[Category: Misc]

Eve and I have just finished a game of chess that we began in late February. We enjoyed playing the game enough to want to share it. The moves are transcribed below in each of two commonly used forms of notation. We invite your questions or comments.

White: Eve
Black: David L
Played by electronic correspondence, February-May 2000

(In Descriptive Notation)

1. P-K4 P-QB4
2. P-KB4 N-QB3
3. N-KB3 P-KN3
4. N-B3 B-N2
5. P-QN3 R-N1
6. B-N2 P-Q3
7. B-K2 N-B3
8. N-Q5 Castles
9. NxN ch. BxN
10.BxB PxB
11.Castles R-K1
12.P-Q3 Q-R4
13.Q-K1 QxQ
14.KRxQ B-Q2
15.B-Q1 P-QN4
16.P-B4 N-N5
17.R-K3 P-Q4
18.N-Q2 NPxP
19.QPxP P-Q5
20.R-N3 R-N3
21.P-QR3 R-R3
22.P-QR4 B-B3
23.B-B3 N-Q6
24.P-B5 N-K4
25.PxP RPxP
26.R-KB1 K-N2
27.R-R1 R-N3
28.R-KB1 N-Q6
29.R-R1 N-N5
30.K-B2 N-B7
31.R-QB1 N-K6
32.R-QR1 B-Q2
33.P-R4 K-R3
34.R-KR1 P-B4
35.PxP BxBP
36.R-QR1 R(N3)-K3
37.R-KR1 N-B7
38.K-N1 R-K6
39.K-R2 R(K1)-K2
40.B-Q1 R-K8
41.RxR RxR
42.B-B3 N-K6
43.R-N5 P-B3
44.RxB NxR
45.P-N3 N-K6
White resigns

(Same game, but in Algebraic Notation)

1. e4 c5
2. f4 Nc6
3. Nf3 g6
4. Nc3 Bg7
5. b3 Rb8
6. Bb2 d6
7. Be2 Nf6
8. Nd5 O-O
9. Nxf6+ Bxf6
10.Bxf6 exf6
11.O-O Re8
12.d3 Qa5
13.Qe1 Qxe1
14.Rfxe1 Bd7
15.Bd1 b5
16.c4 Nb4
17.Re3 d5
18.Nd2 bxc
19.dxc d4
20.Rg3 Rb6
21.a3 Ra6
22.a4 Bc6
23.Bf3 Nd3
24.f5 Ne5
25.fxg hxg
26.Rf1 Kg7
27.Ra1 Rb6
28.Rf1 Nd3
29.Ra1 Nb4
30.Kf2 Nc2
31.Rc1 Ne3
32.Ra1 Bd7
33.h4 Kh6
34.Rh1 f5
35.exf Bxf5
36.Ra1 Rbe6
37.Rh1 Nc2
38.Kg1 Re3
39.Kh2 R8e7
40.Bd1 Re1
41.Rxe1 Rxe1
42.Bf3 Ne3
43.Rg5 f6
44.Rxf5 Nxf5
45.g3 Ne3
0-1

-- David L (bumpkin@dnet.net), May 07, 2000

Answers

Well, Dave ...I guess this one tanked. I just don't understand it -- I thought it was pretty exciting. :)

-- eve (eve_rebekah@yahoo.com), May 09, 2000.

Eve and David -

I'm sorry. I don't know how to play chess although I've always imagined that I would enjoy it.

-- Debra (...@....), May 09, 2000.

Debra, that's cool. Even a lot of people who do play aren't familiar with the notation that Dave used.

-- eve (eve_rebekah@yahoo.com), May 09, 2000.

By the way, Dave's chess rating is close to 2400, which I believe is almost grandmaster strength. I think this would put him in the top thousand or so players in the world (Dave, is this right?). He has at least one chess book out, too. Although I lost, it was an honor to have played him, and I learned a lot -- his play was beautiful.

-- eve (eve_rebekah@yahoo.com), May 09, 2000.

hey you guys-I will take a look at the game sometime this week-have to find the chess set and all-just moved.

-- FutureShock (gray@matter.think), May 09, 2000.

Thanks, David and Eve. Hunting for my pieces now...

-- Normally (Oxsys@aol.com), May 09, 2000.

To expand on Eve's post, a chess rating is based on the player's performance. It fluctuates according to one's results, kind of like a bowling average. The difference between two players' ratings is an indicator of the likely result were they to play a match of many games.

If I were to play many games against a player two hundred points higher (which might be the rating for an "average" grandmaster), the difference in our ratings would predict (though of course not ensure) that I'd score around 25%, i.e., 2.5 points out of 10 games (a draw is worth 1/2 point).

-- David L (bumpkin@dnet.net), May 09, 2000.

!

-- Lars (lars@indy.net), May 10, 2000.

Hi Dave and everyone,

Dave and I thought it would be interesting to analyze our game right on the thread to give y'all some insight into our thought processes during the game. My comments are for Dave as well as for others who are following the game. If there are any questions, no matter how elementary, please feel free to interject at any time and Dave and/or I will be glad to try to answer. And Dave, feel free to critique my comments. So, with that, I'll open it up...

1. P-K4 P-QB4

(The Sicilian Defense; it usually aims for a queenside counter- assault)

2. P-KB4

Now I played this move only to take us out of the more popular variations that I've seen; I'm very unfamiliar with it. Dave, do you know if this has been played often? Have you had experience with it?

2 ..... N-QB3 3. N-KB3 P-KN3 4. N-QB3 B-N2 5. P-QN3

I played this (followed by B-N2) in order to neutralize the pressure on the diagonal by black's king's bishop.

5. ..... R-N1

This is with the idea of eventually playing P-QN4, followed by other queenside pawn advances that would be used as a "battering ram" against white's queenside position. Another purpose would be to harness and control more space by those pawns, if and when they would advance, as well as giving more space to the rook in the knight's file, as the pawn in front of it (the QNP) advances -- and possibly even open the QN file for the rook (by hopefully exchanging the advanced QNP in front of it), where it would then become more powerful. Dave, since this was your move, would you prefer to have commented on it instead? I mean, I don't want to encroach on your territory. And maybe you had other reasons for the move.

6. B-N2 P-Q3 7. B-K2 N-KB3 8. N-Q5

I played this in order to exchange some pieces, therefore hopefully simplifying the game somewhat, and to create a doubled pawn on your king's bishop file, which weakens black's pawn structure, and (if the position allows for it) can be exploited in the endgame.

8. ..... Castles 9. NxN BxN 10. BxB PxB 11. Castles R-K1

Dave, do you want to give your views up to around this point? Or should I go on? I haven't said that much yet, as many of the moves so far are more or less routine developing moves. But you know best...if you'd like us to tackle this differently, in more detail, or move-by-move, let me know. I do know that, as we get further into the game, and things get more complicated, there will much more detail that we could easily go into.

Talk to ya soon...

-- eve (eve_rebekah@yahoo.com), May 12, 2000.

I'm sorry that the moves ended up running together. When I typed them out, they were on separate lines. Any suggestions?

-- eve (eve_rebekah@yahoo.com), May 12, 2000.

Hi Eve,
I like the moves being on a single line, as it cuts down on scrolling.

Before going through the moves in detail, it might be instructive to consider the course of the game at the macro-level, starting at the end and working backwards.

The endgame featured several positional factors that were in Black's favor. I'll address two of them here: the weakness of White's K3 square and the relative immobility of White's bishop. White's K3 square became "weak" as soon as White's QP and KBP had left their starting positions. A weak square (or "hole") is a potential liability, because the opponent's pieces might eventually occupy that square with impunity.

The weakness of White's K3 square was accentuated by White's lacking a dark square bishop, which could have helped control that square. The bishop White did have, was hampered by White's own pawns being on the same shade as that bishop. Black's bishop, in contrast, had the potential to infiltrate White's position and capture one or more queenside pawns.

Both of these factors, the weakness of White's K3 square and the absence of White's dark square bishop, were established very early in the game, and profoundly influenced the outcome. And yet, 2.P-KB4 has been played by world champions, with success.

The good side of 2.P-KB4 is that it gives White a substantial territorial advantage on the kingside. Therefore, the proper plan for White is to prepare an attack against Black's castled king.

The early exchange of pieces, especially queens, left White with no real hope of utilizing her kingside space advantage. I welcomed these exchanges, as they allowed Black to focus fully on utilizing his queenside space advantage without distraction, as well as granting him a half-open king file that he could wait to blast open until just the right time. I judged the position to be decisively in Black's favor as early as move 19, though considerable patience and care was required to convert that into a win.

-- David L (bumpkin@dnet.net), May 12, 2000.

Observations on some of the key moments:

16.P-B4 - I thought it would have been better for White to have let the queenside pawns sit, and challenge Black to formulate an effective plan.

19.QPxP - 19.NPxP seemed slightly better, as that would have opened the QR4/Q1 diagonal for White's bishop, freed the QN3 square for White's knight (to attack Black's QBP) and avoided giving Black a protected passed QP.

33...K-R3 - A vital resource, as it allowed P-KR5 to be answered by ...P-KN4, keeping the kingside closed.

Eve, it's OK by me if you'd like to continue the annotations in the style you've begun. I just thought that giving the "big picture" might make clearer what was happening.

Lurkers, please do feel free to ask questions. If you're not sure what kind of questions we're looking for, two might be "what led you to choose move x" and "did you consider move y instead of move z."

-- David L (bumpkin@dnet.net), May 13, 2000.

Hi Dave,

Actually, I think your approach is an excellent way to give the readers an overall feel and deeper appreciation for the game as a whole, before they start to look at it move-by-move. Since the move- order method seems more natural to me, I'll continue to focus on that way, if you don't mind. But I intend to look at your comments on the key moments and I'll probably want to respond to some of those, too. I'll try to get a post in soon.

-- eve (eve_rebekah@yahoo.com), May 14, 2000.

Hi Dave and Eve,

Here are some comments on your chess game. Mostly, since white lost, they are about whites play. The main question would be: how do the disadvantages of blacks doubled pawns and whites bad bishop compare?

3) N-KB3 Safer is N-QB3 first to guard against P-Q4.

5) P-QN3 This looks bad to me. Your center is vulnerable. P-Q3, P-KN3 and B-KN2 is the usual set-up here.

7) B-K2 As it turned out, your white bishop got very restricted. Maybe B-N5 is better here.

8) N-Q5 Here it looked like black was getting bad pawns. After the trading I was surprised how hard things were for white. Maybe you should have played P-B3 with an eye to P-Q4 after the knight trade, instead of trading the bishops too. This is available because R-N1 was probably premature for black. As it turned out, your king pawn became a nuisance to keep guarded.

13) Q-K1 Dave may be right that you should not offer this trade, especially since you have to recapture with the wrong rook for bringing your pieces towards his king. Did you consider N-R4 threatening B-N4 to get rid of the bad bishop. Black can hassle your queenside. After N-Q5 you can respond R-B2 and after Q-B6 you can play QR-B1. Then after Q-N7, P-B3 looks okay. At the worst I think black might make you bring the knight back without you accomplishing anything.

15) B-Q1 I think this is inferior. You should work to bring the bishop around to KN2 or KR3.

16) P-B4 Dave criticizes this, but I think it goes with the plan started with B-Q1. It does lead to an immediate crisis.

17) N-Q2 Did you consider P-QR3? It forces P-Q5, PxN, PXR, PXBP where you get a pair of passed pawns for the exchange. I think black would still win though.

19) QPxP Dave is right that you should take with the knight pawn. Your king pawn gets too weak after this. I guess this is the losing move.

Thanks for sharing your game.

dandelion

-- dandelion (golden@pleurisy.plant), May 15, 2000.

dandelion,

Thanks for your analysis. I intend to respond to the points you raised; it may take a bit, but hang in there.

-- eve (eve_rebekah@yahoo.com), May 15, 2000.

Here are some comments on your chess game.

Excellent comments, dandelion.

Mostly, since white lost, they are about whites play. The main question would be: how do the disadvantages of blacks doubled pawns and whites bad bishop compare?

Indeed. Here's how I evaluated the displacement of Black's pawn from K2 to KB3:

Weakening of Q3 square - not readily exploitable. by White
Weakening of KB3 square - requires some care by Black, since White can readily open the KB file.
Strengthening of K4 square - negligible, since that square was already firmly held.
Strengthening of KN4 square - big plus, since that's a natural square for White's knight in supporting a kingside attack.
Mobility of Black's kingside pawn mass - if Black were to eventually win White's KP, the extra pawn, being doubled, could be hard to exploit in an endgame.

Looking at just these factors, I don't think it would have been clear who benefited more from the displacement of Black's pawn to KB3. But that assessment changes radically once one takes into account the exchange of dark square bishops, White's dark square weaknesses and the half-open K-file.

3) N-KB3 Safer is N-QB3 first to guard against P-Q4.

I'm not sure that the order in which White's knights are developed makes much difference. 3.N-KB3 P-Q4 4.P-K5 seems playable for White.

5) P-QN3 This looks bad to me. Your center is vulnerable. P-Q3, P-KN3 and B-KN2 is the usual set-up here.

From KN2 the bishop would pressure the Q5 square (inhibiting the counterthrust ...P-Q4) and prevent White's king from becoming exposed as White opens up the kingside. 5.B-QB4, to pressure the KB7 square, is also common.

7) B-K2 As it turned out, your white bishop got very restricted. Maybe B-N5 is better here.

7.B-N5 had me concerned for a while (and made me second guess the flexible but time consuming 5...R-N1) because 7...B-Q2 (if Black allowed 8.BxN PxB, he'd get a very static queenside pawn structure which would stifle his plans) 8.Castles N-B3 9.P-K5 would be annoying (since the attacked knight cannot move into the center). But then I discovered 8...P-QR3, intending 9.BxN BxB 10.P-K5 N-R3 11.PxP PxP 12.R-K1 ch. K-B1, and Black's two bishops and control of the center (his knight is about to come to KB4) more than compensate for the loss of castling.

8) N-Q5 Here it looked like black was getting bad pawns. After the trading I was surprised how hard things were for white. Maybe you should have played P-B3 with an eye to P-Q4 after the knight trade, instead of trading the bishops too. This is available because R-N1 was probably premature for black. As it turned out, your king pawn became a nuisance to keep guarded.

I like your thinking, but unfortunately, 10.P-B3 would be strongly answered by 10...P-K4. Then 11.PxP (11.P-N3 is answered by 11...PxP 12.PxP B-R5 ch.) 11...PxP gives Black an iron clamp on the Q5 square.

13) Q-K1 Dave may be right that you should not offer this trade, especially since you have to recapture with the wrong rook for bringing your pieces towards his king. Did you consider N-R4 threatening B-N4 to get rid of the bad bishop. Black can hassle your queenside. After N-Q5 you can respond R-B2 and after Q-B6 you can play QR-B1. Then after Q-N7, P-B3 looks okay. At the worst I think black might make you bring the knight back without you accomplishing anything.

I like 13.N-R4, though White's game would remain passive. Black should probably continue 13...Q-B6 as you suggest, and later double rooks on the K-file and blast it open with P-B4.

I am reminded of a lecture that International Master Larry D. Evans (not to be confused with Grandmaster Larry Evans) gave many years ago, the theme of which was that if you wanted to trade a certain piece, make it "great," i.e., make it such a nuisance that your opponent wants to exchange it. I tried to do that here with my queen.

15) B-Q1 I think this is inferior. You should work to bring the bishop around to KN2 or KR3.

Worth considering was 15.B-B1 (allowing the rook to protect the KP) with an eye toward playing P-Q4.

17) N-Q2 Did you consider P-QR3? It forces P-Q5, PxN, PXR, PXBP where you get a pair of passed pawns for the exchange. I think Black would still win though.

It may be the best practical try. After 18.P-QR3 P-Q5 19.PxN PxR 20.PxBP I intended to play 20...PxP. Then 21.NPxP P-QR4 gets another passed pawn moving for Black, as 22.RxP R-N8 wins a piece (and curiously threatens mate), while 21.QPxP R-N2 (safer than 21...RxKP) leaves White with only QBPs that are passed. Finally, 21.RxP PxNP would be decisive, as 22.RxB P-N7 23.B-B2 P-N8(Q) ch. 24.BxQ RxB ch. leads to mate, as would 22.BxP RxB 23.RxB R-N8 ch.

-- David L (bumpkin@dnet.net), May 15, 2000.

For anyone looking for an explanation of chess notation, the U.S. Chess Federation website has an explanation of algebraic notation. It may take several minutes to download.

The site does not seem to have an explanation of descriptive notation, but once one of the notations is mastered, the other can be deciphered.

-- David L (bumpkin@dnet.net), May 15, 2000.

Hi Dave and dandelion,

Well, I think I may have come up with a very interesting take that leads to a better position for white -- maybe even a win?

On your variation at white's 18th move, we have so far:

18. P-QR3 P-Q5; 19. PxN PxR; 20. PxBP PxP; 21. NPxP P-QR4; 22. N-K1, winning a third pawn and leaving white with a massive pawn center. Play might resume with 22 ... R-N7 23. N-B2 R(1)-N1; 24. NxP R-N8; 25. RxR RxR; 26. K-B2 P-R5; 27. N-B2 R-N7; 28. K-K3, and I don't see how black can promote the RP. In some related lines, white might even sacrifice the bishop for the RP and still give black a run for his money! What do y'all think?

-- eve (eve_rebekah@yahoo.com), May 16, 2000.

Dave and dandelion,

By the way, although I haven't yet examined some of your comments and suggestions in depth, the ones I did study were excellent.

You know, when I tried to think back over the months as to what variations I considered, I couldn't come up with as much as I thought I'd be able to. For example, while I know that I never considered 13. N-R4, and that I looked at 18. P-QR3, I can't remember why I rejected it. And I spent a long time on 19. NPxP, but now I don't know why I passed that up, either; I probably saw threats on the N- file. I don't know...maybe if I spent more time in this analysis, it would all come back to me. So, I guess I have to agree that 19. QPxP was pretty horrible -- in fact, every time I look at that now, I cringe.

Maybe in the future, Dave, I should make notes as I play.

And it is more interesting jumping right to the "meaty" parts, rather than taking it move-by-move. Again -- thanks, guys, for some great analysis.

-- eve (eve_rebekah@yahoo.com), May 16, 2000.

Oops...I can't yet agree that the line of yours I think I improved on was excellent -- but the rest of 'em were. :)

-- eve (eve_rebekah@yahoo.com), May 16, 2000.

Hi Eve,
18. P-QR3 P-Q5; 19. PxN PxR; 20. PxBP PxP; 21. NPxP P-QR4; 22. N-K1 R-N7; 23. N-B2 loses a piece to 23...P-K7. 23. K-B1 R-B7+; 24.K-N1 R-Q7 ties White up. 23. B-R4 may be the best try. Play could follow 23...BxB; 24. RxB R-R1; 25. P-Q4 R-N5; 26. RxR PxR; 27. K-B1 P-N6; 28. N-Q3 K-B1 threatening ...R-R7 and ...P-N7, but as they say, "Long analysis, wrong analysis." 8^)

I also didn't take notes, but treated it like an over-the-board game (where you can look at the current position but can't analyze by moving the pieces). But in serious correspondence chess, taking notes is crucial. Correspondence players are also permitted (and encouraged) to consult whatever chess literature they wish. This may seem remarkably liberal, but the idea is to facilitate a higher level of play than is possible over-the-board, and the games of top level correspondence players can be breathtaking.

-- David L (bumpkin@dnet.net), May 16, 2000.

I've taken another look at 19. NPxP for White (as an alternative to the game's 19. QPxP), and it doesn't seem much of an improvement after 19...P-Q5 20. R-N3 R-N3 21. N-N3 R-QB1 (keeping Black's knight on its strong post). One point is that 22. P-QR3 N-R3 would be followed by a prompt Black breakthrough on the QN file, since the weakened QN3 square precludes a White barricade. While after 21...R-QB1 Black wouldn't immediately be threatening 22...R-R3 (because of 23. P-QR3 N-B3 24. NxBP), Black could preface this by 22...B-R5, so that a later ...R-R3; P-QR3 could be met by ...BxN, leaving White with the less useful minor piece and a fatally weakened QN3 square once again. White's defense of the queenside is greatly hindered by the estrangement of her rook at KN3.

-- David L (bumpkin@dnet.net), May 19, 2000.

Dave,

This is a delayed response to your comments of May 15. I was out of town, as well as needing time for this.

On choosing which knight to develop first: 3) N-KB3 P-Q4 4) P-K5 black develops the QB and I prefer black. In any case black has equalized easily.

Inspired by your analysis to come up later: instead of 5) ... R-N1, were you already thinking about 5) ... P-K4 followed by perhaps 6) PxP P-KN4 ?

In your line 7) B-N5 B-Q2 8) O-O P-QR3 9) BxN BxB how about 10) P-Q4 (instead of P-K5) since after PxP 11) NxP Q-N3 12) N-Q5 seems okay for white.

Your response 10) P-B3 P-K4 is strong. The main line here (to me) is 11) P-Q4 PxBP 12) Q-Q3 and black has a lot of choices. The position reminds me of the sort of Kings Gambit where the queen often belongs on Q3, but there are a lot of differences too.

It looks unpleasant to try 11) PxP PxP 12) B-N5 N-K2 (I think white can seal the center with P-QB4 and maneuver the knight to Q5 if black lets white trade the light-squared bishop for the knight) 13) P-QN4 although I find the outcome unclear.

In your line in the final note 19) NPxP P-Q5 20) R-N3 R-N3 the move 21) N-N3 seems too soon. White should work to untangle the kingside as fast as possible. K-B1 or perhaps P-KR3 leave the onus on black to produce threats. White may even survive the loss of the QRP if a regrouping can be completed while it is happening. However I agree with your overall diagnosis. White has a rook which is out of play. I think black can attack successfully with 20) ... P-KB4 in place of R-N3 and rip open the king file. So Eve should not beat herself over the head too much for recapturing with the queen pawn.

dandelion

-- dandelion (golden@pleurisy.plant), May 29, 2000.

dandelion,

Hi -- thanks so much for the time and effort you've put into our game. After I look at your analysis I may have some comments. In the meantime, I hope you're having a good weekend, giving some thoughts to our vets and fallen boys (but of course), but also...taking in some sun (if you can get it), with your SO by your side, a bottle of good Bordeaux, some Bach playing in the background, under a tree with the river in front of you, on your hammock(s) or a blanket, with your chess set, as you look some more at this chess game. :)

-- eve (eve_rebekah@yahoo.com), May 29, 2000.

Hello, dandelion. Hope you had a good trip.

I agree that 3...P-Q4 gives Black equality, although I'm not convinced that the move is intrinsically superior to 3...P-KN3. However, I concur that 3. N-QB3 (or still better, 2. N-QB3) would be a more accurate move order for White, as Black would be denied the ...P-Q4 idea. Few players are equally at home in closed versus open positions. Also, it makes for a streamlined opening repetoire for White.

I looked at 5...P-K4, but don't recall whether it was in conjunction with your fascinating idea of 6. PxP P-KN4. Then on 7. P-KN3 (enabling 7...P-N5 to be met by 8. N-KR4 hitting the weakened KB5 square) would Black continue 7...P-KR4 with the idea of 8...P-R5 9. PxP P-N5 (as in From's Gambit)?

A safer line for White after 5...P-K4 is 6. NxP NxN 7. PxN BxP 8. Q-B3 with B-B4 to follow. I may have rejected 5...P-K4 because I felt that White's bishop on QN2 would give me a good game without my having to provoke potentially unfathomable complications.

My original plan with 5...R-N1 was to gobble up space on the queenside after 6. B-N2 P-QN4, but then I noticed 7. Q-B1 which practically wins a pawn due to Black's vulnerable bishop, e.g., 7...P-N5 8. N-QR4, or 7...P-QR3 8. NxP. Black could retain material equality by 7...BxN, but positionally that's really yucko. One might also ask how Black could be justified in so blatantly ignoring his lack of development.

I agree that White can profitably deviate from my analysis that starts with 7. B-N5. My line was trying to show that violent attempts by White to utilize her lead in development would fail.

After 10. P-B3 P-K4 11. P-Q4, I like 11...BPxP 12. PxQP Q-R4+ and only then capturing a pawn. 10. P-B3 P-K4 11. PxP PxP 12. B-N5 can be met by 12...Q-N3, e.g., 13. BxN QxB 14. Q-K2 P-QN4 already threatens the stifling ...P-B5.

One of the points of 20...R-N3 (following 19. NPxP P-Q5 20. R-N3) is to protect the KB3 square, enabling ...P-B4; P-K5 P-B3; PxP RxP. I also concur with regard to the value of Eve's head to this forum.

-- David L (bumpkin@dnet.net), May 30, 2000.

Eve,

You paint a pleasant scene. It reminds me of lunch long ago and far away at a place called The Cheese Factory near Novato. It was situated by itself in the forested area north of San Francisco and sold Schloss cheese which was made on the premises. They also sold bread and juice, maybe wine, for lunchers like us and played classical music outside by the tables near the brook.

Back to the game.

Whites 5) P-QN3 looks weakening to me since black has such a good grip on the d4 square. What should black do? 5) ... R-QN1 seems slow to me and Dave is saying it was based on a misconception. My suggestion 5) ... P-K4 is probably too abrupt. It was based on how strong P-K4 was in the later analysis and with Froms gambit in mind. Another try is 5) ... P-Q4 where after 6) PxP N-N5 there is a threat of B-B4. Yet another try is 5) ... P-Q3 to be followed by, say 7) B-N2 P-K4 8) P-KN3 P-KB4. Question: was 5) ... R-N1 too slow in that white had some way to solidify the center that could otherwise have been prevented? This is where the 7) B-N5 lines are relevant.

I am ready to agree that 10) P-B3 is worse than the actual game. I do want to note that in your (you being Dave) line 10) P-B3 P-K4 11) PxP PxP 12) B-N5 Q-N3 13) BxN QxB 14) Q-K2 P-QN4 that 14) Q-K2 is a mistake. After 14) P-Q3 P-QN4 white can play 15) P-QB4 for if 15) ... PxP 16) BxKP PxQP 17) BxR BxR 18) QxB QxKP+ 19) K-B2 Q-K7+ 20) K-N3 and I think white has survived the fireworks.

In the game after 12) ... Q-R4, I have noticed 13) R-KB2. It prepares for B-B1 or N-R4 with B-N4. It indirectly defends the QBP and has potential in a kingside attack. It is less immediate than 13) N-R4 which allows black to engage in harassing moves while the knight is on the rim. 13) P-QR4 is another possibility here. This prepares to offer the queen trade and recapture with the queen rook if white wants to go that route, or slows down the queenside advance and avoids leaving the QRP isolated later on. Anyway, this is a critical point in the game. Dave gave a list of pluses and minuses for this position, but it lacked a description of the dynamics. I sense that timing could be important here. By the way, am I correct in thinking black played 12) ... Q-R4 to keep white from posting her queen at KR4?

Regards to both of you,

dandelion

-- dandelion (golden@pleurisy.plant), June 03, 2000.

Ah yes, I always did like chess. Still do...

But I have found chess to be a real-time game, something to be done over the next hour or so, not the next quarter... I never was into looking at what "the masters" did, because after all, one of the masters did lose...

Not that I don't like long-term games. I was "famous" playing BRE, in the old, BBS days, "long before" the net. We would be lucky to finish a game in a quarter..

Yea, I do still do some of that, long-term stuff...

Been playing Stars! lately (like the last few years). Not a big "graphics" game, but a good lesson in long term strategy.

In fact, it would be nice to have some new blood in the game. Download the demo and try it out! Maybe we could get a Y2K team going!!!

Hummm, this could be interesting. The Troll race, vs. the Doomer race, vs. the Polly race... Yea, I like it!!! I can see a six month battle here!!! And knowing this crowd, there will be a bunch of weapons research going on. Oh yea, it will be bloody...

Hey, since we all agree that Y2K is over, what else are we going to do? Let's get serious, and make some WAR!!!

No? Not into that game stuff? Oh well, just remember, that if you ever come across "StarMaster" down the road...

You meet the same people on the way down, that ya met on da way up...

<:)))=

-- Sysman (y2kboard@yahoo.com), June 03, 2000.

Sysman,

Your comment about a master losing, struck me as humorous but I also find considerable truth in it. A lot of people mindlessly mimic the masters. I think it makes a lot more sense to use published play as a starting point, and I sense you feel this way also, or at least you would if you read chess literature.

dandelion,

When White played 5) P-QN3, my first impulse was to try to exploit the temporary weakening of the diagonal. (Among the lines I considered was 5) ...N-B3 6) P-K5 N-KR4 7) P-N3 Castles followed by ...P-Q3, but this seemed rash.) Since none of us has discovered how to tactically exploit 5. P-QN3, maybe that suggests that Black shouldn't be so ambitious but just play for a slight edge. 5) ...P-QR3 prevents B-N5, and after 6) B-N2 P-Q3 7) B-B4 P-K3, White's bishop may be dislodged from its active post by an eventual ...P-QN4 or ...P-Q4. 7) P-N3 with B-N2 may be as good as any, although White's bishop on QN2 cannot readily participate in kingside operations,

After the suggested 10) P-B3 P-K4 11) PxP PxP 12) B-N5 Q-N3 13) BxN QxB 14) P-Q3 P-QN4 15) P-B4, I think 15) ... PxP 16) BxKP leads to a hard game for White after 16) ...BxB 17) NxB Q-KB3 18) NxQBP Q-B6+, and now A) 19) N-Q2 QxQP regaining the pawn and still retaining pressure; B) 19) K-B2 P-B4 20) P-K5 Q-Q5+, leaving White discombobulated. But it's hard to crack 16) NxP, e.g., 16) ...Q-K3 17) NxQBP BxB 18) NxB Q-KB3 19) Q-Q2 B-R3 20) Q-KB2 Q-B6+ 21) Q-Q2 and it's not clear how either side can improve on a draw by repetition. Instead of 15) ...PxP, perhaps Black should prefer the sedate 15) ...Q-Q3.

After 12) P-Q3, I had originally intended 12) ...P-B4 13) PxP BxP followed by ...Q-B3, but I couldn't find a concrete way to proceed after 14) Q-Q2. It struck me that one of Black's advantages was in being able to defer opening the position until he was fully prepared, and that 12) ...P-B4 would dissipate this advantage. Also, White's queen, in addition to its attacking potential, helped reinforce the weak dark squares in her position. So 12) ...Q-R4 seemed ideal, inhibiting White's queen from reaching the kingside, (as you noted), and aiming at the dream square QB6 (not only attacking, but enabling ...P-B4 and ...Q-N2 in an emergency).

-- David L (bumpkin@dnet.net), June 04, 2000.

Thanks, guys, (including you, Dave) for your interest in our game. Dave and I are in the midst of our second game, and I'm focusing on that one for now. Although I'm not involved in this analysis right now, I'm saving, and intend to minutely examine, everything that comes in from y'all.

-- eve (eve_rebekah@yahoo.com), June 05, 2000.

Sysman,

Took a look at the Stars! web site. Looks like a Windows game while I am a Mac user. Just as well; I can barely make a few comments on this chess game in a week, but thanks for the invite.

Dave,

I am still thinking about responses to whites move 5) P-QN3. The weaknesses of P-QN3 over P-Q3 are threefold. 1. The knight is pinned. White solved this problem and succeeded in her plan to neutralize the blacks dark-squared bishop. 2. The pawns on K4 and KB4 are not guarded as well as they would be with P-Q3. This became a problem for white in the game. 3. Finally if white plays P-Q3 later, then the dark squares can be vulnerable, which also actually happened.

Now black did exploit these weaknesses in the game. We seem to agree that that white could improve with 7) B-N5 in place of B-K2. (You gave a line you examined during the game to show that white cannot wrest an advantage from 7) B-N5 and a later ambitious P-K5, while I was just trying to find a way for white to be equal as compared to the disadvantage white actually got.) Anyway you suggest that by replacing 5) ... R-N1 with 5) ... P-QR3 you prevent B-QN5 and can proceed as in the game.

You will recall that I was attracted to 3) ... P-Q4. The same taste in positions leads me to examine 5) ... P-Q4. This attempts to exploit the self-inflicted pin to obtain an advantage in the center. I dont claim to improve on 5) ... P-QR3. Here are some lines.

5) P-QN3 P-Q4 6) PxP N-N5 7) B-N2 [after 7) B-N5+ K-B1 and the threat of B-B4 is too strong] 7) ... NxQP [an alternative is 7) ... B-B4 8) P-Q3] 8) NxN [else black liquidates on c3 and gets a favorable pawn formation, i.e. a won king and pawn ending so he can always pressure white by offering trades] 8) ... BxB 9) R-N1 and I think black has a tiny edge. White could also play 6) P-K5 P-Q5 7) N- K4 Q-Q4 8) KN-N5 N-R4 9) P-Q3 P-KB3. The idea is that if 6) P-K5 black seeks to break up whites center with P-KB3 at a point when the pawn has to be taken.

Your last comments also clarified for me some issues around move 12. Enough for now.

Eve,

Enjoy the new game. Im enjoying chewing on your first game.

dandelion

-- dandelion (golden@pleurisy.plant), June 11, 2000.

dandelion,
5) ...P-Q4 6) PxP N-N5 does look excellent for Black. I've looked at 7) B-N2, 7) B-N5+ and 7) N-K5, but none of those seems to equalize for White.

6) P-K5 seems to be a sounder reply. After 6) ...P-Q5 7) N-K4 Q-Q4 8) KN-N5 N-R4, White can improve on the suggested 9) P-Q3 by playing 9) B-N5+, with the more comfortable game after 9) ...K-B1 10) Q-K2. 9) ...B-Q2 is apparently in White's favor after 10) BxB+ QxB 11) P-K6 [murkier is 11) NxQBP Q-B3] 11) ...PxP 12) NxBP Q-B3 13) N(B)xKP B-B3 14) Q-B3 QxP 15) B-R3.

Rather than 7) ...Q-Q4, which exposes the queen to attack, Black could consider 7) ...P-N3, with the possible continuation 8) B-N5 B-Q2 [threatening 9) ...NxP] 9) Q-K2 N-N5 10) BxB+ QxB 11) P-Q3 N-KR3, and the many weak squares in White's position seem to give Black an edge.

During the game, I briefly considered 5) ...P-Q4, but to satisfy myself of its soundness would have required more analysis than I had time to carry out.

Thanks for stimulating me to take a deeper look at it.

-- David L (bumpkin@dnet.net), June 12, 2000.

Dave,

More on 5) ... P-Q4.

I had considered 6) PxP to be the main line, but was initially afraid of 7) B-N5+. It is ironic that after 6) P-K5 that this same check proves to be a monkeywrench in the line I gave [ 6) ... P-Q5 7) N-K4 Q-Q4 ]. The forceful 6) ... P-Q5 was not my original line, but I mistakenly thought it made the point quickly. Im not happy with your improvement 7) ... P-N3 because of 8) B-B4. Black does not want to push the king pawn and weaken d6. Black does not want white to get in P-K6 at some point, yet his KR3 has to be reserved for the king knight to get out, so it is hard to keep a white knight out of g5. Black can waste time trading his queen knight for the bishop, but then he loses his Q4 as a post for a piece. Lastly P-N3 accedes to the loss of a tempo.

Here is a new candidate for the main line. 5) P-QN3 P-Q4 6) P-K5 P-KB3 7) B-N5 [7) P-Q4 PxP loses a pawn for white, while 7) PxP NxP gives black development and better control in the center] 7) ... B-N5. Then A. 8) P-Q4 PxQP 9) QxP BxN 10) PxB P-K3 11) BxN+ PxB 12) B-R3 N-R3 favors black. So B. 8) Q-K2 R-B1 9) O-O P-K3. By playing Q-K2 white gives up on P- Q4 for some time, so black can build up the pressure while whites pieces are uncoordinated with limited opportunities. One more try: C. 8) BxN+ PxB 9) PxP NxP 10) R-QN1. This position is a bit unclear to me. Here is a wild continuation: 10) ... N-K5 11) NxN PxN 12) P-KR3 B-R4 13) P-KN4 PxN 14) PxB Q-Q4 15) O-O P-B7+ 16) KxP B-Q5+ 17) K-K1 [or 17) K-N3 PxP] 17) ... Q-K4+ 18) Q-K2 QxQBP.

Your final comment about satisfying yourself of the soundness of the move before playing it got my attention. I might play a move because I cant satisfy myself that it is unsound, just to see what happens. In another endeavor like writing a computer program, I prefer your attitude. But there are those who will try anything if they cant see why it wont work, without trying to verify carefully that it will work, even if it affects other people. Perhaps peoples positions on the dangers of the Y2K bug last year correlate to their sense of how many people always try to do solid work as compared to how many are willing to skate on the thinner ice.

dandelion

-- dandelion (golden@pleurisy.plant), June 18, 2000.

dandelion,

In assessing 5) ...P-Q4 6) P-K5 P-Q5 7) N-K4 P-N3, I had underestimated the strength of 8) B-B4. 6) ...P-Q5 seems to be a strategic error, as it brings White's queen knight into play While denying Black's knights access to the Q5 square.

On the suggested 6) ...P-B3 7) B-N5 B-N5 8) Q-K2 R-B1 9) O-O P-K3, 10) PxP looks very strong (unleashing on the K-pawn).

A) 10) ...QxP 11) B-R3 threatens 12) BxP or 12) NxP. 11) ...Q-K2 meets both threats, but Black is falling seriously behind in development.
B) 10) ...NxP 11) P-KR3 B-B4 [11) ...BxN 12) QxP+] 12) P-KN4 B-K5 [12) ...BxBP 13) P-Q3] 13) N-K5 and Black's queen's bishop is in trouble.
C) 10) ...BxP 11) P-KR3, and 11) ...B-Q5+ 12) K-R1 P-KR4 would be answered by 13) Q-K1.

Another strong alternative for White is 8) O-O, for the king pawn is poisoned: 8) O-O PxP 9) PxP BxP 10) NxB BxQ 11) NxN and now

A) 11) ...PxN 12) BxP+ Q-Q2 13) BxQ+ KxB 14) RxB.
B) 11) ...Q-Q3 12) N-K5+ K-Q1 13) N-B7+.
C) 11) ...Q-N3 12) NxRP+ K-Q1 13) NxP threatens mate and the queen.

If Black tries 9) ...BxN 10) QxB BxP, then 11) Q-B7+ K-Q2 12) QxQP+ regains the pawn. Though Black's king seems reasonably secure on QB2, he will have many weak pawns after 12) ...K-B2 13) BxN B-Q5+ [to save the piece] 14) K-R1 PxB.

Black needs to ignore the K-pawn and play something like 8) ...N-R3 or 8) ...PxP 9) PxP N-R3, although the upcoming B-R3 seems to give White good play.

At the risk of sounding like a broken record, perhaps 6) ...P-QR3 [after 5) ...P-Q4 6) P-K5] should be considered.

My avoidance of positions that I have difficulty evaluating, is because I approach chess as a science rather than a form of gambling (with no offense meant toward the gamblers). This doesn't mean that I never provoke wild complications, but that I would have to perceive something in the position to justify it. If I wonder what an interesting but unplayed move might have led to, I can always look at it at my leisure, when a game is not at stake.

5) P-QN3 struck me as contrary to the spirit of the position, but it didn't seem so weak that Black should be able to refute it. Consequently, I felt that attempting to refute it could backfire.

-- David L (bumpkin@dnet.net), June 21, 2000.

Dave,

In the line 5) ... P-Q4 6) P-K5 P-B3 7) B-N5 B-N5 8) Q-K2 R-B1 9) O-O P-K3, you say 10) PxP looks very strong (unleashing on the K-pawn). with A) 10) ...QxP 11) B-R3 threatens 12) BxP or 12) NxP. 11) ...Q-K2 meets both threats, but Black is falling seriously behind in development. Instead of 11) ... Q-K2, black has 11) ... BxN. Then of the 3 recaptures, only the unappealing PxB retains the threat of NxP. Ignoring this possibility at my peril, here is a line. 12) RxB P-QR3 13) BxN+ RxB 14) R-K1 N-K2. White has a slight lead in development, but I see no way to keep it from evaporating. Black has more maneuverability and I expect an advantage can be obtained from that, eventually.

Your earlier improvement 8) O-O gives me some pause since the very fact that white can offer the poisoned pawn suggests black is not succeeding in putting white under pressure. After 8) O-O R-B1, white can transpose back to the above line with 9) Q-K2 or play 9) R-K1 PxP 10) PxP P-K3 and I am comfortable enough playing black.

I dont really like 6) ... P-QR3 after 7) P-Q4. If 7) ... Q-R4, then 8) Q-Q2 is ugly but I see no way to punish it. I feel that black would be better off developing a piece with 6) ... B-N5. The situation was different before 5) ... P-Q4 6) P-K5 when the center was more fluid. Here 5) ... P-QR3 seems fine. The moves 5) ... P- K3 or 5) ... P-Q3 also advance blacks position and leave the center fluid.

Here is an argument for 5) ... P-Q4 based on ideas rather than lines. Assuming whites 5th move wasted a tempo, black may view his position as an English opening rather than a Sicilian defense. In the English an early P-Q4 is one of the main variations, so it is plausible here. In an English, the response to P-Q4 is usually PxP, but here that seems to not be best. So if the response must be P-K5, it is plausible to assume this represents a slight deterioration in whites position. So far no decisions that might be unsound have been made (as I see it). Now black can either try to maintain the mild pressure or make a committal move which could turn out not to work. This is where a judgement of the apparent soundness of the committal move versus the chance that the pressure will dissipate must be made.

In your game, I see 17) ... P-Q4 as a committal move.

I have a question, but first let me set the stage by explaining what you made clear to me that is somewhere between the lines in our discussion, just in case Eve wants to make sense of this later on. You presented an assessment of strong and weak squares after the displacement of blacks pawn from K2 to KB3 on move 10. The emphasis in this discussion was whites weak dark squares. But there is a dynamic issue that comes into being at this point. Black has pawn breaks working against whites KP and also on the queen side. White only has chances on the king side and they are far in the future. So black has a classic attack on two fronts. White is crowded and it will be hard to move defenders between the two fronts which black can open at his leisure after putting his pieces where they can easily shift to wherever white is weakest. Usually this means a won game.

How did Eve respond to the two front problem? Trying to guess her intentions, I would say B-Q1 and the followup P-B4 were an attempt to enlarge the communication channel between them so as to be able to shift defenders back and forth.

But 16) P-B4 permitted an immediate crisis. Black decided to commit to 17) ... P-Q4 and after 18) N-Q2 whites rook was bound to be pushed over to KN3 and never available to help on the queenside. You made it clear that 19) QPxP was not really the problem although it didnt help. The problem was the rook getting sidelined. So if there is no improvement on N-Q2 then 16) P-B4 was simply refuted.

What did you plan after 18) N-K1? This seems better than N-Q2 because blacks knight is tieing up both the rook on K3 and the bishop. Instead of supporting the center immediately (which looked natural enough to me that it was the neighboring moves I first questioned), by playing N-K1 white opposes blacks knight and frees up the rook and bishop for defensive duties.

Finally a comment on my own playing style since you said a bit about yours. Well, I have not been an active player for a long time, but I would say that back then I played against the other player as compared to playing the position. As such my play tended toward the level of my opponent - I took rating points from the rich and gave them to the poor. As for analyzing intriguing moves after the game, I found that my analysis during a game was better than after the pressure was over.

My style was shaped from looking at Alekhines games. When you say you are a scientific player I think of Botvinnik.

Ive been calling you Dave, because Eve did, but Ive noticed you sign off as David. Do you have a preference?

dandelion

-- dandelion (golden@pleurisy.plant), June 30, 2000.

dandelion, either David or Dave is fine. Thanks for asking.

In the line 5) ... P-Q4 6) P-K5 P-B3 7) B-N5 B-N5 8) Q-K2 R-B1 9) O-O P-K3 10) PxP QxP 11) B-R3 BxN 12) RxB P-QR3 13) BxN+ RxB 14) R-K1 N-K2, 15) N-R4 looks hard to meet:

A) 15) ...P-N3 16) QxRP.
B) 15) ...P-B5 16) N-B5 hits two pawns, and 16) ...Q-Q5+ 17) K-R1 RxN 18) P-B3 wins for White,
C) 15) ...N-B4 16) P-B3 prevents any nonsense.
D) 15) ...P-QN4 16) NxP P-N5 17) BxP Q-Q5+ 18) K-R1 QxB 19) NxKP with three pawns and pressure for the piece.

After 8) O-O R-B1, how about 9) P-KR3 BxN 10) QxB PxP 11) PxP N-R3 12) Q-N3 with a complex game.

7) P-Q4 is a remarkably effective reply to my suggested 6) ...P-QR3. Maybe 6) ...B-N5 is better, but 6) P-K5 has given Black a very inflexible position where all stakes are bet on ...P-B3.

It's true that in the English Opening, White's P-Q4 is often answered by ...PxP, but in variations where Black has played ...P-KB4, P-Q4 is sometimes answered by ...P-K5. So I'm not sure whether to view White's 6) P-K5 as a concession. [Note to lurkers: 1) P-QB4 constitutes the English Opening, to which Black often answers 1) ...P-K4, which is similar to our game though with colors reversed.]

One drawback of 18) N-K1 is that the piece does not reinforce the QBP or KP. This suggests the line 18) ...NPxP 19) NPxP PxBP 20) PxP R-N3, to probe White's weak pawns.

I know well the Robin Hood tendency you mention. When one draws or beats a much higher rated player, it's easy to delude oneself into thinking that one should easily outplay an equal or lesser player. I managed to conquer this, but only after many stupid losses.

With regard to style, I seem to be equally comfortable whether the position requires patient maneuvering or wild tactics. Here's an entertaining example of the latter, which I played in 1993. I had the Black pieces.

1) P-K4 P-QB4 2) N-KB3 N-QB3 3) P-Q4 PxP 4) NxP N-B3 5) N-QB3 P-K4 6) N(4)-N5 P-Q3 7) B-N5 P-QR3 8) N-R3 P-N4 9) N-Q5 Q-R4+ 10) B-Q2 Q-Q1 11) B-N5 Q-R4+ 12) P-B3 NxP 13) P-QN4 QxN 14) B-B1 Q-R5 15) Q-Q3 N-B4 16) Q-N1 N-K2 17) NxN BxN 18) B-K2 P-N3 19) P-N4 B-N2 20) P-B3 B-R5+ 21) K-B1 P-K5 22) B-N2 N-N6, White resigns. [After 23) PxN QxP(6) he'd have a hopeless position.]

-- David L (bumpkin@dnet.net), July 01, 2000.

Chess game #2 between Eve and David L.

-- David L (bumpkin@dnet.net), July 02, 2000.

Dave,

Work has been keeping me busy lately.

You gave:

In the line 5) ... P-Q4 6) P-K5 P-B3 7) B-N5 B-N5 8) Q-K2 R-B1 9) O-O P-K3 10) PxP QxP 11) B-R3 BxN 12) RxB P-QR3 13) BxN+ RxB 14) R-K1 N-K2, 15) N-R4 looks hard to meet:

C) 15) ...N-B4 16) P-B3 prevents any nonsense. D) 15) ...P-QN4 16) NxP P-N5 17) BxP Q-Q5+ 18) K-R1 QxB 19) NxKP with three pawns and pressure for the piece.

In C) the reply 16)... B-B1 immediately threatens to win a piece as well as freeing the square KN2 for blacks knight to hold the king pawn and free up the heavy pieces. Whites minor pieces are awkwardly posted.

In D) whites pawns are not all that active, so I think the line is playable for black. I am not sure what white would do after 19) ... B-B3.

E) 15) ... Q-B4 16) BxP QxQBP 17) BxN KxB 18) N-B3 BxN is equal. Probably 18) ... K-Q2 19) NxQP B-Q5+ 20) N-K3 QxRP is too risky for black.

Your line, after 8) O-O R-B1, how about 9) P-KR3 BxN 10) QxB PxP 11) PxP N-R3 12) Q-N3 with a complex game, also leaves 12) QxQP as another way to get a complex game. I prefer to solidify with 10) ... P-K3 and let white think about whether black will seal the center with P-KB4 now that the would-be-bad bishop is gone. Perhaps the upshot is that 5) ... P-Q4 permits white to implement her plan to counter blacks dark-squared bishop by blocking its diagonal with the king pawn.

As for 18) N-K1, I agree that every move for white will leave a weakness somewhere. This move seems better than in the game since whites pieces have more scope. The knight may threaten the black QBP rather than reinforce whites pawns.

I had to look over the 1993 game twice just to see what was going on. Instead of 9) N-Q5 should he have played 9) BxN ? Were you willing to take a draw at the repetition around moves 10 and 11?

Thanks for alerting me to the second game with Eve.

dandelion

-- dandelion (golden@pleurisy.plant), July 17, 2000.

Hello dandelion,
You've raised some fascinating possibilities, as usual.

In C) the reply 16)... B-B1 immediately threatens to win a piece as well as freeing the square KN2 for blacks knight to hold the king pawn and free up the heavy pieces. Whites minor pieces are awkwardly posted.

...N-B4 and ...B-B1 is a fine idea. Perhaps White can start to reposition by 17) Q-B2 P-N3 (or ...P-Q5) 18) N-N2, heading for the K5 square.

In D) whites pawns are not all that active, so I think the line is playable for black. I am not sure what white would do after 19) ... B-B3.

I've been looking at the wild 20) P-B5:

I) 20) ...NxP 21) RxN PxR 22) N-Q4+ K-Q2 23) NxR KxN 24) QxP+ wins
II) 20) ...PxP 21) RxP NxR 22) N-Q4+ and now
II.1) 22) ...Q-K2 23) Q-R5+ K-B1 24) RxQ NxR 25) NxR NxN 26) QxQP
II.2) 22) ...K-B2 23) Q-R5+ K-N1 24) R-K8+ Q-B1 25) RxQ+ KxR 26) NxR
II.3) 22) ...K-Q2 23) NxR KxN 24) QxP+ regaining one of the sacrificed pieces advantageously.
II.4) 22) ...N-K2 23) NxR Q-Q3 24) Q-R5+ [ 24) QxP K-B2 and White's knight is doomed ] 24) ...K-Q2 25) NxN BxN 26) Q-N4+ K-Q1 seems equal.

E) 15) ... Q-B4 16) BxP QxQBP 17) BxN KxB 18) N-B3 BxN is equal. Probably 18) ... K-Q2 19) NxQP B-Q5+ 20) N-K3 QxRP is too risky for black.

I'm not sure how Black meets 16) P-B3, as his pawns seem fragile after 16) ...P-Q5 17) K-R1 [ avoiding 17) NxP RxN 18) BxR QxB 19) QxP PxP+ ].

Your line, "after 8) O-O R-B1, how about 9) P-KR3 BxN 10) QxB PxP 11) PxP N-R3 12) Q-N3 with a complex game," also leaves 12) QxQP as another way to get a complex game.

I thought 12) QxQP QxQ 13) NxQ BxP might give Black a good ending.

I prefer to solidify with 10) ... P-K3 and let white think about whether black will seal the center with P-KB4 now that the would-be-bad bishop is gone. Perhaps the upshot is that 5) ... P-Q4 permits white to implement her plan to counter blacks dark-squared bishop by blocking its diagonal with the king pawn.

After 10) ...P-K3, White has the wild sacrificial idea of 11) N-R4 P-QR3 12) NxP PxB 13) NxKP, which I haven't looked at deeply enough to evaluate.

I had to look over the 1993 game twice just to see what was going on.

I hear you. 8^) In annotating this game for the state chess magazine, I spent copious time analyzing it. I believe I still have a copy of the article; email me if you'd like a photocopy.

Instead of 9) N-Q5 should he have played 9) BxN ?

Both moves have been played and analyzed extensively. The usual sequel to 9) N-Q5 Q-R4+ 10) B-Q2 Q-Q1 (that is, if White does not desire an immediate draw) is either 11) P-QB4 or 11) NxN+ QxN 12) P-QB4, both of which lead to mind numbing complexity (which I'm sure is no surprise). The game's 12) P-B3 is considered dubious. If Black wants to avoid a repetition, he can vary from the game with ...B-K2 on move 9 or 11.

9) BxN PxB (with ...P-B4 soon to follow) leads to an entirely different kind of game, in which White's firm grip on the Q5 square counterbalances Black's two bishops.

Were you willing to take a draw at the repetition around moves 10 and 11?

I rarely offer a draw in the opening, but sometimes in the last round of a tournament (which is when this game was played), it's hard to get motivated. Since I had no chance for a prize and my opponent was only slightly lower rated than myself, a draw was acceptable. My opponent no doubt expected to profit from my reluctance to do battle, but in retrospect his declining my implicit draw offer was a serious error, as it snapped me wonderfully to attention.

-- David L (bumpkin@dnet.net), July 23, 2000.