1

2

3

The Practical Application of Miniatures

Carsten Hansen is a Danish FIDE Master & FIDE Trainer with 20 books on chess to

his credit, including the Amazon-bestselling series Catastrophes & Tactics in the Chess

Opening.

For a free e-book, visit his website

http://www.winningquicklyatchess.com/index.php/free-book/ to receive it.

Since I was quite young I have been fascinated by short

games, usually labeled as miniatures when finished in 25

moves or less. I suspect I caught this bug from my

compatriot, the late Grandmaster Bent Larsen. In his daily

newspaper column, he would present a game, a story or

an idea of interest. The space limitations usually called for

it to be a fairly short game with a diagram and some notes.

The longer the game, the less room he had for annotations,

so the games were frequently quite short.

The games in their brevity served me as inspirations for

additions to my opening repertoire either as permanent

fixture or an idea that could be used once or twice.

In the past couple of years I have written ten books on

miniatures, three using the classical definition of the 25-

move limit and they have been specific to a single opening

(the Sicilian Najdorf, the Queen’s Indian with 4.g3, and

the Ruy Lopez Main Lines) or what I classify as ultra-

miniatures, i.e., games of 15 moves or less.

Naturally, when decisive games are short they contain one

or more serious mistakes, but I have found that if you raise

the minimum rating of the games to 2350 or even higher,

you will often find both valuable ideas but also tactical

solutions that are not always immediately obvious. The

game I will show below is interesting for a multitude of

reasons, first and foremost because it arises quite early in

the game and that makes it more likely that you can get a

chance at playing it in your own games. Furthermore, it is

an idea that was barely seen before this year, so it

wouldn’t have made it into any books yet.

Y.Kuzubov (2690) –

P.Schreiner (2480)

European Team Ch (Heraklio) 2017

1.c4 c5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Nc3 d5 4.cxd5 Nxd5 5.e3

This move is played a lot less than the main lines which

are 5.e4, 5.d4, and, of course, 5.g3, the latter being White

most frequent choice.

5...e6

This seems like a natural response and so does 5...Nc6?!

but this is met by 6.Bb5 which is considered problematic

for Black.

The main line is 5...Nxc3 which was also the main focus

in my coverage of the variation in my book from 2000

"The Symmetrical English". It usually leads to Gruenfeld

like position after 6.bxc3 g6 soon followed by d2–d4

where White has, compared to a normal Gruenfeld, a

reinforced center with pawns on both e3 and c3 to support

the pawn on d4. However, recently a new approach by

White has been catching on particularly after Aronian's

use of the move to defeat Nepomniachtchi in St. Louis

this year: 7.h4!? (interestingly, this is also my computer's

preferred move) 7...Bg7 8.h5 Nc6 9.Ba3 (other recent

games have seen both 9.Be2 and; 9.Rb1 tested) 9...Qa5

10.Rh4!? (an interesting way to guard the bishop; if Black

now captures the bishop on a3, the queen will get trapped

by Ra4 followed by Rb1. However, White needs a good

response to 10...c4!?. 10...Bd7 11.Qb3 0–0?! (11...Nd8

seems safer and better) 12.hxg6 hxg6 13.Qxb7 Rfd8

14.Qa6 Bxc3 15.Qxa5 Bxa5 16.Bxc5 (White has won a

pawn and is clearly better) 16...Be6 17.Bb5 Ne5 18.Nd4

Rd5 19.Bxe7 Kg7 20.f4 Nd7 21.f5 Bxf5 22.Bc6 Re5

23.Nxf5+ gxf5 24.Bg5 Kg6 25.Bf4 Rd8 26.Bxd7 Rc5

27.Rh6+ Kg7 28.Rd6 Bc7 29.Rc6 and Black resigned, 1–

0, Aronian-Nepomniachtchi, Saint Louis 2017.

4

Recently, however, White has started playing 6.dxc3

which looks lame but there is a very specific point to it.

In the related line 1.c4 Nf6 2.Nc3 g6 3.Nf3 d5 4.cxd5

Nxd5 5.e4 Nxc3 6.dxc3 Qxd1+ 7.Kxd1 it is considered a

serious inaccuracy if Black plays ...c7–c5 because it

weakens the light squares. Here Black has already played

...c7–c5. On the other hand, he hasn't played ...g7–g6, so

it is still fully okay for Black, but he would be foolish to

take this approach by White lightly. Now: 6...Qxd1+

7.Kxd1 Bf5 (7...b6?! is an unnecessary further weakening

of the light squares: 8.Bb5+ Bd7 9.a4 a6 10.Bxd7+ Nxd7

11.e4 e6 12.Bf4 f6 13.Nd2 Be7 14.Nc4 Kf7 15.Kc2 e5

16.Rhd1 Ke6 17.Be3 Rhb8 18.f4 and White has the

clearly better chances and eventually won the only

decisive game of the Hungary-Russia match in the

European Team Championship and therefore in some

ways, this was the game that lost Russia the

Championship, Erdos-Nepomniachtchi, European Team

Ch (Heraklio) 2017) 8.Nd2 Nc6 9.e4 Bg6 (Or 9...Be6

10.Kc2 g6 11.Bc4 Bd7 12.Nb3 b6 13.a4 Ne5 14.Bb5 a6

15.Bxd7+ Nxd7 16.Be3 e6 17.Rhd1 0–0–0 18.Nd2 Be7

19.Nc4 Kb7 20.a5 and White is clearly better and

eventually won the game on the road to winning the

important grand Prix tournament, Radjabov-Svidler,

Geneva 2017.) 10.Bb5 Rc8 11.h4 h5 12.Re1 e6 13.a4 Be7

14.g3 0–0 15.a5 Rfd8 16.a6 b6 17.Kc2 Ne5 18.f4 Ng4

19.Kb3 f6 20.Nc4 Nf2 21.e5 Ne4 with a sharp ending

where Black currently isn't worse, Carlsen-Vachier

Lagrave, Saint Louis 2017 - the crucial encounter of the

Sinquefield Cup, where Carlsen was winning but then

blundered and ended up losing the game.

6.Nxd5

The text move looks incredibly tame, but it carries an

interesting punch. The main alternative, 6.d4 would

transpose into a Semi-Tarrasch and carries entirely too

much theory to discuss it here. It can lead to both exciting

and incredibly boring positions.

6...exd5

The recapture with the queen is also possible but it looks

less logical than the pawn recapture. After 6...Qxd5 White

usually follows up with 7.b3 Be7 8.Bc4 Qf5 9.Bb2 Nc6

10.0–0 0–0 11.d4 as played in Rakhmanov-Erdos, Linares

2017, both 2600+ rated grandmasters. White has nearly

completed his development whereas Black still has a little

work left to be done and his queen may run into issues at

some point.

7.b4!?

This is the star move and the reason why this game came

to my attention. I was working a chapter in an upcoming

book for New In Chess on the English Opening when I

stumbled over this move which hadn't caught my attention

previously. White sacrifices a pawn to gain control over

the dark squares in the center along with easy

development of his pieces. It doesn't look terribly

dangerous for Black but therein lies the beauty in this

idea: a move that looks somewhat ridiculous but probably

is harmless and therefore not to be taken too seriously,

when, in fact, it carries a rather significant punch.

7...cxb4

In the first games with the gambit Black cautiously

decided to decline the gambit with 7...c4 8.Bb2 Bxb4

(Black can consider 8...a5 9.b5 Nd7 10.Be2 Nc5 with an

interesting battle ahead, I'm not sure who is better) 9.Bxg7

Rg8 10.Bb2!? (This is likely the most accurate; in a later

game, 10.Be5 was tested, e.g., 10...Nc6 11.Bg3 Bf5

12.Be2 Be7 13.0–0 h5 14.d3 h4 15.Bf4 d4 16.exd4 Nxd4

17.dxc4 Nxe2+ 18.Qxe2 Bd3 19.Qe5 Bxf1 20.Rxf1 and

with excellent compensation for the exchange and clearly

better chances for White in Nepomniachtchi-Harikrishna,

Wijk aan Zee 2017, but Black should be able to improve

several times along the way) 10...Nc6 11.Qc2 Rg6 12.Be2

Qe7 13.g3 Bh3 14.Nh4 0–0–0 15.a3 Ba5 16.Nxg6 fxg6

17.Bc3 Bb6 18.d4 cxd3 19.Bxd3 Kb8 20.0–0–0 Rf8 when

it is Black who has excellent compensation for the

exchange although White is okay and eventually won the

game, Anton Guijarro-Salem, Martuni 2015 - this is the

stem game of 7.b4!?.

8.Bb2 Nd7

In a game played just three days after our main game, the

idea was tested in a grandmaster encounter in the

European Team Championship and the outcome was just

about as bad for Black: 8...Nc6 9.Rc1 a6 (Black

deliberately takes away any kind of Bb5+ ideas that we

5

will see used in our main game) 10.Nd4 Nxd4 11.Bxd4

Bf5 (at this point it may be a little difficult to spot what

White has in return for the sacrificed pawn other than it

being a little difficcult for Black to complete the

development of the kingside and the bishop on d4 is

obviously an uncontested monster, this is sufficient to

compensate for the sacrificed pawn) 12.Be2 Qd7 (Black

plays a natural move but it seems that the best way for

Black to combat White's play is to first exchange the rook

to limit White's initiative, e.g., 12...Rc8 13.Rxc8 Qxc8

14.0–0 f6 15.Qb3 Qc6 16.Qb2 Qe6 when Black still need

to play accurately to hold the balance) 13.Qb3 Be6 14.0–

0 f6 15.Bh5+ Bf7 16.Bxf7+ Kxf7 17.Bb6! (Simple and

effective, now the real threats start and Black's lacking

development becomes a real issue) 17...Be7 18.Rc7 Qd6

19.Rfc1 Rhe8? (Black should have played a rook to d8,

intending ...Rd7 to exchange a pair of rooks, now he gets

into even deeper trouble; after 19...Qxb6 20.Qxd5+ White

should win rather easily) 20.Ba5! (now the threat of Bxb4

hangs in the air and the pawn on b7 is also ripe for

picking) 20...Kg8 21.Rxb7 Rac8 22.Rxc8 Rxc8 23.g3

(some luft for the king before the assault continues)

23...Rc4 24.d3 Rc3 25.Qa4 Bf8 26.Bxb4 (26.Qe8! would

have been even stronger) 26...Rc1+ 27.Kg2 Qd8 28.Bxf8

Qxf8 29.Qxa6 and Black resigned, 1–0, Sargissian-Bok,

European Team Ch (Heraklio) 2017.

9.Rc1 Nf6?!

Not a very good idea, but Black is hoping to get his dark-

squared bishop developed without having to play the

weakening ...f7–f6. 9...Qa5 takes away both a4 and b5

from White and therefore makes some sense.

10.Bb5+ Bd7 11.Bxf6 gxf6 12.Nd4

Or 12.Bxd7+ Qxd7 13.0–0 followed by Nd4, in either

case with amble compensation for the sacrificed pawn.

12...Rc8

Black attempts to exchange some pieces to calm White's

attacking potential. However, 12...Bxb5 13.Nxb5 Rc8

was the much safer way to do so.

13.Bxd7+ Qxd7 14.Rxc8+ Qxc8 15.Qa4+ Kd8 16.0–0:

Now White's compensation should be apparent for

everybody: lead in development, strong knight, superior

pawn structure and an unsafe, uncastled black king.

16...Qc5 17.Rb1 Bd6 18.Qd1!

This threatens Rc1 but just as importantly it threatens to

mess with Black on the kingside.

18...Bb8 19.g3

I'm not sure why White didn't interject Rc1, e.g., 19.Rc1

Qd6 20.g3 intending Qc2, Qf3 or Qh5, depending on what

Black decides to do.

19...h5 20.Qf3?!

20.Rc1! followed by Qf3 would have been incredibly

strong.

20...Ke8 21.Qxf6 Rg8 22.Nf5 Qf8 23.Qd4 Rg6 24.Qxd5

Rc6 25.Qe4+ and Black resigned. 1–0

In conclusion, when looking at the above idea, this is

something that with very little additional preparation can

be added to an opening repertoire and will likely cause

major headaches for the opponent.

Catastrophes & Tactics in the Chess Opening is a collection of books, each focusing on a

specific opening. Pictured is volume 1: Indian Defenses.

Other books by Carsten Hansen include (among twenty books):

Accelerated Dragon (with Peter Heine Nielsen), 1998

The Symmetrical English, 2000

Improve Your Positional Chess, 2004

The Sicilian Dragon (2015)

The Closed Sicilian, 2017

6

Once in a while, a weaker player gets lucky

[(as long as he does not blunder (too much!)]

John Barroso, En Passant editor

Chess players are hopefuls despite their strength, so I went to Kings Island with hopes of some wins, but the flu got me

before I even got there. I still played a few games and got a meaningful draw. Meaningful because the opponent was 160

points above me but also, given my horrific health condition, I draw was like win, of sorts. Despite the lower rated

section, neither black or white stayed ahead more than about 4 points at all times. On move 28, white blundered. He could

have won the game by 28. Qxd4 exd4 29. Kg3 and soon white would be back with a King and 4 pawns against King and

three pawns, to win the game. On move 38 I waited some 25 minutes, in panic as 38. b4 would guarantee white a win but

white blundered again! 38. Qxf3 and a draw next. It was agonizing to wait white think for 25 minutes to find a way to

slaughter me when I could see my end right there. And it felt good when he blundered! He was too deep into the “get

him” mode and missed the obvious.

[Event " Kings Island Open, 2017, Under 1250 Section."]

[Site "Kings Island, OH"]

[Date "2017.11.12"]

[White "John Minnich, 1237"]

[Black "John Barroso, 1077"]

[Result "1/2, 1/2"]

[ECO "B21/05"]

[Opening "Sicilian: Smith-Morra gambit, Chicago Defense"]

1. e4 c5 2. d4 cxd4 3. c3 dxc3 4. Nxc3 d6 5. Nf3 g6 6. Bc4 e6 7. O-O Bg7 8. Qe2 Nc6 9. Rd1 Ne5 10. Bg5 Nxf3+ 11.

Qxf3 Qxg5 12. Rxd6 Nf6 13. Bb5+ Nd7 14. Rad1 Bxc3 15. Bxd7+ Bxd7 16. Qxc3 O-O 17. Rxd7 Rac8 18. Rc7 Rxc7

19. Qxc7 Kg7 20. h3 e5 21. Qxb7 Rd8 22. Rxd8 Qc1+ 23. Kh2 Qf4+ 24. Kg1 Qc1+ 25. Rd1 Qxd1+ 26. Kh2 Qa4 27. Qd5

Qd4 28. f3 f6 29. Qb7+ Kh6 30. Qe7 f5 31. Qf8+ Kh5 32. Qg7 h6 33. h4 Qe3 34. g4+ fxg4 35. Qxe5+ Kxh4

36. Qf6+ Qg5 37. e5 gxf3 38. Qxf3 White offers draw, accepted.

diagram 1 after 28. f3

According to Fritz 13, before this

move white was 3.19 points ahead.

After 28. f3 Fritz shows 0.0.

White blunders bladly: 28. f3. Fritz

suggests 28. Qxd4 exd4 29. Kg3

and the white king will catch the

black pawn on d1. In that line white

has pawn majority and should win

the endgame.

diagram 2 after 36. Qf6+

According to Fritz 13, before this move white was 0.44 better. After this move it

is even 0.0, after the response 36…Qg5 (allowing a pin) it is still even but…

7

diagram 3 after 37. e5

Fritz suggests 37. Qxg5+ (queen

takes queen) and 38. Kg3 to keep the

game even but white plays 37. e5

and Fritz instantly gives black an

advantage of 3.89 points.

Fritz points out white’s next move

(f4) if black gets distracted. Note

that black cannot move his queen (or

capture the white queen). But that

treat was too visible at the board and

it alerted me to my next move,

which turned the table! It seems like

white did not see 37….gxf3 coming.

diagram 4 after 37….gxf3

With 37….gxf3, according to Fritz, black is ahead by at least 3.68 points in all

variations.

If the white queen goes to the wrong square on move 38 (note that the white

king cannot get near the f3 pawn) black can checkmate at g2 or seek a draw by

repetition with Qd2+. If on move 38: Qxg5+ Kxg5, 39. e6 and the black king

captures the white pawn on e7. If 38. e6, the white queen is lost.

White blundered again (diagram above, white to move): note that black is

paralyzed! The black queen cannot move or capture the white queen (or the

pawn on e5 recapture and promote). So all white needs now is to move his pawn

on the other end of the board and let black run out of moves. I was paralyzed at

the board too, hoping that he would not see a b4 move, and he didn’t! Fritz saw

this and suggested a winning line for white: 38. b4 Kh5 39. Qxf3+ Qg4 40.

Qxg4 Kxg4 41. e6 and the white pawn queens. He thought for twenty five

minutes and still did not see 38. b4!

So white captured 38. Qxf3 only to promptly offer a draw as he laid the pawn

on the table with disappointment; a little proud last capture to draw with dignity.

I could decline the offer and proceed to 38….Qxe5+ Kh1 and get a draw, or

trade queens and win the game, but the flu had done its part in favor of white.

Draw accepted.

Fritz 13 shows black ahead by 3 points or from moves 7 to move 12, then: 12…..Nf6. Black has been ahead by about 3.85

points but Fritz suggests a line with 12….Be5, which increases Blacks’ advantage. With 13. Bb5+ black loses his advantage.

Now white is ahead by 0.49 points. Note that Fritz suggest 12….Be5 and in that line black does NOT castle (Kf8 upon

check by Be5). I thought of that line but the idea of not castling is scary so at the board I followed with the text and felt

safer though I fell behind and stayed behind till the end of the game. I could feel, however, at move 13, that I was in slight

trouble and started playing for a draw but white avoided it as much as possible as seen in: 21…. Rd8 (to force a draw) 22.

Rxd8 Qc1+ 23. Kh2 Qf4+ 24. Kg1 Qc1+ 25. Rd1 (white gives the rook back to avoid a draw by repetition).

From moves 27 to move 33, the black queen awaits a drawing situation but white knows it and avoids it. All along the black

queen wants to get into e3, then f4, and provoke a draw by repetition. From moves 29 to move 36 the black king gets all

boxed-in, a scary situation that required a lot of thinking before each move on the part of black. It seems that, all along,

white felt he could win but did not know how, and black wanted to draw but seemed to be a move behind to get into perpetual

check.

On 37. e5, for the first time since move 12, black is ahead 3.89 points. At this point I saw I could trade queens (if I got off

the pin seen in diagram 3) and win, or else, draw by perpetual check. So 37…..gxf3 is the move! Black’s advantage increased

to 4.05 points and black wins in all variations shown by Fritz. If white removes the pin it is checkmate next. White, after

thinking for over 20 minutes, made a last capture and offered a draw. Not a bad game for an U1250 section.

8

Blunder Town

by 𝑀𝑒𝑙𝑖ℎ �̈�𝑧𝑏𝑒𝑘, Pittsburgh Chess Club Vice-President.

Why do blunders happen? If there was an easy answer, then we would all eliminate them,

and perhaps even rival machines! My intention in this article is to break down the possible

causes to remedy them systematically with examples.

1. Study Tactics

This might be hard to admit, but sometimes, we might just be lacking the tactical skills. If it's a habit for you to miss a

simple fork, a double attack, or a check, you should simply study more. There is no magic pill that will suddenly make you

a great tactician: You just have to put in the effort and the time.

2. Don't get into time pressure

Easier said than done. "Time pressure makes fools of us all.", said a wise GM once. Everyone blunders when they don't

have enough time to calculate: Just go over a few GM games in rapid / blitz tournaments and you'll see what I mean.

3. Improve your thought process

One of the most important lessons I've learnt playing strong players is that they're very efficient in their decision making

process. This statistically allows for consistently good results, although some of their decisions may not be the absolute

best. One can also tie this in with the superior pattern recognition ability of a better player, however, making it possible in

the first place to move faster and more efficiently.

I played this game below against Bob Atwell, a friend of mine, in a Tuesday

night event. I'd been defending a tough position the entire game. I sacrificed

the exchange and was barely holding on although you can argue that the rook

on h6 is dubiously placed. Mr. Atwell played the move 29. Rc1? We exchanged

a pair of rooks on c1, and we reached the position (diagram on the left):

I was in my usual time pressure (violating the second entry above). A stronger

player would immediately see 30..Nxb1 31.Qxb1 Nc4, with equality.

Especially in time scramble, this should have been automatic, as it leads to a

comfortable position, where White should be careful not to lose the stranded

rook on h6.

The threat is 32..Qf8 33.Qc1 f4! -+ For example, White cannot play 32. Qa2?? Kg7 -+, but he can keep the balance with

32.Qc1! (intending 33.Qg5 against 32..Qf8)

Objectively, the engine shows 0.00 in this position, but that means little for us mere mortals: It is White who has to play

the only move (32.Qc1) to maintain equality. So, Black is very comfortable, with a safe king, with chances for an immediate

win, if White is not precise.

9

What did I do instead? I saw nothing wrong greed: 30..Qxb4?? 31.Qc7!, sacrificing the bishop on b1 for a decisive attack.

A terrible, committal, and impractical choice on my part. I resigned a few moves later.

4. Complacency

It is clear that psychology plays a major part in tournament chess. If you've been winning the entire game, it is very easy to

lose objectivity, thinking: "All moves win, so I can play basically anything, it doesn't matter." This is a recipe for disaster.

Your opponent, on the other hand, is hanging on for dear life, looking for the absolute best continuation every move, can

prove very dangerous. In simple terms, dare I say, psychologically, -100 USCF for you, +100 for your opponent!

This blitz game was played recently in Saint Louis Rapid / Blitz Tournament. Garry Kasparov performed reasonably well

in the tournament, for someone that had been absent from 12 years of tournament chess. He was playing amazingly well

against David Navarra in this game, he was completely dominating. This position below ensued, when Gary didn't handle

an easily winning ending properly and found himself in a double edged position with both players having less than 10

seconds on the clock:

In mutual time pressure, Kasparov played the terrible 49.Nc6+?? (49.Qc7+ or

49.Qc5+ still led to draw). Navarra took on c6 which wins on the spot:

49..Qxc6+! 50.Qxc6 Rd6 (50.Kxc6 Rc1+ is the same thing), and Kasparov

couldn't believe it: The f4 pawn will queen, and there's nothing he can do about

it. A miraculous comeback from Navarra! Kasparov resigned. Notice that Black

didn't have any other alternative anyway, in view of 49.Nc6+?? Kd6?? 50.Qd7#

Conclusions

Be practical, don't get into time pressure, study tactics, and analyze with strong

players to gain more insight into their thinking process, precisely pattern

recognition skills. And don't be too hard on yourself, at the end of the day,

everyone blunders. Good luck!

The Insane Corner, by John Barroso

Insane puzzles, moves, and compositions!

Send yours in!

Edition 1: A Composition by Kenneth S.

Howard, 1936.

White to move and mate in three moves.

Chess is 99% Tactics, by Yisrael Isaacson: SOLUTIONS

#1 – Nagy vs Kmoch

-4.67 1... Bxc5 2. Rxc5 Qb6 3. Rb5 d3+ 4. Rxb6 dxc2 5. Rb2 Bxe4 6. Rxc2 Bxc2 7.

Bd5

#2 – Robson vs Udeshi

+13.95 1. d5 Qxe3+ 2. Rxe3 Kg7 3. Nxf7 Bc2 4. Qb2+ Ne5 5. Nxd6 Re7 6. Qxc2

Rd8 7. Qf2

Kg8 8. Bh3 h6 9. Rc3 Nc6 10. dxc6 Bxc3 11. cxb7 Kh7 12. Qe3 Bg7 13. Rf7

#3 – Gligoric vs Pachman

+7.91 1. Ne6 f6 2. Nxf8+ Nxd5 3. Ne6 Qe5 4. Qxe5 fxe5 5. exd5 Bxd5 6. Rc8+ Kf7

#4 – Sliwa vs Ivanciu

+3.89 1. Bh7+ Kh8 2. Bg6 Be6 3. f5 Bd7 4. Bxf7 Kh7 5. Bg6+ Kg8 6. Bxe8 Bxe

# 5 – Reich vs Dolmatov

-5.85 1... Ng4 2. Re2 Bf5 3. Qg1 Ne5 4. Ne4 Nxc4 5. Qc1 Nb6 6. h3 h6 7. Rd3 Bd4

8.

Kh2 Qd7 9. Rdd2 Re5 10. Qd1 Bxe4 11. Rxe4 Nxd5 12. Qb3 Qf7 13. Rxe5 dxe5

#6 – Illescas Cordoba vs Korchnoi

+3.02 1. g3 Be7 2. h4 Nc5 3. Bxc5 Bxc5 4. Nf6+ Kg7 5. Nxe8+ Bxe8 6. h5

Qc6 7. hxg6

fxg6 8. Rxf8 Bxf8 9. Qf2 Be7 10. Qa7 Qc5

10

MIKHAIL

CHIGORIN

By Steve

O’Connor

Mikhail Chigorin was

the last great player of

the Romantic chess

style and also served

as a major source of

inspiration for the

"Soviet Chess School", which dominated the chess world

in the middle and latter parts of the 20th century. He was

the best Russian player of his time.

Chigorin was born in Gatchina in 1850 but moved to

nearby St. Petersburg some time later. His father worked

in the Okhtensk gunpowder works. Chigorin's parents

died young and Chigorin entered the Gatchinsk Orphans'

Institute at the age of 10. He became serious about chess

uncommonly late in life; his schoolteacher taught him the

moves at the age of 16, but he did not take to the game

until around 1874, having first finished his studies before

commencing a career as a government officer.

Once smitten with the game, he terminated his

employment and started life as a chess professional. In

1876, he started a chess magazine, Chess Sheet, which he

edited until 1881 (only 250 subscribers in all of Russia).

He played a series of matches with established masters

Emanuel Schiffers (1878–1880) and Semyon Alapin

(1880) and notched up a large plus score against each. It

was not long after that he was regarded as the best player

in the city and possibly the whole of Russia.

His first international tournament was Berlin 1881, where

he was equal third (+10-5=1) with Szymon Winawer,

behind Johannes Zukertort and Joseph Henry Blackburne.

This event included 17 master competitors.

At the great London tournament of 1883, he finished

fourth (+16-10=0) behind Zukertort, Wilhelm Steinitz

and Blackburne. The 14 competitors in this double round

robin event included practically all of the best

chessplayers in the world.

At the very strong tournament of New York 1889 he was

equal first with Max Weiss. Following this great success

he challenged the world champion Steinitz for a match

with the World Championship at stake.

The World Championship match was played at Havana in

1889, but he lost 10½–6½ (+6-10=1). A second World

Championship match was played also at Havana in 1892,

but he narrowly lost 12½–10½ (+8-10=5).

His overall record against Steinitz was very close (+24-

27=8). He also played a much publicized 'telegraph

match' against Steinitz in 1890, devised to settle a

theoretical argument. Chigorin had the slight advantage

of choosing the openings in advance from a list supplied

by Steinitz and duly won both games.

Towards the end of the century, his standing at home and

abroad continued to rise, and he was in the world's top

four or five players. His reputation as a match player too,

continued to grow. He drew an 1893 match with Siegbert

Tarrasch in St. Petersburg (+9-9=4) and in his lifetime,

maintained a narrow plus score against Tarrasch (+14-

13=8) He had a strong plus score against Richard

Teichmann (+8-3=1), but a poor record versus David

Janowski (+4-17=4). Most of his losses to Janowski

occurred late in Chigorin's life, when he was past his best.

In all likelihood, his best performance occurred at the

Hastings 1895 chess tournament, where he placed second,

ahead of reigning world champion Emanuel Lasker,

Tarrasch and former world champion Steinitz. All of the

greatest players of the time participated in the event and

Chigorin's outstanding result included winning his

individual encounter with tournament victor, Harry

Nelson Pillsbury. Pillsbury had great respect for

Chigorin's ability and for good reason, as Chigorin had a

marginal lifetime plus score against him (+8-7=6).

Although Chigorin had a poor record against Lasker in

serious play (+1-8=4), he was victorious with the black

pieces in their first game of this 1895 tournament, in

which he outplayed Lasker in a classic two knights versus

two bishops ending.

In other major competitions, he was joint winner at

Budapest 1896, and beat Rudolf Charousek (+3-1) in the

playoff. At Cologne in 1898, he was equal second with

Charousek and Wilhelm Cohn after Amos Burn. His 7th-

place finish at London 1899 was disappointing in

comparison, but this was another tournament notable for

its impressive list of participants. At Monte Carlo 1901,

he placed equal third after Janowski and Carl Schlecter.

A highly skilled exponent of gambit lines, he won the

King's Gambit-themed Vienna Tournament of 1903 and

11

defeated Lasker (+2-1=3) in a sponsored Rice Gambit

tournament in Brighton. The latter was however

something of a hollow victory, as it was emerging that the

Rice Gambit was unsound and so, playing the black side

in each game gave him a distinct advantage. He was also

perhaps the most skilled 19th century practitioner of the

Evans Gambit, which featured in many of his great duels

with Steinitz. At Łódź 1906, in a four-person event, he

finished second to Akiba Rubinstein.

Alongside these international events, he also entered and

won the first three All-Russia Tournaments of 1899,

1900/01 and 1903. These prestigious successes further

cemented his reputation as Russia's best player. Upon

losing the fourth such event in 1906, he challenged the

winner, Salwe to a match and came out the victor (+7-

5=3).

As an ambassador for Russian chess, Chigorin was a

shining example; he gave many lectures, wrote magazine

articles and chess columns and subsidized or otherwise

supported a number of periodicals to keep them afloat

despite low readership levels. He also founded a chess

club in Saint Petersburg and tried for many years to

establish a chess association, an attempt that finally

succeeded just a few years after his death.

In 1907, Chigorin failed badly in a chess tournament. He

was clearly not in good health and was diagnosed by

doctors in with an advanced and untreatable case of

diabetes (some sources say liver cancer). This prompted a

prediction that he had only months to live, whereupon he

returned to his estranged wife and daughter in Lublin and

died the following January. In 1909, a Chigorin Memorial

tournament was played in St. Petersburg. After that many

more followed: from 1947 onwards mainly in Sochi and

from 1990 back in St. Petersburg.

Chigorin has several chess openings or variations of

openings named after him, the two most important being

the Chigorin Variation of the Ruy Lopez and the Chigorin

Defense to the Queen's Gambit. While the former has

remained popular through the 1900s, the latter struggled

to attract a great many devotees until relatively recently.

Another opening line invented by Chigorin is in the

French Defense. It is now generally regarded as a

forerunner of King's Indian Reversed setups, but Chigorin

also played it with a queen bishop’s fianchetto in mind.

There is very little in our library on Chigorin, but there is

an excellent book by Santasiere entitled My Love Affair

with Chigorin sold by USCF Sales at a very reasonable

price.

The Insane Corner: Solution

Credits: Spectacular Chess Problems, p. 57, d. 141

by Kenneth S. Howard, Dover Publications, NY, 1967

1. Rg1

If 1….f2 2.Qxf6+ Kh5 3. g4#

if 1...Kg4 2. gxf3+ Kf4 3. Qe4#

Fritz 13 plays all moves after the human move 1. Rg1:

1…..Be7 2. gxf3 Bd6 3. Qh3#

Fritz 13 plays all moves, including move 1:

1.Qxf6+ Kh5 2. Rb5+ Bc5 3. Rxc5+ Kg4 4. Qg5#

12

How to win against black

with the Sicilian Dragon, Moroczy bind variation

The reader can learn from this game the complexities and

weaknesses of the Sicilian Dragon, Moroczy variation

and see the interesting fight of knight versus bishop and

an interesting rook ending.

Rodrigues, Tiago Pereira (2138)

Martins, Anmartom Mugabe Lou (1998)

Opening: [B22], Sicilian Dragon, Moroczy variation

Brazilian Championship, 2016

U2200 Session

Site: Sport Club Pinheiros, São Paulo, 05.26.2016.

1. e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.c3 [the famous Smith Mora

gambit where black needs to be careful]

4...d3 [it would be possible to accept the gambit with:

4...dxc3 5.Nxc3 Nc6 6.Bc4 g6 7.0–0 Bg7 8.Qe2 Nf6 9.h3

0–0 10.Rd1 Bd7 11.Bf4 with an unclear position; 4...Nc6

5.cxd4 and white has the center and freedom to develop.]

5.Bxd3 Nc6 6.h3 [prophylactic move to avoid the pin and

exchange of pieces]

6...g6 7.c4 Bg7 8.0–0 Nf6 9.Nc3 0–0 10.Bg5 Be6 11.Qd2

Rc8 12.Rfd1 [another option would be: 12.b3! Nd7

13.Rab1 a5 14.Be2 Nce5 (14...Nc5) 15.Nxe5 Bxe5

16.Bh6 Re8 17.f4 Bxc3 (17...Bh8) 18.Qxc3 Qb6+ 19.Kh1

f6 20.f5 Bf7²; a mistake would be: 12.a3?? Na5; 12.Nd5

Bxd5 13.exd5 Na5 14.b3 Nxd5 15.cxd5 Bxa1 16.Rxa1]

12...Nb4 13.b3 Nxd3 14.Qxd3 a6 [14...Qa5; 14...a5]

15.a4?! [another option would be: 15.Rac1 Nd7 16.Nd5

Bxd5 17.exd5 Nc5 18.Qe3]

15...Nd7 [15...a5 16.Nb5 Nd7 17.Nbd4 Nc5 18.Qe2]

16.Nd4 [white should have played 16.Nd2 Nc5 17.Qe3 a5

18.Rab1 Re8 19.Nd5 Bxd5 20.exd5 Qb6 (20...b6) 21.Ne4

e6 22.Nxc5 Qxc5 23.Qxc5 Rxc5 24.dxe6 Rxe6 25.Be3

Rc6 with position favorable to white.; 16.Rab1? Nc5

17.Qe3 Bxc3 18.Qxc3 Nxe4]

16...Nc5 17.Qc2 Bxd4 18.Rxd4 Qb6 [critical position,

what should white do here?]

19.Nd5? [19.Rdd1 Qxb3 e o negro está melhor.; 19.Bxe7

Nxb3 20.Rxd6 Nxa1 21.Qd2 Qa5 com vantagem do

branco.; 19.b4 Nb3–+; 19.Rad1? Nxb3; 19.Rb1! f6 20.a5

Qc7 21.Bh6 com boa posição.]

Position after 18. ... £b6

19...Bxd5! 20.Rxd5 e6! [20...Qxb3 21.Qxb3 Nxb3

22.Rb1 Nc5 23.Bxe7 Rfe8 24.Bxd6 Nxe4 25.Rxb7 Rxc4

26.a5 (26.Be5 Rxa4 27.Re7 Rxe7) 26...Rc1+ 27.Kh2

Nxf2]

21.Rdd1 Qxb3³ [black took advantage of the mistake of

the knight to d5.]. 22.Qxb3 Nxb3 23.Rab1

23...Nc5 [23...Na5 24.Rxd6 Rxc4³]

13

24.f3 [24.Be7 Rfe8 25.Bxd6 Nxe4 26.Rbc1 Red8 27.c5

b6–+]

24...f6 25.Be3 Rf7 [25...Rfd8 26.Bxc5 dxc5 27.Rxd8+

Rxd8 28.Rxb7 Rd4 29.Rb6 Rxc4 30.Rxa6 Kf7 31.Rc6

Rxa4 32.Rxc5=]

26.a5! [important move that fixes black’s pawn structure

in b7]

[26.Rxd6 Nxa4 27.Rb4 Nc5 28.Bxc5 Rxc5 29.Rxe6 a5

30.Ra4 Kg7 31.Kf2 Rfc7 32.Rb6 Rxc4 33.Rxc4 Rxc4

34.Rxb7+ Kg8 (34...Kh6 35.Ra7 Ra4 36.Ra6) 35.Ra7

Ra4 36.h4=]

26...Rc6 27.Rb4? [the plan was to double rook on the b

file]

[27.Rb6! Rfc7 28.Rxd6 Rxd6 29.Rxd6 and white is

better]

27...Rd7 28.Rdb1 Rcc7 29.Rd1 Kf8 30.Bf4 Ke7 31.Kf1

Rc6 [31...f5 32.exf5 gxf5]

32.h4 [we can see black’s advantage but it is not easy to

convert the extra pawn into an advantage]

32...Rdc7 33.Ke2 Nd7 34.Rdb1 Rc5 [34...Rxc4 35.Rxc4

Rxc4 36.Rxb7 Ra4 37.Bd2=]

35.Ra4? [35.Rxb7]

35...Ne5 [35...f5]

36.Bxe5! [this knight is quite superior to the bishop in this

type of position if we note the jumps and the weak pawns

on a4 and c4. The bishop, instead, is passive and has not

target to attack]

36...Rxe5 37.Kd3 Kd7 38.Rb6 Rec5 39.Rb3 Kc8

40.Rb6 R7c6 41.Rb3 Rh5 [41...d5 42.cxd5 exd5 43.exd5

Rxd5+ 44.Ke3 Rcc5 45.Rab4]

42.g3 Rcc5 43.Rab4 Rc7 44.Rb6 Rd7 45.Ra3 g5

46.hxg5 Rxg5 47.g4 f5 48.gxf5 exf5 49.Kd4 fxe4 50.fxe4

h5 51.Rb2 h4 52.Rh2 [52.Rh3 Rxa5 53.Rxh4]

52...Rh7 [52...Rg3! 53.Rxg3 hxg3 54.Rh8+ Rd8 55.Rh7

Rg8 56.Rh1 g2 57.Rg1 Kc7 58.Ke3 Kc6 59.Kf2–+]

53.Rah3 Rgh5 54.Ra2 Kd7 55.Ra1 Ke6 56.Rah1 Kf6

57.Rf3+ [57.Rf1+ Kg5 58.Rg1+ Kf4 59.Rf1+ Kg4]

57...Ke6 [57...Kg5 58.Rg1+ Kh6 59.Rf6#; 57...Kg6

58.Rg1+ (58.Rf8 Rg7! 59.Rf4 Kg5 60.Rf5+

Kg4 (60...Kh6 61.Rf4 h3 62.Rf3 h2 63.Rf2) 61.Rg1+)

58...Rg5 59.Rh1 Kh5]

58.Rfh3 Kd7 59.Rb1 Kc6 60.Rbh1 [60.Rb6+ Kc7]

60...Rxa5 61.Rxh4 Rxh4 62.Rxh4 Ra1 63.Rh8 [63.Rh6

Rd1+ 64.Kc3 Re1 (64...Kc5) 65.Kd4]

63...Rd1+ 64.Kc3 Rc1+ 65.Kd4 b5 66.cxb5+

axb5??“ [66...Kxb5 67.Rb8+ Ka5 (67...Ka4

68.Rb6) 68.Kd5 Rd1+ 69.Kc6 Re1 70.Kxd6 Rxe4

71.Kc5=]

67. Rc8+ 1–0

Fred Foreman, PCC Champion, 1962

A game against himself!

Neat checkmate!

Fred tells me that back in

those days people played

themselves (a time when

online playing and computer

software did not exist) often

to practice. Moves were

made without much

thinking, but notation was

taken to try to improve. This

game dates circa 1960.

Fred’s highest rating

according to his account was

2037 in the 1970’s.

[Result "0-1"]

[ECO "A00"]

[Opening "Benko (plus Reti, English)"]

1. g3 e5 2. d3 Nf6 3. Nc3 Bb4 4. Bg5 O-O 5. Nf3 d6 6.

Qd2 Nbd7 7. O-O-O c6 8. h3

b5 9. a3 Bc5 10. Ne4 Qe8 11. Nc3 b4 12. Na4 bxa3 13.

Nxc5 axb2+ 14. Kxb2 Nxc5

15. Qb4 Be6 16. Qh4 Rb8+ 17. Kc1 Nd5 18. Kd2 f6 19.

Be3 Qd8 20. Bg2 Qa5+ 21. Kc1

Qa3+ 22. Kd2 Qc3+ 23. Kc1 Nb3+ 24. Kb1 Nd2+ 25. Ka2

Nb4# 0-1

Fred has a notebook at the PCC with notations of many

practice games of this type he played against himself.

14

Chess is 99% Tactics

by Yisrael Isaacson

Find the best winning line. Some positions may have a number of winning lines but the

answers given are those that the chess engine Houdini 4 evaluates as best and will have a

valuation at least 2 – 3 points higher than the next best.

Diagram 1: Black to move.

Nagy vs Kmoch Debrecen 1925

Diagram 2: White to move.

Robson vs Udeshi Chennai 2011

Diagram 3: White to move.

Gligorich vs Pachman Buenos Aires

1955

Diagram 4: White to move.

Sliwa vs Ivanciu Correspondence

1986/87

Diagram 5: Black to move.

Reich vs Dolmatov Passau 1996

Diagram 6: White to move.

Illescas Cordoba vs Korchnoi Madrid

1996

DEADLINE TO SUBMIT MATERIALS FOR THE

MARCH 2018 EDITION: Saturday, February 24th, 2018.

Word documents ONLY, no formatting (no columns).

All images in JPG or GIF format only.

profjohnbarroso@gmail.com

15

16

17