October 2013


Wed 2nd: For Completeness
Sat 5th: The rust shows
Sat 5th: T-shirt
Sat 5th: Squeezed
Sun 6th: Another Present
Sun 6th: Wrong again
Tues 8th: Miscalculation
Wed 9th: d6 bind
Sun 20th: President Paulson
Mon 21st: Who votes for these people?
Tues 22nd: Fritz 9 Windows 8
Tue 22nd: Its Tactics Stupid

Wed 2nd: For Completeness
Into October, the official start of the new league season - Newcastle games spill forwards into September because of our members liking for playing in more than one team. RR is lined up to play in the home match against Macclesfield, but the E team are also at home and the club seems to be a player short overall for the night. Solution is for me to swap with Paul on the top board of the E team, making space for John (who is not eligible for the E) to play for the B without pushing them over the limit. Easy really.

Consequently RR found himself with black against George Scattergood, who generously left a bishop en prise on move 10. I can only assume that Holmes Chapel has been the scene of religious persecution in the past, for which revenge is now extracted, for David playing on board three for us was the recipient of a similar ecclesiastical donation. So we won the match. But I'm not convinced that there is any virtue in showing any moves, so I shalln't.
comment on this article


Sat 5th: The rust shows
Recently Leek in September has been my opening congress of the season, but this year my first visit to Bury St Edmunds fulfilled the role. We join the first round nine moves into the game with the unusual sight of RR having castled before his opponent.
Ole Bay-Paterson v RR after 9 ... Bd3

rnbq1rk1/ppp2ppp/1n6/4p3/2PP4/P1PBB3/5PPP/R2QK1NR w
A sane continuation would be Nc6 - I refuse to believe that taking the e-pawn would be good for him. Instead however RR elects to give up a pawn to split white's bishop pair:
9 ... e4, 10 Bxe4 Nxc4, 11 Bxh7+ Kxh7, 12 Qd3+ Kg8, 13 Qxc4 Be6
14 Qd3 c5, 15 Nf3 c4, 16 Qc2 Passive, allowing my queen to take the centre.
16 ... Qd5, 17 O-O Nc6, 18 Ng5 Bf5, 19 Qe2 f6 20 Qf3
Ole Bay-Paterson v RR after 20 Qf3

r4nk1/pp4p1/2n2p2/3q1bN1/2pP4/P1P1BQ2/5PPP/R4RK1 b
20 ... Qd7 No, this gives the knight a simple retreat.
Try 20 Ne7 21 Qxd5+ Nxd5 22 Nf3 Nxc3 and white can't play either rook to c1 because of the fork Ne2+. Black has a considerable initiative.

21 Ne4 Bxe4, 22 Qxe4 Ne7 black is very much lacking compensation for his pawn deficit
23 Rab1 Nd5, 24 Bd2 Rfe8, 25 Qf3 a6 Create something on the queenside or die - that supported passed d-pawn will win the game for white if black does nothing.
26 Rfe1 b5, 27 h4 a5, 28 h5 Rxe1+, 29 Rxe1 Ra6
30 Qe4 b4, 31 axb4 axb4, 32 Rb1 presumably not liking look of
32 cxb4 c3 though I don't think the c-pawn gets through.

32 ... Ra2, 33 Qe2
Ole Bay-Paterson v RR after 33 Qe2

6k1/3q2p1/5p2/3n3P/1ppP4/2P5/r2BQPP1/1R4K1 b
White's retreat into his shell has turned the game around with RR now in a position to dictate. RR's turn to lack courage. Nervous because rook, knight and king are all on the same diagonal as the pawn threatened by the white queen, and also of the rook check that white could play if black takes the c-pawn, RR declines to do so. Yet his queen is ideally placed to stop further checks on the b1h7 diagonal as it supports a push of the f-pawn.

33 ... Qc8, 34 Qf3 Qd8, 35 Bf4 Ra3 RR again tries to keep things under control rather than allowing the wildness of exchanges with Nxc3.
36 Qg4 b3 So now RR decides to rely on a supported passed pawn rather than taking a pawn for his late game threats. The game nevertheless becomes very open before a draw is agreed.
37 Qe6+ Kh8, 38 Bd6 Nxc3, 39 Re1 Ra8, 40 Qxc4 Qxd6
41 Qxc3 Qd5, 42 h6 gxh6, 43 Rb1 Rd8, 44 Qe3 Qxd4
45 Qxh6+ Kg8, 46 Qg6+ Kf8, 47 Qh5 b2, 48 Qh8+ ½ - ½

One that got away, but also one rescued.
comment on this article


Sat 5th: T-shirt
RR v Colin Fell after 8 ... Bb7

r2q1rk1/pbpnppbp/1p1p1np1/8/1PPPP3/5N2/PBQ1BPPP/RN2K2R w
Round two and I have black against Colin Fell. 9 Nbd2 Rc8, 10 O-O c5, 11 bxc5 bxc5, 12 e5
d5 is more my style, and probably better here, creating a solid block in the centre with a small but long lasting space advantage. However I have an eye on getting a pawn to e6.

12 ... Ne8, 13 exd6
(13 e6 fxe6, 14 Ng5 Nc7, 15 Bg4 cxd4, 16 Bxe6+ Nxe6
17 Nxe6 Qb6, 18 Nxf8 Rxf8 leads to the win of an exchange but black has powerful central pawns.)

13 ... cxd4, 14 dxe7 Qxe7, 15 Rfe1 Qd6 Diagram left.
RR v Colin Fell after 15 ... Qd6

Time for a think. I'm happy with my position, though I need to keep my eye on the threat of e3, so Nb3 putting extra pressure on the pawn is a no go. Seem to be spoilt for choice. So after considered thought:

16 Nb3 d3 Oh naughty words - I knew I could't play that!

17 Bxd3 Bxb2, 18 Qxb2 Bxf3, 19 Re3 Bb7 and I soon accept that the piece deficit is fatal to my survival chances.
0-1

How many times have I done that? Decided there is one move I can't play, and that after looking at other possibilities return and play that move anyway. I've a sneaking suspicion that some of my readers have acquired that particular T-shirt too.
comment on this article


Sat 5th: Squeezed
I'm not the only one to have made a slow start to the congress, and in round three RR found himself black against the highly seeded John Peters. We join the game withh RR having just developed his queen's bishop.
John Peters v RR after 8 ... Be6

rn1q1rk1/ppp1bppp/4b3/3p4/3P4/3BBN2/PPP2PPP/R2QK2R w
9 h4 f5 Not only blocks the white squared bishops route to h7, thereby blunting threats there upon, but also ready for further advance to f4.

10 Ng5 Qd7, 11 c3 h6, 12 Nh3 Bd6, 13 Qd2 Nc6, 14 O-O-O Rad8
15 Nf4 Bxf4 Ill-judged. The knight can be annoying rather than dangerous on g6. Now black has considerable problems finding gainful employment for his remaining bishop.

16 Bxf4 Rf6, 17 Bb5 a6, 18 Bxc6 Qxc6 Whilst opposite coloured bishop endings are often drawn, though not necessarily as frequently as their reputation would have you believe, when there are other pieces on the position is liable to favour the side with the freer bishop. Who might that be?

19 Be5 Rf7, 20 f3 b5, 21 f4
John Peters v RR after 21 f4

3r2k1/2p2rp1/p1q1b2p/1p1pBp2/3P1P1P/2P5/PP1Q2P1/2KR3R b
21 ... b4 If I am to get anything out of this game it will be from queenside play. Unfortunately my c-pawn hampers such plans if it stays at home, whilst if it moves I lose the use of b8. thus any attack I make may not be as forceful as I'd like. But needs must.A waste of a move as I cannot stop the loss of the pawn, so why not do something useful like starting to relocate the bishop?

27 Rxb4 Rxb4, 28 Qxb4 Qxb4, 29 axb4 c6 Cannot leave defence of the c-pawn to the rook else white will play Rc1 with the resulting death of the pawn leaving his b-pawns passed. Notice the difference that acting on previous comment could have made - Bd7 instead of Qa5 would now allow Bb5 and then c6. With the bishop outside my pawn chain my survival prospects would have been far greater. Now it is impossible to generate threats with any speed to counter the multiple problems white can set me. The rest is an exercise in squeezing the life out of black, whose death throes and thrashings are pretty ugly.

John Peters v RR after 29 ... c6

6k1/5rp1/2p1b2p/3pBp2/1P1P1P1P/8/1P4P1/1K1R4 w
30 Rc1 Bd7, 31 Kc2 Bc8, 32 Ra1 Bb7, 33 Ra5 Kf8, 34 b5 Ke8
35 bxc6 Bxc6, 36 Ra6 Kd7, 37 Kc3 g5, 38 hxg5 hxg5, 39 fxg5 Rf8
40 g6 Rc8, 41 Kd2 Ke6, 42 b4 Ke7, 43 Ke3 Bb5, 44 Ra7+ Bd7
45 g7 Ke6, 46 Kf4 Re8, 47 Ra6+ Kf7, 48 Rd6 Ke7, 49 Rh6 Rg8
50 Bd6+ Kf7, 51 Bf8 Ke8, 52 Ke5 Bc8, 53 b5 Kf7, 54 Rc6 Bd7
55 Rc7 Ke8, 56 Rxd7 1-0
comment on this article


Sun 6th: Another Present
Another day, maybe my play will have changed. First up Andy Waters with RR white.
RR v Andy Walters after 8 ... Be7

rn1qk2r/1b1pb1pp/1p2pn2/pPp2p2/2P5/4PN2/PB1PBPPP/RN1Q1RK1 w
I'm quite happy with this. Let's take the light squared bishops off, which should blunt at least some of his attacking ideas.

9 Ne5 O-O, 10 Bf3 Qc7, 11 Bxb7 Qxb7, 12 Nc3 d6
13 Qf3 Qxf3, 14 Nxf3 Nbd7
Queens have gone too. Am I trying to win the endgame? If I get my knight into e6 will I be able to get it out again? Don't know. Think I'll just tell him to keep an eye on his b-pawn.

15 Na4 h6, 16 d3 Kh7, 17 Rfe1 g5

RR v Andy Walters after 17 ... g5

r4r2/3nb2k/1p1ppn1p/pPp2pp1/N1P5/3PPN2/PB3PPP/R3R1K1 w
He's playing on the wing, so I go in the centre. Could be a lot of carnage with me better placed at the end. No doubt classical play is Rad1, but I want to have an aggressive response to g4. 18 e4 fxe4, 19 dxe4 g4, 20 e5 gxf3 Better than keeping knights on with a retreat as RR can play exd6 after which his rooks get to dominate the centre.

21 exf6 Bxf6, 22 Rxe6 Bxb2, 23 Nxb2 All as expected.
23 ... fxg2 oops
24 Re7+ Free gifts of pieces seems to be the theme of the season! Pleased to be the recipient rather than the donor.
1-0
comment on this article


Sun 6th: Wrong again
Why do we lose? Dropping material, miscalculation of combinations and choosing the wrong plan(s) all figure highly in our sins. last round at Bury, and RR is happy with the position reached as he contemplaes his 13th move, for his opponent has allowed his own light squared bishop to be exchanged, giving RR's on b7 considerable influence.

Chris Jones v RR after 13 a3

r3k2r/1bq1bppp/pp1ppn2/2p5/5P2/PPN1P3/1BPPQNPP/R4RK1 b
13 ... h5 A statement of crude intent
13 ... Qc6, 14 e4 d5 is a sounder way of maintaining pressure.

14 e4 Qc6 Not now. d5 called for.
15 Rae1 O-O-O, 16 d3 d5 back on track
17 e5 d4, 18 Nce4 Nd5, 19 Nd1 g6 In play I dismissed Bh4 as a waste of time, but by encouraging g3 there is a latent route to h1 opened.
20 c4 dxc3, 21 Bxc3 Qb5, 22 b4 Nxc3, 23 Ndxc3

Chris Jones v RR after 23 Ndxc3

2kr3r/1b2bp2/pp2p1p1/1qp1P2p/1P2NP2/P1NP4/4Q1PP/4RRK1 b
Still doing fine. My plan here was Qxd3, but I had a sudden attack of cold feet about the reply Nd6+, so chickened out. Yet say
23 ... Qxd3, 24 Nd6+ Rxd6, 25 exd6 Qxe2, 26 Rxe2 Bxd6
27 Ne4 Bxe4, 28 Rxe4 b5 and blacks two extra pawns must be easily worth the exchange.
Instead a limp retreat ended up going down a line needing careful handling.

23 ... Qc6, 24 Rc1 Kb8, 25 a4 cxb4, 26 Nb5 Bc5+, 27 Nxc5 bxc5
28 Nd6 Rxd6, 29 exd6 Qxd6 There is no hurry to take this pawn as it can only be protected by the queen, which with the mate threat on g2 still in existence, is not yet possible. Consequently black has time for Rc8 first, which would make life easier. Mostly though the problem for the remainder of the game was a lack of belief on my part, together with a lack of sufficient time that would have enabled me to do the thinking to reveal my thought processes as too pessimistic.

30 Qe5 Rd8, 31 Rxc5 f6, 32 Qxd6+ Rxd6, 33 Rc4 b3
34 Rb4 Rxd3, 35 Rb1 Kc7, 36 R4xb3 Rxb3, 37 Rxb3

My inability to resist these exchanges because of the threat to pin and win my bishop should have been pre-calculable. No great surprise that from here my bishop was no match for the rook, and another loss was recorded against RR's name.
comment on this article


Tues 8th: Miscalculation
After that less than brilliant performance at Bury St Edmunds (about 130 I reckon), its back to league action and a visit to Alsager in the second division. RR finds himself lurking on board three, and playing an old adversary in Steve Brown. As happens so often, Fritz does not approve of my opening play and by the time we join the game on move seven the silicon beast reckons I've more than surrendered white's natural advantage.
RR v Steve Brown after 7 Nc3

rn1q1rk1/ppp1bppp/4pn2/3p1b2/1PP5/P1N1PN2/1B1P1PPP/R2QKB1R b
7 ... c5 Annoying, but hardly unexpected. Didn't particularly want to face a5 either.
8 bxc5 Bxc5, 9 cxd5 Nxd5, 10 Qb3 Qb6, 11 Qxb6 Nxb6, 12 d4
Didn't want to play this earlier being fearful of having to waste time getting my dark squared bishop into the game with queens still on. Now I'm happy to kick bishops.
12 ...Be7, 13 e4 definitely a move I would have been unhappy to play with queens on, and uncastled to boot!
13 ... Bg6, 14 Ne5 Nc6

RR v Steve Brown after 14 ... Nc6

r4rk1/pp2bppp/1nn1p1b1/4N3/3PP3/P1N5/1B3PPP/R3KB1R w
Steve offers a choice of pieces to exchange, and RR unerringly goes for the wrong one. Not only with the board fairly open are the bishops likely to be better than the knights, but by pulling a pawn onto the c-file his d-pawn becomes somewhat fixed. He now needs to worry about multiple attacks on his b2 bishop, c3 knight and his e-pawn.

15 Nxc6 bxc6, 16 Ba6 Rab8, 17 Bc1 c5, 18 dxc5 Bxc5
19 Bf4 Rbd8, 20 f3 f6, 21 Ke2 Bf7, 22 Rhc1 Bd4
23 Be3 e5, 24 Rab1 Bxe3, 25 Kxe3

RR v Steve Brown after 25 Kxe3

3r1rk1/p4bpp/Bn3p2/4p3/4P3/P1N1KP2/6PP/1RR5 b
The pressure is now mostly gone, which doesn't stop Steve trying to penetrate RR's position:

25 ... Bc4??, 26 Rxb6 Rd3+, 27 Kf2 Bxa6, 28 Rxa6 Rc8, 29 Ne2 1-0

Another game won a piece up.
comment on this article


Wed 9th: d6 bind
Into division 3, top board and black against Roger Butters. I've played him before too. After some early minor piece exchanges we reached the position left.
Roger Butters v RR after 10 QxBe2

rn1qk2r/ppp2ppp/4p3/3nP3/8/7P/PPP1QPP1/RNB2RK1 b
10 ... c6 This really is very passive and begs for Qg4. Nc6 is clearly better. Could even lead to
10 ... Nc6, 11 Qg4 Nxe5, 12 Qxg7 Qf6 and castle long. Fortunately Roger is in the mood for a quiet build-up.

11 c4 Nb6, 12 Nc3 Qd4, 13 Rd1 Qxc4, 14 Qxc4 Nxc4
RR has a pawn, but white's control of d6 is a considerable barrier to be overcome.

15 f4 Nd7, 16 b3 Ncb6, 17 Ne4 O-O, 18 Ba3 Rfe8, 19 Nd6 Reb8
20 Rac1 Nd5, 21 Ne4 Rd8, 22 g3 N7b6, 23 Nd6 Rd7, 24 Kf2 Rad8
25 Ne4 Nc8, 26 Nc5 Rc7, 27 Ne4 h6, 28 Rd2 Re8, 29 Rdc2 Rd7
½ - ½

Final position, Roger Butters v RR

A lack of courage perhaps, but I've played these positions before whereby attempts to break out end up with the opponent coming in instead. Certainly with confidence still fragile I'll take the draw and drawn match.
comment on this article


Sun 20th: President Paulson
The ECF had its AGM on Saturday 12th October, at which Andrew Paulson was elected president in succession to Roger Edwards. On the off-chance that you may not know too much about Andrew, I've decided to say a few words, based on his Wikipedia entry, his published election statement for the post, and gleanings from the ECForum, none or more of which may not be regarded as the most reliable of sources. Any quotes will be in italics.

Andrew is an American businessman now living in London having reputedly made a considerable fortune through his Russian publishing and media interests. Despite the pound signs that clearly appeared in some of the electorate's eyes, the actual size of the fortune is not relevant, as Andrew is not proposing to spend any of it on British Chess. Its him we've got, not his money, which is how it should be.

What of his chess background? There are no records of his ever having lost a game of chess, which would be impressive were it not that the reason for this is that there are no records of his ever having played a game of chess. His company Agon have acquired the rights to organise and commercialise the World Chess Championship cycle. Obviously a good guy to tap for ideas for jazzing up the strong players GP.

What do we get? Beyond its day-to-day activities the ECF needs a grand purpose; I propose that it become the moral vanguard of functional and honest chess adminitration.
Yippee!

and
UK chess is the perfect laboratory in which to which to fine-tune old institutions and test new ideas
Maybe the ECF can raise money by selling "I'm a lab-rat" badges.

Did you know that
My first major initiative is a new business model to bring sponsorship revenue to all the ECF's interests, projects and affiliates. The ECF will offer a consolidated asset (ALL of English chess, at every level, every event, any individual) for sponsorship and act as a central clearing house equitably to distribute this revenue to all participants.
Sounds good, but under questioning on the Forum he had to admit that much of chess in this country is not the ECF's to offer to sponsors. Moreover when talking about the London Candidates (Agon had the rights to organise remember) he conceded that
The budget had to be cut due to underperformance in meeting sponsorship targets.

More:
a commercial director will be appointed or elected and paid to find the revenue and manage the sponsoring partners.
Ouch. How often do we hear of professional fund raisers only raising enough, if that, to cover their own salary and expenses? Does this mean that the ECF's own limited financial resources will be put at risk to hunt for sponsors? In truth sponsorship deals can have at most two threads - advertising and philanthropy. Is the chess community such an attractive destination for such activity beyond supporting local (to the sponsor) people and initiatives that money is going to roll in.

And this:
My first concrete goal is to arrange for the Government to accord the status of sport.
A man not shy of his abilities to make things happen. The ECF, and before them BCF, has been chasing this for some considerable time. We now have the man with the wand to make it happen. I fear he will find his influence less telling than he thinks.

What's in it for him?
My personal interest derives from the legitimacy I will earn as a spokesman for chess in Africa and India if I succeed with the ECF.
An eminently understandable motivation.

The ECF already suffers from an image that it is not overly interested in the grassroots, yet our latest president appears interested only in the upper echelons of the game - he has nothing credible to say to those for whom the game forms the centrepiece to a night out with the lads. He's looking up towards FIDE (with whom he has a contract) rather than down towards the local leagues. And dealing with FIDE means Kirsan Ilyumzhinov, its head. Sepp Blatter he is not. After all Mr Blatter has not been abducted by aliens. (Kirsan says that he has, so it must be true). Kirsan will be up for re-election soon, and Nigel Short our FIDE representative wishes to see Kirsan toppled by Kasparov. (Actually, Nigel would put it more strongly than that, but this diary is for family consumption despite some of the scary happenings in some of the games I report.) Guess what? Mr Paulson is anti-Kasparov, though he claims not totally convincingly that this does not make him pro-Kirsan.

It is difficult not to conclude that the best we can hope is that Mr Paulson will move on quickly with he and the ECF soon being seen as irrelevant in each other's lives.
comment on this article


Mon 21st: Who votes for these people?
The ECF voted for interesting times at its AGM, but who actually gets to votes? Short answer the ECF council. Apart from officers, trustees, the immediate past President, CEO and Chairman, a couple of reps for each ECF membership category (bronze, silver, gold, platinum, VPs) and a motley collection of 'other' organisations, the votes are thus held by the constituent units, counties, leagues and congresses that organise chess, with the number of votes each holds being roughly proportoonal to the amount of chess played within their events.

A voting register is published before each meeting showing who holds the votes, and how many votes each holder has. Thus the North Staffs League is shown as having 3 votes at the AGM, and the Leek congress one. The Newcastle mini does not have a vote as its results are submitted through the league, potentially helping to boost its numbers.

Inevitably the various vote holders act in varied ways towards those they represent. Some actively seek opinions, others will listen to those interested enough to submit opinions without prompting, whilst others still treat the vote as their own personal possession.

Whilst the above situation may not be ideal, it still seems better than each member of the ECF being given a vote, as to me it is inevitable that under that scenario only a small proportion of votes would be cast, thereby making it relatively easy for an organisation willing to whip its members into voting to have disproportionate influence.

I can't help comparing with our district association where the limited voting structure means that clubs cannot simply flood the AGM with their members in order to get their way. On the other hand one can't help also believing that at the North Staffs level club reps represent their members more accurately than is always the case within the ECF council.
comment on this article


Tues 22nd: Fritz 9 Windows 8
OK, 'tis not a football result. My latop on which I run Fritz has become rather temperamental with a physical rather than software problem recently - I needed to sit with my elbow exerting pressure just to one side of the tracker pad in order to make the thing work. Talk about having my head in my hand when looking at my games. Shades of thumping old TVs in just the right place to make them go.

Anyway I've now acquired a shiny new Windows 8 laptop. Do I need an equally shiny new version of Fritz, or will Fritz 9 work? So I sucked it to see. Immediately got some warnings about incompatibility, so ignored those as one does, and installed anyway. In it went. no problems at first sight, but then it became apparent that some of the symbols in the analysis panel were not as expected. Fonts problem. Go to original disc, copy fonts directory across. Open said directory and select all the contents. Immediately an option to install fonts arises, which is taken. Problem cured. Can't claim to have tried all the features, and am particularly suspicious that the media ones may fall over - they seems the most likely to give rise to incompatabilities - but its a definite case of so far so good.
comment on this article


Tue 22nd: Its Tactics Stupid
Tue 22nd: Its Tactics Stupid
Most of us like to think that our tactical awareness has advanced beyond the simplest one of all - attack a piece, and if it doesn't move, take it. However in many games missed tactical opportunities shows that our progress beyond these entry level thoughts isn't as great we'd like. RR's game against Doug Barnett amply illustates this. But before getting into the game I'll give you a position (right) as a puzzle. Why can white play Rxd6? Answer later.
RR v Doug Barnett after 26 ... Ng6

1r3rk1/3bqp1p/p1Rn1bnQ/3P2p1/1p1N4/1P2P3/PB2NP1P/1B3RK1 w

RR v Doug Barnett after 6 ... b6

r1bqkb1r/p2n1ppp/1pp1pn2/3p4/2P5/1P2PN2/PBQP1PPP/RN2KB1R w
RR is already thinking of a kingside attack so is looking at ways of getting his queen over to the h-file. So he sets it up as a target. Almost certainly not the best plan in town, but as the man said, any plan is better than no plan.

7 cxd5 cxd5 the only sensible recapture
8 Qc6 Rb8, 9 Nc3 Bb7, 10 Qa4 a6, 11 Rc1 b5, 12 Qh4 Be7 Having ones queen on the same diagonal as an enemy bishop is rarely to be recommended. Clearly I need to keep a close eye on making sure that the f6 knight cannot jump away and grab material. This is somewhat reminiscent of a line in the Centre Counter
1 e4 d5, 2 exd5 Qxd5, 3 Nc3 Qa5 in which white develops his queens bishop on d2 hoping to do nasty things to the enemy queen by moving the knight away at an opportune point. Yet black wouldn't play this line if it were prone to resulting in nasty accidents. White is better ignoring the queen and letting black work out what exactly it intends to achieve on a5. I'm hoping the same sort of principle will apply here.

13 Bd3 greedy, but I'd like to preserve e2 for swinging the c3 knight onto the queenside.
13 ... e5 I spy a fork. At the time I had been intending to meet
13 ... d4 with 14 Nd4 Bxg2, 15 Rg1 not seeing that he then had
15 ... Ne5, 16 Bb1 Nfg4, 17 Qg3 Bb7 Now he's the one with the kingside attack will I enjoy Bh4? On reflection I'm glad I didn't need to find out.

14 Bb1 Ne4, 15 Qh3 Bf6, 16 Ne2 0-0 17 d3 Nd6 (Qa5+ with intent to retreat the knight to c5 to protect his twin may look promising but achieves nothing.)

18 0-0 Bc8, 19 g4 (Qg3 saner, but my one track mind is still eyeing h6.)
19 ... g5

RR v Doug Barnett after 19 ... g5

1rbq1rk1/3n1p1p/p2n1b2/1p1pp1p1/6P1/1P1PPN1Q/PB2NP1P/1BR2RK1 w
A real brain-hurting position. I want to play
20 Nxe5 Nxe5, 21 Bxe5 Bxe5, 22 d4 with discovered mate threat. There are variations that start with theme - certainly black can play Bxh2+ before answering the threat, but at some point he must play f5. RR had difficulty assessing the resulting position, so declined the line, but Fritz he say go for it.

20 Rc6 Qe7
Qh6 was now my immediate thought, pinning the bishop to the knight.
How about 21 d4 e4, not attacking the knight as the pawn is now pinned against mate. Or doubling the rooks? But RR came up with a move-waster:

21 Ba3 b4 (what else!), 22 Bb2 e4, 23 Nfd4 Didn't want to take off the bishops first and bring his knight to join in the attack on g4.

23 ... Ne5, 24 dxe4 Bxg4, 25 Qh6 Bd7
Had been expecting 25 ... Bxe2, 26 Nxe2 though black cannot now take on c6 because of the power of the mate threat exd5.
26 exd5 Ng6 which is the puzzle position above.

I'm sure you've spotted
27 Rxd6 Qxd6, 28 Nf3 with Nxg5 to follow, threatening mate on g7 if black takes the knight, and on h7 if he doesn't. The grovelling necessary to defeat both threats will leave black well behind.

RR didn't spot this, so the game continued
27 Nf5 Nxf5, 28 panic, due to loss of memory.
What should have happened is
28 Bxf6 Qxf6, 29 Qxf8+ Kxf8, 30 Rxf6
or 28 Bxf6 Nxh6, 29 Bxe7 with variations all to white's advantage.

28 Bxf5 Bxb2, 29 Rc7 Rfd8, 30 Ng3 Qd6, 31 Ra7 Bxf5, 32 Nxf5
Down a piece for a pawn RR is in big trouble, but at least the clock is on his side.

32 ... Qf6 (Qb6 nastier), 33 Qh3 Rf8, 34 d6 Rbd8

At least I get a second pawn:
35 Rxa6 Ne5, 36 Rd1 g4, 37 Qh5 Nf3+, 38 Kg2
missing 38 ... Qxf5, 39 Qxf5 Nh4+, which Doug did (or declined to play) too.

38 ... Qg5, 39 Qxg5+ Nxg5, 40 d7 Ne6, 41 Rd5 missing the obvious and advantageous
41 Ne7+ and 42 Nc6.

We're both on increments now, so perhaps its not surprising that Doug played the solid Bf6 rather than Nc7, nor that a draw was agreed several though not too many moves later.
comment on this article