Hello Mark
Below is the bare game score.
Regards, Tyson
[Event "BRISTOL LEAGUE"]
[Site "SOUTH BRISTOL A V CLEVEDON A"]
[Date "2015.10.9"]
[Round ""]
[White "EGGINTON D"]
[Black "TYSON MORDUE"]
[TimeControl "3600"]
[Result "0-1"]
1.Nf3 d6
2.d4 Nf6
3.c4 g6
4.Nc3 Bg7
5.e4 O-O
6.Be2 e5
7.O-O Na6
8.dxe5 dxe5
9.Qxd8 Rxd8
10.Be3 Ng4
11.Bg5 f6
12.Bd2 c6
13.h3 Nh6
14.Be3 Bf8
15.Rfd1 Nf7
16.a3 Bc5
17.Bxc5 Nxc5
18.b4 Ne6
19.Rxd8+ Nfxd8
20.Rd1 Kf7
21.c5 Ke7
22.Bc4 Nf4
23.h4 Bg4
24.Rd2 Bxf3
25.gxf3 Nde6
26.Bxe6 Nxe6
27.Ne2 a5
28.Kg2 axb4
29.axb4 Ra1
30.Rb2 Re1
31.Kg3 h5
32.f4 exf4+
33.Nxf4 Rxe4
0-1
----- Original Message -----
From: Mark R Hague
To: usbca_chess@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Monday, September 28, 2015 3:10 PM
Subject: [usbca_chess] Re: Annotated game: Egginton-Mordue
Hi Tysin,
I guess I'm a bit thick but could you post the complete game score as I'm
finding it very difficult to follow the main line in the annotated text!
Many thanks,
Mark.
----- Original Message -----
From: Tyson Mordue
To: usbca_chess@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Monday, September 28, 2015 10:52 AM
Subject: [usbca_chess] Annotated game: Egginton-Mordue
Hello all.
An annotated game featuring an Exchange Variation on e5. Instructive value
especially for those wishing to win as Black and feel frustrated by the early
Queen swap.
Regards,
Tyson
Text begins:
[Event "BRISTOL LEAGUE"]
[Site "SOUTH BRISTOL A V CLEVEDON A"]
[Date "10-09-2015."]
[White "EGGINTON D
[Black "TYSON MORDUE"]
[Time Control "90/90"]
1.Nf3 d6
My first competitive game in nearly a year and an unexpected opponent. Is
he willing to transpose into a Sicilian with 2 e4 c5? This happened with one
opponent whose first remark after the game was "I didn't know you played the
Sicilian!" Mmm.
2.d4
No, apparently not. Looks like a King's Indian Defence or a Pirc then.
2...Nf6
3.c4 g6
4.Nc3 Bg7
5.e4 O-O
Five standard moves of a King's Indian Defence but my opponent had taken
fifteen minutes to play them. Encouraging.
6.Be2 e5
7.O-O Na6
8.dxe5
Declining to go to any of the complicated systems with 8 d5 or 8 Be3 and
heading straight for an exchange of Queens. I've had lots of opponents do this
and rarely got into bother. In his books on the KID Joe Gallagher is scathing
about players who play the exchange lines and insists that KID exponents should
offer them no respect at all!
From a practical viewpoint on the night I didn't have to concern myself
with a tense and complicated middle-game. Instead a Queenless middle-game
arises where there is an obvious outpost on d4 for me to target. White doesn't
have a corresponding outpost on d5 because I can play .c7-c6 to control it.
However, if I do then I must be aware of White building with a2-a3, b2-b4 and
c4-c5 and getting control of d6 in return.
8...dxe5
9.Qxd8 Rxd8
10.Be3
If White tries winning a Pawn with 10 Nxe5 it's no good after 10...Nxe4 11
Nxe4 Bxe5 with easy equality for Black. This line can also happen at move 7
without 7 0-0 Na6.
The trick is to know what to do if White desperadoes his e5 Knight by
playing Nxf7 hitting the d8 Rook and hoping to win a Pawn I've seen this twice
in Minor tournaments after 1.d4 Nf6 2 c4 g6 3.Nc3 Bg7 4.e4 d6 5 Nf3 O-O 6 Be2
e5 7 dxe5 dxe5 8 Qxd8 Rxd8 [This is the game without 0-0 for White and ...Na6
for Black] 9 Nxe5 Nxe4 10 Nxf7?? In this position Black eliminates the c3
Knight with check by 10...Bxc3+ because the White King is still on e1. After 11
bxc3 Kxf7 Black is a simple piece for Pawn up.
In the game line (1.d4 Nf6 2 c4 g6 3.Nc3 Bg7 4.e4 d6 5 Nf3 O-O 6 Be2 e5 7
0-0 Na6 8 dxe5 dxe5 9 Qxd8 Rxd8) after 10 Nxe5 Nxe4 11 Nxf7 the interposition
11...Bxc3 is not check so Black must capture on c3 with the Knight instead. The
line (carnage?) goes on 11...Nxc3 12 Nxd8 Nxe2+ 13 Kh1 Nxc1 14 Raxc1 (not 14
Rfxc1?? Bxb2 forking the Rooks.) and now 14...Nc5! Black has two pieces for a
Rook and Pawn but the d8 Knight is trapped and the Black pieces have a lot of
activity. White is already losing.
After 9...Rxd8 I checked my database and was startled to see only three
games, all Black wins! Two of them continued 10 Bg5 Re8 11 Rfd1
(Hogberg-Laveryd, Swedish Champ 2 1996 and Katuzian-Kostiuk, Kharkov 2000) and
the third was Martin-Mestel, British Champ 1990 with 10 h3. I'll let the
results speak for themselves.
Oddly enough ChessMaster 9000 (CM9000) rapidly settled on a continuation of
10 Be3 b6 11 Rad1 Bb7. This is all understandable but it has a serious
positional flaw. The game is a competition between the respective potential
outposts on d4 and d5. I've already pointed out Black's .c7-c6 controlling d5.
However, he must maintain a Pawn on b7 to defend the one on c6 otherwise White
advances b2-b4-b5 and liquidates the c6 Pawn, regaining control of d5.
Black has other choices such as 10...c6 (early control of d5), 10...Bg4 (to
eliminate the White Knight that controls d4 and that's why Martin played 10 h3
against Mestel), or 10...Nb4 (threatening 11...Nc2 and angling for .Nb4-c6-d4).
I thought my aggressive choice would get my opponent thinking again - it did!-
and it gave me the chance to regroup my pieces.
10...Ng4!?
11.Bg5 f6
This gives solid protection to the e5 Pawn. On the downside it seems like
it blocks the Bishop's effect on d4 and takes away a retreat square from the g4
Knight. This doesn't matter. Both pieces were set for regrouping anyway and
White is actually giving me tempi to do that!
12.Bd2
The major alternative is 12 Bh4 but Black may continue 12...g5 forcing 13
Bg3 and the Bishop risks being stranded here for a while. Dave is playing
conservatively and intends bringing his Bishop back to e3 shortly.
12...c6
An alternative was 12...Bh6 to try to swap the dark-squared Bishops but I
thought it more prudent to take control of d5 before rearranging my pieces.
13.h3
It's a Pawn to Rook Three. You can regard it as a necessity to get it out
of White's half of the board with tempo, or you can regard it as a loss of
tempo because Black was going to play .Nh6 anyway. It can also be a weakening
move because later on Black may be playing .Nf4 and you can't oust it with
g2-g3 because h3 is then en prise. This motif is a feature of the Simagin
variation of the KID which I occasionally play.
CM9000's suggestion was 13 Rfd1 but, as you'll see shortly, part of my
regrouping as Black is .Bg7-f8-c5. Of course the object is extra control of the
d4 square but this just happens to inconveniently attack f2 as well. I suppose
you can take Andrew Martin's approach against Mestel above and say that if it's
necessary then play it now.
13...Nh6
14.Be3
So we are three moves on from the last time White played Be3. During that
time he's thrown in h2-h3, which could possibly regarded as a weakening move,
while Black has switched his Knight from f6 to h6 and solidified his e5 Pawn by
playing .f7-f6. Visually this doesn't look good for Black.
However, this is all part of my plan. The Knight is going to f7 and if
there's an exchange of Rooks on d8 then the steed will recapture and then go to
e6 to control d4. Meanwhile my now-blocked King's Bishop is going, as already
pointed out in the previous note, via f8 to c5 to contest White's dark-squared
Bishop. This is necessary because an exchange of Rooks on d8 may, in some
positions, divert the a8 Rook from the defence of the a7 Pawn.
CM9000 claims that White consistently has a plus of about +0.66 around
here. That's based on having the initiative due to better development, but
initiatives can easily evaporate. On the other hand Black can claim an
advantage due to the permanent weakness of the d4 square and the potential one
of the f4 square.
Another point to bear in mind is that I've decided to play for a win
because my opponent is playing very slowly. He's already twenty minutes down on
the clock. If I'm playing for a win then I don't want any unnecessary
liquidation of the pieces. To some extent I want to keep the position
strategically complicated.
Now there's only one open file in this position and the natural thing to do
is to oppose Rooks there with the consequence that all of them get swapped off.
I'm happy to swap off one pair because doubled Rooks on the d-file could be a
problem - my second rank is now wide open and the arrival of a Rook at d7
firing left and right would be very awkward - and then I can try to control all
the potential entry points for my opponent's single Rook. At some point I will
open a file elsewhere for my own Rook and achieve counterplay.
Everything I've written about in the last few notes comes to pass. The main
point was that I had belief in the lasting value of my potential outposts on d4
and f4. An apparent slowness in development wasn't going to stop me from
executing my strategic plan.
14...Bf8
15.Rfd1 Nf7
16.a3
Intending the advance b2-b4 and then c4-c5 then switch a Knight to c4 and
into d6. Black must use the c5 square right now.
16...Bc5
17.Bxc5?
A natural move but a critical decision and probably an error. Having
emphasised that I'm playing to exploit potential outposts on d4 and f4 Dave
could play 17 b4 and after 17...Bxe3 18 fxe3 he is controlling the said
squares. This is, of course, at a severe cost to his Pawn structure. CM9000
evaluates this position as almost equal. However, weak Pawns are really only
weak if they can be attacked and that's not so easy for Black to organise here.
CM9000 suggests that 17 Bd2 and following up with 18 b4 will maintain
White's advantage. I'd seen this and I was prepared to put my Bishop on d4 in
that line. I think Black then has a comfortable game, particularly as his move
in-between ought to be 17...Be6.
17...Nxc5
18.b4 Ne6?
Much better is 18...Nb3. If then 19 Rxd8+ Nxd8 20 Rd1 Ne6 ensures that a
Knight gets to d4. If instead 19 Rab1 then the immediate 19...Nd4 is also okay
for Black.
19.Rxd8+ Nfxd8
20.Rd1 Kf7
21.c5 Ke7
Now Black's King controls all the White Rook's entry points. One can argue
that it doesn't control d6 but if White plays the immediate 22 Rd6 then 22...b6
undermines it. White could try 23 Na4 to stop a collapse but he needs to be
aware that if Black captures twice on c5 the Rook is simply loose.
The attempt to switch a Knight to d6 with 22 Nd2 simply allows 22...Nd4. In
the game White puts his Bishop on c4 instead which threatens to take off one of
my Knights. I'd much rather swap my ineffectual Bishop for his so I hop into
one of my objective outposts, namely f4, and prepare .Be6.
This begs the question can White play 22 g3 to stop invasions on f4? Well,
I'd regard this as a pass move and I was seriously considering if my principal
breakout move worked here. It's 22...a5. Remember that I mentioned opening an
alternative file earlier. I was afraid of the reply 23 Na4 particularly as now
Nxc8 is check. However, CM9000 produces 23...axb4 24 Nb6 Rxa3 25 Nxc8+ Ke8 and
then evaluates the position in Black's favour! Next it opts for the perpetual
check with 26 Nd6+ Ke7 27 Nc8+ etc. Strange. I hadn't got around to checking
this line in depth before Dave played his move.
22.Bc4 Nf4
At this point I felt I'd secured equality and was heartened by the fact my
opponent only had half an hour left for the rest of the game. I was still
trying to work out if .a7-a5 was on when my opponent played his move.
CM9000 is considering the crazy 23 Bg8 and if I ever thought White was able
to take on h7 without getting his Bishop trapped - which I don't - I'd just
play 23...h6. A more serious move is 23 Kh2 preparing g2-g3 in better
circumstances, maybe after Bf1. Dave thought he could just get around the
problem of his loose h Pawn in simpler fashion.
23.h4? Bg4
Now White is in serious trouble. There is no way he can avoid the doubling
of his f-Pawns as 24 Be2 allows 24...Nxe2+ 25 Nxe2 Bxf3. It's worth pointing
out that after 26 gxf3 Ne6 if White then chose to play 27 Rd2 then we'd have
the same position as in the game. There's no need to play 27 Rd2 while the text
move is an immediate unpin, but to no respite.
In the note to my 21st I wrote that I'd happily swap my Bishop for White's.
I'm even happier to swap it for a White Knight and damage his Pawn structure as
well. This is reacting to changed circumstances. It always pays to readjust if
your opponent does something unexpected.
24.Rd2 Bxf3
25.gxf3 Nde6
Black Knights on d4 and f4 will be more than White can stand. Dave takes
the opportunity to swap one off but that's the end of whatever dreams his
Bishop had. However, after 26 Ne2 Nxe2+ followed by 27...Nd4 White has to start
worrying about Good Knight v Bad Bishop endgames, which is a bit odd
considering his Queenside Pawns are all on dark squares.
This is the point in the game where we discover that White's advanced
Queenside Pawns are not a strength but a weakness.
26.Bxe6 Nxe6
27.Ne2
To cover the two outpost squares, but now Black takes the initiative with
the move I'd been looking to play move 22.
CM9000 points out 27 Na4 to hinder .a5 because of Nb6-c8+-d6, but also
refutes it with 27...Nd4 28 Kg2 Nb5! 29 Rd3 Rd8 when White must cede the d-file
or drop the a3 Pawn.
27...a5!
CM9000 says 27...b6 is good as well but modern chess strategy says attack
the base of the Pawn chain. Yes, that base will shortly be promoted from a3 to
b4 but Black threatens 28...axb4 29.axb4 Ra1+ 30 Kg2 or h2 Rb1 hitting the Pawn
from behind. Also .a5 means my Rook comes into action vertically rather than
horizontally and is a clear sign that my opponent, despite having had my Rook
bottled up for the entire game so far, has been outplayed.
I must also admit that playing .a7-a5 felt good, and much better than
.b7-b6. Note that even if the White Knight were still on c3 to support b4-b5
that move would leave the c5 Pawn en prise, which is why it was important for
Black to get a Knight on e6 before playing .a5.
28.Kg2
Note that putting the Knight back on c3 doesn't help. After 28 Nc3 axb4 29
axb4 Ra3 the Knight is pinned to the loose Pawn on f3, while 30 Rc2 Nd4 31 Rc1
and 30 Rd3 Nf4 31 Re3 both lose to 31...Rxc3 and 32...Ne2+.
28...axb4
29.axb4 Ra1
30.Rb2 Re1
Quickly played and emphasising that Black now has both the advantage and
the initiative. Dave had about 22 minutes left while I had over 40.
Let's take positional stock. White's Pawn structure is static and riddled
with weaknesses. Black's own structure has some flexibility and he can produce
a passed Pawn on the Kingside by playing .h7-h5 and then g6-g5. Piece for piece
each of Black's is better than its counterpart. Particularly Black's King is
eager to get to either c4 (via e6 and d5 if circumstances permit) or take the
long walk to b5 via b8. Ambitious but possible.
So Black has plans while White looks badly short of moves. One move he
can't play is 31 b5 hoping for 31...cxb5 32 Nc3. Instead it immediately loses
to 31...Rxe2! and if 32 Rxe2 Nf4+ 33 Kf1 Nxe2 34 Kxe2 cxb5. After 35 Kd2 Kd7 36
Kc3 Kc6 37 Kb4 h5 proves Black can win the Pawn ending on either side of the
board.
Instead after 31 b5 Rxe2! 32 Rxe2 Nf4+ 33 Kf1 Nxe2 White can try the
zwischenzug 34 bxc6 - hoping for 34...bxc6 35 Kxe2 - but Black has 34...Nd4 35
cxb7 (35 c7 Kd7) 35...Nc6 remaining a piece up with an easy win. A nice little
Knight gallop.
31.Kg3 h5
CM9000 suggests first 31...Rh1 with the plan of 32...g5 33 hxg5 fxg5 then
34 .Nf4 threatening 35...Rh3 mate forcing 34 Nxf4+ exf4+ 35 Kg2 Rxh4 winning a
Pawn. A bit cumbersome especially when you wonder how quickly the Rook gets
back into play.
However, the text is almost zugzwang. For example, White can't go back with
32 Kg2 because 32...Rxe2 leads to a winning Pawn ending after 33 Rxe2 Nf4+ 34
Kf1 Nxe2 35 Kxe2 g5. If White exchanges on g5 then Black's King takes the
aforementioned walk to b5 while White's has to cover the h Pawn. Otherwise
Black can make progress on the Kingside where White is hampered by his doubled
Pawns. One line is 36 Kf1 Kf7 37 Kg2 Kg6 38 Kh3 f5! (to expose the Pawn on e4)
39 hxg5 Kxg5 40 Kg3 fxe4 41 fxe4 h4+ 42 Kh3 Kh5 43 Kh2 Kg4 44 Kh3 Kf3! 45 Kxh4
Kxf2 46 Kg4 Ke3 47 Kf5 Kd4 winning. Once again this is all calculable despite
the length of the variation. Never be deterred from working out deep lines if
all the moves are easy to calculate. This applies particularly in Pawn endings.
The alternative 32 Kh3 is a blunder after 32...Rxe2 and 33...Nf4+ while 32
Nc3 just cedes more ground after 32...Nf4. Horizontal Rook moves allow 32...Rb1
winning the b4 Pawn so that leaves 32 Kh2 after which I'd have probably
continued with 32...g5 or 32...f5. Instead Dave thought for a few minutes and
played .
32.f4?
My first thought was that I'd made a tactical oversight, then I realised
what Dave must have missed in turn.
32...exf4+
33.Nxf4 Rxe4!
What Dave must have missed was although 31...h5 weakened g6 he can't
exploit it with 34 Nxg6+ because 34...Kf7 simply traps the Knight - if 35 Nh8+
Kg7 the steed has galloped into a dead end. It is possible to save it with 35
f3 Rc4! (the simplest move keeping pressure on the weak Pawns) 36 Nh8+ Kg7 37
Re2 (upon 36 Re2 Black just takes on b4) 37...Nd4 38 Re8 but then his pieces
are tied down while Black picks off the White Pawns like ripe apples.
The alternative is obviously swapping Knights and playing the Rook ending,
but after 34 Nxe6 it's Black's turn for a zwischenzug with 34...Rg4+! This
forces 35 Kh3 to hold the h4 Pawn and after 35...Kxe6 the Black King canters to
c4 to make a meal of the White Queenside Pawns. White has no counterplay at all
and Black can create a passed Pawn on the Kingside to distract or stretch the
defence.
Dave had twenty minutes remaining after the text. He sat there looking
stunned for twelve of them then generously conceded the game and with it the
match.
0-1
Text ends.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus
protection is active.
