| Although I only got to play one strong player in this tournament, I still got to play several games that were instructive, at least for me. The time control was 30/90, SD/60. Kamberi, S. (2339) - Yeh, A. (1794) Dallas Chess Club Grand Prix #1 (1), April 14, 2001 1 Nf3 Nf6 2 c4 c5 3 Nc3 e6 4 g3 Nc6 This non-committal move leaves the eventual opening up in the air. Much more frequent is 4...b6, the so-called Hedgehog defense. About as common as 4...Nc6 is 4...d5 5 cd which leads to the Tarrasch defense after 5...ed 6 d4 or to the Keres-Parma variation of the Symmetrical English after 5...NXd5 6 Bg2 Nc6 7 O-O Be7 8 d4. 5 Bg2 a6 ?! The Korchnoi system, which is an obscure alternative to the almost habitually played 5...d5 6 cd which leads to either a Tarrasch defense or a Keres-Parma as outlined above. In my opinion, however, it is somewhat weaker than ...d5 as it is too early for Black to be neglecting development. 6 O-O d6 One of the things I love about playing 1 Nf3 is that most players below 2200 have no prepared defense to it and often end up adopting passive, weak setups. This is one such setup for a couple of reasons: (1)After 7 d4 cd 8 NXd4 Black's knight on c6 is threatened and Black will have to lose a tempo dealing with the threat. (2)The pawn on d6 ends up being weak in many variations. Korchnoi demonstrated some of the good points of his system in the game Uhlmann-Korchnoi, Havana 1969 which continued 6...Be7 7 d4 cd 8 NXd4 O-O 9 b3?! Qa5 10 Bb2 Rb8. This position has been reached in a few games and practice seems to demonstrate that White's advantage, if any, is very minute. Black can follow up with ...Rd8 and eventually play for either ...b5 or ...d5. But White should have played the stronger 9 Bf4! which would have led to White's advantage. 7 d4 cd 8 NXd4 Qb6 This move, which protects the knight on c6 and attacks the knight on d4 at the same time is a novelty, but still Black does not equalize. This position is not known to theory but I was able to draw some conclusions from my study of the very popular line 1 Nf3 Nf6 2 c4 c5 3 Nc3 Nc6 4 d4 cd 5 NXd4 e6 6 g3 Qb6 7 Nb3. In that line, theory considers that Black must play aggressively with something like 7...Ne5, 7...d5, or 7...Bb4 to have any chance to equalize. Passive ideas like 7...a6 followed by 8...d6 just don't cut it. Therefore, 9 Nb3 must favor White. Before this game, Black had always resorted to 8...Bd7 which is also favorable for White. The most famous example is the classic game Karpov-Schauwecker, Bath 1973 which continued 9 b3 Be7 10 a4 (the more common 10 Bb2 was slightly better for White in Tisdall-Z. Varga, Debrecen 1992 but Karpov is aiming to put the bishop on a3) O-O 11 Ba3 Qb8 12 Ra2 when the weakness of the d6-pawn told in White's favor. 9 Nb3 This is nice for White as pointed out above, but the GM staff of www.chessaid.com recommended instead 9 NXc6 bc 10 b4 d5 and now either 11 a3 or 11 Rb1 with the twin ideas of breaking Black's pawn structure up with e2-e4 and playing on the queenside with moves like Be3, Qd3, and Rfc1. They assessed the position after 10 b4 as offering White a small, but long-lasting advantage, which I would have to agree with. 9...Ne5 Most people probably would have played 9...Be7 so as to castle as quickly as possible, but I think Albert was beginning to regret his opening strategy and desperately looking for some way to justify it. After all, 9...Be7 allows White to play either 10 Bf4 or 10 Be3 to be followed by 11 Rc1 with nice queenside pressure while Black's position offers nothing at all to boast about. Therefore, Albert probably figured he might as well enter the following tactical meele revolving around the vulnerability of the c4-pawn. 10 Be3 Qc7 10...Qb4? is too bold. White just replies 11 Bd4! and then Black cannot take the pawn with his knight 11...NXc4?? because of 12 a3 trapping the queen. And if Black takes the pawn with his queen, 11...QXc4 then the simple 12 Rc1 threatening 13 Nd5 leaves Black with insoluble problems. 11 Nd2 ? This is a "make everything safe" move which is weak for several reasons: (1)It cuts off the retreat of my e3 bishop thus allowing Black's knights to effectively harass this piece. (2)In many variations the knight on b3 is an excellent contributor to White's queenside plans. It can help force through c4-c5 and in some variatons can help pressure Black's queenside by moving to a5. By comparison, on d2 the knight contributes relatively little. (3)11 Rc1! was a far stronger way to save the c4-pawn. If I had just understood this sort of position properly, I would have realized just on the basis of intuition that the c4-pawn was poisoned and that Black was in alot of trouble after 11 Rc1!. For example, (A)11...NXc4 12 Na4 Nd7 (12...NXe3? 13 RXc7 NXd1 14 Nb6 Rb8 15 RXd1 Bd7 16 BXb7 gives White a winning initiative while 12...d5 13 Nb6 Rb8 14 Qd3 allows White to recover the pawn with a nice advantage in development) 13 Qd4 d5 14 Nd2 b5 15 b3 and White's advantage is beyond dispute as the pawn is about to be recovered and Black will have to capture on a4 leaving White with pluses in both structure and development. (B)11...Be7 12 Na4 Nfd7 (12...O-O 13 Nb6 Rb8 14 c5 d5 15 Bf4 [threating e2-e4 which must be stopped] Nh5 16 Bd2 [again threatening e2-e4] Nf6 17 Ba5 Qc6 18 Qd2 gives White a strong initiative) 13 c5 d5 14 Nb6 NXb6 15 cb Qd8 16 Bd4 and White will break the position open with e2-e4 which will favor his better developed forces. (C)11...Bd7 12 Nd2 and we have transposed to the game but Black has lost the chance to play the line 11 Nd2? Nfg4! which allowed him to solve his problems. 11...Bd7 ?! This fails to take advantage of my mistake on the previous move. Of course, Black couldn't play 11...NXc4?? 12 Qa4+ b5 13 NXb5 which wins for White, but he did have 11...Nfg4! which snares the e3-bishop in the following lines: (A)12 Bg5 h6 13 Bf4 Ng6. (B)12 Bf4 Ng6. Note that in this line White can't play 13 Bg5?! h6 14 e4? because of 14...NXh2! with advantage to Black. (C)12 Bd4 Nc6. In all these lines Black's two bishops would adequately counterbalance White's lead in development and space advantage and the chances would be about equal. Another interesting try for Black (although not quite as good as 11...Nfg4! in my opinion) would be 11...Neg4!? 12 Bf4 Nh5 13 Bg5 h6 14 e4 hg, but I think that White would be very slightly better after 15 QXg4 as Black has slightly compromised his structure in this line. 12 Rc1 Albert was getting ready to play ...Bd7-c6 which would have solved one of his biggest positional problems-the disparity between the strength of our light-squared bishops. Thus, this move which neutralizes the idea because 12...Bc6 could be met advantageously by 13 Nd5!. 12...Bc6 Anyways! Around here I started to think that maybe Albert had some philosophical objection to castling! Just about everyone else would have played 12...Be7, but this would not have solved Black's problems either because then White would introduce his queen into the attack with 13 Qb3! (the bright side of the Nd2 maneuver). Then Black would be stuck for a good way to defend his b7-pawn because on 13...Bc6 there comes again 14 Nd5! with advantage to White while 13...Rb8? just drops an exchange after 14 Bb6! Qc8 15 Ba7. The queen-rook opposition also proves valuable for White in some other variations. For example, 12...Nfg4 13 Bd4 Nc6 14 Nd5! Qb8 15 Nb6! NXd4 16 NXa8 QXa8 17 e3 and White wins the exchange for a pawn. Or 12...Neg4 13 Bd4 e5 14 Nd5! NXd5 15 cd Qd8 16 Bc3 and White's lead in development and queenside play give him better chances. 13 Nd5 ! I'm not sure if Albert just missed this thematic stroke or if he saw it but thought that the complications would work out OK for him. 13 ...ed 14 cd NXd5 15 BXd5 Qa5 ? This leads to a hopeless position. Instead, it was high time to complete development with 15...Be7!. Then the direct attempt to win with 16 BXc6+?! bc 17 Qa4 allows 17...Qd7! followed by 18...c5 and Black holds on. Instead White should just play 16 Qb3 O-O 17 Ne4 with better chances due to Black's weak d-pawn. 16 BXc6+ bc Nor does 16...NXc6 save Black as after 17 Nc4! Black can't play 17...QXa2?? because of 18 Qd5! threatening a deadly discovered check as well as the slow kill Rc1-c3-a3. And if 17...Qc7 18 Qd5 (Black's ...Qc7-a5-c7 has lost two tempi and this proves fatal) Be7 19 Rfd1 O-O 20 Bb6 Qb8 21 a3 White wins a pawn and remains with the better position as well. 17 Nb3 ? This allows Black to struggle on in a bad position. Instead 17 Nc4! would have landed a mortal blow, for after 17...NXc4 18 RXc4 Be7 (17...c5 18 Re4+! and the Black king must walk to its doom as 18...Be7?? loses to 19 QXd6 or 17...QXa2 18 Qc2! and the Black king will soon perish as 18...Be7 loses after 19 Ra4 Qd5 20 Rd1 Qb5 21 Rb4!) 19 RXc6 Black loses a pawn since he could not dare to contemplate 19...QXa2? 20 Rc7 which leads to a killing initiative for White. The reason I played the weaker 17 Nb3? was that I was entranced by the pretty queen trap which now occurs. 17...QXa2 ?? A horrible blunder. 17...Qa4 should have been played when Black can continue to fight, albeit from an unpleasant position. 18 Ra1 And now Albert saw that 18...QXb2 19 Bd4 wins his queen, so ... Black Resigned. In round 2 I quickly defeated A. Chua. That put me up against Turkmenistan's top player, GM Babakuli Annakov: Kamberi, S. (2339) - GM Annakov, B. (2556) Dallas Chess Club Grand Prix #1 (3), April 14, 2001 1 Nf3 d5 2 c4 e6 3 d4 The most accurate. 3 g3 is weaker because of 3...dc! and Black gets a very easy game as pointed out by Bob Ciaffone in Michigan Chess a few years ago. 3...c5 Annakov likes and often plays the Tarrasch defense. The alternatives, in order of importance are: (A)3...Nf6 which I used to play myself 5 or 6 years ago. It leads to a variety of main lines in the Queen's Gambit Declined. (B)3...c6 steering the game towards the Semi-Slav defense. (C)3...dc bringing about a Queen's Gambit Accepted. A long time ago, the QGA was considered somewhat inferior for Black, but today it is considered one of the best openings to play if Black wants to make a solid draw. (D)3...f5 setting up a Stonewall Dutch formation. The Texas FM, Keith Hayward, likes to play this way. 4 cd By far the most common, but White also keeps a slight pull after 4 e3 Nc6 5 Nc3 Nf6 6 a3, intending to capture on c5 and expand on the queenside with b2-b4. A slightly inaccurate move is 4 Nc3 since after 4...cd (Black usually just plays 4...Nc6 transposing to normal Tarrasch lines but 4...cd is even stronger) 5 NXd4 dc! Black liquifies the center and easily gets an equal game. It should be noted that 5...dc! is stronger than Schiller's recommendation 5...e5 6 Ndb5 d4 (certainly not 6...a6? 7 Qa4! Bd7 8 cd when White was much better in Bernstein-Perlis, St. Petersburg 1909) 7 Nd5 Na6 because after 8 e4! (Schiller mentions this but dismisses it without analyzing it) White gets the better of it, e.g. 8...Nf6 9 Qa4 Bd7 10 Bg5 Be7 11 BXf6 gf 12 b4 and White is better according to an old analysis by Collijn. 4...ed 5 Nc3 Nc6 This is considered more accurate than 5...Nf6 which allows 6 Bg5 Be6 7 BXf6 QXf6 8 e4 de 9 Bb5+ Bd7 10 NXe4 Qb6 11 BXd7+ NXd7 12 O-O when Black was in trouble in Alekhine-Kusman, New York 1924. But in my opinion this game is not totally convincing. For example, Black could have played 9...Nc6! 10 NXe4 (not 10 Ne5? O-O-O! when both 11 NXc6 bc 12 BXc6 RXd4 and 11 NXe4 Qf4 12 BXc6 RXd4! 13 Nd3 Qc7 look pretty dismal for White) Qf4 when 11 NXc5 BXc5 12 BXc6+ bc 13 dc Rd8 would offer him quite good compensation for a pawn. Another reason to think that theory's disapproval of 5...Nf6 might not be justified is the fact that in practice White usually meets 5...Nf6 with 6 g3 transposing to normal lines. 6 g3 By far the most common in practice and the only move to really threaten Black. My old teacher, FM Fred Lindsay liked to play 6 dc here, but in my opinion 6...d4 7 Na4 BXc5 8 NXc5 Qa5+ followed by 9...QXc5 is just too drawish. Two other toothless lines that are sometimes played are Burn's variation 6 Bg5 Be7 7 BXe7 NgXe7 and 6 e3 Nf6. 6...Nf6 7 Bg2 Be7 8 O-O O-O 9 dc There's alot of theory on this move, but the main move is still considered 9 Bg5. Then Black has: (A)9...h6?! (very rare, but it was once played by Ivanchuk so it deserves examination) 10 BXf6 BXf6 11 dc BXc3 (11...Be6 12 Rc1?! Qa5 13 a3 QXc5 14 Ne4 Qe7 15 NXf6+ QXf6 16 Qd2 led to equal play in U. Andersson-Dankert, Munich 1979 but 12 Qd2! instead would have given White the better chances, e.g. 12...Qe7 13 NXd5 BXd5 14 QXd5 BXb2 [14...QXe2 15 Rab1! Rfe8 16 Qb3 and Black does not have full compensation for the pawn] 15 Rab1 Ba3 16 Qb3 QXc5 17 QXb7 Nb4 18 Nd2 Rab8 [18...NXa2? 19 Qa6 wins the exchange because if Black tries to save it with 19...Rb8 20 Ra1 Rb2 21 Nc4 wins a piece for White and 19...Nc3 20 BXa8 NXb1 21 NXb1 also leaves Black a piece down] 19 Nb3 Qb6 [19...RXb7 20 NXc5 Rc7 21 Na4 and Black lacks compensation because aggressive moves like 21...Rc2? 22 Rb3 RXa2 23 Nc3 and 21...NXa2? 22 Ra1 Rc2 23 Bd5 Nb4 24 Bb3 Bb2 25 Rab1 just lose more material] 20 QXb6 RXb6 21 Na5 Ra6 22 Nc4 NXa2 23 NXa3 RXa3 24 Ra1 and the pin gives White quite good winning chances.) 12 bc Be6 13 Nd4 Qa5 14 NXe6 fe 15 c4 QXc5?! [15...dc would result in a lesser disadvantage but 16 BXc6 bc 17 Qd4 c3 18 Rfc1 would still leave White better] 16 cd Rad8 17 Qc1 QXc1 18 RfXc1 ed 19 Rab1 and White had a much better ending in Vri-Salvi, 1990. (B)9...Be6 (this used to be thought adequate but is now rarely played because White gets a better ending virtually by force) 10 dc BXc5 11 BXf6 QXf6 12 NXd5 QXb2 13 Nc7 Rad8 14 Qc1 and practice has shown that White's structural advantage gives him some winning chances in this ending. (C)9...c4 10 Ne5 Be6 and now: (C1)11 NXc6 (this is the main line) bc 12 b3 Qa5 13 Qc2! (13 Na4 is frequently played but lets Black have it much easier, e.g. 13...Rab8 14 e3 [14 bc dc {better than 14...Rb4?! 15 cd cd 16 Nc5 BXc5 17 Bd2! with better chances for White} 15 Bd2 Bb4 16 Bf4 Rbd8 17 a3 Bc3 18 NXc3 QXc3 was easy for Black in Levitt-Motwani, Hafnarfirdi 1992] Bf5 15 BXf6 BXf6 16 Nc5 Be7 17 bc? [17 Qf3 =, Pajeken-Bach, Hamburg 2001] BXc5 18 dc dc 19 e4 Be6 20 Qd6 Rfd8! and Black even got the better of it in Jasnikowski-Michaelsen, British League 1995.) Rfd8 (Black's standard plan here is to put the rooks on d8 and c8 and play for the ...c5 break but with accurate play White can get better chances) 14 e3 Rac8 15 bc dc 16 Ne4 Qf5 and now 17 Rab1 with the idea of 17...c5 18 Rb5 a6 19 Ra5 should leave White better because Black is going to lose some material, but the size of White's advantage is open to some debate since the passed pawn on c4 always gives Black some counterchances. (C2)11 f4 (In this line Black does not get quite so much activity as above and passive play would quickly get Black in trouble after simple moves like 12 e3 and 13 Qf3.) and now: (C21)11...Qb6? (this is bad, but must be met precisely) 12 f5! NXe5 (after 12...NXd4 13 Be3 Bc5 14 Na4 NXe2+ 15 Kh1! Black loses material) 13 fe fe 14 Na4 and White wins a piece for two pawns. (C22)11...NXe5 12 fe! (and not 12 de?! d4! when Black gets quite good counterplay, Azmaiparashvili-Lputian, Soviet Union 1980) Ng4 (12...Ne4 13 BXe7 NXc3 14 bc QXe7 15 e4 allowed White to dominate the center in Kasparov-Hjorth, 1980) 13 BXe7 QXe7 14 Qd2 Rad8 (14...Qd7? 15 h3 Nh6 was played against me in Kamberi-Jenson, Stillwater North American Open 2000 but is totally inadequate. Had I played 16 g4 Rad8 17 Rad1 followed by 18 e4 Black would have been in a very difficult situation as White would totally control the center and after an exchange on e4 White's knight would be threatening to go to all sorts of nasty squares.) 15 h3 Nh6 16 g4 Kh8 (to free the g8-square for the knight) 17 e4 de (Bellon Lopez-Fernandez Garcia, 1981) 18 NXe4 and White has a lesser version of the advantage I could have had in the Jenson game (Black has not wasted a tempo on ...Qd7) but the advantage is still there. (C23)11...Ng4! (the main line, and Black's best chance in my opinion) 12 NXg4 (12 f5 has led to a forced draw many times after 12...NcXe5 13 BXe7 QXe7 14 fe fe 15 de Qc5+ 16 Kh1 RXf1+ 17 QXf1 Nf2+) BXg4 13 BXd5 BXg5 14 fg QXg5 15 Rf4! Be6! (The most accurate. 15...Rad8?! 16 Qd2 h5 17 e4 Be6 18 Raf1 Qe7 19 a3 g6 20 Qf2 left White with a larger advantage due to control of the f-file and center in Vennix-De Jong, correspondence 1991) 16 Bg2 (16 e4?! as in the previous example would now be effectively met by 16...Nb4) Rad8 17 Kh1! (making the king safer and freeing the g1-square for the queen) and White was a tiny bit better in Salov-Lputian, 1986. (D)9...cd (This has become the main line. In 1998, Schiller wrote a monogrpah, Complete Defense to Queen Pawn Openings, where he recommends this move.) 10 NXd4 h6 11 Be3 and now: (D1)11...Re8 (Schiller's recommendation and the most commonly met move in practice. At first I thought it was bad, but now after looking at some analysis by FM Rajlich it seems to hold up.) 12 Qa4 (The most common move is 12 Rc1, which is a good move I played myself against NM Gallagher at the 1999 Dallas Open, but 12 Rc1 just gives White a small edge. Other options if White is content with just being a little bit better are 12 Qc2 and 12 Qb3. 12 Qa4 is sharper than these moves, and if Black is not familiar with the correct defense he could get blown off the board.) Bd7 (12...Na5?! 13 NXd5 NXd5 14 BXd5 Bd7 is bad because it transposes to an inferior variation for Black below while 12...Ne5?! 13 NXd5 NXd5 14 BXd5 Bh3 doesn't help Black because of 15 BXb7! Rb8 16 Bg2 BXg2 17 KXg2 RXb2 18 Rab1 and Black is a pawn down for nothing) 13 NXd5 (the loose rook on e8 makes this possible) NXd5 14 BXd5 Na5?! (According to Schiller this gives Black great compensation for the pawn and refutes White's play but he didn't consider the following powerful novelty. The correct defense for Black is 14...Nb4! 15 Qb3 NXd5 16 QXd5 Bh3 17 QXd8 RaXd8 18 Rfd1 Bf6 19 Rd2 Bg4 with sufficient compensation for the pawn. In fairness to Schiller, however, I believe he has now corrected this error in his recently released CD on the Tarrasch.) 15 Nb5!! Rf8 ("Taking back" the ill-advised rook move. The point of White's play is revealed after 15...a6? 16 Qf4! ab [16...BXb5? is even worse since Black can't count on the queen to guard the a5-knight after 17 QXf7+ Kh8 {17...Kh7 18 Be4+ Kh8 19 Qg6 Kg8 20 Rfd1 with an attack that will wipe Black off the board}18 BXh6! Rg8 19 Bd2] 17 QXf7+ Kh8 18 BXh6 Rg8 19 Rfd1 [there is no longer any knockout blow so White just transitions to a won ending] gh 20 QXg8+ QXg8 21 BXg8 Bc6 22 Bd5 Bf6 23 Rab1 and with a rook and three pawns for two pieces White is winning. 15...Bf6 would be a natural response which should be met with 16 Qb4!. Then if Black tries to "safely" regain his pawn with 16...BXb5?! 17 QXb5 a6 18 Qd3 BXb2 19 Rab1 Qf6 there comes the surprise 20 BXh6! gh 21 RXb2! QXb2 22 Qg6+ Qg7 23 BXf7+ Kf8 24 BXe8 RXe8 25 Qf5+ Kg8 26 QXa5 RXe2 27 Rd1 and Black's position has fallen to pieces. In this last line, Black could try the exchange sac 16...RXe3! 17 fe Qb6 which requires rather careful handling from White. I think a good forcing line against it is 18 RXf6! [a counter exchange-sac!] gf 19 Qe7 Be6 [of course not 19...BXb5?? 20 BXf7+ Kg7 21 Be6+ Kh8 22 Bf5 Kg8 23 Bh7+ Kh8 24 Bg6 and Black must throw his queen overboard to avert mate] 20 BXe6 QXe3+ 21 Kf1 QXe6 22 QXe6 fe 23 Rc1 Nc6 24 Nc7 Rd8 25 NXe6 Rd2 26 Rb1! when remarkably Black lacks compensation for his pawn. There is nothing to stop White from playing Ke1 and Kd1 chasing the Black rook off the seventh.) 16 b4! Nc6 17 Rad1 BXb4 18 NXa7! Be7 (18...Qe7 19 Rb1 doesn't help Black) 19 Qb3 and the knight escapes leaving White with some of his extra loot. (D2)11...Bg4 and now White can get a slight pull with either 12 Qa4 Na5 (but not 12...Qd7? 13 BXd5! which is very good for White) 13 Rad1 Nc4 14 Bc1 (Kasparov-Palatnik, 1981) or 12 h3 Be6 13 Rc1 Qd7 14 Kh2 (Kamberi-Dokoutchaev, Dallas Action 2000). In conclusion, 9 Bg5 seems to give White the better chances, but there's alot of scope here for further ideas and analysis. And I can't really say that 9 Bg5 is any better than 9 dc-practice has shown that White retains a slight pull in both lines. 9...BXc5 By far the most common reply, but the move 9...d4 still has its supporters. In my opinion, after 9...d4 White keeps somewhat better chances with 10 Na4 Bf5 11 Bf4 Be4 12 Rc1 Qd5 13 Qb3. 10 Bg5 d4 11 BXf6 QXf6 12 Nd5 Qd6 A rare alternative to the usual 12...Qd8, but it has been played by some decent players, including Chandler and Nikitin. 13 Nd2 Bf5 Annakov's patent-most games in this relatively unexplored line have continued 13...Be6 when White should not play 14 Ne4? QXd5 15 Nf6+ gf 16 BXd5 BXd5 since Black's three pieces would be more valuable than the queen. Instead, 13...Be6 should be met by 14 Nf4 when White keeps some pull, Azmaiparashvili-Lautier, Manila 1992. 14 Nb3 A difficult move to meet, but with an accurate reply Black should get equality. Somewhat better would have been the more flexible 14 Rc1. Not only does this retain control of the e4 square thus preventing ...Rae8 followed by ...Be4 but it also reserves more options for the knight on d2. 14...b6 ? This was a difficult situation for Black because all his most obvious moves are bad. For instance, this 14...b6? could have been very strongly met by 15 e3! when Black just loses the pawn on d4 because 15...de? would just make matters even worse after 16 NXe3 and the loose pieces on c6 and f5 are too much for Black to cope with. And Black's next most obvious move 14...Rac8? is bad because of 15 Rc1! b6 16 e3! when Black must lose a pawn because 16...de (the trick 16...Be6 17 ed Ba3!? can be refuted by 18 RXc6! RXc6 19 Nf4 BXb2 20 d5 BXd5 21 BXd5 Rd8 22 Qe2) 17 fe threatens both the bishop on f5 and to take on c5 and play Nf6+ winning the queen (thus Black would have nothing better than to move the queen to e6 or e5 and sacrifice the pawn on c5). Also 14...Rfe8? is silly because of 15 NXc5 QXc5 16 Nc7 winning an exchange. Finally, 14...Rad8 allows White to retain a modest pull after 15 Rc1 b6 16 a3, threatening to take on c5 and play b2-b4. To get out of this situation, Black should play creatively with 14...Rae8!. Black can follow up with ...Be4 trading off White's strong light-squared bishop and creating some pressure on the e-file, which should be sufficient to equalize. 15 Rc1 ? Ugh. You can't let chances like this slip against grandmasters. Now Annakov had a chance to get out of trouble. 15...Rac8 ? Again 16 e3! is a very strong response to this transposing to the analysis above. Annakov should have instead played 15...Rae8 equalizing. 16 NXc5 ? I was still blissfully unaware of all the great opportunities I was passing up. Annakov, to his credit, pointed out right after the game that I should have played 16 e3! here and commented that he didn't think that he would play 12...Qd6 again! 16...bc 17 b3 ? This lame attempt to lock Annakov's pawns in place seriously weakens the c3-square and blocks my own queen's access to the queenside. I should have followed through on my original intention and played the much more agressive 17 Qa4 when my pressure on the queenside would have counterbalanced Black's e-file pressure. 17...Nb4 ! Seizing the initiative. I really felt I had no choice but to capture even though it created an entry point on c3 for Black's rooks because after 18 Ne3 Be6 19 Ra1 Qe7 Black would be able to maneuver his knight into c3 and would have much better piece activity. 18 NXb4 cb 19 Rc4 A correct decision, I think. Accepting a weak pawn on c4 is a lesser evil than letting Black establish permanent control of the c-file with ...Rc3. 19...RXc4 20 bc a5 Black mobilizes his queenside pawn majority. 21 Bd5 Qe5 22 Qd2 Re8 23 Bf3 Be6 24 Rc1 Threatening to push the passed pawn which Black promptly stops. 24...Qc5 25 e3 ? I realized my position was inferior and wrongly thought that simplification would allow me to easily hold a slightly worse endgame. As it turns out, however, the ensuing ending is easily won for Black whereas after 25 Be4, intending to grimly reinforce the queenside with Bd3, Black would have had quite a hard time converting his advantage to a win. 25...de 26 QXe3 QXe3 27 fe Rc8 The rest was trivial for a player of Annakov's strength. All Black has to do is bring the king over to the queenside and combine threats to my c-pawn with advancing his own queenside majority and White stands no chance. The game now finished: 28 Be2 Kf8 29 Rc2 Ke7 30 c5 a4 31 Rb2 b3 32 ab BXb3 33 Rb1 RXc5 34 Bd1 BXd1 35 RXd1 a3 36 Rd2 Ra5 37 Ra2 Kd6 White Resigned. After that game my chances of winning the tournament were pretty much gone, so I decided to do some exploring. In my next game, that meant playing the Sicilian with Black. Bhadrachalam, C. (1772) - Kamberi, S. (2339) Dallas Chess Club Grand Prix #1 (4), April 15, 2001 1 e4 c5 2 Nc3 Nc6 2...e6 is another quite good move that I would give serious consideration if I thought the game would continue 3 g3 d5 4 ed ed 5 Bg2 Nf6 or 3 f4 Nc6 4 Nf3 Nge7! (safer than 4...d5 5 Bb5! which does give White fairly good chances of an advantage, as Dzindzi shows in his tape Grinding the Sicilian Defense. I remember about 5 or 6 years ago Dave Wyatt, who at the time was just a C player knocked the very strong master Andrei Zaremba out of the Michigan Junior with this line.) with fairly easy equality for Black in both cases. But I would have been embarrassed after the simple 3 Nf3 intending 4 d4 because I don't play any open Sicilians featuring an early ...e6. 3 g3 g6 4 Bg2 Bg7 5 Nge2 This has been played hundreds of times, so I can't really call it offbeat. Nevertheless, 5 d3 intending either 6 f4 or 6 Be3 is more popular. 5...d6 6 O-O e6 The most common, and good enough to equalize. I also think that Black gets equal chances with Botvinnik's move, 6...e5. For instance, 7 d3 Nge7 8 f4 O-O 9 Be3 Nd4 10 Qd2 Be6 11 Rae1 Qd7 (Holmov-Tal, 32nd USSR Ch. 1964-65) with equal play according to Marovic and Susic. But I don't like other frequently played lines. For instance, 6...Rb8 7 d3 b5 8 f4 b4 9 Nd5 e6 10 Ne3 and now 10...Nge7 allows 11 f5! ef 12 ef gf 13 Nf4 with more than enough compensation for White who can play against Black's weaknesses on the kingside and also pry open lines on the queenside with a2-a3. And 10...Nd4 allows 11 a3! opening lines before Black has completed development. Another line I don't like is 6...Nf6 7 d3 O-O 8 h3 Bd7 9 Be3 Rb8 10 Qd2 (Karpov-Tsamriuk, Leningrad 1967). White can play Bh6, BXg7, and f4, and his chances on the kingside seem more real than Black's counterplay on the other wing. 7 d3 Nge7 8 Be3 Nd4 Most people play this way in order to stop White from playing d3-d4. 9 Qd2 O-O 10 Nd1 The people that I have shown this game to thought this was a strange move, but actually it is the most frequently seen 10th move in this variation. Usually it is played with the idea of ejecting Black's knight from d4 with c2-c3, but Bhadrachalam has a different idea, to capture on d4 with the knight without losing a piece! 10...Rb8 Now I was expecting something like 11 c3 NXe2+ 12 QXe2 b6 13 d4 Bb7 when Black will follow up with ...f5 and easy equality (Djeno-Vellkhanll, Manila 1992). Instead of going in for this, Bhadrachalam plans to trade knights on d4 and then also trade dark-squared bishops. He will follow that up by trading his c-pawn for my pawn on d4. Then White will have a choice between playing in the center with d3-d4, on the kingside with f2-f4, or even on the c-file. Of course, Black would retain some methods of counterplay, such as challenging the c-file or playing ...f5 or ...e5 followed by ...Nc6-d4 but Bhadrachalam probably reasoned that the deck would always be stacked somewhat in White's favor because White is the one who still has a light-squared bishop to defend the squares around his king! And this does indeed sound quite reasonable, but it turns out to be wrong because in this sort of position any sort of opening up of the board tends to result in an exchange of light squared bishops after which both kings wind up equally exposed. Still, if I had wanted to avoid the sort of position that arises in this game I could have played the simple 10...NXe2+ 11 QXe2 b6 as in Huber-D. Gurevich, Las Vegas 1995. In that case, the game would have been equal as well. 11 NXd4 !? cd 12 Bh6 b5 13 BXg7 KXg7 14 c3 Most of the handful of games that have reached this position have seen White continue with 14 f4 (e.g. Spassky-L. Portisch, 1980), but after 14...Bb7, followed by ...f5 at an appropriate moment Black should be fine. 14...Qb6 15 b4 NM Andrew Whatley didn't like this move. Indeed, I must admit that it's rather silly looking-why lose time and create a potential weakness on b4 when Black is hardly threatening ...b4 himself?. Having said that, though, I must also admit that I don't really see any way to take advantage of it-this just seems to be one of those positions whose basic nature is equal and a few strange moves won't change that. Still, I think I would have continued 15 cd QXd4 16 Nc3 e5 17 Ne2 Qb6 18 Rac1 when White got equality in the game Amrou-Naftel, 1986 without allowing Black the tiny bit of brief initiative he got in this game. 15...Bd7 Preparing to bring a rook to the c-file. Whatley suggested instead 15...Nc6, when play could have continued 16 cd QXd4 (16...NXd4 17 Ne3 is not dangerous to White) 17 Rb1 Ne5 18 Nc3! with no problems for White as the Black queen will be driven off with Ne2 unless Black tries 18...Nc4 19 Qe1 QXd3?! but then his queen gets in trouble following 20 Qc1! when both 20...Ne5 21 Rd1 Qc4 22 Bf1 Qc6 23 NXb5 and 20...Qd2 21 NXb5 RXb5 22 QXc4 Rb6 23 Rfd1 Ba6 24 Qb3 look somewhat unpleasant for Black due to White's more active forces and queenside majority. So 15...Nc6 does not really seem to be any better than the way I played. 16 cd QXd4 17 Ne3 Nc6 ?! I just overlooked his next move, even though it was completely obvious. Had I seen White's next I would have played 17...Rbc8 with the following possibilities: (A)18 Rac1?! (inaccurate as now White must play very precisely to keep the balance) Nc6: (A1)19 Nc2? Qb2 20 d4 NXb4! 21 QXb4 RXc2 22 QXb2 RXb2 23 Rc7 Rd8 24 RXa7 Rd2 25 d5 ed 26 ed Bf5 and Black's rooks get to the seventh first with the help of some tactics 27 Re1 Re8! 28 Rc1 Ree2 or 27 Rc1 Rc8! 28 Re1 Re2! with Black better in both cases. (A2)19 a3 Ne5 (A21)20 Rc2? RXc2 21 NXc2 Qb2! (21...QXd3? 22 QXd3 NXd3 23 Rd1 Rc8 24 RXd3 RXc2 25 RXd6 =) 22 d4 Nc4 23 Qc1 Rc8 24 QXb2 NXb2 leaves Black better in the ending due to control of the open file. (A22)20 Rfd1! RXc1 21 RXc1 Rc8 22 RXc8 BXc8 23 Qc1! (23 Qc2?! looks stronger because it also protects the pawn on c2, but actually turns out worse after 23...Qa1+! 24 Bf1 Nf3+ 25 Kh1 d5!! 26 ed [26 QXc8 d4 27 Kg2 Ne1+ 28 Kh3 de 29 Qc5 ef 30 QXf2 a6 and the queen and knight are better than the queen and bishop] Bb7 27 Qd1 QXd1 28 NXd1 BXd5 29 Nc3 Bc6 with a better ending for Black because the Black king is more active) Bb7 24 Bf1! (weaker is 24 Qc7? Ba8 25 Qc8 Bc6 26 Bf1 d5! 27 ed BXd5 and Black keeps the initiative) and after this long series of precise moves from White the position finally looks equal as 24...d5 can be handled by 25 Qc7 Bc6 26 Qd6. (B)18 Rfc1 (this move is better, as it allows White to preserve equality without such strenuous efforts): (B1)18...f5 19 ef NXf5 20 NXf5+ ef 21 RXc8 RXc8 22 Re1 with equal play. (B2)18...e5 19 Nc2 Qc3 20 Qe3 Nc6 21 a3 Be6 22 Ne1 and White drives off the queen and gets about equal play. My move 17...Nc6?! is weaker as now instead of getting a little initiative and forcing White to play some accurate moves, I cede control of the center to White and have to play carefully to avoid trouble. 18 Nc2 When he played this move I really felt pathetic-how could I have completely overlooked something so simple? This was my stupidest oversight of the tournament. 18...Qb6 19 d4 Rbc8 20 Rfd1 Guarding the d4-pawn so that he can maneuver his knight to e3. 20...Rfd8 I thought about 20...f5?! with the idea of attacking on the kingside with a further ...f4 but this looked too loosening after 21 d5! when 21...Ne5 22 de BXe6 23 ef BXf5 24 Nd4 would leave me with a weak d-pawn and an exposed king and 21...ed 22 ed Ne5 23 Nd4 would also leave White better due to the weaknesses on c6 and e6. So I decided to play a quiet building move 21 Ne3 e5 ?! I was willing to trade the d4 square for the d5 square but here it turns out to be a bad trade because White is able to put his outpost to much better use than me. FM Rajlich pointed out the better defense to 22 Ng4 of 21...h5! after which Black holds the balance. After the only White attempt to improve his position with 22 d5 Ne5 23 Rac1 Black plays 23...Nc4 24 NXc4 bc when his passed c-pawn gives him adequate counterplay. 22 Nd5 Setting a clever trap-22...QXd4? 23 Qg5 Qb2 24 Qf6+ Kg8 25 Rac1! with the threat of 26 RXc6! and after the only reasonable reply 25...Re8 simply 26 QXd6 creates unanswerable threats of 27 QXd7 and 27 Nf6+. 22...Qb8 23 Qg5 Be6 There were more traps to be avoided: (A)23...NXd4? 24 Qf6+ Kh6 25 RXd4! ed 26 QXf7 with a winning attack. (B)23...ed? 24 Qf6+ Kg8 25 Rac1 with just much too much play for the pawn especially when you consider that now even the g2-bishop can start to participate in the attack with a well-timed e4-e5 advance. 24 Nf6 ? This is one of those times where your rating really helps you. Against a player of his own rating, Bhadrachalam would doubtless have found 24 de de 25 Qf6+ Kg8 26 Rac1 with a nice initiative for White. During the game I thought I could handle this with 26...BXd5? 27 ed Nd4 28 RXc8 RXc8 but then there comes 29 d6 Rd8 30 Bd5 Rd7 31 f4! Ne2+ 32 Kh1 Nc3 33 fe NXd1 34 e6 and White wins. And my other obvious defensive try 26...Rd6? fails to 27 RXc6! RcXc6 28 Ne7+ Kf8 29 NXc6 RXd1+ 30 Bf1 Kg8 31 Ne7+ Kf8 32 Qh8+ KXe7 33 QXb8. Therefore, I would have to play something like 26...h6 but I don't like Black's position at all since if Black ever takes on d5 White's strong passed d-pawn will give him the advantage and if Black doesn't capture all he can do is passively defend against White's attempts to ratchet up the pressure. Instead of going in for this, Bhadrachalam probably thought he could force a draw with his 24 Nf6? which would be a good result given our rating difference, but he failed to take into account the possibility of my king running to the queenside after which White stands worse due to Black's strong knight on d4 and control of the c-file. 24...NXd4 25 Nh5+ Kg8 26 Nf6+ Kg7 27 Nh5+ Kf8 28 Qh6+ Ke7 29 Qg5+ Kd7 30 Nf6+ Kc7 31 a4 The next time I saw Bhadrachalam he told me that he felt he went wrong here and that he should have played instead 31 NXh7 so that he would have a passed h-pawn for the endgame, but I think this would have left Black on top after 31...Qb6 with the following possibilities: (A)32 a4?! ba and now 33 RXa4? loses to 33...Ne2+! 34 Kh1 Bb3. (B)32 Nf6 Kb8 33 Nd5 BXd5 34 ed and Black should be better due to his superior minor piece and control of the c-file. A good start would be be 34...Rd7 followed by ...Qd8 to chase the White queen out of its strong position since that is White's only trump in this position. (C)32 Qf6 Kb8 33 Ng5 Rf8 and 34...Qd8 next will give Black a better ending. 31...ba 32 RXd4 !? A surprising and tough shot to meet, but with the right moves Black should be able to prevail. I was really expecting 32 RXa4 when 32...Ne2+ 33 Kh1 Bb3 34 Nd5+ Kb7 35 Ra5 BXd1? fails to 36 Rb5+ Ka8 37 RXb8 KXb8 38 Ne7 followed by 39 Nc6+ and White is winning. But I could instead play 32...Bb3! 33 Rc1+ Kb7 34 RXc8 RXc8 35 Ra1 Ka8 when the extra pawn tells in Black's favor as the following variations demonstrate: (A)36 NXh7 QXb4 and White lacks compensation for the pawn, e.g. 37 Qe7 Qb6 38 Ng5 Qc7 39 Qf6 Ne2+ 40 Kh1 (40 Kf1? Qc3 is crushing for Black) Qd8 41 Qf3 QXg5 42 Qe2 Rc1+ 43 RXc1 QXc1+ 44 Bf1 Qc6 and Black's passed a-pawn gives him a winning position. (B)36 Nd5 BXd5 37 ed f5 and again White lacks compensation for the pawn. 32...ed 33 Rc1+ ? A totally incorrect follow up to the sacrifice after which White could even consider resigning. By adopting the following line White could have forced me to find some fine moves to win: 33 RXa4 Qb6 34 Ra5 (34 Nd5+ BXd5 35 QXd5 Kb8 36 Ra5 Rc1+ 37 Bf1 Rc5! 38 bc QXa5 39 Qb3+ Kc7 40 QXf7+ Rd7 41 cd+ KXd6 and the Black passed pawns will eventually triumph) QXb4! (34...d3? 35 Nd5+ BXd5 36 QXd5 Rf8 37 QXd3 and the exposed Black king and ineffectiveness of the Black rooks gives adequate compensation) 35 Bf1 (35 RXa7+ Kb8 36 Ra1 h6! 37 QXh6 Qb2 38 Rf1 d3 39 Qg5 d2 40 Qa5 Bc4 and the passed pawn is decisive) Rb8! 36 RXa7+ Rb7 37 Ra1 Qb2 38 Qa5+ Qb6 39 Nd5+ BXd5 40 QXd5 Kb8 41 Ba6 Ra7 42 Ra3 Kc7 43 QXf7+ Rd7 44 Qc4+ Qc5 and the Black king can hide on the kingside again after which the passed d-pawn will gradually prove decisive. 33...Kb7 34 Ra1 White was probably counting on 34 Qb5+ Ka8 35 RXc8 RXc8 36 e5+ d5 37 BXd5+ BXd5 38 QXd5+ but after 38...Qb7 the threat of back row mate forces White to exchange queens which would be equivalent to resignation. Still, if you play 33 Ra1-c1+-a1 you must have missed something! 34...Qc7 35 Qb5+ Qb6 36 QXa4 d3 37 e5+ d5 38 Rd1 This is pointless as the rook just has to go to f1 next move but there was nothing adequate anyways. 38 BXd5+ BXd5 39 Nd7 is met by 39...d2! and something like 38 b5 Rc2 39 Rf1 would lose soon enough. 38...Rc2 39 Bf1?? Shortening the torture which he would have undergone after 39 Rf1 Qa6 40 Qb3 Qc4 41 Qa4 d2 42 Bf3 Bh3 43 Rd1 Rc1, etc. 39...QXf2+ White Resigned. |