(21) James Matz - Dwight Kearney
BCC July-Aug Marathon Berkeley (3), 23.07.2004
1.d4 Nf6 2.Nf3 d5 3.c4 c6 4.e3 e6 5.Nc3 Bb4 I guess this is a Ragozin.. can't find any more info. 6.Bd2 [ 6.Bd3 Nbd7 a) 6...dxc4 7.Bxc4 0-0 8.0-0 c5 9.Bd3 Nbd7 10.a3 Ba5 11.Ne4 Nxe4 12.Bxe4 Nf6 13.Bc2 cxd4 14.exd4 Qd5 15.Qd3 Bd7 16.a4 Bc6 17.Bg5 Ne4 18.Be3 Bc7 19.b4 Qh5 20.Rfc1 Nf6 21.Bd1 Be4 22.Qd2 Bxf3 23.Rxc7 Bxd1 24.Rxd1 b6 25.Rdc1 Nd5 26.R7c2 h6 27.a5 Qh4 28.Rc4 1/2-1/2 Bogoljubow,E-Kubbel,A/Leningrad 1925/URS-ch (28); b) 6...0-0 7.0-0 (b) 7.Qc2 Nbd7 8.0-0 Qe7 9.Bd2 dxc4 10.Bxc4 Bd6 11.Bd3 e5 12.h3 Re8 13.Ng5 h6 14.Nge4 Bc7 15.Rae1 Nxe4 16.Nxe4 Nf6 17.Nxf6+ Qxf6 18.Bc3 Qh4 19.dxe5 Bxe5 20.Bxe5 Rxe5 21.f4 Re8 22.Kh2 Bd7 23.Qc3 Rad8 24.e4 Bc8 25.Re3 Qe7 26.e5 Qd7 27.Rd1 Qe7 28.Rde1 Qd7 29.Rf1 Qe7 30.Bb1 Rd5 31.Qc2 g6 32.Rg3 Kf8 33.Qe2 Qb4 34.Bxg6 fxg6 35.Rxg6 Ke7 36.Qh5 Kd8 37.Qxh6 Qxb2 38.e6 Rh8 39.e7+ Ke8 40.Re1 Rd2 41.Qh5 Rxg2+ 42.Rxg2+ Rxh5 43.Rxb2 Rxh3+ 44.Kg1 Rh7 45.Rh2 Rg7+ 46.Kf2 Rg8 47.Rh6 Kf7 48.e8Q+ Rxe8 49.Rh7+ 1-0 Maroczy,G-Romi,M/San Remo 1930/HCL (49)) 7...b6 8.Qc2 Ba6 9.b3 Nbd7 10.Bd2 c5 11.cxd5 Bxd3 12.Qxd3 Bxc3 13.Bxc3 Nxd5 14.Bb2 f5 15.Rad1 Qe7 16.Qb5 Rac8 17.Rd2 cxd4 18.exd4 N7f6 19.Qa6 Ne4 20.Rdd1 Qe8 21.Ne5 Rc2 22.Ba3 Rxa2 23.Ra1 Rxa1 24.Rxa1 Rf6 25.Qxa7 Nec3 26.Qb7 Nb5 27.Bc5 Nbc7 28.Bxb6 Qb5 29.Ra8+ Nxa8 30.Qc8+ 1-0 Alekhine,A-Menzel/Boston 1923/EXT 99 (30); 7.0-0 0-0 8.Qb3 a5 9.Ne2 Bd6 10.Qc3 Re8 11.Ne5 Bxe5 12.dxe5 Ng4 13.f4 Nc5 14.Bc2 b6 15.b3 Ba6 16.h3 Nh6 17.g4 Qh4 18.Kg2 f5 19.exf6 Qxf6 20.Nd4 e5 21.g5 exd4 22.exd4 Re2+ 23.Rf2 Rxf2+ 24.Kxf2 Qe7 25.dxc5 Re8 26.Bb2 bxc5 27.Re1 Qxe1+ 28.Qxe1 Rxe1 29.Kxe1 Nf7 30.a4 dxc4 31.Bc3 cxb3 32.Bxb3 c4 33.Bc2 Nd6 34.Bxa5 g6 35.Bb4 Nf5 36.Bxf5 gxf5 37.h4 Kf7 38.h5 Ke8 39.Kd2 Bc8 40.Kc3 Be6 41.Kd4 Bf7 42.g6 hxg6 43.h6 Bg8 44.Ke5 Bh7 45.Kf6 c5 46.Bd2 Kf8 47.a5 g5 48.a6 1-0 Euwe,M-Von Hartingsvelt,H/Amsterdam 1923/EXT 99 (48); 6.Qb3 Qe7 7.Bd3 Nbd7 8.Bd2 Bd6 9.Qc2 0-0 10.cxd5 exd5 11.0-0 Re8 12.Rfd1 Ne4 13.Be1 Nf8 14.Nd2 Bf5 15.Nf1 Bg6 16.f3 Nxc3 17.Bxc3 Qe6 18.Re1 Bxd3 19.Qxd3 f5 20.Bd2 Re7 21.Rac1 Nd7 22.Bc3 Nf6 23.Ng3 g6 24.Nf1 Rf8 25.Bd2 g5 26.Qb3 g4 27.f4 h5 28.Bb4 Bxb4 29.Qxb4 h4 30.Qa3 a6 31.Qd3 Rfe8 32.Rc2 Ne4 33.Nd2 g3 34.h3 Nxd2 35.Qxd2 Kg7 36.Rcc1 Qd6 37.Kf1 Re4 38.Rc3 Qb4 39.a3 Qb6 40.Re2 Qb5 41.Ke1 Kf6 42.Qc2 a5 43.Kd1 R4e6 44.Rc5 Qa6 45.Rc3 Re4 46.Ke1 R8e6 47.Kd1 Ke7 48.Re1 b6 49.Qa4 b5 1/2-1/2 Gruenfeld,E-Glass,E/Vienna 1932/EXT 99 (49)] 6...dxc4 7.Bxc4 Bxc3?! Diagram
|
after playing this move, I show black going 0-4. Also Fritz downgrades black three fifths of a pawn. I guess basically there is no compensation for trading a bishop for a knight. (kayvey) [ 7...Nbd7 8.0-0 0-0 9.Ng5 g6 10.Qf3 Qe7 11.e4 e5 12.dxe5 Qxe5 13.Rac1 Bd6 14.Bf4 Qxf4 15.g3 Qxf3 16.Nxf3 Ne5 17.Rcd1 Re8 18.Rd4 Nxc4 19.Rxc4 Be5 20.Ne2 Bxb2 21.Ng5 b5 22.Rb1 Ba3 23.Rxc6 h6 24.Nf3 Bg4 25.Rb3 Rxe4 26.Nc3 Re7 27.Nb1 Bh3 28.Nd4 Re1# 0-1 Ciucanu,O-Todoran,M/Eforie Nord 2001/EXT 2004 (29); 7...b5 8.Bd3 ( 8.Bb3 0-0 9.0-0 Nbd7 10.a3 Be7 11.Re1 a6 12.Bc2 c5 13.dxc5 Nxc5 14.b4 Nd3 15.Bxd3 Qxd3 16.Qe2 Qxe2 17.Rxe2 Bb7 18.Nd4 Ne4 19.Nxe4 Bxe4 20.Rc1 Rfc8 21.Rc3 Rc4 22.Re1 Rac8 23.Rec1 Bf6 24.Rxc4 Rxc4 25.Rxc4 bxc4 26.Bc3 e5 27.Ne2 Kf8 28.f3 Bc6 29.Ng3 Ke7 30.Nh5 e4 31.Nxf6 gxf6 32.f4 f5 33.Kf2 Kd6 34.Kg3 Ba4 35.Kh4 Bd1 36.Kg5 Ke6 37.Kh6 Bf3 38.Kxh7 Bxg2 39.Kg7 Bf3 40.h4 Bd1 41.Kh6 f6 42.Kg6 Bg4 43.h5 Bxh5+ 44.Kxh5 Ke7 45.Kh6 1-0 Del Castillo Lopez,R-Morilla Gomez,I/Madrid 2002/CBM 90 ext (45)) 8...Nd5 ( 8...a6 9.Qc2 h6 10.Ne4 Bxd2+ 11.Nexd2 Bb7 12.h3 Nbd7 13.0-0 Qc7 14.Rfe1 c5 15.Rac1 c4 16.Be2 Qc8 17.b3 cxb3 18.Qxc8+ Rxc8 19.Rxc8+ Bxc8 20.Nxb3 Ne4 21.Nfd2 Nc3 22.a3 Nb6 23.Bd3 Nca4 24.e4 0-0 25.Nf3 Bb7 26.Nfd2 Rd8 27.f3 f6 28.Rc1 Rd7 29.Be2 Kh7 30.g4 g5 31.Kg2 Kg6 32.e5 fxe5 33.dxe5 Rd5 34.Ne4 Rxe5 35.Na5 Bxe4 0-1 Podolski,A-Mehl,S/Biedenkopf 1997/EXT 2002 (35); 8...Qb6 9.Rc1 0-0 10.0-0 Nbd7 11.e4 Rd8 12.e5 Bxc3 13.bxc3 Nd5 14.Ng5 h6 15.Qh5 hxg5 16.Qh7+ Kf8 17.Qh8+ Ke7 18.Bxg5+ N7f6 19.Qxg7 Rf8 20.exf6+ Ke8 21.Bh6 Rh8 22.Qxh8+ Kd7 23.Qf8 Kc7 24.Qxf7+ Bd7 25.Qg7 Rd8 26.f7 Qa5 27.f8Q Rxf8 28.Qxf8 Qb6 29.Bf4+ 1-0 Suomalainen,S-Singhal,S/IECC email 1996/E-Mail 2000 (29)) 9.Qc2 h6 10.a3 Qa5 11.0-0 Bxc3 12.Bxc3 Nxc3 13.Qxc3 Qxc3 14.bxc3 f6 15.Rfc1 Bb7 16.a4 a6 17.axb5 cxb5 18.Rc2 Nd7 19.c4 Rc8 20.cxb5 Rxc2 21.Bxc2 axb5 22.Bd3 Bc6 23.Rc1 Nb8 24.Bxb5 Kd7 25.Bxc6+ Nxc6 26.Kf1 Kd6 27.Ke2 Rb8 28.Rc2 g5 29.Kd2 Rb1 30.Rc1 Rb2+ 31.Rc2 Rb1 32.Rc1 Rb2+ 1/2-1/2 Hilpisch,R-Hille,R/Germany 1992/EXT 2002 (32)] 8.Bxc3 Ne4 [ 8...0-0 9.0-0 b5 10.Bd3 Nbd7 11.h3 a5 12.a3 Rb8 13.Qd2 c5 14.Bxa5 Qe7 15.dxc5 Nxc5 16.Bb4 Qd6 17.Bxh7+ Nxh7 18.Qxd6 Ba6 19.Bxc5 Ra8 20.Rfd1 g6 21.b4 Nf6 22.Ng5 Rfd8 23.Qe7 Rxd1+ 24.Rxd1 Re8 25.Qxf6 Rf8 26.Rd8 e5 27.Rxf8# 1-0 Slangal,L-Kracikova,L/Plzen 1998/EXT 2000 (27); 8...b6 9.Qd3 Bb7 10.a3 c5 11.Bb5+ Ke7 12.Rd1 cxd4 13.Bb4+ Qd6 14.Bxd6+ Kxd6 15.Qxd4+ Ke7 16.Qd6# 1-0 Bensouda,S-Nichols,C/Mamaia 1991/EXT 97 (16)] 9.0-0 [ 9.Qc2 0-0 10.Qxe4 f5 11.Qc2 b5 12.Bd3 Ba6 13.b4 Nd7 14.0-0 Nf6 15.Rac1 Nd5 16.e4 Nxc3 17.Qxc3 fxe4 18.Bxe4 Bb7 19.Qc2 g6 20.Qb3 Qd7 21.Rfd1 a5 22.bxa5 Rxa5 23.Ne5 Qd6 24.Rc5 Ra4 25.Qb2 Rd8 26.Rcc1 Rxd4 27.Qxd4 Qxd4 28.Rxd4 Rxd4 29.Bxc6 Bxc6 30.Nxc6 Rd2 31.Ra1 Kg7 32.g3 Kf6 33.a4 bxa4 34.Rxa4 Rd6 35.Nd4 e5 36.Nf3 Kf5 37.Ra8 e4 38.Rf8+ Kg4 39.Rf4+ 1-0 Port Sauer,U-Fuchs,W/Gemuend 1999/EXT 2003 (39)] 9...Nxc3?! I play with ..Ne4 in the Queen's Indian (QI). He's a nice piece. I think black should bolster him with ..f5, not trade him off. Moving a knight up like that only to trade him off seems to me to be a waste of time. This isn't a QI, so I don't know. Still, Fritz and the precedents don't bode well for black's play. (kayvey) 10.bxc3 b5 Diagram Black takes his bishop back, but he has wasted a lot of time doing so. I guess I can call this employing "Modern Chess Strategy" {:) now that he has only pawn moves on the board? (kayvey) [ 10...0-0 11.Qc2 f5 12.Ne5 Qh4 13.g3 Qh3 14.Rfc1 Rf6 15.Bf1 Qh5 16.Qe2 Qxe2 17.Bxe2 g5 18.Rcb1 Nd7 19.Nxd7 Bxd7 20.Rxb7 Rf7 21.Rab1 Kg7 22.Rb8 Rxb8 23.Rxb8 1-0 Kljujev,I-Langguth,W/ICCF-Cup8/9 V186 corr 1990/Corr 2000 (23)] 11.Bd3 Bb7 White has better development and the better bishop (one of the Davids) 12.Qc2 Nd7 13.Rab1 Ba6?! 14.Nd2 0-0? 15.Bxh7+ Kh8 16.Bd3 f5 17.e4! f4 18.e5 Qg5 Diagram Fritz scores white an extra pawn (two total) for positional compensation. (kayvey)19.Nf3 Qh6 20.h4?! Diagram weakens White's kingside (though it works out well) (one of the Davids) Flank pawn moves: a hallmark of "Modern Chess Strategy." The thing about 20.h4 is that I suppose it prevents ..g5 (which of course would be a mad dog type of an attacking move..). Another aspect of black moving both kingside pawns would be to for one thing protect f4, and threaten ..g4 after which ..f3 would be in the realm of consideration. By playing 20.h4, white has the option of hg in the event of ..g5, keeping f4 a lone soldier backed up only by pieces. the kingside complex strikes me this way, white may have a weakness on h4, but it is sort of a bone in black's throat. In a way, the h4 pawn is stronger because it is protected by the mere knight. You could place pawns on a hierarchy, the strongest of them being protected by the weakest (i.e. connected or "protected" pawns e.g. the famous "protected passed pawn.") Using this system, the h4 pawn in somewhat effectively "isolated" in that black's f4 pawn causes some doubt whether white can play g3. However, he has a knight protecting him, which is usually the weakest of the pieces, while the f4 pawn is only protected by a rook which is counted amoung the "heavies." In this way, the h4 pawn is stronger than the f4 pawn. Another key reason that this is true here is also the great potential of the knight as a blockader. We can use the same system for blockaders. Weaker pieces are better blockaders so that ram pawns are the most meaningless situation in terms of pawn mobility. Next step up, the knight, its great virtue as a blockader extolled by Aron Nimzowitch. If it weren't for the fact that the same knight ("same" giving the whole situation a certain elegant efficiency for white) also blockades the f4 pawn, we would have to change our assessment. Say we move the whole structure somehow to the left so that the knight could well.. let's just say the knight sat on the imaginary square j3 to protect the h4 pawn. Then he would have nothing to say of a push f4-f3, where the "heaviness" of the rook's power down the file would sway the balance to the f4 pawn's strength. (kayvey) 20...Nb6 21.Rfc1 Nd5 Now f4 has gained some static strength by virtue of the fact of being protected by the beautifully centralized Nd5. It is also an example of "overprotection" a la Aron Nimzowitch (kayvey) 22.Bg6 [ Fritz wants to immediately question black's strong central position with 22.c4 bxc4 23.Bxc4 it doesn't look like a bad idea. (kayvey)] 22...Ne7 23.h5?! (kayvey) [ Fritz prefers 23.Be4 ] 23...Nf5?! (a david) [ 23...Nxg6 24.hxg6 Rf5 25.Qd3 ( 25.Qe4 Bb7) 25...Rd8 ( 25...Qxg6 26.Nh4) 26.Qe4 Bb7] 24.Qe4?! [ 24.Qb3! Bc8 25.c4 looks stronger (a david) those three ply are Fritz's picks (kayvey)] 24...Rac8 25.Rb3 b4?! 26.Rxb4 Ng3?! Diagram [ 26...c5] 27.fxg3 fxg3 28.Re1 [ 28.Rcb1] 28...Rf4 the point of 26..Ng3? (kayvey) 29.Qe3 Rcf8 30.Reb1 should have played 28.Rcb1 (kayvey) 30...Qg5? 31.Rb8 [ 31.Nxg5? Rf1+ 32.Rxf1 Rxf1# cute, but actually in the complications seen in the text black loses more ground because of the rickety 30.Qg5?. (kayvey)] 31...Qg4 32.Rxf8+ Rxf8 black definitely needed two rookpower for his attack to werk. (kayvey) 33.Qg5! Qxg5 and he certainly needed one queenpower. (kayvey) 34.Nxg5 Bc4 35.Nf7+ Kg8 36.Rb7 Bxa2 allows mate in four 37.h6! Rxf7 38.Rxf7? (kayvey) [ 38.h7+! Kh8 39.Rb8+ Rf8 40.Rxf8#; Also mating in 3 more moves is 38.Rb8+ Rf8 39.h7+ Kh8 40.Rxf8# I'm a tough guy. You don't see mate in 4, you get a question mark {:) (kayvey)] 38...gxh6 39.Kh1 Bc4 40.Rc7 Bd5 41.Bd3 Bb3 42.Rxc6 Kf7 43.Rc7+ Ke8 44.Bc4 Kd8 45.Bxb3?! umm.. that wasn't necessary.. but.. well.. okay trade down into a still winning endgame. Still, now the a7 pawn provides counterplay. (kayvey) 45...Kxc7 46.Bxe6 a5 47.d5 a4 48.d6+ Kd8 49.c4 Ke8 50.c5 not enough counterplay, though! {:} (kayvey) 1-0
