White to move
Who stands better? How should each side proceed?
Marshall Couldn’t Bluff Steinitz
2 hours ago
04 March 2017
Minor Piece Endgame
This position appeared in a game in a youth tournament this afternoon.
Who stands better? How should each side proceed?
Who stands better? How should each side proceed?
02 March 2017
Learn from Others' Errors
My students this week are seeing a series of positions from my games in the 25th Collyer Memorial Chess Tournament. From the same positions, the lessons vary due to skill levels of my students. These students can learn from my error in one game, and the errors of my opponents in others.
In the first position, I erred and lost the game. My error is an instructive tactic that might work in other circumstances.
I played 52.e6+ with the intent of deflecting Black's king from defense of g6. After 52...Kxe6 53.Kxg6, the game would have been drawn. However, my opponent played 52...Kg7! As it turns out, his move wins. It is also the only winning move after my attempted deflection.
Some of my students are learning this deflection tactic for the first time. For them, understanding how it might have worked is more important than comprehending why it failed.
Most of this game is presented with some detailed discussion at "Stronger King".
The second position comes from my first round game. My opponent had a tactical shot that she missed. After her move, I immediately eliminated the vulnerabilities that made this tactical knockout possible.
My opponent played 25.Bd2 and then I removed my rook from the e-file.
She could have played 25.Bxb6, capturing a pawn with a discovered attack on my rook. If I capture the bishop, I lose quickly. 25...cxb6 26.Rxe8 wins a rook for bishop and pins the queen against the king, winning it for a rook. Hence, I would have been forced to play 25...Rxe1 and after 26.Rxe1 the problem of the pin remains, so 26...Re7 27.Bxa5 when White has gained two pawns on the queenside for no cost and the bishop now guards White's vulnerable rook on e1.
I often say there is no luck in chess, but I was lucky that my opponent missed this tactic.
From the third position, my opponent executed a fork combinations that forced the exchange of his two knights for one of my rooks and a pawn. He failed to anticipate, however, my in-between move. In chess, there are two names for an in-between move. There is a German word, zwischenzug, and an Italian, intermezzo. These words mean the same thing. Chess students will find both words used interchangeably by different writers and speakers.
21...Ngxe3 22.fxe3 Nxe3 23.Qe2 Nxf1
I need to capture this knight on f1, but before I do, I have my in-between move. Because my move gives check, the knight does not get time to escape. The importance of my in-between move is not the check, but that it gains a pawn and protects my pawn on d6.
24.Qxe6+ Kh8 25.Rxf1
My d6 pawn was vulnerable and is now secure. Because it is so far advanced, it is also extremely dangerous. After my opponent offered the exchange of queens, I was left with an overwhelming advantage due to the the queening threat of my advanced pawn.
My opponent could have played 21...Qxe6. Then, both players have chances as the game continues.
In the first position, I erred and lost the game. My error is an instructive tactic that might work in other circumstances.
White to move
I played 52.e6+ with the intent of deflecting Black's king from defense of g6. After 52...Kxe6 53.Kxg6, the game would have been drawn. However, my opponent played 52...Kg7! As it turns out, his move wins. It is also the only winning move after my attempted deflection.
Some of my students are learning this deflection tactic for the first time. For them, understanding how it might have worked is more important than comprehending why it failed.
Most of this game is presented with some detailed discussion at "Stronger King".
The second position comes from my first round game. My opponent had a tactical shot that she missed. After her move, I immediately eliminated the vulnerabilities that made this tactical knockout possible.
White to move
My opponent played 25.Bd2 and then I removed my rook from the e-file.
She could have played 25.Bxb6, capturing a pawn with a discovered attack on my rook. If I capture the bishop, I lose quickly. 25...cxb6 26.Rxe8 wins a rook for bishop and pins the queen against the king, winning it for a rook. Hence, I would have been forced to play 25...Rxe1 and after 26.Rxe1 the problem of the pin remains, so 26...Re7 27.Bxa5 when White has gained two pawns on the queenside for no cost and the bishop now guards White's vulnerable rook on e1.
I often say there is no luck in chess, but I was lucky that my opponent missed this tactic.
From the third position, my opponent executed a fork combinations that forced the exchange of his two knights for one of my rooks and a pawn. He failed to anticipate, however, my in-between move. In chess, there are two names for an in-between move. There is a German word, zwischenzug, and an Italian, intermezzo. These words mean the same thing. Chess students will find both words used interchangeably by different writers and speakers.
Black to move
21...Ngxe3 22.fxe3 Nxe3 23.Qe2 Nxf1
I need to capture this knight on f1, but before I do, I have my in-between move. Because my move gives check, the knight does not get time to escape. The importance of my in-between move is not the check, but that it gains a pawn and protects my pawn on d6.
24.Qxe6+ Kh8 25.Rxf1
My d6 pawn was vulnerable and is now secure. Because it is so far advanced, it is also extremely dangerous. After my opponent offered the exchange of queens, I was left with an overwhelming advantage due to the the queening threat of my advanced pawn.
My opponent could have played 21...Qxe6. Then, both players have chances as the game continues.
27 February 2017
Falkbeer Counter-gambit
Ernst Karl Falkbeer (1819-1885) founded Austria's first chess magazine, Wiener Schachzeitung, but is remembered today mostly for the response to the King's Gambit that bears his name. He published an article analyzing Black's third move and also played several games employing the gambit.
The main line appears to be 1.e4 e5 2.f4 d5 (the signature move of the Falkbeer Counter-gambit) 3.exd5 e4 (the topic of Falkbeer's 1850 article) 4.d3 Nf6 and then White has four main options.
a) Nc3
b) Qe2
c) Nd2
d) dxe4
According to John Shaw, The King's Gambit (2013), "White has excellent chances of an edge in the traditional main lines" (560). The Falkbeer "has become something of a museum piece at the highest levels," according to Neal McDonald, The King's Gambit: A Modern View of a Swashbuckling Opening (1998). Even so, Dmitrij Jakovenko has played it as recently as the 2014 Russian Championship.
When I was facing the King's gambit yesterday, I had recollections of one of the Polgar sisters playing the Falkbeer, and also remembered two games that I have studied in some depth, Schulten -- Morphy 1857 and Rosanes -- Anderssen 1862. Both historic games were won quickly by Black. A check of my database this morning shows that Susan Polgar lost to Boris Spassky in 1988 when she played the Falkbeer. She opted for the 3...c6 line that was popular for awhile.
The oldest game in the ChessBase database with Black's 3...e4
Anderssen,Adolf -- Falkbeer,Ernst Karl [C32]
Berlin m3 Berlin, 1851
1.e4 e5 2.f4 d5 3.exd5 e4 4.Bb5+ Bd7 5.Qe2 Nf6 6.Nc3 Bc5 7.Nxe4 0–0 8.Bxd7 Nbxd7 9.d3 Nxd5 10.Nf3 Re8 11.f5 Bb4+ 12.Kf2 N7f6 13.g3 Qd7 14.c4 Nxe4+ 15.dxe4 Nf6 16.e5 Qxf5 17.Kg2 Rad8 18.a3 Bd6 19.Rd1 Qh5 20.c5 Rxe5 21.Qxe5 Qg4 22.cxd6 Re8 23.Qxe8+ Nxe8 24.d7 Qe4 25.d8Q Qc2+ 26.Bd2 1–0
Two memorable historic games.
Schulten,John William -- Morphy,Paul [C32]
New York blindfold m New York, 1857
1.e4 e5 2.f4 d5 3.exd5 e4 4.Nc3 Nf6 5.d3 Bb4 6.Bd2 e3 7.Bxe3 0–0 8.Bd2 Bxc3 9.bxc3 Re8+ 10.Be2 Bg4 11.c4 c6 12.dxc6 Nxc6 13.Kf1 Rxe2 14.Nxe2 Nd4 15.Qb1 Bxe2+ 16.Kf2 Ng4+ 17.Kg1 Nf3+ 18.gxf3 Qd4+ 19.Kg2 Qf2+ 20.Kh3 Qxf3+ 0–1
Rosanes,Jacob -- Anderssen,Adolf [C32]
Breslau m Breslau, 1862
1.e4 e5 2.f4 d5 3.exd5 e4 4.Bb5+ c6 5.dxc6 Nxc6 6.Nc3 Nf6 7.Qe2 Bc5 8.Nxe4 0–0 9.Bxc6 bxc6 10.d3 Re8 11.Bd2 Nxe4 12.dxe4 Bf5 13.e5 Qb6 14.0–0–0 Bd4 15.c3 Rab8 16.b3 Red8 17.Nf3 Qxb3 18.axb3 Rxb3 19.Be1 Be3+ 0–1
My fourth round opponent started with the Bird, which I met with the From, then we transposed into the King's Gambit and the Falkbeer. That is exactly how one of my worst tournament games ever began two years ago, except that I had White (see "Knowing Better").
Tito Tinajero (1614) -- James Stripes (1845) [C32]
25th Collyer Memorial Spokane Valley (4), 26.02.2017
1.f4 e5 2.e4 d5 3.exd5 e4 4.Nc3
4.d3 is considered best. 4...Nf6 5.dxe4 Nxe4 6.Nf3 Bc5 7.Qe2 "theory and practice have demonstrated with a high degree of certainty that White will obtain an advantage" (Shaw, 585).
4...Nf6 5.Bb5+
I expected 5.d3, which is the main line. Shaw mentions 5.Bb5 as a means of avoiding established theory. It's certainly a worthy move at the club level.
5...c6
5...Nbd7 or 5...Bd7 were options. Because I needed to win, I was happier accepting weaknesses in pawn structure than offering minor piece exchanges. Later, however, concrete analysis forced me to consider some exchanges.
6.dxc6 bxc6 7.Bc4
7...Bg4?!
7...Bc5 seems better and was played in the only game in PowerBook 2016 with 5.Bb5+. That game continued 8.d4 Qxd4 9.Qxd4 Bxd4 10.Nge2 Bb6 11.Na4 Ba6 12.Nxb6 axb6 13.Bb3 0–0 14.h3 c5 15.a3 e3 16.Bxe3 Re8 17.Kf2 Ne4+ 18.Kf3 Bb7 19.Rhe1 Nd7 20.Ng3 Ndf6 21.Nxe4 Nxe4 22.Ke2 Ba6+ 23.Kf3 Bb7 24.Ke2 Ba6+ 25.Kf3 Bb7 26.Ke2 ½–½ Metz,H (2275) -- Baburin,A (2530) Liechtenstein 1993
8.Be2
8.Nge2 was worth considering.
8...Be6
8...Bf5 9.d3 Qb6 10.dxe4 Bxe4 was played in Richter,E -- McAloon,J, Ca'n Picafort 1992, which White won in 36 moves.
9.d3 Bb4 10.Bd2
10...exd3
I first thought of 10...e3, as Morphy played against Schulten, but my c-pawn makes a critical element of Morphy's attack impossible.
I missed an opportunity: 10...Qd4! 11.Qc1 (11.dxe4? Bc5 12.Qc1 Qf2+-+) 11...Nbd7 and Black's pieces are more active.
11.Bxd3 Qb6?
I should have castled, but failed to anticipate White's next move.
12.f5 Bd5
I spent twenty minutes on this move.
13.Nxd5 Nxd5
During that twenty minutes, I thought that I would play 13...Bxd2+, but now spent another five minutes considering whether that was best. Although several of my moves in this game were not best, the time that I invested and the care taken are indicators that I was taking the game seriously. I was playing the board, not my opponent. I was not making the sort of hasty moves that cost me a draw on Saturday (see "Stronger King").
14.Qe2+
14...Kf8
I spent another thirteen minutes on this move. I considered 14...Kd8, as well as several other options that seemed to fail tactically. I wanted to castle, but blocking the check and the castling seemed to drop a piece after White drove the knight away. Of course, White would need to castle first or face a skewer along the e-file. Blocking the check with the knight seemed to be going backwards.
My chess engine prefers 14...Kd8, which I rejected because it seemed too easy for White to move the bishops, producing a discovered attack against my king. If I could calculate as well as a computer, I might have been able to assess these dangers. 15.0–0–0 Re8 16.Qf1 Nd7 and Black is equal, according to Stockfish.
14...Kf8 is the computer's second choice.
15.0–0–0 Nd7
Stockfish prefers 15...Be7, which would have been consistent with my earlier plan to avoid exchanges. But, now, I sensed the need to catch up in development. Despite my sacrifice of a pawn for activity, my opponent's pieces seem more active.
16.Bxb4+ Qxb4 17.Bc4?
17.Qd2 and White retains the edge.
17...Re8
The game is equal.
18.Qd3??
18.c3 Nxc3 19.bxc3 Qxc3+ 20.Qc2 Qa1+= and Black forces a draw. I likely would have played something else and been worse.
After 17 moves, my opponent had 1:15 remaining to my 45 minutes. Being behind thirty minutes on the clock might have motivated me to cut my losses and bail. Happily, he spent four minutes finding a horrendous move that I quickly exploited.
18...Ne5 19.Qf1 0-1
After making this move, my opponent tipped his king before I could play 19...Nxc4.
It may be worth my time to find another line against the King's Gambit, or to meet the Bird with something other than the From. Against 1.e4, I usually play the French.
The main line appears to be 1.e4 e5 2.f4 d5 (the signature move of the Falkbeer Counter-gambit) 3.exd5 e4 (the topic of Falkbeer's 1850 article) 4.d3 Nf6 and then White has four main options.
a) Nc3
b) Qe2
c) Nd2
d) dxe4
According to John Shaw, The King's Gambit (2013), "White has excellent chances of an edge in the traditional main lines" (560). The Falkbeer "has become something of a museum piece at the highest levels," according to Neal McDonald, The King's Gambit: A Modern View of a Swashbuckling Opening (1998). Even so, Dmitrij Jakovenko has played it as recently as the 2014 Russian Championship.
 |
| My Round Four Opponent |
The oldest game in the ChessBase database with Black's 3...e4
Anderssen,Adolf -- Falkbeer,Ernst Karl [C32]
Berlin m3 Berlin, 1851
1.e4 e5 2.f4 d5 3.exd5 e4 4.Bb5+ Bd7 5.Qe2 Nf6 6.Nc3 Bc5 7.Nxe4 0–0 8.Bxd7 Nbxd7 9.d3 Nxd5 10.Nf3 Re8 11.f5 Bb4+ 12.Kf2 N7f6 13.g3 Qd7 14.c4 Nxe4+ 15.dxe4 Nf6 16.e5 Qxf5 17.Kg2 Rad8 18.a3 Bd6 19.Rd1 Qh5 20.c5 Rxe5 21.Qxe5 Qg4 22.cxd6 Re8 23.Qxe8+ Nxe8 24.d7 Qe4 25.d8Q Qc2+ 26.Bd2 1–0
Two memorable historic games.
Schulten,John William -- Morphy,Paul [C32]
New York blindfold m New York, 1857
1.e4 e5 2.f4 d5 3.exd5 e4 4.Nc3 Nf6 5.d3 Bb4 6.Bd2 e3 7.Bxe3 0–0 8.Bd2 Bxc3 9.bxc3 Re8+ 10.Be2 Bg4 11.c4 c6 12.dxc6 Nxc6 13.Kf1 Rxe2 14.Nxe2 Nd4 15.Qb1 Bxe2+ 16.Kf2 Ng4+ 17.Kg1 Nf3+ 18.gxf3 Qd4+ 19.Kg2 Qf2+ 20.Kh3 Qxf3+ 0–1
Rosanes,Jacob -- Anderssen,Adolf [C32]
Breslau m Breslau, 1862
1.e4 e5 2.f4 d5 3.exd5 e4 4.Bb5+ c6 5.dxc6 Nxc6 6.Nc3 Nf6 7.Qe2 Bc5 8.Nxe4 0–0 9.Bxc6 bxc6 10.d3 Re8 11.Bd2 Nxe4 12.dxe4 Bf5 13.e5 Qb6 14.0–0–0 Bd4 15.c3 Rab8 16.b3 Red8 17.Nf3 Qxb3 18.axb3 Rxb3 19.Be1 Be3+ 0–1
My fourth round opponent started with the Bird, which I met with the From, then we transposed into the King's Gambit and the Falkbeer. That is exactly how one of my worst tournament games ever began two years ago, except that I had White (see "Knowing Better").
Tito Tinajero (1614) -- James Stripes (1845) [C32]
25th Collyer Memorial Spokane Valley (4), 26.02.2017
1.f4 e5 2.e4 d5 3.exd5 e4 4.Nc3
4.d3 is considered best. 4...Nf6 5.dxe4 Nxe4 6.Nf3 Bc5 7.Qe2 "theory and practice have demonstrated with a high degree of certainty that White will obtain an advantage" (Shaw, 585).
4...Nf6 5.Bb5+
I expected 5.d3, which is the main line. Shaw mentions 5.Bb5 as a means of avoiding established theory. It's certainly a worthy move at the club level.
5...c6
5...Nbd7 or 5...Bd7 were options. Because I needed to win, I was happier accepting weaknesses in pawn structure than offering minor piece exchanges. Later, however, concrete analysis forced me to consider some exchanges.
6.dxc6 bxc6 7.Bc4
Black to move
7...Bg4?!
7...Bc5 seems better and was played in the only game in PowerBook 2016 with 5.Bb5+. That game continued 8.d4 Qxd4 9.Qxd4 Bxd4 10.Nge2 Bb6 11.Na4 Ba6 12.Nxb6 axb6 13.Bb3 0–0 14.h3 c5 15.a3 e3 16.Bxe3 Re8 17.Kf2 Ne4+ 18.Kf3 Bb7 19.Rhe1 Nd7 20.Ng3 Ndf6 21.Nxe4 Nxe4 22.Ke2 Ba6+ 23.Kf3 Bb7 24.Ke2 Ba6+ 25.Kf3 Bb7 26.Ke2 ½–½ Metz,H (2275) -- Baburin,A (2530) Liechtenstein 1993
8.Be2
8.Nge2 was worth considering.
8...Be6
8...Bf5 9.d3 Qb6 10.dxe4 Bxe4 was played in Richter,E -- McAloon,J, Ca'n Picafort 1992, which White won in 36 moves.
9.d3 Bb4 10.Bd2
Black to move
10...exd3
I first thought of 10...e3, as Morphy played against Schulten, but my c-pawn makes a critical element of Morphy's attack impossible.
I missed an opportunity: 10...Qd4! 11.Qc1 (11.dxe4? Bc5 12.Qc1 Qf2+-+) 11...Nbd7 and Black's pieces are more active.
11.Bxd3 Qb6?
I should have castled, but failed to anticipate White's next move.
12.f5 Bd5
I spent twenty minutes on this move.
13.Nxd5 Nxd5
During that twenty minutes, I thought that I would play 13...Bxd2+, but now spent another five minutes considering whether that was best. Although several of my moves in this game were not best, the time that I invested and the care taken are indicators that I was taking the game seriously. I was playing the board, not my opponent. I was not making the sort of hasty moves that cost me a draw on Saturday (see "Stronger King").
14.Qe2+
Black to move
14...Kf8
I spent another thirteen minutes on this move. I considered 14...Kd8, as well as several other options that seemed to fail tactically. I wanted to castle, but blocking the check and the castling seemed to drop a piece after White drove the knight away. Of course, White would need to castle first or face a skewer along the e-file. Blocking the check with the knight seemed to be going backwards.
My chess engine prefers 14...Kd8, which I rejected because it seemed too easy for White to move the bishops, producing a discovered attack against my king. If I could calculate as well as a computer, I might have been able to assess these dangers. 15.0–0–0 Re8 16.Qf1 Nd7 and Black is equal, according to Stockfish.
14...Kf8 is the computer's second choice.
15.0–0–0 Nd7
Stockfish prefers 15...Be7, which would have been consistent with my earlier plan to avoid exchanges. But, now, I sensed the need to catch up in development. Despite my sacrifice of a pawn for activity, my opponent's pieces seem more active.
16.Bxb4+ Qxb4 17.Bc4?
17.Qd2 and White retains the edge.
17...Re8
The game is equal.
White to move
18.Qd3??
18.c3 Nxc3 19.bxc3 Qxc3+ 20.Qc2 Qa1+= and Black forces a draw. I likely would have played something else and been worse.
After 17 moves, my opponent had 1:15 remaining to my 45 minutes. Being behind thirty minutes on the clock might have motivated me to cut my losses and bail. Happily, he spent four minutes finding a horrendous move that I quickly exploited.
18...Ne5 19.Qf1 0-1
After making this move, my opponent tipped his king before I could play 19...Nxc4.
It may be worth my time to find another line against the King's Gambit, or to meet the Bird with something other than the From. Against 1.e4, I usually play the French.
26 February 2017
Stronger King
At the Eastern Washington Open last October, I lost to a former student on Sunday morning. My next loss in standard rated USCF tournament games came yesterday afternoon. In between, I played ten games. I was clearly worse at some point in nearly every game, but still managed eight wins and two draws.
This weekend is the 25th annual Dave Collyer Memorial chess tournament. It is Spokane's premier tournament--both largest and strongest. This year, four former winners--all masters--are competing. In the second round, I was paired against the fifth seed, the strongest non-master. He overlooked a nuance in a tactical sequence in the early middlegame that gave me a slight edge.
James Stripes (1845) -- Chris Kalina (2068) [D37]
25th Collyer Memorial Spokane Valley (2), 25.02.2017
22.Nd7! Bxd3 23.Nxb6 axb6
23...Bxf1 24.Nxc8 It was the vulnerable bishop on e7 that my opponent overlooked when he forced the trade of queens 24...Bf8 25.Kxf1+-
24.Rxd3±
My chess engine insists this position is equal, but most human players would favor White.
24...Rd5 25.Rfd1 Rxd3 26.Bxd3 Nd5 27.Bg3 Bf6 28.e4 Ne7 29.e5
This move was a little hasty on my part.
29.Ba6 does more to improve my pieces relative to those of my opponent. I thought that I was trapping the bishop and moved instantly. Later, this bishop won the game in poetic recall of my round five game during the Spokane Chess Club's Winter Championship. A piece that seemed to be inactive became the star in the ending. See "Perseverance".
29...Bg5 30.f4 Bh6 31.Ba6 Rb8 32.Rd4 Nd5
We have reached the critical position where the middlegame must be played with clear understanding of what may go down in the endgame. Or perhaps, this is already the endgame because I determined that is was time to activate my king. Studying this position, I reasoned that my king was stronger than my opponent's king. My plan was to post my king on f3, protecting my f-pawn, so that my dark-squared bishop was free to harass Kalina's vulnerable b-pawns.
I failed to anticipate how Black could bring his king to the queenside the capture my light-squared bishop, and hence underestimated his next move.
33.Kf2?
33.Bc4 or another move of this bishop leaves me with an edge.
33...b5 34.Kf3 Kf8 35.Be1
35.Bf2 was hard to find, but protects the other bishop.
35...Ke8 36.Bxb4?
36.Bf2 maintains equality.
36...Rb6 37.Bc8 Nxb4
37...Bxf4 38.Ke4 Rb8 39.Ba6 Bxh2 is even better for Black.
38.Rxb4 Kd8 39.Bxe6 fxe6 40.a4 g6 41.g4 Kc7
I offered a draw a move or two before this point. Chris said, "maybe later", and played on.
42.Rxb5
I was too optimistic about being able to eliminate Black's e- and g-pawns.
42.axb5 leaves me with more options for counterplay.
42...Rxb5 43.axb5–+ Bf8 44.Ke4 Bc5 45.f5 Kd7?
My opponent pursues a plan that demonstrated his king to be stronger than mine, but this move could have squandered the win if I had calculated correctly later on.
45...Kb6–+
46.Kf4 Ke7
46...Be7–+
47.h4 Kf7 48.h5 Bb6
I spent a bit of time trying to find the draw. Of course, if I can leave my opponent with only the h-pawn, the draw is elementary. Understanding that, he labored to prevent it. That was the reasoning behind his move 45. In this position, I think I found the correct idea, but then three moves in, the lines crossed in my head and I fell short.
49.fxe6+ Kxe6 50.hxg6 hxg6 51.Kg5 Kf7
52.e6+??
52.Kh6 was necessary Be3+ 53.g5 Bd4 54.e6+ Kxe6 55.Kxg6=
52...Kg7–+ 53.Kf4 Kf6 54.e7 Kxe7 55.Kg5 Kf7 56.Kh6 Kf6 57.b3 g5 58.Kh5 Be3 59.b4 Ke5 60.b6 Kf4 61.b7 Ba7 62.b5 Bb8 63.b6 Bd6 0–1
It was hard for my unbeaten streak to come to an end. It was also hard to squander first an advantage, and then miss a draw. Even so, if I play today as well as I did in this game, I should at least finish the event with a far better performance than last year's Collyer (see "Bishop versus Knight").
This weekend is the 25th annual Dave Collyer Memorial chess tournament. It is Spokane's premier tournament--both largest and strongest. This year, four former winners--all masters--are competing. In the second round, I was paired against the fifth seed, the strongest non-master. He overlooked a nuance in a tactical sequence in the early middlegame that gave me a slight edge.
James Stripes (1845) -- Chris Kalina (2068) [D37]
25th Collyer Memorial Spokane Valley (2), 25.02.2017
White to move
 |
| After 21...Be4 |
23...Bxf1 24.Nxc8 It was the vulnerable bishop on e7 that my opponent overlooked when he forced the trade of queens 24...Bf8 25.Kxf1+-
24.Rxd3±
My chess engine insists this position is equal, but most human players would favor White.
24...Rd5 25.Rfd1 Rxd3 26.Bxd3 Nd5 27.Bg3 Bf6 28.e4 Ne7 29.e5
This move was a little hasty on my part.
29.Ba6 does more to improve my pieces relative to those of my opponent. I thought that I was trapping the bishop and moved instantly. Later, this bishop won the game in poetic recall of my round five game during the Spokane Chess Club's Winter Championship. A piece that seemed to be inactive became the star in the ending. See "Perseverance".
29...Bg5 30.f4 Bh6 31.Ba6 Rb8 32.Rd4 Nd5
White to move
We have reached the critical position where the middlegame must be played with clear understanding of what may go down in the endgame. Or perhaps, this is already the endgame because I determined that is was time to activate my king. Studying this position, I reasoned that my king was stronger than my opponent's king. My plan was to post my king on f3, protecting my f-pawn, so that my dark-squared bishop was free to harass Kalina's vulnerable b-pawns.
I failed to anticipate how Black could bring his king to the queenside the capture my light-squared bishop, and hence underestimated his next move.
33.Kf2?
33.Bc4 or another move of this bishop leaves me with an edge.
33...b5 34.Kf3 Kf8 35.Be1
35.Bf2 was hard to find, but protects the other bishop.
35...Ke8 36.Bxb4?
36.Bf2 maintains equality.
36...Rb6 37.Bc8 Nxb4
37...Bxf4 38.Ke4 Rb8 39.Ba6 Bxh2 is even better for Black.
38.Rxb4 Kd8 39.Bxe6 fxe6 40.a4 g6 41.g4 Kc7
I offered a draw a move or two before this point. Chris said, "maybe later", and played on.
White to move
42.Rxb5
I was too optimistic about being able to eliminate Black's e- and g-pawns.
42.axb5 leaves me with more options for counterplay.
42...Rxb5 43.axb5–+ Bf8 44.Ke4 Bc5 45.f5 Kd7?
My opponent pursues a plan that demonstrated his king to be stronger than mine, but this move could have squandered the win if I had calculated correctly later on.
45...Kb6–+
46.Kf4 Ke7
46...Be7–+
47.h4 Kf7 48.h5 Bb6
White to move
I spent a bit of time trying to find the draw. Of course, if I can leave my opponent with only the h-pawn, the draw is elementary. Understanding that, he labored to prevent it. That was the reasoning behind his move 45. In this position, I think I found the correct idea, but then three moves in, the lines crossed in my head and I fell short.
49.fxe6+ Kxe6 50.hxg6 hxg6 51.Kg5 Kf7
White to move
52.e6+??
52.Kh6 was necessary Be3+ 53.g5 Bd4 54.e6+ Kxe6 55.Kxg6=
52...Kg7–+ 53.Kf4 Kf6 54.e7 Kxe7 55.Kg5 Kf7 56.Kh6 Kf6 57.b3 g5 58.Kh5 Be3 59.b4 Ke5 60.b6 Kf4 61.b7 Ba7 62.b5 Bb8 63.b6 Bd6 0–1
It was hard for my unbeaten streak to come to an end. It was also hard to squander first an advantage, and then miss a draw. Even so, if I play today as well as I did in this game, I should at least finish the event with a far better performance than last year's Collyer (see "Bishop versus Knight").
25 February 2017
Bishop versus Knight
The 25th annual Dave Collyer Memorial chess tournament is this weekend. I have played in more than half of them, perhaps fifteen. My best year was 2012 when I finished in second place, winning four games and taking a third round bye. IM John Donaldson played and won all five games and finished first. My worst year was 1998 when I lost five games and finished in last place.
My first round game in 1998 was memorable and I often use it teaching students.
Rodriguez,Luis (2211) -- Stripes,James (1472) [B21]
Collyer Memorial Spokane (1), 21.02.1998
1.e4 c5 2.d4 cxd4 3.c3 dxc3 4.Nxc3 d6 5.Bc4 a6 6.Nf3 Bg4 7.Ne5 dxe5 8.Bxf7+ 1–0
Last year was my second worst. I played four games, losing three. My rating dropped from 1886 to 1816. That was the start of my worst year since starting tournament chess twenty years earlier. The low point came in October in the Eastern Washington Open, which dropped my USCF rating to 1750, a nine year low. I had reached a peak of 1982 in 2012 a few months after the Collyer.
Then, I started winning again. I won a quick event at the Spokane Chess Club at the end of October, finished second in the Spokane Game 10 Championship in November, won my section of the Turkey Quads in November, and then won the SCC Winter Championship in January-February 2017.
After the low in October, I renewed the discipline and focus of my training and improved my attitude. Even so, I still play blitz marathons that put me in a bad mood and cultivate shallow thinking. See yesterday's "Attitude".
My fifth round game in last year's Collyer was a long and difficult battle with a friend who has won biggest upset more than once beating me. Although his rating seems to hover in the 1400s, he always plays well against me. He also helped me win the Winter Championship by drawing the second seed in the first round. I finished the game resolved to study the endgame, which I thought must be quite instructive. Alas, I did not even look at the game again until yesterday. Here is that ending.
Baker,Ted (1400) -- Stripes,James (1886) [A56]
Collyer Memorial Spokane Valley, 28.02.2016
32...Rb4 33.Ne3 Rb1 34.Ne2 Rb3 35.Nf5?
35.Rf3
35...Bf8 36.Rf3
36...Rb2
36...Rxf3 is better. 37.Kxf3 g6 38.Ne3 Bxh3. If I am alert to such opportunities this weekend, I will do well.
37.Kf2 g6 38.Ne3 Be7
38...Bh6
39.Ng4 Bh4+ 40.Kf1 Rb1+ 41.Kg2 Re1 42.Nc3
42...Bxg4
Forced.
43.hxg4 Rc1 44.Re3 Bg5 45.Rd3 Rc2+ 46.Kf3 Bh4 47.Nb5
47...Kd7?
47...Rf2+ 48.Ke3 Rg2 49.Ra3 Rg3+ 50.Ke2 Rg2+ is equal.
48.Nc3
48.Ra3 gives White the upper hand.
48...Rf2+ 49.Ke3 Rg2 50.Kf3 Rg3+ 51.Ke2 Rxg4
Finally, I began to feel as though I had made some progress. However, I underestimated my opponent's ability to support his d-pawn, while also mistiming my h-pawn push.
52.Rf3 Rg2+ 53.Kd1
53...h5
53...Rf2 offers Black good prospects.
54.Rf7+ Ke8 55.Rc7
55...Bf2
55...Bg5 56.Na4 (56.d6 Rd2+ 57.Ke1 Rxd6 favors Black) 56...h4 57.Nxc5 h3 58.Rh7 Be7 59.d6 Bxd6 60.Nb7 h2 and the computer likes Black.
56.d6 Be3 57.Nd5 Bg5 58.Rxc5 h4
Correct play should lead to a draw. Probably, I was still seeking a win.
59.Rc7
59...h3??
59...Rd2+ 60.Ke1 Rd4 61.Kf2 Rxe4 62.Kf3 Rd4=
60.Rh7+- h2 61.Nc7+ Kd8 62.Ne6+ Kc8 63.d7+ Kb8 64.Nxg5 h1Q+ 65.Rxh1 Kc7 66.Rh7 Rxg5 67.c5 Rg4 68.c6 Rxe4 69.Rh8 Rd4+ 70.Ke2 Re4+ 71.Kd3 1–0
My first round game in 1998 was memorable and I often use it teaching students.
Rodriguez,Luis (2211) -- Stripes,James (1472) [B21]
Collyer Memorial Spokane (1), 21.02.1998
1.e4 c5 2.d4 cxd4 3.c3 dxc3 4.Nxc3 d6 5.Bc4 a6 6.Nf3 Bg4 7.Ne5 dxe5 8.Bxf7+ 1–0
Last year was my second worst. I played four games, losing three. My rating dropped from 1886 to 1816. That was the start of my worst year since starting tournament chess twenty years earlier. The low point came in October in the Eastern Washington Open, which dropped my USCF rating to 1750, a nine year low. I had reached a peak of 1982 in 2012 a few months after the Collyer.
Then, I started winning again. I won a quick event at the Spokane Chess Club at the end of October, finished second in the Spokane Game 10 Championship in November, won my section of the Turkey Quads in November, and then won the SCC Winter Championship in January-February 2017.
After the low in October, I renewed the discipline and focus of my training and improved my attitude. Even so, I still play blitz marathons that put me in a bad mood and cultivate shallow thinking. See yesterday's "Attitude".
My fifth round game in last year's Collyer was a long and difficult battle with a friend who has won biggest upset more than once beating me. Although his rating seems to hover in the 1400s, he always plays well against me. He also helped me win the Winter Championship by drawing the second seed in the first round. I finished the game resolved to study the endgame, which I thought must be quite instructive. Alas, I did not even look at the game again until yesterday. Here is that ending.
Baker,Ted (1400) -- Stripes,James (1886) [A56]
Collyer Memorial Spokane Valley, 28.02.2016
Black to move
 |
| After 32.Rf2 |
35.Rf3
35...Bf8 36.Rf3
Black to move
36...Rb2
36...Rxf3 is better. 37.Kxf3 g6 38.Ne3 Bxh3. If I am alert to such opportunities this weekend, I will do well.
37.Kf2 g6 38.Ne3 Be7
38...Bh6
39.Ng4 Bh4+ 40.Kf1 Rb1+ 41.Kg2 Re1 42.Nc3
Black to move
42...Bxg4
Forced.
43.hxg4 Rc1 44.Re3 Bg5 45.Rd3 Rc2+ 46.Kf3 Bh4 47.Nb5
Black to move
47...Kd7?
47...Rf2+ 48.Ke3 Rg2 49.Ra3 Rg3+ 50.Ke2 Rg2+ is equal.
48.Nc3
48.Ra3 gives White the upper hand.
48...Rf2+ 49.Ke3 Rg2 50.Kf3 Rg3+ 51.Ke2 Rxg4
Finally, I began to feel as though I had made some progress. However, I underestimated my opponent's ability to support his d-pawn, while also mistiming my h-pawn push.
52.Rf3 Rg2+ 53.Kd1
Black to move
53...h5
53...Rf2 offers Black good prospects.
54.Rf7+ Ke8 55.Rc7
Black to move
55...Bf2
55...Bg5 56.Na4 (56.d6 Rd2+ 57.Ke1 Rxd6 favors Black) 56...h4 57.Nxc5 h3 58.Rh7 Be7 59.d6 Bxd6 60.Nb7 h2 and the computer likes Black.
56.d6 Be3 57.Nd5 Bg5 58.Rxc5 h4
Correct play should lead to a draw. Probably, I was still seeking a win.
59.Rc7
Black to move
59...h3??
59...Rd2+ 60.Ke1 Rd4 61.Kf2 Rxe4 62.Kf3 Rd4=
60.Rh7+- h2 61.Nc7+ Kd8 62.Ne6+ Kc8 63.d7+ Kb8 64.Nxg5 h1Q+ 65.Rxh1 Kc7 66.Rh7 Rxg5 67.c5 Rg4 68.c6 Rxe4 69.Rh8 Rd4+ 70.Ke2 Re4+ 71.Kd3 1–0
24 February 2017
Attitude
Win with grace. Lose with dignity.During morning coffee today, I reviewed three games on Chessgames.com, then played a single blitz game. When the blitz game began, I spoke my opponent's name, DarklordCOBRA, and then said, "this could be loss number 10,000." My wife can attest that I was calm and ready to accept defeat. She does not recall my tone of voice. Lack of recall is proof. Expressions of anger and despair do not go unnoticed. Last night, for example, after she went to bed, she called from the bedroom to ask, "what's wrong?" I was in the living room playing blitz on my iPad and had dropped a piece in an otherwise equal position, uttering some profanities.
Susan Polgar
Losses torment me. They bring out such fury that it seems that I hate the world and everyone in it. I yell such obscenities at the computer screen when losing online games that even the deaf dog heads outside for safety.
It need not be this way. It is possible to "lose with dignity", as Susan Polgar advocates. As a youth chess coach, I have spent years urging children to understand, "when you lose, you learn." In truth, however, I am a little half-hearted expressing this sentiment. I know that children hurt when they lose. A cliché offers minimal comfort at such times.
I have a more serious problem with the "win, draw, or learn" saying popular among other coaches. Often, victories should be subjected to the same scrutiny as losses. One of the students whom I coach one-on-one tied for first in his tournament last Saturday, winning his first trophy. During the tournament, he brought one of his game scores to my director's table and we analyzed the victory with his opponent. She missed at least two opportunities to checkmate him with a two move sequence. Although he finished at the top and she finished near the middle, the final standings could have been much different. It is very important to learn from one's mistakes in victories, as well as from defeats.
I recently won the Spokane Chess Club's Winter Championship. It would be easy to find comfort in my success, but it is more important to find humility. I had a lost position in four out of five games (see "Perseverance"). My success stemmed from a lot of help from my opponents who failed to put me away when they had the chance. However, I kept my own chances alive by never giving up. Throughout the course of the event, I tried to remain focused on having fun, finding the best moves, and learning. I found help from the prescriptions Paul Powell puts forth in The Fighting Dragon: How to Defeat the Yugoslav Attack (2016), which I reviewed recently.
Facing an opponent whose rating was higher than I have been in the past two weeks, I resolved to learn. I aimed to find strong moves and not get caught in the rut of playing without thinking. DarklordCOBRA essayed the Advance variation against my French. I commented, "I have played this over-the-board against a titled player and done well." Nonetheless, I went for the old main line instead of what I usually play. My opponent built up an advantage through the opening and early middlegame.
DarklordCOBRA (1946) -- Ziryab (1872) [C02]
Live Chess Chess.com, 24.02.2017
After 21.Bc3
21...Qh4
I wanted to play 21...a5, but miscounted the number of pieces that I had supporting this push. It's kind of hard to count to two during a blitz game. After the game, I looked again at this idea, thinking White would reply 22.a3. Initially, in my postgame analysis, I did not see how 22...Qb6, intending b5-b4 fails to 23.Bxg7!
My move was an effort to play b5-b4, and shows also that I was instinctively aware of some vulnerabilities on the kingside. But, my queen was kicked around a bit.
22.g3 Qh5 23.Re1 Rfd8 24.Bd1 Qc5 25.Rc1 Qf5 26.Bc2 Qh3
My queen has a nice aggressive post, but my opponent is not going to give me time to put my bishop where my knight stands in order to support Qg2#.
27.Qg5
27.Re4 should prove decisive, as my queen is running out of safe squares.
27...g6 28.Re4 b4
I am losing my queen, but at least I can get a rook and bishop for it.
29.Rh4 Qxh4 30.Qxh4 bxc3 31.bxc3
White has a decisive advantage, but also has only sixteen seconds. I have thirty.
31...Ne5 32.Qf6 Ng4 33.Qf4 f5 34.h3 Nf6 35.Bb3 Nd5
After the game, I thought I should have played 35...Kf7. Even here, Black is busted.
36.Qe5 Bc6
37.h4
With only nine seconds remaining, my opponent came up with a plan that seems to lead to checkmate.
37.Qxe6+ Kg7 38.Bxd5 Bxd5 39.Qxd5+- ends matters more quickly.
37...Nxc3 38.h5
My opponent should have found 38.Bxe6+ Kf8 39.Qf6+ Ke8 40.Qf7#
38...Bd5 39.h6 Ne2+
40.Qxe2??
40.Kh2 leaves Black with no checks, and only the possibility to delay checkmate. Black had five seconds in which to find Kh2.
40...Rxc1+
Now, for the first time in the game, Black has an advantage.
41.Bd1 Kf7 0–1
After the game, I went back through the battle looking for errors and opportunities. Mainly, I found my opponent's missed opportunities. Immediate postgame analysis of wins, losses, and draws with an aim to learning can help cultivate the correct attitude.
It need not be this way. It is possible to "lose with dignity", as Susan Polgar advocates. As a youth chess coach, I have spent years urging children to understand, "when you lose, you learn." In truth, however, I am a little half-hearted expressing this sentiment. I know that children hurt when they lose. A cliché offers minimal comfort at such times.
I have a more serious problem with the "win, draw, or learn" saying popular among other coaches. Often, victories should be subjected to the same scrutiny as losses. One of the students whom I coach one-on-one tied for first in his tournament last Saturday, winning his first trophy. During the tournament, he brought one of his game scores to my director's table and we analyzed the victory with his opponent. She missed at least two opportunities to checkmate him with a two move sequence. Although he finished at the top and she finished near the middle, the final standings could have been much different. It is very important to learn from one's mistakes in victories, as well as from defeats.
I recently won the Spokane Chess Club's Winter Championship. It would be easy to find comfort in my success, but it is more important to find humility. I had a lost position in four out of five games (see "Perseverance"). My success stemmed from a lot of help from my opponents who failed to put me away when they had the chance. However, I kept my own chances alive by never giving up. Throughout the course of the event, I tried to remain focused on having fun, finding the best moves, and learning. I found help from the prescriptions Paul Powell puts forth in The Fighting Dragon: How to Defeat the Yugoslav Attack (2016), which I reviewed recently.
I will explore new ideas and open my mind to new patterns. I will learn new patterns and become a stronger player.When I play too much blitz, the quality of my play suffers. My attitude suffers also. The problem, however, stems less from the quantity than from the mindset. It may be possible to play for many hours and still cultivate a positive attitude. It is less likely when play is aimed at getting to that next rating goal (such as the rating I had yesterday).
Failure is not measured by wins and losses; failure is continuing to play without learning.
Paul Powell, The Fighting Dragon, 18.
Facing an opponent whose rating was higher than I have been in the past two weeks, I resolved to learn. I aimed to find strong moves and not get caught in the rut of playing without thinking. DarklordCOBRA essayed the Advance variation against my French. I commented, "I have played this over-the-board against a titled player and done well." Nonetheless, I went for the old main line instead of what I usually play. My opponent built up an advantage through the opening and early middlegame.
DarklordCOBRA (1946) -- Ziryab (1872) [C02]
Live Chess Chess.com, 24.02.2017
After 21.Bc3
Black to move
21...Qh4
I wanted to play 21...a5, but miscounted the number of pieces that I had supporting this push. It's kind of hard to count to two during a blitz game. After the game, I looked again at this idea, thinking White would reply 22.a3. Initially, in my postgame analysis, I did not see how 22...Qb6, intending b5-b4 fails to 23.Bxg7!
My move was an effort to play b5-b4, and shows also that I was instinctively aware of some vulnerabilities on the kingside. But, my queen was kicked around a bit.
22.g3 Qh5 23.Re1 Rfd8 24.Bd1 Qc5 25.Rc1 Qf5 26.Bc2 Qh3
My queen has a nice aggressive post, but my opponent is not going to give me time to put my bishop where my knight stands in order to support Qg2#.
White to move
27.Qg5
27.Re4 should prove decisive, as my queen is running out of safe squares.
27...g6 28.Re4 b4
I am losing my queen, but at least I can get a rook and bishop for it.
29.Rh4 Qxh4 30.Qxh4 bxc3 31.bxc3
White has a decisive advantage, but also has only sixteen seconds. I have thirty.
Black to move
31...Ne5 32.Qf6 Ng4 33.Qf4 f5 34.h3 Nf6 35.Bb3 Nd5
After the game, I thought I should have played 35...Kf7. Even here, Black is busted.
36.Qe5 Bc6
White to move
37.h4
With only nine seconds remaining, my opponent came up with a plan that seems to lead to checkmate.
37.Qxe6+ Kg7 38.Bxd5 Bxd5 39.Qxd5+- ends matters more quickly.
37...Nxc3 38.h5
My opponent should have found 38.Bxe6+ Kf8 39.Qf6+ Ke8 40.Qf7#
38...Bd5 39.h6 Ne2+
White to move
40.Qxe2??
40.Kh2 leaves Black with no checks, and only the possibility to delay checkmate. Black had five seconds in which to find Kh2.
40...Rxc1+
Now, for the first time in the game, Black has an advantage.
41.Bd1 Kf7 0–1
After the game, I went back through the battle looking for errors and opportunities. Mainly, I found my opponent's missed opportunities. Immediate postgame analysis of wins, losses, and draws with an aim to learning can help cultivate the correct attitude.
23 February 2017
Cultivating Youth Skills
My chess students range from absolute beginners who have just learned how the pieces move and are beginning to discover forks and pins to some of the perennial trophy winners at local scholastic events. Students who meet with me one-on-one get tailored instruction that includes analysis of their tournament games. They also get a heavy dose of classic games.
This week, both students who meet one-one-one and my advanced after school club worked through some positions on my green cards. These cards have diagrams from Ziyatdinov, GM-RAM: Essential Grandmaster Knowledge (2000). One of these positions is from Schulten -- Morphy, New York 1857.
These positions are presented not merely as a tactical problem to solve, but also as a position to play. I emphasize, as does Ziyatidinov, finding the best plans for both sides. Yes, there is a tactical shot. But, there is also a need to cultivate the skill that converts the resulting advantage into a win.
Having seen and learned Morphy's Opera Game last week, some students found the key move quickly after being told it is a Morphy game and we need to look at pins.
13...Rxe2 14.Nxe2 Nd4
In the game, Shulten played 15.Qb1.
We explored how Black might proceed after 15.Qe1. Together, we played both sides trying to find a win for Black and the stubborn defense for White.
One of the interesting lines continued: 15.Qe1 Bxe2+ 16.Kg1 Qb6 17.Be3 Ng4 18.Bf2 Re8 and we played on from here, taking back moves that seems to fail and looking for better tries.
We also looked at this position from one of my online games.
40.Rh7+ was played in the game, and it worked well because Black did not find 40...Kg6 41.Rxe7 Rxc5, which gives Black excellent drawing prospects.
40.Bxe7 is White's best move, leading to 40...Kg7 41.Bd6 Rc1 42.Be5+ Kg6 and White should win.
My beginning students completed the worksheet Beginning Tactics 3 after seeing an illustration of the power of pins from the game Portisch -- Berger, Amsterdam 1964.
16.Nxh7 Kxh7 17.Rh5+ Kg7 18.Be5+ f6 19.Rg5.
This week, both students who meet one-one-one and my advanced after school club worked through some positions on my green cards. These cards have diagrams from Ziyatdinov, GM-RAM: Essential Grandmaster Knowledge (2000). One of these positions is from Schulten -- Morphy, New York 1857.
These positions are presented not merely as a tactical problem to solve, but also as a position to play. I emphasize, as does Ziyatidinov, finding the best plans for both sides. Yes, there is a tactical shot. But, there is also a need to cultivate the skill that converts the resulting advantage into a win.
Black to move
Having seen and learned Morphy's Opera Game last week, some students found the key move quickly after being told it is a Morphy game and we need to look at pins.
13...Rxe2 14.Nxe2 Nd4
In the game, Shulten played 15.Qb1.
We explored how Black might proceed after 15.Qe1. Together, we played both sides trying to find a win for Black and the stubborn defense for White.
One of the interesting lines continued: 15.Qe1 Bxe2+ 16.Kg1 Qb6 17.Be3 Ng4 18.Bf2 Re8 and we played on from here, taking back moves that seems to fail and looking for better tries.
We also looked at this position from one of my online games.
White to move
40.Rh7+ was played in the game, and it worked well because Black did not find 40...Kg6 41.Rxe7 Rxc5, which gives Black excellent drawing prospects.
40.Bxe7 is White's best move, leading to 40...Kg7 41.Bd6 Rc1 42.Be5+ Kg6 and White should win.
My beginning students completed the worksheet Beginning Tactics 3 after seeing an illustration of the power of pins from the game Portisch -- Berger, Amsterdam 1964.
White to move
16.Nxh7 Kxh7 17.Rh5+ Kg7 18.Be5+ f6 19.Rg5.
20 February 2017
Black to Move
I failed this problem on Chess.com tactics trainer, but found the first two moves.
Black to move
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
