Skype coaching session, 02 July 2017.
Please note: Re-structuring of the sessions now offers the option for guests to
bring their own games for group discussion.
Recordings of some previous coaching sessions can be found at:
http://www.open-aurec.com/Skype/PaulBenson/PaulBenson.htm
The following game was examined, the games 30 moves is given with annotations
and then again without annotations.
Paul Benson.
* * *
Annotated game.
White: Q. Ramacker, 1947.
Black: L. Roos, 1830.
Event: World Youth Championship U18, Khanty-Mansiysk, 2016.
Result: 1-0 in 30 moves.
Opening: King's Indian Defence, Saemisch Variation, E81.
1. e4 g6
2. d4 Bg7
3. c4 d6
4. Nc3 Nf6
5. f3
| White announces intentions to play mainline systems by opting for the
Saemisch Variation. ||
5. ... O-O
6. g4
| Someone say something about mainlines?
This is very unusual.
Few titled players will choose this move in preference to the most popular, 6.
Be3, with the wealth of experience the databases have on offer to assist them.
So why do players choose such non-standard ideas?
Perhaps they are thinking getting the opponent, "Out Of Book", will give the
innovative player an advantage.
The surprised player might feel slightly insulted by a potentially outrageous,
"Non-Book", move, and decide to set about refuting such behaviour.
In this case the innovator would have won the psychological battle.
But what happens if the surprised opponent just steers the game back into
conventional lines where the innovation does not bring any influence to bear on
the position? ||
6. ... c5
Slightly less popular with black here is, 6. ... Nc6.
There are a few examples of 6. ... e5, when the following variations occurred:
(A). 7. d5 c6 8. h4, looks dangerous but gave two losses for white.
(B). 7. d5 c6 8. Nge2, another loss for white.
(C). 7. d5 Nxg4, attempting to boldly refute where no refutation had gone
before, saw, 8. fxg4 Qh4+ 9. Kd2 Bxg4 10. Be2 f5 11. Kc2 Qf2 12. Bd2 Na6 13. a3
Qd4 14. h3 Bxe2 15. Qxe2, and black did not have sufficient for the piece,
white went on to win this one. ||
7. d5 e6
| This immediate challenge is the usual response by black to the closure of the
centre by white in Benoni systems.
So far white has failed to provoke a fear-response from black, it seems the
novel opening choice of, pawn g4, has been ignored. ||
8. Bg5
| This looks like a characteristic, "Fingerprint", move.
Some people feel certain pieces should be posted on a particular square
whenever possible, irrespective of which opening system is being employed.
White also seems to like playing, Bg5, when meeting the Najdorf Sicilian.
Is this bishop misplaced here?
No, it has good value in putting black to a small test.
Some defenders like to hit the bishop with, pawn h6, which might offer
opportunities to break the pin later if the bishop retreats, Bh4.
The other white response could be a theretreat to the e3 square, where the
black h6 pawn can become a target after white further develops with, Qd2,
though there is a little trap of which one should be aware in such positions.
||
8. ... exd5
9. Nxd5
| The usual strategic choice here is the pawn capture, cxd5, creating a
desirable imbalance in the pawn formation.
The far rarer pawn capture of, exd5, keeps a symmetric pawn formation, and is
usually played when white is wishing to constrain aggressive tendencies, though
this choice fits better with, Nf3, and, Bd3, with a quick, O-O, and start
piling rooks on the e-file. ||
9. ... Qa5+
| A suggestion during the coaching session ran along the lines, 9. ... Nbd7,
when the white plan of, 10. Qd2, perhaps aiming for, 11. Qf4, triply attacking
the pinned black f6 knight and attacking the undefended black d6 pawn, was soon
dismissed.
After, 9. ... Nbd7 10. Qd2, black has the tricky, 10. ... h6, apparently losing
a pawn.
Not so, because after, 10. ... h6 11. Bxh6 Nxe4 12. fxe4 Qh4+, black is winning
the white h6 bishop, material would be equal but white has the worse pawn
structure as well as conceding the bishop pair. ||
10. Bd2
| When setting out with, pawn g4, white was clearly indicating aggressive
intentions.
So blocking the black queen check with10. Qd2, offering a queen trade is not
for consideration.
The tactical, 10. b4, hitting the black queen gains nothing if black plays, 10.
... Qd8. ||
10. ... Qd8
11. Bg5 Qa5+
12. Bd2 Qd8
| We are getting dangerously close to a possible claim of three-fold
repetition.
Surely they are not going to accept a tame draw having travelled so far to
compete in this event, are they? ||
13. Bg5
| It seems white is willing to permit black to create and then claim a
three-fold repetition. ||
13. ... Nc6
| Breaking the sequence and possibly taking upon himself the mantle of
draw-avoidance?
When a draw offer is rejected a feeling of having to justify the rejection by
aggression is well known.
This is fine if the position is already active with imbalance offering
opportunities for imagination to flow,
, but can backfire if the game was roughly equal. ||
14. Qd2 Nd4
15. Kf2
| Perhaps white was uncertain about the opposite wing assaults after, 15.
O-O-O, when black sets about matters with, pawn a6, then, pawn b5, and the
fight is on.
By, "hiding", the king on f2 white wants to have options of continuing with
kingside activity without giving black any counter-chances.
Best laid plans...? ||
15. ... Bxg4
| Tactics flow from a superior position.
Fine, but who has the superior position here?
White to play must avoid immediate disaster. ||
16. Bxf6
| A useful zwischenzug.
Clearly, 16. fxg4 Nxe4+, a royal fork though this is not quite so important as,
17. Kg2, and black can choose between either, 17. ... Qxg5, or, 17. ... Nxe5,
in each case emerging a comfortable two pawns up. ||
16. ... Bxf6
17. fxg4 Bh4+
| It seems black has given up a piece for a pawn along with some disruption to
the white king.
This is not going to be enough, the kingside needs to be further opened up
before white completes development and begins to push back any active black
pieces. ||
18. Kg2 f5
| It should be clear that white must not allow black to invade with, Rf2+, but
how? ||
19. exf5 gxf5
20. g5
| White gives up a pawn to keep the f-file closed, fine, but won't the g-file
now be opened for action?
Yes, but it will take vital time for black to organise a g-file invasion, time
which white can put to good use in trying to find some shelter for the king. ||
20. ... Bxg5
21. Qc3
| White posts the queen on the long a1 - h8 diagonal in the hope black will not
try to hide his king on h8, which would self-pin the d4 knight.
The position is probably critical for black now.
There are several good plans to be sifted through, and not one of them stands
out as obviously better than the rest. ||
21. ... f4
| Black chooses to try to use the f-pawn as a battering ram.
This is fine providing this advance can be followed with, pawn f3+, further
restricting the mobility of the white king.
A different approach was to accept that the immediate assault has reached the
point where re-building must take place.
Perhaps a careful mixing of defence with attacking opportunities involving,
Rf7, intending, Rg7?
Then find a means of safely lifting the queen off the back rank, permitting the
a8 rook to swing across to the centre / kingside to increase the pressure on
white.
This slow building process will permit white to complete development, but as
the white kingside is lacking good pawn cover, the white pieces must find a
formation to protect themselves against a delayed attack of far greater power.
||
22. Nf3 Qd7
| Surely this is a blunder?
Ah, perhaps upon examination one should find there is method in the madness. ||
23. Rg1
| A double purpose move.
Firstly, the white rook sets up some x-ray threats up the g-file.
Secondly, the h1 square has been vacated for the white king to find some
much-needed shelter.
This sort of move indicates that white is now in no mood for letting black slip
away with a draw.
Instead, 23. Nxg5 Qg4+, the black queen can set up a three-fold repetition
with, 24. Kf2 Qh4+ 25. Kg2 Qg4+ 26. Kf2 Qh4+, note how the white king cannot
step onto the e-file.
It would be unwise for black to seek material equality in the line, 23. Nxg5
Qg4+ 24. Kf2 Qxg5, as, 25. Rg1, pins the black queen to her king, and black
would be losing. ||
23. ... Bh4
| Surely another blunder?
Ah, but hang on there, the previous suggestion of an error turned out itself to
be an error, didn't it?
So, what neat trick does black have in mind this time to avoid losing a piece?
Clue: Do not spend all night trying to find the solution, if the answer does
not hit you immediately, as in that case it probably never will. ||
24. Kh1+
| And how many times in your chess career have you moved your king and
announced check?
And if anyone has a game where they moved their king with double-check we would
like to have it published.
White declines the obvious, 24. Nxh4, because...?
Ah, but hang on there.
Surely, 24. Nxh4 Qg4+ 25. Kh1, and the black queen is pinned to her king by the
white g1 rook, a material disaster.
So what did each player miss?
Wouldn't one have liked being a fly on the wall for their post-mortem analysis,
and await the giggles as each realises the bishop was a free gift this time.
Perhaps the black bishop was sent to h4 in the hope that white would fall into,
24. Nxd4 Qg4+ mate. ||
24. ... Bg3
| Black appreciates the white king is finding shelter and that the attack has
run out of steam.
Expecting a loss, the pressure to play sensibly is now removed, and anything
which might complicate and confuse is fair game, as we saw last move.
This game is now white's to throw away. ||
25. Nxd4 cxd4
26. Qf3
| White now has a decisive advantage, but this does not automatically mean one
can relax.
Black might be able to make matters difficult if he is allowed to invade with,
26. ... Qg4, intending, 27. ... Qh4, which might be followed with, Rf5, and
Rh5.
Yes, this takes quite a few moves to arrange, and that bishop on g3 is always
there for the grabbing before the black queen hits the h-file.
The placement of the white queen on f3 is to rule out any activity from black.
A simple case of preventing an illness rather than having to find a cure.
Note that the unmoved white bishop on f1 is preventing the catastrophic, Qh3+
mate, should white capture the bishop with, hxg3. ||
26. ... Kh8
| White to play and demonstrate that the disease of, "Blunderitis", can
sometimes be highly contagious. ||
27. Nxf4
| As the paraphrase goes: "Mistakes are just waiting to happen."
Instead, 27. hxg3 fxg3 28. Qxg3, might leave the white king without pawn cover,
but it is not easy for black to invade.
A few examples:
(A). If, 27. hxg3 fxg3 28. Qxg3 Rg8 29. Qxg8+ Rxg8 30. Rxg8+ Kxg8 31. Nf6+ Kg7
32. Nxd7 Rd8, white has several ways to handle the position. Perhaps the
simplest is to return a piece with,
33. Nb6 axb6 34. Rd1, pick up the black d4 pawn leading to an ending where
white has an extra bishop for the black h7 pawn, a win with careful play.
(B). Or if, 27. hxg3 fxg3 28. Qxg3 Qf7 29. Bd3 Rg8 30. Raf1 Qh5+ 31. Qh2, and
black is running out of ideas as well as being two pieces down.
If snatching the black g3 bishop looks too risky, then the simple. 27. Rd1,
and, Rxd4, should keep everything under control. ||
27. ... Rxf4
| And as the paraphrase goes: "Counter-mistakes are also just waiting to
happen."
Sometimes players just trust the moves of the opponent to be sound when in
reality they are not.
Instead, 27. ... Bxf4, and black wins a piece back but white should have
sufficient resources to hold the draw a pawn down.
The forward-move of the black f8 rook to capture the knight seems so obvious.
Perhaps the backward-move of the black g3 bishop to capture the knight simply
slipped below the radar of both players?
Sad lesson learned during many years of tournament chess, with which
perfectionists may choose to quibble: "A mistake is only a mistake if your
opponent spots it and punishes you." ||
28. Qxg3 Qf5
| Let's all assume there is a mistake in the move recorded and black actually
played, 28. ... Qf7, shall we?
If however the game move is correct, then another mystery is about to remain
unsolved. ||
29. Bg2
| Instead, 29. Qg7+ mate, looks reasonable. ||
29. ... Rg8
30. Qb3
Black resigns, 1-0
| While there are no immediate threat this is clearly a win for white.
Many club players would demand the opponent demonstrate good technique to
convert this decisive advantage into the full point, but when playing in such a
prestigious event one follows the Grand Master rule of resignation with honour.
||
* * *
## Unannotated game.
White: Q. Ramacker, 1947.
Black: L. Roos, 1830.
Event: World Youth Championship U18, Khanty-Mansiysk, 2016.
Result: 1-0 in 30 moves.
Opening: King's Indian Defence, Saemisch Variation, E81.
1. e4 g6
2. d4 Bg7
3. c4 d6
4. Nc3 Nf6
5. f3 O-O
6. g4 c5
7. d5 e6
8. Bg5 exd5
9. Nxd5 Qa5+
10. Bd2 Qd8
11. Bg5 Qa5+
12. Bd2 Qd8
13. Bg5 Nc6
14. Qd2 Nd4
15. Kf2 Bxg4
16. Bxf6 Bxf6
17. fxg4 Bh4+
18. Kg2 f5
19. exf5 gxf5
20. g5 Bxg5
21. Qc3 f4
22. Nf3 Qd7
23. Rg1 Bh4
24. Kh1+ Bg3
25. Nxd4 cxd4
26. Qf3 Kh8
27. Nxf4 Rxf4
28. Qxg3 Qf5
29. Bg2 Rg8
30. Qb3
Black resigns, 1-0
* * *
