Keres Attack with 6...e5

So far at least two readers have advocated studying 6...e5 for Black in the Keres Attack against the Scheveningen Sicilian. My opening book of master games since 2001 (MT IV) indicates that this move is the least popular (44 games of 629) of the four principal continuations. Even so, Linuxguy_on_FICS claims it is the most principled reply, so it's worth a look.


After 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 e6 6.g4 e5 we have the starting position.



Two moves appear in the Encyclopedia of Chess Openings:

7.Nf5
7.Bb5

My opening book MT IV indicates that Bb5 is twice as popular as Nf5, but that Nf5 scores much better. The main line in ECO from Nf5 ends with a substantial edge for White. 7.Bb5 breaks into three lines in ECO--two end as unclear, one ends with a substantial advantage for White.

7.Nf5

ECO gives only 7...h5 in reply to 7.Nf5, but two other moves played in high level games in 2008 complicate my preparations to play the White side.

7...g6 was played against Bobby Fischer in 1964 in a simul, and Fischer lost. It was played a few more times until Sequera Paolini-Alvarez, San Felipe 2008, which Black won.

7...Nc6, a standard Sicilian move, appears to have been introduced into practice in the Bundesliga: Gharamian-Nisipeanu, Trier 2008. That game ended in a short draw. However, a reasonable appearing novelty in a more recent game went badly for White. Perhaps these games deserve closer attention before moving on to 7.Bb5.


Adla,D (2508) - Meier,G (2641) [B81]
TOP 16 Poule Haute Le Port Marly FRA (10), 30.05.2009

1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 e6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 d6 6.g4 e5 7.Nf5 Nc6 8.Bc4N

8.Bg5 h6 9.Bxf6 Qxf6 10.Qd2 g6 11.Ne3 h5 12.gxh5 Rxh5 13.Nb5 Qd8 14.0–0–0 Rh4 15.Bc4 a6 16.Nxd6+ Qxd6 17.Qxd6 Bxd6 18.Rxd6 Ke7 19.Rd2 Rxe4 20.Nd5+ Kf8 21.Nb6 Rb8 22.Bd5 Rb4 Gharamian,T-Nisipeanu,L, Trier 2008 ½–½

8...Be6 9.Bb3 h5 10.Bxe6 fxe6 11.Ne3 hxg4 12.Nxg4 Nd4 13.Nxf6+ Qxf6 14.Be3 Nf3+ 15.Ke2 a6 16.Qf1 Be7 17.Qg2 Rf8 18.Nb1 d5 19.exd5 exd5 20.Nd2 e4 21.c3 a5 22.Kd1 a4 23.Nxf3 Qxf3+ 24.Qxf3 Rxf3 25.Kc2 Kd7 26.h4 Rh8 27.Rag1 Bf6 28.Rg2 Ke6 29.Kd2 Rxh4 30.Rxh4 Bxh4 31.Rxg7 Bxf2 32.Bxf2 Rxf2+ 33.Kc1 b5 0–1

Intimidation

At the suggestion of a friend, I signed up for another thematic tournament. This one features the Keres Attack, ECO B81.

After 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 e6 6.g4 we have the starting position.



A quick glance at the Encyclopedia of Chess Openings is sufficient to intimidate most players unwilling to spend many hundreds of hours learning theory. ECO has no less than fifty-five lines. Chess Informant has published 608 theoretically significant games through its first 103 issues--three in the first issue and four in 103. In Predojevic-Movsesian, Sarajevo 2008 (Informant 103/151), 15...Nad5 was the novelty.

Black's responses from the diagram:

6...e5 lines 1-4
6...a6 lines 5-27
6...Nc6 lines 28-36
6...h6 lines 37-55

Where should I begin?

Encyclopedia of Chess Openings

What does E04 mean?
Overheard at the chess club

Chess is a game of nearly infinite complexity, yet endings with six or fewer pieces have been solved and the openings have been analyzed in considerable depth at least since Friar Ruy Lopez (c. 1540-1580). In 1966, Chess Informant began publication twice yearly, later increased to thrice. Each issue of Informant contains the best games from recent tournaments, especially those of theoretical significance; many are annotated by the players. In 1974, Volume C of the Encyclopedia of Chess Openings became the first volume published in what would become the standard five-volume reference work on opening theory.

Yesterday, the postman brought the second edition of the Encyclopedia on CD. It was part of my prize for placing fifth in Chess Informant's Best of the Best 1000 Reader's Contest.* Along with this electronic version of ECO came several CDs that complete my collection of Chess Informants, except for the most recent volume. With a few mouse clicks, I can check the published theory on a position in the Encyclopedia and in recent grandmaster practice.

Consider a position that is not uncommon for me: 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nf3 d5 4.g3 dxc4 5.Bg2 e6

Five moves present themselves as candidates:

6.a4
6.O-O
6.Ne5
6.Qc2
6.Nc3

I'm pretty certain that I've played all five. Through my ChessBase database program I can search my Big Database--an old version of this CB product that I keep up-to-date through weekly downloads of The Week in Chess--or ChessBase online. My resident database contains 289 games with this position; ChessBase online has quite a few more with 423.

With this mass of data, how does one find the relevant ones--those worthy of study? I have a select database and electronic opening book of games since 2000 played by masters. Searching it produces a mere 83 games, a far more manageable quantity. But, suppose some of the essential theory concerning this position derives from games played before 2000. I'm back to wading through many hundreds of games.

6.Ne5 takes us from E04 to D15, and possibly D17 or D11. One of the lines given in ECO continues with 6...e6, identified as a novelty when Murey played it against Benjamin in 1986, and published as an annotation to Stohl - Ehlvest, Tallinn 1986 42/471. 6.Ne5 ceases to appears in Informant after 1999, although it has made several appearances since then in high level games. Perhaps at the top levels that line lacks promise for White, even though it is quite playable at my level.

When I faced 6.Ne5 from the Black side, I lost on time in a bishop versus knight endgame where I had a slight edge. When I played it as White, I blundered away a rook in the late middlegame.

6.Qc2 is rare, and not the choice of the strongest players. My only foray with it led to victory in a three minute game on Playchess last August.

6.Nc3 is popular, but according to my CB Opening book has an inauspicious record for White. My score over five games is abysmal--20%.

My database of online games reveals that I played 6.a4 most often a few years ago, and 6.O-O most often in recent years. In both cases, I have scored well above average: 64% (eleven games) and 71% (nineteen games), respectively.

Informant 103/326 is the game Pashikian-Meier, Martuni 2008, which strangely is not found in the ChessBase databases. Martuni 2008 was the Lake Sevan International Chess Tournament pitting some of the strongest young Armenian players against players invited from elsewhere. Arman Pashikian won this game and the tournament. Georg Meier lost two games as Black from this position at this tournament, and fragments from both games were published in Informant. In both games, White opted for 6.a4. Ivanchuk also opted for 6.a4 in his first match game against Aderito at Khanty-Mansiysk (Informant 101/383).

My favored choice in recent years, 6.O-O was Peter Svidler's choice against Vallejo-Pons in the 2007 Monaco Rapid event. A portion of this game was published as Informant 102/(361).

With ChessBase I can find more games; with electronic versions of the Encyclopedia of Chess Openings and Informants, I can find the most significant games annotated by leading theorists.



*The contest winner was Russ Brown whose recently released CD, The Fugitive Peace, I am happy to recommend. Some reviews of the album note that his music starts good, and gets better the more you listen. That's certainly the kind of quality I would expect from a fellow reader of Chess Informant! I bought the album last week, listened to it three times through that day, and have it playing again now.

ECO Code is a trademark of Chess Informant

Not Drawn

In a recent game on Chess.com, my opponent optimistically offered a draw from a hopeless position. Of course, I had a lot of moves to make yet, but they were not hard to find.

Muda,I (1921) - Stripes,J (1994) [B18]
Chess.com, 2009

42.Rg7



White offered a draw.

42...h5 43.Rg8 Kh3 44.Rg7 h4 45.Rg6 Kh2 46.Rg7 h3 47.Rg6 Kh1 48.Rg7 h2 49.Rg6



49...Rf5 50.Rg7 b5+ 51.Kd3 Rf4 52.Kc3 Rf2 53.Kd4 Rg2 54.Re7

54.Ra7 Kg1 55.Ra1+ Kf2 56.Ra2+ Kf3 57.Ra1 Rg1 58.Ra3+ Kf4 59.Rh3 h1Q 60.Rxh1 Rxh1–+

54...Kg1 55.Re1+ Kf2 56.Rh1

56.Rc1 Rg1 57.Rc2+ Kg3 58.Rxh2 Kxh2–+

56...Kg3 57.Rc1

57.Rd1 Rd2+ 58.Rxd2 h1Q 59.Rd3+ Kf4 60.Kc3 Qe1+ 61.Kc2–+
57.Re1 Rg1 58.Re3+ Kh4 59.Re4+ Rg4–+

57...Rg1



58.Rc3+ Kg4 59.Rxc6 h1Q 60.Kc5

60.Rc7 Rc1 61.Rxc1 Qxc1 62.Ke4 Qc3 63.Kd5 Kf5 64.Kd6 Qc4 65.Kd7 Ke5 66.Ke7 Qc7+ 67.Ke8 Ke6 68.Kf8 Qf7#

60...Rc1+ 0–1

More Draw Offers

Last night at the Spokane Chess Club, we had a game/29 tournament. I like this time control because the USCF rates it only as quick, while game/30 is dual-rated. I was the third seed, and the first round went as expected: my opponent hung his queen early, making the game easier than it should have been. In round two, I played Phil Weyland--the second seed--and blundered into a theoretically lost game. But, as they say, the hardest thing in chess is to win a won game. He got into time trouble looking for the best plan, and I very nearly equalized. He offered a draw when he had one minute to my five and was only one pawn ahead in what looked to soon become a rook and pawn endgame.

In the final round, Phil played the top seed while I had White against Judge Korsmo. My oversight created opportunities for some tactics that Korsmo played in the wrong sequence, missing his chance for an upset win.

Stripes,J (1720) - Korsmo,K (1625) [E11]
July Quick, Spokane 2009

1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nf3 Bb4+ 4.Bd2 Bxd2+ 5.Nbxd2 d5 6.e3 0–0 7.Rc1 Nbd7 8.Bd3 c6 9.b4N Re8 10.Qb3 e5 11.dxe5 Nxe5 12.Nxe5 Rxe5 13.Nf3 Re7 14.0–0 Be6 15.Rfd1 Qc7 16.Nd4 Bg4 17.f3 dxc4 18.Bxc4 Bh5 19.Nf5 Rd7 20.e4 Rad8 21.a4?? Rxd1+

21...Nxe4? 22.Rxd7 Qb6+ 23.Qe3+-
21...Qb6+–+

22.Rxd1 Rxd1+ 23.Qxd1+/= Nxe4 24.Qd4 Nf6 25.Qd6



I thought about grabbing the pawn, but decided if I could get the queens off the board, the moves required for my opponent to get the bishop back into the game might give me time to create a passed pawn. I was wrong.

25.Qxa7±

25...Ne8

Here my opponent offered a draw. Objectively the game is probably drawn despite his one pawn advantage, but I have some forcing moves. He must defend accurately.

25...Qxd6 26.Nxd6 b6 27.Nc8 b5 28.axb5 cxb5 29.Bxb5 Nd5=

26.Ne7+ Kh8

26...Kf8?? 27.Ng6+ Kg8 28.Qf8#

27.Ng6+ hxg6 28.Qf8+ Kh7 29.Qxe8



29...Qb6+

29...g5 and Black has the edge

30.Kf1 Qxb4??

This obvious looking move loses.

30...g5=

31.Bxf7+- Kh6?



31...Qb1+ 32.Kf2

32.Qh8+?

I wanted to play 32.h4, but thought the black queen could just snap off the pawn because I overlooked the winning skewer.

32.h4! Qxh4 33.Qh8+ Kg5 34.Qd8+ Kf5 35.Qxh4+-

32...Kg5 33.Qd8+ Kh6?



33...Kf5 34.g4+ Bxg4 35.Qd7+ Kg5 36.Qxg4+ Qxg4 37.fxg4 Kxg4 38.a5=

34.h4?

34.g4+-

34...Qb1+ 35.Kf2 Qb2+ 36.Kg1



36...Qc1+??

36...Qa1+=

37.Kh2 Qf4+ 38.g3 1–0

Both of us had two minutes left and checkmate is imminent. My opponent let his clock run out looking for the escape that is not there.

More than Footware

The most wonderful thing about the sport is it's the only sport that every member of the family, young and old, can play competitively.
Jeff Saunders

He is not talking about chess. No, Jeff Saunders is the past president of the Spokane Horseshoe Pitching Association. He is quoted in this morning's Spokesman-Review touting the unique appeal of horseshoes. The article, "Keeping an Eye on the Prize," exposes the popularity of horseshoe pitching among a small but enthusiastic group here in River City.

Chess is not a sport. If it were, we would be forced to contest Saunders assertion. Like horseshoes, chess can be played competitively by young and old. In the recent Washington State Elementary Chess Championship, which I organized, competitors were as young as five. In the I Love Chess 2 side event in the same place at the same time, the oldest competitor turned eighty the week after the event. I'm pushing fifty, and I've played hard-fought games against both the five year old and the eighty.

Chess unites as equals young and old, male and female, and competitors from all cultures. Through chess, young people gain self-esteem. They improve men­tal skills of concentration, memory, and analysis. Chess develops sportsmanship, responsibility, and respect for oth­ers. The game is relatively simple to learn, but never ceases to challenge players of all skill levels.
James Stripes, as quoted in "Checkmate"

Now, the co-host/principal sponsor of the Washington State Elementary Chess Championship was the Spokane Regional Sports Commission. They told me that for their purposes, chess is a sport. It might not make your arm as tired as horseshoes, but it is a grueling activity that requires focus, stamina, and competitive spirit from all ages, male and female.

Chess is more inclusive than horseshoes, and it is certainly a family sport.

Draw Offers

Three pawns to one with rooks on the board, and my opponent who lost our other game offers me a draw.

Mate in six with two seconds left, and my opponent offers a draw.

All the minor pieces gone, but the heavy pieces and all pawn remain, and I offer a draw.

All these offers were refused, as they should have been.

Opening Preparation

It has been said that most tournament players play the openings like Grandmasters, the middle game like experts, and the endings like children. This holds true, to a large extent, at any level below Master. Memory, study, a familiarity with opening principles means that most games are decided in the middle game or later with only a small percentage of games actually being decided in the opening.
Alex Dunne, How to Become a Candidate Master (1986), 1

The opening is not the strongest part of my game. Although I am sufficiently familiar with general principles to play a wide range of opening systems with some comfort, when I sit across the board from a player that has invested considerable time in opening preparation, I have a sense of inadequacy. The level at which I am beginning to play, and that I hope to begin playing--regularly scoring wins against class A players, and beginning to score against experts--requires specific opening preparation.

Last summer, while preparing for the City Championship match, I developed some specific lines against the Dutch Defense. The level of my preparation was such that I scored my first ever draw against Hiarcs 12 playing at full strength (but forced to meet 1.d4 with 1...f5). In a game/15 I drew the beast; that was one of nearly a dozen such training games. This opening work was largely responsible for my performance in the City Championship itself, assisting my success in earning a single draw against a FIDE Master, and very nearly two draws.

That was specific preparation for play against one opponent, but I need to have a battery of prepared lines available for other opponents. I'm not thinking necessarily of lines tailored to the playing styles of particular adversaries, although useful, but specific lines for openings that I'm likely to find myself playing. I need some lines, for example, against the King's Indian Defense. It will come up since 1.d4 is my principal standard, and it would be nice to occasionally uncork a well-prepared novelty or the latest theory against a worthy opponent.

In my game against John Julian Saturday night, I wanted to play the English, partly because I'd beat him in a casual game a few months ago that we played on Facebook.

James Stripes - John Julian [A25]
Facebook, Chess.com Application, 2009

1.c4 e5 2.g3 g6 3.Bg2 Bg7 4.Nc3 Nc6 5.Rb1 d6 6.b4 f5 7.d3 Nf6 8.e3 0–0 9.Nge2 Ne7 10.0–0 c6 11.b5 Be6 12.bxc6 bxc6 13.Qa4 Qd7 14.Ba3 Rf7 15.Qa6 Ne8 16.Qb7 Nc7 17.Qb4 Rd8 18.Qa5 Nc8 19.Rb7 f4 20.exf4 exf4 21.Ne4 f3 22.Bxf3 Rxf3 23.Rxc7 Qe8 24.Nf4 d5 25.Nxe6 Qxe6 26.Ng5 1–0

Although John claimed he was not taking that game as seriously as I did, it appeared from his first move on Saturday that he intended to avoid a repeat of this reversed Sicilian. We quickly transposed into a line of the King's Indian that I had glanced at superficially in mid-April when I read a single chapter--the last--in Joe Gallagher, Starting Out: The King's Indian (2002).


Stripes,J (1819) - Julian,J (1998) [E70]
City Championship Contenders, Spokane Valley, 2009

1.c4 g6 2.Nc3 Bg7 3.d4 Nf6 4.e4 d6 5.Bd3

Some strong grandmasters play this system quite regularly and its main supporter over the years has been the former American Champion Yasser Seiriwan.
Gallagher, 164

If Yasser plays the system, it is good enough for me!

5... 0–0 6.Nge2 e5 7.Bg5?

My recollection of the line has failed. 7.d5 is the correct move.

7... h6 8.Bd2?!

This move appears to be the novelty. 8.Bh4 is more in the spirit of the previous move and seems to have been played in a few games, but not by any strong players because they do not play 7.Bg5.

8... Nc6 9.d5 Ne7 10.0–0



Despite the lack of adequate preparation, I've reached a reasonable position. Black has some difficulties to solve, and I have my plan for meeting the KID's dangerous f7-f5 thrust. On the other hand, I've used nearly half an hour to my opponent's four minutes.

10... Nh7

prepares f7-f5, and it's time to decide where my queen should go

11.Qc2 f5 12.f4



I failed to remember accurately Gallagher's statement that White plans "to meet any subsequent ...f7-f5 by Black with exf5 and f2-f4" (164). I did not forget these two moves, but the sequence in which Gallagher listed them. Does it make a difference? Should White first play exf5, then advance the f-pawn? As it turns out, Hiarcs 12 assesses my 12.f4 as correct. I have a slight advantage, equivalent to nearly a pawn according to my engine.

12... fxe4 13.Bxe4 Bf5 14.Rae1

14.fxe5 was probably better

14...c6 15.fxe5 dxe5 16.Ng3 Qd7 17.Be3 Bxe4



18.Ncxe4?

I removed the bishop from the board, hovered my hand over one knight, then over the other. After a pause, I picked up the wrong knight and moved it where the bishop had been. Just before this move, I had received a text from my wife telling me she had found the spare rings for our Magic Bullet! I responded to my wife before returning my attention to the board.

The horror! The horror!
Joseph Conrad, Heart of Darkness

I realize that cell phones are not permitted in most tournaments, and that sending and receiving texts arouses suspicions of cheating. But small local affairs where everyone knows each other fairly well differs from large events full of strangers. Many of my opponents have been in my home. John has been here several times to play make-up games for club events, and for us to work together on match preparation. He was essentially my trainer for last year's City Championship, and we spent the better part of one day pouring through Informants, the Encyclopedia of Chess Openings, and running engine analysis of key lines we thought worthy of consideration.

In these local affairs, we tolerate marginal breaches of these emergent rules against cell phone use, although I am getting close to forfeiting one player whose ringer never seems to be turned off, and his phone inevitably rings during play. I always set my phone to vibrate, except when I set it to silent, as I did for the Washington Open.

After the game, John told me to pass on his thanks to my wife for the distraction that provoked my selection of the wrong knight.

18.Ngxe4
18.Qxe4 is also better

18...cxd5 19.cxd5 Qxd5



I'm down a pawn, yet Hiarcs 12 still sees me as having an advantage of 1/2 pawn. I thought that I had some play for the material, but at this point I'm looking to struggle for a draw.

20.Nc3

Hiarcs likes 20.Rxf8 Rxf8 21.Qc5, which I recall examining briefly during the six minutes I thought about this move.

20...Qc6 21.Qb3+ Kh8 22.Nge4 b6 23.Rf7 Rxf7 24.Qxf7 Nf5 25.Bf2 Qe8



Should I trade queens? I choose to do so, and bit by bit, my position worsens.

26.Qxe8+ Rxe8 27.g4 Nd4 28.Nd6?

This aggressive move makes things worse. 28.Kg2 is better.

28... Nf3+ 29.Kh1 Rf8 30.Re2 Kg8 31.Nd5 Nf6 32.Ne7+ Kh7 33.h3 Rd8



34.Ne4?

34.Nc4 keeps the knight on the board and makes my opponent show more technique to secure the win.

34...Nxe4 35.Rxe4 Rd2-+



I could resign, but given that John will win the event and thus need to start serious preparation for the City Championship, making him work for every little bit is an effort to assist his preparation. I know he will win, but as his friend, I fight on as the stubborn old man that I am. Let him cuss.

36.Kg2 Ng5 37.Ra4 Nxh3 38.Kxh3 Rxf2 39.Nd5 Rf7 40.Kg3 Bf8 41.Nc3 Bc5 42.Ne4 Bd4 43.b3 a5 44.Rc4 Kg7 45.Rc6 Re7 46.Kf3 Rf7+ 47.Kg3 Rf1 48.Rc7+ Rf7 49.Rc6



49... Rf4

This move has been waiting for him to find it, and he does after several other tries.

50.Rc7+ Kf8 51.Nd2 Bf2+ 52.Kg2 Be1 53.Nf3 Rxg4+ 54.Kf1 Rf4 55.Ke2 Bb4 56.Rb7 Bc5 57.Ne1 e4 58.a4 Rf7 59.Rb8+ Kg7 60.Nc2 Re7 61.Ne3 Bxe3 0–1

Earlier in the day, I had White against Adam Attwood. He plays the Pirc, and I'm not presently happy with my repertoire against that system. On my walk that morning, I decided I would play 1.f4 to make things interesting. Adam replied 1...g5 to my surprise. As the game developed, I sacrificed a knight to bring his king into the center. Adam defends well, and survived the onslaught. To my relief, he offered a draw in a position that he could have won. On Sunday morning, Adam drew John, finishing the event without a loss and capturing second. Ryan failed to show up and everyone got one freebie as a consequence. I won my games against Ron Weyland and Sattar Sattarov and finished third.

In this event, I advanced towards one intermediate goal: staying in class A. Indeed, I went up from 1819 to 1824. John went back over 2000, but Adam was the big winner rating-wise, finding a new peak rating at 1759. His second place earns him free entry into the Spokane Falls Open. I need to prepare my line against the Pirc in case we play then.