Skype coaching session, 26 August 2018.
The game discussed (35 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.
* * *
White: I. Dal (Turkey), 1621.
Black: P. Benson (Great Britain) 1928.
Event: IBCA World Team Championship, Sofia 2018.
Result: 0-1 in 35 moves.
Opening: Queen's Pawn, A41, transposing into Dutch Defence, Staunton Gambit,
A80.
1. d4 d6
| Preparation strongly suggested that, 1. ... f5, would receive, 2. e4, the
Staunton Gambit.
Black isn't worried about this as such, every player of the Dutch Defence must
be ready for a host of offbeat 2nd moves, but simply wished to avoid letting
the opponent have it their way. ||
2. h3
| An unusual choice.
White tends to play Queen's Pawn systems involving, 2. Nf3, against which black
was thinking about, 2. ... f5, getting a Dutch without white having the
Staunton Gambit.
Perhaps white is fearing a specially cooked-up line of, 2. Nf3 Bg4, and throws
in a quiet move which does no harm to his usual Queen's Pawn set-ups?
Such is the psychological sparring of IBCA team chess. ||
2. ... f5
| Does something about Leopards and Spots come to mind?
Old habits die hard, the Dutch Defence has been in the repertoire since 1975,
other systems must be available one supposes. ||
3. e4
| White insists it will be a Staunton Gambit after all.
Fine, but the inclusions of, pawn h3, and, pawn d6, create important
differences to all lines.
Instead, 3. g4, would be a full-blooded Korchnoi Attack, where white offers a
pawn for an open kingside, careful study of how to play this gambit is
recommended before giving it a go. ||
3. ... fxe4
4. Nc3 Nf6
5. Bg5
| White could have hybridised the Korchnoi Attack and Staunton Gambit with, 4.
g4, though perhaps, 4. ... h6, allows black to just about keep hold of the
snatched pawn. ||
5. ... Bf5
| There it is.
The inclusions of, pawn h3, and, pawn d6, permit black the opportunity to
defend the gambit-pawn before white can play the usual plan of, Bxf6, and then,
Nxe4, regaining the pawn with some imbalances thrown in for good luck.
If black can hang on to the pawn then the middlegame will be comfortable.
White must think in terms of busting the black centre, the pieces must be given
activity, and the sooner this happens the better. ||
6. g4 Bg6
7. Bg2 d5
8. Nge2
| Those present in the coaching session unanimously agreed white should combine
a central challenge of, pawn f3, with castling queenside.
Against, 8. f3, black would have captured, 8. ... exf3, leaving white to decide
which of 3 units should recapture.
This would leave black with a backward e-pawn on a semi-open file and probably
seeking some formation involving queenside castling, though quite how this
should be organised had not yet been thought out. ||
8. ... h6
| A difficult move to explain other than following an inner feeling on how
white would respond to this challenge.
Staunton Gambit strategy involves white playing, Bxf6, in order to undermine
the e4 gambit pawn, so black assesses this will be the most likely reply. ||
9. Bxf6
| A serious decision.
This trade usually allows white to regain the gambit pawn but here this cannot
be the case, which means white is losing control of the dark squares without
any compensation whatsoever.
Instead, 9. Bf4, seems sensible. ||
9. ... exf6
| Cleaning up the pawn formation is a positional reply, allowing black to
calmly complete development before deciding on how to take the fight to white.
Since black seems to have snaffled a safe pawn in the opening there is no need
to seek imbalances, so black keeps the option of castling on the same side as
white chooses.
Instead, 9. ... gxf6, is planning a later central break of, pawn e5, and this
would require black to have first organise castling queenside, with all the
risks that opposite-wing attacks bring. ||
10. a3
| Perhaps white fears, 10. ... Bb4, pinning the c3 knight?
This was not in mind, the dark square bishop is destined for unchallengeable
kingside duty from the d6 square. ||
10. ... c6
| Securing the d5 pawn while preventing an annoying white, Nb5, incursion,
after the f8 bishop lands on d6. ||
11. O-O Bd6
12. b4 a6
| Black is trying to keep everything under control across the complete width of
the board. ||
13. Na4 O-O
14. Nc5 Qe7
| Guards the weak b7 pawn and prevents the knight fork, Ne6.
This arrangement of white knight forcing the black queen into defensive duties
is temporary, black intends pushing the white c5 knight back and then getting
on with a kingside campaign starting with, pawn f5, which also allows the black
queen into the white kingside. ||
15. Qc1
| A double purpose move.
Firstly, the queen supports the only decent queenside break of, pawn c4.
Secondly, some attempt is being made to strengthen the dark squares on the
kingside. ||
15. ... b6
16. Nb3 f5
17. Nf4
| This knight sortie is only temporary, so perhaps starting queenside activity
with, 17. c4, should have been preferred. ||
17. ... Bh7
18. gxf5
| White had to decide which kingside pawn formation offers the best chances for
black to stray.
Doing nothing about the tension between the white g4 and black f5 pawns would
hand the decision over to black.
The choice is between an open kingside with, 18. ... fxg4, and invade on the
dark squares, probably more preferable than pushing past with, 18. ... f4,
aimed at squeezing white across the full width of the board.
Both options are good for black, it is only a question of preferring an open
fight over a long-term squeeze. ||
18. ... Bxf5
| Played with a specific light square idea in mind.
Instead, 18. ... Rxf5, offers good prospects as well, just sensible developing
moves such as, Nd7, Raf8, followed with the plan, Nf6 - Nh5 - Nf4, and then
throw in, Qh4 with, Rg5 and finally, Bf5, and something should give somewhere.
The game move of, 18. ... Bxf5, sets up a tactic against the white f4 knight
which must now retreat.
If it stands firm then black can win another pawn with, 19. ... Bxf4 20. Qxf4
Bxh3, unveiling an x-ray attack from the black f8 rook onto the white f4 queen,
this is comfortably winning for black.
Phase 1 of restricting white activity is over.
Phase 2 of completing development and transferring forces over to the kingside
begins. ||
19. Ne2 Qh4
20. Qe3 Nd7
| Instead, 20. ... Ra7, intending to double rooks on the f-file, to be followed
with transferring the b8 knight to the kingside was also good for black. ||
21. Nd2 Rae8
22. c4
| The mutual manoeuvring has resulted in white hitting first, though black does
not need to respond yet to any queenside pressure.
In fact, black might be able to afford the luxury of losing a pawn or two over
on the queenside as this would involve white not paying attention to the
kingside. ||
22. ... Bg4
| Oh dear.
Sometimes a position offers too much and the imagination begins to run riot.
The initial black plan was to lift the e8 rook with, Re6, swing it across with,
Rg6, and wait for the white response.
Pressure could then be further increased by throwing the d7 knight into the
attack with, Nf6 - Nh5 - Nf4, and surely something should happen.
Unfortunately when the time came to put the plan into operation black had a
glance around, just to check if there was, "Something Better", available.
Oh dear indeed. ||
23. Rfe1
| Once you start to lose the thread it is very difficult to get back on track.
Yes, mixing ideas is almost as easy as mixing metaphors.
Black is not only executing a poor plan but is forgetting an couple of
important points repeatedly emphasised during the coaching sessions:
Point 1: "When a unit moves it vacates a square for someone else."
Point 2: "Sometimes there can be more than one purpose for a move."
Here the white rook is not moving to protect the e2 knight, no, it is moving to
vacate the f1 square for someone else to occupy. ||
23. ... Bxe2
| The poor plan just keeps rolling.
Black should revert to the plan of pressuring the white h3 pawn with, 23. ...
Bf5, then lift with, Re6, and swing across with, Rg6. ||
24. Qxe2 Qf4
| And the supposed, "Master Plan", is completed.
Black has removed the defender of the f4 square to set up what is believed to
be an unstoppable invasion onto the h2 square.
Unfortunately this is not the case. ||
25. cxd5
| It appears white does not appreciate the dangers in the position.
It is absolutely essential to protect the h2 square with, 25. Nf1, and only
then think about queenside activity. ||
25. ... cxd5
| The English language seems not to have a word combining the often
too-closely-related concepts of, "Explanation", and, "Excuse".
You decide which term applies as black offers, "Reasons", for playing, 25. ...
cxd5, instead of the much stronger move order, 25. ... Qh2+ 26. Kf1 cxd5.
"Reasons": Black thought the white centralisation of, Rfe1, was designed to
recapture, Rxe2, giving sideways protection to the f2 pawn.
Black totally failed to consider the white retreat, Nf1, dramatically
strengthening the white kingside.
Overlooking, Nf1, came about as this knight has always been a, "Queenside
Player", shuffling around from, c3 - a4 - c5 - b3 - d2, and from d2 is
supporting the, pawn c5, break, so it had no right to interfere with the
kingside, right?
So, there you have the, "Reasons", for permitting white to have another chance
to strengthen the kingside.
After, 25. ... Qh2+ 26. Kf1, black should probably take no risks and play, 26.
... cxd5, and leave white to work out how to prevent threats of, Bg3, combined
with doubling rooks on the f-file. ||
26. Nf1
| And now black must work hard to make dark square strategy into a success.
Of course,black still stands better, the extra pawn, a mobile bishop, but if
rooks and queens are traded off there is a potentially drawn opposite bishop
ending on the horizon.
Slipping back into, "Strategic-Mode", by safeguarding the queenside pawns,
challenging for control of the fully open c-file, seeking pressure on the
isolated white d4 pawn, must be rejected if black is thinking of playing for a
win.
So this game must be sorted out on the kingside, black gets back into,
"Tactical-Mode". ||
26. ... Nf6
27. Ra2
| White provides an extra defence to the f2 pawn, which means, Qxa6, is up for
consideration.
In the game it is black to play and make a serious decision: Keep everything
under control or throw caution to the wind and commit to playing for a win.
Clue: In an opposite colour bishop middlegame whoever is attacking is
effectively a piece up, focus on dark square strategy. ||
27. ... e3
| Not quite, "Punching The Chaos Button", but nevertheless setting off tactics
based on judgement of what might happen in an open position rather than
brute-force calculation.
The idea behind this move is to create a means to eliminate that annoying white
f1 knight, as if that piece goes the white kingside will be very vulnerable
again on the dark squares. ||
28. fxe3
| White has been handed a real stinker of a decision.
The position is about to open up no matter what, it is black who is much more
active, which means white must filter out the dangerous lines, and this all
takes precious time.
A sample of what was available if the time could be invested:
(A). If, 28. f3 Qxd4, black has won another pawn, that black pair of
centre-file passers are going to bury white quite quickly.
(B). Or if, 28. Qxa6 fxe2+ 29. Rxf2 Qxd4 30. Rxe8 Nxe8, and white has no means
to defend the pinned and doubly-attacked f2 rook, black would be winning.
(C). Or if, 28. Qxa6 fxe2+ 29. Rxf2 Qxd4 30. Ree2 Nh5 31. Red2 Qa1, and the
position is rich in possibilities for both sides, too many variations to try to
offer here, just accept this one could lead to any of 3 results.
(D). Or if, 28. Nxe3 (successful deflection) Qh2+ 29. Kf1 Ne4 30. Nxd5 (greedy)
Ng3+ mate, would be amusing as it also wins the white queen.
(E). Or if, 28. Nxe3 Qh2+ 29. Kf1 Ne4 30. Bxe4 Rxe4, threatening, Qh1+ mate,
31. f3 Qxh3+ 32. Kg1 Rxf3, with threats such as, Rexe3, and, Rg3+, very painful
to examine.
(F). Or if, 28. Nxe3 Qh2+ 29. Kf1 Ne4 30. Bxe4 Rxe4 31. f3 Qxh3+ 32. Kf2 Qg3+
33. Kf1 Rxf3+, costs white the queen for the black rook, with surely worse to
follow.
Now can anyone remember that coaching session maxim: "When a unit moves it
vacates a square for someone else."
Here's another maxim to consider: "When a unit moves the network of, "Defences
And Offences", must be re-assessed."
Just what defences altered when white captured, 28. fxe3, and is there an
opportunity to exploit a newly-created weakness? ||
28. ... Qg5
29. Kh1
| Wishing to escape the black queen pin on the g2 bishop is very
understandable.
Unfortunately on the h1 corner square one feels there could be a possibility of
the king having pushed himself into a mating net on the dark squares.
Paraphrasing another coaching session maxim: "Sometimes one has a king too
many", implying awkwardly pieces can try to exchange themselves off to escape
difficulty or danger, this luxury is however not available for kings.
Instead, 29. Rc1, seeking activity up the c-file, might allow, 29. ... Re4,
intending, 30. ... Rh4, and the pin on the white g2 bishop becomes problematic.
||
29. ... Kh8
| The black king similarly shuffles to the corner, this is anticipating both
the f6 knight and g5 queen moving away and leaving the d5 pawn undefended.
With the king now hiding on h8 there can never be any annoying, Bxd5+, captures
with check, meaning whatever tactics taking place around the white king will
not be interrupted. ||
30. Qxa6
| This type of move can come in for a lot of criticism.
However, take a look around and find an improvement.
Beware, black is hatching a really nasty threat which must be anticipated.
In the meantime white has grabbed a pawn and might consider swallowing another,
such a queenside majority would guarantee a winning ending. ||
30. ... Nh5
| The threat is hatched.
Actually, there are quite a few threats for white to avoid, hardly surprising
when you count up the number of active black pieces pointing into the white
kingside. ||
31. Qd3
| The position is rather tricky and white is not helped by being under time
pressure.
Some examples of the dangers just waiting to pounce:
(A). If, 31. Qe2 Rxf1+, and no matter which way white recaptures, with queen,
rook, or bishop, there follows a royal fork of, 32. ... Ng3+, and the white
queen falls off.
(B). Or if, 31. Ree2 Rxf1+ 32. Bxf1 Ng3+ 33. Kg1 Nxe2+ 34. Kh1 Qg1+ mate.
(C). Or if, 31. Ree2 Rxf1+ 32. Bxf1 Ng3+ 33. Kg1 Nxe2+ 34. Kf2 Qg3+ 35. Kxe2
Qh2+ 36. Ke1 Qxa2, black would be a rook ahead.
(D). Or if, 31. Raa1 Re6, intending, 32. Rg6, when white cannot defend the
doubly-attacked g2 bishop without falling into one of the tactics.
(E). Or if, 31. Qxb6, white will suffer the same problems as about to unfold in
the game.
In essence, without feeding this to Fritz, perhaps white is actually losing?
Maybe so or maybe not.
However, there is an idea which is so counter-intuitive that it might never get
past the Fritz quality-control department.
How about, 31. Kg1, deliberately walking into a pin up the g-file?
The advantage of this move is that on g1 the white king can no longer fall into
tactics involving, Ng3+.
Perhaps black can exploit the need for white to keep a knight on f1 to avoid
black invading with, Qg3, with Qh2+ mate to follow.
This means white cannot easily place a rook on the f-file aiming to provide a
flight route into the queenside for the king.
So after, Kg1, back to that original plan of, Re6, then, Rg6, and wait for
white to arrange a defence, or perhaps simply double rooks on the f-file and
wait.
There is also a slow re-arrangement for black, place the bishop on b8 with the
queen forming a battery onto h2 from the d6 square.
The threat then would be simply to double rooks on the f-file, capture with,
Rxf1+, and, Qh2+ mate.
These ideas might be rather long-winded, but how is white to counter the
various threats once the black forces re-arrange themselves? ||
31. ... Ng3+
32. Nxg3
| This loses material.
Perhaps more testing was, 32. Kg1, forcing black to find the following ideas:
(A). If, 32. Kg1 Nxf1 33. Rxf1 Rxf1+ 34. Qxf1 Qg3 35. Qf3 Qh2+ 36. Kf2 Rf8,
black wins the white queen for a rook.
(B). Or if, 32. Kg1 Nxf1 33. Rxf1 Rxf1+ 34. Qxf1 Qg3 35. Qd3 Rf8, and white
cannot stop, 36. ... Qh2+ mate.
(C). Or if, 32. Kg1 Nxf1 33. Rxf1 Rxf1+ 34. Kxf1 Rxe3 35. Qd2 Bg3 36. Ra1 Rf3+
37. Ke2 Rf2+, white is losing the queen for nothing.
(D). Or if, 32. Kg1 Nxf1 33. Rxf1 Rxf1+ 34. Kxf1 Rxe3 35. Qd2 Bg3 36. Ra1 Rf3+
37. Bxf3 Qxd2, and a mate on the dark squares must surely follow.
(E). Or if, 32. Kg1 Nxf1 33. Rxf1 Rxf1+ 34. Kxf1 Rxe3 35. Qd1 Bg3 36. Re2 Rc3
37. Rd2 Bf4, when any white d2 rook other than, Rc2, loses the queen to Rc1,
but if, 38. Rc2 Qf5+, picks of the hapless white c2 rook. ||
32. ... Qxg3
| The black queen threatens a mate on h2 and attacks the undefended white e1
rook. ||
33. Bxd5 Qxe1+
34. Kg2 Qg3+
35. Kh1 Rxe3
White lost on time, 0-1
* * *
White: I. Dal (Turkey), 1621.
Black: P. Benson (Great Britain) 1928.
Event: IBCA World Team Championship, Sofia 2018.
Result: 0-1 in 35 moves.
Opening: Queen's Pawn, A41, transposing into Dutch Defence, Staunton Gambit,
A80.
1. d4 d6
2. h3 f5
3. e4 fxe4
4. Nc3 Nf6
5. Bg5 Bf5
6. g4 Bg6
7. Bg2 d5
8. Nge2 h6
9. Bxf6 exf6
10. a3 c6
11. O-O Bd6
12. b4 a6
13. Na4 O-O
14. Nc5 Qe7
15. Qc1 b6
16. Nb3 f5
17. Nf4 Bh7
18. gxf5 Bxf5
19. Ne2 Qh4
20. Qe3 Nd7
21. Nd2 Rae8
22. c4 Bg4
23. Rfe1 Bxe2
24. Qxe2 Qf4
25. cxd5 cxd5
26. Nf1 Nf6
27. Ra2 e3
28. fxe3 Qg5
29. Kh1 Kh8
30. Qxa6 Nh5
31. Qd3 Ng3+
32. Nxg3 Qxg3
33. Bxd5 Qxe1+
34. Kg2 Qg3+
35. Kh1 Rxe3
White lost on time, 0-1
* * *