30 December 2011

Thoughts on "Best of" Chess Carnival posts

Been doing some thinking about the upcoming "Best of" Chess Carnival for January 2012, with my intended submissions arranged from the easiest to hardest category to decide on.

1.  Best Game?

I'll go with my final round game from the Denker Tournament of Champions.  Several reasons: the tournament result mattered personally (by winning I achieved a 50% score for the tournament); the overall game quality is high (for someone at the Class level); and I was able to find an original, winning idea while also calculating how to avoid a series of threats from my opponent which could have turned the game around.  Accurately calculating and evaluating my opponent's potential moves has been a traditional weak point in my thought process, so this game is an example of what I am capable of on a good day (with the idea of emulating it in the future to create more such good days).

2.  Best Post?

This is of course highly subjective; objectively speaking, this would best be determined by the readership's opinion, if that were really possible.  That said, the "best" post in terms of it being the most meaningful/useful one for me was in fact the first blog post, Setting the Scene.  The creation of this blog and its inaugural post both signified and manifested a new commitment to a serious program of chess training.  We'll see where it leads.

Separately, from the potentially meaningless statistics department: the most read post as of today is Openings Selection - Initial Considerations, which is also in a multiple-way tie for the most commented post.

3.  Best Post on Another Blog?

(Also known as the "Best Post EVAH" category)

Gotta go with the largest pseudo-flame war ever on chess improvement blogs: Shy Guest Blogger (from Elizabeth Vicary's blog).  Note the ironic post title.

Plenty of other internet wackiness and mayhem of course exists on blogs/sites devoted to chess politics and other controversial developments involving the sport/game/art.  The chess improvement community isn't usually a good match for this sort of thing - there really aren't very many things to potentially argue forcefully about and everybody agrees that improvement is a good thing.  Nonetheless, a wide range of interesting folks showed up to the above highly entertaining and sometimes informative exchange (90 comments as of today).

24 December 2011

Annotated Game #24: Kingside attack in the Slow Slav

This game took place in the first round of a five-round weekend tournament, following the previous tournament completed in Annotated Game #23.  My opponent chose the "Slow Slav" variation (4. e3), which leads to a game of maneuver and is normally quite level.  Rather than pursue a completely equal game with no winning prospects, I elect to create a positional imbalance and initiate a kingside attack, somewhat reminiscent of a Dutch Defense formation.  The attack in fact goes well, until I miss an elementary pinning tactic due to "tunnel vision" (focusing on one of my opponent's possibilities without considering other ones).  A useful game nonetheless to look at, with some improvements found for both sides in the maneuvering phase.  I now much better understand the importance of piece placement and activity, for example, which was neglected for both sides in this game.

[Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Class B"] [Black "ChessAdmin"] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "D12"] [Annotator "ChessAdmin/Fritz"] [PlyCount "95"] [EventDate "1995.??.??"] {D12: Slav Defence: 3 Nf3 Nf6 4 e3 Bf5} 1. d4 d5 2. c4 c6 3. Nf3 Nf6 4. e3 { the so-called "Slow Slav" variation} Bf5 5. Bd3 Bxd3 6. Qxd3 e6 7. O-O Nbd7 8. Nc3 Be7 9. cxd5 {this is almost never played in the database; only a handful of games exist, with one win for Black and the rest draws. This kind of premature resolution of the central tension is a common feature of amateur games, however.} (9. e4 {is most commonly played, for example} dxe4 10. Nxe4 O-O 11. Bf4 c5 12. Rad1 Qb6 13. b3 Rfd8 14. Nc3 cxd4 15. Nxd4 Nc5 16. Qe2 Rd7 17. Ndb5 a6 18. Rxd7 Ncxd7 19. Na4 Qc6 20. Nd4 Qe4 21. Qxe4 Nxe4 22. Rd1 Ndc5 23. Nb6 Nc3 {Tal,M-Sveshnikov,E/Leningrad op 1991/TD 91\03/0-1 (74)}) 9... cxd5 {of the games in the database, the majority feature exd5, which leaves the c-pawn on c6, with perhaps a slightly more solid structure for Black.} 10. Bd2 O-O 11. Rfc1 Nb6 (11... Rc8 {activating the rook would be a better developing move. It's common however for amateurs (like me) to neglect rook development in the opening phase.}) 12. b3 {now the Nb6 has no scope. On d7, it would at least cover e5.} a6 {Secures b5} 13. a4 Bd6 14. Na2 (14. a5 Nbd7 $11) 14... Qe7 $11 {despite not having a real plan beyond stopping White's play on the queenside, Black is perfectly fine here. Note the continued underdevelopment of the Ra8, however.} 15. Ba5 Nbd7 16. Qd2 Ne4 17. Qe1 b6 18. Bb4 a5 19. Bxd6 Qxd6 {the pawn structure is now symmetrical and hampers White as much as Black, while Black's pieces (with the exception of the rooks) are a little more active. Black should clear the d6 square for a knight while moving Nd7-f6, thereby improving his minor piece placement.} 20. Nc3 Rac8 {ironically mistimed! Now White gets an advantage in pawn structure. Exchanging on c3 first would have led to further exchanged on the c-file and an even position. Now Black creates a major kingside imbalance in the hopes of an attack - not necessarily a bad thing, however.} 21. Nxe4 dxe4 22. Nd2 f5 23. Qe2 Nf6 24. h3 {Consolidates g4} Nd5 {Black plans f4, as Fritz figures out. Black would like to be able to play g5 in order to support the attack better, but the White queen could then penetrate on h5. The other standard attacking move, the rook lift Rf6, is also not available due to the Rc8 being left hanging.} 25. Nc4 Qe7 26. Qd2 (26. Ne5 {is better for White here, bringing his knight into the action.} Qb4 $11) 26... f4 27. exf4 {this gives Black the attack he wants down the f-file. A more calm defensive move is in order.} (27. Qc2 fxe3 28. fxe3 Qh4 $11 {and White can better use his heavy pieces in the defense.}) 27... Nxf4 $15 28. Ne3 {compare this with the much more active placement on e5.} ({Fritz prefers} 28. Kh2 Nd3 29. Rf1 Rcd8 $11) 28... Rxc1+ 29. Rxc1 Qg5 {the exchange of rooks on the c-file now allows the Rf8 to stay in place and the queen swings over to the attack.} 30. Kh1 Nxg2 $4 {an elementary tactical blunder. I was focusing on Ne3xg2 (impossible due to the Qd2 hanging) and missed the rook move.} (30... Nd3 {allows Black to have a dominant knight and the queen starts probing White's weaknesses.} 31. Rf1 Qd8 $17) 31. Rg1 $18 Rf3 {The mate threat is Rxh3} 32. Rxg2 Rxh3+ 33. Rh2 Qh6 (33... Rxh2+ {is suggested by Fritz, with the idea of creating some counterplay with the advancing h-pawn. However, White still has a strong plus.} 34. Kxh2 h5 $18) 34. Rxh3 Qxh3+ 35. Kg1 h5 36. Qe1 (36. d5 {and White can already relax, says Fritz.} exd5 37. Qxd5+ Kh7 38. Qxe4+ Kg8 $18) 36... g5 37. Qf1 Qf3 ({Fritz suggests trading off queens, but the knight ending is still lost.} 37... Qxf1+ 38. Kxf1 Kf7 39. Nc4 $18) 38. Qg2 Qf4 39. Qg3 Kf7 40. Qxf4+ gxf4 41. Ng2 e5 42. dxe5 Ke6 43. Nxf4+ Kxe5 44. Nxh5 Kd4 45. Ng3 Ke5 46. Kf1 Kd5 47. Ke2 Kd4 48. Kd2 (48. Kd2 e3+ 49. fxe3+ Kd5 50. Nf5 $18) 1-0

23 December 2011

Mindfulness and Effortful Study

In looking for further parallels to serious chess and martial arts training, I came across the below excerpt, taken from a Scientific American article and posted on a martial arts site.  The term "mindfulness" is often used for meditation and other mental exercises, which essentially means that your mind is present in the moment and concentrating on your task, as in Focusing on the Path.  The term used below is "effortful study" which is less aesthetic, but conveys more precisely the process involved, i.e. constantly thinking critically and taking on new challenges.  Note also the comparison with musical study, which shares similar characteristics regarding the attainment of mastery.

"...What matters is not experience per se but 'effortful study,' which entails continually tackling challenges that lie just beyond one's competence. That is why it is possible for enthusiasts to spend tens of thousands of hours playing chess or golf or a musical instrument without ever advancing beyond the amateur level and why a properly trained student can overtake them in a relatively short time. It is interesting to note that time spent playing chess, even in tournaments, appears to contribute less than such study to a player's progress; the main training value of such games is to point up weaknesses for future study
Even the novice engages in effortful study at first, which is why beginners so often improve rapidly in playing golf, say, or in driving a car. But having reached an acceptable performance--for instance, keeping up with one's golf buddies or passing a driver's exam--most people relax. Their performance then becomes automatic and therefore impervious to further improvement. In contrast, experts-in-training keep the lid of their mind's box open all the time, so that they can inspect, criticize and augment its contents and thereby approach the standard set by leaders in their fields."

20 December 2011

Annotated Game #23: English Four Knights (4. e3 Be7)

This next game followed Annotated Game #22 and was the last round of the tournament.  My opponent was rated at the upper end of Class D and played the opening well, coming out of it with a space advantage, well-placed pieces and control of the center with a hanging pawns structure on the c/d files.  However, he apparently did not understand the requirements for subsequent dynamic play that the structure required, allowing me (despite some weak moves on my part) to eventually successfully target the pawns and then achieve a dominating position with a material plus.  Incredibly, at this point I dithered and allowed a draw, at the time being too passive and afraid of nonexistent threats on the kingside.  It is exactly this type of play (and attitude) that should be avoided on the path to chess mastery.

[Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "ChessAdmin"] [Black "Class D"] [Result "1/2-1/2"] [ECO "A28"] [Annotator "ChessAdmin/Fritz"] [PlyCount "58"] [EventDate "1995.??.??"] {A28: English Opening: Four Knights Variation} 1. c4 e5 2. Nc3 Nc6 3. Nf3 { a major transpositional decision at this point. The alternative is to go for the closed systems with g3.} Nf6 {entering the Four Knights variation. Other major possibilities include f5 and d6.} 4. e3 Be7 {Karpov's quiet but effective line.} 5. d4 exd4 6. Nxd4 O-O 7. Be2 d5 8. Nxc6 (8. cxd5 Nb4 9. O-O Nbxd5 10. Nxd5 Qxd5 11. b3 {is the other principal line.}) 8... bxc6 9. O-O Be6 (9... Bd6 {is the overwhelming favorite here.}) 10. cxd5 $146 {this liquidates the central tension to Black's favor and strengthens the Be6.} (10. Qa4 { mobilizing the queen was played in 3 of 4 games in the database. Bf3 has also been played in this position.}) 10... cxd5 11. b3 c5 {Black now has a strong hanging pawns structure and dominates the center.} 12. Qc2 Qd7 13. Bb2 Rad8 14. Rfd1 Bg4 {this reduces the support available for the hanging pawns.} (14... Bf5 15. Bd3 Bxd3 16. Qxd3 $11) 15. Bxg4 $14 Qxg4 {the other drawback to the Bg4 exchange, drawing the queen away from the action on the c/d files. However} ( 15... Nxg4 {doesn't work} 16. Nxd5 Qe6 17. Nxe7+ Qxe7 18. h3 $18) 16. Qe2 ({ White should have taken advantage of the opportunity to hit the hanging pawns with} 16. Na4 {with a possible continuation being} d4 17. f3 Qh4 18. exd4 cxd4 $14) 16... Qg5 17. Rac1 $14 {now White's rooks are well-placed for counterplay on the c/d files.} Bd6 (17... Rfe8 18. Na4 d4 19. exd4 $11 {as Black has tactical threats involving a discovered attack along the e-file.}) 18. g3 { simply a waste of time, missing the chance to be active.} (18. Nb5 d4 $16) 18... Rfe8 $14 19. Qf3 {the right general idea (play against the hanging pawns) but slow, Nb5 again was a possibility.} (19. Nb5 Ne4 $14) 19... Bb8 {this immediately allows White to open up against the hanging pawns.} (19... Be5 $5 $11 {and Black holds.}) 20. Na4 $16 d4 21. Rxc5 $18 (21. Nxc5 $6 dxe3 22. Bxf6 Rxd1+ 23. Rxd1 Qxc5 $11) 21... Qg6 22. Bxd4 Ne4 23. Rcc1 h5 {White is now up two pawns and Black has no real compensation.} (23... Ng5 24. Qb7 $18) 24. Nc5 Ng5 25. Qg2 Qf5 26. f4 {a loosening move which really doesn't seem necessary and which leads to White allowing a draw. Why not h4 instead, if White wants to kick the Ng5 away?} Nh3+ 27. Kf1 Ng5 28. Kg1 $4 ({Something simple would have sufficed to consolidate White's advantage, for example} 28. a3 Bd6 $18 29. b4) 28... Nh3+ 29. Kf1 $4 {White loses the upper hand} (29. Kh1 $142 $18 { would have made live much easier for White, says Fritz.}) 29... Ng5 $11 { and the draw was agreed. Not the way for me to win won games, that's for sure.} 1/2-1/2

10 December 2011

How Kramnik makes us feel better about chess

The ongoing London Chess Classic 2011 is, as its predecessors were, an outstanding tournament filled with interesting personalities.  However one chooses to follow it, it's what used to be called a "chessic feast".

One of the excellent features this year is the post-game internet video commentary by the participants, which usually lasts from 15-20 minutes.  Kramnik's thorough description of his win over Adams in round 5 I think is particularly valuable for us non-GMs.  His commentary is very frank and includes a great deal of talk about uncertainty regarding his evaluation of positions and plans.  I found it very accessible and instructive on a practical level, which is not always the case with GM explanations.

The takeaway from this is that if super-GMs regularly are unsure which plan is best to follow or which side stands better in a position, the rest of us should not be striving for perfection either.  All too often annotated games at high levels don't include the thought process of the players and are presented in a mechanistic way which doesn't reflect how games are really won and lost.  Kramnik's candid lessons should make us all feel better about what playing chess is really like.

Annotated Game #22: English-KID (plus quickest win)

This post resumes the annotations of my past tournament games following Annotated Game #18: Comeback (Round 3).  This game actually was the second one played in the next tournament, as the first round game was the shortest win of my chess career (10 moves) and did not warrant annotation.  It is included afterwards, however, mostly as a warning to those players who don't find it necessary to think in the opening.

Returning to the second round game, an English opening versus a King's Indian Defense setup, it features an all-too-typical pattern of an opening advantage in space and time squandered by too-slow play, then the selection of an incorrect plan based on a lack of appreciation for my opponent's possible threats.  This points to the need for deeper study of the middlegame transition point, in this case moves 10-13, where improvements were found for White.

[Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "ChessAdmin"] [Black "Class A"] [Result "0-1"] [ECO "A16"] [Annotator "ChessAdmin/Fritz/Houdini"] [PlyCount "50"] [EventDate "1995.??.??"] {A16: English Opening: 1...Nf6 with ...d5} 1. c4 Nf6 2. Nc3 g6 3. g3 Bg7 4. Bg2 d6 5. Nf3 Na6 {exactly one game in my database (out of 2500+ with this position) has this move. Castling is the overwhelming favorite at this point.} 6. O-O Rb8 {now out of the database. Black intends to apply ideas similar to the Panno variation with the early Rb8.} 7. d3 {the standard English setup against the KID. The e4 square is covered and the c1 bishop released. Also, Black does not have a target with ...e5.} c5 8. Rb1 {initiating the standard plan of queenside expansion by pushing b4.} Nd7 9. Bd2 {protects the Nc3 and allows the idea of Qc1 and Bh6 to exchange off the Bg7.} Nc7 10. a3 {this is too slow to take advantage of Black's relatively passive play and uncastled king.} (10. b4 cxb4 11. Rxb4 O-O 12. Qc1 {would keep the initiative and a space advantage.}) 10... b5 11. cxb5 Nxb5 12. Nxb5 Rxb5 {now the point of Black's early Rb8 is seen, as this series of exchanges would not have been possible otherwise. Black as a result has more space and play on the queenside. } 13. Bc3 {again a slow approach.} (13. b4 O-O 14. Qc2) 13... O-O 14. Bxg7 Kxg7 {White's earlier advantages in space and development are now gone.} 15. Qc2 Qb6 16. Rfc1 Nf6 17. Qc3 ({Both Fritz and Houdini show} 17. Nd2 Be6 18. Nc4 Qa6 $11 ) 17... a5 ({This suffices to give Black an advantage. Houdini points out the immediate bishop development} 17... Be6 {would threaten Ba2 and Rxb2.}) 18. d4 {this was the idea behind White's erroneous Qc3 plan, which however did not take into account all of Black's threats.} (18. b3 $5 {instead is necessary in order to avoid losing material.}) 18... Bf5 {Black gets deadly initiative, as Fritz puts it.} 19. Ra1 Rc8 {now White cannot stop Black from crashing through on the queenside.} ({Worse for Black is the immediate capture} 19... Rxb2 20. dxc5 dxc5 21. Qxc5) 20. Nd2 $2 (20. d5 {is the best chance} Rb3 21. Qe1 Rxb2 22. Nd2) 20... cxd4 $19 (20... Rxb2 $2 {doesn't work due to the knight fork} 21. Nc4 cxd4 22. Qxb2 Qxb2 23. Nxb2 $18) 21. Qf3 Rbc5 (21... Rxc1+ $5 {and Black can already relax} 22. Rxc1 Rxb2 $19) 22. Rxc5 Rxc5 23. e4 $2 {a last attempt by White at a counterattack.} (23. Qb3 $5 {was objectively best for defense}) 23... dxe3 24. Qxe3 Qxb2 25. Re1 Re5 {and White has nothing left.} ( 25... Re5 26. Be4 d5 27. f3 Re6 28. g4 Bxe4 29. fxe4 Nxg4) 0-1

Below is the first round game, for amusement purposes.

[Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "ChessAdmin"] [Black "Class C"] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "A17"] [Annotator "Fritz 6 (20s)"] [PlyCount "19"] [EventDate "1995.??.??"] {A17: English Opening: 1...Nf6 with ...Bb4} 1. c4 Nf6 2. Nc3 e6 3. Nf3 b6 4. g3 Bb7 5. Bg2 d5 6. cxd5 Nxd5 7. O-O $146 Be7 8. d3 O-O 9. Nxd5 Qxd5 $4 10. Ne1 ( 10. Ne1 Qd6 11. Bxb7 $18) 1-0

07 December 2011

December 2011 Chess Carnival

The Carnival lineup is now out on Blue Devil Knight's Confessions of a chess novice blog.

Normally I comment on an early favorite among the Carnival offerings.  This time, however, I'll instead mention BDK's blog itself, which with this entry may be making its last update.  It's a highly entertaining, often instructive and very human look at an amateur chess career and its theory and practice.  The journey through it is therefore well worth taking, in addition because of the major impact it had on the chess blogging scene for several years.

01 December 2011

Annotated Game #21: Modern Stonewall Hero

As part of learning the Dutch Defense, I'm currently working my way through Win with the Stonewall Dutch (Sverre Johnsen/Ivar Bern/Simen Agdestein, Gambit, 2009).  I'll post my thoughts on the book when it's complete, but one of the more innovative things included is an exercise in each chapter.  In Chapter 5, the reader is directed to research and choose a "Stonewall Hero" from internationally recognized players, while in Chapter 6 the exercise is to analyze and annotate at least one of their games, only using an engine after you have looked at the complete game yourself.

Although for practical reasons I generally prefer using computer-assisted analysis for my own games (i.e. looking at them with the aid of an engine, but not just feeding a game to one), I stuck to the authors' guidance in order to maximize the learning experience.  It turned out to not be as much of a chore as I thought it might be.  The "bare-brained" analysis process did especially help to identify and figure out some of the "roads not traveled" (variations not played) due to tactical or strategic considerations; when looking at positions with an engine, the computer won't offer up moves it considers inferior, although their drawbacks may not be initially obvious.  I also found that I could get something out of the analysis process while looking at an unannotated GM-level game, which had also been a point of doubt for me.  After all, what could I bring to the analysis of such a high level game?  Enough to make it worthwhile, it seems.

I selected Artur Yusupov (alternate spelling Jussupow, which is how he appears in the database I have) as my "Stonewall Hero" because of his breadth and depth of experience playing the Dutch over a number of years. He of course has also been a close collaborator with Mark Dvoretsky on a number of chess instruction books, including Opening Preparation, which I own.  As luck would have it, I opened the first game of his in the Dutch and it was a win in the Stonewall.  I found the game itself to be quite interesting, following a major sideline of the Modern Stonewall and featuring a number of thematic ideas in the opening, which are commented on below.

[Event "WchT U26"] [Site "Mendoza"] [Date "1985.??.??"] [Round "11"] [White "Yrjola, Jouni"] [Black "Jussupow, Artur"] [Result "0-1"] [ECO "A90"] [WhiteElo "2500"] [BlackElo "2590"] [Annotator "ChessAdmin/Houdini"] [PlyCount "74"] [EventDate "1985.08.??"] [EventRounds "12"] [EventCountry "ARG"] [Source "ChessBase"] [SourceDate "1999.07.01"] 1. d4 e6 2. c4 f5 3. g3 Nf6 4. Bg2 d5 5. Nf3 c6 6. O-O Bd6 {the main line Modern Stonewall position} 7. b3 {a standard and flexible move. White can use this as a prelude to exchanging dark-square bishops on a3 (with a little more preparation).} Qe7 {the standard reply, stopping Ba3 for the moment} 8. Bf4 { this appears at first glance to be a dubious idea, but in fact is a major branch of the Stonewall. White exchanges off the Bd6 this way, enhancing his control over the dark squares.} Bxf4 9. gxf4 {The half-open g-file can be both a vulnerability and a path of attack for White, depending on how things develop.} O-O 10. Ne5 Nbd7 {also a standard reaction by Black to the presence of a Ne5, which should not be left in place too long.} 11. e3 {normal development, supporting the f4/d4 pawns and opening the d1-h5 diagonal for White.} Kh8 {preparing for later play down the g-file} 12. Nd2 {the development of Nc3 is rarely seen in the Stonewall, as the reachable light squares on the queenside are dominated by Black pawns.} Nxe5 {no reason to put off the exchange} 13. fxe5 Ne4 {A standard Black theme, which usually has the same result (a knight exchange).} 14. f4 Bd7 {in the Modern Stonewall variations with a bishop exchange on f4, the light-square bishop normally follows the classical Stonewall development pattern of Bd7-e8-h5, to assist in a kingside attack.} 15. Nxe4 dxe4 (15... fxe4 {it's sometimes difficult to understand which pawn to take with in the central formation in the Stonewall. Here it seems the d-pawn is better (as played in the game) due to the mobility of White's f-pawn and the additional space ceded to White (the g4 square), which would allow White attacking chances on the kingside.} 16. Qg4 {with possibilities for increasing kingside pressure with Bh3, Kh1 and Rg1 as well as play on the queenside.}) 16. Qd2 (16. d5 {doesn't seem to lead to anything for White.} exd5 17. cxd5 cxd5 18. Qxd5 Be6) 16... Be8 17. b4 {White needs to activate his play on the queenside, otherwise Black has an easier time of it on the kingside.} Rd8 {restraining the d5 push by anticipating the exchange of pawns on b5.} 18. Rab1 {as it develops, this plan is too slow and does not gain White enough on the queenside. He needed to start preparing defensively on the kingside; Houdini suggests h3.} g5 {now that Black's prophlyaxis is in place on the queenside, operations begin on the kingside with this thematic pawn break.} 19. b5 gxf4 20. Rxf4 (20. exf4 {would leave Black with a monster passed e4-pawn.}) 20... cxb5 {this exchange leaves the b-file closed and White with fewer immediate prospects, although opening- the c-file.} 21. cxb5 Rg8 { activating the rook to great effect} 22. b6 Bh5 {a multipurpose move - activates the bishop and connects the rooks, creating a tactical threat to exchange on g2. Notice the difference in Black's position after just two moves, now that his rook and bishop have sprung to life.} 23. Rf2 (23. bxa7 Bf3 24. Kf1 Rxg2 25. Qxg2 Bxg2+ 26. Kxg2 Qg5+) 23... axb6 24. Rxb6 Bf3 {right now one can't help but think that White should have played Kh1 at some point before this.} 25. Kf1 Qc7 {one of the Dutch Defense's strengths is its flexible play. Here Black is able to extend his initiative to the queenside.} 26. Rb4 Qc6 { very instructive how the Qc6 influences the kingside attack by protecting f3 again.} 27. Rb2 f4 {one must be prepared to play f4 boldly in the Dutch. When done at the right time, it is often the signal that White's position is about to crumble.} 28. Kg1 (28. exf4 Qc4+ 29. Ke1 Rxd4) 28... Bxg2 29. Rxg2 f3 { the nail in White's coffin, taking away valuable squares from White's king.} ({ Houdini finds} 29... Rxg2+ 30. Kxg2 f3+ 31. Kh1 Rxd4 {and the rook is safe due to the back-rank mate.}) 30. Rg3 Rxg3+ 31. hxg3 Rg8 32. Rc2 Qb5 {threatens to penetrate at b1 with check} 33. Kf2 Qd7 {time to swing back over to the kingside} (33... Qe8 {seemed a more obvious method; Houdini agrees.} 34. Qe1 Qh5 35. Qg1 Qh3 {and the pinned g-pawn will inevitably fall as Black can advance his h-pawn to attack it.}) 34. Qc1 Qg7 35. Qg1 Qh6 {forces White to guard h2, otherwise the queen penetrates.} 36. Rc7 Ra8 37. Rc2 (37. Rxb7 Rxa2+ 38. Ke1 Ra1+) 37... Ra3 {and White cannot save the e-pawn.} 0-1