Book completed: The Stonewall Attack

In searching for an alternative opening as White (although I expect to continue to use the English Opening as my primary), I eventually settled on learning the Stonewall Attack, largely because I had put a good deal of time into studying the Dutch Stonewall as Black. While the defense has a robust if not particularly large collection of book and video publications dedicated to it, the White side has relatively few - really, almost none - professional-level ones. The Kenilworthian's 2012 blog post on "The Stonewall in Black and White" is probably the best compilation of resources on the Stonewall, although now somewhat dated from the Black perspective. (It's not dated for White because so little has been done on it.)

Andrew Martin's Foxy video on the Stonewall Attack and Colle Zukertort is still being produced (my summary of the e-DVD content is in the link), but the only dedicated book by a GM is The Stonewall Attack by Andrew Soltis (Chess Digest, 2nd edition, 1993). I recently completed it using the legit downloadable (PDF) version you can find on Scribd.com; the book itself has been out of print for some time. The Kenilworthian post mentioned above praised it as a resource, but offered no details.

It was interesting to see that the structure and recommendations of Andrew Martin's video closely parallel those of Soltis, although to be fair Martin focuses on more recent example games that are not included in Soltis' work. I expect it would be better to read the book first when beginning a study of the opening, since it provides a deeper conceptual foundation, then look at the video presentation for additional commentary and updated modern examples.

I have to say that The Stonewall Attack has become one of my favorite chess opening books - probably chess books in general - because it is both enjoyable to go through and effective in its presentation. Soltis is a prolific and excellent writer; here he clearly enjoys his subject, digging into some of the opening's history - games from Capablanca, Marshall, Pillsbury and other top players from the first part of the 20th century are featured in the chapters - while discussing the various setups and approaches. There is for me a near-ideal balance of conceptual explanations, variations and examples. Some repetition of material occurs from certain example games, but from a learning perspective I felt this was actually a good thing, to help reinforce particular ideas.

Soltis also does certain things I appreciate, such as not sugar-coating things (the Stonewall is respected but not over-sold as a wonder weapon for White), highlighting move-order options that are often neglected, and calibrating his annotations and explanations to an amateur audience, including explanations of variations and moves which are bad/losing, not just focusing on best play for both sides. For improving players, I find this to be a crucial point in gaining chess strength, since rarely will both sides follow the "best" plan in an opening below master level (or even then).

I find studying the Stonewall Attack to be useful for both general chess skill and as a practical opening weapon. It's not just for historical purposes, either, as I was reminded when I saw Anand using it as White to beat an expert-level player in the recent Indian GM online simul at Chess.com (see the game vs. Fllinc, with a full transposition by move 14). Maybe Anand wouldn't play it at a top-level GM tournament, but he nevertheless knows how to play it successfully.

Below is a summary of the contents of the book, for those who may be interested in taking a closer look. It's worth noting that this is not a repertoire book, so both White and Black sides get examined from a number of different perspectives, with many options presented in the text.

INTRODUCTION
This is a narrative introduction to Stonewall Attack ideas and history, covering five games from 1890 (Gunsberg-Tchigorin) to 1992 (Mohammed-Denker).

CHAPTER ONE: The Matter of Move Order
This is a more sophisticated introduction to early concepts and move-orders, for example using a Colle System to start and later playing Nf3-e5 and f2-f4. One point is that the Stonewall Attack should not be treated as a "system" opening in which the same moves are always made in the same order, regardless of what your opponent does, although Soltis recommends beginning with 1.d4 followed by 2. e3 and 3. Bd3. The chapter also contains the high-level clash Yusupov-Anand, Linares 1991.

CHAPTER TWO: Stonewall Strategies
(1) Simple Kingside Attack
(2) Good vs. Bad Bishops
(3) Queenside Play: The Open and Half-Open C-file
(4) The Pawn Re-Capture on d3
(5) Double Stonewall
(6) The Advance of the e-Pawn

CHAPTER THREE: The "Theoretically Best" Defense
Here Soltis deals with the primary theoretical recommendation for Black (3...Nc6) and also points out the move 3...Bg4 as a strong alternative idea.

CHAPTER FOUR: The Traditional Defense
This covers what most Black players are likely to play if not very familiar with the Stonewall Attack, which is a Queen's Gambit Declined (QGD) formation with ...c5 included.

CHAPTER FIVE: Black Fianchettoes
Here we see Black going into either a reversed Dutch Stonewall, where standard plans/ideas apply, or setting up a King's Indian Defense (KID) or Queen's Indian Defense (QID), which require different treatments from White.

ILLUSTRATIVE GAME SECTION
Although these games are sometimes quoted in the main text, here Soltis presents them in full. It's great fun to play over these old games and feel that they are still relevant to our understanding of the positions.
#1: Sultan Khan - A. Rubinstein, Prague (Olympiad) 1931
#2: Marshall - Rubinstein, Vienna 1908
#3: Horowitz - Amateur, New York 1950
#4: Kmoch - Nagy, Budapest 1926
#5: Santasiere - Adams, United States 1940
#6: Lipke - Zinki, Leipzig 1894
#7: Lipke - Schiffers, Leipzig 1894
#8: Pillsbury - Hanham, New York 1893

Video completed - Foxy vol. 135: The Stonewall and Colle-Zukertort Systems

I recently completed the Foxy vol. 135 (e-DVD edition) of "Queen Pawn System: Stonewall & Colle-Zukertort" by IM Andrew Martin. The Foxy video series are older (non-HD) video presentations that don't offer the interactivity or extras of newer computer products, so are basically equivalent to a recorded lecture.

Martin makes no great claims about these systems, instead repeatedly emphasizing their playability and practical effectiveness at "club level", where Black players are unlikely to be familiar with the right plans and also lack obvious opportunities for early counterplay. With the adoption of the Stonewall Attack - what Martin calls an "antique variation" since its heyday was around the beginning of the 20th century - the White player deliberately slows down the game's pace, deprives Black of tactical opportunities in the opening, and can generate some early kingside attacking threats if Black is not careful.

Below is a summary outline of the DVD contents, which run a total of two hours. After an introductory segment from Martin, there are 17 example games presented, with Martin providing light commentary and occasionally some alternative recommendations for White.

The sum of the example games and explanations provides a more or less complete White repertoire, with a couple of different options in different places. Martin is correct in also stressing ideas over specific variations during the presentations, especially since there are a lot of different move-order possibilities to reach these positions. The Stonewall Attack and Colle-Zukertort structures are not just old ideas, though, as searching on these database positions will pull up a number of examples at GM/professional level that are contemporary. The DVD has content through around 2011, so anyone looking to construct or augment a White repertoire should make the effort to find some newer model games, for other examples and ideas.

Contents

Introduction: White systems based on 1.d4 followed by 2. e3. These include three broad categories:

• Stonewall Attack vs. Queen's Gambit Declined (QGD) and related Black setups with ...d5
• Colle-Zukertort (with a delayed or omitted f4) vs. Queen's Indian Defense (QID) or similar Black setups without ...d5
• Rapid queenside expansion plan with Nf3/Be2 development vs King's Indian Defense (KID) setup

Game 1: Standard Stonewall Attack White setup (Stonewall pawn formation c3-d4-e3-f4, Bd3, Nd2, Ne5, Qf3) vs. QGD; game is from a 2002 Cuban tournament

• Explores Black inaccuracies
• White idea is to mount an early kingside attack, with option of castling queenside when there is no Black counterplay there

Game 2: Black QGD setup with blocked center (c5-c4) from 1998 Asian Championship

• Removal of central pawn tension enables idea of White playing e4 to undermine Black's center
• Again shows how White can maneuver to take advantage of planless Black play

Game 3: Black QGD setup with ...b6 to develop the queen bishop; technically a Colle-Zukertort with a delayed f4. (Nikitina-Fedotova, 2011 Sterlitamak Open)

• Notably features White piece development with b3/Bb2, analogous to Modern Stonewall queenside fianchetto

Game 4: Kramnik - Deep Junior (2000 Dortmund Exhibition); Stonewall Attack against QGD with ...c5

• Kramnik uses an old anti-computer strategy, with Deep Junior (2700+ at the time) not able to recognize the long-term attacking potential of White's setup
• Computer plays an early 7...Ng4?! sally to attack e3, which is parried by Qe2 and delayed castling 
• White features play on the g and h files, also eventual queenside castling to bring the second rook into play; again, no Black counterplay on queenside
• Kramnik is familiar with the Dutch Stonewall from his training with Mark Dvoretsky, so understands the positional ideas deeply

Game 5: Black plays ...g6/Bg7 after 3. Bd3 (Parr-Broadbent 1946 British Championship)

• Standard White Stonewall Attack setup, followed by h4/g4 advance
• Relentless attacking play by White suitable for club level, according to Martin

Game 6: Early 2...Bf5 by Black (Liang-Shen, 2010 All China Games)

• Martin's recommendation is to play c4, followed by Qb3, to target b7; 
• White plan is to exchange pawns on d5, followed by Nc3 and Qb3 
• Martin's suggestion is to go for winning the two bishops by Nf3-h4, if the Black Bf5 can't get away

Game 7: Early 2...Bf5 with an early White Qb3, results in queenless maneuvering middlegame (Abdullah - Shaw, 2008 Dresden Olympiad) 

Game 8: "Book Antidote #1": 3...Bg4 (Wall-Olbrich, Bundesliga 2001)  

• Recommended for Black by Martin in previous QP openings video
• White reacts by playing f3 and c4, followed by Nc3/Ne2 development, then b3/Bb2
• White Knight can go to f4, king can go to f2 as needed

Game 9: "Book Antidote #2": 3...Nc6 threatening to follow up with ...e5 or ...Nb4 (Rubinstein-Reti, Vienna 1908; Marshall - Suctung also cited)

• Martin recommends proceeding with Stonewall formation, preventing ...e5
• Continue development with Nf3, allow minor piece exchange and pawn recapture on d3 to cover e4, then play Nc3
• Rf3-h3 rook lift idea, combined with standard Stonewall queen bishop maneuver over to kingside

Game 10: QID setup (Temnekov-Morisov, 2008 Russia) versus Stonewall Attack

• By delaying ...d5, Black prevents usual Ne5 ideas, with ...d6 in reserve
• However, allows for White idea of Qe2 followed by e4
• White continues to grab space with a3/b4
• Once rest of board is locked up, White can look to break on the kingside, but is not in a rush

Game 11: Colle-Zukertort move order (Alekhine-Del Turco, Zurich 1934)

• Leads to favorable version of Stonewall, after Nf3-e5 and f2-f4
• White has alert play on queenside with c2-c4 at the right moment, along with threats to open up long diagonal for the Bb2

Game 12: QID vs Colle-Zukertort (Bogdanovich-Lehman, Munich 1996)

• Less loose (because no initial f4) than Game 10 system
• White plays Qf3 and then e4, with queen moving to h3 after exchange on e4
• No f4 played, more of a central focus

Game 13: Early ...g6 / KID setup (Kovacevic-Zufic)

• White needs to find an alternative to Bd3 development, according to Martin, so goes Nf3/Be2, continuing with c4 and Nc3
• Recommended plan is for queenside pawn expansion, which was started with a4 in the game
• Need to find a place for the dark-square bishop development; default is to leave it on c1 to protect e3, unless specific opportunities/targets appear on the other available diagonals
• Prophylactic play shuts down a kingside attack from Black, after dominance established by White on queenside and center

Game 14: KID setup; (Piskov-De Jong, 2006 Hoogeveen tournament)

• Early b3 (before c4); Martin prefers to play b2-b4 in one go
• Queenside expansion plan

Game 15: Gruenfeld setup; (Savechenko-Baramidze, 2000 Sparkassen Open)

• White uses Nf3/Be2 development, followed by b3/Bb2, delaying or omtting c4
• Ne5 is now available again, now that Black has played ...d5
• Kingside attack after center is blocked
• Exchange sacrifice opens up center after extended maneuvering

Game 16: Gruenfeld setup with ...c5 (Del Rio de Angelis-Suarez Uriel, Madrid 2010)

• b3/Bb2 development again; follow up with Nbd2 and c2-c4; look to occupy e5 with a knight
• White ends up with a c/d hanging pawns structure; defends them, then uses h-pawn advance 

Game 17: KID setup (Zwaig-Poutiainen, Team 6 Nations, 1973)

• White plays early Qc2 after c4; Martin recommends continuing with b4 immediately
• After a/b pawn pushes, White plays Nd5 to exchange off the key Black Nf6
• White relies on c-file pressure and queenside play to break through, sacrificing a knight on c6 after a b-pawn advance

Video completed: Studies in the Stonewall, Volume 2

This ChessLecture.com DVD, the companion to Volume 1, has five presentations on it, from IM (at the time FM) Valeri Lilov, IM David Vigorito and IM Mark Diesen. 

Content:

"Excelling with Modern Stonewall": Lilov presents Van Wely - Vaisser, from early in Van Wely's career. This segment addresses an audience new to the Dutch, explaining some of the basic ideas behind the Bd6 development and Stonewall pawn structure while enthusiastically talking up Black's prospects. The game itself is a 7. Nbd2 sideline, met by ...b6, with a typical plan of continuing ...Bb7, Nbd7 and ...c5. Black ends up playing ...Ba6 early as White goes back and forth with his knights. This is a good example of how strong the Stonewall can be when White does not follow an active plan.

"The Stonewall Attack":  This is an introduction to the Stonewall Attack for White. Lilov pitches it as a way to avoid having to know a lot of theory. He presents standard setups and attacking plans against Black's responses with ...e6 and ...c5, as well as ...Bf5 and ...g6/Bg7. There are useful explanations of some key concepts, including White's problems (such as the dark-square bishop), avoiding initiating an exchange on f5 that will open the e-file for Black, and the need to keep watch over e4. 

"How to Exploit a Good Center": the classic 19th century game Pillsbury - Henem is presented by Lilov. Pillsbury plays the Stonewall Attack, which makes it fit into the Stonewall theme, although the primary topic of the lecture is central control. It's not Lilov's smoothest presentation, and it's rather wordy in relation to the amount of content presented, but the ideas still come through.

"Ideas in the Dutch Stonewall:" IM Vigorito's presentation is a relatively in-depth intro to the Modern Stonewall, looking at primarily at 7. b3 (essentially the main line). It offers a cogent summary of White's main plans (exchanging the dark square bishop on a3 vs. developing on Bb2 vs. alternatively developing 7. Bf4), Black's old vs. modern light square bishop development options, the factors involved in playing ...b6 and tactical tricks after a White Ne5 are all covered. Excellent, systematic treatment of the ideas involved in the main lines of the Stonewall.

"Winning with the Stonewall Attack": Santasiere - Welch is presented by IM Diesen, who also goes into typical ideas and some of the opening alternatives early on. Although the game is one-sided (in White's favor), the general concepts (including some better options for Black) are touched on and well-explained.

Comment: the DVD doesn't attempt to present a coherent picture of the Stonewall, as it's a compilation of different video lectures over time. However, for a player starting to get familiar with the Stonewall, it's helpful in providing a reasonably thorough sketch of the main ideas, and I like the fact that it looks at the Stonewall Attack for White as well.

Video completed: The Stonewall Attack in 60 Minutes

 

I recently completed the video "The Stonewall Attack in 60 Minutes" by IM Andrew Martin, part of the ChessBase series of 60-minute videos on openings. I would generally agree with the comment in the post on The Stonewall Attack, in that the opening analysis is "frivolous" but the example games provided are all useful. Here's a screenshot of the table of contents:

As someone who has studied many (perhaps most) of the Stonewall Attack opening resources available, I would say that the video content could actually be a good starting point for study of the opening, just diving in with some familiarization on key setups and ideas. Personally I found it quite useful in also fleshing out my thinking about the different types of opening setups reached, since Martin provides clear (if brief) explanations about things like piece placement and certain opening ideas. Specifically:

• Martin gives pride of place to what he calls the "kingside smash" that you can reach as a White player if Black tries standard "solid" moves, reaching a true Stonewall Attack formation. Seeing several examples of these, involving both higher and lower-rated players, helped reinforce typical plans, how to place your pieces effectively, and how to take advantage of normal-looking moves by Black that are actually quite weak.
• The seminal game Rubinstein-Reti (1908) is a fine illustration of how White can keep going with an attack, even with the recommended defense for Black of 4...Nb4 and exchanging the light-square bishop.
• Martin presents two games each in the King's Indian / Gruenfeld Defense setups by Black, which feature the idea of an early b2-b4 by White and rapid queenside expansion as the best plan.
• I appreciated the inclusion of a game with Black playing ...Bg4, which in practical terms has given me the most trouble. White however still has a straightforward way of dealing with this after playing Qe1.

The relatively short format of the video did not feel like a constraint and in fact helped encourage me to re-review the game presentations, since they ranged from around 5-9 minutes apiece. So I will count it as a worthy addition to my Stonewall Attack resources.

Annotated Game #303: A strategically won game...is not an actually won game

The next tournament game illustrates how well one can be placed out of the opening, in this case a Stonewall Attack, and yet fail to convert a positional advantage. By move 13 my pieces were dominant and by move 18 I could effectively have been winning on both the queenside and kingside. Unfortunately a mishandled attack, which could at least have led to a perpetual check, failed and Black emerged with a winning material advantage.

[Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "ChessAdmin"] [Black "Class B"] [Result "0-1"] [Annotator "ChessAdmin/Dragon 3.2"] [ECO "D00"] [PlyCount "104"] [GameId "2133320567857269"] 1. d4 Nf6 2. e3 e6 3. Bd3 d5 4. f4 {a standard Stonewall Attack opening position} c5 5. c3 b6 {unusual to see this early, but consistent with how Black will need to develop the light-square bishop.} 6. Nf3 cxd4 7. exd4 {the usual rule in the Stonewall is to recapture with the e-pawn, which points towards future kingside play, but recapturing with the c-pawn is fine as well.} Bb7 8. O-O Nc6 9. Nbd2 {developing and controlling e4.} Qc7 {a signal that my opponent may be looking to castle queenside. It also attacks the f4 pawn.} 10. Ne5 $14 {blocking the attack on the f-pawn and placing my knight on its best outpost. White has achieved a small plus out of the opening, due to the space advantage.} O-O-O {sensing danger on the kingside, the king is removed elsewhere. However, the Stonewall setup is flexible and I should be able to shift my attack.} 11. Qe2 $16 {played after some thought. The B+Q battery is useful and the rooks are closer to being connected.} Nxe5 $6 {my opponent wants to get rid of the advanced knight, but the advanced pawn on e5 and semi-open f-file are advantageous to White.} (11... Kb8 $5 {getting the king off the diagonal and adding a defender to a7.}) 12. fxe5 {the advanced e-pawn is now a major thorn in Black's side.} Ne8 $18 {at this point White has a strategically won game, with my pieces and pawns dominating the board; however, this is not the same thing as an actually won game. I recognized this and thought about my plan, starting off well enough.} 13. Nf3 {this best activates the knight, which may be able to profitably go to g5, as well as freeing the diagonal for the Bc1.} h6 14. a4 {I now correctly shift to a direct attack on the Black king position, which is vulnerable. The a-pawn in this case can be used much like the h-pawn would be against a normally castled king.} Qd7 15. a5 Nc7 16. axb6 {so far so good.} axb6 {another long think. Unfortunately I start to lose the thread here. I need to connect the rooks and move the bishop, but e3 or f4 would be much better squares.} 17. Bd2 {here it blocks the ability of the queen to move laterally to the a-file, and the e1-a5 diagonal is less promising if it opens up, unlike the g1-a7 or h2-b8 ones.} f5 18. Ra7 {not a bad move, but I was too afraid of opening the kingside to play the best one, per the engine.} (18. exf6 {the Stonewall, when most effective, allows play on both sides of the board.} gxf6 19. Nh4 $18 {and White is dominant on both the kingside and queenside, with Ng6 likely coming.}) 18... Kb8 19. Rfa1 {the obvious and effective follow-up.} g5 20. Ne1 {with the idea of repositioning the knight either to help the queenside attack, or if needed to defend the king.} (20. b4 g4 21. Ne1 {looks like a superior version of the same idea, with b4-b5 coming.}) 20... Be7 {connecting the rooks and giving the bishop some future prospects on the kingside.} 21. Nc2 (21. b4 $5 {the alternative idea of advancing the b-pawn, as mentioned earlier, may have been a more effective attack. For example} h5 22. b5 h4 23. Qd1 {with the idea of bringing the queen to a4, and if} Nxb5 {then} 24. R7a2 $18 {retreating is best, and now White has the half-open b-file to target Black's weak b-pawn and king position, for example with Qb3 and Rb2 to follow up.}) 21... f4 {my opponent is doing a good job of attempting counterplay, despite still being significantly under pressure. After another long think, I go astray with the attack.} 22. c4 $2 {I did not assess and calculate accurately here, simply going for the attack based on the open long diagonal after} (22. Nb4 {would be the logical continuation of the knight maneuver, but I did not see past the piece exchange and doubled pawns.} Bxb4 23. cxb4 {and White is doing well with the additional open lines, for example after} Rhf8 24. b5 Qf7 25. Bb4 f3 26. gxf3 $18) 22... dxc4 23. Rxb7+ $11 Kxb7 24. Be4+ Nd5 25. Qxc4 {is the best I could find at the board, but now the attack stalls. Grabbing the pawn is worth less than opening lines.} (25. b3 $1 {is the non-obvious move found by the engine. The point is that it threatens to take on c4 and win the pinned Nd5, and White keeps the initiative, moving with tempo after} cxb3 26. Qa6+ $11 {with a draw by perpetual check.}) 25... Rc8 $6 (25... Ra8 $1 $17 {cutting off control of a6.}) 26. Bxd5+ $2 {again sub-par calculation.} (26. Qa6+ {should maintain a dynamic balance.} Kc7 27. Nb4 {the knight sacrifice is only temporary, and other moves are fine too.} Nxb4 28. Qb7+ Kd8 29. Qxb6+ Ke8 30. Bxb4 Bxb4 31. Qxb4 $11) 26... Qxd5 $17 {now White does not have any compensation for the exchange.} 27. Qa6+ Kc7 {now the point of the placement of the Qd5 is the fact there is no check on b7, unlike in the above variation, and White does not have enough pieces near the Black king to threaten it.} 28. Rc1 {from this point, I simply try to make threats and hope for the best, knowing I'm losing.} Kd7 $19 29. Qxb6 {at this point I correctly assessed that I was essentially lost, but still hoped to swindle a draw based on Black's exposed king position and/or setting up a fortress.} Rb8 30. Qa7+ Qb7 31. Qa4+ Qb5 32. Qxb5+ {the best choice technically, although simplification of material also makes Black's job easier on the brain.} Rxb5 33. Bc3 {the engine validates this as the best choice, but Black is still winning.} Ra8 34. Kf2 Ke8 35. Kf3 Kf7 36. Rf1 Kg6 37. Ke4 h5 {at this point Black's kingside majority looks like it will cruise to victory.} 38. h3 Rbb8 39. Rf3 {using a rook as a physical blocker against pawns is rarely a good idea.} Rf8 40. Nb4 $2 {the idea of a fortress, although perhaps technically doomed, was much more likely to work in practical terms with the knight helping.} Bxb4 41. Bxb4 Rf7 42. Bc5 Ra1 43. Ra3 Re1+ {now it's essentially over.} 44. Kf3 Kf5 45. Kf2 Rc1 46. b4 g4 47. h4 g3+ 48. Kf3 Rf1+ 49. Ke2 Rf2+ 50. Ke1 Rxg2 51. Kf1 Rb2 52. Ra8 f3 0-1

Annotated Game #333: When to trust an attack

This third-round tournament game highlights the attacking potential of the Colle / Stonewall Attack setup, with some spectacular tactics lurking if Black does not defend properly. Unfortunately I miss seizing my chances, first with a knight sacrifice on f7, then afterwards with a rook sac on the same square - which is in fact played, but one move too late to be decisive. My calculation and visualization challenges continue, leading to an eventual loss after sacrificing too much material, although I could have had a saving perpetual on Black's king.

Part of the problem was not trusting the initial attack enough to play into it. Even in a situation where you cannot calculate everything - which inevitably occurs at all levels - one can (and should) still evaluate the likely prospects for the attack. I am still relatively new to attacking play and therefore learning my way in such situations, which in this case called for more boldness. That said, I will also draw attention to the analysis, where after the sacrifices certain more patient prepatory moves would be necessary to seize the advantage. After not seeing immediate forcing sequences, however, I discarded the original attacking ideas. Patience in the attack is also something a lot of club players need to learn.

[Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "ChessAdmin"] [Black "Class D"] [Result "0-1"] [Annotator "ChessAdmin/Dragon 3.2"] [ECO "D05"] [WhiteFideId "-1"] [BlackFideId "-1"] [PlyCount "58"] [GameId "2262411080920471"] 1. d4 Nf6 2. Nf3 e6 3. e3 d5 4. Bd3 Bd6 {when an opponent mimics your setup, it typically means they do not have independent knowledge of the opening. Black decides to break the symmetry in the Colle on the next move, although it's really move 6 which makes things more original.} 5. Nbd2 {a reasonable and flexible developing move.} (5. b3 $5 {instead commits to the Colle-Zukertort setup, and scores slightly higher in the database.}) 5... O-O 6. O-O Re8 {the rook is well-placed on the e-file, but this allows my knight to hop into e5, so I do so.} 7. Ne5 (7. e4 $5 $14 {the engine favors this standard Colle e-pawn break, threatening e4-e5 and activating the Nd2 if there is an exchange on e4.}) 7... Nbd7 8. f4 $14 {I now have e5 firmly under control.} c5 9. c3 {reaching a Stonewall Attack formation.} b6 {White is a little ahead in development - most notably there is no Black bishop on b7 yet - so there are a few more options than normal.} 10. Qf3 $11 {played with the idea of maintaining control of e4 after ...Bb7.} (10. e4 $5 {this central pawn lever still works, without Black's bishop on the long diagonal.}) (10. g4 {played immediately would defer placing the queen.}) 10... Bb7 11. g4 g6 {my opponent thought for a while before deciding on this defensive move.} 12. Qh3 {it is often difficult to decide how exactly to proceed in the Stonewall Attack, either relying on piece play or a pawn storm.} (12. h4 $5 {is now a viable attacking move, with the h-pawn potentially able to target g6 after the defending Nf6 moves. The queen can also swing in behind on h3.} Ne4 {looks good, but} (12... Rc8 13. Qh3 $14) 13. Bb5 $14 {is now a productive use for the bishop.}) (12. b3 Rc8 13. Bb2 $14) 12... Ne4 $2 {this removes the lone minor piece defender of Black's kingside for a crucial tempo.} 13. Bxe4 $6 {taking on e4 with the wrong piece.} (13. Nxf7 $1 {I spent a good deal of time over the board considering this, but could not see how to make it work.} Kxf7 (13... Qe7 {declining the sacrifice is safter but still losing.} 14. Nh6+ Kh8 15. g5 $18 {White is a full pawn up and with a great attack.}) 14. Qxh7+ Kf8 {I did not see how White could further the attack from this point, so did not trust it. However, now taking with the bishop is correct:} 15. Bxe4 dxe4 16. Nc4 $1 $18 {the knight can now penetrate, and if exchanged on e5 then White will retake with the f-pawn and add the Rf1 to the attack.}) (13. Nxe4 {this is the way to go if White wants to take on e4.} dxe4 14. Nxf7 Kxf7 (14... Qe7 15. Nh6+ Kh8 16. Bb5 a6 17. dxc5 Bxc5 18. Be2 $18) 15. Qxh7+ Kf8 16. f5 $1) 13... dxe4 14. Ndc4 $14 {the number two move, according to the engine.} (14. Nxf7 $1 Qe7 15. Nh6+ Kg7 16. b3 $18) 14... Nxe5 15. fxe5 {correctly opening the file for the Rf1, but White still is only slightly better. However, after the reasonable-looking} Bf8 $2 16. Bd2 $6 {I thought for some time at the board, primarily trying to make the capture on f7 work again - this time with the rook - but did not see how. I played the text move on the principle of connecting the rooks and adding to the attack that may, but I missed Black's pinning response.} (16. Rxf7 $1 {wins immediately.} Kxf7 (16... h6 17. Rxb7 $18) 17. Qxh7+ Bg7 18. Bd2 $1 $18 {Now this move is decisive - sequencing matters, as both the Ra1 and Nc4 are threatening to give check and join the attack.}) 16... Ba6 $11 17. Rxf7 $1 {this should still draw. Unfortunately I did not see Black's h-pawn defense, which led to further discombobulation in my thinking.} h5 $6 (17... h6 $11) 18. Raf1 $2 $17 {"long think, wrong think" as the saying goes. Now the Nc4 goes, while I do not get enough compensation.} (18. Rf6 {I spotted the idea but then did not give it enough thought. This immediately targets the weakness on g6, which cannot be defended.} Bg7 19. Rxg6 Bxc4 20. Be1 $14 {with the idea of redeploying the bishop to h4 and seizing the key h4-d8 diagonal, while continuing to threaten the weak h-pawn.} hxg4 $2 {would lead to} 21. Qxg4 Qd7 22. Bh4 $18) (18. b3 $4 {trying to be safe does not work.} Kxf7 $19) 18... Bxc4 19. R1f6 {another long think, correctly this time.} Be2 $2 {neither my opponent nor I correctly calculate the tactics involved in the defense. At the time, it struck me as a clever way to get the bishop involved and threaten taking on g4.} (19... Re7) 20. Rxg6+ $6 {This still should draw, even though I miss another win.} (20. Rxf8+ $1 {I had examined capturing on f8 before, but concluded that it did not work, so did not re-examine it as a candidate move.} Rxf8 21. Rxg6+ Kf7 22. Qxh5 Qd7 {the Black king cannot try to run without being mated, so this provides another square. Now multiple moves win, for example} 23. Be1 (23. d5 exd5 (23... Bc4 24. d6 Ke8 25. Rf6+ $18) 24. e6+ $18) 23... Ke8 24. Rf6+ $18) 20... Kxf7 21. Qxh5 $1 {this should still be enough for a draw.} Bg7 {only move} 22. Qh7 $2 (22. Rf6+ $1 {I did not even consider, missing the fact that the discovery made the rook untakeable. I actually did see this (dimly) early on in the calculation process, but then somehow discounted it.} Kg8 23. Qf7+ Kh8 (23... Kh7 $4 24. Rh6+ Kxh6 25. Qh5#) 24. Qh5+ {with a draw by repetition coming.}) 22... Rg8 {now my opponent's defense is more than enough to emerge with a win, given the material disparity, although it remains slightly tricky.} 23. Be1 {a good idea, but too late.} Kf8 24. Bh4 Qd7 25. Bf6 Qf7 $1 {kills off any remaining chances for White.} 26. Bxg7+ Rxg7 27. Qh8+ Rg8 28. Qh6+ Ke7 {the king now has plenty of room to run.} 29. Qg5+ Kd7 0-1

Annotated Game #277: A 19th-century lesson from Pillsbury

After my first-round loss as Black, I escaped with a draw as White in the second round after a wild game. I keep learning about move-order tricks and issues in the Stonewall Attack, with this game being another reminder of the one involving a Black Bd6 "targeting" the protected f4 pawn; this is a positional threat for a pawn exchange on d4, since White would be forced to recapture with the c-pawn and reach an unfavorable structure. (The same issue happens with Black in the Stonewall Defense.)

While neither myself or my opponent showed a consistent level of play in this game, during analysis I came across an excellent game from Harry Nelson Pillsbury that illustrated a much higher level of understanding of the position for White; the game score is included in the notes to move 10. A valuable lesson from the 19th century!

[Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "ChessAdmin"] [Black "Class B"] [Result "1/2-1/2"] [ECO "D00"] [Annotator "ChessAdmin/Dragon 3.2"] [PlyCount "88"] [GameId "488555916873"] 1. d4 d5 2. e3 Nf6 3. Bd3 e6 4. Nd2 {the idea is to prevent a symmetrical Stonewall formation from Black, which could happen after an immediate f4.} (4. f4 Ne4 5. Nf3 Be7 6. Nbd2 f5 $11) 4... Bd6 5. f4 c5 6. c3 {a problem with following this move-order is that the Bd6 targets f4, so the e-pawn cannot recapture on d4.} (6. Qf3 $5) 6... Nc6 (6... cxd4 7. cxd4 $15 {Black will be able to take better advantage of the open c-file and greater space available on the queenside.}) 7. Ngf3 O-O 8. Ne5 {now White is back into the standard Stonewall Attack formation. The Ne5 physically blocks the pressure on the f-pawn, eliminating that issue.} g6 {not a bad move in itself, but it makes less sense with the dark-square bishop already developed to d6.} 9. O-O Ne8 10. Qg4 {this is premature.} (10. Ndf3 {the knight is better placed and influences multiple key squares, such as d4, e5, g6 and h4. Here's how Pillsbury handled the rest of one game:} f6 11. Nxc6 bxc6 12. Qe2 f5 13. Bd2 Rb8 14. Rab1 Nf6 15. Kh1 Ne4 16. Be1 c4 17. Bc2 Qa5 18. a3 Qc7 19. g4 fxg4 20. Ne5 Nf6 21. Rg1 c5 22. Bh4 cxd4 23. cxd4 Bxe5 24. fxe5 Ne8 25. Rxg4 Qf7 26. Rg3 Ng7 27. Bf6 Ne8 28. Bxg6 hxg6 29. Qh5 Rb7 30. Qh8# {1-0 Pillsbury,H-Taubenhaus,J New York Impromptu 1893 (10)}) 10... Ng7 {evidently this was the idea behind moving the g-pawn earlier.} 11. Ndf3 $6 {played one move too late. Now White's pieces are more cramped on the kingside.} (11. Qh3 {the queen wants to be on the h-file for attacking purposes, in any case. Now if} f6 $2 12. Nxg6 $1 $18 {breaks apart Black's defenses, with a discovered attack on h7 threatened.}) 11... Ne7 12. Qg3 $6 {there's nothing to do for the queen on the g-file, so this just loses a tempo.} (12. Qh3) 12... Nef5 13. Qh3 {finally the queen is forced to the better square, but in less favorable circumstances.} c4 $6 {this actually does White a favor, as the bishop after retreating will no longer be available as a target.} (13... f6 {this now works, or at least keeps the balance for Black.} 14. g4 fxe5 15. fxe5 Be7 $15) 14. Bc2 h5 $6 {this unnecessarily weakens the pawn shield and allows White to attack.} 15. Kh1 {a good attacking move, preparing to put the rook on g1.} (15. g4 {immediately, however, is possible and best, according to the engines.} hxg4 16. Qxg4 {followed by Kh1 and possibly Rg1 seems like a better approach than the game.}) 15... Nh6 {now Black can exchange off on g4 and defend.} 16. Rg1 {not a bad idea, but the rook was fine on the f-file and there are better moves available.} (16. e4 $1 {this pawn lever is a key idea in these position-types, threatening to undermine Black's pawn chain while also moving towards opening up the two bishops' diagonals.}) 16... Bxe5 {understandable that Black would want to exchange off an attacker, but it in reality it does nothing for him, and could lead to a greater White attack, in fact.} 17. Nxe5 {this breaks the rule in the Stonewall Attack of recapturing on e5 with the f-pawn, to open up the f-file for an attack. This would also help clear the c1-h6 diagonal.} (17. fxe5 $1 Ngf5 18. Re1 $18 {preparing the e3-e4 blow and anticipating a potential ...Ng4.}) 17... Qf6 $2 {this would allow a winning tactical blow.} 18. Bd2 $16 {maintaining an advantage, but no more than that.} (18. g4 $1 {now there is a pawn fork on g5, so things are forced. Black cannot take with the pawn, since the Nh6 would be hanging.} Nxg4 19. Rxg4 hxg4 20. Nxg4 $18 Qe7 21. Nh6+ $1 {picking up the queen on e7 after a windmill tactic on f7 and then ...Nf5, due to the queen checks on the h-file.}) 18... Ngf5 19. e4 {this pawn lever is perhaps not quite as effective as if played in move 16, but it is still good. Black does not respond correctly, in any case.} Ne7 $2 (19... dxe4 20. Bxe4 Nd6 21. Bf3 $16) 20. Raf1 $18 {a strong move, preparing the f-pawn advance, although it could also be played immediately.} (20. f5 $1 {with a discovered attack on the Nh6.} Ng4 (20... Kh7 $2 21. fxg6+ fxg6 22. Bxh6 Kxh6 23. Ng4+ $1 $18) 21. Nxg4 hxg4 22. Qh6 $1 $18 {is decisive, with Bg5 threatened to follow.}) 20... Qg7 21. g4 (21. Qh4 $5 f6 {this appears to largely resolve Black's problems, but White is still winning after} 22. g4 $1 fxe5 23. fxe5 Nxg4 24. h3 {and the knight is trapped, since if} Nh6 25. Bxh6 {deflection tactic on the overloaded Qg7 defender} Qxh6 26. Qxe7 $18) 21... Nxg4 22. Nxg4 $2 {this is a big failure of both imagination and calculation.} (22. Rxg4 $1 {the same idea from the move 18 variation. The Ne5 is a stronger attacker, so the rook sacrifices itself to get the h-file open.} hxg4 23. Nxg4 $18) (22. Qh4 $5) 22... hxg4 23. Rxg4 dxe4 $15 {the next move is the "automatic" recapture, which of course is a blunder.} 24. Bxe4 $4 {the pawn is tactically protected.} (24. b3) 24... Nf5 $2 {here I rushed to exchange pieces, amazed by my good fortune. I recall thinking that I did not wish my opponent to realize his mistake, although it would not have made a difference.} (24... f5 $1 {and the pawn fork decides it.}) 25. Bxf5 (25. Rfg1 $11) 25... exf5 26. Rg3 Bd7 {this is too passive for the bishop and allows my next move.} (26... Be6 $15 {would maintain a small positional advantage, with contested control over the center and Black's better kingside pawn formation.}) 27. d5 $11 {I was proud of finding this, since it appears to weaken White's pawn structure, but in fact seizes central space and equalizes. Black actually cannot get at the advanced d-pawn, which restricts the bishop.} Rad8 28. Qg2 {oriented towards reinforcing the d-pawn.} (28. Be3 {is the more active and better choice.}) 28... Be8 29. Kg1 {the point is to get the king off the long diagonal, so the d-pawn can advance without triggering a ...Bc6 bishop skewer.} Qf6 {attempting to extricate the queen from the g-file pin, but this is too slow. I spot the idea of occupying the long diagonal with my centralized bishop.} 30. Be3 $16 Qd6 {again getting out of the line of fire.} 31. Bd4 $6 $11 {it was not necessary to give up the pawn, and White does not have enough of an attack in response.} (31. Rd1 $16 {simple and best, retaining the pawn.}) 31... Qxd5 32. Qh3 {a mate threat is always nice, except when there is a simple defense like} f6 {and from this point on, neither side should be able to make progress - although it is trickier for Black, as we'll see on the next move.} 33. Re1 {logically occupying the open file.} Qf7 $2 (33... Rd7 $11) 34. Qxf5 {I missed Black's next resource, which is the best defense.} (34. Bc5 $1 {wins material and provides White a winning position. However, this was evidently too simple for me to understand, so instead I go with a more complicated attack.}) 34... Rd5 35. Qc2 Rh5 36. Bc5 $4 {my brain was evidently tired at this point and I went back to what should have been played on move 34. But what has changed about the position?} Rxc5 $19 {oh, that's right.} 37. Rxe8 {a desperate attempt to get a perpetual on Black's king.} Rxe8 38. Rxg6+ Kh8 39. Rh6+ Kg8 40. Qg2+ Kf8 (40... Qg7 $1 {my opponent does not spot this idea, which works due to} 41. Rg6 Rg5 $19 {which is admittedly hard to visualize and find.} 42. Rxg7+ Rxg7 {and the queen is pinned.}) 41. Rh8+ Ke7 42. Qxb7+ Ke6 {by this point we were both short on time and my opponent plays it safe, accepting a perpetual. There is in fact a draw, but not in the line I played.} 43. Qe4+ $2 (43. f5+ $1 {diverting the rook away, leaving the king bare.} Rxf5 44. Qc6+ $11) 43... Kd7 44. Qb7+ Ke6 (44... Rc7 $1 {and the king will have enough of a shield.}) 1/2-1/2

Annotated Game #78: Chess is 99% Calculation

This fourth-round tournament game continued my woes and ended rather quickly due to a calculation mistake.  Eerily I made a very similar mistake in yesterday's game against Rocky Rook during our first game of the Double My Egg Nog tourney, involving a miscalculation that dropped a pawn after ...Ne4 (see move 17 in this game).  Had I fully analyzed this game beforehand, I probably could have avoided that mistake.  Losing twice in that manner should be incentive enough to avoid doing so again, however.

The opening is similar to the Colle that made an appearance in Annotated Game #75 (and in the Rocky Rook game).  White, rather than going for the b-pawn on move 6, instead transposes into a Stonewall Attack formation.  White's early unusual move order choices (2. c3 and 3. e3) indicated that was a strong possibility from the start.  Black has no troubles in the opening, despite helping White's cause by prematurely exchanging pawns on d4 and then trading off White's bad dark-square bishop.  It's pretty obvious from these moves that I had no idea at the time how to play a Stonewall formation.  Nevertheless, Black was equal coming out of the opening.

It's the early middlegame where Black's lack of understanding becomes even more obvious and hurtful.  Pieces are moved incoherently and there is no real plan.  Had White been more quick to exploit this, he could have had an excellent game, for example with 17. Rc7.  However, it wasn't good play by White, but rather a miscalculation by Black that ends the game, in the sequence starting with 17...Ne4.

This game is an excellent example of where it's not enough to see a tactical theme, one must calculate and visualize its consequences.  The saying that Chess is 99% tactics isn't quite true; it's 99% calculation.  Black in this case wasn't forced into the sequence; rather, it was chosen based on faulty calculation and judgment (why do it at all?)  A good lesson for the future, both for this particular middlegame structure and in general.

[Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Class B"] [Black "ChessAdmin"] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "D00"] [Annotator "ChessAdmin/Fritz/Houdini"] [PlyCount "45"] [EventDate "2006.??.??"] {D00:1 d4 d5: Unusual lines} 1. d4 d5 2. c3 Nf6 3. e3 {one way to get to a Stonewall Attack type formation.} Bf5 4. Bd3 Bxd3 5. Qxd3 e6 $146 {as pointed out in Annotated Game 75 in a similar position, this involves a pawn sacrifice if White follows with Qb5+. Black scores well with the other two main moves, for example:} (5... Nbd7 6. Nf3 e6 7. Nbd2 c5 8. O-O cxd4 9. exd4 Bd6 10. Re1 O-O 11. Ne5 Qb8 12. f4 b5 13. Re3 Rc8 14. Rh3 Nf8 15. g4 Bxe5 16. fxe5 Nxg4 17. Nf3 f6 18. Bf4 Ng6 19. Bg3 Qb6 20. exf6 {Prymula,R-Jirovsky,M/CSR 1990/EXT 2002/0-1 (40)}) (5... c6 6. Nd2 Nbd7 7. f4 e6 8. Ngf3 Be7 9. O-O O-O 10. Kh1 Rc8 11. g3 c5 12. h3 c4 13. Qc2 b5 14. a3 a5 15. g4 b4 16. Rg1 b3 17. Qb1 g6 18. Rg2 Qc7 19. g5 Nh5 20. Nf1 {Nykanen,O-Hodokainen,J/Mikkeli 1998/EXT 2000/ 0-1 (59)}) 6. f4 (6. Qb5+ $5 {is noteworthy, says Fritz.} Nbd7 7. Qxb7 $11 { Nonetheless Black's better development and piece activity will compensate for the pawn.}) 6... c5 7. Nf3 {Now the Stonewall Attack formation has appeared.} cxd4 {typical amateur move, Black is in a rush to release the tension. Further development with Bd6 or Nc6 would be better.} 8. cxd4 Bb4+ {Black helps White here by exchanging off White's bad bishop.} 9. Bd2 Bxd2+ 10. Nbxd2 O-O 11. O-O Re8 {poor developing move, as what exactly is the rook going to do on the e-file?} 12. Rac1 Nbd7 {this isn't bad, but putting the knight on c6 would have been a little more active placement.} 13. Rc2 (13. Ne5 {if White is going to play the Stonewall Attack, he really should go for this move, which thematically uses the e5 outpost.}) 13... Rc8 14. Rfc1 Rxc2 15. Rxc2 Qa5 { this starts an unsupported, unproductive demonstration against White's position by the queen. The better plan would be to clear the c-file immediately, for example with Qb8 followed by Rc8.} 16. a3 Qa4 17. h3 (17. Rc7 {would punish Black for his inattention to the c-file.}) 17... Ne4 $2 {this simply loses a pawn, due to miscalculation of the following sequence.} (17... Nb6 $142 $5 $14 {is a viable option, notes Fritz.}) 18. Nxe4 $16 dxe4 19. Qxe4 Nf6 20. Qd3 Nd5 {I had seen things to this point and thought that Black would be able to recover the pawn by force.} 21. Ng5 h6 22. Ne4 Nxe3 $2 {the key miscalculation. The deflection theme was there, of course, but I simply overlooked the blocking move with threat to the queen.} 23. b3 $18 1-0

Annotated Game #33: Stonewall Attack

This next tournament game serves up a mix of positional play and tactical play, along with a heaping portion of blunders on both sides.  The Stonewall Attack was completely unknown to me at the time (the computer classifies the opening as a transposition to a Caro-Kann Exchange variation, which is essentially true after move 5.)  However, I still equalize easily enough by move 10, when White misplaces his queen.

It's the middlegame where I go astray, but this in fact is related to my unfamiliarity with the opening and its resulting plans.  The Stonewall emphasizes using the knights to occupy key outposts at e5/e4, so challenging this idea is critical.  Black's 12...Nb6 is therefore a positional blunder and also demonstrates the classic amateur error of neglecting rook development with the alternative 12...Rac8 (a recurring theme from my tournament play during this period).  White plays the correct follow up, but then fails to take full advantage and misses a key pawn break on move 15, letting Black back into the game.

What follows from Black's point of view is a seesaw game where he is largely responding to White threats without much of an independent plan.  My tactical calculating ability at the time was also relatively undeveloped (shall we say), which meant that I missed a number of equalizing or winning opportunities, failing to think coolly under pressure.  Some days the bear gets you...

[Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Class C"] [Black "ChessAdmin"] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "B13"] [Annotator "ChessAdmin/Fritz/Houdini"] [PlyCount "79"] [EventDate "2002.??.??"] {B13: Caro-Kann: Exchange Variation and Panov-Botvinnik Attack} 1. d4 d5 2. e3 Nf6 3. Bd3 c5 4. c3 cxd4 (4... Nc6 {is most typically played here, as in this game fragment which features a true reversed Stonewall:} 5. f4 g6 6. Nf3 Bf5 7. dxc5 Bxd3 8. Qxd3 Ne4 9. b4 Bg7 10. Nd4 e5 11. Ne2 O-O 12. O-O exf4 13. Nd4 a5 14. b5 Nxc5 15. Qc2 Ne5 16. exf4 Nc4 17. Na3 Re8 18. Rd1 Ne3 19. Bxe3 {Berkes, F-Toth,A/Paks 1998/EXT 99/0-1 (38)}) 5. exd4 Bg4 6. Nf3 e6 (6... Nc6 {is the preferred move, with more flexible development.}) 7. Bg5 (7. Qa4+ Nbd7 8. Ne5 a6 $11) 7... Be7 8. Nbd2 O-O 9. O-O Nbd7 10. Qb3 (10. Qc2 {was a more promising square for the queen and consistent with the Stonewall Attack kingside strategy, generating pressure on the b1-h7 diagonal.}) 10... Qc7 $11 11. h3 Bh5 12. Rac1 Nb6 {moves a key defender away from the e5 square.} (12... Rac8 {was best here; once again, I fall into the common amateur pattern of error of not developing rooks early enough.}) 13. Ne5 Bd6 14. f4 Nfd7 { fixating on the e5 square and removing another defender from the kingside.} 15. Rce1 (15. c4 $1 {with a multitude of threats.}) 15... f6 {and Black has regained equality.} 16. Nxd7 Nxd7 17. Bh4 (17. Rxe6 $5 {is found by the engines } Nb6 ({not} 17... fxg5 18. Qxd5 {and the threat of discovered check along with White's attack is very strong.}) 18. Bh4 Bxf4 19. Qc2 $11) 17... Bxf4 { now with an extra pawn, Black is better equipped to ride out White's kingside attack.} 18. Nf3 (18. Qc2 {bringing the queen into the fight is necessary.}) 18... g5 (18... Rae8 {why not activate the do-nothing rook?} 19. Qc2 h6) 19. Bf2 $15 (19. Rxe6 {is again possible here, although it doesn't work quite as well.}) 19... Kh8 $6 (19... Bxf3 20. gxf3 Rae8) 20. g4 {although my opponent evidently wanted to stop Bxf3, this simply helps Black defend.} (20. Rxe6 $142 $5 Bf7 21. Re7 Rae8 22. Rfe1 Rxe7 23. Rxe7 Bd6 $11) 20... Bf7 $15 21. Qc2 h5 22. Bg6 ({Not} 22. gxh5 Bxh5 {gaining a tempo on the undefended Nf3 and creating kingside threats for Black as well.}) 22... hxg4 23. hxg4 Kg7 24. Bxf7 Kxf7 $4 {overly materialistic thinking, focusing on the immediate threat to e6 and not the queen penetration.} (24... Rxf7 25. Rxe6 Nf8 26. Re2 Ng6 {and it is Black who has winning chances.}) 25. Qh7+ Ke8 26. Rxe6+ Kd8 27. Rfe1 $16 Bd6 $2 {this is bad, but Black is otherwise still unsuccessfully struggling to try and defend both e8 and the pawn on d5 while White stomps all over him.} 28. Bg3 $4 {instead of simply winning the game, comments an incredulous Fritz.} (28. Qg6 {and White wins.} Qc6 29. Nxg5 Kc7 30. Nf7 Rxf7 31. Qxf7) 28... Bxg3 $19 29. Qe7+ Kc8 30. R1e2 (30. Qxf8+ {doesn't work:} Nxf8 31. Re8+ Kd7 32. R1e7+ Kd6 33. Rxc7 Rxe8 34. Rxb7 Re2 35. Rxa7 Rxb2 36. Ra6+ Ke7 37. Ra7+ Nd7 $19) 30... Qd8 $2 {doesn't lose, but fails to capitalize on the possibilities of active play.} (30... Qf4 {and Black has prevailed, notes Fritz. The c7 square is cleared for the king and Black now has major kingside threats.}) 31. Qa3 Kc7 (31... Kb8 {is the safer square, not leaving the king exposed to further checks.}) 32. Kg2 Bf4 33. c4 (33. Qa5+ Nb6 34. Qc5+ Kb8 35. Qe7 $19) 33... dxc4 34. d5 (34. Qa5+ {is insufficient:} Nb6 35. Qc5+ Kb8 36. Qb5 $19 Qc7) 34... b6 $2 {a beginner's error, creating more holes around the king and allowing White perpetual check.} (34... Rh8 $142 $19 {nails it down, states Fritz.}) 35. Nd4 Kb7 $4 (35... Nc5 36. d6+ Bxd6 37. Nb5+ Kc6 38. Nd4+ Kc7 39. Nb5+ {etc. is the shortest line for repeating the position, but there are others.}) 36. Qa4 $4 { not a good decision, because now the opponent is right back in the game, says Fritz.} (36. Re7 {pinning the knight wins:} Rc8 (36... Qc8 37. Qa4 Rd8 38. Ne6) 37. Ne6 Rc7) 36... Rc8 $4 {the mutual blunders continue.} (36... Be5 $142 { defending by interfering with the connection between the rooks.} 37. Nc6 Qc7 $17) 37. Nb5 $4 {stumbles just before the finish line, remarks Fritz.} (37. Nc6 $142 {with double threat of mate on a7 and taking the Qd8.} a6 38. Nxd8+ Rfxd8 39. Re7 $18) 37... Bb8 $2 (37... a6 $142 {and Black has triumphed} 38. Nd6+ Bxd6 39. Rxd6 Rf7 $19) 38. Re7 $11 Rc7 $4 {throws away the game} (38... Rc5 $11 {leads to another perpetual check.}) 39. Nxc7 $18 Kxc7 {(played with 5 seconds left on Black's clock)} 40. Qc6# 1-0

Annotated Game #274: The en passant rule and a repertoire hole

In this next game my opponent played well in the opening against my Stonewall Attack, and indeed put her finger (figuratively) on a significant repertoire hole for me. By move 9 I am significantly worse positionally and do not help my cause by delaying a knight jump into e5. However, things turn around due to my opponent not fully comprehending the en passant rule, attempting to execute it illegally and then being forced to move the pawn involved, which dropped a piece. I did not take the win for granted, however, and seriously focused on calculating out my defense afterwards, given some potentially scary-looking operations by Black down the now-open g-file. This was successful, thanks to a well-placed knight and rook combination, even though my kingside ended up denuded of pawns. I was then able to break through in the center and unleash my queen decisively.

[Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "ChessAdmin"] [Black "Class D"] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "D00"] [Annotator "ChessAdmin/Dragon 3.2"] [PlyCount "117"] [GameId "487213742334"] 1. d4 Nf6 2. e3 d5 3. Bd3 (3. Nf3 $5 {in light of White's problems in this line that are soon illustrated, perhaps a better choice.}) 3... c5 4. c3 {attempting to reach standard Stonewall Attack lines.} (4. dxc5 $5 {and then the engine line goes} e5 5. b4 a5 6. c3 {with both sides in strange opening territory.}) 4... Nc6 5. f4 {the main problem with this type of Stonewall Attack formation is Black's next move.} (5. Nf3 $5) (5. dxc5) 5... Bg4 $17 {engines typically undervalue the Stonewall, but in this particular case I do consider its assessment of a Black advantage as valid. The main problem is that White cannot get the "Pillsbury knight" to e5 soon, and Black will be able to exchange off the light-squared bishops, a key part of White's normal attacking game.} 6. Nf3 e6 7. O-O Bd6 8. h3 Bf5 9. g4 (9. Bxf5 {I didn't like the resulting pawn formation, which favors Black by restraining g2-g4 and also fixing White's backwards e-pawn on the half-open file. However, it's still objectively best, according to the engine.} exf5 10. Qd3 Ne4 11. dxc5 Bxc5 $17 {Black is ahead in development and has more space, so this is not losing perhaps but rather miserable for White.}) 9... Bxd3 10. Qxd3 {in contrast with the above variation, Black's central pawn formation is stronger.} Qd7 11. Nbd2 $6 (11. Ne5 {immediately looks better, removing the pressure of the Bd6 on the f-pawn, which is a common issue if an exchange is possible on d4.}) 11... O-O-O $15 {this gets the king out of the way of White's kingside pawn expansion, but allows me to get my knight to its to ideal square, while creating a target for play on the queenside. Now opening the c-file isn't such a great idea for Black.} (11... cxd4 {forcing open the c-file.} 12. cxd4 {normally White would prefer to capture with the e-pawn, but the Nd2 is blocking the Bc1 and the f4 pawn would be hanging.} Rc8) 12. Ne5 Qc7 13. b3 {the idea being to restrain c5-c4 and perhaps support a future c-pawn advance.} (13. b4 $5 c4 14. Qe2 {and looking to follow up with the e4 pawn lever or an a-pawn advance would be more aggressive.}) 13... h5 {this was probably played in error, since after} 14. g5 $11 {my opponent tried to illegally take en passant on g4. After that was confirmed by the TD, she was then forced to play} h4 {having touched the h-pawn.} 15. gxf6 {still required some thought in order to calculate its safety, however, as now Black gets pressure down the open g-file.} gxf6 16. Nxc6 $18 Qxc6 17. Nf3 {I will still have to sort out my pieces from here, so Black has a bit of initiative, but no real attack.} Rdg8+ 18. Kf2 c4 19. Qd1 {interferes on the back rank a bit, but I wanted to maintain protection of the Nf3 and put the queen on the d1-h5 diagonal. Moving Qe2 immediately would have been fine.} Qe8 {this is too slow.} (19... Rg3 {is the critical try, but is stopped easily by} 20. Rh1 $18) 20. Bd2 (20. Rg1 $5 Rxg1 21. Qxg1 Rg8 22. Qf1 $18) 20... Rg6 {again too slow to create threats.} (20... e5 $5 {looks like the best practical try.}) 21. Qe2 Qg8 $6 {this helps set up a tactic shortly.} (21... Rg3) 22. Rg1 {now with the queen out of the way, exchanging on g1 simply benefits White.} Rg3 {this no longer works for Black, due to} 23. Nxh4 $1 {removal of the guard theme} Rxg1 24. Rxg1 {coming with tempo, since it hits the queen instead of a rook} Qh7 25. Nf3 Qxh3 {While Black has regained the material, strangely enough the queen and rook are effectively out of play on the kingside, as the Nf3 and Rg1 cover everything, so now I can turn my attention to breaking through in the center, with Black's king looking vulnerable behind it.} 26. bxc4 Be7 27. cxd5 exd5 28. Qf1 {by this point I felt it would be easier just to exchange into a won piece-up endgame, rather than keep queens on the board. I also saw I could harass Black's queen if it weren't traded, then take control over the kingside files.} Qh5 29. Rg2 f5 $2 {this effectively ends the game, cutting off the queen's retreat.} (29... Qf5 30. Rh2 Rxh2+ 31. Nxh2 Qc2 32. Nf3 Qxa2 33. Qh3+ Kc7 34. Qh5 $18) 30. Rh2 {skewering the queen against the rook.} Qxh2+ 31. Nxh2 Rxh2+ 32. Ke1 {now I simply had to be careful not to blunder into a Black tactic, for example pinning one of my pieces against the king.} Bh4+ 33. Kd1 Rf2 34. Qh1 Bg3 35. Qh3 Bh2 36. Qxf5+ Kc7 37. Qxf7+ Kc6 38. Qe6+ Kc7 39. Qxd5 {my opponent, like many scholastic players, appears to have been trained to never resign, even when it is hopeless. This doesn't bother me any more, since I have decided to just play completely safely to win in response; if there are extra moves involved, that's then more agony for my opponent, rather than myself.} Bg3 40. Qh1 a6 41. Qg1 Bh4 42. Qg7+ Kb8 43. Qh8+ Kc7 44. Qxh4 Rg2 45. Qe1 Rg8 46. e4 Re8 47. f5 b5 48. e5 a5 49. e6 Kb7 50. Qe5 Kc6 51. Qc5+ Kb7 52. Qxb5+ Ka7 53. Qxe8 a4 54. f6 a3 55. f7 Kb6 56. f8=Q Kb7 57. Qd6 Ka7 58. Qee7+ Ka8 59. Qdd8# 1-0

DVD completed: Stomping White with the Stonewall Defense

I recently finished the DVD "Stomping White with the Stonewall Defense" by GM Eugene Perelshteyn.  I found it to be a complete, if not comprehensive, intro to the Stonewall; the run-time is a little over 2 hours.  In my view, it offers enough of a mix of general ideas and specific suggestions to enable you to start playing it immediately in tournaments and experimenting on your own.  I've looked at other Stonewall resources previously and I would say this DVD is also a good addition to a Stonewall player's library, not just at the "intro" level, with some novel approaches and key concepts clearly explained and illustrated.  (Don't let the "Stomping White..." title mislead you, as it's actually a balanced treatment of the opening that doesn't promise a win for Black.)

One of the practical strengths of the lessons is the repeated presentation of different move-order possibilities to enter the base Stonewall formation (Black pawns on f5/e6/d6/c6, with Nf6 and Bd6 piece developments).  This allows you to strategize and choose which ones may be best suited for your existing repertoire - including the French move-order (1...e6), Queen's Gambit Declined (1...d5 followed by ...e6), Slav and others.  Naturally you can also commit on move one to the Dutch Defense (1...f5), but be careful with that; all of the anti-Dutch lines (like 2. Bg5 and so on) are in play after that, so you may never reach the Stonewall.

GM Perelshteyn typically mentions multiple, equally good plans for Black at critical points, although he will indicate a preference and then go deeper into certain lines.  For example, the primary strategic option he presents is fianchettoing Black's light-square bishop (with ...b6 and ...Bb7) in the main lines, but there are also examples where the alternate plan of ...Bd7-e8-h5 is shown to be strong.

The lessons also emphasize the fact that in the Stonewall, understanding the keys to the different setups / development schemes are usually more important than the move-order.  This reduces the amount of memorization required in terms of sequencing moves, and is a helpful insight in general for the improving player.  For study purposes, however, it may actually be a little more difficult to integrate the Stonewall into your existing computer repertoire database.  I ended up splitting my Dutch Stonewall "games" into two: White fianchetto and White non-fianchetto setups and using more text comments than usual on the ideas involved.

Following is a summary of the chapter contents with some personal commentary.

Chapter 1: Introduction and Fianchetto Systems with Nh3

• Nh3 development by White (instead of Nf3): GM Perelshteyn does a good job of highlighting possible Black plans and offers a suggested method of taking on White's main ideas: Black should preserve the dark-square bishop, exchange off White's bishop once it lands on f4 by ...Nh5, or - in the case of b3 followed by Ba3 - exchange on a3 and misplace White's knight.
• I appreciated the expert evaluations and explanations of why particular exchanges and moves worked in this particular setup. Normally Black tries to avoid exchanging off the dark-square bishop, for example, but here specific positional considerations outweigh that general principle when White plays Ba3.  In the other scenario, Black drops back the bishop on d6 to e7 when challenged by Bf4, since the exchange on f4 would in contrast help reposition White's Nh3 to a better square.

Chapter 2: Fianchetto Systems with Nf3

• GM Perelshteyn prefers the ...b6/Bb7 development in the main line for White that features the development setup b3/Bb2/Qc1/Ba3.  He points out simplifying lines leading to endgame and more complex middlegame possibilities.
• 8. Bf4 plan for White is also covered; here the exchange is OK, and then he shows the potential power of alternate bishop development for Black (...Bd7-e8-h5/g6)
• Also shows alternate bishop development in Nc3/Qc2 plan for White, with queenside pawn expansion (Rb1 followed by b4).

Chapter 3: e3 and Nf3 Setups (non-Fianchetto)

• This chapter demonstrates more classic Stonewall kingside attack ideas, centered around an early ...Ne4 by Black, followed by ...Qf6 and ...g5.  
• Does a good job of emphasizing the elements of attack and the associated key concepts (control of e5, exchanging with a knight on g3, etc.)

Chapter 4: e3, Bd3 and Nge2 Setups

• In this setup, White reserves the option of f2-f3 to kick a ...Ne4.
• White also has different castling options - Bd2 followed by O-O-O is a possibility.
• GM Perelshteyn recommends quick action by Black on the queenside after castling (O-O), with ...Na6 development, exchanging pawns on c4 then following up with ...b5.  These lines may involve pawn sacrifices, but Black has good compensation.

Chapter 5: Sample game: Kramnik-Anand, Melody Amber 2008

• This game is particularly interesting for reaching the Stonewall via the Queen's Indian Defense move-order.
• Black undertakes a thematic attack on the kingside after playing in the center; Anand switched to this strategy after Kramnik committed to a queenside advance.
• Also notable for Anand's brilliant tactical finish with the queen
• Below is the (unannotated) game, for those interested in taking a look.

[Event "Amber-rapid 17th"] [Site "Nice"] [Date "2008.03.15"] [Round "1"] [White "Kramnik, Vladimir"] [Black "Anand, Viswanathan"] [Result "0-1"] [ECO "E15"] [WhiteElo "2799"] [BlackElo "2799"] [PlyCount "86"] [EventDate "2008.03.15"] [EventType "tourn (rapid)"] [EventRounds "11"] [EventCountry "FRA"] [EventCategory "21"] [SourceTitle "CBM 123 Extra"] [Source "ChessBase"] [SourceDate "2008.05.06"] [SourceVersion "1"] [SourceVersionDate "2008.05.06"] [SourceQuality "1"] 1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 b6 4. g3 Ba6 5. b3 Bb4+ 6. Bd2 Be7 7. Bg2 c6 8. Bc3 d5 9. Ne5 Nfd7 10. Nxd7 Nxd7 11. Nd2 O-O 12. O-O f5 13. Rc1 Nf6 14. Bb2 Bd6 15. Nf3 Qe7 16. Ne5 Rac8 17. Nd3 Rfd8 18. Re1 Qe8 19. e3 g5 20. Rc2 g4 21. Qc1 Qe7 22. Rd1 Ne4 23. c5 bxc5 24. dxc5 Bb8 25. Ne5 Ng5 26. Qa1 Nf7 27. Nxf7 Kxf7 28. a4 h5 29. b4 h4 30. b5 Bb7 31. Rdc1 Kg6 32. Be5 Bxe5 33. Qxe5 Qf6 34. Qd4 e5 35. Qb4 hxg3 36. hxg3 Rd7 37. Qa5 Rh8 38. Qxa7 f4 39. exf4 exf4 40. gxf4 Rdh7 41. Qb6 Qxf4 42. bxc6 Qf3 43. cxb7+ Kf5 0-1

Chapter 6: Sample game 2: student game

• This game, by one of GM Perelshteyn's students, features an early c5 by White, followed by immediate queenside play. Black responds with the classic ...Bd7-e8-h5 plan and builds up on the kingside after locking the queenside and center.
• It illustrates typical Black attacking themes against a setup that might be used by a club-level opponent.  One of the important lessons is that Black takes the necessary time to build up and does not rush the attack.

Chapter 7: Conclusion

• Summarizes the overarching ideas: Stonewall pawn formation achieved through various openings - Dutch, Slav, QGD, Triangle formation, French 1...e6; there are various move-order tricks; Black's fianchetto development vs. Bd7-e8-h5 standard plans.

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

Commentary: Golden Apricot 2015, Round 1 (Cam - Volkov)

This game finishes off the 2015 master-level commentary cycle for me.  As a Stonewall Dutch, it's also useful to compare with other related commentary games on this site (and in the downloadable PGN database), including more recently featured wins by Carlsen over Anand and Caruana as Black.  (2015 was certainly a good year for the Stonewall at the top levels).

This particular game is a little different, coming from round 1 of the Golden Apricot tournament in Malatya, Turkey.  In an open tournament, the first round features mismatches between master and amateur players, which while rather hard on the amateurs can actually yield useful lessons for the improving chess player.  (The relatively recent book Grandmaster Versus Amateur for example looks at this theme, as does the classic book by Max Euwe Chess Master vs. Chess Amateur.) It's not often that these types of games are publicized or analyzed, however, so I'm grateful that this one was featured in the above ChessBase tournament news link (which contains some commentary as well by IM Alina l'Ami).

I find that studying these kind of "mismatch" games can help fill an important and often neglected niche in chess study, namely looking at how one should proceed against less-than-perfect play.  I believe this is especially important for opening study, since if you know your opening's key concepts and plans better than your opponent, you should end up in a more advantageous position.  That said, most opening references don't even look at the potential inferior moves by your opponent, even if they are the most commonly played by non-professional players.  The improving player can therefore lose out on a lot of opportunities, from a practical standpoint, by not being exposed to them.

In the game below, White (the amateur) plays a reasonable opening, but one that has some subtle strategic flaws, most notably the c5 advance releasing the tension against Black's central d5 pawn.  Once the queenside is locked up, Black turns his full attention and activity to the kingside, breaking in the center with ...e5 (also a theme in the Anand-Carlsen game linked above).  The end then comes remarkably quickly, as Black executes typical Stonewall attacking ideas that White is unable to understand and block effectively.

[Event "3rd Golden Apricot 2015"] [Site "Malatya TUR"] [Date "2015.08.25"] [Round "1.2"] [White "Cam, Vedat"] [Black "Volkov, Sergey"] [Result "0-1"] [ECO "A85"] [WhiteElo "1872"] [BlackElo "2589"] [Annotator "ChessAdmin/Komodo 8"] [PlyCount "40"] [EventDate "2015.08.25"] 1. d4 d5 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 c6 {instead of following up with the standard QGD moves, Black heads for a Stonewall by transposition.} 4. e3 Bd6 {typically ... f5 would be played immediately when transposing to the Stonewall. The text move may try to tempt White into the c5 advance, which is normally in Black's favor because it leaves his central d5 outpost unchallenged.} 5. Nc3 f5 6. Bd3 Nf6 {Black has now reached the standard Modern Stonewall formation.} 7. Bd2 O-O 8. O-O Ne4 {the overwhelming favorite move in the database. Black follows the typical Stonewall plan with his knights, seizing the outpost on e4. With White's bishop on d3, the Nc3 cannot exchange off the Ne4 due to the resulting pawn fork.} 9. c5 {this move scores only 6 percent (!) in the database out of nine games, illustrating its strategic weakness.} Bc7 {Black's bishop is no less effective on c7, as its primary function is exerting pressure on the b8-h2 diagonal.} 10. b4 a6 {there are several different ways Black could play here. The game continuation is relatively straightforward, restraining further advance of the b-pawn, then getting the knight and queen developed.} 11. a4 Nd7 12. b5 {White's plan of rapid queenside expansion looks like it puts him ahead of Black in development. White's initiative is only temporary, however, as Black's position holds no weaknesses despite White's space advantage.} Qf6 { this does multiple things for Black, including adding support for the idea of the ...e5 break and positioning the queen well for further action on the kingside.} 13. b6 {this move is probably unavoidable, according to Komodo 8. Black is threatening to undermine the queenside pawns with ...e5, so maintaining the tension with the b-pawn could eventually lead to a collapse of White's extended pawn formation. However, once the queenside pawns are locked up, then the game becomes strategically much easier for Black; the only open play is on the kingside, which is the natural hunting ground for the Stonewall. } Bb8 {the bishop is still very much in play here, although the Ra8 is now locked to its square. The problem with the rook will be offset by the inability of White to transfer his queenside rook, or other needed forces, to the kingside in an effective manner.} 14. Rc1 e5 {illustrating the classic principle of reacting to a flank advance by breaking in the center. Note how Black's pieces are activated by this freeing advance. In addition to the strategic aspects, there is now a tactical threat of ...Nxc3 followed by the pawn fork ...e4.} 15. Ne2 (15. Nxe5 {disrupting Black's formation in the center is the only way to stay relatively equal.} Bxe5 16. dxe5 Nxe5 17. Bb1 Qe7 18. Be1 Nc4 (18... Nxc5 {?} 19. Nxd5 cxd5 20. Qxd5+)) 15... Nxd2 16. Nxd2 e4 {this is no longer a double attack, but is still a highly advantageous move. The pawn lever ...f4 is now an obvious future threat. ⩱} 17. Bb1 Qh6 { hitting h2. A standard follow-up plan for Black would now be ...g5, coupled with ...Nf6, ...Kh8 and ...Rg8, to get the kingside attack rolling.} 18. g3 { under pressure, White chooses poorly. Blunting the attack on the b8-h2 diagonal looks like an obvious choice, but now Black can end things much more quickly. ?} (18. h3 {⩱}) 18... Nf6 {usually, moving a knight to f6 is routine rather than devastating. Here, however, the light-square weakness on the kingside means that it can go to g4 and combine with the Qh6 on the attack. White has no good options to defend against this threat. −⁠+} 19. Kg2 (19. h4 Ng4 20. Rc3 g5 {−⁠+}) (19. f3 Qxe3+ {−⁠+}) 19... f4 {there's a reason this pawn advance is a key attacking concept in the Dutch. White's position now falls apart; Black has a significant preponderance of material participating in the kingside attack, having with f5-f4 just added the Bc8 to it (removing the blocking pawn on f5 and hitting h3). Meanwhile, White's pieces are barely in the game. !} 20. exf4 (20. Nxf4 {temporarily staves off defeat, but Black can then penetrate White's position at his leisure.} Bxf4 21. h4 (21. exf4 Qh3+ 22. Kg1 Ng4 {−⁠+}) 21... Bb8 22. Qe2 Bg4 23. Qe1 Qh5 24. f3 exf3+ 25. Nxf3 Ne4 {−⁠+}) 20... Qh3+ {and the follow-up ...Ng4 cannot be stopped.} 0-1

Annotated Game #87: Is it a Colle? A Stonewall? No, it's a bust

This fourth-round tournament game has a more satisfying feel to it than the previous "ratings draw" where I (as White) should have made the necessary effort to win the endgame, regardless of the ratings gap.  Here, as Black I am unable to play my usual ...Bf5 in response to a Colle System setup because White plays an early Bd3 - probably with preventing that move in mind.  However, opening theory and practice exists for a reason and a drawback of the unusual early bishop move is quickly demonstrated by Black, who exchanges off the d-pawn and then pressures its replacement.  The opening - which seems to be a strange mix of Colle and Stonewall Attack ideas - doesn't lose for White, but he quickly abandons any chance of an advantage while giving himself some positional flaws, so it has to be considered a bust.

By move 9 Black has the game fully in hand and White is struggling to come up with good ideas, although the position is still balanced.  Black never loses his grip and then steers the game towards a drawn ending, although the alternatives shown around move 19-20 would have allowed him to keep pressuring White in the hopes of realizing his positional advantage.  Given the 250-point ratings gap and Black's lack of a clearly winning advantage, I think a draw was a reasonable result, although it would have been useful to probe harder in the middlegame, as White had no real counter-threats.

This was an encouraging game from the improvement standpoint, as it was blunder-free and I essentially dominated things strategically from early in the opening phase against a much higher-rated opponent, even though the advantage obtained was not sufficient for a win.  In more general terms, games like these should be encouraging for us Class B players, as they help show that Class A players should not be feared.

[Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "Class A"] [Black "ChessAdmin"] [Result "1/2-1/2"] [ECO "D00"] [Annotator "ChessAdmin/Fritz/Houdini"] [PlyCount "76"] {D00:1 d4 d5: Unusual lines} 1. d4 d5 2. e3 Nf6 3. Bd3 {this prevents ...Bf5, which is my normal defense against a White setup with the pawns on e3/d4 (as occurs with the Colle System). It looks like White intends trying an accelerated Colle System or a Stonewall Attack and wants to eliminate my preferred option, but the early bishop move has its own problems.} c5 {this scores very well (60 percent) for Black.} 4. b3 cxd4 {perhaps a little hasty, although it's not a bad idea to exchange White's central pawn and open the c-file for Black.} (4... Nc6 {would maintain the tension in the center.} 5. Bb2 Bg4 6. Nf3 e6 7. h3 Bxf3 8. Qxf3 cxd4 9. Bxd4 e5 10. Bc3 e4 11. Bxf6 gxf6 12. Bxe4 dxe4 13. Qxe4+ Qe7 14. Qxe7+ Bxe7 {0-1 (46) Cordova,E (2567)-Glud,J (2496) Sabadell 2011}) 5. exd4 Nc6 {now we see a drawback of the early Bd3, as all of White's options for defending the d4 pawn create some sort of positional problem for him.} 6. Ne2 {this avoids the pin that would occur after Nf3, but Black plays ...Bg4 anyway in order to provoke the weakening pawn advance.} Bg4 7. f3 {Consolidates e4, notes Fritz, but this is not sufficient compensation for the weaker king position.} Bh5 8. O-O e6 9. Be3 Bd6 {Black has developed naturally and has a comfortable game, while White cannot say the same thing.} 10. Qe1 {this move is aggressive but ignores development. White appears to be playing as if this were a Stonewall Attack, but without the stonewall.} (10. c4 {would mobilize White's pawns and allow for a Bc2 retreat and a more effective eventual Nc3.} dxc4 (10... e5 $5 11. Nbc3 e4 12. fxe4 $6 (12. Bc2 exf3 13. gxf3 Bg6) 12... Bxh2+ 13. Kh1 (13. Kxh2 $2 Ng4+)) 11. bxc4 Bg6 $11) 10... Qc7 { the threat to the h-pawn is not real and this should in fact encourage White to play the best and naturally aggressive follow-up to his previous queen move. } (10... Bg6 $5 {immediately would be good.}) (10... Rc8 {would also be useful, given Black's plan of exchanging the Bd3 and fully opening the c-file.}) 11. Kh1 (11. Qh4 $5 {should be considered, comments Fritz.}) 11... Bg6 $15 { a powerful little move. White cannot initiate an exchange on g6 because it would open the h-file and the threat to h2 would then become real. He must therefore allow the exchange on d3 doubling his pawns (Qd1 or Qd2 would allow . ..Bxh2).} ({Instead of} 11... Bxh2 $2 12. g3 $16) 12. a3 Bxd3 13. cxd3 Rc8 14. Nbc3 a6 {prophylaxis against Nb5 and supporting the future ...b5 advance.} 15. b4 O-O (15... Bxh2 {still doesn't work:} 16. g3 Bxg3 17. Nxg3 Nxb4 18. axb4 Qxc3 19. Qb1 $14) 16. Rc1 b5 {with the idea of eliminating any useful White play on the queenside.} 17. Bd2 {seems like a wasted move, as the Nc3 hardly needed any more protection and the half-open e-file does nothing for White.} Qb8 18. Na2 Rfe8 19. Qf2 {steps out of the way of the Black rook, which was contemplating supporting an ...e5 pawn break, and reinforces d4.} Ne7 {Black here has a very pleasant position with a definite advantage, but no single obvious plan. Rather than try to increase my advantage, however, I focus on simplification via rook exchanges.} (19... h6 {would be a good prophylactic move against Bg5.}) 20. Qg1 (20. Bg5 {is probably the most annoying for Black.} Nd7 21. Bxe7 Bxe7 {and White at least has traded off his bad bishop.}) 20... Rxc1 (20... Nf5 {would be one way to improve Black's pieces and keep pressing for an advantage.}) 21. Rxc1 Rc8 22. g3 {White decides to put a stop to any possibility of playing ...Bxh2.} Rxc1 23. Qxc1 Qc7 {heading straight for a drawn ending via additional simplification.} (23... Nd7 $5 $11 {is how the engines suggest to play on, although the exchanges have now resulted in a dissipation of Black's previous advantage.}) 24. Qxc7 $11 Bxc7 25. Nac1 { now White's doubled d-pawns, his only real weakness, cannot be threatened by any Black pieces, so the draw is assured from here. If anything, Black has to be more careful not to let his opponent penetrate his position.} Nc6 26. Nb3 Nd7 27. Kg2 Kf8 28. Kf2 Ke7 29. h3 Ndb8 30. Bf4 Bxf4 31. Nxf4 Nd7 32. Ke3 Nb6 33. Nc5 a5 {Black's one chance to try for an advantage. However, he still will not be able to threaten White's remaining pawn effectively, so a draw is agreed in the end.} 34. bxa5 Nxa5 35. Ne2 Nc6 36. Kd2 Kd6 37. Nb7+ Kc7 38. Nc5 Kd6 1/2-1/2

Annotated Game #306: The Stonewall Attack formula

The Stonewall Attack has an undeserved reputation as a "system" opening, although perhaps some people do play the first several moves always by rote. As with its Dutch Stonewall counterpart as Black - see Annotated Game #305 - it is important to pay attention to move-order issues and not expect the same sequence to work every time against different setups from your opponent. However, in certain circumstances there is indeed a "formula" that usually works for White, which I am able to achieve in this next tournament game. Here I demonstrate that I finally have learned the lesson of the e-pawn lever in this position-type - after which, I have at worst a pleasant game, while giving my opponent a chance to mishandle the defense, which he does on move 15.

[Event "?"] [Site "?"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "ChessAdmin"] [Black "Class B"] [Result "1-0"] [Annotator "ChessAdmin/Dragon 3.2"] [ECO "D00"] [PlyCount "63"] [GameId "2153324382056515"] {[%evp 0,14,19,31,14,5,12,-7,11,-30,-31,-48,-48,-47,-33,-45,-45]} 1. d4 Nf6 2. e3 d5 3. Bd3 e6 4. f4 c5 {my opponent was evidently unfamiliar with the Stonewall Attack setup and took a fair amount of time in the opening.} 5. c3 Nc6 6. Nf3 c4 {this significantly changes the character of the position. The middlegame plan of e3-e4 should now take priority.} 7. Bc2 b5 8. O-O Be7 9. Nbd2 {the move-order for White does not matter a lot here.} O-O 10. Ne5 {while this is fine, the natural reaction by Black which follows simply helps him develop a bit. The immediate e3-e4 or preparatory Qe2 look slightly better.} Bb7 11. Qe2 {here I debated playing the immediate e3-e4 pawn lever, but decided that I wanted additional control over e4 first. I did not see how Black could exploit the extra tempo.} b4 12. e4 bxc3 $6 {this intermediate pawn exchange does not get Black much, and gives the Bc1 a potentially good square on a3.} 13. bxc3 dxe4 {this was actually the point of the pawn lever, to get a knight on e4.} (13... Nxe5 14. fxe5 Nxe4 15. Nxe4 dxe4 {is equal according to the engine, but is also a pleasant game for White.}) 14. Nxe4 $14 {now some tactical possibilities start to appear, based on the centralized pair of knights and the b1-h7 diagonal being open.} Nd5 $6 {while not immediately losing, the self-removal of the kingside defender on f6 makes things easier for White.} (14... Nxe4 {I had seen the following sequence, which gives a small advantage to White.} 15. Qxe4 {threatening mate on h7} f5 16. Nxc6 fxe4 17. Nxd8 Raxd8 18. Re1 $14) 15. Rf3 {I had a long think here and decided that the rook lift would be good to play regardless, also protecting the c3 pawn. However, there are tactical ideas in play involving d4 that make this not as desirable.} (15. Bd2 {is the engine recommendation, reinforcing c3 while connecting the rooks.}) 15... Nf6 $2 {this is the losing move, although I did not calculate the best follow-up. The defender, while back on f6, can be removed with tempo.} (15... f5 16. Ng5 {White no longer has a breakthrough opportunity, while Black has various equalizing moves, including the tactical sequence} Nxc3 17. Rxc3 Qxd4+ 18. Qe3 Bc5 19. Kf1 Nxe5 20. fxe5 Qd5 $11) 16. Rh3 $18 (16. Nxf6+ $1 Bxf6 17. Bxh7+ {I was not looking for this sacrificial idea at the time, as I was too focused on achieving a normal ("safe") capture on h7. However, the best tactical point of Rf3 is the rook lift threat, which comes into play in exactly these types of situations.} Kxh7 18. Rh3+ Bh4 {I had also seen a version of this blocking idea earlier, but now} (18... Kg8 19. Qh5 $18) 19. Qh5+ $1 Kg8 20. Rxh4 $18) 16... Nxe4 {this loses a piece, as the Nc6 is underprotected.} (16... g6 {is the best try and would have required much more effort to win.} 17. Rb1 Rb8 18. Nxf6+ Bxf6 19. Qe3 $18 {with threats on the dark squares (Qh6, Ba3), along with the current threat of Rxb7 getting two pieces for the rook.}) 17. Bxe4 {now the Nc6 is double attacked and h7 is also forked, so Black cannot parry both threats.} ({Not} 17. Qxe4 $2 f5 $11) (17. Qh5 {the engine validates this as the number 2 choice, but I could not make it work in my calculations, so chose the (superior) text move.} h6 18. Ng4 $1 {I missed this idea.} Nxd4 19. Nxh6+ gxh6 20. Qxh6 Bh4 21. Rxh4 Qxh4 22. Qxh4 Nxc2 23. Qg4+ Kh8 24. Rb1 $18) 17... f5 18. Bxc6 (18. Nxc6 {also works, but is more complicated and I was satisfied with the bishop capture leading to an easily winning position.}) 18... Bxc6 19. Nxc6 {played after first checking the immediate Qh5 possibilities, which are not decisive. I therefore left the queen on e2 as a superior square. Being a piece up and with no counterplay for Black, as long as I was careful, the win should be assured.} Qd6 20. Nxe7+ {no reason not to exchange down, while up material.} Qxe7 21. a4 {played to activate my extra piece.} Rab8 $2 {moving the wrong rook.} 22. Ba3 {it seems my opponent missed the long-distance bishop skewer. Now there is truly no doubt of the outcome, although I was still careful to avoid any back-rank threats.} Qb7 23. Bxf8 Kxf8 24. Qxe6 Re8 25. Qxf5+ Kg8 26. Qxh7+ Kf8 27. Rb1 {this activates my remaining passive piece, to good effect.} (27. Qg6 {leads to mate in 7 according to the engine, but I was not worried about the game outcome at this point, as just getting to the win worry-free was good enough.} Re4 28. Rh8+ Ke7 29. Qxg7+ Kd6 30. Qxb7 $18) 27... Qe7 {evidently hoping for a back-rank blunder on my part.} 28. Qh8+ Kf7 29. Qh5+ Kf8 30. Qc5 {the triangulation maneuver with the queen forces the trade, and was easiest on my brain.} Qxc5 31. dxc5 Rd8 32. Rh8+ 1-0