Skype coaching session, 15 September 2019.
Forthcoming coaching sessions in September will be on Sundays: 22, 29, at 14:00
UTC, which is 15:00 BST.
The game discussed (36 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. Clegg, 151 (ECF), 1741.
Black: P. Benson, 162 (ECF), 1845.
Event: Paignton Rowena Bruce Challengers.
Result: 0-1 in 36 moves.
Opening: London System versus Dutch Defence, A80.
| Editorial.
All opposite-wing attacks are equal, but some are less equal than others.
What does one do when an opponent sets up the mutual pawn-race but then refuses
to set the attack rolling?
||
1. d4 f5
2. Bf4 Nf6
3. e3 g6
4. h4
| Looks crude but can be rather effective if black mishandles the defence.
Strangely, these white systems involving an early, pawn h4, have no variation
name to identify them.
Anyone objecting to them being called: "The Mad-Axeman Attack"?
A few samples of what white can achieve from this early hack-attack:
V. Vishwa (1240) - H. Nguyen (1441), World Cadet U12, Batumi 2016.
1. d4 f5 2. Bf4 Nf6 3. e3 g6 4. h4 Bg7 5. h5 Nxh5
6. Rxh5 gxh5 7. Qxh5+ Kf8 8. Qxf5+ Kg8 9. Nf3 e6 10. Qg4 h5
11. Qg3 d6 12. Nc3 Nc6 13. Bc4 Kf8 14. O-O-O Bd7 15. Rh1 Qe8
16. Nh4 Ne7 17. Bg5 Nf5 18. Nxf5 exf5 19. Nd5 Bh6 20. Nxc7 Qg6
21. Bxh6+ Qxh6 22. Nxa8 Ke7 23. Qh4+ Qf6 24. Qxf6+ Kxf6 25. Nc7 1-0.
A. Gorti (2261) - D. Marhoefer (1714), Reykjavik 2017.
1. d4 f5 2. Bf4 Nf6 3. e3 g6 4. h4 Bg7 5. h5 Nxh5
6. Rxh5 gxh5 7. Qxh5+ Kf8 8. Qxf5+ Kg8 9. Nc3 e6 10. Qh5 d6
11. Nf3 Bd7 12. Bd3 Qe8 13. Qh2 Nc6 14. a3 Ne7 15. O-O-O b5
16. Ne4 a5 17. Ng3 b4 18. Nh5 Ng6 19. Bh6 Bxd4 20. exd4 Kf7
21. Bxg6+ hxg6 22. Qf4+ 1-0.
Quite brutal, but what if black declines to capture the white h-pawn?
A. Gorti (2261) - J. Meyer (1944), Reykjavik 2017.
1. d4 f5 2. Bf4 Nf6 3. e3 g6 4. h4 Bg7 5. h5 d6
6. h6 Bf8 7. c4 e6 8. Nc3 Nc6 9. Nf3 Nh5 10. d5 e5
11. dxc6 exf4 12. Qd4 Qf6 13. Nd5 Qxd4 14. Nxd4 Kd8 15. Be2 bxc6
16. Nxc6+ Kd7 17. Bxh5 gxh5 18. Nd4 fxe3 19. fxe3 c6 20. Nf4 Ba6
21. b3 Bxh6 22. O-O-O Bxf4 23. exf4 Raf8 24. Rxh5 c5 25. Nxf5 Rf6
26. Rg5 Rg6 27. Rxg6 1-0.
In the game examined here lack knew enough about the dangers of permitting
white the luxury of advancing with, pawn h5, and is having none of it.
||
4. ... h6
| So that if white persists in swinging that axe, 5. h5 g5, rather slows the
attack.
||
5. Qf3
| This is not going to be an easy ride.
Why are we Dutch Defence players persecuted so often with sharp lines designed
to mate us before rooks can be connected?
Is playing, 1. ... f5, really such a positional crime in need of immediate
judgement as guilty followed by as swift an execution as possible?
White is preparing a win of a pawn, this can be prevented, but at the cost of a
change in game-plan.
||
5. ... d6
| Blunting the action of the white f4 bishop, which may become part of a
battery should white continue with, Qg3.
Instead the careless, 5. ... Bg7 6. Qg3, hits both g6 and c7, black is losing
at least a pawn.
Continuous vigilance is required at all time.
Making, "Automatic Moves", when confronted with an uncommon and
dangerous-looking system can lead to a lost position without having tested the
opponent.
||
6. Bc4
| Despite kingside appearances, black is still planning castling short,
intending to make the middlegame fight in the kingside / centre of the board,
even if white castles queenside.
Instead, 6. Qg3 Rg8, forces black into a completely different game-plan of, Nc6
- Bd7 - Qe7, and finally, O-O-O.
||
6. ... e6
| The a2 - g8 diagonal must be closed.
Note that black avoids, 6. ... d5, which would again leave the white threat of,
Qg3, hitting g6 and c7 in the air.
||
7. Ne2
| Instead, 7. Nc3, intending, O-O-O, and, pawn e4, was a more active approach.
White has 4 pieces developed, black only the f6 knight, such a development-lag
should normally set alarm bells ringing.
But this is not a, "Normal", position.
The 5 pawn moves by black prevent the white active units from getting any
further into the black position.
So despite breaking that, "Beginner's-Rule", about falling behind in
development, black is not in any immediate danger.
This cannot remain so for much longer, some development is required, right?
||
7. ... Nh5
| And another, "Beginner's-Rule", is flouted.
The only developed black piece makes another move, this was well-motivated, but
turns out to be not as clever as initially thought.
When a unit moves it vacates a square for someone else, fine, however when a
unit moves it also gives up the fight for control of previously-fought-for
squares.
||
8. Nd2
| A more direct approach was to try to take advantage of the misplaced black h5
knight with, 8. g4, which was not advisable when the black knight prevented
this advance when it sat on f6.
After, 8. g4, black would have had to decide between:
(A). If, 8. g4 fxg4 9. Qxg4 Qf6 10. Rg1 Rg8, when white can simply play, Nc3 -
O-O-O, and think about how to gang up on the potentially weak black g6 and e6
pawns.
(B). Or if, 8. g4 Nxf4 9. Nxf4 Qf6, seemingly holding matters, but, 10. Nxe6,
sets off lots of tricks as the black c8 bishop is overloaded, 10. ... Bxe6 11.
Bxe6 Qxe6 12. Qxb7, wins the black a8 rook, white emerges at least an exchange
and couple of pawns up.
||
8. ... Qf6
| The point of playing, Nh5, black is now ready for, Bg7 - O-O, get the king
off the a2 - g8 diagonal, and finally plan a central break of, pawn e5.
||
9. Nc3 Bg7
10. O-O-O O-O
| Opposite-wing castling usually results in pawn races to open up the position
in front of the opposing king.
However personal experiences in this variation have led black to conclude this
strategy does not have to be followed here.
Instead it is possible for black to fight in the kingside / centre, ignoring
the queenside altogether.
||
11. Bh2
| Offering the h4 pawn, any takers out there?
Note the relationship between the white h2 bishop and the black h5 knight.
They are in the, "Bishop Versus Knight Stand-Off", established when the
opposing units are on the same file / rank separated by 2 squares.
Here each unit is fighting for control of the g3 and f4 squares.
Which piece has the better of it in this present battle?
Wrong question.
Each cancel each other out, it is not about who is winning the fight.
No, it is all about who might need to move to either of the squares but find
they dare not.
For the ultimate victory in this, "Stand-Off", imagine a completely empty board
except for a black knight on h5 and a white bishop on e5.
The squares under contention are: g3, f4, f6, g7.
Neither piece can play to the named squares, fine, so why the big fuss?
Imagine a white king marching up the h-file, when it lands on h4 the black h5
knight is threatened but has no safe move.
The point of mutual restriction is thus revealed.
In the, "Bishop Versus Knight Stand-Off", it is when a piece needs to move but
cannot safely do so which determines who is the victor.
Understanding this relationship can become critical in a single bishop versus
single knight endgame.
||
11. ... Kh7
12. Qe2
| Since the white blitzkrieg involving an early, pawn h5, never happened, the
white queen vacates the f3 square for someone else.
||
12. ... Nc6
13. f3
| The, "Bishop Versus Knight Stand-Off", is already becoming critical, white is
threatening, pawn g4, snaring the sidelined black h5 knight.
||
13. ... f4
| A doubler.
Firstly, for the defence, the black h5 knight is saved by mini-tactics, a
possible en passant capture avoids the snare.
Secondly, for the attack, black is threatening to dissolve the white centre,
winning a useful pawn in the process.
Black is prepared to settle matters in the kingside / centre, so pushing
forward in this region to maintain the h5 knight makes sense.
Instead backing off with either, 13. ... Qe7, or, 13. ... Bh8, each creating a
flight square would let white obtain a kingside initiative with, 14. g4.
||
14. Nb3
| Fischerism: "In chess it is important to know when to punch and when to
duck."
Punching: White loses a pawn with, 14. g4 fxg3, and the kingside attack is
seriously compromised.
Ducking: White has now protected the d4 pawn from both b3 and d1, had white
instead tried for kingside activity with, 14. Rdg1 fxe3 15. Qxe3 Nxd4, white
drops the d4 pawn for zero compensation, and since the white e3 pawn would have
gone, the black h5 knight would have f4 as a flight square should white push,
pawn g4.
||
14. ... Bd7
15. Ne4
| A doubler.
Firstly, the black f6 queen is about to be shoved to a less active square, the
black battery up the f-file is disrupted, the white f3 pawn will no longer be a
target should white organise, pawn g4.
Secondly, the g3 square is given another support, white can now push, pawn g4,
without fear of losing a pawn by black, fxg3.
There is however a downside, black is threatening to fork white pieces with,
pawn d5.
||
15. ... Qe7
16. Nf2
| White prefers to avoid complications.
Instead, 16. g4 would start some kingside play, some ideas run:
(A). If, 16. g4 Nf6 17. Nxf6+ Qxf6 18. exf4, black drops a pawn and the white
pawn mass will find a means to open up the black king, white would be quite
happy to lose a pawn or 2 in the process.
(B). Or if, 16. g4 fxg3 17. Nxg3 Nxg3 18. Bxg3, white is ready to switch the
heavy pieces over to the kingside, in particular pushing, pawn h5, black will
reply, pawn g5, and then white responds with, pawn f4.
(C). Or if, 16. g4 fxg3 17. Nxg3 Nf6 18. h5, white is offering a pawn to
shatter the black defences, black will probably play, 18. ... g5, but again
white can slowly organise, pawn f4, breaking up the black kingside defence.
(D). Or if, 16. g4 d5 17. gxh5 dxe4 18. hxg6+, the black kingside is opening
up, not nice, black must keep the king's knight for defensive fighting.
By retreating the white e4 knight and thus avoiding opening up the position a
subtle psychological signal has been sent across the board.
On move 4 white came out wielding his h-pawn in, "Mad-Axeman Mode", but since
it failed to make contact there has been little aggressive intent, though
opportunities to create imbalances have been available.
Perhaps white is just content to sit and hold the position, such lack of
ambition is risky strategy.
Fail to place pressure on the opponent and they will slowly but surely make
gains in whatever region of the board takes their fancy.
Black started the game with the intention to fight in the kingside / centre,
but flexibility of thinking is an asset, dogma is fine in politics but a severe
handicap in chess strategy.
||
16. ... a5
| Well, the kingside is holding itself together, black is waiting for white to
start the fisticuffs over there and respond accordingly.
Similarly, white has more space in the centre, it is for white to act there and
black to respond.
But what can black do here if the opponent keeps refusing to do something?
Simple, take a little space on the queenside, disrupt whatever coordination
white might have there, and if still white persists in avoiding kingside /
centre activity, then the fight must be taken over to the queenside, despite
initial intentions.
||
17. c3
| A tripler.
Firstly, the d4 pawn is given another support.
Secondly, should the black queen ever return to f6, then all ideas of a mate on
the h8 - a1 diagonal should be ruled out.
Thirdly, when a unit moves it vacates a square for someone else.
All very good from the defensive perspective, but surely an appropriate
Fischerism contains an important message?
"In chess it is important to know when to punch and when to duck."
This is a clear warning to be aware that while you are merrily throwing
everything at the opponent, they might have some threats on your own king which
are of greater importance, and so taking a little time to strengthen the
defences will save much heartache.
Excellent advice, but here white seems to be ducking on the kingside, ducking
in the centre, and is now settling down to ducking on the queenside.
||
17. ... a4
18. Na1
| This knight will re-activate itself with, Nc2, fighting for some dark squares
in front of the white king.
||
18. ... e5
| Black places some tension into the centre, the tactics do not work just yet,
the opposing queens x-raying each other up the e-file prevent black from
snatching a pawn on d4.
||
19. d5
| Not much of a surprise, white defuses the central tension.
||
19. ... Na5
| A different plan of queenside activity was to play, Na7, to follow up with
Rab8, then push on with, pawn b5, nothing concrete yet, but with white
seemingly choosing passivity at each twist and turn, something should come to
mind once the queenside pawns make contact.
||
20. Bd3 c5
| Offering white the opportunity to create some imbalance with, dxc6, giving
black 3 pawn islands.
If white declines to capture en passant, then black will have 3 pawns to throw
at the white king, so black seems to be in a favourable situation whichever
choice white makes.
||
21. Bb1
| Another retreat.
Instead, 21. dxc6 bxc6, gives black mobile centre / queenside pawns plus a
semi-open b-file.
||
21. ... b5
| With white showing no intentions of playing kingside / centre, black just
transfers the fight to the queenside.
Under normal conditions playing across the entire width of the board would be a
little greedy, but white is insisting in letting the tension remain
undisturbed.
||
22. Nc2
| Black to play, for better or worse, decides to provoke white into some sort
of action.
||
22. ... Qxh4
| This pawn has been en prise for no less than 11 moves, so why is black
snatching at the bait now?
The answer is completely psychological, black is calling the white bluff.
||
23. Ne4
| Perhaps white was fearing black, 23. ... Ng3, forcing white to capture, 24.
Bxg3 Qxg3, but now, 25. Ne4, snares the greedy black queen.
Instead trying for tactics does not harm black, some ideas run:
(A). If, 23. Bxf4 Nxf4 24. Rxh4 Nxe2+ 25. Kd2 Ng3, black has won a piece for a
pawn.
(B). Or if, 23. Bxf4 Nxf4 24. exf4 Qxf4+ 25. Ne3 Nc4, white is beginning to
become tied up.
(C). Or if, 23. Bxf4 Nxf4 24. exf4 Qxf4+ 25. Rd2 Nc4, white is losing an
exchange.
(D). Or if, 23. Bxf4 Nxf4 24. exf4 Qxf4+ 25. Qd2 Qxd2+, queens are off and
black seems to have snatched a safe pawn.
||
23. ... Qe7
24. Ne1
| Perhaps played to open up an attack for the skulking white b1 bishop?
However on e1 this knight offers no defensive support to the queenside, in
particular the a3 square has just become significantly weaker.
||
24. ... Nc4
| With a tempo-gaining attack on the white e3 pawn, surely now white is going
to be forced into making some sort of a capture on f4?
||
25. Bg1
| A doubler.
Firstly, the e3 pawn is again sufficiently protected.
Secondly, the sulking / skulking white h1 rook is finally given a little
activity up the h-file, there might be some tricks involving the x-ray attack
from the white b1 bishop through 2 units onto the black h7 king, nothing
immediate yet, but ignore x-ray attacks at your peril.
||
25. ... Bf5
| That should prevent any trickies up the b1 - h7 diagonal.
||
26. Rxh5
| So the, "Mad-Axeman", Strategy as shown in the illustrative games for move 4,
that is of luring a black knight onto the h5 square, in order to sacrifice an
exchange, finally comes to pass.
Unfortunately, the black defences are now well-organised and the white forces
in no position to blitzkrieg the black position.
This smacks of desperation, sure, there are now weaknesses around the black
king, but plenty of defenders available to repulse any optimistic white
invaders thinking of advancing further than the 4th rank.
||
26. ... gxh5
27. exf4 Kh8
| Not strictly necessary, but black simply wanted to avoid receiving an awkward
check as the assault against the white queenside proceeded.
||
28. Bd3
| Intending to eliminate the dangerous black c4 knight, fine, but having given
up an exchange on the black h5 knight, surely white should be flailing around
on the kingside, however futile it might seem?
So maybe, 27. g4, and await the black response, some activity is always better
than none.
If you do not put pressure on the position, then how do you expect cracks to
appear?
||
28. ... a3
| Black does not fear losing a pawn due to successive trades on c4, it is of
greater importance to find queenside entry-routes for the heavy pieces.
||
29. fxe5
| Black was making queenside gains no matter what white does.
Instead, 29. b3 Nb2 30. Rd2 exf4, black threatens creating a strong h8 - a1
long diagonal battery with, Qe5, then eliminate the white e4 knight,
undermining the weak white c3 pawn, mating ideas up the long diagonal should
soon come to mind.
||
29. ... axb2+
| Open lines are arising, the only real problem confronting black was
time-shortage, it would be very tempting to search for a quick killer-blow.
Fine if it is both there and found, but what if all is there is material-losing
combinations which fail to force mate?
So black quickly resolved not to bother searching for the show-off ideas, but
focused only on keeping control of the position while slowly trying to increase
the pressure.
Yes, a neat win in just another 5 moves would be great, but tournament tables
are happy to report 0-1 whether the game is finished quickly or required a
patiently controlled drawn-out ending.
||
30. Kb1
| Black to play has both a materially and positionally won game.
Temptations to think one is, "Tal-Reincarnate", are ever-present.
So get crunching out the tactics beginning with, 30. ... Rxa2, with heavy piece
invasion up the a-file to follow.
||
30. ... Qxe5
| So how did the analytical search for the proposed mating attack beginning
with, 30. ... Rxa2, conclude?
If you failed to find the winning lines do not worry, they are probably not
there.
Sure, if white snatches with, 31. Kxa2, there are some interesting variations
involving, Qa2+.
But what happens if white ignores the a2 rook, and instead plays, 31. Bxc4,
undermining the black b2 pawn as well as eliminating a strong attacking unit?
In the game black only glanced at, 30. ... Rxa2, listed the white candidate
replies, and as soon as, 31. Bxc4, was on the agenda, black gave up the whole
mating chase idea, instead preferring to stabilise the centre.
||
31. Bxc4
| When under pressure eliminate any strong attacking units in the vicinity of
your king, fine, but not so useful when behind in material, exchanges only
assist black to reach a strongly favourable ending.
||
31. ... bxc4
32. Qxc4 Qxc3
| Due to the pin on the white e4 knight black is ultimately able to retain the
strong b2 pawn.
||
33. Qxc3
| Attempting to keep queens on allows black to use the previously unused
tactic.
Instead, 33. Qe2 Rxa2 34. Kxa2 Ra8+ 35. Kb1 Ra1+ mate.
||
33. ... Bxc3
34. Nc2
|The pin on the white e4 knight is broken, this piece is now free to move.
Backward knight captures are reputed to be the simple tactic most commonly
overlooked, will black notice this new attack on the c3 bishop?
||
34. ... Bxe4
| Black would probably have made this move irrespective of the unprotected
status of the c3 bishop.
An exchange and pawn up means thoughts of weaving mating nets are replaced with
trading material to convert the material advantage in a winning endgame.
||
35. fxe4 Rae8
| The white e4 pawn is doomed, the extra exchange is at last about to count.
||
36. Rd3
| A final roll of the dice.
The black c3 bishop is again targeted, white knows this is hopeless but demands
black, in some time-shortage, find the right response.
||
36. ... Rf1+
White resigns, 0-1
| The white knight on c2 creates a back-rank mating pattern.
If, 37. Ne1 Rxe1+ 38. Kc2 Rc1+ 39. Kb3 b1=Q+ 40. Kc4 Qb4+ mate.
||
* * *
## Unannotated Game.
White: R. Clegg, 151 (ECF), 1741.
Black: P. Benson, 162 (ECF), 1845.
Event: Paignton Rowena Bruce Challengers.
Result: 0-1 in 36 moves.
Opening: London System versus Dutch Defence, A80.
1. d4 f5
2. Bf4 Nf6
3. e3 g6
4. h4 h6
5. Qf3 d6
6. Bc4 e6
7. Ne2 Nh5
8. Nd2 Qf6
9. Nc3 Bg7
10. O-O-O O-O
11. Bh2 Kh7
12. Qe2 Nc6
13. f3 f4
14. Nb3 Bd7
15. Ne4 Qe7
16. Nf2 a5
17. c3 a4
18. Na1 e5
19. d5 Na5
20. Bd3 c5
21. Bb1 b5
22. Nc2 Qxh4
23. Ne4 Qe7
24. Ne1 Nc4
25. Bg1 Bf5
26. Rxh5 gxh5
27. exf4 Kh8
28. Bd3 a3
29. fxe5 axb2+
30. Kb1 Qxe5
31. Bxc4 bxc4
32. Qxc4 Qxc3
33. Qxc3 Bxc3
34. Nc2 Bxe4
35. fxe4 Rae8
36. Rd3 Rf1+
White resigns, 0-1
* * *
