7 Apr 2016

Chess960 SP958

Chess960 SP958

It is time once again to explore the wonderful world of chess960. This game was played in a team match called open challenge. The match is played on 15 boards between Geto-Daci and CHESS960 SOCIETY and I play on board 3 for CHESS960 SOCIETY. The current score in the match is 11 - 14 in favor CHESS960 SOCIETY. We may be closer in securing at least a draw from the match, but Geto-Daci can still turn things around and win if we are not careful.

I am not sure what the best plan of developing the pieces is in this particular starting position, but I kind of like how my opponent started the game. 1.g4 opens up the long diagonal for the queen, which now eyes on the pawn on b7 in front of my king. Now that I looked at this move, I started to think that maybe one could follow up g4 with h3 or h4 and plant the dark-squared bishop on h2, so that both bishops and the queen would eye on menacingly towards the enemy king. The problem with this plan is that it can be handled simply by blocking the paths for the bishops with pawns in a same way I did in this game. B7 is not actually that weak of a square from the start either because it is defended by the king and the knight, so the queen and bishop battery will need more help in demolishing the defences. The way I played the first two moves is not really ideal because playing both e5 and f6 block the path for my queen potentially for a long time. Then again, I do not want to bring my queen too early into the game, but obviously I want to make it easy for the queen to come to the play when she is needed. On his third move, dragos_paul_visan, played Nf3, which to me seems a bit off because why he would want to block the diagonal for his bishop and queen. After White's third move, I am slightly on the better side of things. My slight advantage disappears a bit according to Stockfish after 4...Bc5. The reason why I played that move is that I like fast development of pieces instead of making lot of pawn moves. I thought that c5 is the best square for my bishop and I wanted to develop it before I move my knight from e8 to d6 after I have played d5, so that the knight does not block the pawn. However, 4...Nc6 might have been a better move.

My opponent played 6.Na4, a move that I do not really understand. Well, maybe the idea is to drive the bishop to a square where it is not so well placed or if I do not move it, then trade the knight to the bishop. The problem with the relocation idea is that the knight is also badly placed after it has gone to a4. I chose the wrong square to go to and placed it to e7 instead of d6, which would have been somewhat better square. I chose the square e7, so that I could put my knight to d6. I was pretty much following a plan at this point and I had some idea on how to develop my pieces. Dragos_paul_visan continued with 7.d3, which is a bad move because it allowed me to play 7...d4, which I did not play for some reason. Instead I played 7...Nd6, which is not good because it allows Nc5 because the bishop that covered that square is now blocked by the knight. The game went on evenly until my opponent played 11.Nf3, interesting part of that move is that the knight lands on f3 for the second time during this game and neither time has been a good one, on both occasions the position has gone from equal to favoring me. However, the balance is immediately restored with the move 11...b6. The balance does not last long and after the move 13.Nd4, I should be on the slightly better side of the board.

The next turning point is when my opponent for some reason decided to castle short, even though in this starting position it does not really look like it as the king goes from one side of the board to the other. Maybe it appeared as the safer side even though the pawns in front of the White king are far from protecting pawns. My reply to 16.O-O was less than ideal and after 16...g5 my opponent may have hold on to a draw had he played accurate moves in the remaining part of the game. He went astray immediately with 17.c3 after which the position went more and more downhill for him and could not get to a more even position again. I have added one analysed game to the following posts: C18 French Defense: Winawer Variation. Classical Variation, D02 Queen Pawn Game: Symmetrical Variation, C44 Scotch Gambit and C45 Scotch Game: Schmidt Variation. I have added two mate in one, two mate in three and one mate in four puzzle today.

6 Apr 2016

C33 King's Gambit Accepted: 3.Nc3 and 3.Bc4 (1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Bc4 Qh4+ 4.Kf1 d6 5.d4)

C33 King's Gambit Accepted: 3.Nc3 and 3.Bc4 (1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Bc4 Qh4+ 4.Kf1 d6 5.d4)

The game I am sharing today was played on the second round of the 2014 October Split II tournament that is being played at Red Hot Pawn. I advanced from the first round by sharing the win of group 1 with two other players, NN Cheap and aukermdr (1933). All three of us were able to get 56 points out of the possible 66. It was a bit of a surprise for me to tie the win with these two players. I was quite confident at some point that I will not be able to make it, but somehow it all worked out for me. Interestingly also the winner of group 2 managed to get 56 points. Based on these things one might think that the second round group would be evenly fought, but it is not. While the winner of the second round group and with it the winner of the tournament has not been decided yet, NN Cheap is very close in securing at least the shared win of the tournament. NN Cheap is the highest rated player in the group, so it is not a surpise that he or she is leading the group. I may be currently the second highest rated player of the group, but my chances to get the shared win of the tournament are lower than those of the other three players.

I have never really liked the positions that arise in the King's Gambit and this game was not going to change my views about it. Already on my 5th move I went a bit astray because I was not playing aggressively, but instead I played the slow move 5...g6, with the intention of planting my dark-squared bishop to the long diagonal. A much better alternatives would have been 5...Bg4 and 5...Nf6. Even after the move I played, the game is still not over yet, the position only slightly favors NN Cheap after the move 5...g6. The move that made my position go downhill even more came when I played 7...c6. I just can't afford to play so many pawn moves and get behind in development so badly. The reason I played 7...c6 was that I wanted to prevent moves like Nd5 and Nb5. That being said, it was better to play Be6 and develop one piece to protect d5 instead of the pawn move. Be6 would have also protected against Nb5 because after that I could have taken the bishop with a check and on my next move I could take the knight on b5 with my bishop as well. Therefore 7...Be6 prevents the immediate Nb5. If White takes on e6, I take back with a pawn and if now Nb5, then Na6 and White has nothing. My 7th move was far from the losing move, because even after that I could have ended up in a decent position after 9.Bxf4, but my 9th move was already the losing move. After that I just try to hold on as best as I can. I struggle with the game quite awhile, but after the move 26.dxc6+ even I have to admit that I am completely lost and there is no point in continuing the misery this game had ended up being for me so early on.

[Event "Split"] [Site "http://www.redhotpawn.com"] [Date "2016.01.25"] [Round "2"] [White "NN Cheap"] [Black "Vierjoki, Timo"] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "C33"] [WhiteElo "2134"] [BlackElo "1937"] [Annotator "Stockfish 7 64 POPCNT (30s), TV"] [PlyCount "51"] [EventDate "2016.??.??"] 1. e4 e5 2. f4 exf4 3. Bc4 Qh4+ 4. Kf1 d6 {King's Gambit Accepted, Bishop's Gambit, Cozio Variation} (4... b5 {King's Gambit Accepted, Bishop's Gambit, Bryan Countergambit}) (4... Bc5 {King's Gambit Accepted, Bishop's Gambit, Greco Variation}) (4... g5 5. Nc3 Bg7 6. d4 Ne7 7. g3 {King's Gambit Accepted, Bishop's Gambit, McDonnell Attack}) 5. d4 {C33 King's Gambit Accepted: 3.Nc3 and 3.Bc4} g6 (5... Nf6 6. Nf3 Qg4 7. Nc3 Be7 8. e5 Nh5 9. Nd5 Bd8 10. exd6 cxd6 11. Qe2+ Kf8 12. b3 Nc6 13. Ba3 Qg6 14. Re1 Bd7 15. Ne5 Nxe5 16. Qxe5 h6 17. Bd3 Kg8 18. Bxg6 dxe5 19. Bxh5 exd4 20. Ne7+ {Zuckerman,B (2460) -Myagmarsuren,L (2380) Polanica Zdroj 1972 1-0}) 6. Nf3 {N White threatens to win material: Nf3xh4} (6. Nc3 c6 7. Nf3 Qd8 8. Bxf4 Bg7 9. Kf2 Ne7 10. Re1 O-O 11. a4 Bg4 12. Qd3 Bxf3 13. gxf3 Kh8 14. Kg1 Qd7 15. d5 Be5 16. Bxe5+ dxe5 17. Rad1 Rd8 18. Qe3 Qe8 19. f4 Ng8 20. Qf2 f6 {Eberth,Z (2195) -Herman,T Aggtelek 1997 1-0 (34)}) 6... Qf6 {White king safety improved} 7. Nc3 c6 {Secures b5} ( 7... Be6 $5 8. Qd3 Bh6 {+/=}) 8. e5 Qd8 9. Bxf4 (9. d5 b5 10. Qe1 {+/-}) 9... Be6 $2 (9... d5 {is the best option Black has} 10. Bd3 Bg7 {+/=}) 10. Bxe6 fxe6 11. exd6 (11. Ng5 d5 12. Nxe6 Qe7 13. Nxf8 Qxf8 {+-}) 11... Bxd6 {+/-} 12. Bg5 Be7 13. h4 Nf6 14. Qe2 Qd6 15. Re1 Kf7 $4 {simply worsens the situation} (15... Nbd7 {+/-}) 16. Bxf6 (16. Bf4 $1 {and White wins} Qxf4 17. Qxe6+ Kg7 18. Qxe7+ Kh6 19. h5 {+-}) 16... Bxf6 17. Ne4 Qe7 18. Neg5+ Bxg5 19. Nxg5+ (19. hxg5 $6 Nd7 {+/-}) 19... Ke8 (19... Kg8 {hardly improves anything} 20. Qc4 Qf6+ 21. Kg1 {+-}) 20. Qc4 (20. Nxe6 {keeps an even firmer grip} Qf6+ 21. Kg1 Kd7 {+-}) 20... Kd7 (20... b5 {doesn't improve anything} 21. Qc3 Kd8 22. Rh3 {+-}) 21. Nxe6 (21. Rxe6 {might be the shorter path} Qg7 22. Ke2 Na6 {+-}) 21... Qf6+ ( 21... Kc8 {a fruitless try to alter the course of the game} 22. Rh3 b5 23. Qe2 {+-}) 22. Kg1 Na6 (22... b5 {otherwise it's curtains at once} 23. Qb3 Kc8 {+-}) 23. Rh3 (23. d5 {and White can already relax} Raf8 24. dxc6+ Kc8 {+-}) 23... Rae8 (23... Rad8 {does not improve anything} 24. d5 cxd5 25. Rd3 Qxe6 26. Rxe6 Kxe6 27. Qg4+ Kd6 28. Qf4+ Kd7 29. Rc3 {+-}) 24. d5 Nb8 (24... Nc7 {is not much help} 25. dxc6+ bxc6 26. Rf3 Qxf3 27. gxf3 Nxe6 28. Rxe6 Rxe6 29. Qd4+ Kc7 30. Qxa7+ Kc8 31. Qa8+ Kc7 32. Qxh8 {+-}) 25. Rf3 Qe7 26. dxc6+ (26. dxc6+ Nxc6 27. Qg4 {+-}) 1-0