A Brilliant Finish by Lasker

    St. Petersburg 1895/96 was a quadrangular event with the four strongest players in the world, Lasker, Steinitz, Pillsbury and Chigorin who played 6 games each against the other three competitors. 

    The only top player missing from this event was Tarrasch. According to Chessmetrics' December 1895 rating lisi the top players were Lasker ((2842), Tarrasch (2803), Chigorin (2794), Steinitz (2746) and Pillsbury (2727). 

    Lasker clearly maintained his right to claim the World Championship despite the fact that he had a minus score of +1 -2 =3 against Pillsbury. Pillsbury was the most dangerous opponent that Lasker faced during the first years of his reign and between 1893 and 1904 they faced each other in 12 tournament games. The final score was +5 -4 =3 in Lasker’s favor. 

    The openings in this event were mostly QP, Ruy Lopez, Petrov and the Evans Gambit. Steinitz was experimenting with his line against the Ruy Lopez (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 d6) without much success and later abandoned it in favor of 3…a6 followed by 4…d6. It was also rumored that in three of their game Pillsbury and Steinitz agreed to open with 1.d4. 

 

 

    Blunders. Lasker hardly made any while Steinitz and Pillsbury (most of Pillsbury’s were because of time pressure) made a fair share. Chigorin also made quite a few, but his seemed to have mostly been caused by fatigue, perhaps due to illness. 

    In the following game, while Steinitz wastes a lot of time maneuvering on the K-side, Lasker methodically builds up his position and when Steinitz blunders on move 26, it’s all over. You’ll like Lasker’s refutation of Steinitz’ mistake and it’s worth playing through the final moves several times trying to visualize the possibilities.

[Event "St. Petersburg 1895/96"] [Site ""] [Date "1895.12.15"] [Round "2"] [White "Emanuel Lasker"] [Black "Wilhelm Steinitz"] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "C71"] [Annotator "Stockfish 17.1"] [PlyCount "63"] [EventDate "1895.12.13"] {C87: ClRuy Lopez} 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6 4. Ba4 d6 {The ideas for both sides are somewhat limited with this defense and black's main disadvantage is that he remains cramped.} 5. d4 Bd7 6. c3 {These days this is the most popular move, but also playable is the immediate 6.O-O} Nf6 7. Nbd2 Be7 8. O-O O-O 9. Re1 Re8 10. Nf1 Bf8 11. Ng3 g6 12. h3 Bg7 13. Bc2 (13. d5 {is also effective.} Ne7 14. Bc2 Rf8 15. c4 Nh5 16. Nxh5 gxh5 17. Nh2 Be8 18. Qxh5 {Gruenfeld,Y (2545)-Adams,M (2660) New York, 1994}) 13... Bc8 {Black has tried multiple moves here, but none are especially promiaing.} (13... h6 {is the usual move today. At the time Steinitz was experimenting.} 14. Nh2 Kh7 15. f4 exd4 16. cxd4 {White is still better. Reti,R-Bogoljubow,E Dortmund 1928}) 14. d5 Ne7 15. Be3 {In the tournament book James Mason was critical of Steinitz’ play hereabouts because he does a lot of shifting about of his pieces, eventually playing for ...f5. This was typical of Steinitz’ play, but in the meantime Lasker methodically prepares his attack. But there appears to be no better plan for black.} Rf8 16. Qd2 Ne8 17. Bh6 Kh8 $14 18. Rad1 Ng8 {Black seems to be wasting a lot time fiddling around here, but his position is so solid that it is difficult for white to make any headway.} 19. Bxg7+ Nxg7 20. c4 {[%mdl 2048] Black is under pressure and with his nexr nive seeks some freedom..} f5 21. Qc3 {Better woulld have been 21.exf5} fxe4 (21... f4 {This was Mason’s recommendation and it does seem better. The N’s aren’t well placed, but there is some possibility that Black would be able to work up a K-side attack. Opening up the file has some disadvantages in this position as we shall see.} 22. Nf1 g5 {with about equal chances.}) 22. Bxe4 Nf6 {Evidently played with the intention of exchanging the B, but the result is that white's N finds a nive outpost on e4. Something like the precautionary 22...b6 hindering white's counterplay with c5 was in order.} 23. Qe3 Nxe4 24. Nxe4 {The N occupies a nice outpost from here.} Rf4 {This turns out to be a poor idea.} (24... Nf5 25. Qd3 b6 26. b4 {and white is only slightly better.}) 25. c5 Bf5 (25... dxc5 26. Nxe5 {Threatening Nf7+} Qf8 27. Nxc5 {with a technically won position.}) 26. Nfg5 Qd7 {Lasker finishes the game in great style.} 27. Qxf4 {[%mdl 512] This must have come as a shock to Steinitz.} exf4 28. Nf6 Ne6 (28... Qc8 29. Nf7#) ( 28... Qd8 29. Nf7#) 29. Nxd7 Nxg5 30. Re7 Kg8 31. Nf6+ Kf8 32. Rxc7 {Black resigned, White is up the exchange and a P/} 1-0

Rose Almost Beat Capablanca

    My father, who never played chess, was born in 1907, a time when comic strips, dime novels and early silent films (nickelodeons) were becoming popular. Traveling vaudeville shows were popular. They featured variety acts like comedians, singers, dancers, magicians, acrobats, trained animals, and dramatic skits. 

    In 1907, Emanuel Lasker successfully defended his World Championship title against Frank Marshall that was played in six American cities. Lasjer won by a score of +8 -0 =7. 

    A major tournament was held in Ostend, Belgium that was won by Siegbert Tarrasch. It was also the year some young player, ike Akiba Rubinstein, Aron Nimzovich, Richard Reti, Milan Vidmar and Tarrasch himself were beginning to make their mark. 

    In a minor, long forgotten event, for the seventh time the international cable match between an American team of players from Columbia, Harvard and Yale met a British team rom Oxford and Cambridge in a cable match that was held on Saturday, March 23, 1907. They were playing for a silver shield, a gift from Professor Isaac L. Rice. At the time it was in the custody of Oxford and Cambridge.

 

    The Americans played at the rooms of the Rice Chess Club in the Cafe Boulevard, 156 Second Avenue, New York City. The British team played in the rooms of the Metropolitan Chess Club in the Inns of Court Hotel, London. By 7:30am New York time, a crew from the Commercial Cable Company established a direct connection and play began half an hour later. 

    Capablanca’s opponent in this game, Herbert J. Rose (1883-1961, 78 years old) was born in Orillia, Ontario, north of Toronto. He attended McGill University in Montreal, and was awarded a Rhodes Scholarship. Studying at Balliol College, Oxford, he was a member of the university chess team playing in four Varsity matches, and against Capablanca in the cable match. Rose went on to become a professor of Latin and Greek, authoring the standard textbook, A Handbook of Greek Mythology, in 1928.

 

[Event "College Cable Match"] [Site "?"] [Date "1907.03.23"] [Round "?"] [White "Jose Capablanca (USA)"] [Black "H.J. Rose (England)"] [Result "1/2-1/2"] [ECO "C63"] [Annotator "Stockfish 17.1"] [PlyCount "83"] [EventDate "1907.??.??"] {C63: Ruy Lopez: Schliemann Defense/Jaenisch Gambit} 1. e4 {[%emt 0:00:00]} e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 f5 {The Schliemann Defense, aka the Jaenisch Gambit, is a sharp line in which black sacrifices a P with the hope of getting a K-side attack. It's risky.} 4. d3 {At the time a great deal of analysis was done on this position and it was concluded that 4.Nc3, a move which had the backing of Lasker, was best. Today both moves get equal billing, but statistics seem to favor 4.Nc3} Nf6 5. O-O fxe4 6. dxe4 d6 7. Nc3 Be7 8. h3 O-O 9. Ng5 {It was correctly suggested that 9.Bc4+ and 10.a3 securing a retreat for the valuable B was better.} Qe8 10. f4 h6 11. Bc4+ Kh8 12. Ne6 (12. Nf7+ Rxf7 13. Bxf7 Qxf7 {Generally speaking the B+N are to ne favored over the R amd sp sucj an exchange should be avoided.}) 12... Bxe6 13. Bxe6 Nd4 14. Bb3 (14. Bc4 b5 15. Bd3 b4 16. Ne2 Nxe2+ 17. Qxe2 {is about equal. Schurade,M (2360)-Moehring,G (2375) Leipzig 1981}) 14... Nxb3 15. axb3 Qc6 16. Qe2 {He could have played 16. Qd3 immediately.} exf4 17. Bxf4 a6 18. Rae1 Rae8 19. Qd3 Nd7 20. Nd5 Nc5 21. Qc3 {Baiting a trap.} Ne6 (21... Nxe4 {An early annotator suggested that this was less complicated, but it is, in fact, more complicated and inferior to the move played.} 22. Qxc6 bxc6 23. Nxc7 Bh4 24. Nxe8 Bxe1 25. Nxd6 Rxf4 26. Rxf4 Nxd6 {White has a R+P vs B+N plus nlack has weak Ps and so this position strongly favors white.}) 22. Qd2 {White would have done better by making a couple of exchanges.} (22. Nxe7 Rxe7 23. Qxc6 bxc6 24. Bd2) 22... Nxf4 23. Nxf4 Qc5+ 24. Kh1 Bg5 25. Ng6+ Kg8 26. Qd3 Rxf1+ 27. Rxf1 Bf6 {[%mdl 2048] Now a good way for white to seek play is to advance his h-Pawn.} 28. e5 {An annotator of the day correctly called this move unnecessarily risky, adding that apparently Capablanca felt it incumbent upon himself to do something. His main problem is that he was hampered by the weak e-Pawn. Writing in The Unknown Capablanca author Dale Brandreth stated that Capablanca only played in two telegraph matches, because he did not like the slow pace of play. And, he arrived late for this game, played quickly and that explains his rash play in maling this move.} (28. h4 Qb5 29. c4 Qc6 30. Rf4 b5 31. h5 bxc4 (31... Bxb2 { loses to} 32. Rf8+ Rxf8 (32... Kh7 33. e5 Rxf8 34. Ne7+) 33. Ne7+) 32. bxc4 Bg5 {with completely equal chances.}) 28... dxe5 29. b4 {Baiting another trap.} Qc6 (29... Qxb4 30. Qd5+ Kh7 31. Rxf6 gxf6 32. Qf7#) 30. Qb3+ Qe6 31. Qg3 {Trading Qs would have left white with no chances at all.} Bg5 32. Nh4 {This loses outright, but even after his best try of 32.h4 black would be winning.} Bxh4 { This move is just OK, but it's not the strongest.} (32... Qc4 {threatening ... Qxf1# secures the win after. It;s surprising that the annotator in the American Chess Bulletin and the players missed this.} 33. Kg1 Qxh4 {and black is a B and a P up.}) 33. Qxh4 {[%mdl 4096]} e4 34. Re1 Qe7 {His passed P would have been stronger with Qs on the board.} (34... e3 {has better winning chances.} 35. Re2 Qd5 36. c3 Qd1+ 37. Qe1 Qd3 {Black has the advantage, but squeezubg out the win would likely be an arduous process.}) 35. Qxe7 Rxe7 36. Kg1 Kf7 37. Kf2 Kf6 38. Ke3 Ke5 39. Rd1 h5 40. Rd4 Kf5 41. Rd5+ Kg6 42. Rd4 { Fraw agreed.} 1/2-1/2

Geller Gets Lucky Against Fischer

    Soviet GM Yefim Geller (1925-1998) was one of the least appreciated of the GM’s of his era. In addition to ranking among the world’s elite players, he was known for his tactical ability and brilliant attacking style. 

    In later years he abandoned his youthful aggressiveness and became a more rounded player and, according to Botvinnik, was the best player in the world in the late 1960’s. If you enjoy attacking chess, his games are worthy of examination.

    Here’s one of his wins over Fischer that was played at Skopje in 1967. Skopje was rebuilt because of a devastating earthquake in 1963 that destroyed about 80% of the city. Following its rebuilding Yugoslavia organized the first in a series of international tournaments to be held in Skopje. 

    The first tournament featured a field of twelve Yugoslav masters headed by GM Milan Matulovic. The Soviet Union sent two veteran grandmasters, Efim Geller and Ratmir Kholmov. Fischer had just recently returned to international competition and Skopje would be an important stop on his road to the 1967 Sousse Interzonal.

    Going into this event, Matulovic, Geller, and Kholmov all had plus scores against Fischer, making them excellent choices to potentially challe Fischer’s chances at taking first place.

 

 

    Fischer lost his second round game to Geller and after the ninth round, despite being tied for first with Kholmov, Fischer, ever the petty little snot, announced he would withdraw from the tournament unless the spectators were removed from further rounds. The organizers wouldn’t meet the demand and Fischer forfeited his tenth round game (against Knezevic). However, upon a compromise was reached and in a show of true sportsmanship Knezevic agreed to play the forfeited game.

 

 

[Event "Skopje"] [Site ""] [Date "1967.08.08"] [Round "2"] [White "Robert Fischer"] [Black "Efim Geller"] [Result "0-1"] [ECO "B88"] [Annotator "Stockfish 17.1"] [PlyCount "46"] [EventDate "1967.08.??"] {[%evp 21,46,113,104,96,123,110,155,176,183,164,163,190,171,147,155,143,109, 146,217,0,-7,-335,-347,-338,-332,-499,-499] B89: Sicilian: Velimirovic Attack} 1. e4 {In tournament play Geller's life time score against Fischer was +5 -2 =3.} c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 Nc6 {Geller plays the classical 5...Nc6 instead of the popular and highly analyzed Najdorf 5...a6} 6. Bc4 {A Fischer favorite as it leads to sharp play.} e6 7. Be3 Be7 8. Bb3 O-O 9. Qe2 {Preparing to castle Q-side. Wf can plan on seeing a real fight.} Qa5 { Gekker is going all out for an attack, but this is risky, The standard ...a6 and ...b5 is a safer alternative.} 10. O-O-O Nxd4 {Best. With black's Q on a5 the other two options (10...a6 and 10...Bd7 have proven much less effective.} 11. Bxd4 Bd7 12. Kb1 Bc6 {The point of his 10th move. On c6 the B puts pressure on white's e-Pawn and allows for a potential break by ...d5} 13. f4 Rad8 (13... d5 {loses the game...} 14. exd5 Nxd5 15. Nxd5 Bxd5 16. Bxd5 Qxd5 ( 16... exd5 17. Qxe7) 17. Bxg7) (13... e5 {Appears to limit white's attacking possibilities by blocking the center, but after} 14. fxe5 dxe5 15. Bf2 { Black should now play ...Bd7-e6 when white still has the better game, but not} b5 16. g4 {This is a very sharp position, but the complications favore white.} b4 17. g5 Nd7 18. Nd5 Bxd5 19. Rxd5 Qc7 20. h4 {White has all the chances.}) 14. Rhf1 b5 15. f5 {The idea is to open up lines so he can use his two Bs which are aimed at the black K. At this point Fischer has established a very promising position.} b4 {This traps the N, but white has resources that make up fot it!} 16. fxe6 bxc3 17. exf7+ Kh8 {Black threatens ...Bb5.} (17... Rxf7 { fails because the B on c6 is loose.} 18. Bxf7+ Kxf7 19. Qc4+ d5 20. Qxc6 dxe4 21. Bxc3 Qc5 22. Qxc5 Rxd1+ 23. Rxd1 Bxc5 24. Bd4 Bxd4 25. Rxd4 {and white is winning.}) 18. Rf5 {[%mdl 2048] Keeping up the pressure.} (18. Bxc3 {This is a good looking movem but after} Qg5 {white's K-side play is gummed up.} 19. h4 Qg4 {and black can claim at least equality.}) 18... Qb4 19. Qf1 {Fischer has a very strong attack on f6 which, if successfully carried out, would win. Unfortunately for him, in the complications he mishandles the attack.} Nxe4 { There is but a single move that keeps the attack going and Fischer fails to find it.} 20. a3 Qb7 21. Qf4 {[%mdl 8192] What a paradox! Last move this would have won; this move it loses.} (21. Rh5 {keeep white in the game.} Qd7 (21... Ba4 22. Qf5 Ng5 23. Bxg7+ Kxg7 24. Rxg5+ Kh8 (24... Bxg5 25. Qxg5+ {mayes}) 25. Rxd6 {wins as the R cannit be taken.} Rxd6 26. Rg8+ Rxg8 27. fxg8=R#) 22. Bxg7+ Kxg7 23. Qf4 d5 24. Qh6+ Kxf7 25. Qxh7+ Ke8 26. Qg6+ Rf7 {and a draw is a likely outcome.}) 21... Ba4 {This sudden attack on white's K is an unexpected blow.} 22. Qg4 Bf6 23. Rxf6 {Losing instantly, but there was no way of saving the game/} Bxb3 {White resigned.} (23... Bxb3 24. cxb3 Nxf6 25. Bxf6 gxf6 26. Qd4 c2+ 27. Kxc2 Rxf7 {White is a R down.}) 0-1

Postal Chess Before Engines

    A while back I did exactly what I said I wouldn’t do...I played a couple of correspondence games. My opponent for the two game match holds the ICCF Senior International Master title. As white I played a sharp line against the Sicilian and as black, my opponent played 3.e4 against my Queen’s Gambit Accepted. Both games fizzled out into uneventful draw. It just proves the futility of correspondence chess these days unless one possess a heavy duty laptop and infinite patience. Even them decisive results are rare. 

     It wasn’t always that way. Before engines the only “help” we had was opening books and almost everybody used Modern Chess Openings. 

    In 1962 the top rated “Postalites” at Al Horowitz’ popular Chess Review were 1) Postal Master Hams Berliner who was rated far ahead of Postal Master Candidates Lionel Joyner and Gerald Gross. Possessing the Air Mail Postalite title were Jack Buck, Robert Steinmeyer, R.E.A. Doe, C. Kalenian, E. W. Buerger, G. Katz, John Curdo and J. W. Harper. They were followed by 34 First Class Postalites. 

     The following game between a couple of Class A Postalites is filled with tactics, some sound, some not.

 

[Event "Chess Review Postal Tournament"] [Site "?"] [Date "1962.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "E.L. Walrath"] [Black "B. Davidson"] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "E88"] [Annotator "Stockfish 17.1"] [PlyCount "87"] [EventDate "1962.??.??"] {E88: King's Indian: Saemisch Variation} 1. d4 {As was the custom of the day, we are informed that the opening was found in Modern Chess Openings, 9th edition, page 314m column 37.} Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. Nc3 Bg7 4. e4 d6 5. f3 {The Saemisch Variation often leads to castling on opposides and ,ot can lead to weighty positional struggles.} O-O 6. Be3 e5 7. d5 {The main option is 7.Neg2. Either way, white seems to do well.} c6 8. Qd2 cxd5 9. cxd5 a6 10. a4 {This is rather weakening in view of the fact that white intends to castle Q-side. More to the point was 10.g4} Ne8 {Normally black plays 10...Nbd7. With the text move it seems as if black is preparing ...f5, but he has another maneuver in mind..} 11. g4 (11. Bd3 f5 12. Nge2 f4 13. Bf2 Nd7 14. O-O {os equal. Carol Querol,S-Movsziszian,K (2501) Castellar 1999}) 11... Bf6 {The thematic is 11... f5 is no better though.} (11... f5 12. gxf5 gxf5 13. Nh3 Qh4+ 14. Qf2 Qh5 15. exf5 Bxf5 16. Ng5 {White is better.}) 12. Nge2 (12. h4 {is an interesting temporary P sacrifice. The idea is to get the Q to the h-file with a gain of time.} Bxh4+ 13. Kd1 Nd7 14. Qh2 g5 15. Bxg5 Qxg5 16. Qxh4 Qxh4 17. Rxh4 { White is better.}) 12... Bh4+ 13. Ng3 f5 {Ultimately this does not work out well for black as all he is doing i opening lines of attack for white. 13... Nd7 was better. It seems as if the whole maneuver initiated by 10...Ne8 is suspect.} 14. gxf5 gxf5 15. exf5 Bxf5 16. O-O-O Bg6 17. Bh6 {Better would have been 17.Bd3 because as will be seen, black's light squared B is very well placed.} Nd7 {Black is relying on a cheap tactical trick which works to his disadvantage.} (17... Bxg3 {Eliminating a piece which has good attacking potential.} 18. hxg3 Rxf3 {and white has only a modest advantage.}) 18. Nge4 ( 18. Bxf8 {loses immediately.} Nc5 {and there is no good way to meet the threat of ...Nb3+ Note how strong the B on g3 is.}) 18... Rxf3 {While this wins a P, it eventually results in white getting a file for an attack. However, passive play with something like 18...Ng7 does not lool very appetizing.} 19. Be2 { More promising would have been 19.Rg1 and Bd3. Black noiw has an ingenious reply.} (19. Rg1 Rxc3+ {doesn't wirk in this situation.} 20. bxc3 Nef6 21. Bd3 Qc7 22. Nxf6+ Bxf6 23. Bxg6 {and white wins.}) 19... Rxc3+ {[%mdl 512] Correctly sacrificing the exchange. Adopting a defensive posture by retreating the R would be much less effective.} 20. Nxc3 Nc5 {Threatening 21...Nb3#} 21. Bc4 {This covers b3, but it also opens up the b1–h7 diagonal with disastrous consequences. Correct was 21.Rdf1! wich gives the K an escape square and, at the same tome, occupies an open file. In that case the chances would have been equal.} Rc8 (21... b5 {[%mdl 512] is even harder for white to meet.} 22. b4 Nxa4 23. Nxa4 Rc8 24. Nc5 dxc5 {and white's position is pretty much hopeless.}) 22. Rdf1 {Placing the R opposite black's K with 22.Rdg1 would have been considerably better. The R has no prospects on f1 even though it's on an open file.} Bf6 (22... Ng7 23. Rhg1 b5 24. Ba2 b4 {and white has no good reply.} 25. Rxg6 hxg6 26. Qg2 Kh7 27. Bb1 e4 28. Bxg7 Kxg7 {and black's attack on the c-file wins.}) 23. Rhg1 b5 24. axb5 axb5 25. Rxg6+ {Returning the exchange is necessary because the B is just too dangerous to white's K.} hxg6 26. Qg2 { [%mdl 2048] White has some pressure.} Kh7 {Very good...black gets his K out of harms way.} (26... bxc4 27. Qxg6+ Bg7 28. Bxg7 Nxg7 29. Rf7 {wins.}) 27. Rg1 g5 28. Qh3 Kg6 29. Bxb5 {Over the last several moves a state of equality has been reached. Black's next move opens the diagonal for his B.} e4 30. Kb1 {Black's K is still in some damger and so 30...Ng7 would help insure its safety/} Rb8 31. Bxg5 Bxg5 32. Qg2 Ng7 33. h4 {The situation has completely changed over the last few moves and it is now white who has a lot of pressure on his opponent's K. The position is razor sharp and black must defend carefully.} Nf5 {...which he does not!} (33... Qe7 {was necessary.} 34. hxg5 Nf5 35. Rh1 Qxg5 36. Qh3 e3 37. Bd3 Qf4 {with about equal chances.}) 34. Qh2 {This is much stronger that exchanging Qs.} ({Inferior is} 34. Nxe4 Nxh4 35. Qxg5+ Qxg5 { with equal chances.}) 34... Nxh4 35. Qxh4 {Material is now equal, but white has a decisive attack.} Qf6 36. b4 {[%mdl 32] Well played! Attention is suddenly dicerted away from the K-side. This move looks risky, but it actually secures the win.} Qf5 37. bxc5 {Hint...this P is going to win the game.} Qf1+ ( 37... dxc5 38. Kc2 Rg8 39. Be2 Rg7 40. Qh5+ Kf6 41. Qe8 {Black can't safely evade the threat of Rf1}) 38. Rxf1 {White threatens Rg1 and mate.} Bxh4 39. c6 e3 40. Kc2 Bd8 41. Rf8 Bc7 42. Rxb8 Bxb8 43. Bd3+ Kf6 44. Nb5 {Black resigned/} 1-0

Kansas State Meeting of Long Ago

    When the Kansas State Chess Association mrt in Wichita from December 26-30 in 1922 things were looking pretty good for Kansas chess. Festivities began with a simul by W.W. Livingston who had been the state champion for the past three years. Then officers were elected. 

    The report did not give any information about how the tournament was organized, but the 14 players met in a double round event. 

    Nothing is known of W.W. Livingston, but George S. Barnes (1902-1977) went on to become the 10-time Minnesota state champion between 1931 and 1951. Like Livingston, nothing is known of Barnes’ opponent in this gae. 

 

 

    Barnes was inducted into the Minnesota chess Hall oif Fame in 2018 based on both his accomplishments as a player and as an organizer. There was no rating system prior to 1951 so it’s unknown how strong he was in his prime, but in recongnition of his accomplishments the USCF awarded him the Master Emeritus title. 

     Prior to his exploits in Minnesota, Barnes had won the Kansas championship and, also, the University of Michigan championship. He spent his retirement years in Florida where he passed away in 1977. 

 

[Event "Kansas State Champ, Wichita"] [Site ""] [Date "1922.12.??"] [Round "?"] [White "E.E. Felt"] [Black "George S. Barnes"] [Result "0-1"] [ECO "C58"] [Annotator "Stockfish 17.1"] [PlyCount "104"] [EventDate "1922.??.??"] [Source ""] {C59: Two Knights Defense} 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Nf6 {This ancient defense dates backs to the 1500s and it's still good today.} 4. Ng5 {This is white’s most direct approach immediately attacking f7.} d5 {This is the only satisfactory way of meeting white's last move.} (4... Bc5 {has been tried on a few occasions, but after} 5. Bxf7+ Ke7 6. Bc4 {znd blzck has zero compensation for the P} Rf8) (4... Bc5 5. Nxf7 {results in sharp play that allows black to equalize.} Bxf2+ 6. Kxf2 Nxe4+ 7. Ke3 Qh4 8. g3 Nxg3 9. hxg3 Qd4+ 10. Kf3 O-O) 5. exd5 Na5 6. Bb5+ c6 7. dxc6 bxc6 8. Be2 Bd6 {A logical developing move, but driving the N back with 8...h6 9.Nf3 e4 was more accurate.} 9. d3 O-O 10. Ne4 ( 10. Nc3 Nd5 11. Nce4 Be7 12. Nf3 f5 13. Ng3 {is equal. Krivokapic,M (2418) -Marinc,D (2041) Sunny Beach BUL 2011}) 10... Nxe4 11. dxe4 Nb7 {[%mdl 32] The beginning of a long trek to f4.} 12. O-O Nc5 13. f3 Qe7 14. c3 {This serves no purpose. Developing with 14.Nc3 was better.} Rd8 15. Qc2 Ne6 16. b4 g5 { Technically, black should have challenged white on the Q-side with 16...a5, but Barnes is going all out for an attack on white's K.} 17. h3 {White is barking up the wrong tree and only succeeds in weakening his own K-side. Developing with 17.Nd2 is the correct procedure.} Kh8 18. g4 Nf4 {Completing the trip this N started on move 11. The fact that all black has accomplished in the lasr 7 moves has been the repositiong of his N while white has accomplished nothing is an indicator that white's play has been aimless.} 19. Kh2 Qe6 20. Rg1 h5 21. Bxf4 gxf4 22. Nd2 hxg4 23. fxg4 Qh6 {[%mdl 128] Black has some attack, but it's far from being decisive.} 24. Bf3 {It would have been better to have the N on f3 than the B.} Kg7 {[%mdl 1024]} 25. Nc4 { This puts the N out of play. Repairing the damage with 25.Bg2 and 26,Nf3 was considerably better. After the text white's [position is critical.} Rh8 26. Qg2 Bc7 27. Rh1 Be6 28. Be2 Qg5 29. Kg1 (29. a3 {A pass to show black's threat.} Rxh3+ 30. Qxh3 Rh8) 29... Rad8 {[%mdl 32]} 30. Rh2 Bxc4 31. Bxc4 Bb6+ 32. Kh1 Be3 33. Qf3 Rd6 34. Re1 {White has been holding on grimly, but now black should play ...Rd7 and ...Qh4} Rhd8 {Doubling Rs is oerfectly natural, but it should have allowed white to equalize with h4, g5 and Rf1 shutting down black's play on the K-side.} 35. Rxe3 {[%mdl 8192] A tactical miscalculation. The attack on f7 fails to accomplish anything.} fxe3 $19 36. Qxf7+ Kh8 { Now what? White has to deal with the P on e3, the doubled Rs and it's just too much to handle.} 37. Re2 Rd1+ {This is not bad, but black missed the knocjout punch.} (37... Rf6 {The Q has nowhere to go,} 38. Qxa7 Rf3 {and white gets mated.} 39. b5 Rxh3+ 40. Rh2 Rd1+ 41. Bf1 Rxf1+ 42. Kg2 Rf2+ 43. Kxh3 Qh6+ 44. Kg3 Qxh2#) 38. Kg2 Qf4 39. Qh5+ {[%mdl 8192] It's understandable that white is reluctant to exchange Qs, but that was his best defense.} (39. Qxf4 exf4 40. e5 {Black still has a lot of work to do. Nite that his connected passed Ps are nitm at this time, a reak threat because they are immobile,}) 39... Kg7 40. Qf5 {White realizes the need to exchange Qs, but black does not have to obligee.} R8d2 (40... Qxf5 41. exf5 {White's K-side Ps are an equalizing factor.}) 41. g5 (41. Qxf4 {is not playable.} exf4 42. e5 Re1 43. Kf3 Rf1+ 44. Ke4 Rxe2) 41... Rg1+ {[%mdl 512] Barnes wraps up the game with precision.} 42. Kxg1 Qg3+ 43. Kh1 Rd1+ 44. Re1 Qxe1+ {[%mdl 4096] Endgame KQR-KQB} 45. Kg2 Rd2+ 46. Kf3 Rf2+ {OK, so he missed a mate here!} 47. Kg4 Rxf5 (47... Qd1+ 48. Kh4 Rxf5 49. exf5 e2 50. Bxe2 Qe1+ 51. Kg4 Qxe2+ 52. Kg3 Qe3+ 53. Kg2 e4 54. h4 Qf3+ 55. Kh2 e3 56. f6+ Kg6 57. f7 Kxf7 58. h5 e2 59. g6+ Ke7 60. g7 e1=Q 61. g8=N+ Ke6 62. h6 Qef2#) 48. exf5 Qxc3 49. Be6 e2 {Black mates.} 50. h4 e1=Q {[%cal Re1e2]} 51. f6+ Kf8 52. g6 Qcg3+ {White resigned. Aggressive play, even if not 100% accurate) by Barnes.} 0-1

Weaver Adams Plays the Frankenstein-Dracula Variation

    The Frankenstein–Dracula Variation (1.e4 e5 2.Nc3 Nf6 3.Bc4 Nxe4 4.Qh5 Nd6 5.Bb3 Nc6 6.Nb5) usually arises from the Vienna Game, but can also be reached from the Bishop's Opening. 

    The opening involves a lot of complications and it's not seen much in top-level play. The blurb for Eric Schiller's book on it calls it "a monstrous thicket of complications which still have not been fully explore.” 

    You can watch an interesting video on the Frankenstein-Dracula Variation HERE. 

     In the following old game we see Weaver Adams playing the Vienna, an opening which became closely associated with him. In his first book, White to Play and Win, published in 1939, Adams claimed that 1.e4 was white's strongest move and that if both sides played the best moves white ought to win. After 1...e5 Adams claimed the magic bullet was the Bishop's Opening (2.Bc4). 

    When the Bishop's Opening didn't produce the desired results, he switched to the Vienna Game, claiming a win with what is today known as the Frankenstein–Dracula Variation. When that failed he switched to the Adams Gambit where he played 6.d4 instead of 6.Nb5. 

    In the following game Adams adopted what was at the time his favorite opening line, but his opponent was well prepared for it. I could not discover any information on the match, but the Massachusetts Chess Association has a very nice tribute to his opponent, Harry Lyman, HERE.

    Obviously neither of these players was a GM, but at that time they were among the best in the county. The first USCF Rating List (Novemberm 1951) had two Grandmasters (Fine and Reshevsky), 5 Active Senior Masters and 5 who were Inactive. There were only 27 Active Masters (Adams was #10 and there were 10 Inactive Masters. Lyman was not rated. 

 

 

[Event "Match, Bostom"] [Site ""] [Date "1946.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Weaver W. Adams"] [Black "Harry Lyman"] [Result "0-1"] [ECO "C27"] [Annotator "Stockfish 17.1"] [PlyCount "52"] [EventDate "1946.??.??"] {C27: Vienna Game: FrankensteinDracula Variation} 1. e4 e5 2. Nc3 Nf6 3. Bc4 Nxe4 (3... Nc6 {is for the less adventerous.} 4. d3 {and now black can play 4.. .Na5, 4... Bb4 or 4...Bc5.}) 4. Qh5 {This is the only move that offers white any real chances at gaining an advantage.} (4. Nxe4 d5 {and none of the moves available to white have proven satisfactory/}) (4. Nf3 {is a so-so move.} Nxc3 5. dxc3 f6 6. Nh4 g6 7. f4 {Despite appearances black is doing quite well.}) ( 4. Bxf7+ {was suggested by Max Lange back in 1863, but it's not quite sound.}) 4... Nd6 {This is the only good way of defending against the mate threat.} 5. Bb3 {This is, by far, the best even though 5.Qxe5+ might look inviting.} (5. Qxe5+ Qe7 6. Qxe7+ Bxe7 {With Qs off the board white has no real attacjing prospects whic is the reason for playing the Frankenstein-Dracula in the first place.}) 5... Nc6 6. Nb5 {[%mdl 512] This is almost always played because it threatens 7.Nxd6 and 8.Qxf7#. This is the move that Adams eventually gave up on.} (6. d4 {The Adams Gambit. White's play soon fizzles out.} Nxd4 7. Nd5 Ne6 8. Qxe5 c6 {White has more freedom for his pieces, but there is no way to crack open black's position.}) 6... g6 7. Qf3 {Renewing the threat of mate on f7.} f5 (7... Nf5 {does not fare well after} 8. Qd5 Nh6 9. d3 {Black still must deal with the threat of mate on f7.} g5 10. Nf3 f6 11. h4 {Black has a difficukt position,}) 8. Qd5 {Again, white threatens mate on f7.} Qe7 9. Nxc7+ Kd8 10. Nxa8 b6 11. d3 Bb7 12. h4 f4 {Lyman : " A much more logical move than 12... (as given in Modern Chess Openings) since it has the merit of holding whlte's Queen Bishop in check while black tries to open more lines."} 13. Qf3 Nd4 {This looks good, but he could better have stifled white's play with 13... Bh6} (13... Bh6 14. Bd2 Nd4 15. Qg4 e4 {with equak chances.}) 14. Qh3 Bh6 { Preparing ...e4 which is not good immediately.} (14... e4 15. Bxf4 exd3+ 16. Kf1 d2 17. Bg5 Ba6+ 18. Ne2 Nxe2 19. Bxe7+ Bxe7 20. c4 Nxc4 21. Kxe2 Ne5+ 22. Kd1 Nd3 23. Qg3 Nxb2+ 24. Kc2 Bf6 25. Qd6 Bd3+ 26. Kxd2 {1-0 Mrudul,D (2256) -Iinuma,P (2010) chess.com INT 2022}) 15. Bd2 e4 16. O-O-O {Playing it safe, but in this sharp position there is no time for that!} (16. Bc3 exd3+ 17. Kf1 Nxb3 18. axb3 dxc2 19. Qd3 (19. Bxh8 Ne4 20. Ne2 f3 21. gxf3 Nd2+ 22. Kg2 Bxf3+ {is fatak ti white.}) 19... Be4 20. Qe2 {with a doubk-edged position.}) 16... e3 {Black now has the initiative and never lets up.} 17. Bc3 exf2 {And now ... f3+ would win.} 18. Nf3 Ne2+ 19. Kb1 Nxc3+ 20. bxc3 Nb5 {It's surprising how quickly white's K, which looked so safe after 16.O-O-O, has fallen into danger. } 21. Kb2 Qa3+ 22. Ka1 Qa5 23. Ng5 Qxc3+ 24. Kb1 Re8 25. Qg4 Na3+ 26. Kc1 f3 { 0-1 Mate is looming.} (26... f3 {WHite can hold out the longest only as follows...} 27. Qe4 Rxe4 28. dxe4 fxg2 29. Nc7 Qe3+ 30. Kb2 Bg7+ 31. e5 Bxe5+ 32. Rd4 Nc4+ 33. Bxc4 Bxd4+ 34. c3 Qxc3+ 35. Kb1 Qb2#) 0-1

A Must Watch Video

A Fine Mini Loss

    In 1937, Reuben Fine played in a number of European tournaments: Hastings, Warsaw, Moscow, Leningrad, Ostend, Kemeri, the Stockholm Olympiad and Semmering/Baden.

    According to Google AI, a tournament took place in Orebro, Sweden that year, the Nordic Chess Championship, which was won by the Swedish master Erik Lundin. Naturally, Fine did not participate, but he did give a simul there in which the following game was played. It’s a short, sharp tactical display won by his opponent.

    Tactics are crucial because they are short-term, forcing moves that capture pieces, deliver mate or gain a decisive advantage. Tactical patterns (or motifs) and mating patterns can be learned. Today there are a lot of books on tactics, but the one I learnrd from was The Art of Checkmate by Renaud & Kahn. You can read C.J.S. Purdy’s review of the book HERE. 

    Today programs and websites offer a wealth of possibilities for tactical training. The only problem is that in the training positions you know a tactic is lurking in the position. In your own games you don’t and that’s the problem! In casual Internet games I see a lot of players who evidently think they are playing tactical chess when they just willy-nilly sacrifice a piece without a tactical motif being present,  Those are not sacrifices...they are blunders.

     In the following miniature Fine played in a simul in Orebro in 1937, he played 11.Qb3, voluntarily walking into a pin on his N, he immediately got into serious trouble and his opponent took advantage of it in grand fashion. 

 

[Event "Simultaneous, Orebro"] [Site "Orebro SWE"] [Date "1937.01.26"] [Round "?"] [White "Reuben Fine"] [Black "Pettersson"] [Result "0-1"] [ECO "D17"] [Annotator "Stockfish 17.1"] [PlyCount "36"] [EventDate "1937.??.??"] {D17: Slav Defense} 1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 c6 3. Nc3 d5 4. Nf3 dxc4 5. a4 Bf5 6. Ne5 Nbd7 {[%mdl 32]} 7. Nxc4 Qc7 8. g3 e5 9. dxe5 Nxe5 10. Bf4 Nfd7 {Here white has a wide chouice of moves avilable, but the most obvious is 11.Ng2 with equal chances.} 11. Qb3 {This move is the cause of all white's trouble.} Be6 { White manages to extricate himself out of the pin, but the cost is too high.} 12. e3 Nf3+ 13. Kd1 {Black has a decisive advantage.} Qd8 {Note that white's B has no retreat square.} 14. Kc1 (14. Qxb7 {also loses.} Nc5+ 15. Nd6+ Qxd6+ 16. Bxd6 {and wins.} Nxb7) (14. e4 {runs into} Nc5+) 14... Nc5 15. Qd1 Qxd1+ 16. Kxd1 {On the surface it looks like white is in no danger, but black's pieces are poised to swarm white's K.} O-O-O+ 17. Ke2 (17. Kc1 Nb3+) (17. Kc2 { loses the Q.} g5 {trspd the B.}) 17... Bg4 (17... g5 {is note quite as good, but after} 18. Kxf3 gxf4 19. Be2 Bg7 20. gxf4 Bxc3 21. bxc3 Bd5+ {with a dwcisive advantage.}) 18. h3 {This alliws a mate in 3, but there was no way of saving the game.} (18. Rd1 Nxh2+ 19. Ke1 Rxd1+ 20. Nxd1 Nf3+ 21. Ke2 g5 22. Bg2 Ne5+ 23. f3 Nxc4 24. Bxg5 Rg8 25. Bf4 Be6 {Black is a piece up.}) 18... Rd2+ { [%mdl 512] White resigned. It's mate in 2. An excellent performance by an amateur in a simul!} (18... Rd2+ 19. Nxd2 Nd4+ 20. Ke1 Nc2#) 0-1

Rhoda Bowles

 

    The biography of Rhoda Bowles (1861-1931) appears in an excellent article by Batgirl on chess,dom HERE. 

    It’s hard to say how strong she really was, but in the following game her Accuracy Rating (i.e. how closely her moved matched Stockfish) was a whopping 85% which is considerably higher that most GMs achieve. 

    Her opponent was Frideswide (Fannie) Rowland (née Beechey (1845-1919) who was married to the Irish player Thomas Rowland (1850-1929). She was born in Gallway, Ireland and passed away in Bray, a coastal town on Ireland’s east coast. 

  

 

 

 

[Event "Correspondence"] [Site "corr"] [Date "1901.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Rhoda Bowles"] [Black "Frideswide Rowland"] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "C45"] [Annotator "Stockfish 17.1"] [PlyCount "69"] [EventDate "1901.??.??"] [Source "Belfast News Let"] {C45: Scotch Game} 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. d4 {The Scotch was common in the 1800s, but by the time this gae was played had declined in popularity because it was brlirvrf that it release the central tension too early and allowed black easy equality. Garry Kasparov revived it in the 1990s.} exd4 4. Nxd4 { The Scotch Gambit (4.Bc4) might appeal to gambiteers. In my database the results are about 50-50 with few draws.} Bc5 5. Be3 Qe7 {Today 5...Qf6 is far more popular, but that’s not to say better.} 6. Nc3 {Black should now play 6. ..Nxd4 instead of the more popular and slightly inferior 6...Nf6} Bxd4 { This is also better that 6...Nf6} (6... Nf6 7. Nf5 Qf8 8. Nxg7+ Qxg7 9. Bxc5 { White has the much better position/}) 7. Bxd4 Nf6 8. Bxf6 (8. Be2 {baits a nice trap. Black should now play either 8...O-O or 8...d6 when in either case white has the better position. However, black must not snatch the P.} Nxe4 9. Nd5 Qd6 10. Bxg7 Rg8 11. Nf6+ {and white is much betterm of not winning.}) 8... Qxf6 9. Nd5 (9. Be2 O-O 10. O-O d6 11. f4 Qd4+ 12. Kh1 f5 13. Nd5 {Avdic,A (2261)-Mujic,H (2326) Tuzla 2004. The chances are equal.}) 9... Qd8 10. Qh5 { Very aggressive!} O-O 11. Bd3 Re8 12. O-O-O Re5 13. Qh3 d6 14. Qe3 {White has lost some time with hew Q, but she still has a good position and continues her aggressive policy wuth her next move,} a6 15. f4 {[%mdl 2048]} Rh5 {Black lands in trouble after this. The simple retreat 15,,,.Re8 would have been better.} 16. h3 b5 17. g4 Rh4 18. g5 h6 19. Rdg1 {Now it's clear that 15...Rh5 has resulted in black's ending up with a lost position. Bowles is merciless in her attack.} hxg5 20. Rxg5 g6 21. Qg3 Rh6 22. e5 {Threatens Bxg6!} Nd4 (22... dxe5 {results a slaughter.} 23. Bxg6 fxg6 24. Rxg6+ Rxg6 25. Qxg6+ Kf8 26. fxe5 Nd4 27. Rf1+ {etc.}) 23. Nf6+ {White can also win with 23.Bxg6} Kg7 {From here to the end of the game black had several "stronger" moves than the ones she played, but nine if then were good enough to change the outcome.} 24. Rg1 Qh8 25. f5 Kf8 26. fxg6 Rxg6 27. Rxg6 fxg6 28. Qxg6 Bb7 29. Nh7+ Ke7 {There is no safety in fleeing to the Q-side.} 30. Qf6+ Kd7 31. Rg7+ Kc6 32. b4 Qe8 33. Be4+ {White mates im 4.} Kb6 34. Qxd6+ {Nice!} Qc6 (34... cxd6 35. Rxb7#) 35. Qxd4+ {Black resigned. It's mate next move.} 1-0

Nezhmetdinov’s Flight of Fancy

    From time to time I like to pull out Super Nezh: Rashid Nezhmetdinov, Chess Assassin by Alex Pishkin and play through a few of his games. 

    Nezhmetdinov was an early version of Tal...his combinations were fantastic, if not always entirely sound. Every time I play over his games I get to thinking I could play like that, but, of course I can’t. 

    The following game was played against Oleg Chernikov (1936 – 2015), an International Arbiter and the 2000 World Senior Champion. It was played in a Russian team championship at Rostov-On Don in 1962. 

    After Chernikov played 11...Bf6 a position was reached that had long been known to be drawn and so after making it, Chernikov went for a stroll thinking Nezhmetdinov would take a quick draw. But, Nezhmetdinov sunk into deep thought and everyone wondered what he could be thinking about. Finally, after 45 minutes a youngster rushed up to Chernikov and informed him that Nezhmetdinov had sacrificed his Queen. Nezhmetdinov’s Queen sacrifice only netted him two pieces, but he hoped to attack the weakened dark squares around black’s King.

    Immediately after the game it was thought black had a draw at best. Subsequent analysis reached the conclusion that the chances should be about equal if black plays 14...d5 instead of Chernikov’s 14...Re8. 

    However, since then it’s been discovered that black has several reasonable moves. While the engine evaluations after 14.Nc3 lead one to believe that the chances are even, practical results strongly favor black. 

    In the end, Nezhmetdinov didn’t succeed in overturning theory, but what does that matter? The depth of his plan and his flight of fancy are worth more than reams of engine analysis. 

 

[Event "Chigorin Team Cup"] [Site "Rostov-on-Don"] [Date "1962.05.??"] [Round ""] [White "Rashid Nezhmetdino"] [Black "Oleg L Chernikov"] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "B32"] [Annotator "Stockfish 17.1"] [PlyCount "65"] [EventDate "1962.??.??"] {B35: Sicilian: Accelerated Dragon} 1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 g6 5. Nc3 Bg7 6. Be3 Nf6 7. Bc4 O-O 8. Bb3 Ng4 9. Qxg4 Nxd4 10. Qh4 {After 10.Qd1 it is difficult for black to equalize as was known when this game was played.} Qa5 {aiming for ...Nxc2+!} 11. O-O Bf6 $1 {This leads to a known draw. White can play 12.Qh6 Bg7 13. Qh4 and repeating moves. Or, he can play 13.Qg5 and after the exchange of Qs the endgame is drawn. Here Nezhmetdinov thought for 45 minutes.} 12. Qxf6 {White only get two pieces for his Q, but he hopes to attack on the weak dark squares around black's K. Of you're wondering what the engine thinks, Stockfish’s evaluation is that the position is almost dead equal. Black can't try to grab material herewith 12...Ncb3} Ne2+ $1 $11 { The position is equal.} (12... Nxb3 13. axb3 Qxa1 14. Qxe7 Qa5 15. Nd5 Qd8 16. Bd4 f6 (16... Qxe7 17. Nxe7#) 17. Nxf6+ Rxf6 18. Qxd8+ {White has a forced mate.}) 13. Nxe2 exf6 14. Nc3 Re8 (14... d5 15. Nxd5 Rd8 16. Bd4 Rxd5 17. exd5 Kg7 18. Rae1 Bf5 19. Re3 {White is better. Serwinski,B-Grabczewski,R Polanica Zdroj 1965}) 15. Nd5 Re6 16. Bd4 Kg7 17. Rad1 d6 {Not the best.} (17... Rxe4 { is met by} 18. Bxf6+ Kf8 19. Bc3 Qc5 20. Nf6 {with a promising position.} Rf4 21. Nxh7+ Kg8 22. Nf6+ Kf8 23. g3 Rxf6 24. Bxf6 {and white has the better chances.}) (17... b6 18. Bc3 Qc5 19. Bb4 Qc6 20. Bc3 Bb7 {with equal chances.}) 18. Rd3 {The R joins the attack.} Bd7 19. Rf3 Bb5 (19... Rxe4 $2 20. Bc3 $18 Qc5 21. Nxf6 Re7 22. Nxd7+ {wins}) 20. Bc3 Qd8 21. Nxf6 {[%mdl 32] Both sides have been playing extremely well, but black's next move coats hom the game. He needed to play 21...Rc8 and be prepared to eliminate white's deadly B on c3 by sacrificing the exchange.} Be2 {[%mdl 8192]} 22. Nxh7+ {[%mdl 512] Alertly played.} Kg8 (22... Kxh7 {isn't playable.} 23. Rxf7+ Kh6 24. Bxe6 Bxf1 25. Bg7+ Kh5 26. g4+ Kh4 27. Kxf1 {White is winning.}) 23. Rh3 {Not the best.} (23. Nf6+ {is much better.} Kf8 (23... Kg7 24. Nd7+ Kg8 25. Rh3 Bh5 (25... Qxd7 26. Rh8#) 26. Bxe6 fxe6 27. Nf6+ Kf7 28. g4 {White is winning.}) 24. Rh3 Rxf6 25. Rh8+ { wins easily.}) 23... Re5 (23... Bxf1 {is met by} 24. Ng5 Kf8 (24... Bb5 25. Rh8#) 25. Rh8+) 24. f4 {[%mdl 2048] As a result of whits's less than optimal 23rd nive black is under strong pressure, but there is no forced win/.} Bxf1 { After this move black is completely lost. In annotating this game one one author made no comment on this move. If it was bad to take on f1 last move, it's still bad. Black could have put up stiffer resistance with 24... Rh5!} ( 24... Rh5 25. Nf6+ Kf8 26. Nxh5 Qb6+ 27. Rf2 gxh5 28. Rg3 h4 29. Bg7+ Ke8 30. Rc3 d5 {White is better, but black has reason to continue the games as he is not witjout play.}) 25. Kxf1 (25. fxe5 {is a bit weaker.} Qb6+ 26. Kxf1 dxe5 27. Ng5 Qf6+ 28. Nf3 Re8 {White still has some work to do.}) 25... Rc8 (25... Rh5 {would not nave been any better.} 26. Nf6+ Kf8 27. Nxh5 gxh5 28. Rxh5 Ke7 29. Rh7 Qb6 30. Rxf7+) 26. Bd4 {Nezhmetdinov is over finessing. The prosaic 26. fxe5 was sufficient.} b5 27. Ng5 (27. fxe5 {Oddly, this is now a bad move!} dxe5 28. Bxe5 Qd1+ 29. Kf2 Rxc2+ 30. Bxc2 Qxc2+ 31. Kg3 Qd3+ {Draw?} 32. Kf4 { Who knows after this?} Qf1+ 33. Rf3 Qc1+ 34. Kg4 f5+ 35. exf5 gxf5+ 36. Kxf5 Kxh7 {This position is evaluated as 0.00, but that does not mean it's a draw!}) 27... Rc7 28. Bxf7+ Rxf7 29. Rh8+ {[%mdl 512] A crisp finish.} Kxh8 30. Nxf7+ Kh7 31. Nxd8 Rxe4 32. Nc6 Rxf4+ 33. Ke2 {Black resigned. Among amateurs black might well play on in a position like this, but in the case of string Masters, to quote the Fritz program, "White us clearly winning."} 1-0

Potpourri

    Now that the last few hectic days have passed things are starting to settle down. Christmas day put the quietus on chess activity although I did run a 5-minute tournament using the strongest engines in my arsenal. Clearly, Stockfish is the best, but the other engines can serve a purpose for strong OTB players who are looking for more human-like play in the search for opening innovations. The poor result of Lc0 is probably due to the fact that it requires more powerful hardware than I possess. 

    Isaias Pleci (1907-1979) was of Argentine was awarded the IM title in 1965 and was the Argentine Champion in 1929-30. He is little known, but fared very well in South American events in the 1930s and Chess metrics estimates his highest ever rating ti have bee 2582 in 1940 making him the 44th best player in the world. 

    Pleci won the individual bronze medal at the Stockholm 1937 Olympiad and the gold medal at the 1939 Buenos Aires Olympiad 

    His opponent in the following game played in the 1939 Olympiad was Gunnar Fried,amm (1909-1i44, 34 years old) of Estonia. He played on several occasions in Estonian championships and was a member of the Estonian Olympic temam several times. 

    Friedemann played for Estonia in the following Chess Olympiads. According to Chess metrics his highest rating was 2536 in 1941 ranking him #80 in the world. He died in the German Army on the Eastern front. 

    This game is the first game in Alekhine’s book 107 Great Chess Battles,; the games date from 1939 to 1943. The book gets a lot of negative reviews on Amazon and while it feels like an Alekhine potboiler, I like it simply because it has a lot of great games and not all were played by Alekhine. 

 

[Event "Buenos Aires Olympiad Final-A"] [Site ""] [Date "1939.09.18"] [Round "?"] [White "Isaias Pleci (Argentina)"] [Black "Gunnar Friedemann (Estonia)"] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "C84"] [Annotator "Alekhine/Stockfish"] [PlyCount "93"] [EventDate "1939.09.01"] {C90: Closed Ruy Lopez} 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6 4. Ba4 Nf6 5. O-O Be7 6. Re1 b5 7. Bb3 d6 8. c3 Na5 {Alekhine correctly predict t hat this premature move would be abandoned in favour of 8...O-O. He said it would happen within 3 years. How accurate his time limit was is unknown, but 8...Na5 does not serve black well at all in my database.} 9. Bc2 c5 10. a4 Rb8 (10... Bg4 {was played in Leventic,I (2481)-Rubil,M (2255) Djakovo CRO 2011 and after} 11. h3 Bd7 12. d4 Nc6 13. Nbd2 O-O {white is only slightly better.}) (10... Bb7 {has asi ben tried.} 11. d4 Qc7 12. Nbd2 O-O 13. Nf1 Nc6 14. d5 Nd8 {White gas the advantahe. Leventic,I (2481)-Rubil,M (2255) Djakovo CRO 2011}) 11. axb5 axb5 12. d4 Qc7 13. dxe5 dxe5 14. Nxe5 {Alekhine stated that this capture was rightly considered by theory to be too dangerous and recommended 14.Nbd2. However, he added that there was no supporting proof of that opinion and therefore this game was a good test. Stockfish gives the nod to 14.Nxe5 although 14.Nbs2 is not far behind. In the end, the best move is a matter of how much risk white wants to take.} Qxe5 15. Rxa5 Ng4 $1 {Black must continue aggressively. Any oyjrt move, say 15...O-O, is too slow.} 16. g3 $1 {The only good defense.} (16. f4 Qc7 17. Ra1 c4 18. Qe2 Bc5+ 19. Kh1 Nf2+) 16... Qh5 17. h4 Bxh4 {Best. After this move both players are ion the razor's edge, Alekhine wrote that ,any spectators (some of them experts of proven international renown) were surprised that Friedemann did not play the recommended book move 17...g5. He added that probably Friedemann saw over the board that white would have the strong reply 18.Qd5} (17... g5 18. Qd5 { only results in equality after} O-O 19. Bxg5 Rd8) (17... g5 18. Ra7 { overlooked by Alekhine! White gains a decisive advantage after} Rb7 (18... gxh4 19. Qd5 {Now is the time for this.} Qg6 20. Bf4 Rb6 21. Rxe7+ Kxe7 22. Qxc5+) 19. Ra8 O-O 20. Bxg5 Bxg5 21. Qd5 Re7 22. Bd1 Rd7 23. Qxg5+ Qxg5 24. hxg5 { White is two Ps up and has a decisive advantage.}) 18. gxh4 Qxh4 19. Qf3 Qh2+ 20. Kf1 {And now Bf4 would win.} Ne5 {A key move necause it allows his B to participate.} 21. Qg3 Qh1+ $1 {The correct decision, 21...Bh3+ may look goodm but it falls way short.} (21... Bh3+ 22. Ke2 Bg4+ 23. Ke3 $1 {The only defense. } Qh6+ 24. f4 $1 {Again, the only defense.} Qb6 {It looks like white is in trouble, but he has the surprisubg...} 25. Rxb5 $3 Qxb5 26. fxe5 h5 27. Na3 $1 {The Ns appearance leads to a decisive advantage.} Qd7 28. Nc4 O-O 29. Nd6 { Whiye has a B+N vs a R, but he has a dominating position.}) 22. Ke2 Qh5+ $1 { Yet another move that is the only correct one.} 23. f3 Nxf3 $1 {Still another only move! Alekhine wrote, "A fresh a n d perfectly correct sacrifice. It is evident that the N's untouchable..."} 24. Kf2 $2 {It's odd that Alekhine passes over thsi in silence. Now it is black who is in control.} (24. Bf4 { Keeps the chances equal after} Rb6 25. Nd2 Nxd2+ 26. Kxd2) 24... Nxe1 25. Kxe1 Qh1+ (25... Rb6 $1 $19 {[%cal Rb6g6] ...Rg6 is the strong threat.} 26. Be3 O-O) 26. Kf2 $1 {Threatens to win with Qe5+.} Qxc1 {Alekhine incorrectly gave this move a question mark calling it an “unbelievable error after such inspired play” adding that black was probably in time pressure and completely overlooked the check that was coming. With all due respect to one of the greatest players ever, that is completely wrong. I took lunch break here and left Stockfish running. Over an hour later its evaluation was 0.00. Curious, I checked with a couple of other engines and they all agreed with the evaluation. } (26... O-O {This was Stockfish's (and Alekhine's) first choice, but black is only a half a P better adter} 27. Bf4 Rb6 28. Qh2 Qxh2+ 29. Bxh2 f5 30. e5 g5 31. Bg1 Re8) 27. Qe5+ {"Now black is lost." (Alekhine) Not according to Stockfish.} Kd8 $2 {[%mdl 8192] Now black is lost (Stockfish)} (27... Kd7 { leads to a draw.} 28. Qf5+ Kd8 29. Qd5+ Ke8 30. Qe5+ Kd7 31. Bd3 Qxb2+ 32. Be2 Rb6 33. Qxg7 Bb7 34. Qxh8 Rg6 35. Qe5 Rg2+ 36. Kxg2 Qxe2+ 37. Kg3 Qe1+ {draw}) 28. Qd6+ Ke8 29. Ra7 {This wins, but 20.Qxb2 was even quicker. It's quite possible that for the rest of the game bothplayers were in time pressure as there are a few small inexactitudes.} (29. Qxb8 Qxc2+ 30. Ke3 Qc1+ 31. Ke2 g6 32. Qe5+ Kd8 33. Qd6+ Ke8 34. Ra8 Qc2+ 35. Nd2 Qd3+ 36. Kxd3 f5 37. Rxc8+ Kf7 38. Rc7+ Kg8 39. Qd8#) 29... Qxc2+ 30. Nd2 Rb7 31. Ra8 Rc7 32. Ke2 Qa4 33. Rxa4 {Ra8 would kill now.} bxa4 34. Qxc7 Bg4+ 35. Ke3 Rf8 36. Qxc5 f6 37. Kf4 Bd7 38. Nc4 g5+ 39. Ke3 Rg8 40. Nd6+ Kd8 41. Nb7+ Ke8 42. Qc7 Ke7 43. Qd6+ Ke8 44. Qxf6 Bh3 45. Qd8+ Kf7 46. Nd6+ Kg7 47. Qxg5+ {Black resigned. It's mate next move. A fascinating game.} 1-0

Tal vs, Botvinnik

Mikhai; Ta;

    One of the most exciting World Championship matches that I remember was the 1960 Tal vs, Botvinnik match. How would the staid, scientific Botvinnik do against the “Magician from Riga”, Mikhail Tal with his wild and sometimes unsound sacrifices Botvinnikd didn’t do well at all, but in the rematch the following year he turned the tables and won easily. 

    In their very first game Tal’s success was well deserved, but it wasn’t much of a fight. Botvinnik adopts one of his pet lines which is now known ti be questionable and his 11th move worsened the situation. Then for no obvious reason Botvinnik gave away a Pawn after which Tal demonstrated flawless technique. 

 

[Event "World Championship Match, Moscow"] [Site ""] [Date "1960.03.15"] [Round "1"] [White "Mikhail Tal"] [Black "Mikhail Botvinnik"] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "C18"] [Annotator "Stockfish 17.1"] [PlyCount "63"] [EventDate "1960.??.??"] {C18: French: Defense Winawer Variation} 1. e4 e6 2. d4 d5 3. Nc3 Bb4 4. e5 c5 5. a3 Bxc3+ 6. bxc3 Qc7 {This is questionable. Evn at the tine this game was played most experts recommend 6...Ne7} 7. Qg4 f5 8. Qg3 Ne7 9. Qxg7 Rg8 10. Qxh7 cxd4 11. Kd1 {This position was known and wa cinsidered favorable to white. Botvinnlk obviously disagreed, but ahite is, in fact, slightly better and black's position is difficult to defend.} Bd7 {This move is also questionable. 11...dxc3 would have been better/} 12. Qh5+ (12. Rb1 {is much less effective,} Nbc6 13. Nf3 O-O-O 14. cxd4 {equals. Borovikov,V (2570) -Berg, E (2516) Pardubice 2002}) 12... Ng6 {Botvinnik has played the opening very poorly which qas uncharacteristice of him. Walking into a pin was a very poor decision. That saidm even after the better 12.Kd8 white stands considerably better.} (12... Kd8 {My database has 12 games that have reached this position anf white has tried 5 different movesm but the correct move to keep the advantage was not played in any of them.} 13. cxd4 Qc3 14. Rb1 Qxd4+ 15. Bd3 { with the advantage.}) 13. Ne2 {Better was 13.cxd4. After the text cxd4 the d-Pawn is defended and black can't play ...Qc3+. As played black could have gotten some counterchances.....} d3 {In his notes to this game Hams Knoch was wrong when he wrote that this move seems to be the resu lt of some miscalculation by Botvinnik because he gets nothing it and it leds to a losing game. In fact, it's the only move that keeps black in the game/} (13... dxc3 { was Kmoch's recommendation, but after} 14. Nf4 Kf7 15. Rb1 b6 16. Qh7+ Rg7 17. Qh6 Qxe5 18. Nh5 {Black's position is difficult, but hardly lost.}) 14. cxd3 Ba4+ {Botvinnik missed ti correct followuo to his last move.} (14... d4 15. cxd4 Nc6 16. Bd2 O-O-O 17. Rc1 Kb8 {Black has gotten his K to safety and white; s advantage is not so great.}) 15. Ke1 Qxe5 {After this logical looking move blacl's game is hopeless.} (15... d4 16. cxd4 Nc6 17. Bd2 O-O-O 18. Rc1 Kb8 { As in the previous note black has some chance of defending himself.}) 16. Bg5 Nc6 17. d4 Qc7 {Now black is a P down in an inferior position and so his resignation is only a matter of time.} 18. h4 {It is good technique to adva n ce the passed P and mobilize the R on h1. Also, by keeping his K in the center he gives black no opportunity for counterplay against it.} e5 {The only dim chance for counteplay· play} 19. Rh3 Qf7 20. dxe5 {Well timed. The poInt is that. on 20...Rh8 white has 21.e6!} Ncxe5 21. Re3 {The R has been mobilized.} Kd7 22. Rb1 b6 23. Nf4 Rae8 24. Rb4 Bc6 25. Qd1 Nxf4 26. Rxf4 Ng6 27. Rd4 Rxe3+ 28. fxe3 Kc7 29. c4 {Tal starts an attacj that wins a second P.} dxc4 {The d- Pawn cannot be defended.} (29... Ne7 30. cxd5 Bxd5 31. Bc4 Bxc4 32. Rd7+ Kc6 33. Qd6+ Kb5 34. Rxe7) 30. Bxc4 Qg7 31. Bxg8 Qxg8 32. h5 {Black resigned. Botvinnik's poor oprning and Tal's excellent technique secured the point.} 1-0

Petrov’s Immortal Game

    Such tactics as we see in the following game are likely to be considered crude by today’s strong players, but they were considered charming in the 1800s. Today most of us amateurs still find then charming, I think. 

    The idea of readily surrendering the Queen in order to hound the hostile King with the other pieces isn’t new, but Petrov's sacrifice was one of the earliest examples we have. What’s more, Stockfish suggested no improvements on his play. 

    Alexander Petrov (1794-1867) was a Russian player, composer and writer. He was born into a noble family and is usually remembered as the first great Russian master. From 1804, he lived in St. Petersburg. He established himself as the best Russian player at the age of 15 and remained so for over half a century. 

    He was the author of the first chess handbook in Russian. He also analyzed with Carl Jaenisch the opening that later became known as the Petrov Defense. From 1840. he lived in Warsaw (then in the Russian Empire), where he successfully played against the top Warsaw masters which included Alexander Hoffmann (1798-1855). 

    During the January Uprising (1863–64), he left Warsaw for Vienna and Paris. He died in Warsaw in 1867, and was buried there. 

 

[Event "Warsaw m"] [Site "Warsaw POL (Russian Empire)"] [Date "1844.11.??"] [Round "?"] [White "F Alexander Hoffmann"] [Black "Alexander Petrov"] [Result "0-1"] [ECO "C53"] [Annotator "Stockfish 17.1"] [PlyCount "40"] [EventDate "1844.??.??"] {C54: Giuoco Piano} 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Bc5 4. c3 Nf6 5. d4 exd4 6. e5 Ne4 {This is unsound, but in 1844 such assessments mattered little. Black’s only good move is 6...d5 which equalizes.} (6... d5 7. Bb5 Ne4 8. cxd4 Bb6 { is the Main Line which is equal.}) 7. Bd5 {Black has only two options here, Sacrifice the N or try to defend it with 7...f5} Nxf2 (7... f5 {This move is almost always met by 8.cxd4 after which white is better, but castling is actually a bit stronger.} 8. O-O Ne7 9. Bb3 d5 10. exd6 Qxd6 11. cxd4 Bb6 12. Nc3 {White is better because he is stronger in the center and black's K-side is a bit loose.}) 8. Kxf2 dxc3+ 9. Kg3 {Surprisingly it matters little where the K gord. It's perfectly safe on g3.} cxb2 (9... O-O {May look better, but it's not at all satisfactory either.} 10. Nxc3 d6 11. Bxc6 bxc6 12. Re1 { with a substantial advantage.}) 10. Bxb2 Ne7 {[%mdl 32] White has a N vs. 3Ps, but what counys is his space and mobility because they give him a clear advantage after 11.h3 or 11.Qe2. Instead, in the spirit of the day white decided on a sacrifice of his own.} (10... O-O 11. h3 {Equally good is 11.Re1} d6 12. Bxc6 bxc6 13. Qc2 Rb8 14. Nbd2 Be6 15. Rhe1 {White stands well. Mammadov,A (2409)-Abasov,N (2504) Baku AZE 2011}) 11. Ng5 {Intending to counter-sacrifice his N on f7.} Nxd5 (11... Nf5+ {also works.} 12. Kf4 O-O 13. h4 (13. Kxf5 d6+ 14. Kf4 dxe5+ 15. Bxe5 {Black has inly one winning move.} Be3+ 16. Kxe3 Qxg5+ 17. Kf2 Qxe5 18. Na3 Be6 {Black wins material.} 19. Bxe6 (19. Re1 Qxd5) 19... fxe6+ {wins}) 13... d6) 12. Nxf7 {Black would still be much better after 12.Qe7, but...} O-O {Spectacular! White is lost wheather he takes the Q or not.} ({Not} 12... Kxf7 13. Qxd5+ Ke8 14. Qxc5 {and white has equalized.}) 13. Nxd8 {Black has a forced mate.} (13. Qxd5 Rxf7 {White's K cannot escape the clutches of black's pieces.} 14. h3 Qg5+ 15. Kh2 Qf4+ 16. g3 Qf2+ 17. Qg2 Qxg2+ 18. Kxg2 Rf2+ 19. Kg1 b6 20. Ba3 Bd4 {and wins}) 13... Bf2+ 14. Kh3 d6+ {Black mates.} 15. e6 Nf4+ 16. Kg4 Nxe6 17. Nxe6 Bxe6+ 18. Kg5 Rf5+ 19. Kg4 h5+ 20. Kh3 Rf3# {Analysis with Stockfish informs us that Petrov's Accuracy Rating was a perfevt 100%} 0-1

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