Training quote of the day #68: Viswanathan Anand

     

From Mind Master: Winning Lessons From A Champion's Life by GM Viswanathan Anand:

Unquestionably, talent exists. It’s no myth or hokum. Your talent tells you that you’re cut out for something. It points you towards what you can do effortlessly and what your potential career could be. However, talent isn’t everything. Knowledge and growth don’t come easily. You have to be willing to put in the hours and the effort, sometimes even without visible progress, because one day, unexpectedly, the results will flower. But without that work, it’s unlikely to happen. Eventually, hard work is not just about plugging away at something. It’s thinking intelligently about what you want to achieve, the goals you’re setting yourself, how you’re improving and how you can incorporate all of this into the list of things that will help you scale that peak.

Pop culture chess imagery: Daggers Inn

 

The recently-released indie UK film 'Daggers Inn' - watched on Amazon Prime - has some well-placed chess imagery. In the main title sequence - above is a screen capture from that - a crystal chess set is depicted, along with a knife that is symbolic of later action in the film. The chess set itself repeatedly shows up as a centerpiece on the conference room table of the (evil) law firm at the hub of events in the English village.

Unlike in some other film examples, the chess set is set up correctly and the king is toppled in a later scene by one character in a parallel to the title sequence. The use of the chess board appears to reference the strategic play of the main character, who early on is alluded to be a witch, on a mission of revenge in the village. I gave the film a 4/5 and can recommend it for the proper use of chess imagery throughout.

Training quote of the day #67: Norbert Wiener

Below is excerpted from the Medium.com article by Alvaro Garcia "How to achieve in weeks what others don't achieve in years"

Norbert Wiener, the father of cybernetics, put forward this law in 1943:

“Every self-regulating system needs a feedback loop that translates the result of an action into a signal readable for the next decision cycle.” (Norbert Wiener, 1943)

What does this mean?

He explained it with a rocket. A rocket that does not receive continuous information about its deviation from its trajectory never reaches its destination, no matter how much fuel it carries. The same happens to you with your goals. It doesn’t matter the effort, the hours, the money, the willpower. It will all be wasted if you don’t have a signal that tells you, in time, how much you’ve deviated.

You need to study your own performance every day.

Annotated Game #357: The Leningrad Dutch is different

In this last-round tournament game, it is evident that I have little experience as Black in the Leningrad variation of the Dutch Defense. Analysis shows a series of mis-placed pieces and long-missed ideas (...Nh5) that would have given me a better game. This was based on lack of familiarity with positional characteristics and common ideas specific to the Leningrad (including not blocking the bishop on g7). My opponent shows a similar lack of familiarity with the opening, but manages to create a weakness to target, establishing a strong passed d-pawn and a strategically winning position. While my calculation was not very accurate in picking up my opponent's threats, I did at least show good judgment in some cases by deliberately complicating the situation, which (luckily) led to my opponent missing some winning opportunities. I was pleased enough to be able to legitimately clinch a draw at the end, after fighting to come back.

[Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Class C"] [Black "ChessAdmin"] [Result "1/2-1/2"] [Annotator "ChessAdmin/Dragon 3.2"] [ECO "A85"] [WhiteFideId "-1"] [BlackFideId "-1"] [PlyCount "55"] [GameId "2323483478960776"] 1. d4 f5 2. Nf3 Nf6 3. c4 g6 4. Nc3 Bg7 5. Bf4 d6 6. e3 O-O 7. Bd3 Nbd7 $6 {in other Dutch variations this is more normal, but here the knight belongs on c6, not blocking the Bc8.} (7... Nh5 $5 {is also an interesting idea, taking advantage of the Bf4's lack of squares.}) 8. O-O Qe8 {again, not a great idea in this particular position. The intent is to prepare an e-pawn push. However, the queen's absence now leaves c7 vulnerable to the idea of Nb5.} (8... Nh5) (8... e5 $5 {is actually playable here without preparation.} 9. dxe5 dxe5 10. Nxe5 Nh5 {is a pawn sac in exchange for piece activity, notably the Bg7.}) 9. d5 $6 {luckily my opponent also plays a standard idea that is not appropriate here, allowing me to immediately equalize.} (9. c5 $16) 9... Nc5 $11 10. Bc2 e5 11. dxe6 Bxe6 {Black has a comfortable game here, although I am not really familiar with the position.} 12. Qe2 h6 {this is too slow, and/or premature.} (12... Nh5 $1 $17 {pressures the Bf4 and unleashes the Bg7.}) 13. Nd4 Nfe4 {I thought for a while here. This move is unnecessarily fancy.} (13... Bf7 $11 {preserving the bishop. White has no particular follow-up.}) 14. Nxe4 {obvious and best} Nxe4 15. f3 Nf6 {it's probably better to simply return the knight to its previous square, rather than obstruct the Bg7.} (15... Nc5 $11) 16. Nxe6 Qxe6 17. Bb3 {with the obvious threat of c4-c5, pinning my queen and king.} Kh7 (17... Qe7 $5 {removing the queen first from the diagonal and placing it on a better one. This also prevents White from targeting d6.} 18. c5+ d5 $11) 18. c5 Qd7 {long think, correct think (for once!) - however, I spoil it with my next move.} 19. cxd6 c6 $2 {it is correct to do an intermediate move rather than immediately recapture, but unfortunately this is the wrong one.} (19... Nh5 $1 $11 20. dxc7 Nxf4 21. exf4 Qxc7 $11 {even if Black stays a pawn down - both f4 and b2 are threatened - the structure and piece activity are such that there is still equality.}) (19... cxd6 $2 $16 {I correctly evaluated as good for White, who can pile up on the d-pawn.}) 20. Rad1 $16 {unfortunately White can easily reinforce his advanced d-pawn.} Rae8 (20... Nh5 $16) 21. Bg3 $1 $18 {the bishop decides to retreat and preserve itself, which is best, although during the game I resolutely ignored the idea of trading it off. White will have two very good bishops and an advanced passed pawn, which is enough to be strategically winning.} Nh5 {this comes far too late in the game.} 22. Bf2 Be5 {played after a long think. I thought best for inducing complications in which my opponent might go wrong.} 23. e4 $6 {this both gives up the f4 square and allows me to exchange the f-pawn and open up the file. However, I do neither of these beneficial things.} Bxd6 $2 {and we're back to a strategic win for White with this desperate grab back at the d-pawn, which lands my pieces in trouble.} (23... fxe4 24. Bxa7 Bxd6 25. Qd2 b5 $1 $14 {taking advantage of the hanging Ba7.}) (23... Nf4 $5) 24. Qd3 Rf6 {after another long think, I decide this is my best chance.} 25. Bxa7 $6 (25. e5 {is what I was expecting and would have shortly lead to resignation.} Rxe5 26. Bd4 $18) 25... Qc7 $2 {a reasonable move, but Black would do better by counterattacking.} (25... Nf4) (25... b5) 26. Bf2 $6 {concerned about evacuating his bishop, again my opponent misses} (26. e5 $1 Rxe5 27. Bd4 $18) 26... Bxh2+ $11 27. Kh1 Rd6 28. Qc4 {we are now back to complete equality and with not a lot of time on my clock, I accept my opponent's draw offer.} 1/2-1/2

Welcome to Carlo Fortunati!

As I move into what I intend to be a more sustained and focused phase of chess improvement than has been possible in recent years, I've decided to update my chess-world alias to "Carlo Fortunati" - in truth, I do feel fortunate to be an amateur with more time and (hopefully) energy to devote to the cause in coming years. The original "ChessAdmin" alias was rather generic (boring?) but was created at a time (2011) that was in the last part of the golden years of independent chess blogging, when being your own "admin" meant something. It worked well enough as an internet identity, although once I did get yelled at by one site for registering there under that alias, since apparently some users confused me for an actual admin. I plan to continue to use it in the annotated games, for continuity as well as to avoid confusion with anyone actually named "Carlo Fortunati".

Currently there is an active and diverse chess blogging community, largely based on major global sites (Chess.com, lichess.org, Substack), which is a pleasure to see after some relatively lean years. Part of this content is of course related to marketing efforts by chess professionals, which is fine if not overdone, and there are a good number of sites/blogs with genuine substantive content that are enriching for the whole community. I will continue to link to selected chess improvement blogs in the sidebar and post snippets/comments on particular posts of interests as I run across them.

In the near term another change I may consider is opening up (moderated) comments to anonymous posters, at least as an experiment. When the blog was originally created, most people actually had Google accounts (for Gmail use if nothing else) and filtering permission by that status - the current setting - was not significantly exclusionary. This is no longer the case and the intermediate filter option of allowing OpenID verification for commenting is long gone as well. (I am limited to the options for the Blogger platform being used.) Past anonymous random comments largely consisted of advertising spam and were occasionally creepy (spam or not), so I did not enjoy the task of having to read and delete them all for content moderation purposes. I'm therefore not in a rush to open the gates again to anonymous posters, although I would welcome more engagement on ideas and topics that are posted. We will see how it goes. Naturally anyone with a Google account will still be able to comment, in any case.

Annotated Game #356: Cramped to death in the endgame

This next tournament game features what should have been a comfortable draw as White in a King's Indian Defense (KID) by transposition - with some opportunities for advantage passed up along the way - but which devolved into a highly cramped loss. The key error, if not the final losing one, was exchanging queens on the c-file to reach a cramped minor piece ending. This was simply unnecessary and reflects a repeated tendency I have to worry excessively about an open file with an opponent's major piece (queen/rook) on it, even if I have all the penetration squares effectively under control. My opponent does an excellent job of demonstrating how squeezes can happen in endgames, although I had opportunities to relieve the pressure with an f-pawn break. Very instructive.

[Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "ChessAdmin"] [Black "Class A"] [Result "0-1"] [Annotator "ChessAdmin/Dragon 3.2"] [ECO "E61"] [WhiteFideId "-1"] [BlackFideId "-1"] [PlyCount "78"] [GameId "2323483478960775"] 1. d4 Nf6 2. Nf3 g6 3. e3 Bg7 4. Be2 O-O 5. O-O d6 6. c4 Nbd7 7. Nc3 e5 8. Qc2 c6 9. b3 Re8 10. Re1 $6 $11 {this is simply an unnecessary precaution. White can do several other useful and more urgent things here.} (10. Ba3) (10. dxe5) (10. h3) 10... h6 11. Ba3 {now this is less effective.} (11. Bb2) (11. a4 $5) 11... Qc7 $6 {it looks perfectly reasonable to defend d6 in this way, but it gives White a freer hand in the center.} (11... e4 12. Nd2 Qe7 $11) 12. Rac1 (12. Rad1 {I also considered and the engine prefers. Instead of opposing the queen on the c-file, the rook's influence down the d-file can be felt more quickly.}) (12. h3 $5 {it's not a bad idea to get some luft for the king and take away the g4 square from Black.}) 12... a6 {now White has multiple strategic options available.} 13. d5 (13. dxe5 {there is often a tension between playing this and the text move in the KID setup. Here the engine prefers to exchange.} dxe5 (13... Nxe5 $6 14. Red1 $16) 14. c5 $14 {this is one pleasant possibility for White, constraining Black and controlling d6 and b6.}) 13... c5 $6 {this essentially justifies White's choice to advance, as now the d5 pawn is much stronger.} 14. Nd2 $14 {not a bad move, but} (14. e4 {is stronger. I've noticed a pattern in which I am reluctant to play e3-e4 when it is favorable.}) 14... Nh7 $6 {this is too passive.} 15. b4 {no pawn break, no plan. Although my edge is still small, I have the initiative on the queenside.} f5 $6 {consistent with how KID players normally want to advance on the kingside, but the action is currently on the queenside.} 16. bxc5 $16 Nxc5 17. Nb3 $6 {at the time, it seemed reasonable to bring the knight over to increase the pressure, but it is easily negated by Black's next move. I needed to strike immediately with} (17. Bxc5 Qxc5 (17... dxc5 18. e4 $16) 18. Na4 $1 $18 {with follow-up ideas like Qb3, Rb1 and c4-c5 to keep things rolling and dominate Black's backward queenside.}) 17... b6 $1 $11 18. Nxc5 {the point of bringing the knight over, but after} bxc5 {White's initiative on the queenside is gone and we are back to equality.} 19. Rb1 (19. e4 $5) 19... Bd7 20. Rb3 Rab8 21. Reb1 e4 22. Rxb8 {White has no prospect for obtaining an advantage, so I decided to head for a drawn endgame.} Rxb8 23. Rxb8+ Qxb8 24. Qb1 $6 {while not disastrous, this still gives Black more play than I should allow. I have made similar types of mistakes with heavy pieces on open files before, when my opponent stands better after the (unnecessary) exchange.} (24. Bc1 $11) 24... Qxb1+ 25. Nxb1 Ba4 {objectively Black is not really better, but certainly has the easier game, while I am cramped.} 26. Bc1 Ng5 27. Bd2 (27. f4 $5 $11 {this was probably a good time to make my position a little more flexible.} exf3 28. gxf3 $11) 27... Nf7 28. Ba5 (28. f4) 28... Kf8 29. Kf1 Ne5 30. Ke1 $6 {now my refusal to use the f-pawn lever is starting to make things worse.} (30. f3) 30... Bc2 $15 31. Nd2 $2 {unfortunately I am too cramped after Black's next, and he gains a winning advantage.} (31. Na3 $1 {this "only move" would leave the d2 square open for the king, after ...Nd3+}) 31... Nd3+ $1 $19 32. Bxd3 Bxd3 {the correct choice. Now I cannot do anything about the bishop on the d3 outpost and Black has a strategically won game.} 33. f3 Ke7 {good enough to maintain the advantage.} (33... exf3 $1 {my opponent probably thought that} 34. gxf3 Ke7 35. e4 {looked good for White, but now Black's kingside pawn majority will eventually win.}) 34. f4 g5 35. g3 gxf4 36. gxf4 Bf6 {unfortuantely, I have nothing left to do that can improve my position, while Black can further infiiltrate with his dark-square bishop. Eventually the c- or e-pawns will fall.} 37. Kd1 {this speeds up the loss a bit.} (37. Kf2 Bb2 $19 {and Black threatens to either exchange off the Ba4 and gain a 2v1 queenside majority, or exchange the Nd2 and then capture on c4.}) 37... Bh4 38. Bc3 Bf2 39. Nxe4 {pure desperation.} fxe4 0-1

Annotated Game #355: The Stonewall does its job

After an unfortunate loss in the first round of the tournament and barely escaping with a draw in the second, in this next game I was satisfied enough with a relatively easy and clean draw against a higher-rated player. I transposed into a Modern Stonewall as Black and achieved equality early on, which was the job of the opening to accomplish, but I missed a couple of chances to press for a clear strategic advantage. My opponent did well to disrupt my plans with 12. Qb3! and this lesson should help me keep a better eye on tactics along the g8-h2 diagonal in the future.

[Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Class A"] [Black "ChessAdmin"] [Result "1/2-1/2"] [Annotator "ChessAdmin/Dragon 3.2"] [ECO "A90"] [WhiteFideId "-1"] [BlackFideId "-1"] [PlyCount "43"] [GameId "2323483478960774"] 1. Nf3 d5 2. d4 c6 3. c4 e6 {while the Triangle/Wedge pawn formation can be played as an independent line, I normally use it to head for a Slav Stonewall. Another option of course is to enter a Slav Defense with ...Nf6.} 4. Nc3 f5 5. g3 Nf6 6. Bg2 Bd6 {now Black has a full Modern Stonewall formation.} 7. O-O O-O 8. cxd5 exd5 {the rule with this pawn exchange is normally for Black to retake on d5 with the e-pawn, since it opens up the diagonal for the Bc8.} 9. Qc2 Ne4 {the most played move in the position, according to the database, but not the only option.} (9... Kh8 {is a common prophylactic move, preventing future tactical threats by White on the g8-a2 diagonal. This would avoid a problem that we will see shortly in the game.}) 10. Nxe4 fxe4 11. Ng5 $6 {White I expect intended this with the Qb3 follow-up, which unfortunately I did not consider.} Bf5 $6 {of course I thought about ...h6, but played this on the general principle that developing a piece would be more valuable than immediately kicking the knight. The bishop lines up on the Qc2 and threatens ...e3, with a discovered attack. However, White can immediately dodge this.} (11... h6 $1 {simplest and best.} 12. Nh3 {the knight only has one square, and now after} Bf5 $1 $17 {the e4 pawn is no longer tactically under threat, while Black has superior pieces and the initiative on the kingside.}) 12. Qb3 $1 {I only saw this after I moved. The queen is out of danger and attacking b7, while the d5 pawn is now pinned, meaning the e4 pawn is effectively hanging. An effective double attack.} Qb6 {the best response - immediately challenging the pinning Qb3, screening b7 and attacking d4.} 13. Qxb6 axb6 {the doubled pawns here are not a problem, plus the a-file is now opened for the Ra8.} 14. Rd1 $2 {this doesn't really do anything for White, as the d4 pawn is not threatened yet.} (14. f3 {would attack the spearhead of Black's pawn formation.}) 14... Nd7 $17 {again played on general developing principles. Good but not best.} (14... h6 $1 15. Nh3 $19 {and Black has no immediate breakthrough, but possesses a major strategic/positional advantage, with superior pieces and open lines for pressure.}) 15. Bh3 {a goodl decision to trade by my opponent, since the Bg2 was mostly buried. However, my light-square bishop was not so great either, so I was fine with the exchange.} Bxh3 16. Nxh3 Nf6 (16... b5 $5 {would restrict ideas of counterplay based on a2-a4.}) 17. Bf4 {evidently my opponent had a similar idea with this exchange.} Bxf4 (17... Ne8 {this move is preferred by the engine and occurred to me at the time, but I thought it looked a bit silly putting the knight back on the 8th rank. The point however is to reposition the knight on d6 after a bishop trade, either on d6 or f4.}) 18. Nxf4 Rae8 $6 $11 {not a bad move, but it essentially settles for equality. At this point, with reduced material and no obvious ways to break through, we are heading for a draw. Previous ideas might be used to fight a bit harder for a (small) advantage.} (18... Ne8) (18... b5) 19. e3 Rf7 (19... g5 {should be played first to rule out h2-h4.}) 20. Rd2 g5 21. Nh3 h6 22. Rc1 {here my opponent offered a draw and I accepted. I did not feel up to trying to grind a way to victory in a balanced double-rook endgame. One way to try for something more would be to move the rook back to a8, play ...b5 and reposition the knight to d6 for a small positional plus.} 1/2-1/2

Annotated Game #354: Learning the Staunton Gambit the hard way

In this second-round tournament game, as a relatively new player of the Dutch Defense, I faced my first Staunton Gambit. Although it is now considered somewhat theoretically deficient for White, it is still dangerous if Black is not fully prepared. This fact is well-illustrated below, as I confuse the necessary move 4 response with that for other lines in the gambit. White as a result gets exactly what he wanted out of the opening, including a clear pawn-up advantage. In the early middlegame at first I am barely hanging on, but after sorting out my pieces I am able to target my opponent's vulnerabilities and gain equality, after some interesting tactics (including a big missed one for White). I was happy to reach a fully drawn position and will certainly remember more of my prep for the next time I see the Staunton Gambit.

[Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Class D"] [Black "ChessAdmin"] [Result "1/2-1/2"] [Annotator "ChessAdmin/Dragon 3.2"] [ECO "A83"] [WhiteFideId "-1"] [BlackFideId "-1"] [PlyCount "45"] [GameId "2320325602521239"] 1. d4 f5 2. e4 {my opponent thought for several minutes before playing the Staunton Gambit. At first I thought it was because he was unfamiliar with the Dutch, but he must have been weighing the risk of it, because he rattled off the next few moves immediately.} fxe4 {there is no good way to decline the gambit.} 3. Nc3 Nf6 {always the first step, to protect e4 while developing the knight and covering h5.} 4. Bg5 {this is the modern way to play the gambit and is now far more popular than 4. f3. The text move threatens to exchange off the defending knight, which is relatively more valuable than the bishop, and also lays a trap in case Black responds reflexively with} d5 $2 {this is the correct follow-up to the old 4. f3, but not here, because the White queen's diagonal to h5 is not blocked. Black has two alternative major ways to equalize:} (4... g6) (4... Nc6) 5. Bxf6 {now I saw the problem with my previous move and thought for a while. There is no way to avoid damage, but it can be contained.} exf6 {the only move that keeps Black in the game, with the forcing sequence} 6. Qh5+ $1 $16 g6 7. Qxd5 {now White will be a clear pawn up, no matter what Black does, but I thought for a while about what was best, and decided to play} Qe7 {with the idea of White's knight ending up on e4 instead of d5 after exchanging queens.} 8. Qxe4 Qxe4+ {this is actually a bit rushed, Black in fact can play a useful developing move rather than immediately exchanging on e4.} (8... Nc6) (8... Bh6 $5 {is an engine suggestion, with no database examples yet.}) 9. Nxe4 f5 10. Nf6+ Kf7 $6 (10... Kd8 {this is better defensively, as Black's king will be needed to help contain White's pawn majority in the long run. At the time, I felt it over-exposed Black's king, but White does not have a way to get at it.}) 11. Nd5 Bd6 {necessary to defend c7 from the knight, which reaches d5 after all, but only has one target now.} 12. Bc4 Be6 $2 {this seemed like it was obviously good, blocking the diagonal, but White has a simple and effective rejoinder.} (12... Re8+ {would be good to play immediately.}) 13. Nf3 $1 $16 {I had not realized before this the strength of his Ng5+ ideas, which of course now fork the king and bishop.} Re8 14. O-O Kg7 {althought still under considerable pressure in the center, I felt good about getting the king out of immediate danger.} 15. Ng5 $6 {with no fork, this is no longer an effective forcing move, and my response surprised my opponent.} (15. Ne3 $5 {would be a simple and good way to continue, since simplifying exchanges will favor White.}) 15... Bg8 $1 $14 {this significantly improves my pieces' stability and coordination.} 16. Rfe1 $6 Nc6 $1 $15 {now my pieces are fully active and I can think about making some threats of my own, as the Nd5/Bc4 pair are somewhat vulnerable. The engine evaluation gives me more than full compensation for the pawn now.} 17. c3 Na5 18. b3 $1 {well done by my opponent in finding this defensive move; I did not see it, although it seems obvious.} Nxc4 {going for simplification and guaranteeing that I can hold the position.} (18... b5 {the engine prefers this imbalancing move.} 19. Nxc7 Bxc7 20. Bxb5 {and Black has a piece for three pawns with a slightly better engine eval than the text move, but I had no desire to play against the 4v1 connected pawns on the queenside.}) 19. bxc4 c6 $11 20. Ne3 {I felt the danger was over, but relaxed too soon.} Re7 $2 {a terrible idea, missing the forcing move by the c-pawn, which means the rook is now blocking the bishop's retreat and is also hanging. Anything else reasonable holds equality.} (20... f4) (20... Bf4) (20... b6) 21. c5 $1 Bf4 {forking the two knights, so the bishop cannot be trapped.} 22. Nf3 {a completely reasonable move, except that White had} (22. Nxf5+ $1 {which neither of us saw.}) 22... Rae8 {now the danger is truly gone.} 23. Nc2 {my opponent here made a draw offer, accepted after a long think. The engine validates the 0.00 evaluation and I had a lot less time on my clock, plus was tired enough from defending to mistrust my ability to try to press for a win with the two bishops.} 1/2-1/2

Annotated Game #353: Striking the second-best blow is not enough

In this first-round tournament game, I achieve an ideal Colle-Zukertort attacking formation as White out of the opening and nearly put my opponent away after a couple of his inaccuracies. However, my initial attack failed to fully connect as I could not find the knockout blow. The second-best move (according to the engine) was enough to keep up the attack's momentum and give me a second chance, but again I failed to find the key idea, which was to shut down my opponent's queenside counterplay possibilities first, before returning to prying open the h-file. My opponent did not give me a third chance and recovered well, taking advantage of an open White backfield to first infiltrate his queen, then decisively with a rook. A valuable game to study for lessons in attacking dynamics and strategic prioritization.

[Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "ChessAdmin"] [Black "Class A"] [Result "0-1"] [Annotator "ChessAdmin/Dragon 3.2"] [ECO "D05"] [WhiteFideId "-1"] [BlackFideId "-1"] [PlyCount "120"] [GameId "2320646267293337"] 1. d4 Nf6 2. Nf3 d5 3. e3 e6 4. Bd3 Bd6 5. b3 {this commits White to the Colle-Zukertort setup, which is fine if that is what you want to play. Castling or playing Nbd2 are more flexible options.} O-O 6. Bb2 c6 {Black chooses to go with a Semi-Slav formation.} 7. Nbd2 Nbd7 8. O-O (8. Ne5 {is equivalent and also possible now.}) 8... Re8 {clearly signaling the plan of pushing the e-pawn.} 9. Ne5 $14 {this mechanically stops the advance of the e-pawn and centralizes the knight.} Qc7 {a reasonable-looking move, but White is perfectly happy to reinforce the knight with} 10. f4 $1 $16 {and now has an ideal Colle-Zukertort setup out of the opening, with a kingside attack in view.} Nf8 {my opponent goes into defensive mode, reinforcing h7.} 11. g4 {this was my first real think in the game, and the engine agrees this is best. The short-term point is to chase away the defending Nf6.} N6d7 {jumping back before being pushed.} 12. g5 {although the knight has already removed itself, the pawn still belongs on g5, where it can disrupt Black's defenses.} f6 {this is more of a weakening move than a counter-blow, although it appears that Black has no good options at this point.} 13. Qh5 $18 {bringing the queen into the attack, which hits the hanging Re8.} g6 {I expected this blocking move and had a long think (wrong think) about the possibilities of sacrificing on g6. I eventually calculated (wrongly) that it would not work.} 14. Qf3 {second best, according to the engine.} (14. Bxg6 $1 {I confess that I spent more time examining an initial knight sac here, so did not give this move the attention it deserved.} Nxg6 (14... hxg6 15. Nxg6 Nxg6 16. Qxg6+ Kf8 17. e4 $1 $18 {and the classic Colle e-pawn lever helps pry open the position for White. For example} dxe4 18. Nxe4 {and Black does not have time for} Bxf4 $2 19. gxf6 Bxh2+ 20. Kh1 Nxf6 21. Qxf6+ $18 {with mate to follow}) 15. Nxg6 $18 {during the game, I could not see what White was really threatening here. Indeed, there's nothing immediate that is forcing on the king.} Nf8 {visually looks like it holds, but} (15... f5 16. Nh4 $18 {and the attack continues with White a pawn to the good, with ideas of Kh1 and Rg1 as follow-up.}) 16. Ne5 $1 {with a discovered attack on the Re8} fxe5 17. fxe5 $18) (14. Nxg6 $2 hxg6 15. Bxg6 Re7 $17) 14... f5 $1 $16 {the best defense, attempting to lock up the kingside.} 15. h4 Nxe5 16. fxe5 (16. dxe5 {is also possible.}) 16... Be7 {now I had to think about how to best make progress.} 17. c4 {one of the top engine choices. I play to restrict ...b5 and give myself the option of play in the center and along the c-file.} (17. h5 $5 {would be more focused on following up on the h-pawn push.}) 17... Bb4 {expected, since now I cannot play c2-c3 to block the bishop.} 18. Rf2 {best and most active response, protecting the Nd2. This also mobilizes the rook for potential duty on the h-file.} Qe7 19. Qf4 {this misses the strategic mark, although I still have an edge. The idea was to protect h4 and restrain h7-h6 by Black.} (19. Nf1 {would be more on the mark, with the plan of Ng3 and targeting the h5 square.} h6 20. Ng3 hxg5 21. hxg5 Qxg5 $6 {visually looks good for Black, but} 22. Rg2 $1 {lines up the heavy piece on the vulnerable g-file, enabling threats like Nh5.}) 19... Bd7 20. Nf1 Rac8 {clearly looking to push ...c5, which I should have shut down, as this is Black's only means of real counterplay.} 21. Ng3 {persisting with kingside play first.} (21. c5 $1 $16 {this prophylactic move shuts Black down and strands the Bb4.}) 21... b5 $6 22. h5 $6 {the problem is that my kingside play, while good long-term, does not come quickly enough to maintain my advantage, when compared with the opposite side race to break through.} (22. c5 $16 {now would shut down Black even more fully.}) 22... bxc4 {now Black has a much freer game.} 23. bxc4 $14 Rb8 $6 {this allows me to finally play} 24. c5 $16 {although with the b-file now open, Black still has some counterplay ideas.} Ba5 25. Rh2 {resuming the plan of increased h-file pressure. Unfortunately I missed the next tactic, since I did not consider the possibility of a capture on b2.} (25. Raf1 $16) 25... Rxb2 $1 {while this (temporary) sacrifice does not get Black completely out of his positional hole, it forces an exchange of pieces which reduce my attacking chances.} 26. Rxb2 Bc3 {skewer tactic} 27. Rab1 Bxb2 28. Rxb2 Bc8 $2 {evidently my opponent was concerned about the potential Rb7 penetration. However, this move blocks his own rook from getting active on the b-file and gives me time to swing back to the kingside.} 29. Rh2 $16 (29. Qh4 {first is an improved version of the idea, as White's plan is to double the Q+R on the h-file; no reason to move the rook off the b-file first.}) 29... Qc7 30. Qh4 $1 $18 Re7 {a logical defensive move, and I fail to find the breakthrough.} 31. Ne2 $6 {second best attacking idea again.} (31. hxg6 $1 $18 Nxg6 32. Qh6 {and now the threat of Nh5-f6 is too much for Black to handle.}) 31... gxh5 32. Nf4 $6 {this was the original idea behind Ne2, but I should have reset my expectations of the position after it changed.} (32. Ng3 $1 {avoids the knight trade} Ng6 33. Qxh5 Rf7 34. Qe2 $18 {vacating h5, which the knight can now use for the attack.}) 32... Ng6 33. Qxh5 Nxf4 34. exf4 Qa5 $1 $11 {with reduced material and my queenside vulnerable, along with the possibility of ...Qe1+, Black has now effectively equalized.} 35. Qe2 $2 {pretty much anything else is even. I missed my opponent's next move, which attacks the vulnerable d4 square.} (35. Rg2 Qe1+ 36. Kh2 Qe3 37. Qh4 {is equal but would bait Black.} Qxd3 $4 38. g6 $1 {with a discovered attack on the Re7 and a double attack against h7, with mate to follow.}) (35. g6 Qe1+ 36. Kg2 Qd2+ 37. Kh1 Qxd3 38. Rg2 Kf8 $11) (35. Rb2 $11) 35... Qc3 $1 $17 {it seems incredible, but there is no good way to protect d4.} 36. Qe3 $6 Qa1+ $6 (36... Ba6 $1 $19 {I saw this pin only after I moved, it would have ended the game sooner.} 37. Rd2 Rb7 $19 {the rook will penetrate for a winning advantage and there's nothing White can do to stop it.}) 37. Bf1 $4 {unfortunately, low on time, there was nothing better that I could see. This of course allows the ...Ba6 pin motif again.} (37. Kg2 Qxa2+ 38. Qf2 $11 {I didn't like this during the game because I thought the ending was lost, but the engine calls it equal.}) 37... Ba6 $19 38. Rf2 Rb7 $1 {the winning idea, as noted above.} 39. Kg2 Bxf1+ 40. Rxf1 Rb2+ {now the game is effectively over, but I decide to play out the queen ending in hopes of a swindle.} 41. Rf2 Qxa2 42. Rxb2 Qxb2+ 43. Kf1 Qb1+ 44. Kf2 Qc2+ 45. Kg1 Qb1+ 46. Kh2 a5 $6 (46... Qf1 $19) 47. Qh3 $2 {after this Black has an easy time of it.} (47. Qe2 $17 {aiming for a6 and Black's backfield, while screening the king.}) 47... Qc2+ 48. Kg1 Qd1+ 49. Kh2 Qe2+ 50. Kh1 Qe4+ 51. Kg1 Qxd4+ 52. Kg2 Qe4+ 53. Kg1 Qe1+ 54. Kh2 Qe2+ 55. Kh1 Qd1+ 56. Kh2 Qd2+ 57. Kh1 Qc1+ 58. Kg2 Qxf4 59. Qh6 Qxe5 60. g6 Qg7 0-1

Training quote of the day #66: Junta Ikeda

 From IM Junta Ikeda's Substack post "Deciding to play" on his mindset for tournaments:

Acknowledging that you’re going to make mistakes and potentially lose, even if you play your best, takes some pressure off whether you’re the top seed or bottom seed. It’s not necessarily a mechanism for defending yourself in advance from painful losses, ‘unlucky’ results or having excuses ready. It’s being objective and accepting that chess is a hard game and it takes a lot of time and tournaments over months and years to know more about yourself and your chess. And there will be many painful losses and tournaments, but you’ll keep learning and adjusting with each one.

Annotated Game #352: Simul vs. GM Ben Finegold

This simul game, played versus GM Ben Finegold at this year's National Open in Las Vegas, ended up in an exciting finish. As with other GM simuls I've played in, I was able to do well with my opening prep, studying published games and focusing on the most likely lines I would face. GM Finegold has publicly touted the Torre Attack setup versus the Dutch Defense, and we in fact enter that, following some other games in the database until around move 8. In the middlegame, I make some awkward, piece-restricting moves that GM Finegold takes advantage of positionally with easy, harmonious development, which is instructive to see. The end becomes wild as I boldly (finally!) emphasize piece activity for practical chances and could have drawn (or even won), but was not able to find the more subtle solutions, and White then wins with an aesthetic discovered checkmate.

[Event "National Open - Simul"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Finegold, Ben"] [Black "ChessAdmin"] [Result "1-0"] [Annotator "ChessAdmin/Dragon 3.2"] [ECO "A80"] [WhiteFideId "-1"] [BlackFideId "-1"] [PlyCount "73"] [GameId "2323483478960773"] 1. d4 f5 2. Nf3 Nf6 3. Bg5 {a Torre Attack-style setup versus the Dutch Defense. I had expected this from my pre-game prep.} e6 {the usual antidote for Black, playing in more of a Classical Dutch style. This is relatively easy to remember and implement.} (3... Ne4 $5 {is an interesting, non-traditional approach.}) 4. Nbd2 {this looks a little strange at first glance, but is the main line. The knight is developed without blocking the c-pawn.} Be7 5. Bxf6 Bxf6 6. e4 O-O 7. exf5 (7. Bd3 {is usually played first, to develop the bishop.}) 7... exf5 8. Be2 {now out of my prep} Nc6 $11 {the engine validates this move as a good equalizing one. The knight is developed straightforwardly.} (8... d5 $5 {interestingly is played in all of the (handful of) database games. This would be less flexible and leave a hole on e5, but typical Stonewall plans can then be used.}) 9. c3 {a natural reaction to protect d4.} Re8 $6 {while the rook looks good lined up against the White king, it immediately castles away and afterwards it is not clear if the rook would be better off on the f-file (probably so).} (9... d6 {would control e5 and release the Bc8.}) (9... Kh8 $5 {is a standard precaution in the Dutch when the g8-a2 diagonal is open and White pieces (as is the case here) can take advantage of it.}) 10. O-O $14 d5 {here I go with what I know and aim for a Stonewall-like domination of the light squares.} 11. Re1 Be6 $6 {following the principle of getting the minor pieces out first, but the bishop is awkwardly and prematurely placed here.} (11... Qd6 12. Bb5 Bd7 $14) 12. Bd3 {safe but not particularly aggressive.} (12. Bb5 Qd6 {is now more awkward for Black than the above variation.} 13. Ne5 $16) 12... Qd7 $6 {wrong square for the queen and an over-reaction to pressure on f5.} 13. Qc2 $16 {White now enjoys harmonious development and easy pressure on my position.} g5 {I decided that it would be better to go for counterplay than play passively with ...g6} 14. Ne5 {I'm happy to exchange off the good White knight.} (14. Nb3 $5 {would preserve more of an edge for White, with his knights eyeing both c5 and e5.}) 14... Nxe5 15. dxe5 Bh8 $2 {simply a blunder. I over-valued the pressure on the e5 pawn, when greater piece activity was better.} (15... Be7 $16 {White still has an edge, but the bishop is much more in the game, rather than having just two squares.}) 16. Nf3 $1 $18 {simple but effective. Without piece support, Black's advanced kingside pawns are now good targets, and combined with White's central pressure my position crumbles.} h6 17. Nd4 Rf8 18. Rad1 {bringing all the pieces to the party} c6 19. c4 a6 {preventing White from using b5 as a pivot for his minor pieces} 20. cxd5 cxd5 21. Qb3 b5 22. Be2 Rfe8 {it is interesting to see just how useless the Bh8 is.} (22... Bxe5 $2 23. Nxe6 Qxe6 24. Bf3 $18) 23. Nxe6 Qxe6 24. Rxd5 (24. Bf3 {would be even more devastating.}) 24... Kf8 {I am out of good moves, but at least wanted to get the king off the diagonal with White's queen.} 25. Bh5 {now the bishop joins the party.} Re7 26. h4 Kg7 {completing the entombment of the bishop.} 27. Qf3 Rf8 28. Rd6 Qc4 {objectively the engine assesses it is best to trade on d6, which tells you how badly off I am.} 29. hxg5 hxg5 30. Rg6+ Kh7 31. Qh3 Rxe5 {a last desperate shot, which is the best practical move.} 32. Rxe5 (32. Rd1 $1 $18 {and I have no follow-up.}) 32... Qc1+ {this was the point.} 33. Kh2 $6 {after this, things are still very tricky, but as the engine observes Black is now equal.} (33. Bd1+ $1 $18) 33... Bxe5+ $11 34. g3 Qxb2 $4 {I knew this was a critical move but could not find a way to make progress, so figured I should at least grab a pawn and threaten f2.} (34... Qd2 $11 {I did not consider this superior move, protecting g5 while still attacking f2 and therefore maintaining equality.}) 35. Kg2 $4 {a natural response, to protect f2, but one that should lose.} (35. Rxg5 $1 Qxf2+ 36. Kh1 Qe1+ 37. Kg2 {and Black is done, due to the threat of mate on move with the Bh5}) 35... Qxa2 $4 (35... Bd4 $1 $19 {I did not consider moving the bishop to threaten f2, against which White has no good reply.}) 36. Rxg5 $1 {White finds the solution. Now the bishop is mobile and the rook can no longer be taken, so mate is inevitable.} Qd5+ 37. Bf3# {a nice finish, with a discovered checkmate.} 1-0

Book completed - Chess Duels: My Games With The World Champions

 

I recently completed Chess Duels: My Games With The World Champions (Everyman Chess, 2010) by GM Yasser Seirawan. As part of my study/training process, on a daily basis at lunchtime I normally work through a book of annotated games, ideally written by a master-level player that showcases their internal thought process. There are of course a number of good "Best Games" type books out there - including ones I've previously completed - but I found this one to be uniquely valuable in several respects:

• Seirawan includes all his career games with the world champions he played against, not just the best ones, which immediately differentiates this collection from others. While in fact he has an excellent competitive record against them, some of the games (win, loss or draw) inevitably feature his blunders and bad decisions. This balance makes the book even more valuable for instructional purposes, since he can provide firsthand explanations of not just why moves (or evaluations) were incorrect, but the thought process behind the choices. It also serves to humanize and normalize even his bad play, which of course we can all relate to from our own experience, making us feel better about chess.
• The background stories he shares about himself and his opponents are similarly humanizing and provide interesting context to the games. I found the content overall to be appropriately balanced and largely focused on chess-relevant themes, rather than trying to be too biographical. He had particularly fascinating accounts of some of the behind-the-scenes activities of Fischer and Kasparov.
• While the events of international chess politics are of course historically dated (through 2010), this is still the best review and set of insights into those World Championship-level issues that I've seen. Personally one of the reasons I was turned off from an interest in tournament chess for a number of years after college was the interminable series of Kasparov-Karpov matches, which were followed by a fragmented, confusing and opaque world championship process. Seirawan provides an insider and largely objective viewpoint on all this, without letting it become too much of a rant.
• For those familiar with his live commentary style, Seirawan's authorial "voice" is similarly clear and well-organized, as well as being appropriately humorous (often self-deprecating) while still taking his subject matter seriously.
• Factors that were behind historical world championship controversies are still relevant to what we see in today's top-level chess scene, as evident in the following excerpt, where Seirawan comments on Garry Kasparov's retirement from competition in 2005:

Kasparov's retirement left the chess world in a sad state. It was denied the joy of seeing Kasparov play, and the World Championship title itself no longer seemed to have legitimacy. After all, the title only meant something if chess players around the world thought it did. With multiple and ever-changing Champions, and shorter and shorter matches, the chess world could really only look to the rating list to determine who was "number one."