Skype coaching session, 15 March 2020.
Note: Daylight saving time might be in operation in your time zone, check your
calendar to be certain when 14:00 UTC occurs for you.
1 coaching session is planned for March on Sunday: 29, at 14:00 UTC, which is
15:00 BST.
The game discussed (30 moves) is given below with annotations and without
annotations.
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
Paul Benson.
* * *
Annotated Game.
White: R. Granat, 2275 (estimate).
Black: M. Basman, 2390.
Event: Borehamwood 1983.
Result: 0-1 in 30 moves.
Opening: Borg Defence, B00.
| Editorial.
White had no FIDE Elo when this game was played, but did generate a rating of
2295 just 2 years later.
Chess has often been compared to war, this game would support this view.
Take note of how a battle following a theme ends, only for another on a
different theme to begin.
||
1. e4 g5
2. d4 h6
3. f4
| Black sets up a space-gaining pawn chain on the dark squares, white responds
with a challenge to that dark square pawn chain.
The theme for, "Battle 1", is announced.
||
3. ... Bg7
| Dark square fianchetto activity, fine, but is not black about to lose a pawn
on the g5 square?
||
4. c3
| A quiet move which, believe it or not, significantly affects the middlegame
opportunities for both players.
White is trying to reduce the activity of the black g7 bishop.
Fine, but the c3 square is the best square for the b1 knight to influence the
centre.
Does this then mean when this knight is developed, Nd2, or, Na3, a mistake is
being made?
Not at all.
These squares can be equally used to get the b1 knight into the game.
Perhaps the simplest way to understand this concept of white denying the b1
knight a good start in life is to monitor how this piece gets on in this game.
Instead, 4. fxg5 hxg5 5. Bxg5, snatches a pawn but runs into, 5. ... c5, a
likely continuation here could be, 6. c3 cxd4 7. cxd4 Qb6, hitting both
unprotected white b2 and d4 pawns, black gets the pawn back.
||
4. ... d5
| Hang on there, surely the battle is supposed to be on dark squares?
It is, and despite appearances, this is all part of the plan.
Black can get in this pawn advance because white has chosen to let a pawn
reside on c3 instead of a knight.
So which unit is better on c3, pawn or knight?
Wrong question.
Pawn and piece formations lead to particular types of middlegames, choose those
which lead to fights in which you feel most comfortable.
It is all about what suits you best and not automatically what we receive in
numerical judgements from Fritz and friends, unless of course your choice leads
to material loss without compensation, in which case take advice from the chess
engines.
||
5. e5
| Trying to block out the black g7 bishop, this strategy is not going to remain
unchallenged.
||
5. ... c5
| Immediate dark square response, the white e5 pawn is about to become the
focus of attention.
||
6. dxc5
| This pawn is not easy for black to capture, it seems black is sacrificing a
pawn to undermine the white e5 pawn - Let the dark square battles continue.
||
6. ... Nc6
| With a definite threat on the dark squares which white dare not ignore, the
idea is, 7. ... gxf4 8. Bxf4 Nxe5, and the white centre is liquidated.
But white has a move to prevent this black plan.
||
7. Bb5
| Pinning a piece to a king neutralises whatever threats it was creating, the
white centre is again safe for the time being.
||
7. ... Bd7
| This re-creates the old threat to the white e5 pawn plus another possibility.
The new threat is, 8. ... Nxe5, trying to take advantage of the undefended
nature of the white b5 bishop, the analysis goes:
(A). If, 8. ... Nxe5 9. fxe5 Bxb5, black has won a pawn while gaining the
bishop pair in an open position, but white can improve on this.
(B). Or if, 8. ... Nxe5 9. Bxd7+ Nxd7 10. Qxd5, white gets the pawn back, but
if black had time to play, pawn e6, protecting d5, then the black idea of,
Nxe5, will win a pawn.
However, when playing 7. ... Bd7, black has interfered with the black d8 queen
defence to the d5 pawn.
||
8. Bxc6
| Continuing the battle for dark square control, the black c6 knight can no
longer join in with the fight to liquidate the white pawns.
White cautiously declines any complications arising from, 8. Qxd5, though
precisely what black gets after, the pawn falls is not clear, some ideas run:
(A). If, 8. Qxd5 Nxe5 9. Bxd7+ Nxd7 10. Qxb7 Nxc5 11. Qc6+ Nd7 12. e6 fxe6 13.
Qxe6, black has a lead in development, but is it worth 2 pawns?
(B). Or if, 8. Qxd5 Qa5 9. Qc4 a6 10. Bxc6 Bxc6 11. Nf3, does black have enough
for the 2 pawns?
So why is white declining the offered black d5 pawn?
Mike Basman is known as a very dangerous tactician, give him an active position
at your peril.
Perhaps white was just unwilling to give black such activity on principle
rather than chess judgement of capturing the d5 pawn.
And besides, the present, "Battle 1", dark square strategy is to close black
down, taking another pawn which opens up the light squares is not yet on the
agenda.
||
8. ... bxc6
| Capturing with the b-pawn is preferred.
Instead capturing with the d7 bishop would tie a piece down to protecting the
d5 pawn.
||
9. Nf3 Qc7
| Increasing the pressure on the cramping white e5 pawn, the critical black
central challenge is now prepared.
||
10. Na3
| Denied the c3 square, what other choice is there?
Clearly this knight cannot go forward, but perhaps, Nc2 - Nd4, is a possibility
once other white pieces have developed?
Keep checking how this a3 knight contributes to the white game.
||
10. ... f6
| The dark square challenges are complete, the white centre cannot be
maintained.
Note that black needed to wait until white had played, Nf3, blocking any
immediate possibilities of, Qh5+, which would force the black king to decide
whether to stay on the kingside or start walking queenside.
||
11. exf6
| White trades rather than risk being left with an isolated pawn on e5,
depending on how black might choose to initiate exchanges.
||
11. ... exf6
| Capturing with, 11. ... Nf6, leaves black with a backward e-pawn on a
semi-open file, a target-in-waiting just asking to be ganged up on.
||
12. Nd4
| "Battle 1", fighting for the central dark squares, is over, welcome to,
"Battle 2", arguing over some central light squares.
On d4 the white knight cannot be pushed away by an enemy pawn, such a location
is called an outpost, highly desirable for white.
||
12. ... O-O-O
| And even though, "Battle 2", has only just begun, black sets about setting up
the possibility of, "Battle 3", a middlegame of opposite-wing attacks.
||
13. O-O
| White accepts, "Battle 3", shall take place, an opposite-wing attack is in
motion.
||
13. ... f5
| This might appear to be part of, "Battle 2", light square play, perhaps so,
but it is vacating the f6 square which prompts the advance of the black f-pawn.
||
14. Qd3
| Is this, "Battle 2", light square fighting, or, "Battle 3", starting the
opposite-wing attack?
Both.
On d3 the white queen is prodding and probing at the white kingside, f5 pawn
doubly-attacked, and queenside, possible invasion with, Qa6+, available.
the big question now is which way she will jump.
||
14. ... Nf6
| Black ignores the attack on the f5 pawn, development combined with speed of
campaign is more important than the odd pawn in opposite-wing attacks.
White to play is at a massive crossroad, time to choose, kingside or queenside
activity?
||
15. Nxf5
| Kingside, white perhaps assesses any activity black can generate on the
kingside can be controlled, challenged, pushed back, and there would be a 2
pawn advantage for the ending.
It is impossible to analyse this idea to a satisfactory conclusion, such a
decision is pure judgement based on study plus personal experience.
So, "Battle 3", opposite-wing attacks is put on hold.
All in the coaching group felt queenside play would have been their option
here.
The general white plan could have began with, Rb1, supporting pushing the
b-pawn to make contact with the black defences.
This may or may not include, Qa6+, at some point.
A negative aspect of this idea was black finding, Ne4, attacking and possibly
winning the white c5 pawn.
The group strongly felt that white would begin to open lines on the queenside
before black could get serious threats going on the kingside.
When engaged in opposite-wing attacks having the initiative is very important,
in just 3 moves white would be ready to remove defences.
Whether white should capture, bxc6, when available, or push on further with,
pawn b6, was left undecided while choosing to fight on the queenside.
Such decisions can be made when the time arrives, the real point is that
feeling were that white must break open the black queenside, and as quickly as
possible.
Again, this is purely judgement, offering line after line here will prove
nothing, there are just too many branches to be crunched through.
||
15. ... Bxf5
| Such a strong enemy piece should not be allowed to remain in play, simply
eliminate it.
Permitting, Nxg7, in some way gains black little, while, Bf8, is literally
going backwards.
||
16. Qxf5+ Kb7
| Appearances suggest the black king might seem exposed on b7, fine, but who in
the white army is capable of getting after him?
And even if some pressure mounts on the queenside, simply, Ka8, gives black
chances to draw defenders queenside if necessary.
||
17. Be3
| "Battle 2", light square activity seems over, white 2 pawns up is planning
liquidation to an endgame.
||
17. ... Ne4
| A tripler.
Firstly, the white queen is denied retreat down the h7 - b1 diagonal, if
attacked she must retreat kingside.
Secondly, on e4 this knight influences several dark squares.
Thirdly, the g7 bishop is given activity, though white has a means of
neutralisation available.
Remember how white continued in, "Battle 1", play on the dark squares, way back
on move 4, with, pawn c3, trying to block out the black g7 bishop?
Well, that took away the c3 square for the b1 knight, which means white would
have to find another method of fighting for the e4 square.
Matters were further worsened when, "Battle 1", strategy, block out the dark
squares, white trading light square bishop for black knight with, Bxc6, needed
to be played.
So the black e4 knight is not easy to challenge, it can only be done, at the
cost of 3 white tempi, Rad1 - Nb1 - Nd2, not really, "Battle 3", is it?
||
18. Bd4
| Chalenging intending liquidation, white will be another step closer to an
ending 2 pawns up.
||
18. ... Rdf8
| Tempo-gain on the white queen, black is getting a kingside initiative
rolling.
||
19. Qh3
| Wandering forward with, 19. Qg6, just feels wrong, there must be further
tempo-gains available to black to increase the speed of the coming attack.
||
19. ... Bxd4+
| Counter-intuitive.
Surely just sitting there and waiting for white to trade, Bxg7, allowing, Qxg7,
getting the black queen into the kingside action was better?
Not automatically so.
Yes, black needs heavy piece action on the g-file, but the queen is not the
best unit to take up this job, well, not yet.
Besides which, on c7 she is already performing a couple of useful duties.
Firstly, should the white queen manage to float queenside then the black queen
must be in the region to be capable of restraining any white activity.
Secondly, despite appearances, on c7 the black queen is pointing into the white
kingside, she just has not yet got open lines to join the attack.
||
20. cxd4 gxf4
| A serious turnaround has occurred.
The, "Black Attacker-Count" = 3, the, "White Attacker-Count" = 0.
Moreover, black can quickly get the apparently passive c7 queen and h8 rook
into the action, can the same be said for the scattered white forces?
"Battle 3", opposite-wing action has not yet started.
||
21. Qb3+
| Aha, white makes that, "Attacker-Count", 1 - 3, but we are still wondering
about the rest of the white army.
Perhaps white could have bit the bullet and accepted counter-attacking is
unlikely to work, instead kingside defensive strategy, however undesirable,
might have been a better way?
If so, then the 3-tempi plan of, Rad1 - Nb1, Nd2, challenging the strong black
e4 knight was an option.
||
21. ... Ka8
22. Qa4
| A doubler.
Firstly, the white queen escapes the potential, Nd2+, black knight
exchange-winning fork.
Secondly, the b3 square is vacated for someone else.
Anyone recall that discussion over, "Battle 2", and, "Battle 3"?
Hit on the light squares or get on with an opposite-wing attack?
The white queen has spent 5 moves to reach a square she could have arrived at
in just 1 move, and she snatched a pawn only to lose it back a few moves later.
Could white have better spent the missing 4 tempi by throwing pawns up the
queenside to create open lines?
||
22. ... Rhg8
| "Attacker-Count" = 1 - 4 in favour of black, this sort of imbalance usually
spells disaster for the defender.
Furthermore, there seems no obvious way for white to challenge any of the
active black units, something should be about to happen here, just the right
preparation is required.
||
23. Kh1
| Sensible, getting out of the black g8 rook x-ray attack, but does not help
with the opposite-wing campaign, any defensive moves slow up the assault on the
other side of the board.
Black to play must surely be ready to hit out?
Clue: Fischerism: "In chess it is important to know when to punch and when to
duck."
||
23. ... Rg6
| Protecting the black c6 pawn, fine, but surely the black c7queen is already
performing this task?
Yes, but if the c6 pawn is only protected by the black queen then she is tied
down to this duty, prospects of joining the kingside attack would be very
limited for her.
So black over-protects the c6 pawn, which means either of the defending units
are capable of moving into any attack as desired.
||
24. Rf3
| A doubler.
Firstly, the obvious black dynamic kingside move of, pawn f3, is prevented by
occupying the f3 square.
Secondly, a white rook swing queenside with, Rb3, is available.
Instead strengthening the g2 square fails badly, 24. Rg1 Nf2+ mate.
Black to play has several plans of increasing the kingside pressure, fine, but
perhaps the time for forcing moves is here?
Clue: Fischerism - "Tactics flow from a positionally superior game", the black,
"Attacker-Count" = 4 active units, if only a 5th could just join in...
||
24. ... Ng5
| The white rook on f3 is blocking the black f4 pawn, it must be pushed away if
black is to achieve a dynamic kingside break.
||
25. Rb3 f3
| And the black queen on c7 is now directly pointing into the white kingside,
black, "Attacker-Count" = 5, and just what defensive forces does the white h1
king have around him?
||
26. g3
| This is the start of, "Battle 4", returning to blocking dark square activity,
fine, but "Battle 3", opposite-wing attack is about to explode.
Opening up the white kingside is doomed to failure, instead, 26. gxf3 Nxf3, the
only sensible way to prevent the immediate black, Qxh2+ mate, is, 27. Rxf3
Rxf3, but all this does is slow down a decisive black attack.
||
26. ... Ne4
| Job done on g5, push the blockading white rook off the f3 square in order to
advance with, pawn f3, the black knight returns to enter, "Battle 4", fighting
on the dark squares.
||
27. Qa6
| White is beginning to create the odd threat.
Pinning the black c6 pawn to the unprotected black g6 rook means, Nb5, is
possible, disrupting the defending / attacking roles of the black c7 queen.
Also on a6 there is a threat of white, Qb7+, to be guarded against, the black
queen must not stray off the black 2nd rank.
Instead strengthening the white defences seems impossible, 27. Rg1 Nf2+ mate.
Black to play can demonstrate that the reputation of being a dangerous
tactician is well-deserved.
||
27. ... Nxg3+
| Demolition, though a chain of 2 pawns could hardly be thought of as a
fortress to be sieged then dismantled.
||
28. Kg1
| Accepting with, 28. hxg3, does no good:
(A). If, 28. hxg3 Rxg3 29. Nb5 Rh3+ 30. Kg1 Qh2+ 31. Kf1 Qg2+ 32. Ke1 Rh1+
mate, this can be avoided but would only lengthen the agony.
(B). Or if, 28. hxg3 Rxg3 29. Qb7+ Qxb7 30. Rxb7 Kxb7 31. Kh2 Rg4, black is an
exchange up in a simple position and should win comfortably.
Black to play has a few discovered checks available, care is needed to find the
right variation.
||
28. ... Ne4+
| Following the advice offered in the recent 103 move endgame where white king,
bishop, knight, had to force the black king into a corner.
We have another, "Mini-Barrier", g2, f2, e2, d2, squares all covered, the white
king is restricted to his back rank.
Less clear is, 28. ... Ne2+ 29. Kf2 Rg2+ 30. Ke3 Qf4+ 31. Kd3 Qf5+ 32. Kd2, and
the analytical tree begins expanding, there should be something here for black,
but time and effort will be spent finding it.
A different and completely forcing line was found by the coaching group,
instead, 28. ... f2+ 29. Kg2 f1=Q+ 30. Rxf1 Nxf1+, and whether white tries, 31.
Kh3, or, 31. Kh1, black has, 31. ... Qxh2+ mate.
||
29. Kf1
| Instead, 29. Kh1 Nf2+ mate.
Black to play has a forcing line to end the game.
Clue: Which of the black forces is contributing the least, and how can that
unit get into the fight?
||
29. ... Rg1+
| This would be mate if the rook were protected, but it is not.
A couple of tactical tools of, "Deflection", with, "Line-Clearance", are in
action.
Black needs the white king on a fully-open g-file, "Deflection", the black rook
previously on g6 was standing in the way of someone stronger, so we need,
"Line-Clearance".
||
30. Kxg1 Qg7+
White resigns, 0-1
| The black, "Mini-Barrier", g2, f2, e2, d2, is a prison for the white g1 king,
the finishes run:
(A). If, 31. Kh1 Nf2+ mate, is prettier than, 31. ... Qg2+ mate.
(B). Or if, 31. Kf1 Qg2+ 32. Ke1 f2+ 33. Ke2 f1=Q+, a double check, 34. Ke3
Rf3+ mate, though black had no less than 7 queen-mates here with, Qh3+, Qgg1+,
Qg5+, Qgf2+, Qgf3+, Qd2+, Qff3+.
||
* * *
## Unannotated Game.
White: R. Granat, 2275 (estimate).
Black: M. Basman, 2390.
Event: Borehamwood 1983.
Result: 0-1 in 30 moves.
Opening: Borg Defence, B00.
1. e4 g5
2. d4 h6
3. f4 Bg7
4. c3 d5
5. e5 c5
6. dxc5 Nc6
7. Bb5 Bd7
8. Bxc6 bxc6
9. Nf3 Qc7
10. Na3 f6
11. exf6 exf6
12. Nd4 O-O-O
13. O-O f5
14. Qd3 Nf6
15. Nxf5 Bxf5
16. Qxf5+ Kb7
17. Be3 Ne4
18. Bd4 Rdf8
19. Qh3 Bxd4+
20. cxd4 gxf4
21. Qb3+ Ka8
22. Qa4 Rhg8
23. Kh1 Rg6
24. Rf3 Ng5
25. Rb3 f3
26. g3 Ne4
27. Qa6 Nxg3+
28. Kg1 Ne4+
29. Kf1 Rg1+
30. Kxg1 Qg7+
White resigns, 0-1
* * *
