Bird vs Chigorin, Vienna 1882, Part Two

Last time we presented the game Bird – Chigorin, Vienna 1882, with analysis by Solomon Lipschutz and supplemental comments by Mikhail Chigorin. Today we present the same game with annotations from the modern era by the Soviet grandmaster Evgeny Vasyukov, extracted from his 1973 book Mikhail Chigorin, co-authored with Alexander Narkevich and Alexander Nikitin.

Bird – Chigorin, Vienna 1882 Two Knights Defence C59

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Ng5 d5 5.exd5 Na5 6.Bb5+ c6 7.dxc6 bxc6 8.Be2 h6 9.Nf3 e4 10.Ne5 Qc7 11.Ng4

This retreat is not considered the strongest. Instead of making the useful developing move 11.d4 or reinforcing his central position with 11.f4, White trades off his only active piece.

11...Bxg4 12.Bxg4 Bd6

A standard move in this system, and strong enough here because it stops White from castling. But 70 years after this game was played, one of our best masters of attack Rashid Nezhmetdinov suggested an even stronger plan in which both h2 and f2 are subjected to attack: 12...Bc5! 13.Be2 Rd8 14.c3 Nb7 15.0-0 h5! 16.d4 exd3 17.Bxd3 Ng4! The game Ciocaltea – Nezhmetdinov, Bucharest 1954, continued 18.Qe2+ Kf8 19.g3 Qd7 20.Be4 h4 21.Bf4 Nxh2! and Black won shortly.

13.h3

In a 1953 training game against Smyslov, Bronstein retreated his bishop to h3 with the idea of relocating it to g2. However this manoeuvre requires a lot of time and allows Black to increase the pressure: 13.Bh3 0-0 14.g3 Nd5 15.0-0 Rae8 16.d3 e3.

13...O-O 14.Nc3

Steinitz considered that 14.b3 was necessary here, hindering the transfer of Black's knight to the centre. But this move, which does nothing to aid White's development, can hardly change the nature of the struggle. Black would develop strong pressure on the central files, for example: 14...Be5 15.Nc3 Rad8 16.Bb2 e3! 17.fxe3 Bxc3 18.Bxc3 Ne4!

14...Nc4 15.b3?

White is playing the opening rather carelessly. Developing the bishop on b2 is a mistaken idea. The main events are bound to take place over on the kingside, where Black has directed all of his pieces. Therefore the following plan of development deserved attention: 15.Be2 Ne5 16.d3! (16.d4 Ng6 17.0-0 Nh4) 16...exd3 17.cxd3 Rad8 18.0-0. Of course, even here Black's edge in development would guarantee him the initiative, but it would be far easier for White to defend than in the game.

15...Ne5 16.Bb2 Rfe8 17.O-O

It is too late for White to retreat his bishop (17.Be2 Nf3+! 18.Kf1 Nh4) so he hurries to get his king out of the centre. However, this loses a pawn.

17...Nexg4 18.hxg4 Qd7 19.Qe2

Defending the pawn on g4 would lead to the creation of other weaknesses: 19.f3 Bc5+ 20.Kh1 Rad8 21.Na4 Bd4!

19...Nxg4

Diagram

A critical moment. With material being equal White can hardly count upon a successful defence. But can he capture the pawn on e4? This makes use of the fact that after 20.Nxe4 Black cannot play 20...f5 because of 21.Qc4+. The risk appears to be substantial. The pin on the knight is very unpleasant and enables Black to obtain the advantage in two ways: 20.Nxe4 Bh2+ 21.Kh1 Bc7 22.f3 f5 23.Qc4+ Kh8 24.Nf2! Qd6 (for example, 25.Nxg4 fxg4 26.f4 Qg6) or 20...Qf5 21.f3 (sacrificing the queen does not work: 21.Nxd6 Qh5 22.Qxg4 Qxg4 23.Nxe8 Rxe8 24.Rfe1 Rxe1+ 25.Rxe1 Qf5 26.d3 Qa5!) 21...Qh5! 22.fxg4 Qh2+ 23.Kf2 Qf4+ 24.Kg1 Rxe4 25.Rxf4 Rxe2 26.Rf2 Re4 (Chigorin). Nevertheless, if White wants to choose the least of evils, he should try to find salvation in this endgame. In declining to take the pawn he dooms himself to a prospectless defence.

20.g3 Qf5 21.Kg2 Re6 22.Rae1

Exchanging the e-pawn with 22.f3 exf3+ (22...Qe5 23.f4!) 23.Qxf3 does not save White from the attack after 23...Qg6!

22...Rae8 23.Rh1 h5!

Winning the exchange with 23...Qxf3+ 24.Qxf3 exf3+ 25.Kxf3 Rxe1 26.Rxe1 Rxe1 27.Kxg4 Be5 would also guarantee Black victory, but it would take much longer. He still has ways of strengthening the attack, and Chigorin decides to press on with them. The threat now is 24...Qf3+, winning a rook since the knight on g4 is defended.

24.Ref1 Qg6! 25.Nd1

Diagram

Black has apparently retreated his queen in order to make way for his f-pawn, and here in fact 25...f5 26.Ne3 f4 would also give him an irresistible attack. But Chigorin demonstrates an unexpected combinative possibility.

25...e3!

Now it becomes clear that the square g3 cannot be defended against intrusion by the Black queen, since after 26.Nxe3 Nxe3+ 27.dxe3 there follows 27...Rxe3 28.Qxh5 Rxg3+ and mate on the following move.

26.Bd4 Nxf2 27.Rxf2 Qxg3+ 28.Kf1 exf2 29.Ne3 c5 30.Bc3 Rxe3! 31.dxe3 Rxe3 32.Qd1 h4 33.Bd2 h3!

White resigned (0-1).

Here we conclude our extract from Vasyukov's 1973 analysis as well as our two-part excursion into master chess of the late 19th century.

Bird vs Chigorin, Vienna 1882, Part One

The Russian master Mikhail Chigorin compiled an amazing record on the Black side of the Two Knights Defence. Over the course of his career he employed this counterattacking system in a total of 17 games, mostly against the world's elite. He scored 13 wins, 1 draw, and only 3 losses for a winning percentage of 79%, far in excess of the standard 45% that Black can expect from the starting position. In particular his great rival Wilhelm Steinitz was bested by a score of four games to one.

Why was Chigorin so successful with the Two Knights Defence? In the first place, he was a fine attacking player with a strikingly modern feel for the initiative and the importance of piece activity. He was also aided by the generally low reputation enjoyed by the Two Knights Defence in those days. This reputation was based in large part on the writings of his rival Steinitz, who famously believed that “a pawn is worth a little trouble.” In particular, Steinitz believed that Black did not have the right to sacrifice a pawn in the opening. For his part, Chigorin didn't care what Steinitz (or anyone else) thought was right or wrong. He saw the assets in Black's position and worked hard to make them count.

Today we present a lesser-known but particularly fine example of Chigorin's play in the Two Knights Defence – his game with the English master Henry Bird from the great Vienna tournament of 1882. This event, by the way, was won by Steinitz after a playoff match with Simon Winawer. Chigorin finished 12th and Bird 15th out of 18 participants.

The Bird-Chigorin encounter did not go unnoticed by the contemporary chess press. It appeared in the Russian magazine Shakhmatny Vestnik in 1885, and later in The Chess-Player's Manual by Gossip and Lipschutz (1888). It also came to the attention of Wilhelm Steinitz, who included it in Part 1 of his two-volume opus The Modern Chess Instructor (1889).

While preparing his 1950 commemorative book on Chigorin, Nikolai Grekov gained access to the Russian master's archives, including a copy of The Modern Chess Instructor. There he found some pencilled comments to the Bird-Chigorin game in which Chigorin expressed disdain for aspects of Steinitz's analysis. Needless to say, these comments were included in Grekov's book in order to demonstrate that, even in analysis, Chigorin could hold his own against his rival.

In preparing this article I had occasion to refer directly to The Modern Chess Instructor, where I found the following caveat by Steinitz, which had been conveniently omitted from Grekov's book: “Our notes to this game are chiefly quoted from the Appendix to Gossip's Manual by S. Lipschutz.” Chigorin would have known this, so his disdain would have been largely directed at Lipschutz instead of Steinitz. However, Steinitz was ultimately responsible for the content of his book. In our article today, the comments by Steinitz/Lipschutz have been slightly edited for clarity. Chigorin's pencilled comments appear in italics, and there are two further comments of his from Shakhmatny Vestnik.

Bird-Chigorin, Vienna 1882 Two Knights Defence C59

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Ng5 d5 5.exd5 Na5 6.Bb5+ c6 7.dxc6 bxc6 8.Be2 h6 9.Nf3 e4 10.Ne5 Qc7 11.Ng4

11.d4 exd3 (and if one does not capture en passant?) 12.Nxd3 Bd6 13.Nd2 followed by Nf3 would give White an excellent game with a pawn ahead. For should Black then attempt 13...Bxh2, then would follow 14.g3 Bxg3 15.fxg3 Qxg3+ 16.Nf2 and should win.

11...Bxg4 12.Bxg4 Bd6 13.h3 O-O 14.Nc3

White would have done better first to prevent the entrance of the hostile knight by 14.b3. Rubbish; then comes 14...Be5 15.Nc3 e3 16.fxe3 Bxc3, etc.

14...Nc4 15.b3 Ne5 16.Bb2 Rfe8 17.O-O

17.Be2 Nd3+ (or 17...Nf3+ 18.Kf1, etc.) (Just so: “et cetera.” And how will things turn out for White after 18...Nh4?) 18.cxd3 exd3 19.0-0 was far more favourable for White.

17...Nexg4 18.hxg4 Qd7 19.Qe2

If 19.f3 Bc5+ 20.Kh1 Qe7 with a winning attack.

19...Nxg4 20.g3

20.Nxe4 Qf5 21.f3 Qh5 22.fxg4 Qh2+ 23.Kf2 Qf4+ (or 23...Qh4+ 24.g3 Bxg3+ 25.Kg2 and should win; if here 24...Qh2+ 25.Kf3 Qxe2+ 26.Kxe2 Rxe4+ 27.Kf3 with a pawn ahead) 24.Kg1 was by far better play, for Black's best plan would be now to draw by perpetual check. What on earth for? After 24...Rxe4 25.Rxf4 Rxe2 26.Rf2 Re4! Black's position is better – perhaps significantly so.

20...Qf5 21.Kg2 Re6 22.Rae1

Ill-judged. 22.Rh1 followed by 23.Raf1 was much better.

22...Rae8 23.Rh1 h5!

Black could win the exchange by playing 23...Qf3+ but after 24.Qxf3 (24.Kg1 Bxg3!) exf3+ 25.Kxf3 Rxe1 26.Rxe1 Rxe1 27.Kxg4 play would continue for quite some time. Now, having defended his knight, Black threatens 24...Qf3+ (Chigorin, Shakhmatny Vestnik, 1885).

24.Ref1 Qg6 25.Nd1

Premature. 25.Rh3 was necessary for the defence. Black was threatening 25...e3 26.dxe3 Nxe3 (Chigorin, Shakhmatny Vestnik, 1885).

(diagram)

25...e3!

A real master coup which forces the victory in elegant style.

26.Bd4

If 26.dxe3 Nxe3+ 27.Nxe3 Rxe3 threatening 28...Rxg3+ and wins.

26...Nxf2 27.Rxf2 Qxg3+ 28.Kf1 exf2 29.Ne3 c5 30.Bc3 Rxe3

Beautiful play, which finishes off the quickest way.

31.dxe3 Rxe3 32.Qd1 h4

32...Rxc3 followed by 33...Kf8 (if White reply 33.Qxh5) was also good enough.

33.Bd2 h3

White resigned (0-1)

Next time we will present this game with more modern annotations. Stay tuned!

Beating the Petroff

At the highest level of play the Petroff (or Russian) Defence is generally regarded as a problem for White. Quite often a symmetrical pawn position is obtained, and White struggles to convert his extra tempo into something more concrete. In some quarters the notion of banning the Petroff Defence from tournament play has been suggested. But what do the Petroff experts say?

“A more skilful strategic player triumphs in the Petroff Defence regardless of the colour of his pieces and the position's symmetry.” -- Alexander Raetsky and Maxim Chetverik

That is certainly encouraging. And how about this quote from the noted author of Think Like a Grandmaster:

“When I stayed behind at school with my school friends after lessons, and managed to play up to a hundred games in a single afternoon, the strategy was simple enough: I castled on the opposite side in the middle of violent (and mutual) King attacks. Whoever got his attack in first, won. [When] the Kings find themselves at opposite corners of the board... the attacker not only can but must carry out the attack with pawns...” -- Alexander Kotov

The message is clear: let's castle queenside against the Petroff!

dadian - lox1900, G/5 Chess Assistant Club 2010, Petroff Defence C42

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Nxe5 d6 4.Nf3 Nxe4 5.Nc3 Nxc3 6.dxc3 Be7 7.Be3 d5 [7...Nc6 8.Qd2 Be6 9.0–0–0 Qd7 10.Kb1 a6 11.h4] 8.Qd2 c6 9.0–0–0 [9.c4!?] 9...Bg4 10.Be2 0–0 11.h3 Bxf3 12.gxf3 (first diagram) 12...b5 13.Rhg1 Bf6 14.Rg4 [14.Bd4 Nd7 15.Qh6 g6 16.h4 Re8 17.Bd3 Ne5 unclear] 14...Nd7 15.Rdg1 [15.f4!?] 15...g6 [15...Ne5 16.R4g3 Re8 17.f4 Ng6 18.f5 Nh4 19.Bd4±] 16.f4 Bg7 17.f5 Ne5 [17...Nf6 18.Bg5 (18.R4g2 Qa5 19.Kb1 Ne4 20.Qd3 b4) 18...Qa5 19.Bxf6 Bxf6 20.Kb1 d4 21.Qd3 dxc3 22.fxg6 and White wins] 18.R4g3± Nc4 19.Bxc4 bxc4 20.Bd4 Qd6?! [20...Rb8! with counterplay] 21.h4 c5 22.Bxg7 Kxg7 (second diagram) 23.h5 f6 24.hxg6 h6 25.Rh3 Rh8 26.Rgh1 Qe5 27.Rxh6 Qxf5 28.Rxh8 Rxh8 29.Rxh8 1–0

The right execution

Here is a tense position from the game Fine-Reshevsky, A.V.R.O. 1938 (first diagram). White – to play – is a pawn down, and he obviously wants to win it back before Black can consolidate. The pawn on a6 is the natural target.

16.Qe2!?

Theatening 17.Bxa6, which is not easy to meet directly because of the pressure against Black's e-pawn.

16...Nh5!

A counterattack against the central light squares, and against White's queen in particular.

17.Bxa6

In the actual game, Fine prevented the threat of ...Nf4 by playing 17.g3. The matter of interest today is Reshevsky's analysis of 17.Bxa6. In his book Reshevsky on Chess (1948) he gave the following line:

17...Nf4 18.Qf1 Rxa6 19.Qxa6 Rb8 (second diagram)

and wrote that “White is helpless against the threat of ...Bb5.”

It is obvious that White cannot prevent ...Bb5, so things are certainly looking grim. What is not obvious is that White has a defence – more precisely, a counterattack. How about this:

20.b4!

Making a square for the queen on a5, and also attacking the knight.

20...Bb5!?

Pushing ahead with the plan of trapping White's queen. The alternatives are less promising:

A. 20...Nb3? 21.Nxb3 axb3 22.Bxf4 exf4 23.Qa3 and White is simply the exchange up with a clear advantage;

B. 20...Rxb4 21.Ba3 (or the more complex 21.dxe5 Bc8 22.exd6 Bxd6 23.Qf1 Rb6 24.e5 Bc5 25.Re4, etc.) 21...Bc8 22.Qf1 Rb6 23.Rec1! (winning time to make space for the queen) 23...Qd7 24.Nc4 Nxc4 25.Qxc4 Ba6 26.Qc7 Ne2+ 27.Kh2 and White is again up the exchange, although Black's bishop pair is also a factor;

C. 20...Nc6 21.Qxa4 Nxd4 21.Qa5 with equality.

21.Qxa5 Qd7

Now Black is threatening 22...Bd8, so White needs to find another resource.

22.Rxa4!

White does have an extra rook, so that gives him the option of returning it in order to extricate his queen.

22...Bxa4

White's queen escapes after 22...Bd8 23.Qa7 (also interesting is 23.Qa8!?, aiming to get two rooks for the queen) 23...Rb7 24.Qa8 (here too 24.Qxb7!? is possible) 24...Bxa4 25.dxe5. Here White must still tread carefully but having all the pawns on one side of the board is the key leveling factor.

23.dxe5! Nd3 24.Rf1

White has survived the complications and reached an equal position.

Does this mean that White can recover the pawn with 17.Bxa6? Of course not. After 17...Nf4 18.Qf1 Black has a much stronger way to exploit the light squares:

18...Qb6!

Now if 19.Bxc8? then 19...Bb5 wins easily for Black. White must retreat his bishop:

19.Bd3 exd4

White is again a pawn down but can play to win it back by gaining a tempo on Black's knight.

20.Nc4 Nxc4 21.Bxc4 Be6!

The most accurate way to preserve the advantage. Now if 22.Bxe6 then 22...Nxe6 and Black keeps the extra pawn. Of course White cannot contemplate 22.Bxf4? Bxc4 and wins.

22.Bb5 Ng6 23.Rd1

With this move White clears a square for his queen and renews the threat to recover the pawn.

23...Bf6!

Consolidating the more important pawn.

24.Rxa4 Rxa4 25.Bxa4 Bc4 26.Qe1 Qa6!

Taking control of the key diagonal without loss of time.

27.b3 Be2! 28.Rd2 Bxf3 29.gxf3 Nh4! (third diagram)

The culmination of Black's strategy commencing with 18...Qb6! The strategic advantage of controlling the a6-f1 diagonal has been transformed into a decisive advantage in pawn structure.

One might say that Reshevsky had the right idea, but did not show the right way to execute it.

Culture shock

I was impressed by Black's play in this game. He unleashed a new move in the opening, seizing the initiative and making White the one to look for equality. A few moves later he offered a sharp exchange sacrifice. White unwisely accepted the offer, and his king was soon stranded in the middle of the board, perilously short of safe squares. The battle was decided long before White could get his extra material into action.

Khouseinov,R (2330) - Magomedov,M (2600) Dushanbe, 1999 [D36]

1.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.Nf3 Nf6 4.Nc3 Be7 5.cxd5

The Exchange Variation is recommended by many authors as a simple and safe way for White to handle the Queen's Gambit Declined. The reality is that it does not promise White a simple and safe advantage -- IF Black knows what he is doing. Many years of practice have shown that the lines with an early Nf3 are not the most incisive. To achieve an edge, White's priority moves are Bg5, Qc2, e3, and Bd3, taking control of an important diagonal and denying Black a safe equalising manoeuvre with ...Bf5 (sometimes assisted by ...g6). Depending on Black's specific reaction White can then try a setup with Nge2, or revert to lines with Nf3. But in this game White has already committed himself to the move Nf3.

5...exd5 6.Bg5 c6 7.Qc2 Na6!?

Interfering with White's intended setup in the most direct way. If White had played e3 instead of Nf3 he could simply capture this knight, at the same time spoiling Black's queenside pawn structure.

8.a3

Some players have tried 8.e3 Nb4 9.Qd1 Bf5 10.Rc1 intending 11.a3, but Black can keep his queenside demonstration going with 10...Qa5!?

8...g6 9.e4?!

There are many positions in the Exchange Variation where this central break gives White a space advantage and pressure on Black's weak points. This is not one of those positions. White's play has been slower than usual, so the advance has fewer chances of success.

The game Portisch-Jussupow, Rotterdam 1989 saw the more restrained 9.e3 Bf5 10.Bd3 Bxd3 11.Qxd3 Nc7 and Black had few problems, the game eventually ending in a draw.

9...Nxe4! 10.Nxe4 (first diagram) 10...Nc7!!

A new move which had been suggested by Lubomir Ftacnik but not actually played until this game. Because of a later inaccuracy by Magomedov I suspect that he was not following home analysis and may even have been unaware of Ftacnik's suggestion.

11.Qc5!

The best reply. Black cannot play 11...Bxc5 because 12.Bxd8 wins a piece, so White manages to get his queen to an active position. Ftacnik's analysis ended after 11.h4 dxe4 12.Qxe4 Bf5, but after the further moves 13.Qe5 Kd7!, it is clear that the upcoming exchanges will be favourable for Black.

11...dxe4 12.Qe5 Rf8 13.Qxe4 Bf5 14.Qe3

White avoids 14.Qxe7+ Qxe7+ 15.Bxe7 Kxe7, when his isolated d-pawn is the central feature of a much-simplified position.

14...Nd5 15.Qd2 Be4!

White is being driven back on all fronts and this move adds to his difficulties. The upcoming exchange on f3 will seriously compromise White's defences, and for specific tactical reasons it cannot be easily prevented. For example, 16.Be2 Bxf3 17.Bxe7 Qxe7 18.gxf3 and Black has the advantage after 18...Qf6. White finds the only sensible reply to 15...Bd4 – a counterattack on Black's rook – but there is another surprise waiting for him.

16.Bh6 (second diagram) 16...Bxf3!

Far more energetic than 16...Rg8. Recapturing on f8 will clear the e-file for Black's remaining rook, adding to the pressure on White's king. It might be said that the exchange sacrifice is based less on exact calculation and more on what Kasparov famously described as “chess culture.”

17.Bxf8?

White should not accept the offer, although he is still in difficulties after 17.gxf3 Rg8 18.Bd3 Qd6! 19.h4 Bf8 20.Be3 f5 (Magomedov).

17...Bg5?!

A strange decision because the simple 17...Kxf8 18.gxf3 Bg5 19.Qc2 would transpose to the game. This might be described as Magomedov's only slip in an otherwise-impressive attacking display.

18.Qc2?!

Much stronger was 18.Qd3. In his analysis Magomedov gave 18... Kxf8! 19.gxf3 Qa5+ 20.Kd1 Re8! 21.Kc2 without further comment, but there are some blank spots here. To start with, in the position after 21.Kc2 Black wins easily with 21...Nb4+ 22.axb4 Qxa1. More critically, what happens if White preserves his pawn structure with 19.Qxf3? The best line for both sides seems to be 19...Qb6 20.Bc4 Bd2+! 21.Kf1! Qxb2 22.Rd1 Qxd4 23.Qd3 Qxd3 24.Bxd3 Bc3 25.g3 when Black has two pawns for the exchange but one can hardly speak of an advantage for him.

Instead of 21.Kc2 White can try 21.Rb1 but after 21...Re1+ 22.Kc2 Qa4+! 23.b3 Qxa3 24.Rxe1 Black has a mating attack: 24...Qa2+ 25.Kd1 Qa1+! 26.Ke2 ( 26.Kc2 Nb4#) 26...Qb2+ 27.Kd1 Qc1+ 28.Ke2 Nf4#) These lines were given by Magomedov.

18...Kxf8! 19.gxf3 Qa5+ 20.Kd1 Rd8!

In Magomedov's line given above, this rook went to e8 in order to get at White's king. The switch to d8 is a pleasing variant on this idea. White's king is just as vulnerable on the d-file, the isolated pawn being a minor obstruction that will soon be swept away.

21.Be2

Black mates after 21.Qc5+ Qxc5 22.dxc5 Nb4+! 23.Ke2 Rd2+ 24.Ke1 Nc2#.

21...Nf4

The editors of Informant 76 pointed out that 21...Nb4 wins more quickly, but the text does not spoil anything.

22.Qc3 Qe5! 23.Qe3

Or 23.Re1 Rxd4+ 24.Kc2 Nxe2, etc.

23...Rxd4+ 24.Kc2 Qf5+ 25.Kb3 Qd5+ 26.Kc3 Nxe2+ 27.Qxe2 Rd2 28.Qe4 Bf6+ 0–1

Powerful stuff!

Seven Brutalities 4

Sitting down to the board to begin play, you never know when you are going to be involved in a so-called miniature game (of 25 moves or less). If your opponent is relatively weak there could be some advance clue, but when you're up against a strong player there's no way of foreseeing the result, much less the number of moves you will play. It's just a roll of the dice.

Reeve J - Scoones D

Labour Day Open 1975

Spanish Game C68

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Bxc6 dxc6 5.0-0 Bd6 6.d4 exd4 7.Qxd4 f6 8.Nbd2 Be6 9.Nb3 b6 10.Be3 Ne7 11.Qd2 c5 12.Rad1 Ng6 13.Qe2 Qe7 14.c4 0-0 15.Nfd2 (diagram) 15...f5 16.exf5 Bxf5 17.Rfe1 Rae8 18.Nb1 Qh4 19.g3 Qh3 20.Qf1 Qh5 21.Nc3 Ne5 0-1

Jeff Reeve is a strong master who has won many impressive games on the White side of the Ruy Lopez Exchange Variation. Before our last-round matchup in the 1975 Labour Day Open in Vancouver I was fiddling with a pocket set, trying to find something that would keep me in the game for awhile. Of course it was always going to be a sideline, and on this occasion my eye fell on the rare move 5...Bd6. I was sure my opponent would continue with 6.d4, which I intended to meet with 6...exd4 (7...f6 returns to one of the main lines) 7.Qxd4 f6.

On d6 the bishop is often vulnerable to exchange with Nd2-c4. But in looking at the position after 8.Nbd2 it occurred to me that Black could play the useful developing move 8...Be6. If White carries on with 9.Nc4 then Black wins a pawn with a minor tactic: 9...Bxh2+! followed by 10...Qxd4 and 11...Bxc4.

White sidestepped this variation with 8.Nb3 but his knight was left in an offside position. After 13...0-0 Black had completed his development and was very comfortable.

After this White began to drift, which can be seen from the sequence 14.c4?! 0-0 15.Nfd2?!, which merely decentralises a key defender. Black struck immediately with 15...f5!, guaranteeing himself a clear advantage after 16.exf5 Bxf5.

In the sequel the key strategic factor is Black's unopposed light-squared bishop. After 18.Nb1? Qh4 19.g3, fatal weaknesses had appeared in White's kingside. The centralising move 21...Ne5 leads forcefully to the win of at least the exchange. White decided he had seen enough and called it a day.

Crystal ball

It is generally accepted that the Sicilian Defence did not fully enter the modern era until the early 1950s due mainly to the efforts of Soviet players such as Vsevolod Rauser, Isaak Boleslavsky and David Bronstein.

In this connection many of the theoretical recommendations made before the Second World War look exceedingly quaint from today's perspective. For example, after the moves 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 no less a figure than Alexander Alekhine came down strongly in favour of 3.Be2, considering it to be clearly White's best move. If such a dynamic player as Alekhine could be so dogmatic, what then of Dr Siegbert Tarrasch, a classical player whose stubbornness was the stuff of legend?

The position in the diagram comes about after the moves 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 e5 6.Ndb5. In the game Tarrasch-Mieses, Nuremburg 1888, Black now played 6...a6?!, provoking the following prophetic annotation from Praeceptor Germaniae:

“I would play ...d7-d6 here in order to retain the dark-squared bishop, which is needed for the defence of Black's weaknesses. This move also has the advantage that White's knight would be forced into a poor position for some time: 6...d6 7.Bg5 a6 8.Bxf6 gxf6 9.Na3 b5 10.Nd5 f5. Although White has a noticeable advantage here (based primarily on his control of the square d5) Black's chances would have been better than in the game thanks in large part to his much faster development.”

The variation cited above is of course known today as the Sveshnikov Variation, which made its modern appearance in the mid-1960s. Yet Dr Tarrasch wrote this note while preparing his book Dreihundert Schachpartien... in 1895!

Insight

When a player rated below 1800 asks me for some quick pointers I will often start by playing out the first few moves of the Scotch Gambit: 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 exd4 4.Bc4 Bc5. Giving the student the Black pieces I will then play the move 5.Ng5 for White and ask him or her to respond to the threat of taking on f7. The resulting position is shown in the first diagram.

In the early part of the 19th century, chess theory held that attacking moves should always be given priority and that pure defensive moves are to be avoided unless absolutely necessary. Sometimes you must defend of course but if you can find a defensive move that attacks at the same time – well, there's a really strong move for you!

The defenders of long ago who reached this position with Black usually had no difficulty finding the move that followed the thinking of the day: 5...Ne5!? attacking the bishop on c4 and defending f7. But then one day someone found a tactic: 6.Nxf7! Nxf7 7.Bxf7+ Kxf7 8.Qh5+ g6 9.Qxc5 (see the second diagram.) White is temporarily a pawn down but he is recovering the d-pawn since if Black defends with 9...Qf6 then the pawn on c7 is left en prise. With Black's king in an exposed position White has all the chances. A dangerous opening, that Scotch Gambit!

Fast forward to 1855 and a young man named Paul Morphy is playing one of his father's colleagues, a Judge named Alexander Beaufort Meek. Judge Meek adopts the Scotch Gambit and plays the 5.Ng5 line. Morphy thinks for a minute and responds with a new move at that time: 5...Nh6!?. The judge executes the same combination: 6.Nxf7 Nxf7 7.Bxf7+ Kxf7 8.Qh5+ g6 9.Qxc5 (see the third diagram.) Morphy now plays 9...d6 and the Judge is somewhat annoyed to find that he cannot capture White's d-pawn because it is protected. Something has gone wrong... He plays 10.Qb5, which Morphy quickly meets with 10...Re8. It is becoming clear that Black has taken over the initiative and he wins in only 11 more moves.

I can still remember the deep impression these two game fragments made on me when I was a young A-class player. There is no better illustration of the principle of development than Morphy's simple move 6...Nh6, which makes all the difference between a very dubious position and a very promising one. No matter that the knight is oddly placed for a short time; what counts is that the other one stays in place and protects the d-pawn.

If you can find the handful of tournament and match games produced by Paul Morphy a century and a half ago, please set up your board and pieces and replay them for yourself. I would be very surprised if this doesn't cause you to discover new ideas in your own games.

Left turn

Here's a scenario that is not uncommon in open tournaments. Your latest opponent is a complete unknown who is rated perhaps 150-200 points below you, and right in the opening he plays something slightly unusual. I don't mean a respectable side variation, I mean an odd move order that gives you an opportunity to play for an immediate advantage. The chance will disappear if you don't take it now. What should you do?

I for one like to spend some time trying to refute such moves. Just imagine, this could be the big reason why no one plays this way (or will not play this way after your brilliant win makes the rounds!) If you pass up this chance, memories of the game will always be tinged with regret, especially if you go on to lose.

After the opening moves 1.c4 c5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Nc3 Nc6 4.d4 cxd4 5.Nxd4 a recent opponent of mine played the unusual 5...Nxd4!? 6.Qxd4 g6. The position is shown in the first diagram.

There is no compelling reason for Black to exchange knights on the fifth move unless he is worried that White will avoid simplification by playing 6.Nc2 or 6.Nb3 in reply to 5...g6. Of course White should not consider exchanging on c6 himself because it only strengthens Black's pawn position.

After 6...g6 White has a decision to make. Should he transpose back to regular lines by playing 7.e4 or 7.g3, or should he try to inflict damage on Black's pawn structure with the aggressive 7.Nd5!? After the further moves 7...Bg7 8.Bg5 (not 8.Bf4?! d6! intending 9...e5) 8...0-0 White has another choice to make. He must capture on f6, or else Black will play 9...Nxd5 and break the bind. There are two ways to do this: 9.Nxf6+ or 9.Bxf6+. Lots to think about!

During the game I concentrated my efforts on 9.Nxf6+. Because it creates a significant material imbalance (centralised knight vs unopposed dark-squared bishop), I don't think White should take with the bishop unless he is ready with prepared analysis or some previous experience.

After 9.Nxf6+ exf6 10.Bf4 f5 11.Qd2 Black has the obvious move 11...Qb6. White has to protect the b-pawn since 12.Bd6 Qxb2 13.Qxb2 Bxb2 14.Rb1 Bc3+ 15.Kd1 Re8 16.c5!? (White is a pawn down and must try for compensation) 16...Be5! is starting to look good for Black. So White's next move has to be 12.Rb1. Castling queenside instead drops a pawn after 12...Qxf2.

After 12.Rb1 it was time to pause and take stock of the situation (remember that I'm analysing on my mental chessboard!) White has managed to give Black a backward d-pawn on an open file, but in order to accomplish this he has had to cash in his lead in development. If White were given the free moves g3, Bg2, 0-0 and Rfd1 (or even Bd6 and c5) then one could speak of a serious positional advantage for White. Unfortunately, Black can throw a large spanner into the works by playing 12...d5!? (see the second diagram.)

This is a highly thematic idea. At one stroke Black eliminates his backward pawn and opens up the centre in order to put pressure on White's position. White cannot play the quiet 13.e3 because of the variation 13...dxc4 14.Bxc4 Rd8 15.Qc2 Qb4+, which strands his king in the centre. And 13.Qxd5 is no better in view of 13...Be6 14.Qb5 Qxb5 15.cxb5 Bxa2 with a clear advantage for Black. The only reply to 12...d5 is 13.cxd5. I got this far in my analysis and decided I didn't like White's position. He is a pawn ahead, and it is a centre pawn, but he is at least three moves away from completing his development. I remembered Capablanca's guideline that a pawn sacrifice in the opening is usually sound if the opponent's development is delayed by at least three moves. That is certainly the case here, and in fact Black can keep up the pressure with 13...Rd8.

So it turns out that 7.Nd5!? followed in due course by 9.Nxf6+ is a dubious idea. After spending 5 minutes or so on this analysis I made the practical decision to reenter the main lines, in this case by playing 7.g3.

Later on I had a look in my database and found the old game Capablanca-Colle, Barcelona 1929. Capablanca had the same opportunity to play 7.Nd5, but he too transposed to the main lines, this time with 7.e4. That settled the matter, at least in my mind. If 7.Nd5 gave White an advantage greater than the main lines, Capablanca would certainly have played it!