were some instances of brilliance. Technique, especially in the endgame, was poor. For example, in one game McDonnell had a R+2Ps against a R, but didn't know how to win it. To make matters worse, he even blundered away his Rook and lost!! For his part, de la Bourdonnais was bad, but not as bad as McDonnell, in the endgame but he was weak in the opening. 
     There were relatively few draws, mostly due to McDonnell's poor defensive technique which meant he lost games he could have drawn 
     Still, as long as one is not too critical, the games were entertaining in an way that we amateurs can appreciate. Here's an example.
A game that I liked (Komodo 14)
[Event "3rd Match"] [Site "London ENG"] [Date "1834.??.??"] [Round "5"] [White "Louis de la Bourdonnais"] [Black "Alexander McDonnell"] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "D20"] [Annotator "Stockfish 15"] [PlyCount "57"] [EventDate "1834.??.??"] {Queen's Gambit Accepted} 1. d4 d5 2. c4 dxc4 {With this capture black surrenders the center and white will try to seize space there and use it to launch an attack. Black will have counterchances if he can weaken white's center Ps by playing ...c5 and ...cxd4 at some stage and thereby gaining an endgame advantage. In some cases, white gets an isolated d-Pawn which can lead to sharp middlegame play. If white recaptures on d4 with a piece then the center is liquidated and a fairly even game ensures.} 3. e3 {This seemingly passive move aimed at the immediate recovery of the P had a harmless reputation for a long time because of the reply 3...e5. However, it was discovered that is has more bite than originally thought because the open positions that result are not easy for black to play in practice.} (3. e4 { This logical followup in which white tries to establish a strong P-center is an old move that became popular again in the 1990s. The result of 3.e4 is an increase in strategic and tactical complexity.} e5 {Trying to defend the P with 3...b5 is highly risky. Popular is 3...Nf6 trying to provoke white into advancing in the center Ps and then attacking it is frequently seen, but the text is a highly theoretical system.} 4. Nf3 exd4 5. Bxc4 {Black can now continue with either 5...Bb4+ or 5...Nc6}) 3... e5 {Black can, if he wishes, play 3...e6 transposing into less critical lines.} (3... b5 {The dangers of trying to hang onto the P with this move were pointed out by Alessandro Salvio way back in 1604.} 4. a4 c6 {Two question marks for this which fatally opens the a8-h1 diagonal. Trying to defend the P with 3...Be6 allows white too much positional compensation.} (4... b4 {is best, but after} 5. Qf3 c6 6. Bxc4 { white is better.}) 5. axb5 cxb5 6. Qf3 {wins a piece.} Nc6 7. Qxc6+ Bd7) 4. Bxc4 exd4 5. exd4 Nf6 6. Nc3 Be7 7. Nf3 O-O 8. h3 {White could also play 8.O-O} Nbd7 9. Be3 {The opening play has been surprising modern and my database has several games which have reached this position. The text is aimed at setting up a solid, if somewhat passive, position.} (9. O-O Nb6 10. Bb3 {Also playable is 10.Bd3} Nbd5 11. Re1 {Marshall,F-Napier,W Cambridge Springs 1904 saw 11.Bg5} Be6 12. Ng5 Nxc3 13. bxc3 Bxb3 14. Qxb3 h6 {a draw was agree in Vaganian,R (2550)-Tal,M (2605) Moscow 1982}) 9... Nb6 10. Bb3 c6 11. O-O Nfd5 12. Qe2 { White need not fear 13...Nxe3 14.fxe3 which only strengthens his center.} f5 { This horrible move is typical of McDonnell's reckless style. Correct was 12... a5 with equality.} 13. Ne5 f4 {This is totally unjustified.} (13... Bf6 { keeps the damage caused by his last move to a minimum.} 14. a4 a5 15. Nxd5 Nxd5 16. Rfe1 {and white can only claim that he stands slightly better.}) 14. Bd2 g5 {McDonnell shows fallacious pluck. In this position 14...g5 is probably as good a move as any.} 15. Rae1 Kg7 16. Nxd5 (16. Nxc6 {is clever and also quite good.} bxc6 17. Nxd5 Nxd5 18. Bxd5 cxd5 19. Qxe7+ Qxe7 20. Rxe7+ {with a winning position.}) 16... Nxd5 (16... cxd5 {was no better.} 17. Bc2 {Intending Qh5} Bf5 18. Bxf5 Rxf5 19. Qg4 Qf8 20. Nf3 {The threat is Rxe7+and Qxf5} Rf7 21. Rxe7 {It still works! The K gets caught in a crossfire from white's pieces. } Qxe7 22. Re1 Qf6 23. Nxg5 Kf8 24. Re6 Qf5 25. Nxh7+ Qxh7 26. Bb4+ Re7 27. Qxf4+) 17. Nxc6 {[%mdl 512]} bxc6 18. Bxd5 Qxd5 {Only marginally better was taking with the P. Either way black is dead lost.} 19. Qxe7+ Rf7 20. Qb4 { de la Bourdonnais finishes up the game quite efficiently.} Bf5 21. Re5 Qd7 22. d5 cxd5 23. Qd4 Kh6 24. h4 Be6 25. Rfe1 Re8 26. Rxg5 Ref8 27. Qe5 {It's a moot point, but white missed a mate in 6.} (27. Bxf4 Bg4 (27... Rxf4 28. Rxe6+ R4f6 29. Rxf6+ Rxf6 30. Qxf6#) 28. Qe5 Rf5 29. Rxf5+ Kg6 30. Rg5+ Kh6 31. Rxg4+ Rxf4 32. Qg5#) 27... Bg4 {Losing outright, but it's too late to salvage anything.} ( 27... Rf5 28. Qxe6+ Qxe6 29. Rxe6+ R5f6 30. Rxf6+ Rxf6 31. Rxd5 {wins easily.}) (27... Qd8 28. Rh5+ Kg6 29. Qxe6+ Kg7 30. Bc3+ {mates in 7 moves at most.} d4 31. Bxd4+ Qf6 32. Rg5+ Kh6 33. Bxf6 Rxf6 34. Qg4 Rg6 35. Re7 Rf7 36. Rxf7 Rxg5 37. Qxg5#) 28. Rh5+ {[%mdl 512]} Bxh5 29. Qg5# {Not a badly played game at all, especially by de la Bourdonnais.} 1-0

Wednesday, June 8, 2022

Showalter Gets Hornswoggled By Torre

     In 1926 the Western Chess Association hosted a Masters Tournament in Chicago that was held in conjunction with the Western Championship. The entrants included former Western champions, the current US Champion plus Carlos Torre and Geza Maroczy who was touring the US and had delayed his return home for this tournament. 
     Torre was probably the favorite, but he had left Mexico ten days before the start of the tournament, arrived in New Orleans and from there traveled to Chicago. In Mexico he had been on a lengthy exhibition tour and from the very first round it was evident that he was in poor form, but he recovered and defeated both Marshall and Maroczy. 
     After Pillsbury left the scene and before the arrival of Marshall, Jackson W. Showalter was probably the best player in the country. He lost two matches to Pillsbury (1897 and 1898), but scored a very respectable +11 -17 =5. He also played four matches against David Janowski. Three during a visit by Janowski to New York in 1898-1899 and a fourth in 1916 when Janowski was in the States during the war. Janowski dominated the first and last while Showalter prevailed in the two shorter and less formal matches. In 1889-1900 he played some international chess, but after that he seldom played serious chess. This Chicago tournament was his last important event. 
     As for Torre, after the tournament he went to New York. He had never given much attention to his health or diet, sometimes going for weeks without a hot meal or good food. Instead, he had a fondness for sweets and it was reported that he sometimes ate a dozen pineapple sundaes a day. But, in New York acquaintances reported he was eating almost nothing but candy and fudge. 
     Today sugar addiction is recognized as a very real thing and a serious cause for concern. Sugar fuels every cell in the brain and it also sees sugar as a reward which makes a person keep wanting more of it. 
     Though it is not as strong, the site AddictionCenter.com links the addictive properties of sugar to those of cocaine; sugar creates a burst of energy and a short-term high. One study showed that the effects of sugar addiction withdrawal and relapse are similar to those of drugs of abuse. In addition to his sugar addiction, there were also likely other factors in his life that resulted in a breakdown in which he briefly suffered from psychosis.
     Psychosis is characterized by a disconnection from reality and while it may occur as a result of an illness like schizophrenia it can be caused by other health conditions, medications or drug use. Symptoms include delusions, hallucinations, talking incoherently and agitation and person usually isn't aware of their behavior.
     In Torre's case he began undressing on a bus. As a result he was hospitalized for several weeks in New York. During this time he determined to abandon chess and return to Mexico which he did on October 23, 1926. During the remaining 51 years of his life in Mexico he followed chess, bur never again played a serious game. 
     The tournament was held August 21 through September 2, 1926, and while it was going on there was also a turf war taking place between rival gangs in Chicago; they were hijacking each others booze trucks that were bringing alcohol in to the city. 
     After the tournament ended, on September 20th, the North Side Gang used drive by cars full of gangsters with Thompson sub-machine guns to shoot into Al Capone's entourage as he was eating lunch in the Hawthorne Hotel restaurant. DETAILS 

  A game that I liked (Komodo 14)

[Event "Chicago International Tournament"] [Site "Chicago, IL USA"] [Date "1926.08.30"] [Round "10"] [White "Jackson W. Showalter"] [Black "Carlos Torre"] [Result "0-1"] [ECO "B03"] [Annotator "Stockfish 15"] [PlyCount "50"] [EventDate "1926.??.??"] {Alekhine's Defense} 1. e4 {[%mdl 32]} Nf6 {This defense is one of the most provocative opening systems black has at his disposal. Black invites his opponent to occupy the center with Ps in order to challenge it. White can chose between various setups.} 2. e5 Nd5 3. d4 d6 4. Bc4 {[%mdl 32] Seldom seen, but in 1926 theory on the Alekhine was sparse sinc Alekhine had introduced it only in 1921.} (4. c4 {The Four Pawns Attack s a critical test, but it has pretty much been replaced by the Modern Variation.} Nb6 5. f4 { These days white usually prefers 5.exd6} dxe5 6. fxe5 Nc6 7. Be3 Bf5 8. Nc3 e6 9. Nf3) ({The Modern Variation} 4. Nf3 dxe5 5. Nxe5 c6 6. Be2 Bf5 7. O-O) 4... Nb6 5. Bb3 dxe5 6. Qf3 {Practically forcing 6...e6 and avoiding an exchange of Queens.} e6 7. dxe5 Nc6 {Also good is 7...a5 right away.} 8. Qg3 a5 (8... Qd4 { allows the exchange of Qs, but that was not Torre's style.} 9. Nf3 Qe4+ 10. Be3 Qg6 11. Nc3 Qxg3 12. hxg3) (8... Nd4 {leads to interesting complications after} 9. Bg5 Qd7 10. Nf3 Nxf3+ 11. Qxf3 {Provocative. Safer was 11.gxf3} Qd4 12. Qg3 Qxb2 13. O-O h6 (13... Qxa1 14. Nc3 Qb2 15. Bc1 Qa1 16. Bg5 {draws.}) 14. Bd2 Qd4 (14... Qxa1 15. Bc3 Qxc3 16. Nxc3 {This extremely unbalanced material situation should favor white.}) 15. Rd1 Nc4 16. c3 Qe4 17. Ba4+ {with equal chances.}) 9. c3 {Although this ultimately entails sacrifice of the e-Pawn it's not bad. Safer though was 9.a4} a4 10. Bc2 Nc4 {This tempts white to defend his e-Pawn with 11.f4, after which his K would be vulnerable. Consequently Showalter prefers to sacrifice the Pawn.} 11. Nf3 (11. f4 Qd5 12. Nf3 Bd7 13. O-O Bc5+ {and black can be satisfied with his position.} 14. Kh1) 11... Qd5 {[%cal Rc4e5]} 12. O-O N4xe5 {Wrong N! He should have taken with the other N. The difference is that in doing so he maintained a N on c4. Now white gets a slight advantage.} (12... N6xe5 13. Nxe5 Qxe5 14. Bf4 Qc5 15. Nd2 (15. Bxc7 e5 {cuts off the B.}) 15... e5 {with equal chances.}) 13. Nxe5 Qxe5 14. Bf4 Qh5 {Going after white’s b-Pawn would not have been in keeping with Torre’s style; he preferred sacrificing Ps for the sake of attacking possibilities.} (14... Qf6 {was tried without success in Petzold,H-Barnstedt,D (2149) Dresden 2004} 15. Bxc7 Be7 16. Nd2 Qg5 17. Qd3 Qd5 18. Qe2 Qc5 19. Ne4 ( 19. Rac1 {preventing ...Nd4? keeps the advantage.} Nd4 20. cxd4 Qxc7 21. Bxa4+) 19... Nd4 20. cxd4 Qxc7 21. Rac1 {The position is even but white went on to win.}) (14... Qb5 15. Bd3 Qxb2 16. Nd2 Qxc3 17. Rac1 Qd4 18. Nc4 Bc5 19. Rcd1 { leaves black in a precarious situation. Five Shootout games were won by white.} ) 15. Na3 (15. Bxc7 {This is not bad, but it leads to complications.} Qe2 16. Rc1 h5 17. Na3 h4 18. Qf4 g5 {This is black's best chance.} 19. Qxg5 Rh5 20. Qf6 Be7 21. Qf4 Bg5 22. Qc4 Qxc4 23. Nxc4 Bxc1 24. Rxc1 {and the chances are equal in this unbalanced material situation.}) (15. Re1 {With this move white has a modest advantage after} f6 16. Bxc7 Qf7 17. Bb6 e5 18. f4 Be7 19. Nd2 O-O 20. fxe5 Nxe5 21. Nf3) 15... f6 {[%mdl 8192] This is a serious mistake because now white can safely take the c-Pawn. Black could have prevented that and kept the chances equal by playing 15...e5} (15... e5 16. Rfe1 f6 17. Nb5 Qf7) 16. Bxc7 e5 17. Nc4 {Also good was 17.Nb5} (17. Nb5 Bf5 18. Bd1 Qg5 19. Qxg5 fxg5 20. Bb6 Kd7 21. Be2 {and black is in serious trouble.}) 17... Bf5 {This is the best black has and it's trappy!} (17... Be6 {is no better, a little worse in fact.} 18. Nb6 Ra7 19. Rfd1 Kf7 20. Qe3 g6 21. Bxa4 Bh6 22. Qe4 {and black is in dire straits.}) 18. Bxf5 {Back in the old days before engines Showalter was criticized for taking the bait with this move and the inferior 18.Nd6+ was recommended. It's not so. Showalter's move is the correct one...Stockfish says so!} (18. Nd6+ {This only leads to equality after} Bxd6 19. Bd1 {Equally good was 19.Bxf5} Qg6 20. Bxd6 Qxg3 21. hxg3) 18... Qxf5 19. Nd6+ {Tempting, but as on the previous move it leads to no more than equality.} (19. Nb6 {is quite advantageous to white.} Ra6 20. Rad1 {and black has no entirely satisfactory move. All he can do is keep trying to defend his position as he has no prospects of launching any kind of counterattack.}) 19... Bxd6 20. Qxg7 { [%mdl 8192] After this move Showalter gets swindled!} (20. Bxd6 {is correct. Black is equal after} Kf7 21. Rad1 Rhd8) 20... Bf8 {And wins!! It's a well known fact that backward moves are hard to see. With this move Torre wins a piece or traps the Queen. An amazing turn of events.} 21. Qxh8 {White has a R+P against a N, but his Q is a goner and his position is lost.} (21. Qg3 { also loses after} Ne7 22. Rad1 Rg8) 21... Kf7 22. h3 Re8 23. g4 Qg6 24. Rad1 Be7 25. Qxe8+ Kxe8 {White resigned.} 0-1

Tuesday, June 7, 2022

Queen Sacrifice by Orrin Frink

 
     The years 1920 was an interesting year in the United States. Many people familiar with US history know that was the year that the 19th amendment to the Constitution was ratified. It's the one that gave women the right to vote.
     There was also an event that took place that I had never heard of...the Red Scare that was lead by President Woodrow Wilson's Attorney General, A. Mitchell Palmer. 
     During its height in 1919-1920 many foreigners suspected of involvement in radical political activity were deported.  The deportations occurred as a result of witch hunts over the effects of radical political agitation and the feared spread of communism and anarchism in the American labor movement. 
     Under the leadership of J. Edgar Hoover, Federal agents, without search warrants, broke into homes of suspected anarchists, jailed labor leaders and held about 5,000 people while disregarding their right to legal counsel. The government had amassed a storehouse of information about radicals in the country. They had infiltrated many organizations and following raids made in November 1919 and January 1920, had seized thousands of boxes of records and interrogated thousands of those arrested. 
     Though the agency knew very well that the evidence about plans for an attempted overthrow of the government on May Day 1920 were quite remote, Hoover warned the nation to expect assassinations, bombings and general strikes. Possibly Hoover was remembering the May Day riots that took place in Cleveland, Ohio, in 1919.
     Thanks to the hysteria generated by Palmer and Hoover newspapers headlined Terror Reign by Radicals and city police forces prepared themselves and some states mobilized their militias. New York City's 11,000-man police force worked for 32 hours straight. Boston police mounted machine guns on automobiles and positioned them around the city. May Day came and went with no incidents. 
     Even so, Federal agents rounded up suspected radicals and many of them ended up getting deported. Some communists agreed to be deported while others were put in a concentration camp at Camp Upton in New York pending deportation hearings.
     As unbelievable as it sounds, in Centralia, Washington, some members of the American Legion attacked members of the Industrial Workers of the World (the members of which are commonly called Wobblies), an international labor union that was founded in Chicago in 1905. Twelve of the Wobblies were arrested, one was beaten, castrated and then shot. The New York State Legislature expelled five Socialist representatives, twenty-eight states banned the public display of red flags. It seemed as though the witch hunt would never end, but eventually responsible citizens began to speak out against Palmer's raids and demanded that civil liberties be respected.
    Chessplayers lost in 1920 were Polish master Georg Rotlewi (1889-1920, 31 years old) and Romanian master Adolf Albin (1848-1920) who died of tuberculosis in Vienna. William Crane (1851-1920), the Australian champion in 1888 and 1897, died in Stanmore, Australia. And, on December 20th, Horatio Caro (1862-1920) died in London.
     In 1920, the first All-Russian Chess Olympiad (won by Alekhine) was held in Moscow. About half way through the event the players went on strike demanding more food rations and prize money. Their demands were finally met. Douglas Griffin published a full account of the event on his site HERE.
     On January 23, 1920, Capablanca and Lasker agreed to play a World Championship chess match in 1921, but in June, Lasker, who began his reign in 1894, resigned his world championship to Capablanca. 
     On August 10, 1920, a broke Emanuel Lasker, who was living in The Hague, re-considered after Cuban enthusiasts raised $20,000 and agreed to a match of 24 games to be played in Havana with him being the challenger and Capablanca the champion. After 14 games the score stood at 9-5 in favor of Capablanca and so Lasker resigned the match. 
     Closer to home, in New York City Metropolitan Chess League play, Brooklynite and Columbia team player Orrin Frink, Jr. downed M.I. Lockwood of the Staten Island Chess Club with a Queen sacrifice in a game in which auto-annotation with Fritz 17 and Stockfish 15 labeled his play "very precise." 
Frink in 1931

     Orrin Frink, Jr. (May 31, 1901 - March 4, 1988) was born in Brooklyn and earned his Ph.D. from Columbia University in 1926 and joined the Penn State faculty two years later where he taught in the mathematics department for 41 years from 1928 to 1969. He was chairman of the university's mathematics department from 1949 to 1960.
     Before his professional career he was active in both New York and Chicago chess circles, his best result being a tie with David Janowski for 3rd-4th in the 1923-24 Manhattan Chess Club championship. 
     Frink also played postal chess and was an endgame composer; most of his endings were published in the magazine The Chess Amateur. The magazine ran for 24 volumes from October 1906 to June 1930, each volume running from October until the following September except the final volume 24 which ceased after 9 issues. It was an important periodical that had many well known contributors such as Alain White, T. R. Dawson, Rev. E. E. Cunnington, W. Moffatt, I. Gunsberg and W. A. Fairhurst.
      Frink passed away at his home in Kennebunkport, Maine at the age of 86
A game that I liked (Komodo 14)
[Event "League Match, New York City"] [Site "?"] [Date "1920.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "M.I. Lockwood"] [Black "Orrin Frink, Jr."] [Result "0-1"] [ECO "D40"] [Annotator "Stockfish 15"] [PlyCount "38"] [EventDate "1920.??.??"] {Queen's Gambit Declined: Semi-Tarrasch} 1. d4 d5 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 c5 { Recommended by Tarrasch, this move is an aggressive bid for central space. After White plays cxd5 and dxc5, black will be left with an isolated d-Pawn. It may be weak or it may be strong depending on how the game progresses.} 4. Nf3 (4. cxd5 exd5 5. Nf3 Nc6 6. g3 Nf6 7. Bg2 Be7 8. O-O O-O 9. Bg5 cxd4 10. Nxd4 {is the main line of the Tarrasch and it is what is usually today.}) 4... Nc6 {Unlike the regular Tarrasch, in the Semi-Tarrasch black does get the isolated d-Pawn.} 5. e3 Nf6 6. a3 {White also plays 6.cxd5 quite often and then black has a choice between playing either 6...exd5 or 6...Nxd5} (6. cxd5 { is also seen quite often,}) 6... a6 7. Bd3 {Capturing 7.cxd5 is more popular.} dxc4 8. Bxc4 b5 9. Bd3 (9. Ba2 {is a viable alternative.} Bb7 10. O-O Qc7 11. Qe2 {equals.}) 9... Bb7 10. dxc5 (10. O-O Qc7 (10... cxd4 11. exd4 Be7 12. Bc2 b4 13. axb4 O-O {with equal chances. Abergel,T (2449)-Louis,T (2244) Sitges ESP 2015}) 11. Qe2 Rd8 12. dxc5 Bxc5 13. e4 Ng4 14. g3 Qb6 15. Bc2 O-O { black has a good game. Langeweg,K (2450)-Olafsson,F (2550) Wijk aan Zee 1976}) 10... Bxc5 11. b4 {Black is already slightly better. Note how all of his pieces are aimed at the K-side where white's K must eventually take up residence. It's surprising how the lurking danger grows.} (11. O-O Qc7 12. b4 Be7 13. Bb2 Rd8 14. Qc2 {This position is fully even. Anit,T (1881)-Ibarra Chami,L (2389) Dresden 2008}) 11... Bd6 12. Bb2 O-O 13. Qc2 {With the c-file open this is not a good square for the Queen,} (13. Ne4 {eliminating on of black's potential attackers is correct. After} Nxe4 14. Bxe4 {followed by castling would have left white safe enough.}) 13... Rc8 {Not only does this prevent a veiled threat to the Q it prevents the aforementioned Ne4 by white.} 14. Rd1 (14. Ne4 Ne5 15. Nxf6+ Qxf6 16. Bxh7+ Kh8 17. Qb1 g6 18. Bxe5 Bxe5 19. Nxe5 Qxe5 20. Bxg6 Qc3+ 21. Ke2 fxg6 22. f3 (22. Qxg6 Qb2+ {mates in 3}) 22... Qc4+ {black is left with a winning position.}) 14... Qe7 15. O-O (15. Ne4 { is still bad.} Nxe4 16. Bxe4 Nxb4 17. Bxh7+ Kh8 18. Qb1 f5 19. axb4 Kxh7 { black is better.}) 15... Ne5 16. Nd4 (16. Nxe5 {eliminates one of black's attackers, but it was no safer.} Bxe5 17. h3 Bxc3 18. Bxc3 Nd5 19. Bxh7+ Kh8 20. Rxd5 Bxd5 21. Bd3 e5 {black has a winning game.}) 16... Nfg4 17. Qe2 { Stepping on a land mine.} (17. Bxh7+ {was his best chance to play on.} Kh8 18. Be4 Bxe4 19. Qxe4 Nxh2 20. Rfe1 f5 21. Qc2 Qh4 22. f4 Nc4 23. Bc1 Rf6 24. Qf2 { Strategically black is winning, but at least white has hopes of holding on for some time.}) 17... Qh4 {[%csl Gg4][%cal Rh4h2] Setting up a devastating finish. } 18. h3 Nxd3 19. Rxd3 Qxh3 {White resigned before black could deliver mate in 2.} (19... Qxh3 20. gxh3 Bh2#) 0-1