B07 Pirc Defence: Miscellaneous Systems (1.e4 d6 2.d4 Nf6 3.Nc3 Nbd7 4.Nf3)

There are some moves in this game that even though they were bad, I didn't make any markings on them, since those moves didn't really change the outcome of the game anymore. There might be in worse case scenario four days when I'm not able to post anything here due to the fact that I'm heading off to a Blitz tournament and I start making my way there tomorrow and come back Monday. There might be also other changes to this blog starting next week, mostly affecting the way I do the analysis. I might also get some training positions in addition to the daily puzzle that already is here in courtesy of GameKnot. Analysis updated February 1st 2015.

[Event "ICC 5 0"] [Site "Internet Chess Club"] [Date "2014.04.15"] [Round "?"] [White "Vierjoki, Timo"] [Black "Race11"] [Result "0-1"] [ECO "B07"] [WhiteElo "1470"] [BlackElo "1315"] [Annotator "Tactical Analysis 2.10 (30s), TV"] [PlyCount "72"] [EventDate "2014.??.??"] {[%evp 9,72,8,61,10,148,23,104,89,260,116,237,154,383,388,447,420,667,667,651, 627,970,465,471,426,439,175,178,159,289,109,120,52,72,30,110,7,442,312,546,398, 505,318,356,224,558,558,835,567,725,242,252,40,83,0,10,-54,8,-501,-495,-493, -274,-282,-272,-485,-307]} 1. e4 d6 {B07 Pirc Defense} 2. d4 Nf6 3. Nc3 Nbd7 4. Nf3 {B07 Pirc Defence: Miscellaneous Systems} c6 5. Bc4 b5 6. Bd3 a5 $146 { 1.48/23} (6... e5 $11 {0.10/26}) (6... a6 7. O-O e5 8. dxe5 dxe5 9. a3 Be7 10. b3 O-O 11. Bb2 Qc7 12. Ne2 Bb7 13. Ng3 g6 14. h3 Rfe8 15. c4 Rad8 16. Qe2 Bf8 17. cxb5 cxb5 18. Rac1 Qb8 19. b4 Bh6 20. Rc2 Nb6 21. Bc1 {Behlert,S (2128) -Hack,K Nuremberg 2002 1/2-1/2 (35)}) (6... b4 7. Ne2 e5 8. O-O (8. Bc4 Be7 9. Ng3 O-O 10. O-O Nb6 11. Bb3 Qc7 12. h3 exd4 13. Nxd4 c5 14. Nb5 Qc6 15. a4 a6 16. Bd5 Nbxd5 17. exd5 Nxd5 18. Re1 Bf6 19. Ne4 Be5 20. c4 bxc3 21. Nbxc3 Nxc3 22. Nxc3 Bb7 {Lukash,N (2085)-Podobed,V (2054) Konakovo 2014 1-0 (34)}) 8... Be7 9. Ng3 O-O 10. Nf5 Re8 11. c3 d5 12. Nxe5 Nxe5 13. dxe5 Nxe4 14. Bxe4 dxe4 15. Nd6 Bxd6 16. exd6 Re6 17. Bf4 g5 18. Bg3 f5 19. h4 f4 20. Bh2 bxc3 21. bxc3 {Falout,L (2197)-Krejcik,J (2141) Czechia 2004 0-1 (53)}) (6... Bb7 7. O-O Qc7 8. Bf4 e5 9. dxe5 dxe5 10. Bg3 Be7 11. Nd4 g6 12. Qd2 Qb6 13. Nde2 Nh5 14. Rad1 Nxg3 15. Nxg3 Nc5 16. Kh1 Ne6 17. a4 a6 18. b3 Bb4 19. Nd5 Bxd2 20. Nxb6 Ba5 21. Nxa8 {Dankovics,A-Botos,J (2042) Aggtelek 2005 1-0 (46)}) 7. a3 {0.23/25} ( 7. e5 $16 {1.48/23}) 7... Nb6 {1.04/25} (7... e5 $11 {0.23/25}) 8. O-O $16 { White is better.} Bb7 $2 {2.60/24 [#]} (8... g6 $16 {0.89/25}) 9. Bg5 {1.16/27} (9. e5 $18 {2.60/24 and the rest is easy.}) 9... Qc7 {2.37/21} (9... b4 $16 { 1.16/27}) 10. Re1 Nbd7 $2 {3.83/22} (10... e6 $16 {1.54/27} 11. d5 Be7 12. dxc6 Bxc6) 11. e5 $18 dxe5 12. dxe5 Nd5 {6.67/24} (12... e6 $142 {4.20/27} 13. exf6 Nxf6) 13. Nxd5 cxd5 14. e6 Nf6 15. exf7+ {4.65/23} (15. Bxb5+ $142 {9.70/21} Kd8 16. Qd4) 15... Kxf7 16. Ne5+ (16. Qe2 Qd6 $18) 16... Kg8 17. Bxf6 $2 { 1.75/25} (17. Bxb5 {4.39/23} a4 18. Qf3) 17... exf6 18. Nf3 Bc6 {2.89/24} ( 18... Bd6 $16 {1.59/28 was called for.} 19. Bxb5 g6) {[%tqu "En","","","", "d3b5","",10]} 19. Bf5 $2 {1.09/25} (19. Bxb5 $1 $18 {2.89/24 [%mdl 512] has better winning chances. aiming for c4.} Rb8 (19... Bxb5 20. Qxd5+) 20. Bxc6 Qxc6 21. b3) 19... g6 $16 20. Be6+ {0.52/26} (20. Bh3 $16 {1.20/25}) 20... Kg7 $14 21. Qd4 {0.30/28} (21. Nd4 $16 {0.72/22} Bc5 22. Nxc6 Qxc6 23. Qxd5 (23. Bxd5 Bxf2+ 24. Kh1 Qc5 $11) 23... Qxd5 24. Bxd5) 21... Rd8 {1.10/24} (21... Bd6 $11 {0.30/28 remains equal.}) 22. Ng5 {0.07/26} (22. h4 $16 {1.10/24}) 22... Qd6 $2 {4.42/28 [%mdl 8192]} (22... Bd6 $11 {0.07/26 and Black stays safe.} 23. Nf7 Bxh2+ 24. Kh1 Bd6) 23. Nf7 Qc7 $2 {5.46/27} (23... Qc5 {3.12/29} 24. Qd2 Re8) 24. Qh4 {[#] Threatening mate with Qh6+.} h5 25. Nxd8 Qxd8 26. Rad1 { Threatens to win with Qd4.} Be7 $2 {5.58/25} (26... Bc5 {2.24/29 is more resistant.} 27. Qg3 Re8) 27. Qd4 $18 Qa8 28. Re3 Rd8 {[%tqu "En","","","", "e6c8","",10]} 29. Rg3 $2 {2.42/28} (29. Bc8 $1 {7.25/26 [%mdl 512]} Kf7 (29... Qxc8 30. Rxe7+) 30. Rde1) 29... Bd6 30. Rh3 $2 {0.40/30} (30. f4 $18 {2.52/26}) 30... Be5 $14 31. Qd3 {0.00/31} ({White should try} 31. Qd2 $16 {0.83/27}) 31... d4 32. f3 {-0.54/26} (32. g4 $11 {0.10/29} Be4 33. Qxb5 Bxc2 34. Rf1) 32... Re8 {0.08/32} (32... Qb8 $15 {-0.54/26}) 33. Rxh5 $2 {-5.01/23 [%mdl 8192]} (33. Bf5 $11 {0.08/32} gxf5 34. Qxf5 (34. Rxh5 Rh8 $15)) 33... gxh5 $19 34. Bf5 Kf8 {-2.74/28} (34... Qb8 $142 {-4.93/25} 35. Kh1 Bxh2 36. Qxd4 Qe5 37. Qxe5 Bxe5) 35. Bg6 Re7 36. Bxh5 $2 {-4.85/26} (36. Qf5 {-2.72/24} Kg7 37. Bxh5) 36... Rg7 {Accuracy: White = 22%, Black = 11%.} 0-1

B06 Modern Defence (1.e4 g6 2.d4 c6 3.Nf3 d5 4.e5 Bg7 5.c4)

This is one of those games where the engine didn't really like the Black's opening choice and considered this clearly better for White from the start. Since I started analysing my games for this blog, I have started to see positions where the engine gives maybe a bit false results. In the old versions of Fritz I faced this more often and started to disengage myself from computer analysis and started to think better moves myself and not be so reliant on the computer.

The biggest increase in my chess skills was probably when I started playing correspondence chess in 2004, then I used to spend several hours thinking about the next moves in my games. I used to write down on my notebook the variations that I came up with so I could remember them after it was my time to move again. I can't even think of doing that again, just not enough time anymore for that sort of thing. So many other things taking up my time these days but back then my day schedule was like, wake up, get breakfast, turn on computer and see what my opponents have done, start analysing the positions on my chess board. It was that glorious time when I spent most of my waking time studying chess.

[Event "ICC 5 0"] [Site "Internet Chess Club"] [Date "2014.05.27"] [Round "?"] [White "Vierjoki, Timo"] [Black "dtimm1"] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "B06"] [WhiteElo "1573"] [BlackElo "1424"] [Annotator "Stockfish 5 64 SSE4.2 (30s), TV"] [PlyCount "59"] [EventDate "2014.??.??"] [TimeControl "300"] 1. e4 g6 {Modern Defense: King Pawn Fianchetto.} 2. d4 c6 (2... Bg7 3. Bd2 { Modern Defense: Westermann Gambit.} (3. Bd3 {Modern Defense: Wind Gambit.}) (3. c4 c5 4. d5 Qa5+ {Pterodactyl Defense: Central. Benoni Pterodactyl} (4... d6 5. Nc3 Qa5 {Pterodactyl Defense: Central. Benoni Quetzalcoatlus} (5... Bxc3+ 6. bxc3 Qa5 {Pterodactyl Defense: Central. Benoni Beefeater Pterodactyl}))) (3. Bc4 b5 {Modern Defense: Bishop Attack. Bücker Gambit})) 3. Nf3 d5 4. e5 Bg7 5. c4 f6 6. Nc3 (6. cxd5 cxd5 7. Nc3 Nc6 8. Bb5 Bg4 9. O-O fxe5 10. dxe5 e6 11. h3 Bxf3 12. Qxf3 Rc8 13. Qg4 Qd7 14. Rd1 Nge7 15. Ne4 O-O 16. Nc5 Qe8 17. Nxe6 Rf5 18. Nxg7 Kxg7 19. Qh4 a6 20. Bd3 Rxe5 {Ehlvest,J (2585)-Ivanov,I (2505) Saint John 1988 1-0 (55)}) 6... fxe5 7. dxe5 Nh6 {N} (7... e6 8. h4 Nd7 9. Bf4 Nh6 10. h5 Nf7 11. cxd5 cxd5 12. hxg6 hxg6 13. Rxh8+ Bxh8 14. Nxd5 exd5 15. e6 Qe7 16. Qe2 Kf8 17. exf7 Bxb2 18. Rb1 Bc3+ 19. Kd1 Qxe2+ 20. Bxe2 Kxf7 21. Rc1 Ba5 22. Ng5+ {Djuraev,S (2339)-Khamrakulov,I (2580) Dresden 2008 0-1 (37)}) (7... e6 {!? +/= is noteworthy}) 8. cxd5 {+/-} O-O 9. Be2 Bg4 $2 (9... Nf7 10. O-O { +/-}) 10. O-O (10. Ng5 Bxe2 11. Qxe2 cxd5 {+-}) 10... Bxf3 (10... cxd5 11. h3 Bxf3 12. Bxf3 {+/-} (12. gxf3 e6 {+/-})) 11. Bxf3 Nf5 (11... Nf7 12. Qb3 Qb6 13. e6 {+-}) 12. dxc6 {+-} Nxc6 $2 (12... bxc6 13. Qb3+ Kh8 {+-}) 13. Qb3+ Kh8 14. Qxb7 Nxe5 15. Qe4 (15. Qxa8 {and White takes home the point} Qxa8 16. Bxa8 Rxa8 17. Rd1 {+-}) 15... Nxf3+ (15... Nd6 $5 {should be considered} 16. Qe3 Nxf3+ 17. gxf3 Qd7 {=/+}) 16. Qxf3 {+/=} Qb6 17. Nd5 {White threatens to win material: Nd5xb6} Qd6 (17... Qb7 {=}) 18. Bf4 $4 {White lets it slip away} (18. Qe4 Rad8 19. Nc3 Qb6 {+/=}) 18... Qd7 $4 {throwing away the advantage} (18... e5 19. Bg5 h6 20. Bd2 {+/-}) 19. Rab1 $4 {hands over the advantage to the opponent} (19. Qe4 {+/-}) 19... Nd4 {-+} 20. Qe4 Rae8 $4 {ignoring the path to victory} (20... Qf5 {and Black is on the road to success} 21. Rfe1 Rad8 22. Qxf5 Rxf5 (22... Nxf5 23. Ne3 {+/-}) 23. Rxe7 Rfxd5 {-+}) 21. Be5 {+/-} Nf5 ( 21... Ne2+ 22. Qxe2 Qxd5 23. Bxg7+ Kxg7 24. Rfd1 {+/-}) 22. Bxg7+ Kxg7 (22... Nxg7 23. Rbd1 {+-}) 23. Nf4 (23. Rbd1 $5 Qb7 {+-}) 23... e5 {+/-} 24. Nh3 (24. Nd3 Nd6 25. Qd5 Qe6 26. Qxe6 Rxe6 {+/-}) 24... Nd6 (24... Re7 25. Rbd1 Qb7 26. Qxb7 Rxb7 27. Rd2 {+/-}) 25. Qd5 Qe6 26. Qxe6 Rxe6 27. Rbd1 e4 28. Rfe1 (28. g3 Rfe8 {+/-}) 28... Rfe8 (28... h6 {!? +/-}) 29. Nf4 Re5 $4 {the pressure is too much, Black crumbles} (29... Rf6 {+-}) 30. Rxd6 {Black resigns} 1-0

B00 Queen's Fianchetto Defence, Nimzowitsch Defense (1.e4 Nc6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 Bf5 4.Nf3)

Another short game with a nice finish. This a decent example of how I play better chess when the time controls are longer. Sure there are still some small mistakes here and there but not clearly as much big blunders as there are in shorter games. There will be couple of days that I can't update this blog but rest assured that it will continue with daily updates after this small break. Saturday and Sunday this week there will be no posts here, Monday evening I might have enough time to make a post here but I can't guarantee it. The analysis was updated on December 22nd, 2019.

[Event "ICC 15 0"] [Site "Internet Chess Club"] [Date "2011.06.21"] [Round "?"] [White "Vierjoki, Timo"] [Black "zap2"] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "B00"] [WhiteElo "1835"] [BlackElo "1689"] [Annotator "Tactical Analysis 2.10 (30s), TV"] [PlyCount "37"] [EventDate "2011.??.??"] {[%evp 9,37,0,0,-41,82,16,44,17,41,0,0,-4,26,24,28,16,321,27,41,13,33,-13,-10, -20,302,22,584,581,1310,1058]} 1. e4 Nc6 2. d4 d5 3. e5 {B00 Nimzowitsch Defense: Scandinavian Variation, Advance Variation} Bf5 4. Nf3 {B00 Queen's Fianchetto Defence, Nimzowitsch Defence} h5 (4... f6 5. Be2 fxe5 6. dxe5 e6 7. O-O Bc5 8. c3 a5 9. Nbd2 a4 10. Bb5 Nge7 11. Bxa4 O-O 12. Bc2 Bxc2 13. Qxc2 Ng6 14. Nb3 Bb6 15. Nbd4 Nxd4 16. Nxd4 Qd7 17. Qe2 c5 18. Nc2 Rf5 19. f4 {Harestad, T (2270)-Karpatchev,A (2465) Gausdal 1993 0-1 (34)}) 5. Bg5 $146 (5. Bd3 Qd7 6. c3 O-O-O (6... h4 7. h3 f6 8. Qc2 Bxd3 9. Qxd3 O-O-O 10. Be3 e6 11. Nbd2 Nge7 12. b4 Nf5 13. Bf4 Nb8 14. a4 Qf7 15. b5 Qg6 16. Rg1 Ne7 17. Qxg6 Nxg6 18. Bh2 Nd7 19. Ke2 Rh5 20. exf6 gxf6 21. Rgc1 {Nagy,I (1484)-Ruip,J (2051) Hunary 2012 0-1 (69)}) 7. b4 f6 8. Be3 g5 9. exf6 exf6 10. Qc2 Nh6 11. a4 Bxd3 12. Qxd3 Nf5 13. O-O Re8 14. a5 Bd6 15. Na3 g4 16. Nd2 g3 17. fxg3 Nxe3 {0-1 (17) Vagvolgyi,I (1905)-Ruip,J (2051) Hunary 2013}) 5... Qd7 6. Bd3 {-0.41/24} (6. Be2 $11 {0.00/26}) 6... e6 {0.82/23} (6... O-O-O $15 {-0.41/24}) 7. c3 {0.16/26 } (7. Bxf5 $16 {0.82/23 Threatens to win with Bd3.} exf5 8. O-O) 7... Be7 8. Qc2 {White is slightly better.} Bxg5 {[%tqu "En","","","","d3f5","",10]} 9. Nxg5 {0.00/28} (9. Bxf5 $1 $14 {0.41/28 is superior.} exf5 10. Nxg5) 9... Nh6 $11 10. Nd2 Bxd3 11. Qxd3 Nf5 12. Nb3 f6 $2 {3.21/24 [%mdl 8192] [#]} (12... b6 $11 {0.16/25}) 13. Nf3 $2 {0.27/27} (13. Nc5 $18 {3.21/24} Qc8 14. Ngxe6) 13... b6 14. O-O-O a5 15. exf6 {-0.13/28} (15. Rhe1 $14 {0.33/24}) 15... gxf6 16. Rhe1 {[%tqu "En","","","","e8c8","",10]} a4 $2 {3.02/24 [%mdl 8192] [#]} (16... O-O-O $1 $11 {-0.20/28}) 17. Nbd2 $2 {0.22/26} ({Better is} 17. Qxf5 $18 { 3.02/24} O-O-O 18. Rxe6 axb3 19. axb3) 17... h4 $2 {5.84/25 [%mdl 8192]} (17... Kd8 $11 {0.22/26 and Black stays safe.}) {[%tqu "En","","","","d3f5","",10]} 18. Qxf5 $1 $18 Kf7 19. Ng5+ {Accuracy: White = 7%, Black = 7%.} 1-0

B00 Queen's Fianchetto Defence, Nimzowitsch Defense (1.e4 Nc6 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 Nf6 4.Nc3 Bg4 5.Be2 e6)

If anything, this game that I have analysed today, shows how sometimes I just can't see tactics. For quite a long time now I have done 3 tactical exercises every day and that is the minimum amount but I may need to increase it, in order to improve my vision more. The level at which I see tactics now, is disgraceful at least to me. Only barely over 50% accuracy in solving is not all that good. Well, in truth that is only my accuracy in the tactical trainer at Chess.com. On Chess Tactics Server, I have managed a 85% solving accuracy but as it is based on solving the exercises as fast as possible, my tactical rating there is really bad, since I am old and slow... ;-)

[Event "ICC 5 0"] [Site "Internet Chess Club"] [Date "2011.06.15"] [Round "?"] [White "Vierjoki, Timo"] [Black "skumar"] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "B00"] [WhiteElo "1529"] [BlackElo "1661"] [Annotator "Tactical Analysis 2.10 (30s), TV"] [PlyCount "79"] [EventDate "2011.??.??"] {[%evp 10,79,64,27,46,28,31,31,56,11,39,15,45,-25,-8,-27,-3,-44,-38,-18,-13, -55,81,-238,41,-244,65,-90,124,115,118,29,31,32,26,0,29,-124,-121,-293,-120, -104,-98,-140,-66,-66,88,91,177,163,369,185,187,173,321,150,29998,0,0,0,0,0, 29997,0,0,0,8,8,12,7,196,182]} 1. e4 Nc6 2. Nf3 d6 {B00 Nimzowitsch Defense: Williams Variation} 3. d4 Nf6 4. Nc3 Bg4 5. Be2 e6 {B00 Queen's Fianchetto Defence, Nimzowitsch Defence} 6. O-O {LiveBook: 31 Games} (6. d5 $5 Bxf3 7. gxf3 (7. Bxf3 exd5 8. exd5 Ne5 $14) 7... exd5 8. exd5 $14 (8. Nxd5 Nxd5 9. Qxd5 Be7 $14)) 6... d5 7. e5 (7. exd5 Nxd5 8. Nxd5 exd5 9. h3 Bh5 10. Re1 Be7 11. Ne5 Bxe2 12. Qxe2 Nxe5 13. Qxe5 f6 14. Qh5+ g6 15. Qe2 Qd7 16. c4 c6 17. cxd5 cxd5 18. Bh6 Kf7 19. Qf3 Qf5 20. Qb3 Qd7 21. Re2 Rae8 {Khatoev,E (2277) -Derbenev,A (2331) Kostroma 2011 1/2-1/2 (48)}) 7... Nd7 (7... Ne4 8. h3 Bf5 9. Bd3 Nxc3 10. bxc3 Be7 11. Bxf5 exf5 12. Qd3 Qd7 13. Rb1 Rb8 14. Bg5 Bxg5 15. Nxg5 O-O 16. Rfe1 Rfe8 17. f4 Nd8 18. Nf3 g6 19. g3 Ne6 {1/2-1/2 (19) Sinitsina,A (2091)-Drugov,P (2302) Panevezys 2017}) 8. Be3 $146 {White is slightly better.} (8. h3 Bh5 9. Bg5 Be7 10. Be3 Bxf3 11. Bxf3 Bg5 12. Bxg5 Qxg5 13. Ne2 O-O 14. Bg4 f5 15. exf6 Rxf6 16. f4 Qh6 17. Qd3 Raf8 18. f5 exf5 19. Bxf5 Nb4 20. Qb5 Qe3+ 21. Kh2 Qe7 22. Ng3 Nb6 {Krebs, P-Werner,T Ratzeburg 1997 1/2-1/2 (40)}) 8... Na5 9. h3 {0.11/26} (9. Ng5 $14 {0.56/23} Bxe2 10. Qxe2) 9... Bh5 10. Qd2 {Threatening Bg5.} b6 11. Nb5 {-0.25/24} (11. Ng5 $14 { 0.45/24} Bxe2 12. Qxe2) 11... Be7 12. b3 O-O 13. c4 {-0.44/26} (13. g4 $11 { -0.03/28} Bg6 14. c4) 13... dxc4 $15 14. bxc4 Bxf3 15. Bxf3 {-0.55/26} (15. gxf3 $11 {-0.13/29 might be stronger.} a6 16. Nc3) 15... Nxc4 {0.81/28} (15... c6 $15 {-0.55/26} 16. Nc3 Nxc4) 16. Qd3 $2 {-2.38/29 [%mdl 8192]} (16. Qe2 $16 {0.81/28 keeps the pressure on.} Nxe3 17. Qxe3) {[%tqu "En","","","", "d7e5", "",10]} 16... Nxe3 $2 {0.41/27} (16... Ndxe5 $1 $19 {-2.38/29 [%mdl 512]} 17. Qe2 (17. dxe5 Qxd3) 17... Nxf3+ 18. Qxf3 Nxe3 19. fxe3 c5) 17. fxe3 $4 { -2.44/27 [%mdl 8192]} (17. Qxe3 $14 {0.41/27 is the one way to stay ahead.} a6 18. Bxa8) {[%tqu "En","","","","d7e5","",10]} 17... Rb8 $2 {0.65/26} ({Better is} 17... Nxe5 $1 $19 {-2.44/27 [%mdl 512]} 18. Qd1 (18. dxe5 Qxd3) 18... Nxf3+ 19. Qxf3 c5) 18. Nxa7 $2 {-0.90/28} (18. Qe2 $14 {0.65/26 stays ahead.}) { [%tqu "En","","","","d7e5","", 10]} 18... Qe8 $2 {1.24/23} (18... Nxe5 $1 $17 { -0.90/28 [%mdl 512] and life is bright.} 19. Qb5 (19. dxe5 Qxd3) 19... Nxf3+ 20. Rxf3 Ra8) 19. Nc6 $16 Rc8 20. Nxe7+ {0.29/28} (20. Rfc1 $16 {1.18/22}) 20... Qxe7 $11 21. Be4 h6 22. Rf3 Rcd8 {[#] And now ...Nxe5! would win.} 23. Rg3 $2 {-1.24/26} (23. Qc4 $11 {0.29/27}) {[%tqu "En","","","","d7e5","", 10]} 23... Nxe5 $1 $17 {[%mdl 512]} 24. Qe2 $2 {-2.93/24} (24. Qb5 $17 {-1.21/27} Nd7 25. Bc2) (24. dxe5 Rxd3) 24... f5 {-1.20/28} (24... Qh4 $19 {-2.93/24 is more deadly.} 25. Qf2 Qxe4 26. dxe5 Qxe5) 25. Bc2 Nf7 26. Rf1 {-1.40/22} (26. Rf3 $142 {-0.98/24}) 26... Kh8 {-0.66/27} (26... Ng5 $17 {-1.40/22} 27. Qc4 Kh8 ) 27. e4 $15 Nd6 $2 {0.88/31} (27... Qf6 $15 {-0.66/30} 28. exf5 exf5 29. Rxf5 Qxd4+ 30. Qe3 Qxe3+ 31. Rxe3 Nd6 32. Rxf8+ Rxf8) 28. exf5 $16 Qf6 {1.77/29} ( 28... Rde8 $16 {0.91/30}) 29. fxe6 $18 Qxd4+ $2 {3.69/27} (29... Qxf1+ {1.63/27 } 30. Qxf1 Rxf1+ 31. Kxf1 g5) 30. Kh2 {1.85/35} (30. Kh1 $142 {3.69/27} Qc4 31. Qxc4 Nxc4 32. Rxf8+ Rxf8 33. Rc3) 30... Rxf1 31. Qxf1 {e7 is the strong threat. } Re8 {3.21/29} (31... Qe5 $142 {1.73/33}) {[%tqu "En","","","","c2g6","",10]} 32. e7 {1.50/32} (32. Bg6 $1 $18 {3.21/29 and the rest is easy.} Rg8 33. Qe2) 32... Qe5 $2 {#2/30 [#]} (32... Qf6 $16 {1.50/32} 33. Qd3 g6) {[%tqu "En","", "","","f1f8","",10]} 33. Qd3 $2 {0.00/35} (33. Qf8+ $1 {#2/30} Rxf8 34. exf8=Q# ) 33... Kg8 $11 34. Qh7+ $40 {[%mdl 128] Black needs to defend precisely.} Kf7 35. Bb3+ Kf6 $2 {#3/30 [%mdl 8192]} (35... Kxe7 $11 {0.00/30} 36. Qxg7+ Kd8) 36. Qg6+ $2 {0.00/34} (36. Qxg7+ {#3/30 mates} Kf5 37. Qg6+ Kf4 38. Qg4#) 36... Kxe7 {aiming for ...Nf5.} 37. Qxg7+ Qxg7 38. Rxg7+ Kd8 39. Rh7 Ne4 $2 {1.96/24} (39... c5 $11 {0.07/27}) 40. Rxh6 {Accuracy: White = 17%, Black = 11%.} 1-0

B04 Alekhine's Defence: 4.Nf3 (1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Nd5 3.c4 Nb6 4.Nc3 d6 5.exd6 cxd6 6.d4 g6 7.Nf3 Bg7 8.Be2 O-O 9.O-O)

Another game in an opening I know almost nothing about. Somehow I get into decent positions, sometimes even winning positions and then I walk straight into a mate in one...

[Event "ICC 5 0"] [Site "Internet Chess Club"] [Date "2011.07.09"] [Round "?"] [White "Vierjoki, Timo"] [Black "steve526"] [Result "0-1"] [ECO "B04"] [WhiteElo "1477"] [BlackElo "1483"] [Annotator "Tactical Analysis 2.10 (30s), TV"] [PlyCount "116"] [EventDate "2011.??.??"] {[%evp 18,115,10,6,35,32,39,49,39,40,48,0,89,97,104,59,128,53,58,-13,-10,-15, -16,-14,-14,-14,-14,-10,-10,-12,-12,-39,-31,-31,-38,-33,-31,-31,0,0,89,86,220, 0,0,0,0,0,29982,29981,6379,-5,0,0,0,-77,-75,-59,-6,-106,-118,-1726,-1531,-5102, 0,0,433,433,425,425,418,411,411,411,390,397,373,321,383,362,321,320,321,0,265, 7,1319,1282,860,1271,1196,320,5595,252,4214,2113,1601,1167,1597,-29999]} 1. e4 {[%mdl 32]} Nf6 2. e5 Nd5 3. c4 {B02 Alekhine Defense: Two Pawn Attack} Nb6 4. Nc3 d6 5. exd6 cxd6 6. d4 g6 7. Nf3 Bg7 8. Be2 O-O 9. O-O {B04 Alekhine's Defence: 4.Nf3} Bg4 10. Be3 {LiveBook: 20 Games} (10. c5 dxc5 11. dxc5 N6d7 12. Be3 Nc6 13. Qa4 Bxf3 14. Bxf3 Nde5 15. Bxc6 Nxc6 16. Rad1 Qa5 17. Qxa5 Nxa5 18. Rd7 Bxc3 19. bxc3 Rfe8 20. Rb1 Rad8 21. c6 Nxc6 22. Rdxb7 Rd3 23. c4 Rc8 24. Bxa7 Ra3 {Munoz Pantoja, M (2471)-Zvjaginsev,V (2673) Barcelona 2016 1/2-1/2 (40)}) 10... e6 $146 (10... d5 11. c5 (11. h3 Bxf3 12. Bxf3 Nxc4 13. Bxd5 Nxe3 14. fxe3 Nc6 15. Qb3 e6 16. Qxb7 exd5 17. Qxc6 Qg5 18. Rae1 Rad8 19. Qc7 a6 20. Qa7 Rd6 21. Qc5 Rfd8 22. Ne4 {1-0 (22) Schwarz,H (1918)-Werner,B (2074) Erfurt 2014}) 11... Nc4 12. Bxc4 dxc4 13. d5 Na6 (13... e6 14. d6 Qa5 15. Ne4 Nc6 16. Qc2 Bxf3 17. gxf3 Qa6 18. Nd2 Na5 19. Rac1 b6 20. Nxc4 Nxc4 21. Qxc4 Qxc4 22. Rxc4 bxc5 23. Bxc5 Bxb2 24. d7 Rfd8 25. Rd1 Bf6 26. Ra4 a6 27. Bb6 Rdb8 28. Bc7 {Deen,R-Regan,N (2160) Haarlem 1998 0-1 (51)}) 14. h3 Bf5 15. Ne1 Qa5 16. g4 Bd7 17. Qe2 Nxc5 18. Qxc4 Rac8 19. b4 Qa6 20. b5 Bxb5 21. Qxb5 Bxc3 22. Rb1 Qxb5 23. Rxb5 b6 24. Nf3 Rfd8 25. Rd1 {Dziodzio,A (2080)-Fritz,A (1934) Katowice 2017 0-1 (83)}) 11. c5 dxc5 {White is slightly better.} 12. dxc5 Nd5 13. Nxd5 Qxd5 14. Qc2 {0.00/30} (14. Qa4 $14 {0.48/24} Bf5 15. Rad1) 14... Nd7 {0.89/27} (14... Nc6 $11 {0.00/30}) 15. Rad1 $16 Qc6 16. b4 {0.59/24} ({ White should play} 16. Qd2 $16 {1.04/25} e5 17. h3) {[%tqu "En","","","", "c6c7","",10]} 16... Nb6 {1.28/24} (16... Qc7 $1 $14 {0.59/24}) 17. Nd4 { 0.53/28} (17. h3 $16 {1.28/24} Bf5 18. Qd2) {[%tqu "En","","","","g7d4", "",10] } 17... Bxd4 $1 $14 18. Bxg4 {-0.13/30} (18. Bxd4 $14 {0.58/25} Bxe2 19. Qxe2) 18... Bxe3 $11 19. fxe3 Nd5 20. Bf3 Nxb4 21. Qc4 {[%tqu "En","","","","b4d5", "",10]} Nd5 $1 {[%mdl 512]} 22. Bxd5 exd5 23. Rxd5 b6 24. Rc1 Rac8 25. Qd4 Qe6 26. a4 Rfe8 27. Rc3 Qe4 28. c6 {[%tqu "En","","","", "e4d4","",10]} Qb1+ { 0.89/33} (28... Qxd4 $1 $11 {0.00/31} 29. exd4 Re6) {[%tqu "En","","","", "g1f2","",10]} 29. Kf2 $1 $16 Qb2+ {2.20/27} (29... Qe4 $16 {0.86/29}) 30. Qd2 $2 {0.00/35} ({White should try} 30. Kf3 $18 {2.20/27}) {[%tqu "En","","","", "b2d2","",10]} 30... Qxd2+ $1 $11 31. Rxd2 {[%mdl 4096] Endgame KRR-KRR} Re6 32. c7 {Rd8+ is the strong threat.} Re7 $2 {#18/32 [%mdl 8192] [#]} (32... Kf8 $11 {0.00/31}) 33. Rd8+ Re8 34. Rxc8 $2 {-0.05/43} ({White must play} 34. Rxe8+ $18 {63.79/23} Rxe8 35. Rd3) 34... Rxc8 $18 {KR-KR} 35. Kf3 {[%tqu "En","", "", "","g8f8","",10]} Kf8 $1 36. Ke4 {-0.77/32} (36. Kg4 $11 {0.00/37 keeps the balance.}) 36... Ke7 $17 37. Ke5 {[%tqu "En","","","","f7f6","",10]} Kd7 { -0.06/29} (37... f6+ $1 $15 {-0.59/29} 38. Kd5 Kd7) 38. Kf6 {-1.06/30} (38. Rd3+ $11 {-0.06/29 was the only way to keep the balance.} Ke7 39. Rc3) 38... Rxc7 39. Rxc7+ $4 {-17.26/31 [%mdl 8192]} (39. Rd3+ $17 {-1.18/27} Ke8 40. h3) 39... Kxc7 $19 40. Kxf7 $17 {KP-KP} a6 $2 {0.00/40} (40... Kd6 $19 {-51.02/29} 41. h4 a6) {[%tqu "En", "","","","e3e4","",10]} 41. e4 $1 $11 b5 $2 {4.33/31 [%mdl 8192]} (41... Kd6 $11 {0.00/40} 42. Kf6 Kd7) 42. axb5 $18 axb5 {K3P-K3P [%tqu "En","","","","e4e5","",10]} 43. e5 $1 b4 44. e6 {[#] Strongly threatening e7.} b3 {intending ...b2.} 45. e7 b2 46. e8=Q {White wants to mate with Qe5+.} b1=Q {KQ-KQ} 47. Qe7+ Kc8 48. Qe6+ Kc7 49. Qe5+ Kc8 50. Qe6+ Kc7 51. Kg7 $2 {0.07/25} (51. Qd5 $18 {2.65/24}) 51... g5 $2 {13.19/28 [%mdl 8192]} (51... Qb2+ $11 {0.07/25} 52. Kxh7 Qxg2) 52. Qe7+ Kc8 53. Qxg5 Qe4 54. Kh6 $2 { 3.20/35} (54. g4 {11.96/22 Qf5+ would kill now.} Qb7+ 55. Kh8) 54... Kd7 $2 { 55.95/29} (54... Qc6+ {3.20/35} 55. Kxh7 Qd7+ 56. Kh8 Qd4+ 57. Kg8 Qc4+ 58. Kf8 Qf1+ 59. Kg7 Qa1+ 60. Qf6 Qh1 61. Qf5+ Kb7 62. Qe4+ Kb6) 55. Kh5 $2 {2.52/27} ( 55. g4 {55.95/29} Ke6 56. Qg8+ Kd6 57. Qf8+ Kc7 58. Qf5) 55... Ke8 $2 {42.14/30 } (55... Qe8+ {2.52/27} 56. Kh6 Qe6+ 57. Kxh7 Qe4+ 58. Kh8 Kc6) 56. Qg8+ Ke7 57. Qg7+ Ke8 58. Kh6 $4 {-#1/37 [%mdl 8192]} (58. h4 $18 {15.97/27} Qe1 59. Qh8+ Ke7 60. Qxh7+ Ke6 61. g4 Qe5+ 62. g5) 58... Qh4# {Accuracy: White = 36%, Black = 35%.} 0-1

B00 Queen's Fianchetto Defence, Nimzowitsch Defense (1.e4 b6 2.d4 Bb7 3.Nc3 e6 4.Nf3 d6)

An example of an opening that I don't face all that often in my games. Even though this is not all that great opening for Black, it may still have quite descent results against low rated people. I mean even I can hang a queen at any given moment...;-) That actually has happened too many times lately, not sure why that might be. Sure there was a long time when I didn't play chess at all, but I have played quite a lot this year at least on the internet. Then again, what I consider to be a lot, might not be the same to everyone. I may have actually only played less than 100 games last year or maybe barely over that and this year I have already played probably hundreds of games.

[Event "ICC 5 0"] [Site "Internet Chess Club"] [Date "2014.06.19"] [Round "?"] [White "Vierjoki, Timo"] [Black "arben"] [Result "0-1"] [ECO "B00"] [WhiteElo "1587"] [BlackElo "1360"] [Annotator "Stockfish 8 64 POPCNT (30s), TV"] [PlyCount "66"] [EventDate "2014.??.??"] 1. e4 b6 {Owen Defense: General} 2. d4 Bb7 3. Nc3 (3. Bd3 f5 4. exf5 Bxg2 5. Qh5+ g6 {Owen Defense: Matovinsky Gambit}) (3. Bg5 {Owen Defense: Naselwaus Gambit}) (3. f3 e5 {Owen Defense: Wind Gambit}) (3. Nf3 {Owen Defense: Smith Gambit}) 3... e6 4. Nf3 d6 {B00 Queen's Fianchetto Defence, Nimzowitsch Defense } 5. Bc4 Nd7 6. O-O (6. Qe2 a6 7. a4 g6 8. Bg5 Ne7 9. h4 h6 10. Bf4 Bg7 11. O-O-O Nf6 12. Kb1 d5 13. exd5 Nexd5 14. Nxd5 Nxd5 15. Be5 O-O 16. h5 g5 17. Bd3 Nb4 18. Bxg7 Kxg7 19. Be4 Bxe4 20. Qxe4 Qd5 {Dominguez Pons,E (2325)-Palit,S (2435) Barcelona 2012 1/2-1/2}) 6... g6 7. Bg5 Ne7 8. Qd2 Bg7 $146 (8... h6 9. Be3 Bg7 10. Rad1 a6 11. a4 Nf6 12. Bd3 d5 13. exd5 Nfxd5 14. Nxd5 Nxd5 15. Ne5 Bxe5 16. dxe5 Nxe3 17. Qxe3 Qg5 18. Qg3 Rd8 19. f4 Qxg3 20. hxg3 h5 21. Kf2 Ke7 22. a5 bxa5 23. Ra1 {Ambrus,E (2375)-Roy Chowdhury,S (2469) Canberra 2009 1/ 2-1/2 (50)}) 9. Bh6 Bxh6 10. Qxh6 {Black has a cramped position} Nf8 $2 (10... Ng8 11. Qe3 $16) 11. Ng5 $4 {there were better ways to keep up the pressure} ( 11. d5 $142 {and White can look forward to a comfortable game} a6 12. dxe6 Nxe6 13. Rad1 $18) 11... Ng8 $11 {Black threatens to win material: Ng8xh6} 12. f4 $4 {throws away the game} (12. Bb5+ $142 {was possible} c6 13. Qg7 $11) 12... Nxh6 $19 13. d5 Qd7 (13... exd5 {keeps an even firmer grip} 14. Bxd5 Bxd5 15. Nxd5 $19) 14. dxe6 Nxe6 15. Nh3 O-O-O 16. Rad1 Nc5 17. e5 Qg4 18. Bd5 Bxd5 19. Nxd5 dxe5 20. fxe5 Nf5 21. c4 Rxd5 $1 {Decoy: d5} 22. cxd5 (22. cxd5 Ne3 {Decoy Double attack}) (22. Rxd5 Ne3 {Decoy Double attack}) (22. -- $140 Ne3 {Mate threat}) 22... Ne3 23. Rd2 Nxf1 24. Kxf1 Re8 25. d6 (25. Re2 {is no salvation} Nd3 26. Ng1 Rxe5 27. Nf3 Rxe2 28. Kxe2 Qe4+ 29. Kd2 Nf4 30. Ne5 Qxe5 31. b4 Qe2+ 32. Kc3 Nxd5+ 33. Kb3 Qd3+ 34. Kb2 Qd2+ 35. Kb1 Nc3+ 36. Ka1 Qxa2#) 25... Rxe5 (25... Qc4+ 26. Kf2 Ne4+ 27. Ke1 Rxe5 28. d7+ Kd8 29. g4 Nxd2+ 30. Kf2 Qe2+ 31. Kg3 Nf1+ 32. Kh4 Qxh2 33. a3 Qg3#) 26. dxc7 (26. Ng1 {doesn't change anything anymore} Qc4+ 27. Ne2 Nd3 28. g3 Qe4 29. Kg1 Qe3+ 30. Kh1 Qxd2 31. d7+ Kxd7 32. Ng1 Ne1 33. Ne2 Qxe2 34. a3 Qg2#) 26... Qf5+ (26... Nd3 27. Rxd3 Qe2+ 28. Kg1 Qe1#) 27. Nf2 Kxc7 (27... Ne4 28. Re2 Ng3+ 29. hxg3 Qb1+ 30. Nd1 Qxd1+ 31. Kf2 Qxe2+ 32. Kg1 Qe3+ 33. Kf1 Rf5#) 28. g4 (28. Rd4 {doesn't get the cat off the tree} Qc2 29. g3 Qe2+ 30. Kg2 Rf5 31. Rf4 Rxf4 32. gxf4 Ne4 33. a3 Qxf2+ 34. Kh3 Qf3+ 35. Kh4 Qh5#) 28... Qb1+ (28... Qf4 29. Rc2 Kb8 30. a3 Nd3 31. Kg2 Nxf2 32. b3 Nxg4 33. h3 Qh2+ 34. Kf3 Qxh3+ 35. Kf4 g5#) 29. Kg2 (29. Rd1 {is not the saving move} Qxb2 30. Kg2 Re2 31. Rf1 Nd3 32. Kf3 Qe5 33. g5 Qe3+ 34. Kg4 Nxf2+ 35. Rxf2 Rxf2 36. a3 Rf4#) 29... Ne4 (29... Qc1 30. Rd1 Qf4 31. Rf1 Re2 32. h4 Ne4 33. Rc1+ Qxc1 34. g5 Rxf2+ 35. Kh3 Qf1+ 36. Kg4 Rf4#) 30. Nxe4 (30. Re2 {does not solve anything} f6 31. a3 Nxf2 32. Kxf2 Qd3 33. Rxe5 fxe5 34. h4 e4 35. a4 Qf3+ 36. Kg1 e3 37. Kh2 e2 38. a5 bxa5 39. b3 e1=Q 40. b4 Qfh1#) 30... Qxe4+ 31. Kg3 Qe3+ 32. Kh4 (32. Kg2 {does not win a prize} Qxd2+ 33. Kf3 g5 34. a3 Re3#) 32... Qxd2 (32... g5+ 33. Kh5 Qh3#) 33. b3 (33. Kg3 {cannot undo what has already been done} g5 34. a3 Re3#) 33... Qxh2# 0-1

A88 Dutch Defence: Leningrad System: 5.Nf3 0-0 6.0-0 d6 7.Nc3 c6 (1.d4 f5 2.c4 Nf6 3.Nf3 g6 4.g3 Bg7 5.Bg2 O-O 6.O-O d6 7.Nc3 c6 8.b3)

This time I present you with two light games, both are under twenty move short games. In the first game I manage to get a win, not a brilliant win since I was in a position earlier in the game that should have ended in my loss. It is quite horrible sometimes when I look at my blitz games and see how bad moves are played in them. Maybe in time I learn not to make as much bad moves as I make nowadays. Analysis updated on December 23rd, 2019.

[Event "ICC 5 0"] [Site "Internet Chess Club"] [Date "2014.06.09"] [Round "?"] [White "Tocklin, Tomi"] [Black "Vierjoki, Timo"] [Result "0-1"] [ECO "A88"] [WhiteElo "1409"] [BlackElo "1496"] [Annotator "Tactical Analysis 2.10 (30s), TV"] [PlyCount "38"] [EventDate "2014.??.??"] {[%evp 15,38,11,64,9,156,113,152,36,67,75,119,20,248,30,34,22,33,-42,29,-67,8, -103,-21,-642,-641]} 1. d4 f5 2. c4 Nf6 3. Nf3 g6 4. g3 Bg7 5. Bg2 O-O 6. O-O d6 7. Nc3 c6 {A88 Dutch Defense: Leningrad Variation, Warsaw Variation} 8. b3 { A88 Dutch Defence: Leningrad System: 5.Nf3 0-0 6.0-0 d6 7.Nc3 c6} Nbd7 { 0.64/22 LiveBook: 3 Games} (8... Re8 $11 {0.11/26}) 9. Bb2 {0.09/25} (9. Ng5 $14 {0.64/22} Nb6 10. Qc2) (9. Qc2 Re8 10. Bb2 e5 11. dxe5 dxe5 12. Rad1 e4 13. Nd4 Qc7 14. f3 f4 15. gxf4 Qxf4 16. Nxe4 Nxe4 17. fxe4 Qe5 18. Kh1 Nc5 19. b4 Nxe4 20. Nxc6 Qxb2 21. Ne7+ Kh8 22. Qxe4 Bf5 23. Qxb7 Rab8 {Hayrapetyan,H (2426)-Khairullin,I (2643) St Petersburg 2014 1-0 (35)}) 9... b6 $146 {1.56/25} (9... e5 $11 {0.09/25 keeps the balance.} 10. e3 (10. dxe5 dxe5 11. e4 Re8 12. exf5 gxf5 13. Qc2 e4 14. Nd4 Ne5 15. Nde2 Nd3 16. Rad1 Qc7 17. Bc1 Ng4 18. h3 Nxc1 19. Nxc1 Ne5 20. Qd2 Be6 21. N3e2 Rad8 22. Qe3 Qa5 23. Nd4 Bc8 24. Nc2 Nd3 {Naipal,V (1781)-Veer,W Paramaribo 2008 0-1 (38)}) 10... e4 11. Nd2 d5 12. Qc2 Rf7 13. c5 Nf8 14. b4 g5 15. Nb3 Ng6 16. Ne2 f4 17. gxf4 gxf4 18. Nxf4 Nxf4 19. exf4 Nh5 20. Bc1 Bh6 21. f5 Bxc1 22. Qxc1 Rg7 23. Qe3 Bxf5 24. Nc1 Qh4 { Diaz Cesar,W (1889)-Steil Antoni,F (2159) Baku 2016 0-1 (44)}) (9... Nb6 10. Qd3 Qe8 11. e4 fxe4 12. Nxe4 Nxe4 13. Qxe4 Bf5 14. Qe2 Qd7 15. Nh4 Bh3 16. f4 Bxg2 17. Kxg2 Bf6 18. Nf3 Rf7 19. Rad1 Re8 20. Rfe1 Na8 21. b4 Nc7 22. a4 b5 23. axb5 cxb5 24. Ra1 {Neudel,B (1820)-Blask,G (1654) Bad Sooden 2004 1-0 (52)} ) 10. Ng5 {1.13/25} (10. Qd2 $142 {1.56/25}) 10... Nb8 $16 {White is better.} 11. e4 {0.36/25} (11. d5 $16 {1.52/24}) 11... h6 $14 12. Nh3 fxe4 13. d5 { 0.20/27} (13. Nf4 $16 {1.19/23}) {[%tqu "En","","","","g6g5","",10]} 13... Kh8 $2 {2.48/21 [#]} (13... g5 $1 $11 {0.20/27}) 14. dxc6 $2 {0.30/28} (14. Nf4 $18 {2.48/21}) 14... Nxc6 $11 15. Nf4 Bf5 {[%tqu "En","","","","c3e4","",10]} 16. Ncd5 {-0.42/29} (16. Nxe4 $1 $14 {0.33/26 [%mdl 512]} Nxe4 (16... Bxe4 17. Bxe4 ) 17. Bxg7+ Kxg7 18. Bxe4 (18. Qd5 $2 Nb4 $19)) 16... g5 {0.29/28} (16... e5 $15 {-0.42/29} 17. Ne2 Rc8) 17. Ne2 {-0.67/24} ({Better is} 17. Bxf6 $11 { 0.29/28} Bxf6 18. Nxf6) 17... Bg6 {0.08/29} ({Black should try} 17... Qd7 $15 { -0.67/24}) 18. Nec3 {-1.03/23} (18. Qb1 $11 {0.08/29 remains equal.}) {[%tqu "En","","","","f6d7","",10]} 18... Nxd5 {-0.21/29} ({Black should play} 18... Nd7 $1 $17 {-1.03/23} 19. Qb1 e6) 19. Nxd5 $4 {-6.42/22 [%mdl 8192] [#]} (19. cxd5 $11 {-0.21/29} Nb4 20. Na4) 19... Bxb2 {Accuracy: White = 8%, Black = 10%. } 0-1

A83 Dutch Defence: Staunton Gambit with 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bg5 (1.d4 f5 2.e4 fxe4 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bg5 d5 5.Bxf6 exf6 6.Qh5+ g6 7.Qxd5)

This is quite a long game and if possible I try to post shorter games in the future in order to do these posts a bit faster. It is safe to say that analyzing this game took much longer than it did to play it... In any case, I hope you enjoy all the mistakes in the game and maybe learn from my mistakes as well. Going through my database of games in Eco order lately so next game is probably A88 Leningrad Dutch. Going through the games this way helps me get through all the possible opening variations easier. If you like these posts, feel free to tell your friends about it and other chess enthusiasts. Also if you want to see a game in particular opening that I haven't covered yet, please leave a comment and I'll see if I can find a game in that opening and I'll analyse and post it here.

[Event "ICC 5 0"] [Site "Internet Chess Club"] [Date "2014.06.17"] [Round "?"] [White "XBoru"] [Black "Vierjoki, Timo"] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "A83"] [WhiteElo "1497"] [BlackElo "1547"] [Annotator "Tactical Analysis 2.10 (30s), TV"] [PlyCount "159"] [EventDate "2014.??.??"] {[%evp 12,159,90,70,80,70,194,192,217,204,253,211,251,232,254,228,252,225,254, 206,292,223,272,252,280,0,9,0,646,-45,10,-27,0,0,0,-36,-23,-42,67,65,93,90,119, 99,105,106,113,93,116,93,107,107,206,185,216,188,344,268,344,269,282,162,311, 292,268,327,423,301,332,337,429,393,462,328,409,435,401,333,330,230,303,205, 215,0,0,0,0,0,0,-95,-95,-155,-8,-95,-95,-95,-95,-95,-95,-124,-105,-209,-98, -209,0,0,0,-427,-295,-290,-287,-282,-270,-305,-278,-350,-150,-615,-587,-1114, -519,-29984,-29985,-29986,-29987,-29992,-29993,-29999,-29985,-29986,-29987, -29989,-29990,-29990,-29985,-29987,-29988,-29988,-29989,-29989,-29989,-29989, -29990,-29990,-29991,-29992,-29984,-29984,-29984,-29984]} 1. d4 f5 2. e4 fxe4 3. Nc3 Nf6 4. Bg5 {A83 Dutch Defense: Staunton Gambit} d5 5. Bxf6 exf6 6. Qh5+ g6 7. Qxd5 {A83 Dutch Defence: Staunton Gambit with 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bg5. LiveBook: 3 Games} Qxd5 8. Nxd5 Bd6 {1.94/23} (8... Kd8 $14 {0.70/26}) 9. Nxf6+ $18 Kf7 { White is clearly better.} 10. Nxe4 Bf5 $146 (10... Re8 11. f3 Bf5 12. Bd3 Nc6 ( 12... Bf4 13. Kf2 Nc6 14. Ne2 Bh6 15. c3 Rad8 16. Bc4+ Kg7 17. N2g3 Na5 18. Bb5 c6 19. Bd3 Be6 20. Nc5 Bc4 21. Rhe1 Bxd3 22. Nxd3 Nc4 23. Ne4 a5 24. Re2 Nb6 25. Rae1 Nd5 26. Nec5 Be3+ 27. Rxe3 {Goregliad,S (2315)-DeMoore,S Irland Long 1995 1-0 (44)}) (12... Nd7 13. Ne2 Nf6 14. Nxd6+ cxd6 15. Bxf5 gxf5 16. Kd2 { 1-0 (16) Koltanowski,G-Prenter Edinburgh 1937}) (12... h5 13. O-O-O Bf4+ 14. Kb1 Nc6 15. Ne2 Nb4 16. Nxf4 Nxd3 17. cxd3 Rad8 18. Rhe1 {1-0 (18) Nass,E (1972)-Luc,R St Chely d'Aubrac 2003}) 13. c3 Bf4 14. Ne2 Be3 15. d5 Ne5 16. Bb5 Red8 17. g4 Nxf3+ 18. Kf1 Bxe4 19. Rd1 Nd2+ 20. Rxd2 Bxd2 21. Rg1 Rxd5 22. Bc4 Kg7 23. Bxd5 Bxd5 24. Rg3 Rf8+ 25. Kg1 {Robu,C (1151)-Craita,A (1276) Baile Felix 2017 0-1 (47)}) 11. Nxd6+ cxd6 12. O-O-O Nc6 13. Bc4+ Ke7 14. Nf3 Nb4 15. Rhe1+ Kd7 {2.92/25} (15... Kf6 {2.06/24 keeps fighting.}) 16. Bb3 Rac8 17. c3 Nd3+ {[%tqu "En","","","","d1d3","",10]} 18. Kd2 $2 {0.09/28 [#]} ({White must play} 18. Rxd3 $1 $18 {2.80/30} Bxd3 19. Be6+ Kc6 20. Kd2 (20. Bxc8 Rxc8 21. b3 Kd7 $18)) 18... Nxe1 $11 19. Rxe1 Rhe8 $2 {6.46/29 [%mdl 8192]} (19... Kc6 $11 {0.00/34}) 20. Rf1 $2 {-0.45/26} (20. Ba4+ $18 {6.46/29} Rc6 21. Rxe8 Kxe8 22. d5) 20... a6 {0.10/29} (20... Re7 $15 {-0.45/26}) 21. h3 b5 22. g4 Be6 23. Ne1 Bxb3 24. axb3 $15 {[%mdl 4096] Endgame KRR-KRN} d5 {0.67/32} (24... a5 $15 { -0.42/29}) {[%tqu "En","","","","b3b4","",10]} 25. b4 $1 $14 Re7 26. Nd3 Rce8 27. Ne5+ Kd6 28. f4 Rf8 29. Ke3 Ra7 30. Ra1 Rfa8 31. Ra5 Rg8 {2.06/29} (31... Ke6 $16 {1.07/34}) 32. g5 $18 Rf8 33. h4 Rf5 $2 {3.44/33} (33... Ke6 {1.88/34 was called for.} 34. Kf3 Rfa8) 34. Ra1 Kc7 35. Nd3 Kb6 36. Ra5 {1.62/34} (36. Rh1 $142 {2.82/27}) 36... Rff7 {3.11/33} (36... h6 $142 {1.62/34} 37. Ra1 (37. gxh6 Rh5 $11) 37... Re7+ 38. Kf3 hxg5) 37. Kf3 Rfe7 38. Ne5 Re6 39. Ke3 Rae7 40. Kf3 Kb7 41. Ra1 Kb6 42. Ra5 Rd6 43. Ra1 Rd8 44. Ra2 Ra8 45. Ra5 Raa7 46. Nd3 Re4 {intending ...Rae7.} 47. Ne5 $2 {0.00/45} ({Better is} 47. Ra1 $18 { 2.15/29}) 47... Re1 $11 48. Kf2 Rb1 49. Nd3 Rd1 50. Ke2 {-0.95/37} (50. Nc5 $11 {0.00/42 remains equal.}) 50... Rh1 $17 51. Kf3 {-1.55/29} (51. Kf2 $142 { -0.95/42}) 51... Rxh4 {-0.08/36} ({Black should try} 51... Rh3+ $17 {-1.55/29} 52. Ke2 Re7+ 53. Ne5 Rxh4) {[%tqu "En", "","","","f3g2","",10]} 52. Kg3 { -0.95/39} (52. Kg2 $1 $11 {-0.08/36 keeps the balance.}) 52... Rh1 53. Kg2 Rd1 54. Nc5 Rd2+ 55. Kg3 Rxb2 56. Kg4 {-2.09/31} (56. Ra1 $17 {-1.05/29 was necessary.}) 56... Rc2 {-0.98/32} (56... Rg2+ $19 {-2.09/31} 57. Kf3 Rc2) 57. Ra3 {-2.09/35} (57. Ra1 $17 {-0.98/32}) 57... a5 $2 {0.00/45} (57... Kc7 $19 { -2.09/35} 58. Kg3 Kd8) 58. bxa5+ $11 Rxa5 59. Rb3 $2 {-4.27/29 [%mdl 8192]} ( 59. Nd7+ $11 {0.00/37 and White stays safe.} Ka6 60. Nc5+ Kb6 61. Nd7+ Ka6 62. Nc5+ Kb6) 59... Rf2 60. Nd3 Rf1 61. Nb4 Raa1 62. Nxd5+ Kc6 63. Nb4+ Kb6 { -1.50/29} (63... Kd6 $19 {-3.50/27 has better winning chances. Threatens to win with ...Rfb1.} 64. Nc2 Rab1) 64. d5 $2 {-6.15/25} (64. Rb2 $17 {-1.50/29}) 64... Kc5 $19 65. Nd3+ Kxd5 {-5.19/30} (65... Kc4 $142 {-11.14/25} 66. Nc5 Kxc5 ) 66. Rxb5+ {-#16/29 [#]} (66. Rb4 $19 {-5.19/30} Ra3 67. Rd4+ Kc6 68. Kh3) 66... Kc4 {Black mates.} 67. Rc5+ Kxd3 68. f5 gxf5+ 69. Kh5 f4 70. Kh6 f3 71. Kxh7 Rh1+ 72. Kg6 Rag1 73. Rd5+ Ke4 74. Rd8 f2 75. Re8+ Kf4 76. Rf8+ Kg3 77. Rxf2 Kxf2 78. Kf6 Rxg5 79. Kxg5 Rh3 80. c4 {[%mdl 32768] Accuracy: White = 39%, Black = 19%. . Loss on time!?} 1-0

A80 Dutch Defence: Unusual White second moves (1.d4 f5 2.Bf4 Nf6 3.Nf3 g6)

After I started this blog in July 15th 2014, I have analysed more of my games than I have in years. This year has been somewhat weird for me, in a few places in the internet where I play chess, I have managed to get my highest ever ratings. This also correspondence chess sites, which might be the oddest thing about my rating progress since I have only used minimal time to look at each move on my corr games. At the same time that this weirdness has been going on this year, in other parts of my life the past nine months or so have probably been worse than ever before. Well the last two of those months have at least gone in better direction. Analysis updated on December 23rd, 2019.

[Event "ICC 5 0"] [Site "Internet Chess Club"] [Date "2014.06.04"] [Round "?"] [White "ChessAkrasia"] [Black "Vierjoki, Timo"] [Result "0-1"] [ECO "A80"] [WhiteElo "1655"] [BlackElo "1592"] [Annotator "Tactical Analysis 2.10 (30s), TV"] [PlyCount "52"] [EventDate "2014.??.??"] {[%evp 9,52,-37,23,-45,55,-25,33,-60,-31,-83,-64,-96,87,53,71,42,202,-44,-13, -60,-26,-75,-75,-111,-103,-144,-55,-148,0,-124,-111,-100,-96,-237,-143,-296, -250,-262,-231,-318,-206,-247,-239,-646,-628]} 1. d4 f5 {A80 Dutch Defense} 2. Bf4 Nf6 3. Nf3 g6 {A80 Dutch Defence: Unusual White second moves} 4. Nbd2 (4. e3 d5 5. Be2 Bg7 6. Nbd2 O-O 7. Ne5 Nbd7 8. h4 Nxe5 9. Bxe5 e6 10. Nb3 b6 11. Qd3 a5 12. Qc3 Ra7 13. f3 Qe7 14. a3 Nh5 15. Bxg7 Qxg7 16. f4 Nf6 17. Bf3 h5 18. Kf2 Bd7 {Krueger, K (2325)-Kuehl,R Kiel 1992 1/2-1/2}) 4... Bg7 5. h4 $146 (5. c3 O-O 6. h4 (6. e3 c6 7. Bd3 d6 8. Qb3+ d5 9. O-O Qb6 10. Rfc1 Be6 11. Ng5 Bf7 12. Nxf7 Kxf7 13. c4 e6 14. Bd6 Rd8 15. Qa3 Qa6 16. cxd5 Qxa3 17. dxe6+ Kxe6 18. Bxa3 Bf8 19. Bxf8 Rxf8 20. Nf3 Ke7 {Mundell,P (1927)-Chambourdon,A (1560) Montigny le Bretonneux 2013 1-0 (36)}) 6... d6 7. e3 Qe8 8. Bc4+ Kh8 9. Qe2 Nc6 10. Bb5 Bd7 11. Bd3 e5 12. h5 Nxh5 13. d5 Nxf4 14. exf4 exf4 15. dxc6 Bxc6 16. O-O-O Qf7 17. Rxh7+ Kg8 18. Ng5 Rfe8 19. Nxf7 Rxe2 {Lucas,M-Fries,E (1697) Belgrade 2010 1-0 (54)}) (5. h3 O-O 6. e3 d6 7. c3 (7. Bc4+ d5 8. Be2 c5 9. c3 cxd4 10. exd4 Nc6 11. O-O Nh5 12. Bh2 f4 13. Ne5 Nxe5 14. Bxh5 Nd3 15. Be2 Bf5 16. Qb3 b5 17. g4 fxg3 18. fxg3 e6 19. g4 Qg5 20. Bxd3 Bxd3 21. Rxf8+ Rxf8 {Manowski,W (1440) -Oelrichs,M (1620) Pinneberg 2010 0-1}) 7... h6 8. Qb3+ Kh7 9. Be2 Qe8 10. h4 b6 11. Qc2 Bb7 12. O-O-O Nbd7 13. Bb5 c6 14. Be2 e5 15. dxe5 dxe5 16. Bh2 c5 17. Nc4 Ne4 18. Nd6 Nxd6 19. Rxd6 e4 {Lueders,G (1663) -Pfueller,V (1585) Berlin 2010 1-0 (65)}) 5... e6 {0.23/26} (5... Nc6 $15 { -0.37/24}) 6. e3 {-0.45/25} (6. c3 $11 {0.23/26}) 6... b6 {0.55/25} ({Black should try} 6... d6 $15 {-0.45/25}) 7. Bd3 {-0.25/25} (7. Ne5 $14 {0.55/25}) 7... Bb7 {0.33/28} (7... O-O $11 {-0.25/25}) 8. h5 {-0.60/22} ({Better is} 8. Qe2 $14 {0.33/28}) 8... Nxh5 $15 9. Rxh5 gxh5 10. Ng5 {[%tqu "En","","","", "d8f6","",10]} O-O $2 {0.87/25} (10... Qf6 $1 $17 {-0.96/26 and life is bright. } 11. Qxh5+ Qg6) 11. Qxh5 $16 {[#]} h6 12. Ngf3 Qf6 $2 {2.02/21} (12... Qe8 $14 {0.42/26} 13. Qh4 Rf6) 13. Be5 $2 {-0.44/28} (13. g4 $18 {2.02/21}) 13... Qf7 $15 14. Qh3 {-0.60/27} (14. Qxf7+ $11 {-0.13/27 deserves consideration.} Rxf7 15. Bxc7) 14... d6 {[%tqu "En","", "","","e5f4","",10]} 15. Bxg7 {-0.75/22} ( 15. Bf4 $1 $11 {-0.26/26 is more appropriate.}) 15... Qxg7 $17 16. O-O-O Nd7 17. Rh1 {-1.44/22} (17. Nf1 $142 {-1.03/27}) 17... Rf6 {-0.55/26} ({Black should play} 17... Nf6 $17 {-1.44/22} 18. Bc4 Rae8) 18. e4 {-1.48/23} (18. Nf1 $15 {-0.55/26}) 18... fxe4 {0.00/28} (18... Qg4 $17 {-1.48/23} 19. exf5 exf5) 19. Nxe4 {-1.24/27} (19. Bxe4 $11 {0.00/28 was the only way to keep the balance.} d5 20. Bd3) 19... Bxe4 20. Bxe4 Raf8 {[%mdl 32]} 21. Nh4 {-2.37/25} ( 21. a3 $17 {-0.96/26}) 21... R8f7 22. f3 $2 {-2.96/28 [#]} (22. Nf3 $17 { -1.43/26 was necessary.}) 22... Qg5+ $19 23. Kb1 Rg7 24. g4 c5 25. d5 exd5 26. Bxd5+ $2 {-6.46/23} (26. Bf5 {-2.39/30} Ne5 27. c3) 26... Qxd5 {Accuracy: White = 15%, Black = 19%.} 0-1

E72 King's Indian: 4.e4 d6 5.g3 (1.c4 d6 2.d4 Nf6 3.g3 g6 4.Bg2 Bg7 5.Nc3 O-O 6.e4 c6 7.Nge2)

A bit newer game than usual and also I don't think I have posted any other 3 minute chess analysis before. One might argue that you should only look at the opening phase on blitz games as the rest is most likely not that accurately played. Then again I play like an idiot no matter the time controls so that might not apply to me anyway. How many of the readers can, for example, say that they have hang their queen in correspondence games, I have done so twice this year... And yes, I feel very ashamed of that fact. Then again, I have played my corr games almost like blitz lately, so replying to my opponents moves almost instantly I see them, has obvious drawbacks. I think the same kind of concentration loss has had a significant effect on my tactics solving. For instance, the rating I have in the tactics trainer at Chess.com has been around 300-400 points lower than it was when I was in my peak. If my memory serves me right, my rating used to be easily over 2000 and sometimes close to a 2200 mark. Now I have barely rating of 1700 there.

[Event "ICC 3 0"] [Site "Internet Chess Club"] [Date "2014.05.13"] [Round "?"] [White "Vierjoki, Timo"] [Black "OldBuddy"] [Result "0-1"] [ECO "E72"] [WhiteElo "1342"] [BlackElo "1306"] [Annotator "Tactical Analysis 2.10 (30s), TV"] [PlyCount "82"] [EventDate "2014.??.??"] {[%evp 12,82,53,0,107,33,89,69,155,68,89,11,92,76,157,122,154,122,155,97,157, 97,146,104,176,-80,-57,-68,0,-113,-46,-132,-98,-132,-42,-92,-40,-63,-38,-46, -38,-46,-37,-454,-442,-422,-410,-393,-385,-537,-349,-495,-491,-482,-438,-589, -560,-579,-555,-585,-579,-779,-790,-787,-768,-29985,-29986,-29986,-29987, -29987,-29988,-29989,-29989]} 1. c4 d6 2. d4 Nf6 {A53 Old Indian Defense} 3. g3 g6 4. Bg2 Bg7 5. Nc3 O-O 6. e4 c6 7. Nge2 {0.00/26 E72 King's Indian: 4.e4 d6 5.g3. LiveBook: 98 Games} (7. Nf3 $14 {0.53/25}) 7... Bg4 {1.07/25} (7... e5 $11 {0.00/26}) 8. O-O {0.33/27} (8. f3 $16 {1.07/25} Bc8 9. O-O) 8... Bxe2 { 0.89/26} (8... Qc8 $14 {0.33/27}) 9. Qxe2 Nbd7 {1.55/22} (9... e5 $14 {0.69/28} ) 10. h3 {0.68/27} (10. e5 $16 {1.55/22}) 10... e5 $14 {[%tqu "En","","","", "d4d5","",10]} 11. Be3 {0.11/27} (11. d5 $1 $16 {0.89/23}) 11... Re8 $146 { 0.92/22} (11... Ng4 $11 {0.11/27 keeps the balance.}) (11... Qe7 12. Rad1 b6 13. Kh2 Rfd8 14. f4 h6 15. Qd2 exd4 16. Bxd4 Nb8 17. Rfe1 c5 18. Nd5 Nxd5 19. Bxg7 Kxg7 20. Qxd5 Na6 21. Qc6 {1/2-1/2 (21) Stabolewski,A (2219)-Hasenbank,D (2074) Hamburgo 2005}) 12. d5 c5 {1.57/26} (12... cxd5 $142 {0.76/28} 13. exd5 (13. cxd5 a6 $16) (13. Nxd5 Nxd5 14. cxd5 f5 $16) 13... a6) 13. a3 a6 14. Rab1 Rb8 15. b4 {0.97/28} (15. h4 $142 {1.55/26}) 15... Qc8 {1.57/25} (15... Qc7 $142 {0.97/28}) 16. b5 {0.97/30} ({White should play} 16. Na4 {1.57/25}) 16... a5 {1.46/26} (16... Nb6 $142 {0.97/30}) 17. a4 {1.04/37} (17. Bf3 $142 {1.46/26 }) 17... b6 {1.76/27} (17... Nb6 $16 {1.04/37}) 18. f4 $2 {-0.80/28 [#]} (18. h4 $18 {1.76/27}) 18... exf4 19. Bxf4 Qc7 {0.00/35} (19... Nh5 $15 {-0.68/27} 20. Qc2 Nxf4 21. gxf4 Qd8) 20. Nd1 {-1.13/26} (20. Bf3 $11 {0.00/35}) {[%tqu "En","","","","f6e4", "",10]} 20... Nh5 {-0.46/31} ({Better is} 20... Nxe4 $1 $17 {-1.13/26 [%mdl 512]} 21. Qc2 (21. Bxe4 f5 $17) 21... Bd4+ 22. Kh2 f5) 21. Ne3 {-1.32/27} (21. Kh2 $15 {-0.46/31}) 21... Nxf4 22. Rxf4 Ne5 {-0.42/30} ( 22... Qd8 $17 {-1.32/24} 23. Kh1 Qg5) 23. Rbf1 {-0.92/29} (23. Ng4 $15 { -0.42/30}) 23... Rf8 {-0.40/30} (23... h5 $17 {-0.92/29}) 24. Ng4 $15 Nxg4 25. Qxg4 Be5 26. R4f3 Rbe8 27. R3f2 $2 {-4.54/28 [%mdl 8192] [#]} (27. Rd3 $15 { -0.37/37}) 27... Bd4 $19 28. Kh2 Bxf2 29. Rxf2 Qe7 30. Qf4 Qe5 31. Qxe5 { -4.95/27} (31. Qf6 {-3.49/33 was necessary.}) 31... Rxe5 {[%mdl 4096] Endgame KRR-KRB} 32. Rf6 Rd8 33. h4 Kg7 34. Rf4 h6 35. g4 Rf8 36. g5 hxg5 37. hxg5 Rxg5 38. Kh3 Rh8+ {Black mates.} 39. Rh4 Rxh4+ 40. Kxh4 Rxg2 41. Kh3 Re2 {Accuracy: White = 15%, Black = 20%.} 0-1

A45 Trompowsky Attack (1.d4 Nf6 2.Bg5 Ne4 3.Bf4 d5)

It does take a long time to go through a game properly. Sure I could have added some variation examples of games played by much better players than me in the analysis but I think this should be good enough look through to guide me in the right direction in my chess improvement. There are still a lot more games to go through and quite a lot of different opening variations that I haven't gone through. We shall see when the time comes when I ran out of different variations I have played and need to start looking at games that have been in the same variations that I have already posted. Luckily every game is unique so that I never ran out of material to post.

[Event "ICC 15 0"] [Site "Internet Chess Club"] [Date "2014.05.09"] [Round "?"] [White "Sallubhai"] [Black "Vierjoki, Timo"] [Result "0-1"] [ECO "A45"] [WhiteElo "1505"] [BlackElo "1768"] [Annotator "Tactical Analysis 2.10 (30s), TV"] [PlyCount "52"] [EventDate "2014.??.??"] {[%evp 9,52,47,79,32,87,5,54,18,81,48,35,20,86,80,78,28,147,78,135,97,69,0,-15, -190,-190,-338,-345,-377,-372,-355,-358,-393,0,-244,-211,-206,-83,-310,-202, -397,-390,-1672,-672,-1135,-583]} 1. d4 Nf6 2. Bg5 {A45 Trompowsky Attack} Ne4 3. Bf4 d5 {A45 Trompowsky Attack} 4. f3 (4. c3 e6 5. Nd2 Bd6 6. Bxd6 Nxd6 7. e3 Nd7 8. Ngf3 Qe7 9. Qb3 c6 10. c4 dxc4 11. Nxc4 Nxc4 12. Bxc4 O-O 13. O-O e5 14. dxe5 Nxe5 15. Nxe5 Qxe5 16. Rfd1 g6 17. a4 Rb8 18. Rd4 Bf5 {Klaric,Z (2445) -Cvitan,O (2515) Palma de Mallorca 1989 1/2-1/2 (46)}) 4... e5 (4... g5 5. Bc1 Nd6 6. Bxg5 h6 7. Bf4 e6 8. e3 Nd7 9. Bd3 c5 10. c3 cxd4 11. exd4 Qh4+ 12. Bg3 Qe7 13. Ne2 h5 14. O-O h4 15. Bf4 Bh6 16. Re1 Nb6 17. Bxh6 Rxh6 18. Qd2 Qf6 19. Nf4 {Tirelli,M (1990)-Biava,P (1655) Crema 2012 1-0 (49)}) 5. dxe5 $146 (5. Bxe5 Nf6 6. Nc3 Bb4 7. e3 O-O 8. Bd3 Nbd7 9. Bg3 Re8 10. Bf2 c5 11. Be2 Qa5 12. Qd2 Nb6 13. a3 Bf5 14. g4 Bxg4 15. fxg4 Ne4 16. axb4 Qxa1+ 17. Qd1 Qxb2 18. Nxe4 dxe4 19. bxc5 Nd5 {Egberts,K-Sylbing,G Haarlem 2000 0-1}) 5... Nc5 { [%tqu "En","", "","","e2e4","",10]} 6. Nc3 {0.32/26} (6. e4 $1 $16 {0.79/24 [%mdl 512]}) 6... c6 {0.87/23} (6... d4 $14 {0.32/26}) 7. e3 {0.05/28} (7. e4 $16 {0.87/23}) 7... Be7 {0.54/25} (7... Qb6 $11 {0.05/28 should be considered.} ) 8. Bd3 {White is slightly better.} (8. Bg3 {seems wilder.} O-O 9. Nge2 Re8 10. Nd4 Bf8 11. Be2) 8... Nxd3+ {0.81/23} (8... Nbd7 $11 {0.18/25 keeps the balance.}) 9. Qxd3 O-O 10. Nge2 Be6 {0.86/25} (10... Nd7 $11 {0.20/27}) 11. O-O-O $16 Nd7 12. g4 {0.28/27} (12. Kb1 $16 {0.78/24}) 12... Bg5 {1.47/24} ( 12... Qc7 $11 {0.28/27}) 13. Bg3 {0.78/27} (13. Kb1 $142 {1.47/24}) 13... Bh4 { 1.35/23} ({Black should try} 13... Nc5 {0.78/27} 14. Qd2 Be7) 14. Bxh4 Qxh4 15. f4 {-0.15/26} (15. Qd4 $14 {0.69/23}) 15... Bxg4 $11 16. Rdg1 $2 {-1.90/25 [#]} (16. Rhg1 $11 {-0.15/26}) 16... Bf3 $19 17. Qf5 {-3.38/24} (17. Qd4 {-1.90/27 keeps fighting.}) 17... Nc5 18. Rf1 Bxh1 19. Rxh1 Rae8 20. Rg1 Qxh2 $2 { 0.00/27 [#]} (20... f6 $19 {-3.93/24 Threatens to win with ...fxe5.} 21. e6 g6) 21. Qg4 $2 {-2.44/25} (21. Rxg7+ $1 $11 {0.00/27 [%mdl 512]} Kh8 (21... Kxg7 22. Qf6+) 22. Rxf7 Qh1+ 23. Kd2) 21... Qh6 22. Ng3 Qg6 {-0.83/28} (22... Kh8 $19 {-2.06/26 is more deadly. White must now prevent ... Qe6.} 23. Nf5 Qg6 24. Qxg6 hxg6) 23. Qh4 $2 {-3.10/25} (23. Qd1 $17 {-0.83/28 is the only way for White.}) 23... Kh8 24. f5 $2 {-3.97/28} (24. b4 {-2.02/26 is a better defense.} Ne6 25. Qh1) 24... Qh6 25. Nh5 $2 {-16.72/24} (25. Qd4 {-3.90/29} Nd7 26. Rh1) 25... Rxe5 {-6.72/28} (25... Qxe3+ $142 {-16.72/24} 26. Kd1 Qxg1+ 27. Qe1 Qg4+ 28. Qe2 Qxf5) 26. Rxg7 Rxf5 {Precision: White = 18%, Black = 24%.} 0-1

A39 Symmetrical English vs ...g6: 4.Bg2 Bg7 5.Nf3 Nf6 6.O-O O-O 7.d4 (1.c4 Nf6 2.g3 g6 3.Bg2 Bg7 4.Nc3 c5 5.Nf3 Nc6 6.O-O O-O 7.d4 cxd4 8.Nxd4 Nxd4 9.Qxd4 d6 10.e4)

Another day, another opening variation to share with the world. This game I went through with Stockfish today and went on all the major advantage changes 25 or more moves deep. I also did some chess video experimentations today so that maybe in the future I could get also a YouTube channel, where I would post videos were I would commentate the games while I play and usually quite badly ;-) Maybe those fun times will be on the near future... If or when that happens I will post here the necessary details to let you know how you can find me on YouTube. Analysis updated on December 23rd, 2019.

[Event "ICC 15 0"] [Site "Internet Chess Club"] [Date "2012.03.02"] [Round "?"] [White "Vierjoki, Timo"] [Black "Tocklin, Tomi"] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "A39"] [WhiteElo "1847"] [BlackElo "1790"] [Annotator "Tactical Analysis 2.10 (30s), TV"] [PlyCount "47"] [EventDate "2012.??.??"] {[%evp 18,47,45,-10,27,-23,-23,-9,-8,-6,-13,-155,-153,-151,-158,-155,-164,-144, -169,-166,-153,-164,-156,-142,-139,-214,-192,-175,0,-145,251,262]} 1. c4 Nf6 2. g3 g6 3. Bg2 Bg7 4. Nc3 c5 5. Nf3 Nc6 6. O-O O-O 7. d4 {A39 English Opening: Symmetrical Variation, Mecking Variation} cxd4 8. Nxd4 Nxd4 9. Qxd4 d6 10. e4 { -0.10/26 A39 Symmetrical English vs ...g6: 4.Bg2 Bg7 5.Nf3 Nf6 6.0-0 0-0 7.d4 LiveBook: 9 Games} (10. Qd3 $14 {0.45/23}) 10... Qa5 (10... Be6 11. Qd3 Qc8 12. b3 Bh3 13. Bb2 Qg4 14. Rfe1 Nd7 15. Qe2 Qxe2 16. Rxe2 Bxg2 17. Kxg2 Rac8 18. f4 Rfe8 19. Nd5 Bxb2 20. Rxb2 Rc5 21. Rc1 Kf8 22. Rbc2 a5 23. Kf3 Rec8 24. a3 b5 25. Ne3 {Ioseliani,N (2325)-Petrovic,M Jajce 1982 1-0 (43)}) 11. Bd2 {-0.23/25} (11. Qd3 $142 {0.27/26}) (11. Nd5 Nxd5 12. Qxd5 Qc7 13. Rb1 Be6 14. Qd1 Bxc4 15. Re1 Bxa2 16. Ra1 Be6 17. Ra3 Rfc8 18. Bf1 Qxc1 {0-1 (18) Rickert,B (1803) -Hemmers,D (1799) Germany 2016}) 11... Qh5 $11 12. Qd3 {[%tqu "En","","","", "f6g4","",10]} Ng4 $146 {[#] The position is equal.} (12... Bh3 13. Nd5 Bxg2 14. Nxe7+ Kh8 15. Kxg2 Rfe8 16. Nd5 Nxe4 17. Nc7 Ng5 18. Bxg5 Qxg5 19. Nxa8 Rxa8 20. Rad1 Rd8 21. b4 Bf6 22. f4 Qg4 23. Qd5 Qe2+ 24. Rf2 Qe7 25. a4 Rd7 26. c5 {1-0 (26) Bellafiore,E (1661)-Crosa,F (1320) Ivrea 2007}) {[%tqu "En","","", "","h2h4","", 10]} 13. h4 $1 Ne5 {[%mdl 32] [%tqu "En","","", "","d3c2","",10]} 14. Qe2 {-1.55/27} (14. Qc2 $1 $11 {-0.13/27}) 14... Qxe2 $17 15. Nxe2 Nxc4 16. Bc3 Nxb2 17. Bxg7 Kxg7 18. Rfc1 Nd3 19. Rc7 Re8 20. Nc3 Nc5 21. Nd5 {-2.14/26} (21. e5 $17 {-1.39/29}) 21... e6 22. Nc3 a6 $2 {0.00/32 [#]} ({Black should try } 22... Bd7 $19 {-1.75/26 Threatens to win with ...Bc6.} 23. e5 Rec8 24. Rxc8 Rxc8 25. exd6 Nd3) {[%tqu "En","","","","e4e5","",10]} 23. Rd1 {-1.45/29} (23. e5 $1 $11 {0.00/32 [%mdl 512] was the only way to keep the balance.}) 23... Rd8 $2 {2.51/29 [%mdl 8192]} (23... e5 $17 {-1.45/29 stays on course. ... Ne6 is the strong threat.} 24. Rxd6 Ne6) {[%tqu "En","","","","c7c5","",10]} 24. Rxc5 $1 {[%mdl 512] Accuracy: White = 41%, Black = 49%.} 1-0

C55 Two Knights: 4.d3, 4.d4 exd4 5.e5 and Max Lange Attack (1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Nc6 3.c3 Nf6 4.Nf3)

Since I started posting my games and maybe looking at them a bit closer than before, it has been interesting to see how many different openings and variations I have really faced over the years. This particular opening variation I had never before even heard of, until I did some studying, did I learn what it is called. Truth to be told though, the game doesn't follow the normal move order of this variation. The normal order is 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.c3. This has not been the first time nor will it be the last time that the move order in my games doesn't follow the usual move order. As you can see, it is another loss as I'm trying to balance things out. If I would post all the games I have notations of, I would be slightly on the plus side but maybe not in the ratio that you see my games here in this blog. The analysis for this game was updated on November 28th, 2019.

[Event "ICC 5 0"] [Site "Internet Chess Club"] [Date "2011.08.10"] [Round "?"] [White "Tocklin, Tomi"] [Black "Vierjoki, Timo"] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "C55"] [WhiteElo "1393"] [BlackElo "1441"] [Annotator "Tactical Analysis 2.10 (30s), TV"] [PlyCount "55"] [EventDate "2011.??.??"] {[%evp 9,54,-52,-47,-121,-111,-119,-70,-76,-78,-73,0,-4,0,-18,39,31,39,22,27,0, 72,66,77,72,72,86,146,110,199,136,127,120,233,122,212,206,194,159,208,205,310, 293,297,149,149,150,29999]} 1. e4 e5 2. Bc4 Nc6 3. c3 Nf6 4. Nf3 {C55 Two Knights: 4.d3, 4.d4 exd4 5.e5 and Max Lange Attack C55 Italian Game: Two Knights Defense. De Riviere Gambit} Nxe4 5. O-O d5 6. Bb3 {-1.21/24} (6. Bb5 $15 {-0.47/27} Bd6 (6... f6 7. d3 Nd6 8. Bxc6+ bxc6 9. h3 Be7 10. Nbd2 O-O 11. Re1 Qe8 12. Nf1 Qf7 13. Ng3 Nf5 14. Nxf5 Bxf5 15. Nh4 Bd7 16. Qf3 f5 17. Nxf5 Qxf5 18. Qg3 Bd6 19. Bh6 Qf6 20. Bxg7 Qxg7 21. Qxg7+ {Pedersen,H (1419) -Sjoberg,I (1864) Oslo 2016 0-1}) 7. d3 Nf6 8. h3 O-O 9. Bg5 h6 10. Bh4 a6 11. Ba4 Bf5 12. Bc2 g5 13. Bg3 Bg6 14. d4 e4 15. Bxd6 Qxd6 16. Nh2 Nh5 17. Ng4 Kg7 18. Nd2 f5 19. Ne3 Ne7 20. c4 c6 21. cxd5 {Oszczanowski,K-Barsegian,A (2330) Plock 1994 0-1 (43)}) 6... Be7 $146 (6... Be6 7. d4 Bd6 8. Re1 O-O 9. Bc2 f5 10. Ng5 Nxg5 11. Qh5 h6 12. f4 Ne4 13. Re3 exf4 14. Rh3 Qd7 15. Qg6 Bf7 16. Qxf5 Qxf5 17. Nd2 Rfe8 18. Nf3 Qf6 19. g3 fxg3 20. hxg3 Qxf3 21. Bd2 {Maneklal, T (1401)-D Nagesh,W Golden Sands 2014 0-1}) 7. Re1 {[%tqu "En","","","","c8g4", "",10]} O-O {-0.70/27} (7... Bg4 $1 $17 {-1.19/24 ...Bh4 is the strong threat.} 8. h3 Bh5) 8. d3 $15 {Black is slightly better.} Nc5 9. Nxe5 Nxb3 {-0.04/28} ( 9... Nxe5 $17 {-0.73/25} 10. Rxe5 Bd6) 10. Nxc6 $11 bxc6 11. axb3 Bf6 {0.39/27} (11... Bd6 $11 {-0.18/27}) 12. b4 Bf5 13. Qf3 Bg6 14. Be3 a6 {0.72/27} (14... d4 $11 {0.00/28 keeps the balance.} 15. cxd4 Bxd4) {[%tqu "En","","","", "d3d4","",10]} 15. d4 $1 $16 Re8 16. Nd2 Qd7 17. Nb3 Qd6 {1.46/26} (17... Be7 $142 {0.86/30}) 18. Nc5 Ra7 {1.99/26} (18... Be7 $16 {1.10/29} 19. Bf4 Qd8) 19. Rxa6 {1.36/32} (19. h4 $18 {1.99/26}) 19... Rxa6 20. Nxa6 Ra8 {2.33/28} (20... h6 $16 {1.20/32} 21. h3 Qd8) 21. Nc5 {1.22/29} ({White should play} 21. Bf4 $18 {2.33/28} Qd7 22. Nxc7) 21... Ra2 {2.12/28} (21... Be7 $16 {1.22/29} 22. Bf4 Qd8) 22. Bf4 $18 Qd8 23. Qe2 {[#] White threatens Qe8+ and mate.} h6 {2.08/26} (23... Be7 $16 {1.59/29} 24. b5 (24. Nb7 Qd7 $16) 24... Bxc5) 24. h3 Bg5 { 3.10/32} (24... Kh7 $142 {2.05/28} 25. g3 h5) 25. Bxg5 Qxg5 26. Nd3 {1.49/32} ( {White should try} 26. Qe8+ $18 {2.97/27} Kh7 27. Nd7 (27. Qxc6 Rxb2 28. Qe8 Qf5 $16)) 26... Bxd3 $16 27. Qxd3 Rxb2 $2 {#1/31 [#]} (27... Ra8 $16 {1.50/36} 28. g3 g6) 28. Re8# {Accuracy: White = 32%, Black = 19%.} 1-0

C10 French with 3.Nc3: Unusual Black 3rd moves and 3...dxe4 (1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nd2 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Bd7 5.Nf3 Bc6 6.Bd3 Nd7 7.O-O Ngf6 8.Bg5 Be7 9.Nxf6+ Bxf6 10.Bxf6 Qxf6 11.Be2)

In my many games over the years, French Defense is most likely one of the rarest occurring opening. Despite that fact, I would like to at some point learn it so that I could play with both colors with some confidence. Well, actually I would like to at some point rotate between a lot openings without the result suffering in the process. It is an ambitious plan I have to admit and I may never achieve it but I am still going to try my best, for what it is worth.

[Event "ICC 15 0"] [Site "Internet Chess Club"] [Date "2011.07.02"] [Round "?"] [White "Vierjoki, Timo"] [Black "Kanenda"] [Result "0-1"] [ECO "C10"] [WhiteElo "1836"] [BlackElo "1840"] [Annotator "Tactical Analysis 2.10 (30s), TV"] [PlyCount "66"] [EventDate "2011.??.??"] {[%evp 20,66,0,-8,13,0,15,-14,0,-13,0,-20,-22,-16,-27,-21,0,0,0,-5,0,0,0,0,0, -17,-3,-30,-32,-47,67,-185,27,-104,56,0,135,-268,-262,-438,-433,-479,-471,-749, -754,-733,-722,-29987,-29988]} 1. e4 e6 2. d4 d5 3. Nd2 dxe4 4. Nxe4 Bd7 5. Nf3 Bc6 {C10 French Defense: Rubinstein Variation, Fort Knox Variation} 6. Bd3 Nd7 7. O-O Ngf6 8. Bg5 Be7 9. Nxf6+ Bxf6 10. Bxf6 Qxf6 {[%tqu "En","","","","d3e2", "",10]} 11. Be2 $1 {C10 French with 3.Nc3: Unusual Black 3rd moves and 3...dxe4 } O-O 12. c3 (12. Re1 Rad8 13. c3 b6 14. Qc2 Bb7 15. Rad1 c5 16. a4 cxd4 17. Nxd4 Ne5 18. f3 Nc6 19. Nb5 Qe7 20. Bd3 h6 21. Qf2 Rd7 22. Rd2 Rfd8 23. Red1 Ne5 24. Bf1 Rxd2 25. Rxd2 Rxd2 26. Qxd2 Qc5+ {Poetsch,L (1946) -Kolb,V (1674) Willingen 2017 1-0 (43)}) 12... Rfd8 $146 (12... Rad8 13. Qd2 (13. Qc2 Qf4 14. Rad1 h6 15. Nd2 e5 16. Bf3 Bxf3 17. Nxf3 e4 18. Nd2 f5 19. Nc4 b5 20. Ne3 c6 21. Rde1 Qg5 22. f4 Qg6 23. a4 a6 24. axb5 axb5 25. Ra1 Ra8 26. Rxa8 Rxa8 27. Qb3+ Kh8 {Castellanos Silva,A-Thilaganathan,J (1906) Chalkidiki 2007 0-1 (41)}) 13... b6 14. Rad1 Bb7 15. Qe3 c5 16. Ne5 cxd4 17. cxd4 Bd5 18. b3 Qe7 19. Rc1 Rc8 20. Ba6 Rxc1 21. Rxc1 Nxe5 22. dxe5 Qa3 23. Bc4 Bxc4 24. Rxc4 Qxa2 25. h4 Rd8 26. h5 h6 27. Rg4 {Litwak,A (2168)-Bjelajac,M (2370) playchess.com INT 2003 0-1 (64)}) (12... Bxf3 13. Bxf3 c6 14. Re1 Nb6 15. Qc2 Rfd8 16. a4 Nd5 17. a5 Rac8 18. Qb3 Rd7 19. Rad1 Ne7 20. Re3 Rcd8 21. Qa4 Rd6 22. Qb4 R6d7 23. Qc5 a6 24. Rde1 Qf5 25. Re5 Qc2 26. Qb4 Nd5 27. Bxd5 {Lutring, A (2015)-Decsey,K (2005) Paks 1996 1/2-1/2 (50)}) 13. Qc2 b6 {The position is equal.} 14. Rfe1 Bb7 15. Bd1 c5 16. dxc5 Nxc5 17. Re3 Ba6 18. Be2 Bxe2 19. Qxe2 Qf4 20. Nd4 Qc7 21. Qg4 Rd5 22. Rae1 Rad8 23. Rg3 {[#]} g6 24. h4 Rh5 {0.67/29} (24... e5 $15 { -0.47/27} 25. Nf5 Kf8) {[%tqu "En","","","","g4h5","",10]} 25. Nf3 $2 {-1.85/ 24 [%mdl 8192]} (25. Qxh5 $1 $14 {0.67/29 stays ahead.} Qxg3 {[%tqu "En","","", "","h5h7","", 10]} 26. Qxh7+ $1 {[%mdl 512]} (26. fxg3 gxh5 27. a3 Kg7 $15) 26... Kxh7 27. fxg3) {[%tqu "En","","","","c5d3","",10]} 25... Rdd5 $2 {0.27/27 } (25... Nd3 $1 $19 {-1.85/24} 26. Re3 (26. Qxh5 $2 Nxe1 27. Qg4 Rd1 $17) 26... Nf4) {[%tqu "En","","","","c3c4","",10]} 26. Ng5 {-1.04/26} (26. c4 $1 $11 { 0.27/27} Rdf5 27. Nd4) 26... Kh8 $2 {0.56/28 [#]} (26... h6 $17 {-1.04/26} 27. Nf3 Rhf5) {[%tqu "En","","","","c3c4","",10]} 27. Rf3 {0.00/32} (27. c4 $1 $14 {0.56/28} Rf5 28. Rf3 Rxf3 29. Qxf3 (29. Nxf3 e5 $11)) {[%tqu "En","","","", "h5g5","",10]} 27... f5 {1.35/27} (27... Rhxg5 $1 $11 {0.00/32 remains equal.} 28. hxg5 Nd3 29. Rxd3 Rxd3) 28. Qh3 $2 {-2.68/24 [%mdl 8192]} (28. Qc4 $16 { 1.35/27 and life is bright. aiming for b4.} Qd7 29. Rfe3 Rxg5 30. hxg5) { [%tqu "En","", "","","h7h6","",10]} 28... h6 $1 $19 {[%mdl 32]} 29. g4 $2 { -4.38/26} (29. Nxe6 {-2.62/30} Nxe6 30. Qg3) 29... fxg4 30. Qxg4 hxg5 31. Rf8+ {-7.49/25} (31. b4 $142 {-4.71/26} Rxh4 32. Rh3) 31... Kg7 32. Qf3 Rf5 33. Qa8 Rxf8 {Accuracy: White = 15%, Black = 26%.} 0-1

C45 Scotch Game (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 exd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nxc6 bxc6 6.Bg5)

I have played the Scotch on both colors though more games as Black than with White. It is a opening that I know quite well these days in my honest opinion, well at least the two variations that I most often faced either over the board or in the internet. Since I no longer really play close chess and haven't done so in quite a long time, it has been more of the latter for me for some months. I did by accident analyse this game again with my current engine so I replaced the old analysis with the new one.

[Event "Corr Game 14.7.2008 - 2.10.2008"] [Site "http://gameknot.com"] [Date "2008.10.02"] [Round "?"] [White "emanuele"] [Black "Vierjoki, Timo"] [Result "0-1"] [ECO "C45"] [WhiteElo "1442"] [BlackElo "1567"] [Annotator "Tactical Analysis 2.10 (5s), TV"] [PlyCount "76"] [EventDate "2008.??.??"] [EventType "corr"] 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. d4 exd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 {C45 Scotch Game: Schmidt Variation} 5. Nxc6 bxc6 6. Bg5 {-0.91/17 C45 Scotch Game} (6. e5 $1 $14 {0.52/21 keeps the upper hand.} Qe7 7. Qe2) 6... Qe7 {0.26/23} (6... h6 $17 {-0.91/17} 7. Bf4 Nxe4) 7. Bd3 $146 {-0.50/21} (7. Nc3 $11 {0.26/23} Qb4 (7... Qe6 8. Bxf6 Qxf6 9. Bc4 Bb4 10. Qd3 Bxc3+ 11. Qxc3 Qxc3+ 12. bxc3 O-O 13. O-O Re8 14. f3 d6 15. Rab1 Re5 16. Rb3 d5 17. Bd3 c5 18. exd5 Rxd5 19. Be4 Be6 20. Rfb1 Rdd8 21. Bxa8 Bxb3 22. Rxb3 {Altenburg,N (1518)-Lemke,B (1436) Hamburgo 2010 1-0 (46)}) 8. Bxf6 gxf6 9. Rb1 Bg7 10. Bd3 O-O 11. O-O Qc5 12. Qg4 d5 13. Qh5 h6 14. exd5 Bb7 15. Be4 Rfe8 16. Rfe1 Re5 17. Qf3 cxd5 18. Bd3 Rb8 19. Rxe5 fxe5 20. Qf5 e4 21. Bxe4 Re8 22. Bxd5 {Simon,D (1159)-Sromovska,L (1165) Lubovna 2013 0-1 (38)}) ( 7. Nd2 Qe5 8. Bxf6 Qxf6 9. c3 Bc5 10. Qf3 Qe7 11. Be2 O-O 12. O-O Qg5 13. Nb3 Bd6 14. Qg4 Qe5 15. g3 Re8 16. Bd3 Bf8 17. f4 Qd6 18. Rad1 Qh6 19. Qg5 Qxg5 20. fxg5 d5 21. exd5 Bg4 {Hagi,C-Todorovic,M (2235) WchT 1994 0-1 (42)}) (7. Qd4 Qxe4+ 8. Qxe4+ Nxe4 9. Bf4 Bd6 10. Bxd6 Nxd6 11. Bd3 O-O 12. O-O Rb8 13. b3 Re8 14. Nd2 Bb7 15. Rad1 Nb5 16. c4 Nc3 17. Ra1 Ne2+ 18. Kh1 Nf4 19. Be4 c5 20. Bxb7 Rxb7 21. Rae1 Kf8 {Payet,A (1890)-Gretry,P (2073) Reunion 2006 0-1 (67)}) 7... Qe5 8. Bxf6 {-0.70/21} (8. Bd2 $11 {-0.19/22}) 8... Qxf6 $15 {Black is slightly better.} 9. c3 Bc5 {0.06/23} (9... Rb8 $15 {-0.56/20} 10. Qc2 d5) 10. O-O $11 O-O {0.24/23} (10... d6 $142 {-0.26/23}) 11. Nd2 {-0.37/23} (11. Qh5 $11 {0.24/23} Qd6 12. Qe2) 11... d5 {0.63/20} ({Black should try} 11... d6 $15 {-0.37/23}) 12. Qf3 {-0.54/21} (12. exd5 $14 {0.63/20} cxd5 13. Qh5) 12... Qxf3 {0.15/23} (12... Qg5 $1 $15 {-0.54/21} 13. Nb3 Bd6) 13. Nxf3 Re8 {0.21/21} ( 13... a5 $142 {-0.24/22}) 14. exd5 cxd5 15. Rae1 {-0.28/21} (15. Bb5 $14 { 0.56/23} Rd8 16. b4) 15... Bb7 16. Rxe8+ Rxe8 17. b4 Bb6 18. a4 c6 {0.67/23} ( 18... a5 $1 $11 {-0.09/25}) 19. a5 $14 Bd8 20. c4 {-0.09/26} (20. Nd4 $16 { 0.83/18}) 20... g6 {0.66/23} (20... Ba6 $11 {-0.09/26} 21. Rc1 Bf6) 21. c5 { -0.43/23} ({Better is} 21. cxd5 $14 {0.66/23} cxd5 22. Rc1) 21... a6 {0.00/27} (21... Bf6 $15 {-0.43/23 is more appropriate.}) 22. g3 Bf6 23. h4 {-0.50/24} ( 23. Re1 $11 {0.00/28} Rxe1+ 24. Nxe1) 23... h5 {0.00/29} ({Black should play} 23... Bc8 $15 {-0.50/24}) 24. Nh2 {-1.18/23} (24. Re1 $11 {0.00/29} Kf8 25. Rxe8+ Kxe8 26. Ne1) 24... Bc3 $17 25. g4 $2 {-3.03/24 [#]} (25. Nf3 $17 { -1.11/25 only move.}) 25... hxg4 26. Nxg4 Re1 27. Rxe1 {-2.62/25} (27. Nf6+ { -1.78/31 is a better defense.} Kf8 28. Nd7+ Kg7 29. Rxe1 Bxe1 30. Nb8 Bxb4 31. Bxa6 Bxa6 32. Nxa6 Bxa5 33. Nb8) 27... Bxe1 $19 {Endgame KBB-KBN} 28. Nf6+ Kh8 $2 {-0.62/26 [#]} (28... Kf8 $1 $19 {-2.72/26 ...Ke7 is the strong threat.} 29. Nd7+ Ke8) 29. Ng4 $2 {-3.87/26} (29. Ne8 $15 {-0.62/26} Bc8 30. Nd6) 29... Bxb4 30. Ne5 Kg7 ({Stronger than} 30... Bxa5 31. Nxf7+ Kg7 32. Nd6 $16) 31. f4 $2 { -5.72/19} (31. Nd7 {-3.09/28}) 31... Bxc5+ {Black is clearly winning.} 32. Kg2 Bb4 33. Kg3 Bxa5 34. Kg4 Bc3 35. h5 gxh5+ 36. Kxh5 a5 37. f5 Bxe5 38. Kg5 a4 { Accuracy: White = 25%, Black = 31%.} 0-1

C25 Vienna Game: Alternatives to 2...Nf6 (1.e4 e5 2.Nc3 Nc6 3.f4 exf4)

This is similar to the King's Gambit as I don't like either opening all that much. I know this particular opponent quite well, he is better at tactics than I am and almost every time we play blitz he usually gets a better position, sometimes he is even up a piece or something but his time usage gives me usually the win...

[Event "Corr game 10.5.2008 - 30.9.2008"] [Site "http://www.queenalice.com"] [Date "2008.05.10"] [Round "?"] [White "trallala"] [Black "Vierjoki, Timo"] [Result "0-1"] [ECO "C25"] [WhiteElo "1742"] [BlackElo "2011"] [Annotator "Tactical Analysis 2.10 (5s), TV"] [PlyCount "54"] [EventDate "2008.??.??"] [EventType "corr"] 1. e4 e5 2. Nc3 Nc6 3. f4 {C25 Vienna Game: Vienna Gambit} exf4 {C25 Vienna Game: Alternatives to 2...Nf6} 4. Bc4 Qh4+ 5. Kf1 Bc5 {[#]} 6. Qe1 Qxe1+ 7. Kxe1 Nf6 (7... Bxg1 8. Rxg1 Nd4 9. Nd5 Kd8 10. Bd3 Ne6 11. Rf1 Nf6 12. b4 Re8 13. Nxf6 gxf6 14. Bb2 Ke7 15. g3 Rg8 16. gxf4 Rg4 17. e5 fxe5 18. fxe5 b6 19. Bf5 Rh4 20. Bxe6 fxe6 21. Rf2 Bb7 22. Ke2 {Vitor,A (2302)-Santos,C (2379) Aveiro 2000 0-1 (32)}) (7... Nd4 8. Kd1 c6 9. Nf3 Nxf3 10. gxf3 b5 11. Bb3 Ne7 12. d3 Ng6 13. h4 h5 14. Ne2 a5 15. a4 Be3 16. Bxe3 fxe3 17. Rg1 Nxh4 18. Rxg7 Nxf3 19. Ng3 d6 20. axb5 cxb5 21. Bd5 Ra7 22. e5 {Spitzer Isbert,R (2023) -Santamaria Baeza,A (1855) Madrid 2017 0-1}) 8. Nf3 $146 {Black is slightly better.} (8. Na4 Bd6 9. Nf3 Nxe4 10. d3 Nf6 11. Nc3 Ne5 12. Bb3 Nxf3+ 13. gxf3 c6 14. Ne2 Nh5 15. Bd2 Bc7 16. Bc3 d5 17. Rg1 f6 18. Bb4 a5 19. Bc5 a4 { 0-1 (19) Weber,A (1776)-Herold,H (2003) Fürth 2015}) 8... h6 9. Nd5 Nxd5 10. exd5 Nd4 (10... Ne7 {feels hotter.} 11. Kd1 g5 12. h4 g4 13. Ne5 d6) 11. Nxd4 Bxd4 12. c3 Be5 13. Kf2 {[#] And now Re1 would win.} Bd6 14. Re1+ Kf8 15. d4 b6 16. a4 a6 17. Bd3 g6 18. Bd2 Bb7 19. b4 a5 {0.16/20} ({Black should play} 19... g5 $15 {-0.38/21}) 20. b5 {-1.28/19} (20. bxa5 $11 {0.16/20} Rxa5 21. c4) 20... Bxd5 $17 21. c4 Bb7 22. Be4 {-1.69/20} (22. Rec1 $17 {-1.21/22 keeps fighting.} ) 22... Bxe4 $19 23. Rxe4 g5 24. Bc3 f6 25. Rae1 {-2.03/22} (25. c5 $17 { -1.48/22} bxc5 26. dxc5 Bxc5+ 27. Bd4 Bxd4+ 28. Rxd4) 25... Kf7 26. Kf3 h5 27. g3 $2 {-4.41/22} (27. c5 {-1.81/22 was called for.} bxc5 28. dxc5 Bxc5 29. Rd1) 27... g4+ {Accuracy: White = 25%, Black = 41%.} 0-1

C64 Spanish Game: Classical Defence (3...Bc5) except 4.O-O Nf6 (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 Bc5)

This one was played in the 2014 August Grand Seven Fourteen II tournament that is held at Red Hot Pawn. I am currently second in the tournament but I still have some chances for taking the first place and be the winner of the tournament. Only time will tell what will happen. I have already secured at least third place in the 21 player tournament so this will not be a huge disaster no matter what happens in my remaining games.

Up to the move 7...d5 both players played if not accurately, at least reasonably. The diagram below shows the position in which my opponent played 8.d4, a move that created problems for jose sureda. Both pawn captures 8...dxe4 and 8...exd4 good enough to take the advantage. However, with accurate play my opponent should still be holding the position.

The penultimate mistake from jose sureda saw the light of day when he played 15.Qd2 in the next diagram position. The move that my opponent played ignored my threat of Nc2 completely and it was something that jose sureda could not afford to do.

I was mostly able to keep my winning advantage, but I did mess up on move 28, when I played c5. The position where I played that move can be seen in the next diagram. I should be clearly better after that move, but the sloppy move gave some unnecessary counterplay to my opponent.

The game continued with the moves 29.Ne4 Qe7 and then jose sureda made the move that lost the game 30.Rxc5. I replied with 30...Bb6 and it should be quite clear that the game is over.

[Event "Grand Seven Fourteen"] [Site "http://www.redhotpawn.com"] [Date "2014.08.11"] [Round "1"] [White "jose sureda"] [Black "Vierjoki, Timo"] [Result "0-1"] [ECO "C64"] [WhiteElo "1472"] [BlackElo "1844"] [Annotator "Stockfish 8 64 POPCNT (30s), TV"] [PlyCount "71"] [EventDate "2014.??.??"] 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 Bc5 {C64 Spanish Game: Classical Defence (3...Bc5) except 4.O-O Nf6} 4. h3 (4. b4 Bxb4 5. c3 Ba5 6. O-O Nf6 7. d4 Nxe4 8. Qd3 Nd6 9. dxe5 Nxb5 10. Bg5 f6 11. exf6 gxf6 12. Bh6 d5 13. Qxb5 Kf7 14. Rd1 a6 15. Qd3 Bg4 16. Nbd2 Qd7 17. Nb3 Bb6 18. c4 dxc4 {Rocha,S (2285)-Santos,C (2405) Lisbon 1991 1/2-1/2}) (4. b4 {Spanish Game: Classical Variation. Spanish Wing Gambit}) (4. c3 Bb6 {Spanish Game: Classical Variation. Charousek Variation} ( 4... d5 {Spanish Game: Classical Variation. Konikowski Gambit}) (4... f5 { Spanish Game: Classical Variation. Cordel Gambit})) 4... Nge7 5. c3 $146 { Consolidates b4} (5. d3 d6 6. Bg5 h6 7. Bh4 g5 8. Bg3 Bd7 9. Nc3 f5 10. h4 f4 11. Bh2 g4 {0-1 (11) Fontalvo, N (1507)-Mosquera,A (1741) Cartagena 2012}) 5... Bb6 6. O-O O-O 7. Re1 (7. d3 d6 $11) 7... d5 8. d4 (8. d3 $5 $11 {is an interesting idea}) 8... exd4 $15 9. cxd4 dxe4 10. Rxe4 Bf5 {Black threatens to win material: Bf5xe4} 11. Re1 a6 (11... Nxd4 12. Nxd4 Bxd4 13. Nc3 $17) 12. Bxc6 Nxc6 13. Bg5 {White threatens to win material: Bg5xd8} f6 {Black threatens to win material: f6xg5} 14. Be3 Nb4 15. Qd2 $2 (15. Qb3+ $142 { would keep White in the game} Nd5 16. Bd2 $15) 15... Nc2 $19 16. Nc3 Nxa1 17. Rxa1 Qd7 18. Nh4 Rad8 19. Nxf5 Qxf5 20. Re1 $2 (20. Qe2 Qd7 21. Rd1 Qf7 $19) 20... Rfe8 (20... Bxd4 {might be the shorter path} 21. Bxd4 c5 22. Re4 $19) 21. Ne2 (21. a3 Qg6 22. d5 Bxe3 23. Rxe3 Rxe3 24. Qxe3 Qe8 $19) 21... Qd5 (21... c5 {keeps an even firmer grip} 22. Qc3 cxd4 23. Nxd4 $19) 22. Nc3 (22. b4 c6 $19) 22... Qc4 23. b3 Qb4 24. Rd1 (24. d5 {doesn't change anything anymore} Ba5 25. Rc1 c6 $19) 24... Ba5 25. Nb1 Qb5 (25... Qxd2 {and Black can already relax} 26. Nxd2 c5 27. Nf3 cxd4 28. Rxd4 Rxd4 29. Nxd4 $19) 26. Nc3 (26. Qb2 c6 $19) 26... Qc6 (26... Qh5 $142 $5 {makes it even easier for Black} 27. Rc1 c5 28. d5 $19) 27. Rc1 Qd6 28. Qd3 c5 (28... Bxc3 $142 {and Black can already relax} 29. Rxc3 c6 $19) 29. Ne4 $17 Qe7 30. Rxc5 $4 {cause more grief.} (30. Nxc5 $142 Qf7 31. a3 $17) 30... Bb6 $19 (30... Qxe4 $6 {is clearly weaker} 31. Qxe4 Rxe4 32. Rxa5 $17) 31. Qc4+ Kh8 32. d5 (32. Nd2 {the only chance to get some counterplay} Bxc5 33. dxc5 $19) 32... Qxe4 33. Qxe4 Rxe4 34. Rc4 (34. Rc3 {otherwise it's curtains at once} Bxe3 35. fxe3 $19) 34... Rxc4 35. bxc4 Bxe3 36. fxe3 0-1

A93 Classical Dutch: Classical Stonewall: 7.b3 (1.c4 f5 2.g3 Nf6 3.Bg2 c6 4.d4 d5 5.Nf3 e6 6.O-O Be7 7.Nbd2 O-O 8.b3)

Even if this game doesn't have the usual move order of the Stonewall Dutch, it does end up in a same position as it would after the usual move order 1.d4 f5 2.c4 e6 3. Nf3 Nf6 4. g3 c6 5. Bg2 d5 6. 0-0. But it does miss the last move in that line 6...Bd6, so it must be classified under a different opening. I do have examples of the Leningrad Dutch as well, those in the usual move order but they have not yet been analysed so it will take some time to post even one of them. Until next time my fellow chess enthusiasts. Improved and updated analysis added on December 23rd, 2019.

[Event "Corr game 23.8.2007 - 5.2.2008"] [Site "www.redhotpawn.com"] [Date "2008.02.05"] [Round "?"] [White "Vierjoki, Timo"] [Black "saffa73"] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "A93"] [WhiteElo "1666"] [BlackElo "1492"] [Annotator "Tactical Analysis 2.10 (5s), TV"] [PlyCount "85"] [EventDate "2008.??.??"] [EventType "corr"] 1. c4 (1. d4 f5 (1... d5 2. Nf3 e6 3. c4 c6 4. Nbd2 f5 5. g3 Nf6 6. Bg2 Be7 { 1-0 (30) Epishin,V (2574)-Tatai,S (2372) Bratto 2008}) 2. g3 Nf6 3. Bg2 e6 4. Nf3 Be7 5. O-O O-O 6. c4 d5 7. b3 c6 {1-0 (53) Schuurman,P (2234)-Matto,M (1954) Gibraltar 2006}) (1. Nf3 d5 2. g3 e6 3. Bg2 f5 4. d4 Nf6 5. O-O Be7 6. Nbd2 O-O 7. c4 {1-0 (30) Kiesel,L (1530)-Goldenbaum,T (1390) Magdeburg 2014}) 1... f5 {A10 English Opening: Anglo-Dutch Defense} 2. g3 Nf6 3. Bg2 c6 4. d4 d5 5. Nf3 e6 6. O-O Be7 7. Nbd2 O-O 8. b3 {A93 Classical Dutch: Classical Stonewall: 7.b3} Ne4 9. Bb2 Qe8 (9... Nd7 10. Ne5 (10. Ne1 Ndf6 (10... Bg5 11. e3 Ndf6 12. Qe2 Nxd2 13. Qxd2 Ne4 14. Qe2 b6 15. f3 Nd6 16. Ba3 Ba6 17. Rc1 Be7 18. Nd3 dxc4 19. Ne5 Qc7 20. f4 Qb7 21. Nxc6 cxb3 22. Nxe7+ Qxe7 23. Qxa6 Rad8 24. axb3 g5 25. Rc6 {Kiesel,L (1530)-Goldenbaum,T (1390) Magdeburg 2014 1-0}) 11. Ndf3 Ng4 12. Nd3 Qe8 13. Nfe5 Nxe5 14. Nxe5 Qh5 15. f3 Ng5 16. e3 Rf6 17. f4 Qxd1 18. Rfxd1 Nf7 19. Nd3 h6 20. a4 a5 21. Rdc1 Bd8 22. Ba3 Rb8 23. Kf2 Bd7 24. b4 axb4 {Epishin,V (2574)-Tatai,S (2372) Bratto 2008 1-0}) 10... Bf6 11. Ndf3 {1-0 (53) Schuurman,P (2234)-Matto,M (1954) Gibraltar 2006}) 10. Ne5 Nd7 { White is slightly better.} 11. Ndf3 Bf6 12. Nxd7 $146 (12. Nd3 Qh5 13. Nf4 Qf7 14. Ne5 Qe7 15. Nfd3 Ng5 16. a4 Re8 17. Qc2 Bxe5 18. dxe5 h6 19. b4 Qf7 20. c5 Nf8 21. Bd4 Ng6 22. e3 Bd7 23. Rfb1 a6 24. Nc1 Rf8 25. Ne2 Qe7 26. h4 Nh7 { Schuurman,P (2234)-Matto,M (1954) Gibraltar 2006 1-0 (53)}) 12... Bxd7 13. Ne5 Bxe5 14. dxe5 {Ba3 is the strong threat.} Qg6 15. e3 Rad8 16. Ba3 {aiming for f3.} Rf7 {1.39/24} (16... Rfe8 $14 {0.66/18}) 17. f3 $16 Ng5 {1.87/22} (17... Nxg3 $16 {1.36/21 might work better.} 18. hxg3 Qxg3) 18. h4 $36 {White is in control.} Nh3+ {2.32/18} (18... Ne4 $142 {1.74/21}) 19. Kh2 f4 20. gxf4 Nxf4 21. exf4 Rxf4 22. Be7 Re8 23. Bg5 Rff8 24. Qd4 h6 25. Bd2 Qh5 26. Kg3 g5 { 3.65/23} (26... b6 $142 {2.15/18} 27. Rae1 Kh8) 27. hxg5 hxg5 {Threatening ... Rf4.} 28. Rh1 Qg6 29. Qxa7 Re7 30. Qe3 Rg7 31. Bh3 Qf7 32. Bg4 Be8 {7.09/20} ( 32... b5 $142 {4.02/11} 33. cxd5 cxd5) 33. Rh6 {White is clearly winning.} Qe7 34. Bxe6+ Bf7 35. Bxf7+ Rfxf7 36. Rah1 {[#]} Rh7 37. Rxh7 Rxh7 38. Rxh7 Qxh7 39. Qxg5+ Kf8 40. Qh6+ Qxh6 41. Bxh6+ Kf7 42. cxd5 {[#] Threatens to win with d6.} cxd5 43. Be3 {Accuracy: White = 76%, Black = 23%.} 1-0

A36 Symmetrical English vs ...g6: 4.Bg2 Bg7 (1.c4 c5 2.g3 g6 3.Bg2 Bg7 4.Nc3 Nc6 5.e4 e6 6.Nge2 Nge7 7.O-O O-O 8.d3 d6 9.Be3 Nd4 10.Qd2)

Here is an example of the Botvinnik System which has in turn embedded in the comments, examples from games played by much better players than I am. I hope you find it useful. There are a lot of examples in my analysed games of the English and this type of system but I think I will find games from other openings for my next post. The analysis in this game has been updated on December 23rd, 2019.

[Event "Corr game 23.8.2007-14.12.2007"] [Site "http://www.redhotpawn.com"] [Date "2007.08.22"] [Round "?"] [White "Vierjoki, Timo"] [Black "ender67"] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "A36"] [WhiteElo "1856"] [BlackElo "1756"] [Annotator "Tactical Analysis 2.10 (5s), TV"] [PlyCount "73"] [EventDate "2007.??.??"] 1. c4 (1. e4 c5 2. c4 Nc6 3. Nc3 g6 4. g3 Bg7 {1-0 (59) Bencze,N (1245)-Apostu, M (1090) Calimanesti 2014}) 1... c5 (1... g6 2. Nc3 Bg7 3. g3 c5 {1/2-1/2 (21) Mudra,T (2185)-Vesselovsky,S (2355) Czechia 2015}) 2. g3 g6 3. Bg2 Bg7 4. Nc3 Nc6 5. e4 {A36 English Opening: Symmetrical Variation, Botvinnik System} (5. d3 e6 6. e4 Nge7 7. Nge2 O-O {0-1 (40) Narciso Dublan,M (2480)-Izoria,Z (2590) Solsones 2004} 8. Be3 Nd4 9. O-O {1/2-1/2 (21) Mudra,T (2185)-Vesselovsky,S (2355) Czechia 2015}) 5... e6 (5... d6 6. Nge2 e6 7. d3 Nge7 8. Be3 Nd4 9. Qd2 O-O {1-0 (59) Bencze,N (1245)-Apostu,M (1090) Calimanesti 2014}) 6. Nge2 Nge7 7. O-O O-O 8. d3 d6 9. Be3 Nd4 10. Qd2 {-0.31/21 A36 Symmetrical English vs ... g6: 4.Bg2 Bg7} (10. h4 $11 {0.19/21}) 10... Bd7 {0.35/19} (10... Rb8 $15 { -0.31/21}) 11. f4 {-0.68/19} (11. Bh6 $14 {0.35/19} Bc6 (11... e5 12. Bxg7 Kxg7 13. Rab1 a5 14. f4 f6 15. b3 Nxe2+ 16. Qxe2 Nc6 17. a3 Nd4 18. Qd2 b5 19. b4 cxb4 20. axb4 bxc4 21. dxc4 axb4 {1/2-1/2 (21) Mudra,T (2185)-Vesselovsky,S (2355) Czechia 2015}) 12. Bxg7 Kxg7 13. f4 f5 14. Rae1 Qd7 15. Nxd4 cxd4 16. Nd5 Rae8 17. Nb4 fxe4 18. dxe4 e5 19. fxe5 Rxf1+ 20. Rxf1 dxe5 21. Nd3 Ng8 22. b4 Qe7 23. b5 Bd7 24. Qa5 Bg4 25. Rf2 b6 26. Qd2 {Narciso Dublan,M (2480) -Izoria,Z (2590) Solsones 2004 0-1 (40)}) 11... Bc6 $146 {0.04/22} (11... Qb6 $15 {-0.68/19}) (11... b5 12. e5 Nxe2+ 13. Qxe2 Bc6 14. exd6 Qxd6 15. Bxc6 Qxc6 16. Nxb5 a6 17. Nc3 a5 18. Rab1 a4 19. Ne4 Ra5 20. Qf2 Rc8 21. Nxc5 Rxc5 22. Bxc5 Qxc5 23. Qxc5 Rxc5 24. b4 Rc8 25. b5 a3 26. Rb3 {Bencze,N (1245)-Apostu,M (1090) Calimanesti 2014 1-0 (59)}) 12. Rf2 {-0.76/16} (12. Rab1 $11 {0.04/22 remains equal.}) 12... a6 {0.00/21} ({Better is} 12... f5 $17 {-0.76/16}) 13. Rb1 {-0.75/19} (13. f5 $1 $11 {0.00/21} Nxe2+ 14. Qxe2 exf5 15. Raf1) 13... b5 (13... Qd7 {with more complications.} 14. b4 b6 15. Rff1 f5 16. a4 Rfd8) 14. b4 bxc4 {0.12/24} (14... f5 $17 {-0.84/19}) 15. dxc4 $11 Nxe2+ 16. Nxe2 {-0.40/23} (16. Rxe2 $11 {0.24/22} cxb4 17. Rxb4) 16... cxb4 {0.42/19} (16... Rb8 $15 { -0.40/23}) 17. Rxb4 {0.00/23} (17. Nd4 $14 {0.42/19 is superior.}) 17... Qd7 { 0.99/19} (17... Rb8 $11 {0.00/23 keeps the balance.}) 18. Rf1 {0.16/21} (18. Nd4 $1 $16 {0.99/19}) 18... a5 {0.70/22} ({Black should try} 18... f5 $11 { 0.16/21}) 19. Rb3 {-0.12/23} (19. Rb6 $14 {0.70/22}) 19... Nc8 $2 {1.47/19 [#]} (19... f5 $11 {-0.12/23}) 20. Bd4 {0.76/22} (20. Nd4 $142 {1.47/19} Ba4 21. Rbb1) 20... Qc7 {2.15/18} (20... a4 $16 {0.76/22} 21. Rbb1 e5) 21. Bxg7 $18 Kxg7 22. Nd4 Ba4 {2.37/19} (22... h6 $142 {1.62/23} 23. Nxc6 (23. f5 e5 $18) 23... Qxc6 24. Qd4+ e5 25. fxe5 Qc5 26. Qxc5 dxc5) 23. Rc3 $2 {0.71/21} (23. Rbf3 $18 {2.37/19 has better winning chances.}) 23... Rb8 $2 {2.63/21} (23... e5 $16 {0.71/21 was called for.}) 24. f5 h6 $2 {7.38/24} (24... Qc5 {2.63/22}) 25. f6+ Kh7 26. g4 $1 {[#] White threatens Rh3 and mate.} Qc5 27. Rh3 h5 28. gxh5 g5 {White should prevent ...e5.} 29. h6 $2 {0.33/25} (29. Kh1 $18 {6.09/21 }) 29... Rg8 $2 {3.06/22} (29... Rb4 $14 {0.33/25} 30. Kh1 Rxc4) 30. Kh1 $2 { 0.00/22} ({White has to play} 30. e5 $1 $18 {3.06/22} Kh8 31. h7) 30... Bd7 $2 {5.76/21} (30... g4 $11 {0.00/22 and Black stays safe.} 31. Rg3 Qe5) 31. Rh5 { 2.39/23} (31. e5 $142 {5.76/21} Kh8 32. h7) 31... Rb4 $2 {12.04/19} (31... Nb6 {2.39/23}) 32. Nf3 Rxc4 33. Nxg5+ Rxg5 34. Rxg5 Rc2 35. Rg7+ Kh8 36. Qf4 Rxg2 37. Rxg2 {Accuracy: White = 24%, Black = 11%.} 1-0

C34 King's Gambit Accepted: 3.Nf3: 3...Nf6 and 3...d6 (1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Nf3 d6 4.Bc4 Be6)

One of the rare examples of me winning a game in the King's Gambit Accepted. Just to balance things out, I will post my losses at some point in time. Feel free to post a comment if you want to see a game in particular opening and I will get an example of it if I can and analyse it. Analysis updated on December 23rd, 2019.

[Event "Let's Play Chess!"] [Site "http://www.queenalice.com/gam"] [Date "2007.12.22"] [Round "?"] [White "CampbellMarcel"] [Black "Vierjoki, Timo"] [Result "0-1"] [ECO "C34"] [WhiteElo "1945"] [BlackElo "1820"] [Annotator "Tactical Analysis 2.10 (5s), TV"] [PlyCount "62"] [EventDate "2007.??.??"] 1. e4 e5 2. f4 exf4 3. Nf3 (3. Bc4 d6 {0-1 (32) Polgar,J (2555)-Sand,P Szentendre 1989}) 3... d6 {C34 King's Gambit Accepted, Fischer Defense} 4. Bc4 Be6 {C34 King's Gambit Accepted: 3.Nf3: 3...Nf6 and 3...d6} 5. Bd5 (5. Qe2 g5 6. d4 g4 7. Bxe6 fxe6 8. Bxf4 Bh6 9. Bxh6 Nxh6 10. Nfd2 Qg5 11. Nc3 Nc6 12. d5 Nd4 13. Qd3 e5 14. Nb5 Nxb5 15. Qxb5+ c6 16. dxc6 Qe3+ 17. Kd1 O-O 18. cxb7 Rab8 19. c3 Rf7 {Polgar,J (2555)-Sand,P Szentendre 1989 0-1 (32)}) 5... c6 6. Bxe6 fxe6 7. d4 Qf6 $146 (7... g5 8. O-O Nd7 9. Ne1 Qb6 10. Qh5+ Kd8 11. Qxg5+ Kc7 12. Kh1 Qxd4 13. Qxf4 Bh6 14. Nf3 Qb6 15. Qf7 Bxc1 16. Rxc1 Qxb2 17. Nbd2 Qf6 18. Qh5 Nh6 19. Rf1 Qg6 20. Qxg6 hxg6 21. Ng5 Nc5 22. Kg1 {Slehofer, M-Blaheta,P Klatovy 2000 1-0 (43)}) 8. O-O {The position is equal.} e5 9. dxe5 dxe5 10. Nc3 Bc5+ 11. Kh1 Nd7 12. Bd2 O-O-O 13. Qe2 g5 14. h3 {-1.98/20} (14. Na4 $17 {-1.04/18 was worth a try.}) 14... h5 15. Na4 {-2.12/18} (15. h4 $142 { -1.70/18}) 15... Bd6 16. Ba5 Rf8 17. Rad1 Bc7 {-0.12/17} ({Better is} 17... g4 $17 {-1.60/18} 18. Nd2 Be7) 18. Bb4 $2 {-1.72/21 [#]} (18. Rxd7 $1 $11 { -0.12/17} Kxd7 19. Nc5+ Kc8 20. Bxc7 Kxc7 21. Rd1) 18... Ne7 {-1.10/19} (18... g4 $19 {-1.72/21} 19. Ng1 Rf7) 19. Bxe7 {-1.92/16} (19. Rxd7 $17 {-1.10/19 was necessary.} Kxd7 20. Nc5+ Kc8 21. Qd3) 19... Qxe7 $19 20. Rxd7 {-3.21/18} (20. Qf2 {-1.88/13 might work better.}) 20... Kxd7 21. Rd1+ Kc8 22. Ng1 g4 23. Qc4 { -5.85/14} (23. Qf2 $142 {-4.02/18}) 23... Rd8 {Black is clearly winning.} 24. Rd3 Rxd3 25. cxd3 Rd8 26. Nc3 Qd7 {[#] And now ...f3 would win.} 27. Kh2 Kb8 { Strongly threatening ...gxh3.} 28. b4 Qxd3 29. Qb3 Qg3+ 30. Kh1 gxh3 31. Nxh3 Rd2 {Accuracy: White = 16%, Black = 41%.} 0-1

C53 Giuoco Piano sidelines (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.c3 Bb6 5.d4 exd4 6.cxd4 d6)

This game and the analysis that comes with it are a blast from the past, played around seven years ago on a correspondence chess site called Red Hot Pawn. By the way, I changed my handle in the notation so if you do find this handle in Red Hot Pawn it isn't me. I could post my other games quite fast from now on, well the ones that have already been analysed but when they run out, I need to start analyzing again and then the rate of my posts will slow down a bit. Posts will come everyday though, so be prepared for them. Please post comments if you find something odd about the analysis or in general want to chat about the great and time consuming 64 square madness that we call chess. In the game below you see a game that is full of mistakes, which hopefully means that you can learn from the mistakes made in this game, so you are not going to do similar ones in your own games. I may not remember much from these old games but I do remember seeing that mate in two on moves 23... and 24... after it was no longer possible to do. I was angry for myself not being able to see it before. Luckily now that I am older and maybe in some cases even wiser, I do not take it all that hard if I miss something like this and I am able to concentrate on next moves without the previous mistakes still in mind.

[Event "Corr game 23.6.2007-14.8.2007"] [Site "http://www.redhotpawn.com"] [Date "2007.06.23"] [Round "?"] [White "aanepade"] [Black "Vierjoki, Timo"] [Result "0-1"] [ECO "C53"] [WhiteElo "1657"] [BlackElo "1844"] [Annotator "Tactical Analysis 2.10 (5s), TV"] [PlyCount "72"] [EventDate "2007.??.??"] 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Bc5 4. c3 Bb6 (4... d6 5. d4 exd4 6. cxd4 {1-0 (47) Svobodova,R-Kristofova,T Svetla nad Sazavou 1998}) 5. d4 exd4 6. cxd4 d6 { C53 Giuoco Piano sidelines C53 Italian game: Classical Variation. De la Bourdonnais Variation} 7. Nc3 {-0.06/20} (7. Bb5 $1 $16 {1.21/17}) 7... Qf6 $2 {1.69/18} (7... Nf6 $11 {-0.06/20 and Black is okay.}) (7... h6 8. h3 Qe7 9. O-O Bd7 10. a4 O-O-O 11. b4 a6 12. b5 Na5 13. Bd3 axb5 14. axb5 c6 15. Ba3 Qf6 16. Bb4 {1-0 (16) Roos,D (2380)-Collado Forner,J (2270) Orange 1990}) (7... Na5 8. Bd3 Bg4 9. h3 Bh5 10. O-O Bxd4 11. Qa4+ Nc6 12. Nxd4 Nge7 13. Bb5 O-O 14. Nxc6 bxc6 15. Bxc6 Nxc6 16. Qxc6 Rb8 17. Qd5 Bg6 18. f4 h6 19. f5 Bh7 20. g4 Re8 21. h4 Qxh4 22. Rf2 {Roessler,K (1081)-Kort,A (1301) Hofheim 2014 0-1 (44)} ) 8. Nd5 $146 ({But not} 8. Bg5 $6 Qg6 $14 9. O-O Nf6 10. Re1 O-O 11. Bf4 Bg4 12. d5 Na5 13. Bd3 Nh5 14. e5 Bf5 15. Nh4 Qg4 16. Nxf5 Qxf4 17. Qe2 g6 18. Ng3 Qh4 19. Qe4 Qxe4 20. Rxe4 Nxg3 21. hxg3 Rae8 22. exd6 cxd6 23. Rae1 Rxe4 { Svobodova,R-Kristofova,T Svetla nad Sazavou 1998 1-0 (47)}) 8... Qg6 $2 { 2.87/16} (8... Qd8 $16 {1.29/22 was worth a try.}) 9. Ng5 {White has a decisive advantage.} Nd8 $2 {5.30/18} (9... Be6 {2.72/21 keeps fighting.} 10. Nxb6 axb6) 10. O-O {2.18/20} (10. f4 $142 {5.30/18}) 10... Nf6 $2 {3.85/20} ( 10... h6 {2.18/20 is a better defense.}) 11. e5 $2 {-0.46/21} (11. Re1 $18 { 3.85/20}) 11... Nxd5 $15 12. Bxd5 O-O {0.90/22} (12... dxe5 $15 {-0.47/22 keeps the upper hand.} 13. dxe5 h6) 13. exd6 {-0.22/21} (13. g4 $1 $16 {0.90/22 }) 13... Qxd6 {1.18/19} (13... h6 $11 {-0.22/21} 14. dxc7 Bxc7) 14. Be4 $2 { -0.58/21} (14. Qd3 $16 {1.18/19} Qg6 15. Be4) 14... h6 15. Nh7 $2 {-3.87/19} ( 15. Nf3 $15 {-0.31/22}) 15... Re8 $19 16. Bc2 f5 {-2.55/21} (16... Bxd4 $142 { -4.37/19} 17. Be3 Bxb2) 17. Ng5 $2 {-4.90/18} (17. Qh5 {-2.55/21 is the only way for White.} Bd7 18. Bxf5) 17... hxg5 18. Bxg5 Qxd4 19. Qh5 Nf7 $1 20. Bb3 Be6 21. Rad1 Qxb2 22. Bxe6 Rxe6 23. Rd7 Nxg5 {-11.79/23} (23... Qxf2+ $142 $1 { -#2/20} 24. Rxf2 Re1#) 24. Qxg5 Qf6 {-6.82/23} (24... Qxf2+ $142 $1 {-#2/21} 25. Rxf2 Re1#) 25. Qd2 {Black is clearly winning.} Rd6 26. Rxd6 Qxd6 27. Qg5 Rf8 28. h4 c5 29. h5 Bc7 {[#]} 30. f4 b5 31. Re1 Qd4+ 32. Kh1 Qxf4 33. Qxf4 Bxf4 34. Re7 Rd8 35. Kg1 Bg3 {[#] ( -> ...Rd1+)} 36. Kf1 Rd1+ {Accuracy: White = 7%, Black = 15%.} 0-1

B72 Sicilian Dragon: 6.Be3, lines with h3+Bc4 and sidelines (1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 g6 6.Bc4 Bg7 7.O-O Nc6 8.Be3 O-O 9.Qd2 Ng4 10.Nxc6 bxc6 11.Bf4)

I don't know the openings all that well but maybe after I have done enough studying them for these blog posts, I will play them better... That is the hope anyway and hopefully readers will find my posts in some way useful as well. The games so far that I have put here are from my ICC five minute pool games but I will post in the future also probably games from other places as well, for example, some of my correspondence chess games from various sites.

Even though this was a five minute game, the first mistake of note was played on move 17, which just shows that even lower rated players can play quite well for some time with fast time controls. The diagram below shows the situation at the board after my 17th move e5. Vicwill played the horrible 17...Nh5 in reply, which placed the knight on a square from which it can't go anywhere safely. I should have played 18.Be3, but instead I thought that the bishop needed to stay on the h2-b8 diagonal and backed up with my bishop to h2. Had I played 18.Be3, it would have attacked the queen on b6, which in turn would have given me time to perhaps trap the knight on h5. However, had I played g4 after Be3, then the pawn cover in front of my king would have been very much weakened and I am not sure it would be worth it to do so just to trap the knight.

The game then continued roughly evenly up to the move 20.Qxc4. The diagram position is taken after my 20th move. In that position vicwill made another horrible move 20...Qxb2. Taking the pawn on b2 was not a good idea because it allowed me to play 21.g4 and trap the knight on h5. I did not go for the material because I was probably worried a bit too much for weakening the pawn cover in front of my king. I played 21.a4 instead and saved my pawn on the a-file. It was an awful move that turned the tables because my opponent would have been able to win the pawn on e5, so that my opponent would be up two pawns.

Winning the second pawn with 21...dxe5 was probably the best idea for my opponent to take the pawn and gain a clear advantage, but also the moves 21...Qb4 and 21...Bxe5 would have been good alternatives. All three moves should give vicwill a clear advantage. For some reason vicwill decided not to win a pawn from e5 and played 21...d5, which only attacked my queen and reached an equal position. Maybe the move d5 was designed as a trap for me. Had I taken the pawn on c6, then Rfc8 or Rac8 and my knight on c3 would be lost. I saw the problem with Qxc6, so I moved my queen to d3. It was not the best square for the queen, d4 was the right square for the queen. The next diagram shows the situation at the board after my 22nd move Qd3.

Vicwill played 22...Bh8 in order to allow the knight from h5 to have one safe square to which it could go. It was a blunder that turned the tables once again. I was able to take the advantage of my opponent's sloppy move and moved my rook to b1. It forced the queen to go to a3 and then I had the very nice move Nxd5! It wins at least a pawn because it is a discovered attack on the undefended queen on a3, so vicwill could not have taken the knight with the pawn because it would be replied with Qxa3 and the game would be lost for my opponent. If vicwill would take the queen on d3, then I would play Nxe7+ and then cxd3 and then I would be up a pawn. Therefore Qc5 would be vicwill's best reply to Nxd5. I missed my chance and played 24.Rb6?? Vicwill could have replied with 24...Qc5 and I would have been clearly worse. Vicwill did not protect the pawn on c6 at all, instead my opponent played 24...e6. I took my chance to get material equality and took the pawn on c6. After that the position was even again. In reply vicwill made a move so horrible that it could have meant a loss for my opponent, had my answer to it being the correct one. It may not seem at first that it matters which rook to place to c8, but there is a significant difference. The move played in the game, 25...Rac8, would have allowed me to play 26.Nxd5 and win material. Had my opponent played the other rook to c8, I could not have played 26.Nxd5, because of the following line 26...Qxd3 27.Ne7+ Kf8 and I would lose material.

The time control in this game probably had some effect to the inaccurate moves and may have caused me not to see the move 26.Nxd5. I played 26.Qb5 probably because it does not require as much calculating as the move 26.Nxd5. The safer move unfortunately also threw away the possibility for me to win the game and I had to accept an even position. The balance did not last long, my 29th move that was played in the diagram position below put me in some trouble. I took the pawn on a5 and probably thought that I can get something done with my pawn on the a-file. It was more important for me to prevent the rook from coming to the second rank with Rxc2. The rook on c2 would attack the knight on e2 and after it moves, the rook could go to c4 perhaps and I would lose another pawn on a4.

My opponent had other plans in mind, however, vicwill played 29...Qc5 and immediately turned the tables again. From a clearly favorable position vicwill went to a position where my opponent was worse. The game continued with me taking the queen on c5 and vicwill then took back with the rook obviously. I replied to that with the move 31.c3, protecting my pawn and taking better control over the square d4. After my 31st move it should be clear why 29...Qc5 was so bad move. It only helped me to keep my material advantage. With queens on the board and my opponent's rook wreaking havoc on the second rank, the game would have been much more difficult for me. In the continuation where the rook took on c2, I would have likely lost the a-pawn and maybe even the e-pawn at some point. The last option might have been less likely to happen, but I would have had at least two pawns less than on the game continuation. To 31.c3 vicwill answered with 31...d4, which was a huge blunder that could have lost the game. I continued correctly with the move 32.cxd4 and then my opponent played 32...Rc2 a little bit too late as it would have been much more impactful a couple of moves earlier. The next diagram shows the situation on the board after 32...Rc2.

I wanted to keep everything as well defended as possible, so I played 33.Re1. It is a really passive move that allows my opponent to be more active and therefore get good compensation for the material. Vicwill replied with 33...Ra2 and I played 34.Nc3 because I thought that the pawn on a4 is more important than the pawn on d4. However, I could not protect the pawn on a4 as the move 34...Ra3 basically forced my knight away. I may have tried the move 35.Rc1, but then 35...Nxd4 with the threat of Rxc3 Rxc3 Ne2+ winning my knight and I do not like the position. Then again I may just reply to 35...Nxd4 with 36.Kf1 and the tactic does not work. After driving the knight away, my opponent took the pawn on a4 and it seemed that a draw would be the likely outcome of the game. A draw should have been indeed the outcome, but I tried too hard to win and made a huge blunder because of it. The next diagram is taken after the move 43...Kg6.

I unnecessarily weakened my position with the move 44.h4 and my path towards a loss had started. We played a few more moves, but I resigned after I had accidentally sacrificed my rook... At that point it was pointless to carry on with the game.

[Event "ICC 5 0"] [Site "Internet Chess Club"] [Date "2014.05.25"] [Round "?"] [White "Vierjoki, Timo"] [Black "vicwill"] [Result "0-1"] [ECO "B72"] [WhiteElo "1532"] [BlackElo "1470"] [Annotator "Stockfish 8 64 POPCNT (30s), TV"] [PlyCount "92"] [EventDate "2014.??.??"] 1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 g6 {Sicilian Defense: Dragon variation. General} 6. Bc4 (6. Be2 Bg7 7. Be3 Nc6 8. Nb3 {Sicilian Defense: Dragon Variation. Classical Variation} (8. O-O O-O 9. Nb3 {Sicialian Defense: Dragon Variation. Classical Variation Normal Line} (9. Qd2 {Sicilian Defense: Dragon Variation. Classical Variation Battery Variation}) 9... Be6 (9... a5 { Sicilian Defense: Dragon Variation. Classical Variation Alekhine Line}) 10. f4 Na5 {Sicilian Defense: Dragon Variation. Classical Variation Maroczy Line} ( 10... Qc8 {Sicilian Defense: Dragon Variation. Classical Variation Tartakower Line}) 11. f5 Bc4 12. Nxa5 Bxe2 13. Qxe2 Qxa5 14. g4 {Sicilian Defense: Dragon Variation. Classical Variation Stockholm Attack})) 6... Bg7 7. O-O Nc6 8. Be3 O-O 9. Qd2 Ng4 10. Nxc6 bxc6 11. Bf4 {B72 Sicilian Dragon: 6.Be3, lines with h3+Bc4 and sidelines} Qb6 {Black threatens to win material: Qb6xb2} (11... Be6 12. Bxe6 fxe6 13. f3 Qb6+ 14. Kh1 Qxb2 15. fxg4 Bxc3 16. Qe2 Rxf4 17. Rab1 Raf8 18. g3 Rxf1+ 19. Rxf1 Rxf1+ 20. Qxf1 Qxc2 {0-1 (20) Garcia Cruz,J (1408) -Acosta Sosa,J (2141) Las Palmas 2012}) 12. Bb3 $146 {White has an active position} (12. Nd1 Be6 13. Be2 f5 14. exf5 Bxf5 15. h3 Ne5 16. Be3 Qb7 17. Rc1 Rfb8 18. c3 Be6 19. b3 a5 20. Rc2 c5 21. f4 Nf7 22. Bf3 d5 23. Bxc5 Qc7 24. Bd4 Nh6 25. Bxg7 Kxg7 26. Bxd5 Qc5+ {Arsenault,Y (1402)-Duret,S (990) Gatineau 2009 1-0 (38)}) (12. Rab1 Qb4 13. Bd3 Rb8 14. h3 Ne5 15. a3 Qa5 16. b4 Qc7 17. Bh6 Be6 18. Bxg7 Kxg7 19. Be2 f6 20. Qd4 Qb6 21. Qxb6 Rxb6 22. Rfd1 Rfb8 23. Na4 R6b7 24. Ba6 Rc7 25. f4 Nc4 26. Bxc4 Bxc4 {Buldrova,M-Cedikova,K (2082) Klatovy 1999 1/2-1/2 (42)}) 12... Qd4 13. Qe2 a5 14. h3 Nf6 15. Rad1 {White threatens to win material: Rd1xd4} Qb4 {White has an active position} 16. a3 { White threatens to win material: a3xb4} Qb6 {White has a very active position} 17. e5 {White threatens to win material: e5xf6. White forks: d6+f6} Nh5 (17... Ba6 18. Qe3 Qxe3 19. Bxe3 $11) 18. Bh2 (18. Be3 $142 Qa6 19. Bc4 $16) 18... Ba6 $15 19. Bc4 Bxc4 20. Qxc4 Qxb2 $4 {letting the wind out of his own sails} ( 20... Bxe5 $142 21. Bxe5 dxe5 $11) 21. a4 $4 {there were better ways to keep up the pressure.} (21. g4 $142 $16) 21... d5 {Black threatens to win material: d5xc4} (21... dxe5 $5 22. Rb1 Qxc2 23. Rfc1 $17) 22. Qd3 (22. Qd4 $142 Rfb8 23. g4 $11) 22... Bh8 $4 {hands over the advantage to the opponent} (22... Qb4 $142 23. Ne2 Bh6 $17 (23... Qxa4 $143 24. g4 $16)) 23. Rb1 $16 Qa3 24. Rb6 $4 { White loses the upper hand} (24. Nxd5 $142 $5 Qc5 25. Nb6 $18) 24... e6 (24... Qc5 $142 $5 25. Rb7 Ng7 $17) 25. Rxc6 (25. g4 $142 Qc5 26. Rfb1 $14) 25... Rac8 $4 {Black is ruining his position} (25... Rfc8 26. Nb5 Qxa4 27. Rxc8+ Rxc8 28. Nd6 $11) 26. Qb5 $4 {White threatens to win material: Qb5xa5. simply marches past the door to victory} (26. Nxd5 $142 {secures victory} Qxd3 27. Ne7+ (27. cxd3 $2 exd5 28. Rfc1 Ra8 $19) 27... Kg7 28. cxd3 $18) 26... Ng7 {Black's piece can't move: h8} 27. Ne2 Nf5 28. Rxc8 Rxc8 29. Qxa5 (29. c3 $142 $15) 29... Qc5 $4 {Black prepares the advance d4. Black has let it slip away} (29... Rxc2 $142 30. g4 Nh4 31. Qd8+ Qf8 32. Qxh4 Rxe2 $17) 30. Qxc5 $16 Rxc5 31. c3 ( 31. Ra1 $142 Ra5 32. Nc1 $16) 31... d4 $2 (31... Ne7 $142 $14 {and Black can hope to live}) 32. cxd4 $18 Rc2 33. Re1 (33. g4 $142 $5 Ne7 34. Re1 $18) 33... Ra2 $14 {Black threatens to win material: Ra2xa4} 34. Nc3 {White threatens to win material: Nc3xa2} (34. a5 $5 $14) 34... Ra3 $11 {Black threatens to win material: Ra3xc3} 35. Nb5 {White threatens to win material: Nb5xa3} Rxa4 { Attacks the backward pawn on d4} 36. g4 Nxd4 37. Nxd4 Rxd4 38. Rc1 Kg7 39. f4 h6 40. Bg3 Rd3 {Black threatens to win material: Rd3xg3} 41. Kg2 g5 (41... Kh7 42. h4 $11) 42. fxg5 (42. f5 $5 $14) 42... hxg5 $11 43. Rc7 Kg6 44. h4 $4 (44. Rc5 $142 $5 $11 {is an interesting idea}) 44... gxh4 (44... Rxg3+ 45. Kf2 gxh4 46. Rc5 Rxg4 47. Rc1 Bxe5 48. Rh1 Kg5 49. Ke2 Rg3 50. Kd2 h3 51. Kc2 Rg2+ 52. Kb3 h2 53. Ka3 Rg1 54. Rxh2 Bxh2 55. Ka2 Kf5 56. Kb3 Ke4 57. Kc4 Rc1+ 58. Kb3 Be5 59. Ka4 Kd5 60. Kb4 Rb1+ 61. Ka4 Kc5 62. Ka3 Kc4 63. Ka2 Ra1#) 45. Bxh4 $17 Bxe5 46. g5 $4 {causes further problems for White} (46. Rc5 $142 Re3 47. Rc4 $17) 46... Bxc7 (46... Bxc7 47. Kf1 e5 48. Be1 Kxg5 49. Ke2 e4 50. Bd2+ Kg4 51. Be1 f5 52. Bd2 f4 53. Kd1 f3 54. Kc2 f2 55. Bc1 f1=Q 56. Bd2 Qe2 57. Kb2 Qxd2+ 58. Ka1 Be5+ 59. Kb1 Rb3#) 0-1

B01 Scandinavian Defence (1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Qxd5 3.Nc3 Qa5 4.d4 Nf6 5.Nf3 Bf5 6.Bc4 e6 7.O-O c6 8.Re1 Be7 9.Bf4)

Under this post I will start collecting examples of the B01 Scandinavian Defense: Classical Variation with some analysis. I will start posting games on all the possible openings I have played with comments where I look on the opening and positions where the players have made clear blunders. If you want to see an example of a specific opening, post a comment and I'll see if I can find an example of it and then I will analyse it and post it here on my blog. Analysis updated on November 27th, 2019.

[Event "ICC 5 0"] [Site "Internet Chess Club"] [Date "2014.07.09"] [Round "?"] [White "Vierjoki, Timo"] [Black "mrquinn"] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "B01"] [WhiteElo "1661"] [BlackElo "1493"] [Annotator "Tactical Analysis 2.10 (30s), TV"] [PlyCount "59"] [EventDate "2014.??.??"] {[%evp 16,58,52,7,42,-14,12,-34,11,-38,104,67,473,455,743,761,1047,1049,1182, 1175,1151,1137,1501,1478,2972,2833,1512,1755,2003,1716,29979,2754,2667,1579, 29988,29989,29990,29991,29991,29992,29992,29993,29993,29994,29999]} 1. e4 d5 2. exd5 Qxd5 3. Nc3 Qa5 4. d4 Nf6 5. Nf3 Bf5 {B01 Scandinavian Defense: Classical Variation} 6. Bc4 e6 7. O-O c6 8. Re1 Be7 9. Bf4 {0.07/27 B01 Scandinavian Defence} (9. Nh4 $14 {0.52/23 feels stronger.} Bg6 10. Nxg6 hxg6 11. Bf4) 9... Nbd7 $11 10. Ne5 {-0.14/28} (10. Ne2 $14 {0.42/24}) (10. a3 Qd8 11. Qe2 O-O 12. d5 exd5 13. Bxd5 Nxd5 14. Nxd5 cxd5 15. Qxe7 Bxc2 16. Rac1 Ba4 17. Rc7 b6 18. b3 Nc5 19. bxa4 Qxe7 20. Rexe7 Ne6 21. Rxa7 Nxf4 22. Rxf7 Rxa7 23. Rxa7 Rc8 24. h3 Rc3 {Sarana Hungeling,O (2205)-Novak,I (2330) Bratislava 1997 1/2-1/2 (31)}) (10. Nh4 Bg6 11. Nxg6 hxg6 12. Qe2 Qf5 13. Bc7 Rc8 14. Bg3 Nh5 15. Bd3 Nxg3 16. fxg3 Qg5 17. Ne4 Qh6 18. h3 Nf6 19. Bc4 O-O 20. Rad1 Nd5 21. Bxd5 cxd5 22. Nf2 Qg5 23. Ng4 Bd6 24. Rd3 Rc7 {Onwezen,E (1621)-Brooker,C (1670) Guernsey 2008 1/ 2-1/2 (54)}) 10... Nxe5 11. dxe5 $146 {-0.34/24} (11. Bxe5 $11 {0.12/24 should be considered.} O-O (11... O-O-O 12. a3 Bd6 13. b4 Qc7 14. Qe2 Bxe5 15. dxe5 Nd5 16. Na2 Rd7 17. Nc1 Rhd8 18. Nb3 Nb6 19. h4 h6 20. a4 Nxc4 21. Qxc4 Rd5 22. Qe2 Qb6 23. Qc4 Qc7 24. Qc3 Kb8 25. g3 g5 26. hxg5 {Priebe,V (2082) -Baumhackel,M (2153) Germany 1999 0-1 (53)}) 12. h3 (12. Ne2 c5 13. c3 cxd4 14. Nxd4 Rad8 15. Qe2 Qb6 16. Nxf5 exf5 17. Bd4 Bc5 18. Bxc5 Qxc5 19. Bb3 Rfe8 20. Qf3 Rxe1+ 21. Rxe1 g6 22. Qe3 Qxe3 23. Rxe3 Ne4 24. f3 Nc5 25. Bc4 Kf8 26. Kf2 Rd2+ {Janl-Pither,J playchess.com INT 2004 1/2-1/2 (48)})) 11... Rd8 {0.11/29} (11... Nd5 $15 {-0.34/24} 12. Nxd5 cxd5) 12. Qe2 {-0.38/28} (12. Qf3 $11 { 0.11/29} Nd5 13. Nxd5 cxd5 14. Bd3) 12... Ng4 {1.04/24} (12... Nd7 $15 { -0.38/28 stays ahead.}) 13. h3 $16 g5 $2 {4.73/23 [%mdl 8192] [#]} ({Black should play} 13... Nh6 $14 {0.67/26}) 14. hxg4 $18 gxf4 {7.43/22} (14... Bxc2 $142 {4.55/27} 15. Bxg5 Bxg5 16. Qxc2 Bd2) 15. gxf5 Rg8 16. fxe6 fxe6 17. Bxe6 Rg6 18. Qh5 f3 19. Bf5 Bc5 20. Bxg6+ hxg6 21. Qxf3 Rd4 22. Ne4 {[#] Threatening mate with Nd6+.} Be7 23. Nf6+ {27.54/25} (23. Nd6+ $142 {#21/23} Kd7 24. Qh3+ Kc7 25. Qc8+ Kb6 26. Qxb7+ Kc5 27. Qxe7 Qa4 28. e6) 23... Kd8 24. Rad1 Qc5 25. Rxd4+ {White mates.} Kc8 26. Qg4+ Kc7 27. Qd7+ Kb6 28. Re3 a5 29. Rb3+ Ka6 30. Qxb7# 1-0