drt e56u h

Volume 141

JUNE 2021

CHESS AND CRYPTO AS VOLATILE CARLSEN WINS BITCOIN CUP, WILL THERE BE MORE CRYPTO PRIZES IN CHESS?

044000 770007 9

ISSN 0007-0440

02106

FIDE TELLS BCM: 'WE ARE TALKING TO SOME LARGE COMPANIES DIRECTLY CONNECTED WITH CRYPTO-CURRENCY'

TONY CULLEN, AUTHOR OF CHESS RIVALS OF THE 19TH CENTURY:

WHEN DOES THE ENDGAME START?

EUROPEAN WORLD CUP QUALIFIER 2021: HYBRID ISN'T THAT BAD!

IMPRESSUM

Contents BRITISH CHESS MAGAZINE Founded 1881 www.britishchessmagazine.co.uk

Chairman Shaun Taulbut Director Stephen Lowe

Editors Milan Dinic and Shaun Taulbut Photo editor David Llada Prepress Specialist Milica Mitic Photography David Llada, Wikipedia, Instagram, Shutterstock Advertising Stephen Lowe Enquiries editor@britishchessmagazine.co.uk ISSN 0007-0440 © The British Chess Magazine Limited Company Limited by Shares Registered in England No 00334968 Postal correspondence: Albany House, 14 Shute End Wokingham, Berkshire RG40 1BJ Subscription support@britishchessmagazine.co.uk 12 monthly issues UK: £55 | RoW: £85 Printed in the UK: by Lavenham Press Ltd Cover photography: BCM, Shutterstock

322 | BRITISH CHESS MAGAZINE

325

Volatile Carlsen wins Bitcoin Cup

324 Chess and Crypto BCM Editorial Comment 340 Revisiting the NIC Classic Carlsen’s first victory since turning 30

By GM Aleksandar Colovic 352 Hybrid isn’t that bad

By GM Aleksandar Colovic 360 Empire of the Mind

By Grandmaster Raymond Keene OBE 364 Openings for Amateurs The Caro-Kann with 1.e4 and 2.c4, Part IV

By Pete Tamburro 367 Book Review THE TURN OF THE SCREW

By Peter O'Brien 375 When does the Endgame start?

By Tony Cullen 378 Endgame Studies

By Ian Watson 380 Quotes and Queries The Vienna Game and the great old masters

By Alan Smith

June 2021

It´s now even easier to subscribe to British Chess Magazine An exclusive chess magazine!

Great news, BCM just got better! More content, more pages, more GM and IM writers (including top UK grandmasters), outstanding photography and design, and the regular features which have long been part of BCM’s tradition.

Now in partnership, American Chess Magazine and BCM have combined to re-launch BCM which now offers more high class, authoritative and in-depth coverage of major British chess events and leading players, a brand new look, and of course our much loved regular articles.

save

printed magazine

UK

Non-UK

£55

£85

12 issues per year postage included

subscribe

Purchase or renew your subscription and have BCM delivered to your door: On-line: visit our website www.britishchessmagazine.co.uk Email: contact support@britishchessmagazine.co.uk, we’ll get back to you right away By post: write to BCM at Albany House, 14 Shute End, Wokingham, Berkshire, England RG40 1BJ with a cheque payable to British Chess Magazine Limited, your post and email addresses (and if possible a contact phone number) Save time, go on-line. It’s more convenient and better for the environment, why not do it on-line. Enjoy priority support. No waiting for your turn, we are here for you 24/7. Anytime, anywhere. If you’re on the move, read digital BCM from your handheld or other device.

Thank you for your continuing support!

BRITISH CHESS MAGAZINE, the World’s Oldest Chess Journal

BRITISH CHESS MAGAZINE | 323

The BCM view: Chess and Crypto Chess has surprised the world during the breakout of the COVID-19 pandemic with how fast it adapted to the new circumstances, embracing technology and migrating events online. Now, chess is one of the first sports in the world (next to football and basketball) to include prizes in crypto currencies. Is that just following a fad or, is crypto the new gold of the 21st century?

The FTX Crypto Cup (sponsored by the FTX crypto exchange) which finished at the beginning of June had a prize fund of $320,000 out of which £100,000 was in bitcoin, the number one crypto currency.

Interestingly, just in the runup to the FTX tournament one of the (so far) worst crashes of crypto currencies happened: bitcoin fell from nearly £40,000 to £25,000.

This intertwinement of chess and crypto isn’t that surprising. The companies which are in the forefront of the chess world today (The Magnus group, Chess Base, chess.com, to name a few) all style themselves as techcompanies and, it seems, you can’t be proper tech if you don’t embrace crypto. In a sign that this is more than a fashion craze, FIDE has confirmed that they are also looking to do events with prizes in crypto.

‘We are talking to some large companies directly connected with crypto-currency, and also electronic banking. They all have a strong interest in e-sports, and of course they are not indifferent to chess’, David Llada, Chief Marketing Officer of FIDE told BCM. This isn’t the first time sports prizes have been given in crypto. The English Premier League team Southampton has revealed that contracts with their players include an ‘option for the club to be paid certain performance-based bonuses in Bitcoin at the end of each season, allowing the club the opportunity to take advantage of the new, high-growth currency if it feels it will bring significant future benefits’.

Also, certain teams in the NBA have said they will offer players to be paid in Bitcoin and for tickets to matches to be purchased using crypto.

Here at BCM we very much welcome new and innovative link-ups between chess and the financial world. Chess at the elite level has a long history of partnership with and sponsorship from the financial sector - one 324 | BRITISH CHESS MAGAZINE

remembers in particular Jim Slater tempting Bobby Fischer into playing Boris Spassky for the world title in 1972, and financial institutions in the UK and elsewhere have sponsored chess events down the years.

Chess has a very long tradition and a generally very positive and "solid" reputation in the public mind. Crypto currencies on the other hand are widely seen as very new, potentially volatile, in some cases very un-green, and may not be widely understood. Seen in this light, a link-up with chess is the attraction of apparent opposites.

Here at BCM we are not currency experts or economists, but a little background to crypto currencies may interest our readers.

Digital or crypto currencies are not new. Before Bitcoin, there have been various attempts to launch non-state backed forms of digital currency: Hash Cash, E-gold and Digicash, to name a few. These were created in the same vein as Hayek's denationalised money and with echoes of the 19th century Free Banking Era in the United States. The Bitcoin predecessors envisaged a system of private currencies created by financial institutions who would control the issuing, supply and transactions of a digital currency.

These digital currencies utilised the internet to process transfers, and were generally operated by a centralised company or financial institution with a physical headquarters and an identifiable management team. The significant difference with Bitcoin is that it is fully peer-to-peer, with no "trusted third party" or identifiable intermediary involved. The concept of a digital value transfer without an identifiable intermediary is a significant change from traditional financial services, where each transaction requires a bank, a payment processor and a currency issued by a central bank.

But there is a lot to be worked out with crypto, and there will be lots of ups and downs. Given how volatile the crypto currencies are (with ups and downs which can go over 20 percent in a few days), it might be an interesting experiment to see if and how that will affect the attention of chess players competing at events with crypto-prizes.

Whatever one thinks of crypto currencies, in today's world of profound distrust of financial institutions, regulatory and government structures, combined with near universal access to the internet in developed countries, we suspect that they are here to stay.

June 2021

World s first bitcoin chess tournament: The FTX Crypto Cup

Volatile Carlsen wins Bitcoin Cup

By GM Aleksandar Colovic / www.alexcolovic.com The sixth event of the Meltwater Champions Chess Tour (23-31 May) managed to gather all the top 10 on the FIDE rating list: Carlsen, Caruana, Ding Liren, Nepomniachtchi, Aronian, Giri, Grischuk, Mamedyarov, So and Radjabov. The additional players were also not to be underestimated – Nakamura, Vachier-Lagrave, Svidler, Dubov and Firouzja. The only non-elite player was the Argentinian GM Alan Pichot who won the voting of the chess24 premium members as the nominee for the event.

Thanks to the sponsorship of the FTX crypto exchange the prize fund of $320,000 was augmented by 2.18 Bitcoin, the price of which fluctuated quite a bit during the event. To honour this sponsorship the event was called FTX Crypto Cup. With such mouth−watering prizes it was only logical to expect the players to show their best as a way of respect for the sponsors and organisers. But the players had some other ideas.

Fabiano Caruana; Source: instagram.com

The Preliminaries Perhaps surprisingly, as he is not known to be among the best rapid players, Fabiano Caruana convincingly won the preliminaries with 10/15, a full point ahead of the field. He did this after a full year of abstinence from online chess. This was the first preliminary event not won by Carlsen, who, again surprisingly, barely managed to qualify.

He only secured his qualification for the knock−out matches with his last−round win over Radjabov.

The plague of the preliminaries - the quick not−played−out draws − continued in this event. The usual suspects of So, Radjabov and Nakamura seem impervious to social media criticism and as is their wont played their usual number of quick draws. Readers of BCM already know these draws in the Queen’s Gambit Declined and the Berlin as I haven’t tired of showing them in previous issues. This time I will spare you the pleasure and will introduce a new one, a forced draw in the Grunfeld used by So and Giri.

Wesley So – Anish Giri FTX Crypto Cup | Prelims (14.7) 1.d4 ¤f6 2.c4 g6 3.¤c3 d5 4.cxd5 ¤xd5 5.e4 ¤xc3 6.bxc3 ¥g7 7.¤f3 c5 8.¦b1 0–0 9.¥e2 cxd4 10.cxd4 £a5+ 11.¥d2 £xa2 12.0–0 ¥g4 13.¦xb7 ¥xf3 14.¥xf3 ¥xd4 15.e5 ¤a6 16.¦xe7 ¦ad8 17.e6 fxe6 18.£e1 So has already (ab)used this line on more than one occasion. On the next move the games diverge.

BRITISH CHESS MAGAZINE | 325

06/141

Particularly successful in the drawing series was Wesley So, who made 10(!) draws in a row, 7 of them featuring the non-games with the Berlin, QGD and Grunfeld lines we all know so well. He also wrapped up his qualification with the draw with Giri above and the Berlin draw with Ding Liren in the last round.

18...¤c5

XIIIIIIIIY 9-+-tr-trk+0 9zp-+-tR-+p0 9-+-+p+p+0 9+-sn-+-+-0 9-+-vl-+-+0 9+-+-+L+-0 9q+-vL-zPPzP0 9+-+-wQRmK-0 xiiiiiiiiy

Nakamura and Radjabov were decent in comparison with So, with 4 quick draws each, but Radjabov saved his best for the knockout stage. More on this below.

Another way to force a draw. The advantage of this move is that it leaves no room for prolongation of the game.

18...¥f6 19.¦xa7 ¦xd2 20.¦xa6 £xa6 21.£xd2 And here the players could have already shaken virtual hands, but the games So-Svidler and So-Vachier from 2020 continued until move 37 and 29 respectively.

19.¥c3 In the next round we had the novelty 19.¥e3 ¤d3 ½–½ (25) Giri,A (2780)-VachierLagrave,M (2760), and the players didn’t even bother to repeat the moves from the previous day after 20.¥xd4 ¤xe1 21.¦g7+ ¢h8 22.¦d7+ with perpetual check.

19...¤d3 20.¥xd4 A flashy queen sacrifice that leads to perpetual check.

20...¤xe1 21.¦g7+ ¢h8 22.¦d7+ ¢g8 23.¦g7+ ¢h8 24.¦d7+ ¢g8 25.¦g7+

XIIIIIIIIY 9-+-tr-trk+0 9zp-+-+-tRp0 9-+-+p+p+0 9+-+-+-+-0 9-+-vL-+-+0 9+-+-+L+-0 9q+-+-zPPzP0 9+-+-snRmK-0 xiiiiiiiiy

326 | BRITISH CHESS MAGAZINE

The first duel of Carlsen and Nepo since the Russian became the Challenger From the preliminaries one interesting game was the duel between the World Champion and his challenger. From the moment Nepomniachtchi won the Candidates every game until the match in Dubai in November will receive heightened interest.

Magnus Carlsen – Ian Nepomniachtchi FTX Crypto Cup | Prelims chess24.com (2.5) 1.e4 c5 2.¤c3 e6 3.¤f3 ¤c6 4.d4 cxd4 5.¤xd4 £c7 The Taimanov Sicilian is not Nepomniachtchi’s usual weapon against 1.e4, but it’s clear that the choice of openings in their encounters will be aimed at confusing the opponent before the match.

6.¥e3 a6 7.¥e2 The first time that Carlsen has played like this. He has played other lines against the Taimanov in the past, for example the English Attack with 7.£d2 or the lines with 7.¥d3 or 7.a3.

½–½

7...b5 For a very long time this was considered inferior to the move 7...¤f6, but both players seem to be trying to outfox each other. Nepomniachtchi has played like this before, so probably Carlsen had a concrete idea for this game.

June 2021

8.¤xc6 £xc6 9.e5 The alternatives are 9.a3 and 9.¥f3.

9...¥b7 10.¥f3 £c7 11.¥xb7 £xb7 12.£d3 ¤e7

XIIIIIIIIY 9r+-+kvl-tr0 9+q+psnpzpp0 9p+-+p+-+0 9+p+-zP-+-0 9-+-+-+-+0 9+-sNQvL-+-0 9PzPP+-zPPzP0 9tR-+-mK-+R0 xiiiiiiiiy

Here is Black’s improvement.

12...¥b4 13.0–0 ¥xc3 14.£xc3 was better for White in: ½–½ (37) Giri,A (2776)-Nepomniachtchi,I (2789) played in March 2021, though Black managed to draw the game.

13.¥c5 £xg2?! This is risky.

13...¤d5 was better, but it required either good memory of the prepared lines or precise calculation of what follows.

14.¥xf8 ¤xc3 15.¥xg7 £xg2 16.¦f1 ¦g8 17.bxc3 (17.£xc3 £e4+! forces White to move the king as the endgame after 18.£e3? £xe3+ 19.fxe3 ¦xg7 is bad for White in view of the weak pawns on the e-file.) 17...¦xg7 18.0–0–0 £d5!

(18...£c6?! 19.¦g1 ¦g6 20.h4 gives White unpleasant initiative.) 19.£xd5 exd5 20.¦xd5 ¦c8 when Black’s activity should suffice for a draw.

14.0–0–0 £c6 15.¤e4 White has compensation for the pawn thanks to his pressure in the centre and the problematic position of Black’s king that cannot find a safe haven.

15...¤f5 16.¥xf8 ¦xf8 16...¢xf8 was somewhat better, with the idea of ...g6

and ...¢g7. 17.£a3+! Forcing the king back. 17...¢e8 and in spite of Black’s lack of coordination with the uncastled king on e8 White cannot easily break through thanks to the strong position of the knight on f5. (17...¢g8? 18.¤f6+ gxf6 19.¦hg1+ ¤g7 20.exf6 leads to mate.)

17.¦he1 ¦c8 18.¢b1

XIIIIIIIIY 9-+r+ktr-+0 9+-+p+pzpp0 9p+q+p+-+0 9+p+-zPn+-0 9-+-+N+-+0 9+-+Q+-+-0 9PzPP+-zP-zP0 9+K+RtR-+-0 xiiiiiiiiy

18...f6? Nepomniachtchi’s active style cannot withstand passive defence. This may be important information for Carlsen before the match.

18...¦h8 is the engine’s shocking suggestion, implying that Black has nothing to fear and White cannot find a way to break through.

19.f4? Missing a big chance.

19.exf6! leads to a big advantage for White. After 19...g6 (19...gxf6? 20.¤c5! ¦f7 21.¤xe6! dxe6 22.£xf5 is winning for White, with only heavy pieces on the board king safety is everything and Black will never have it.) 20.f4 h6 with the idea of ...¢f7–g8, but even that doesn’t help. 21.£e2 ¢f7 22.h4 ¢g8 23.h5 and the black king finds no peace.

19...fxe5 20.fxe5 h6 Now things are unclear again - White has compensation for the pawn but nothing concrete is visible.

21.¦g1 £d5?

BRITISH CHESS MAGAZINE | 327

06/141

curious line that can serve as a transposition to the Sveshnikov. It has the advantage of avoiding the very popular Rossolimo Variation (1.e4 c5 2.¤f3 ¤c6 3.¥b5) but on the other hand it allows the line chosen

by Pichot.

XIIIIIIIIY 9-+r+ktr-+0 9+-+p+-zp-0 9p+-+p+-zp0 9+p+qzPn+-0 9-+-+N+-+0 9+-+Q+-+-0 9PzPP+-+-zP0 9+K+R+-tR-0 xiiiiiiiiy

Black wants to force the exchange of queens, but blunders an exchange.

Again a patient move was required: 21...¦f7 22.¤d6+ ¤xd6 23.exd6 £f3 and Black holds.

22.¤d6+! ¢e7 22...¤xd6 23.£g6+ wins the queen.

23.¤xc8+ ¦xc8 24.£xd5 exd5 25.¦xd5 White is a clear exchange up and it shouldn’t have been a problem for Carlsen to win. However, in his shaky form he allowed counterplay and Black saved the draw. A curious game with a lot of information about the players ahead of the upcoming match. ½–½ To keep his qualification hopes alive Aronian played a Sicilian in the last round against Pichot. The result was the following spectacular miniature.

Alan Pichot – Levon Aronian FTX Crypto Cup | Prelims (15.1) 1.e4 c5 Aronian very rarely deviates from his preferred 1...e5. Here he faces the tournament’s outsider and is in a must-win situation, so he essays the Sicilian.

2.¤f3 e6 3.d4 cxd4 4.¤xd4 ¤f6 5.¤c3 ¤c6 The Four Knights Variation is a 328 | BRITISH CHESS MAGAZINE

6.¤xc6 When faced with the same choice in the game against Giri at the Candidates Tournament (analysed in depth in the May issue of BCM) Caruana chose the rare 6.a3. Of course, the principled move 6.¤db5 would lead to the Sveshnikov Variation after 6...d6 7.¥f4 e5 8.¥g5, avoiding the popular line with 7.¤d5 (after 1.e4 c5 2.¤f3 ¤c6 3.d4 cd 4.¤d4 ¤f6 5.¤c3 e5 6.¤db5 d6).

6...bxc6 7.e5 ¤d5 8.¤e4 £c7 9.f4 ¥b7!? A rare move compared to the popular main line starting with 9...£b6.

It is supposed to lose according to the engine, but as a surprise factor in a human game it is quite a good attempt.

10.c4 ¥b4+ 11.¢e2 0–0 12.cxd5 cxd5 13.¤g5

XIIIIIIIIY 9r+-+-trk+0 9zplwqp+pzpp0 9-+-+p+-+0 9+-+pzP-sN-0 9-vl-+-zP-+0 9+-+-+-+-0 9PzP-+K+PzP0 9tR-vLQ+L+R0 xiiiiiiiiy

13.£d4 is also quite good. After 13... a5 (13...£c2+ 14.¤d2) 14.a3 ¥e7 15.£c3 ¥c6 16.¤d6 White remains a piece up.

13...f6 14.¤f3? Aronian’s gamble pays off. Now things are unclear and Black is not worse.

June 2021

14.exf6! ¦xf6 (or 14...gxf6 15.¤f3 e5 16.¥d2) 15.£d3 ¦f5 16.¢d1 was the correct way to keep the position winning, though of course White will still have to navigate some troubled waters with his centralised king on a board full of pieces.

14...fxe5 15.fxe5?

XIIIIIIIIY 9r+-+-trk+0 9zplwqp+-zpp0 9-+-+p+-+0 9+-+pzP-+-0 9-vl-+-+-+0 9+-+-+N+-0 9PzP-+K+PzP0 9tR-vLQ+L+R0 xiiiiiiiiy

A further mistake that hands Black a decisive attack.

15.£b3! was the only way to stay afloat, but it’s clear that if such unobvious moves are necessary then White’s position is far from easy to play.

XIIIIIIIIY 9r+-+-+k+0 9zplwqp+-zpp0 9-+-+p+-+0 9+-+-zPr+-0 9-vl-zp-+-+0 9+-+-vLN+-0 9PzP-+K+PzP0 9tR-+Q+L+R0 xiiiiiiiiy

Opening the long diagonal for the lightsquared bishop.

17.¥xd4 ¦af8 White cannot hold the f3–point.

18.£b3 ¦xf3! 19.gxf3 ¥xf3+ 20.¢d3 £b7 Threatening ...¥e4.

21.¢c2 ¥xh1 Regaining the material and Black is even a pawn up now. That is of course irrelevant as it is the attack on the king that decides the game.

22.a3 £e4+ 23.¥d3 ¦c8+ 24.¢b1 £xd4 25.axb4 £xe5 Two pawns up and the attack still continuing, so Pichot decided it’s enough.

15...¦f5? Aronian misses the chance.

15...¦xf3!? According to the engine 15...¦ac8 is even stronger, but this is spectacular, as Black will be a rook down. 16.gxf3 £xe5+ 17.¢f2 ¦f8 18.¥e2 d4 with a winning attack. In spite of being a rook down all Black’s pieces are participating in the attack, which cannot be said of White’s rooks on h1 and a1 that will never join the defence.

16.¥e3? Allowing a second chance, that Aronian takes.

16.£d4! ¥c5 17.£d3 kept the advantage for White.

16...d4!

0–1

Unfortunately for Aronian, this fine effort was not sufficient to qualify him for the KO phase – with the same number of points, it was Nepomniachtchi who qualified, thanks to the win in their direct duel.

The Knock-Out Phase The quarter-final matches produced different level of excitement. Eventually one player must win and progress, but this was sometimes not enough to justify the means.

The “classical” encounter between Carlsen and Nakamura had only three draws out of the 10 games they played. This was a result BRITISH CHESS MAGAZINE | 329

06/141

of Carlsen’s instability and Nakamura’s inability to keep the lead: Nakamura was leading three times but allowed Carlsen to come back each time. After two drawn sets Carlsen won the blitz tie-break 2-0.

Here is one comeback, the second game of the first set.

Magnus Carlsen – Hikaru Nakamura FTX Crypto Cup | Knockout (2.3) 1.e4 e5 2.¤f3 ¤c6 3.¥c4 ¥c5 4.0–0 ¤f6 5.d3 0–0 6.h3 Apparently unable to get anything against 6...d5 Carlsen played 6.¦e1 in the first game of the second set, but in spite of getting a good position he lost that game. Then he stopped playing 1.e4 and played 1.b4 and 1.d4 in the remaining white games.

6...h6 In the next game Nakamura switched to 6...d5, a set-up he prepared for this event.

He played set-ups with ...d5 against Carlsen and Svidler in the preliminaries and with good success usually when he sticks to his prepared set-ups. Nakamura usually sticks to his prepared set-ups but here he decides to deviate: 6...d5 7.exd5 ¤xd5 8.a4 ¥e6 9.¤g5 ¥f5 was played in the 4th game of the first set.

7.c3 d6 8.¦e1 a5 This is one of the most popular set-ups for Black in the Giuoco Piano.

9.d4!?

XIIIIIIIIY 9r+lwq-trk+0 9+pzp-+pzp-0 9-+nzp-sn-zp0 9zp-vl-zp-+-0 9-+LzPP+-+0 9+-zP-+N+P0 9PzP-+-zPP+0 9tRNvLQtR-mK-0 xiiiiiiiiy 330 | BRITISH CHESS MAGAZINE

White has other moves at his disposal, for example 9.¤bd2, 9.¥b5, 9.a4.

9...¥b6 Going to a7 is also possible.

10.¥e3 exd4 11.cxd4 d5 Black typically reacts with ...d5 when White has a centre of pawns on e4 and d4.

11...¤xe4? is bad in view of 12.d5 ¤e7 13.¥xb6 and White wins the knight on e4.

12.exd5 ¤e7 13.¤c3 ¤exd5 14.£d2 c6 15.¥xh6!? The alternative is 15.¦ad1, but obviously the bishop sacrifice is the critical move in the position.

15...gxh6 16.£xh6 This has all been known before, but Nakamura fails to remember the theory.

16...¥f5??

XIIIIIIIIY 9r+-wq-trk+0 9+p+-+p+-0 9-vlp+-sn-wQ0 9zp-+n+l+-0 9-+LzP-+-+0 9+-sN-+N+P0 9PzP-+-zPP+0 9tR-+-tR-mK-0 xiiiiiiiiy

White wins now.

16...¤h7 is the only move, already played in a couple of games. The idea is that the move 17.¥d3 is parried by 17...f5 when White has compensation but only sufficient for equality.

17.¦e5 The rook goes to the g-file to join the attack.

17...¥g6 18.¦g5 ¤h7 19.¦g4 There is an inevitable catastrophe happening on the g6–square.

Hikaru Nakamura; Source: instagram.com

June 2021

Ian Nepomniachtchi – Fabiano Caruana FTX Crypto Cup | Knockout (3.1) 1.e4 c5 2.¤f3 e6 3.d4 cxd4 4.¤xd4 ¤c6 5.¤c3 £c7 Here we see Caruana use the Taimanov Sicilian. He has already used before it; for example, he introduced a novel concept in his game against Tari in the Norway Chess event in 2020. This game was analysed in the November issue of BCM. 6.¥e3 a6 7.g4 Not the most common move, but Nepomniachtchi had already lost a game playing against it, so this time he uses it for White.

19...¦e8 20.¤xd5 cxd5 21.¥d3 ¤f8 22.¤e5 White attacks g6 four times so Black cannot survive.

22...¦e6 23.¥f5 The immediate capture on g6 was also possible.

23...¦d6 24.¤xg6 fxg6 25.¥xg6 ¦xg6 26.¦xg6+ ¤xg6 27.£xg6+ ¢h8 28.£h5+ ¢g8 29.£g4+ ¢h7 30.¦e1 The other rook joins the attack with decisive effect.

30...¦c8 31.¦e6

7...¤xd4

XIIIIIIIIY 9r+l+kvlntr0 9+pwqp+pzpp0 9p+-+p+-+0 9+-+-+-+-0 9-+-snP+P+0 9+-sN-vL-+-0 9PzPP+-zP-zP0 9tR-+QmKL+R0 xiiiiiiiiy

1–0

Caruana employs a typical Taimanov recipe, taking on d4 followed by ...b5.

What was surprising in this match was how often the players misplayed the opening. Carlsen messed up an open Spanish, while Nakamura misplayed openings he plays all the time, the Giuoco Piano and the QGD.

7...h6 8.h4 ¤f6 9.¤xc6 bxc6 10.£f3 was played in March this year in the game: 1–0 (41) Giri,A (2776)-Nepomniachtchi,I (2789), from the Magnus Invitational.

The match between the previous challenger and the current one resembled trench warfare, two drawn sets with Nepomniachtchi winning the blitz tie-break 1.5-0.5. Here is a curious exchange of blows from the 3rd game of the first set.

8.£xd4 b5 9.0–0–0 ¥b7 10.¢b1 ¤f6 11.g5 And here it starts.

11...¤g4 Black attacks the important darksquared bishop.

12.¥f4 White naturally doesn’t give it away, attacking the queen. The bishop is taboo since there is mate on d7.

BRITISH CHESS MAGAZINE | 331

06/141

12...e5 But what about this fork?

13.¤d5 The answer is a counter-attack on the black queen!

13...0–0–0 How about leaving everything hanging and calmly castling?

14.f3 And if there were not enough pieces hanging, let’s just add an attack on the knight on g4! An incredible sequence that ends with 4 pieces hanging.

14...exd4 15.¥xc7 ¦e8 16.¥g3 ¥xd5 17.exd5 ¤e3 18.¦xd4 ¤f5 19.¦d1 ¤xg3

XIIIIIIIIY 9-+k+rvl-tr0 9+-+p+pzpp0 9p+-+-+-+0 9+p+P+-zP-0 9-+-+-+-+0 9+-+-+Psn-0 9PzPP+-+-zP0 9+K+R+L+R0 xiiiiiiiiy

With this match we are slowly approaching the problem that culminated in the first set of the match for 3rd place between Nepomniachtchi and Radjabov. After winning the first set Radjabov didn’t mind playing two non-games with White, drawing in exactly the same manner against Giri’s Grunfeld.

Teimour Radjabov – Anish Giri FTX Crypto Cup | Knockout chess24.com 1.d4 ¤f6 2.c4 g6 3.¤c3 d5 4.cxd5 ¤xd5 5.e4 ¤xc3 6.bxc3 ¥g7 7.¥e3 c5 8.¤f3 £a5 9.¤d2 0–0 10.¤b3 Forcing the draw that Black cannot avoid.

10...£xc3+ Otherwise Black just loses the pawn on c5.

11.¥d2 £b2 12.¥c1 £c3+ 13.¥d2 £b2 14.¥c1 £c3+ 15.¥d2

The engine promises Black equality after 19...¥d6, while now it claims White is better.

20.hxg3 ¢c7 The opposite-coloured bishops allowed Caruana to get the draw after 73 moves. ½–½ So eliminated Vachier by beating him twice with Black and once with White, without losing a single game (3-1 and 2-1 per set). Vachier is one of the rare players who willingly enters the Berlin endgame and manages to pose problems there. The fact that he lost with White in the Berlin endgame speaks volumes of his shape in this particular match.

Radjabov eliminated Giri in typical fashion – he won one game (the 4th game of the first 332 | BRITISH CHESS MAGAZINE

set) and drew the rest. In spite of Giri’s efforts he couldn’t break down Radjabov’s Berlin Defence.

XIIIIIIIIY 9rsnl+-trk+0 9zpp+-zppvlp0 9-+-+-+p+0 9+-zp-+-+-0 9-+-zPP+-+0 9+Nwq-+-+-0 9P+-vL-zPPzP0 9tR-+QmKL+R0 xiiiiiiiiy

Exactly the same moves were repeated in the 3rd game of the second set. ½–½

June 2021

The semi-finals The semi-finals saw Carlsen eliminate Radjabov (2-2 and 3-1) and So beat Nepomniachtchi (2.5-1.5 and 2-1).

Carlsen couldn’t hold his lead in the first set when Radjabov used an aggressive idea in the Ragozin Defence in a must-win situation in the 4th game.

Teimour Radjabov – Magnus Carlsen FTX Crypto Cup | Knockout (15.2) 1.d4 ¤f6 2.c4 e6 3.¤f3 d5 4.¤c3 ¥b4 Carlsen played all sorts of openings in this match and here he goes for the Ragozin, a solid choice.

5.¥g5 h6 6.¥xf6 £xf6 7.£a4+ ¤c6 8.e3 0–0 9.¦c1 £g6 10.h4!?

XIIIIIIIIY 9r+l+-trk+0 9zppzp-+pzp-0 9-+n+p+qzp0 9+-+p+-+-0 9QvlPzP-+-zP0 9+-sN-zPN+-0 9PzP-+-zPP+0 9+-tR-mKL+R0 xiiiiiiiiy

In a must-win situation some imbalance is desperately needed so Radjabov uses an old idea introduced by Dreev.

10...¦d8 10...dxc4 was played in the first game where the move 10.h4 was played.

11.h5 ¥xc3+ 12.bxc3 £f6 13.¥xc4 with an advantage to White in the game: ½–½ (68) Dreev,A (2698)-Huzman,A (2574) Rethymno 2003.

The patient 12...£e7 was better. Or 12... dxc4 13.¥xc4 ¥d7 14.£c2 £f5 with a good endgame if White exchanges or a good middlegame after 15.¥d3 £a5.

13.cxd5 ¦xd5 14.dxe5 ¥xc3+ 15.¦xc3 ¤xe5 16.£e8+! You don’t get to give a check on e8 on move 16 in any modern opening!

16...¢h7 17.¦f4? 17.¦d4! was the precise way to fully take advantage of the active position of all White’s pieces. 17...£e6 18.£xe6 ¤xf3+ 19.gxf3 ¥xe6 20.¦xd5 ¥xd5 21.¦xc7 ¥xa2 22.¥d3+ ¢g8 23.¥e4 is a dominating endgame for White as Black can barely move without dropping material.

17...£d6?

XIIIIIIIIY 9r+l+Q+-+0 9zppzp-+pzpk0 9-+-wq-+-zp0 9+-+rsn-+P0 9-+-+-tR-+0 9+-tR-zPN+-0 9PzP-+-zPP+0 9+-+-mKL+-0 xiiiiiiiiy

Carlsen misses the chance, but the saving idea required some precise calculation.

17...£b6! creating counterplay against the pawn on b2 was crucial to stay in the game.

18.b4 (The point is that taking the piece loses to 18.¤xe5? £xb2 19.¥d3+ ¦xd3!

20.¦xd3 ¥g4! threatening the queen on e8 and mate on e2.) 18...¥g4! 19.£xa8 ¥xf3 20.gxf3 ¤xf3+! 21.¢e2 (21.¦xf3? £xb4 wins for Black.) 21...¤g1+ 22.¢e1 ¤f3+ with a curious perpetual check.

18.¥e2 Now Black is tied up.

11.h5 £f6 12.¦h4 These rook manoeuvres are hardly a surprise nowadays.

18...f5 19.¤d4 c6 20.¤xf5 £d8 21.£xd8 ¦xd8 22.¤d4 White was a clear pawn up and he won in 54 moves.

12...e5? But Carlsen goes astray. Maybe he missed the check on e8?

1–0 BRITISH CHESS MAGAZINE | 333

06/141

A ten second interview: After being asked about the game with Radjabov, Carlsen just said “I blundered, he played well. Thank you. See you tomorrow” and hung up, leaving everyone in the studio visibly surprised. Source: YouTube

This was Radjabov’s finest moment in the whole event, while Carlsen was visibly upset at losing the game. In the second set Carlsen won the first game and, as has become fashionable among the elite players, gave up the white pieces with a quick draw. There is always punishment for this, though the players seem to be under the impression that they can avoid it. Sometimes they do, as Carlsen did manage to save the lost 3 rd game, but he did have to suffer a lot for it. Radjabov didn’t manage to create winning chances in the last game after 1.e4 b6 and even lost the game.

So beat Nepomniachtchi thanks to a strong mosquito attack somewhere in Moscow.

After drawing the first 3 games of the first set the 4th game was also headed for a draw when a swarm of mosquitos entered Nepomniachtchi’s premises and attacked him. Understandably, instead of drawing a simple position he was more concerned with defence against the flying pests, so he lost the game and the set. In the second one he had one chance in the 3 games they played, but he missed it.

The final between Carlsen and So was a dramatic one as it went all the way to the Armageddon. In the first set Carlsen committed the same mistake as in the match with Radjabov: after winning the 334 | BRITISH CHESS MAGAZINE

first game with Black he gave away the white pieces with a theoretical draw in the second. Even Carlsen cannot get away with such a sin twice, so he lost the third game after messing up the opening.

He again gave up the white pieces in the 4th game to fix a drawn first set.

The first game of the second set saw a beautiful technical win by Carlsen in the Queen’s Gambit Accepted.

Magnus Carlsen - Wesley So FTX Crypto Cup | Knockout (24.1) 1.d4 ¤f6 2.c4 e6 3.¤f3 d5 4.¤c3 c5 5.e3 This isn’t supposed to be scary, but Carlsen avoided So’s pet line 5.cxd5 cxd4! where a forced endgame arises in which Black has excellent drawing chances.

5...dxc4 So transposes to a QGA with a white knight already on c3. An alternative is to play symmetrically with 5...¤c6 or to try 5...a6.

6.¥xc4 a6 7.0–0 b5 8.¥e2 ¥b7 9.dxc5 White’s only chance is the ensuing endgame, otherwise Black has easy development after ...¤bd7, ...¥e7 and ...0–0.

9...¥xc5 It’s curious that Carlsen himself played this position as Black

June 2021

in one of his World Championship matches. In the 7th game of the match against Karjakin in 2016 he arrived here via the Chebanenko Slav and played the move 9...¤c6. He drew that game easily, but afterwards it was discovered that White can pose some problems after the move 10.£c2!?.

18...¤c5 19.¤xc5 ¥xc5 20.¦ac1 White’s pressure increases. Now Black is forced to concede the bishop pair.

20...¥xd4 20...¥d6 is much worse as after 21.f3 with ideas like e4 and ¤c6 Black will be strangulated.

21.exd4 ¢d7 22.¥f4 ¦b7 23.h4!

10.£xd8+ ¢xd8 11.¤d2 Transferring the knight to b3 to obtain control over the dark squares on the queenside.

11...¢e7 12.¤b3 ¤bd7 12...¥d6 is an alternative.

The

move

13.¦d1 ¥b6 14.a4 b4 15.a5 ¥a7?!

XIIIIIIIIY 9r+-+-+-tr0 9vll+nmkpzpp0 9p+-+psn-+0 9zP-+-+-+-0 9-zp-+-+-+0 9+NsN-zP-+-0 9-zP-+LzPPzP0 9tR-vLR+-mK-0 xiiiiiiiiy

A dubious move that gives White the initiative.

15...¥c7! was necessary. After 16.¤a4 (or 16.¤a2 ¥d5 17.¤d4 ¦hb8 defending the queenside.) 16...¥d5 17.¤d4 ¦hc8 Black is relatively safe.

16.¤a4 Now White is in the driver’s seat. He wants to play ¤d4 and ¥d2, attacking the pawn on b4. The difference of having a bishop on a7 is that it is rather useless on the g1–a7 diagonal, while from c7 it was attacking the pawn on a5.

16...¥d5 17.¤d4 ¦hb8 18.¥d2 White finished development and now plans ¤c2 to attack the pawn on b4.

XIIIIIIIIY 9r+-+-+-+0 9+r+k+pzpp0 9p+-+psn-+0 9zP-+l+-+-0 9-zp-zP-vL-zP0 9+-+-+-+-0 9-zP-+LzPP+0 9+-tRR+-mK-0 xiiiiiiiiy

A technical move. White will need to expand on the kingside in order to win, so Carlsen starts the process early, opening a luft for his king at the same time.

23...¥b3?! So reroutes his bishop to b5 and liberates the d5–square for the knight, but this is time-consuming and achieves little.

23...g6 was better, banking on the impenetrability of Black’s position. After 24.¥e5 ¤e8 25.f3 White is of course better, but it will take quite some effort to win.

24.¦d3 ¥a4 25.¥e5 Another technical move, pinning down the knight.

The engine indicates a concrete solution: 25.¦g3! g6 26.¥f3 ¤d5 27.¥xd5! exd5 28.¦c5 ¥c6 29.¦f3 and after ¥e5 Black’s position falls apart. We will see something similar in the game.

25...¥b5 26.¥f3! ¤d5 27.¥xd5 exd5 28.¦g3 g6 29.¦c5 ¥c6?

BRITISH CHESS MAGAZINE | 335

06/141

But in the next game Carlsen misplayed the opening, committing a mistake as early as move seven(!) in the Rossolimo.

XIIIIIIIIY 9r+-+-+-+0 9+r+k+p+p0 9p+l+-+p+0 9zP-tRpvL-+-0 9-zp-zP-+-zP0 9+-+-+-tR-0 9-zP-+-zPP+0 9+-+-+-mK-0 xiiiiiiiiy

Wesley So – Magnus Carlsen FTX Crypto Cup | Knockout (25.1), 1.e4 c5 2.¤f3 ¤c6 3.¥b5 e5 Carlsen has played like this before, but I wonder why he didn’t choose a more solid variation in a situation when he was leading the match.

Passive defence, but after 29...¦c8! was more resilient. 30.¦xd5+ ¢e7 31.¦e3 ¦d7 when Black managed to coordinate his pieces.

30.¦f3 Now White even got the position from the comment to his 25th move a full tempo up!

30...f5 31.h5 Black’s kingside falls apart as White will be able to penetrate using the h-file - Black cannot oppose on it since the bishop on e5 controls the h8–square.

31...¦b5 32.¦c1 ¦e8 33.hxg6 hxg6 34.¦h3 ¦e6 35.¦h7+ ¢d8 36.b3! Black is practically in zugzwang.

36...g5 37.¥c7+ ¢e8 38.¥b6 f4 39.¦g7 The pawns are falling and Black’s position isn’t improving.

1–0

4.0–0 ¥d6 Black’s set-up is an ambitious one. If he manages to play ...¥c7, ...¤ge7 and ...0–0 then he can either advance in the centre with ...d5 or he can start kingside activities with ...¤g6, ...f5 etc. Naturally, White won’t allow this, which makes the whole variation a dubious one.

5.c3 a6 6.¥a4 b5 7.¥b3

XIIIIIIIIY 9r+lwqk+ntr0 9+-+p+pzpp0 9p+nvl-+-+0 9+pzp-zp-+-0 9-+-+P+-+0 9+LzP-+N+-0 9PzP-zP-zPPzP0 9tRNvLQ+RmK-0 xiiiiiiiiy

So deviates from Carlsen’s previous games.

7.¥c2 has been played twice by Caruana against Carlsen. Carlsen lost those games so apparently he had something prepared. 7...¤ge7 8.d3 (8.d4 gives nothing now. After 8...cxd4 9.cxd4 exd4 10.¤bd2 ¥b7 Black was fine in the classical game: ½–½ (62) Grandelius,N (2663)-Caruana,F (2823) Wijk aan Zee NED 2021) 8...¤g6 (8...0–0 9.¥e3 ¥b7 10.¤h4 was also good for White as in the game: 1–0 (57) Caruana,F 336 | BRITISH CHESS MAGAZINE

June 2021

(2835)-Carlsen,M (2863) Lichess.org INT 2020) 9.¥e3 0–0 10.¤bd2 ¥e7 11.¥b3 d6 12.¥d5 £e8 (12...£c7!? looks more natural.) 13.d4 with some advantage to White in the game: 1–0 (40) Caruana,F (2835)-Carlsen,M (2863) Lichess.org INT 2020.

7...¤ge7?

XIIIIIIIIY 9r+lwqk+-tr0 9+-+psnpzpp0 9p+nvl-+-+0 9+pzp-zp-+-0 9-+-+P+-+0 9+LzP-+N+-0 9PzP-zP-zPPzP0 9tRNvLQ+RmK-0 xiiiiiiiiy

Already this is a mistake!

7...c4 8.¥c2 ¤f6 is better, when after 9.d4 cxd3 10.£xd3 ¥c7 Black has an acceptable position.; 7...¥b7 is also better than the game move. 8.d4 exd4 9.cxd4 c4 10.¥c2 ¤b4 with unclear play.

8.d4 c4 9.¥c2 ¤g6 It’s difficult to choose the lesser evil.

9...exd4 10.cxd4 ¤b4 11.e5 ¥b8 12.¥e4 is preferred by the engine, but it’s still fantastic for White..

10.dxe5 So chooses a more direct way, with open piece play.

10.d5 ¤ce7 11.b3 was an alternative.

10...¥e7 10...¥c5 was somewhat better, though White is clearly on top after 11.¤d4 ¤cxe5 12.f4.

11.¤d4 ¤gxe5 12.f4 ¤g6 13.¤xc6 dxc6 14.£h5

XIIIIIIIIY 9r+lwqk+-tr0 9+-+-vlpzpp0 9p+p+-+n+0 9+p+-+-+Q0 9-+p+PzP-+0 9+-zP-+-+-0 9PzPL+-+PzP0 9tRNvL-+RmK-0 xiiiiiiiiy

White has a decisive initiative on the kingside and he won in 40 moves.

1–0

Two more draws meant that the players had to play a blitz tie-break. In the first game the following happened.

Magnus Carlsen – Wesley So FTX Crypto Cup | Knockout (28.1)

XIIIIIIIIY 9r+-+-+k+0 9+q+n+pzpp0 9-trp+p+-+0 9+-+pzP-+-0 9-zP-+-+-+0 9+-+NzP-+-0 9-+Q+-zPPzP0 9+RtR-+-mK-0 xiiiiiiiiy

Carlsen started the game with 1.b4 (as he did in one of the games from the match with Nakamura) but the move didn’t bring him much success. Here the position is equal, but with his next move Carlsen invites a confrontation.

25.¦b3?! The rook is not defended on b3 and this allows Black to get rid of the backward c6–pawn.

BRITISH CHESS MAGAZINE | 337

06/141

25...c5! 26.¤xc5 Horrible!

¤xc5

27.£xc5??

27.¦c3! allowed White to regain the piece in view of the weakness of Black’s back rank. After 27...¤d7 28.¦c7 White regains the knight with equality.

27...¦c6! And now it’s game over because of the weakness of White’s back rank!

White loses the queen.

28.¦bc3 28.£xc6 £xc6 29.¦xc6 ¦a1+ is the point.

10...¤e7?

XIIIIIIIIY 9r+lwq-trk+0 9+pzp-snpzp-0 9pvl-zp-sn-zp0 9+-+-zp-+-0 9PzPL+P+-+0 9+-zPP+N+-0 9-+-sN-zPPzP0 9tR-vLQtR-mK-0 xiiiiiiiiy

28...¦xc5 29.¦xc5 h5 With a queen up So won in 10 more moves.

A mistake. Here the knight transfer to g6 is too slow.

0–1

10...¤g4! 11.¦e2 ¢h8 12.h3 f5! is a dynamic approach that gave Black good play.; 10...¥e6 is also preferable to the game move.

Carlsen was now forced to win with Black in order to force an Armageddon. He managed by outplaying So in exemplary fashion, taking advantage of So’s passive treatment of the Moscow Variation.

In the Armageddon So chose Black, but this time it was he who misplayed the opening.

Magnus Carlsen – Wesley So FTX Crypto Cup | Knockout (30.1) 1.e4 e5 2.¤f3 ¤c6 3.¥c4 ¤f6 4.d3 ¥c5 5.0–0 h6 Carlsen likes the pin ¥g5 in this type of position, both in the Spanish and the Giuoco Piano, so So prevents it as early as possible.

6.c3 0–0 7.b4 7.d4 looks natural, but So already had experience here playing with White. 7...¥b6 8.dxe5 ¤xe4 9.¥d5 ¤xf2!

10.¦xf2 d6 11.exd6 £xd6 12.¥b3 ¥xf2+ 13.¢xf2 £f6 with unclear play in the game: ½–½ (29) So,W (2771)-Aronian,L (2792) Saint Louis 2016.

7...¥b6 8.a4 a6 9.¤bd2 d6 10.¦e1 An alternative is the move 10.h3, preventing a possible ...¤g4.

338 | BRITISH CHESS MAGAZINE

11.d4 exd4? A further mistake, going for the typical reaction with ...d5, but here it doesn’t work because of the knight’s position on e7.

11...¤g6 was better, though White is better, having managed to establish a strong centre.

12.¥f1 c6 13.h3 White will continue to expand in the centre and on the queenside, though Black is solid.

12.cxd4 d5 13.e5!

XIIIIIIIIY 9r+lwq-trk+0 9+pzp-snpzp-0 9pvl-+-sn-zp0 9+-+pzP-+-0 9PzPLzP-+-+0 9+-+-+N+-0 9-+-sN-zPPzP0 9tR-vLQtR-mK-0 xiiiiiiiiy This is the problem. If White had been forced to take on d5 Black would have

June 2021

been fine, but White has this move at his disposal.

13...¤h5 The point of White’s move is that after 13...dxc4 14.exf6 the knight on e7 is hanging and he destroys Black’s kingside with a winning position.; 13...¤e4 14.¥d3 ¤xd2 15.£xd2 also gives White free hands for a kingside attack.

14.¥f1 ¤f4 15.¤b3 ¤eg6 16.a5 ¥a7 17.¥xf4 ¤xf4 18.£d2 ¤g6 19.¤c5

XIIIIIIIIY 9r+lwq-trk+0 9vlpzp-+pzp-0 9p+-+-+nzp0 9zP-sNpzP-+-0 9-zP-zP-+-+0 9+-+-+N+-0 9-+-wQ-zPPzP0 9tR-+-tRLmK-0 xiiiiiiiiy

The first set of the match between Radjabov and Nepomniachtchi saw four draws in less than an hour, lasting 15, 11, 15 and 14 moves. The players were playingfor the 3rd prize of $25.000 and 0.25 Bitcoin (won by Nepomniachtchi), but money matters little to them. It feels insulting to the sponsors, the organisation and the public that they don’t care to play for such prizes when the other chess professionals can only envy them helplessly. It is always the same players who abuse the situation as they are inevitably invited to all the events. With every passing event the social media criticism is getting louder, but so far it has had no effect on the usual suspects. It is really a shame that such an original idea as the Champions Tour is spoiled by the behaviour of a few.

The next event of the Tour is scheduled for 26 June. Let’s see how many short draws we will have.

White is dominating on the whole board and Carlsen won the game with a steady hand in 44 moves.

1–0 Carlsen’s wild reaction after winning the game was quite telling. It showed a certain lack of confidence in these stressful situations, a pent-up energy that needed to get out. It was as if he himself wasn’t sure that he could win and once it happened he was exalted in his reaction, resembling a gorilla after the submission of a dangerous rival. It is noteworthy that a volatile Carlsen wins events against the world’s best players, indicating that he is still the best player by far.

If the final was an exciting affair and something that the public expects of these events, the match for 3rd place was the culmination of the shameless behaviour of some of the players, as indicated at the beginning of this text.

MELTWATER CHAMPIONS CHESS TOUR Tour Standings Total Player Points Earnings 1 Magnus Carlsen 271 $155,000 201 $130,000 2 Wesley So 3 Teimour Radjabov 133 $98,500 4 Ian Nepomniachtchi 115 $85,000 5 Anish Giri 111 $85,000 6 Hikaru Nakamura 85 $55,000 7 Levon Aronian 81 $71,000 8 Maxime Vachier-Lagrave 64 $56,500 9 Daniil Dubov 23 $30,000 10 Shakhriyan Mamedyarov 21 $18,500 11 Fabiano Caruana 20 $10,000 12 Alireza Firouzja 9 $22,500 13 Jon Krzysztof Duda 3 $10,000 14 Le Quang Liem 2 $7,500 15 David Anton 0 $12,500 16 Alexander Grischuk 0 $12,500 BRITISH CHESS MAGAZINE | 339

06/141

REVISITING THE NIC CLASSIC

CARLSEN’S FIRST VICTORY since turning 30

By GM Aleksandar Colovic / www.alexcolovic.com Photo: David Llada Let’s take a look at one of the recent tournaments of the Champions Chess Tour. From 24 April to 2 May the usual suspects played at the NIC Classic, joined by a few newcomers like the Norwegians Tari and Christiansen, Britain’s Jones, the Indians Vidit and Praggnanandhaa and the Vietnamese Le Quang Liem.

This event happened just after Ian Nepomniachtchi won the Candidates and sealed his place as the challenger to Magnus Carlsen. The World Champion surely had his mind and heart focused on Nepo, but that didn’t seem to affect his play at the NIC where he confirmed why he is the best.

Alongside the Candidates, the NIC event was a good showcase of where chess and its top players are today.

340 | BRITISH CHESS MAGAZINE

June 2021

THE FORMER CHALLENGER WHO CANNOT FIND HIS WAY

THE BERLIN - OVER AND OVER AGAIN

The preliminaries saw an atrocious tournament

by Sergey Karjakin , who was never in contention and ended with 6.5/15. After a relatively successful Russian superfinal, when he finished second, the former challenger still cannot find the way out of the crisis that has been plaguing him for quite some time now.

Perhaps he was punished by Caissa for the following game from round 2?

The notorious Berlin repetition, together with the Queen’s Gambit repetition, is a very common occurrence in the Tour and I’ve written about it before. Just a reminder of the Queen’s Gambit repetition:

Sergey Karjakin – Hikaru Nakamura New In Chess Classic | Prelims (2.4) 1.e4 e5 2.¤f3 ¤c6 3.¥b5 ¤f6 4.0–0 ¤xe4 5.d4 ¤d6 6.dxe5 ¤xb5 7.a4 ¤bd4 8.¤xd4 d5 9.exd6 ¤xd4 10.£xd4 £xd6 11.£e4+ £e6 12.£d4 £d6 13.£e4+ £e6 14.£d4 £d6

½–½ Sergey Karjakin

XIIIIIIIIY 9r+l+kvl-tr0 9zppzp-+pzpp0 9-+-wq-+-+0 9+-+-+-+-0 9P+-wQ-+-+0 9+-+-+-+-0 9-zPP+-zPPzP0 9tRNvL-+RmK-0 xiiiiiiiiy

Teimour Radjabov - Hikaru Nakamura New In Chess Classic | Prelims (6.6) 1.d4 ¤f6 2.c4 e6 3.¤f3 d5 4.¤c3 ¥e7 5.¥f4 0–0 6.e3 ¤bd7 7.a3 c5 8.cxd5 ¤xd5 9.¤xd5 exd5 10.dxc5 ¤xc5 11.¥e5 ¥f5 12.¥e2 ¥f6 13.¥xf6 £xf6 14.£d4 £d6 15.¦d1 ¦fd8 16.£d2 £f6 17.£d4 £d6 18.£d2 £f6 19.£d4 £d6

XIIIIIIIIY 9r+-tr-+k+0 9zpp+-+pzpp0 9-+-wq-+-+0 9+-snp+l+-0 9-+-wQ-+-+0 9zP-+-zPN+-0 9-zP-+LzPPzP0 9+-+RmK-+R0 xiiiiiiiiy

½–½

The Berlin draw happened in five games, three of them played by Nakamura, two by Karjakin, while the QGD was used twice

by Radjabov and once by Nakamura.

The last four games between Nakamura and Radjabov, all of them played in these online events of the Tour, have finished in exactly the same manner. Nakamura seems to be the worst offender here, closely followed by Radjabov, but as I’ve said before, the players don’t care about public opinion. The only way to avoid this from happening again is to stop inviting these players, but I don’t think that will happen, so I guess I will just vent my frustration about them every time.

BRITISH CHESS MAGAZINE | 341

06/141

GAMES WORTH NOTING The preliminary event was again won by Carlsen, with 10.5/15, a point ahead of Nakamura and Mamedyarov. The usual suspects qualified for the knock-out phase, with the Indian prodigy Praggnanandhaa and Tari coming close but eventually failing.

From the games of the preliminaries here’re a few interesting ones. Wesley So started with 0/2 and this is how he lost the second game.

Wesley So - Jan-Krzysztof Duda New In Chess Classic | Prelims (2.2) 1.d4 ¤f6 2.¤f3 e6 3.¥f4 The London System is becoming more and more popular in these events. This is telling because it means a couple of things: 1. It is universal, easy to learn and prepare, so players can save energy on preparation; 2. It is not very forcing and it leads to positions that can be played out.

3...c5 4.e3 £b6 5.¤c3 cxd4 6.exd4 £xb2?

XIIIIIIIIY 9rsnl+kvl-tr0 9zpp+p+pzpp0 9-+-+psn-+0 9+-+-+-+-0 9-+-zP-vL-+0 9+-sN-+N+-0 9PwqP+-zPPzP0 9tR-+QmKL+R0 xiiiiiiiiy 342 | BRITISH CHESS MAGAZINE

Wesley So

You may ask, how come Karjakin was punished by Caissa and Nakamura wasn’t?

The difference between the two is that the former still has ambitions to fight for the title and enter the top 10; the latter is a professional streamer and has a different outlook on chess and his future career. The ambitious must show ambition if they are to deserve Caissa’s honours.

This is known to be bad, so it’s difficult to say why Duda chose it. Moves like 6... a6, 6...¥e7 and 6...¤c6 give Black a satisfactory position. 6...a6 is also an idea.

7.¤b5 ¥b4+ 8.¤d2 ¤d5 9.¦b1 9.c3 also wins. For example 9...¤xc3 10.£c1 £xc1+ 11.¦xc1 and Black loses a piece because of the pin on the c-file.

9...£xa2 10.¦xb4 ¤xb4 11.¤d6+ ¢e7 12.¥c4??

XIIIIIIIIY 9rsnl+-+-tr0 9zpp+pmkpzpp0 9-+-sNp+-+0 9+-+-+-+-0 9-snLzP-vL-+0 9+-+-+-+-0 9q+PsN-zPPzP0 9+-+QmK-+R0 xiiiiiiiiy

One careless move and the tables are completely turned. Now Black is winning.

12.£h5! was the way to win. Black cannot defend the f7–pawn as 12...¦f8? leads to mate after 13.£g5+ f6 14.£xg7+ ¢d8 15.£xf8+ ¢c7 16.£xc8+ ¢b6 17.£c5#.

12...¤xc2+ 13.¢f1 £a1! Exchanging queens, after which Black is ahead in material, having a rook and 3 pawns for a bishop.

June 2021

14.£xa1 ¤xa1 15.¢e2 ¤c2 16.d5 ¤a6 17.¦c1 ¤ab4 18.¤f3 b6 19.¥b3 ¥a6+ 20.¢d2 ¤d3

XIIIIIIIIY 9r+-+-+-tr0 9zp-+pmkpzpp0 9lzp-sNp+-+0 9+-+P+-+-0 9-+-+-vL-+0 9+L+n+N+-0 9-+nmK-zPPzP0 9+-tR-+-+-0 xiiiiiiiiy

The point of White’s combination is that after 19...¢xg7 20.£g5+ ¢f8 (or 20...¢h8 21.¥xd4 when the knight on f6 is lost) 21.¥xd4 and Black cannot defend against the threats along the long diagonal despite being a rook up and having the move.

20.¥xc4 ¥xc4 21.¤xd4 White consistently plays to open the long diagonal.

21.£h6 was devastating, but the game move is good enough.

21...¦xe4 22.£h6 Now it’s also quite good. The rest is rather easy.

0–1

The following game featured a cute combination.

22...¢e8 23.¤f5 ¦e6 24.¥xf6 £xf6 25.¦g8+ ¢d7 26.¦d1+ ¢c7 27.£f4+ ¢b6 28.£f2+ ¢c7 29.¦xa8 ¥e2 30.¦e1 1–0

Leinier Dominguez Perez Johan-Sebastian Christiansen New In Chess Classic | Prelims (2.6)

XIIIIIIIIY 9r+-wqr+k+0 9+p+-+pzpp0 9p+-+lsn-+0 9+-+-+-+-0 9-zPnzpP+-+0 9zP-+L+-tRP0 9-vLPwQN+P+0 9tR-+-+-mK-0 xiiiiiiiiy Black has just played 18...¤e5–c4, attacking White’s queen.

19.¦xg7+! Not an obvious move because it appears that White’s pieces are too far away to support any attack. But, surprisingly, things work out!

Gawain Jones didn’t have a great tournament, but he can be content with the following game where he caught one of the Tour’s favourites in a wellknown opening trap.

Gawain Jones – Wesley So New In Chess Classic | Prelims (4.1) 1.e4 e5 2.¤f3 ¤c6 3.¥c4 ¤f6 4.d4 This leads to lively play, but objectively Black is fine.

4...exd4 5.0–0 ¤xe4 The alternative is 5...¥c5.

6.¦e1 d5 7.¥xd5 £xd5 8.¤c3 £a5 Black has a wide choice here, as 8...£h5 and 8...£d7 are both good alternatives.

9.¤xe4 ¥e6 10.¥d2 £f5 11.¥g5 ¥c5??

19...¢f8 This gives White a free attack, but the alternative wasn’t any better.

BRITISH CHESS MAGAZINE | 343

XIIIIIIIIY 9r+-+k+-tr0 9zppzp-+pzpp0 9-+n+l+-+0 9+-vl-+qvL-0 9-+-zpN+-+0 9+-+-+N+-0 9PzPP+-zPPzP0 9tR-+QtR-mK-0 xiiiiiiiiy

So must have forgotten his theory. The unfortunate bishop ties down the queen because she has to defend it. Black has more than one satisfactory move here, for example 11...h6 and 11...¥d6.

Gawain Jones

06/141

17.¢h1 £d4 18.¤f3 Now it’s over - the queen can no longer keep protecting the bishop on c5.

18...£xc4 19.¦c1 The bishop on c5 falls.

12.¤h4 Now the queen is harassed as she has to move along the 5th rank in order to defend the bishop on c5.

12...£d5 13.c4! £e5 13...£xc4 14.¦c1 wins the bishop on c5.; 13...dxc3 14.¤f6+! gxf6 15.£xd5 wins the queen.

14.¤f3 Jones repeats once before landing the decisive blow.

14...£f5 15.¤h4 £e5

XIIIIIIIIY 9r+-+k+-tr0 9zppzp-+pzpp0 9-+n+l+-+0 9+-vl-wq-vL-0 9-+PzpN+-sN0 9+-+-+-+-0 9PzP-+-zPPzP0 9tR-+QtR-mK-0 xiiiiiiiiy

16.f4! d3+ The only move, liberating the d4–square for the queen, but it is short-lived.

344 | BRITISH CHESS MAGAZINE

19...d2 Everything loses. So tries to pick up some rooks, but it doesn’t change much.

20.¦xc4 dxe1£+ 22.¤xc5+

21.£xe1

¥xc4

XIIIIIIIIY 9r+-+k+-tr0 9zppzp-+pzpp0 9-+n+-+-+0 9+-sN-+-vL-0 9-+l+-zP-+0 9+-+-+N+-0 9PzP-+-+PzP0 9+-+-wQ-+K0 xiiiiiiiiy

White has a queen and a piece for two rooks, plus Black’s king is stuck in the centre and he loses more material.

1–0 The knock-out phase saw Carlsen eliminate Radjabov and Aronian before meeting Nakamura in the final. Nakamura eliminated Le Quang Liem and Mamedyarov.

June 2021

THE CARLSEN – NAKAMURA BATTLES

27.c4 £e5 28.£d3 followed by f3 (to kill off the bishop on g6) and then advance with b5 would have been quite comfortable.

The final between these two players was quite different from the epic final of the last year’s Tour. Back in August 2020, Nakamura was a match for Carlsen and the World Champion won by the smallest of margins. Things were different this time.

27...¦xb7 28.e5 £e7! Of course, this simple retreat that defends the rook refutes White’s "sacrifice". Luckily for White, he can pick up some pawns and remain in the game.

In spite of not having won a tournament since turning 30 last November, Carlsen was clearly superior to Nakamura this time. Nakamura remains a very strong player in rapid and blitz, but being a professional streamer inevitably leads not only to a decrease in the quality of his play (particularly notable in tense situations where a high level of tactical control is required – something that Nakamura did very well last August), but also to an approach with a “safety first” attitude that often means a loss of sharpness and competitive edge.

This was notable in several instances in the final.

Magnus Carlsen – Hikaru Nakamura New In Chess Classic | Knockout (22.1)

XIIIIIIIIY 9-+-+r+-mk0 9+p+r+pzp-0 9p+-zp-wqlzp0 9zP-+L+-+-0 9-zP-+PzpP+0 9+-zP-+Q+P0 9-+-+-zPK+0 9+-+RtR-+-0 xiiiiiiiiy

White has a stable plus here and can push his queenside pawns at his leisure.

Surprisingly, Carlsen blunders his bishop!

27.¥xb7?! Carlsen admitted that this was a blunder, but luckily for him he’s not lost.

29.exd6 £d7 30.¦xe8+ £xe8 31.¦d4 Preventing ...¥e4.

31...¦d7 32.£xf4 White has 3 pawns for the piece and the game is balanced. Still, Black cannot dream of losing this and yet Nakamura managed to blunder his extra bishop and lose a long queen endgame.

1–0

Hikaru Nakamura – Magnus Carlsen New In Chess Classic | Knockout (23.1)

XIIIIIIIIY 9-+-+r+k+0 9wq-+-+pzpp0 9-+p+-sn-+0 9+psn-vl-+-0 9p+-+-+-+0 9zP-+-zP-zPP0 9LzPQ+NzPK+0 9+-+RvL-+-0 xiiiiiiiiy

After losing the previous game Nakamura was in a must-win situation. He slowly outplayed Carlsen and now instead of going forward he loses the plot in two moves.

27.¦c1?! 27.¤d4! was natural and strong.

The threat is to take on c6 and if Black defends the pawn by 27...£b6 then after 28.¤f3 ¥b8 29.¦c1 Black’s position collapses as he cannot maintain his knight and pawn on the c-file, for example 29...¥a7 (or 29...¤fe4 30.¤d2 followed BRITISH CHESS MAGAZINE | 345

06/141

by ¤xe4.) 30.¥b4 ¤fe4 31.¤g5 ¤xg5 32.£xc5 when the c6–pawn will soon fall.

27...¤e6 28.f3?? A move that is difficult to explain as it goes against all White’s previous play, which was based on the solidity of his position and the long-term advantage of the bishop pair.

28.¤f4 kept a solid advantage. White challenges the knight on e6 and taking on f4 works for him, for example 28...¥xf4 29.gxf4 and the pressure on c6 ties Black down. 29...¦c8 30.¥c3 with a technically winning position thanks to the powerful bishops.; Even 28.£xc6 was better than the game move. White must have been reluctant to exchange the queenside pawns, though after 28...¥xb2 29.¦b1 ¥xa3 30.¦xb5 White still keeps an advantage.

28...¤d5! Immediately weakness on e3.

targeting

the

29.£xc6 ¤xe3+ 30.¢h1 £b8 All of a sudden White has to defend and take care of his weakened king.

31.¥f2 ¥xb2! Black didn’t really have a choice as the knight is short of squares.

Nevertheless, this transformation is good for him.

32.¥xe3 ¥xc1 33.¥xc1 ¦c8 34.£e4 £d6

XIIIIIIIIY 9-+r+-+k+0 9+-+-+pzpp0 9-+-wqn+-+0 9+p+-+-+-0 9p+-+Q+-+0 9zP-+-+PzPP0 9L+-+N+-+0 9+-vL-+-+K0 xiiiiiiiiy

35.¥e3?! White wants to continue the game, but this only puts him at risk as he 346 | BRITISH CHESS MAGAZINE

doesn’t have an advantage any more and he also has a weak king to attend to. However, we shouldn’t forget that this was a mustwin game for Nakamura, who was trailing by a point and a draw in this game would have meant loss of the first set.

35.¢g2 forces a draw after 35...¦xc1 36.¤xc1 £d2+ 37.£e2 £xc1 38.¥xe6 fxe6 39.£xe6+ ¢f8 40.£d6+ with a perpetual check.

35...£d1+ 36.¤g1 £c2 37.£d5??

XIIIIIIIIY 9-+r+-+k+0 9+-+-+pzpp0 9-+-+n+-+0 9+p+Q+-+-0 9p+-+-+-+0 9zP-+-vLPzPP0 9L+q+-+-+0 9+-+-+-sNK0 xiiiiiiiiy

Losing on the spot. It’s incredible how Nakamura’s level dropped starting from move 28.

37.¥xe6 was the only move. 37...£xe4 38.fxe4 fxe6 39.¥d2 ¦c4 40.¤f3 ¦xe4 41.¢g2 and White won’t lose, but it’s also improbable that he would win. Still, the game would have continued and anything was still possible.

37...¦d8 White’s queen cannot keep defending the bishop on a2.

0–1 The fact that Nakamura couldn’t maintain the level of his play and convert a practically winning position was a clear sign that he was not the same player as last year.

The second set started well for Nakamura – he won the first game.

June 2021

Hikaru Nakamura – Magnus Carlsen New In Chess Classic | Knockout (24.1)

XIIIIIIIIY 9-+-+-tr-+0 9+p+rsNpzpk0 9-+-zP-+-+0 9+P+-vL-sn-0 9-+Q+l+qzp0 9+-+-zP-+-0 9-+-tR-+PzP0 9+-+-+RmK-0 xiiiiiiiiy

White is completely winning as Black is paralysed.

35.¥f4?? A losing blunder, strange as it may sound!

Putting another piece on the same square would have wrapped things up: 35.¦f4 ¤h3+ 36.¢h1 ¤xf4 37.£xe4+ with £xf4 next.

35...¤h3+?? Both players missed the refutation, but here at least Black is not losing any more.

35...¦xd6! wins for Black. The point is that after 36.¥xd6 ¤h3+ 37.¢h1 ¥xg2+ Black picks up the undefended queen on c4.

36.¢h1 f5 Now the game is balanced, but obviously still sharp.

37.£e6 ¤xf4??

XIIIIIIIIY 9-+-+-tr-+0 9+p+rsN-zpk0 9-+-zPQ+-+0 9+P+-+p+-0 9-+-+lsnqzp0 9+-+-zP-+-0 9-+-tR-+PzP0 9+-+-+R+K0 xiiiiiiiiy

37...¦fd8 kept things unclear; 37...¦a8! was the correct way to execute Carlsen’s idea. After 38.£xd7 £xg2+! 39.¦xg2 ¤f2+ 40.¢g1 (40.¦fxf2?? ¦a1+ 41.¦f1 ¦xf1# is a cute mate.) 40...¤h3+ is a curious perpetual.

38.¦xf4 ¦a8 Threatening mate on a1, but White easily defends.

39.¢g1 White also wins by 39.£e5, controlling the a1–square.

39...¦a1+ 40.¦f1 ¦xf1+ 41.¢xf1 Black has no counterplay now and the passed d-pawn decides.

41...¦d8 42.h3 £g5 43.d7 £xe3

XIIIIIIIIY 9-+-tr-+-+0 9+p+PsN-zpk0 9-+-+Q+-+0 9+P+-+p+-0 9-+-+l+-zp0 9+-+-wq-+P0 9-+-tR-+P+0 9+-+-+K+-0 xiiiiiiiiy

43...¦a8 is a desperate attempt, after which the simplest is to exchange queens and win the exchange: 44.£g6+! £xg6 45.¤xg6 ¢xg6 46.d8£ ¦xd8 47.¦xd8 with an easily winning endgame.

44.£g6+ ¢h8 45.£h5+ £h6 46.£e8+ ¢h7 47.£xd8 ¥xg2+ 48.¢e2 ¥f1+ 49.¢d1 The king hides easily.

1–0 The critical moment of the whole final occurred in the second game.

BRITISH CHESS MAGAZINE | 347

06/141

Magnus Carlsen – Hikaru Nakamura New In Chess Classic | Knockout (25.1)

XIIIIIIIIY 9-+-+r+k+0 9zppzpq+pzpp0 9-+-vl-+-+0 9snP+n+-+l0 9-+-+N+-+0 9+-zPP+N+P0 9P+L+-zPP+0 9tR-vLQ+-mK-0 xiiiiiiiiy

A surprising lack of “killer instinct” for Nakamura! This wasn’t even “safety first” as there was no risk in continuing the game. Perhaps he was under the influence of last year’s match when it was difficult to win games and a +1 was often safely guarded to win a set. Not this time though.

The next game sealed the fate of the match.

Nakamura obtained a very safe position out of the opening but started to treat it in an uncharacteristic manner, weakening his kingside, and was swiftly punished.

Hikaru Nakamura – Magnus Carlsen

Black has great compensation for the pawn.

He has several good options at his disposal.

18...¤xc3 One of the good options.

18...f5!? 19.¤xd6 ¤xc3 20.£d2 ¤e2+ 21.¢h1 £xd6 was an alternative.; 18...¥xf3 19.£xf3 ¤xc3 was another idea for Black.

19.¤xc3 ¥xf3 20.£d2? This lands White in trouble. He had to take the draw by taking on f3.

New In Chess Classic | Knockout (26.1)

XIIIIIIIIY 9r+-+r+k+0 9+p+q+p+p0 9p+p+nsnp+0 9+-+p+-+-0 9-+-zP-+-+0 9wQ-+NzP-+P0 9PzPL+-zPP+0 9+-tR-+RmK-0 xiiiiiiiiy

20.gxf3! was the only move for White. Now Black has nothing more than a perpetual after 20...£xh3 21.f4 ¦e6 22.¤e4 rushing to the defence. 22...¦g6+ 23.¤g3 ¦xg3+ 24.fxg3 £xg3+ 25.¢f1 £h3+ and the king cannot escape the checks.

A safe position for both sides in this Carlsbad structure. Nakamura decides to go forward, but this is not well-founded.

20...£e6 21.£e3 £d7 22.£d2 £e6?

This is the decision that lost the final for Nakamura. In an advantageous position with no risk in continuing, he decided to take the draw.

19.¤e5 £c7 20.b4 with atypical minority attack was a safer option.

22...b6 was a simple move, intending to drop the bishop to b7. Black is simply better here as White has nothing to show for his bad queenside structure.

23.£e3 £d7 24.£d2 ½–½ 348 | BRITISH CHESS MAGAZINE

19.f4?! White weakens his position for no concrete gains.

19...¤g7 20.f5?! This weakens White’s grip over the e5–square.

20.¤e5 was better, as the knight cannot easily be chased away.

20...g5 21.¤e5 £c7 Now the knight on e5 isn’t very stable in view of the possible exchange sacrifice ...¦xe5.

June 2021

Nakamura remains a very strong player in rapid and blitz, but being a professional streamer inevitably leads not only to a decrease in the quality of his play Source: https://www.twitch.tv/gmhikaru

22.h4?

XIIIIIIIIY 9r+-+r+k+0 9+pwq-+psnp0 9p+p+-sn-+0 9+-+psNPzp-0 9-+-zP-+-zP0 9wQ-+-zP-+-0 9PzPL+-+P+0 9+-tR-+RmK-0 xiiiiiiiiy

This is bad as it weakens White’s kingside.

22.£c3 kept it more or less under control, at least preventing sacrifices on e5. If now Black continues as in the game White has 22...¤gh5 23.¦f3, preventing ...¤g3. In the game this wasn’t possible because of the black pawn on g4.

24.e4 was better, though Black is on top after 24...£b6 25.¢h2 ¦ad8 when White’s centre is under attack.

24...¦xe5! 25.dxe5 £xe5

XIIIIIIIIY 9r+-+-+k+0 9+p+-+p+p0 9p+p+-sn-+0 9+-+pwqP+n0 9-+-+-+pzP0 9+-+-zP-+-0 9PzPL+-+P+0 9+-tR-wQRmK-0 xiiiiiiiiy

Black is winning here - he has good squares for his knights and can also advance his central pawn mass. Carlsen won without problems.

0–1

22...g4 Taking away the f3–square.

23.£c3 ¤gh5 Threatening ...¤g3 and now White doesn’t have the ¦f3 defence.

24.£e1? Allowing the crushing sacrifice on e5.

Again it is unusual to see Nakamura treating a calm position inappropriately.

Leading in the set he played as if he needed to win at all cost! This points to a certain lack of inner composure in BRITISH CHESS MAGAZINE | 349

06/141

situations of high tension, something that wasn’t visible last August, when he still wasn’t 100% committed to streaming.

In the last game, in a must−win situation and playing with Black,Nakamura didn’t even come close. He was completely lost in the final position when he offered a draw.

Comparing the two matches it is obvious that Nakamura’s play has worsened in the last eight months and − in view of his professional activity in the online world − this is not surprising.

Carlsen won a tournament after a long time, his first victory since turning 30. He must be relieved and can now start thinking

about Dubai and Nepomniachtchi in a more positive state of mind.

The world champion proved that he is sharp and building up his form for the forthcoming match. Until then, all eyes will be on his and Nepo’s preparations for their duel.

A word about the match for 3rd place between Aronian and Mamedyarov.

It was incredible that the first set was tied 2−2 with both players winning with Black! This continued in the second set, but only for Mamedyarov. He continued to win with Black but managed to draw his white games, thus winning the set and the match.

NEW IN CHESS CLASSIC GM Magnus

CARLSEN

GM Teimour

RADJABOV

GM Levon

ARONIAN

GM Wesley

SO

GM Shakhriyar

MAMEDYAROV

GM Alireza

FIROUZJA

GM Quang Liem

LE

GM WHikaru

NAKAMURA

1.5

0.5

2

GM Magnus

CARLSEN

GM Levon

ARONIAN

1.5

0.5

GM Magnus

CARLSEN

1.5

0 GM Magnus

CARLSEN

2

0

0

2

350 | BRITISH CHESS MAGAZINE

GM Shakhriyar

MAMEDYAROV 1

GM WHikaru

NAKAMURA

2

GM WHikaru

NAKAMURA

0.5

June 2021

Problem World

by Christopher Jones cjajones1@yahoo.co.uk Grandmaster of Chess Composition

Solutions are given on page 382

1

XIIIIIIIIY 9-+-tR-+L+0 9+-+-sn-+P0 9-zpp+Nzp-+0 9+-+Pmkp+-0 9-+-+N+p+0 9zp-+-+-+-0 9l+Q+-+-+0 9+-+K+-+-0 xiiiiiiiiy David Shire (Canterbury)

2

XIIIIIIIIY 9-+-+-+-+0 9+-+-+-+-0 9-+-+-mK-+0 9+-+-sN-zp-0 9-+-+-+-+0 9+-+-+-zPk0 9-+-wQ-+-+0 9+-+-+-+-0 xiiiiiiiiy Nikolay Akimov (Kazakhstan)

3 4 Mate in 2

Mate in 3

Original

ORIGINAL

XIIIIIIIIY 9-+-+-+-+0 9+-+-mK-+N0 9-+-vL-+p+0 9+-+-+-+p0 9Rsn-+-+-mk0 9vl-+-+R+P0 9-+lzp-+-+0 9+-+-+-+-0 xiiiiiiiiy Steven B. Dowd (USA)

XIIIIIIIIY 9-+-+-+k+0 9+-+-+-+-0 9-+-+-+-+0 9+-+-zp-+-0 9-+-+-+-+0 9zppzpp+p+-0 9l+-tr-zp-+0 9wqnmK-sNrvl-0 xiiiiiiiiy Ljubomir Ugren (Slovenia)

Mate in 3

Helpmate in 9

Original

Original BRITISH CHESS MAGAZINE | 351

06/141

Photo: Shutterstock

BCM author and GM Aleksandar Colovic comments on the European Qualifier for the World Cup held in a hybrid format

Hybrid isn’t that bad

By GM Aleksandar Colovic/www.alexcolovic.com I badly wanted to play some chess, but playing online has never been very attractive to me. Therefore, when the proposal to hold the European Qualifier for the World Cup in a hybrid format came out, it got me thinking.

The hybrid formula is aimed at combining both over−the−board (OTB) and online chess. The moves are translated by an online platform and the players use laptops or computers to play, but in order to do so they have to go to a venue (like a playing hall in OTB events) and can use physical chess boards if they like.

So why did the hybrid get me thinking?

Online chess is full of cheats; that is the main reason why I don’t play. But the hybrid, with arbiters present at the venue and thorough checks, makes it at least as difficult to cheat as in OTB play. There was a panoramic camera installed, showing the whole room, and in addition each player also had to have his laptop camera switched on at all times.

352 | BRITISH CHESS MAGAZINE

An additional attraction for me was that I could use a chess board to think and execute my moves on - staring at a screen for hours while playing a standard time control game is definitely something I don’t want to do. The time control for the event was 2 hours plus 30 seconds per move for the whole game.

I was lucky not to have any technical issues, as I know others had them. Our internet connection was stable so I had no issues with lag or disconnects, which in case of a properly−working server would have been the responsibility of the player and the local organiser.

My main concern was the ability to concentrate under strange conditions, but this turned out to be an easy problem. What was different from OTB was that I felt more relaxed: without having a physical opponent to see in front of me there was less tension.

June 2021

An additional motivation for me to play was that I have never played a match in my life. Here I was guaranteed two games against a strong opponent and this spiked my curiosity to see how I can deal with a match situation.

I was paired to play against GM Ivan Salgado Lopez from Spain. I happen to know Ivan pretty well: he was a board member of the ACP for quite some time and we worked together well. When I analysed his games in the process of preparation I saw that he is very gifted tactically, so I thought that my chances would be higher if I "dulled" the game somewhat. I also noticed that he prefers to attack, so taking the initiative was also a priority (you can notice how this affected my decisions in the second game).

I cannot say that my chess preparations went particularly well, due to other commitments, but I did what I could.

The venue in Skopje was in one of the best schools in the city. It was comfortable and the internet connection was stable. I used a chess board to think and move my pieces on, which was a bit unnatural in the beginning, as I had to make the move on the laptop first and then on the board. This made it a bit difficult to concentrate at the start of the first game, but I quickly got used to it and soon enough my concentration was quite all right.

The only time I ditched the chess board was at the end of the first game, when I had several minutes left to finish the game, so I moved to my laptop to execute the moves directly. Unfortunately, that was when I blundered.

Generally speaking, I was pleasantly surprised by the hybrid format. My main concern was the ability to concentrate under strange conditions, but this turned out to be an easy problem. What was different from OTB was that I felt more relaxed, without having a physical

opponent to see in front of me there was less tension.

The match was very exciting and I enjoyed it tremendously. I should have won the first game and, in that case, I would have played the second one differently, but both games were fullyfledged fights and this is something I have missed for quite some time with the lack of playing opportunities.

In the first game I was Black and in spite of all the preparation we left theory rather early.

Ivan Salgado Lopez – Aleksandar Colovic World Cup Hybrid Qualification m/1 (1), 2021 1.c4 e6 2.g3 d5 3.¥g2 ¤f6 4.¤f3 d4 5.d3 ¥e7?! I played this fast, missing his next.

Both 5...¤c6 and 5...c5 are better.

6.e4! Now White gets a good version of the King’s Indian Attack as e5 cannot be stopped.

6...c5 6...dxe3 7.¥xe3 …d4 7...c5 8.0–0 ¤c6 9.¤c3 0–0 10.d4 seemed pleasant for White as Black has problems with the queenside development.

7.e5 ¤fd7 8.h4 ¤c6 9.¥f4 h6 10.¤a3?

XIIIIIIIIY 9r+lwqk+-tr0 9zpp+nvlpzp-0 9-+n+p+-zp0 9+-zp-zP-+-0 9-+Pzp-vL-zP0 9sN-+P+NzP-0 9PzP-+-zPL+0 9tR-+QmK-+R0 xiiiiiiiiy

He probably missed my next move. He admitted that he didn’t understand that the knight should aim for d2 and e4 instead of a3 and c2.

BRITISH CHESS MAGAZINE | 353

06/141

10.¤bd2 £c7 11.£e2 b6 12.¤e4 ¥b7 13.0–0 0–0–0 was a typical KIA position, where I thought it’s acceptable for Black, with ideas like ...¦dg8 and ...g5, though the engine disagrees. A sample line is 14.h5 g5 15.hxg6 fxg6 …g5 16.g4 ¦df8 17.¥g3 g5 18.¤d6+ ¥xd6 19.exd6 £d8 20.¦ae1 with strong pressure for White.

10...£a5+! Now White loses the right to castle.

11.¢f1 11.£d2?! £xd2+ 12.¢xd2 a6 the endgame is comfortable for Black as there is no threat of an attack against the king. He can then continue to attack the pawn on e5 after ...b6, ...¥b7, ...¥d8–c7.

11...a6 Black is fine now.

12.g4? This just felt too loose. Now I manage to undermine the e5–pawn.

12.¢g1 £c7 13.£e2 b6 looked normal.

12...£c7 13.£e2

XIIIIIIIIY 9r+l+k+-tr0 9+pwqnvlpzp-0 9p+n+p+-zp0 9+-zp-zP-+-0 9-+Pzp-vLPzP0 9sN-+P+N+-0 9PzP-+QzPL+0 9tR-+-+K+R0 xiiiiiiiiy

13...f6! Black takes over the initiative.

14.exf6? 14.¦e1 ¤dxe5 15.¤xe5 ¤xe5 16.¥xe5 £xe5 17.£xe5 fxe5 18.¦xe5 ¥d6 19.¦e1 ¦b8 looked like a very nice endgame for Black, but this is still better for White than the game continuation.

14...£xf4 15.fxe7 354 | BRITISH CHESS MAGAZINE

XIIIIIIIIY 9r+l+k+-tr0 9+p+nzP-zp-0 9p+n+p+-zp0 9+-zp-+-+-0 9-+Pzp-wqPzP0 9sN-+P+N+-0 9PzP-+QzPL+0 9tR-+-+K+R0 xiiiiiiiiy

15...¤f6! The engine says Black is already winning.

15...e5 was my initial idea, but I realised that it’s more important to get the knight to g4 first. 16.¦e1! is better, with an unclear position. (16.g5 is what I considered. I thought my knight on d7 could not find a way to enter the game. The engine disagrees after 16...hxg5! 17.hxg5 ¦xh1+ 18.¥xh1 ¤b6! I missed this idea, opening the bishop - I thought the knight should go to the kingside and not anywhere else.)

16...¢xe7 17.h5! I didn’t consider this. The idea is ¤h4. (17.g5 ¢d6!? is a curious line I saw and I thought it was OK for me.)

17...£xg4 18.¤c2 £e6 19.b4 with a messy position.

16.g5 ¤g4 17.¤c2 He goes for the b4– push, but that gives nothing. It just felt as if he ignored everything as I built up my attack.

17...e5 18.¦b1 ¤xe7

XIIIIIIIIY 9r+l+k+-tr0 9+p+-sn-zp-0 9p+-+-+-zp0 9+-zp-zp-zP-0 9-+Pzp-wqnzP0 9+-+P+N+-0 9PzPN+QzPL+0 9+R+-+K+R0 xiiiiiiiiy

June 2021

A move that took me a lot of time as my initial idea was ...¥f5. Eventually I realised that taking with the knight allows ...0–0, ...¤g6 and ...¥f5 is still on the cards.

18...¥f5. With this I wanted to win quickly, but I couldn’t see how as the ideas of ...e4 or ...¥d3 don’t work because Black needs the rooks and the pawn on e7 impedes their inclusion. 19.b4 ¤xe7 is similar to the game. (19...b5–+ I missed this idea.) I also considered this amusing idea 18...¢xe7 19.b4 ¢d6!?

(19...b5!? I didn't consider this; it's good for Black after 20.bxc5 bxc4! 21.dxc4 ¦f8) 20.bxc5+ ¢xc5 it looks very Steinitz-esque, but objectively it isn't very good. I didn't really see how, but I felt I shouldn't venture here. 21.¢g1 (21.¤d2 threatening mate. 21...¢d6 looked fine.)

21...¦f8 22.¤d2 ¢d6 23.¤e4+ ¢c7 24.¦h3 with good play for White.

19.b4 0–0 20.bxc5 ¥f5! Pawns matter little as I get all my pieces in the attack.

21.¦xb7 ¤g6 Another move that took me a lot of time as I was already looking for a direct win. I didn’t find it so I decided to continue to pile up.

21...e4! was my initial idea and it works, but I couldn’t see it clearly. 22.¦xe7 (22. dxe4 d3! I saw this, but after 23.£d2 things looked messy. Black wins though after 23...£xd2 24.¤xd2 dxc2 25.¢e2 ¥e6 26.f3 ¤g6 and Black is a piece up.) 22... exd3 23.£d2 £xd2 24.¤xd2 dxc2: here I saw that I could not queen immediately and lost interest in the variation, but Black just wins with simple means.

25.¢e2 (25.¦e1 ¥d3+ 26.¢g1 ¦ae8) 25...d3+ 26.¢f3 ¦ae8 and it wins: this wasn’t that obvious to me; 21...¥xd3!? was another idea I looked at. 22.£xd3 e4 23.£d2 was what bothered me, but even here after 23...£xd2 24.¤xd2 ¦xf2+ 25.¢e1 (25.¢g1 ¦xd2 26.¥xe4 also looked unclear (or at least too little from the starting position) and indeed here Black here has the only winning move

26...¦e8!) 25...¦xg2 26.¤xd4 and here I wasn’t sure any more. 26...¤g6 Black should win even though this is less clear than the alternatives; 21...£c1+ 22.¤ce1 ¤g6?! 23.£d2 wasn’t very good.

22.¦b3 22.h5 £c1+ …¤f4 23.£e1 ¥xd3+ 24.¢g1 ¤f4! wins for Black.

22...e4

XIIIIIIIIY 9r+-+-trk+0 9+-+-+-zp-0 9p+-+-+nzp0 9+-zP-+lzP-0 9-+PzppwqnzP0 9+R+P+N+-0 9P+N+QzPL+0 9+-+-+K+R0 xiiiiiiiiy

Everything wins.

22...¦ae8 was also good. The main difficulty was choosing a winning line and calculating it through tothe end; 22...h5 even this wins, as I considered it to take away the option of h5. However, I thought it was already time to wrap up.

23.dxe4 ¥xe4 23...d3 I also looked at this. 24.¦xd3 ¥xe4 25.¦d4 ¦ae8 White’s position collapses.

24.¤cxd4 ¦ad8 24...¦ae8 25.£d1 ¦d8 I saw this and it also wins.

25.¢g1 ¦fe8 Just piling up.

26.£f1 Finally dropping material.

26.h5 ¥xf3 27.£xf3 £xd4 (27...£c1+ 28.¥f1 ¤6e5 29.£e4 £d2 30.¤e2 £e1 31.£g2 ¦f8 is the engine line.; 27...¦e1+?

28.¥f1) 28.hxg6 ¦f8 wins.

26...¦xd4 27.¤xd4 ¥xg2 28.¢xg2 28.£xg2 ¦e1+ 29.£f1 £xf2#.

BRITISH CHESS MAGAZINE | 355

06/141

28...£xd4 Now the game shouldn’t have lasted much longer, but he just refused to resign.

level. I had some 5 mins to finish the game so that put some more pressure on me.

29.¦f3 ¤4e5 With the idea of ...¤h4.

35...£xc5 was more than sufficient and it would have been according to the plan and keeping control.

29...¤f4+ 30.¢g1 ¦e4 would have been quite picturesque.

30.¦g3 ¤xh4+ This wins a piece.

31.¦xh4 The only move to stay in the game.

36.£f5 ¦g6+ 37.¦g3 ¦xg3+ Nothing wrong with this.

37...¦h6 was better according to the engine.; Or 37...¦c6.

31.¢h3 £d7+; 31.¢g1 ¤ef3+.

38.¢xg3 31...£xh4 32.£e2 …¦e3.

32...hxg5 I saw the construction ...£c5, ...¦e7 and I untangle so I took on g5.

32...¦e7 33.gxh6 ¤g6 with the idea of ¤f4 is the engine’s suggestion.; 32...£xc4?

33.£xc4+ ¤xc4 34.gxh6 is a draw.

33.¦e3 £d4 34.£h5 34.c6 £c5 with the idea of ¦e7,¤c6.

34...¦e7 I was still going for the ...£c5, ...¤c6 construction.

34...¦e6 was better as it defends the pawn on g5.

35.£xg5 ¦e6?!

XIIIIIIIIY 9-+-+-+k+0 9+-+-+-zp-0 9p+-+r+-+0 9+-zP-sn-wQ-0 9-+Pwq-+-+0 9+-+-tR-+-0 9P+-+-zPK+0 9+-+-+-+-0 xiiiiiiiiy

Of course this wins, but I change the plan and I miss his next move. This is the moment when things start to go a bit astray and this seemed to unnerve me at some 356 | BRITISH CHESS MAGAZINE

XIIIIIIIIY 9-+-+-+k+0 9+-+-+-zp-0 9p+-+-+-+0 9+-zP-snQ+-0 9-+Pwq-+-+0 9+-+-+-mK-0 9P+-+-zP-+0 9+-+-+-+-0 xiiiiiiiiy

38...£c3+?? A hallucination. I spent 2 minutes on this and still blundered.

38...£xc5 was my initial idea, but I panicked that he can play.

A) 39.£e6+ is better, though after 39...¤f7 (39...¢f8? 40.£xa6 ¤xc4 41.£a8+ is a perpetual.) 40.£xa6 £e5+ Black should win, but the game will continue and with little time on the clock it would not have been trivial.

B) 39.¢f4 and here I sat in a shock that I lose the knight. I completely missed that I can give the check on d4! 39...£d4+ easily winning.

39.¢g2! Now it’s a draw.

39...¤xc4 40.£d5+ ¢h7 41.£h5+ ¢g8 42.£e8+ ¢h7 43.£h5+ ¢g8 44.£e8+ ¢h7 45.£h5+ ½–½

June 2021

It was a real pity not to win a game where, as he admitted after the match, I completely outplayed him. But there was no time to waste and this is what happened in the 2nd game.

Aleksandar Colovic - Ivan Salgado Lopez World Cup Hybrid Qualification m/2 (2), 2021 1.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.¤c3 ¤f6 4.¥g5 dxc4 I couldn’t remember anything after this.

5.e3 5.e4 was an alternative, but Black has 5...b5 (or 5...c5 6.d5 ¥e7) 5...c5 6.¥xc4

XIIIIIIIIY 9rsnlwqkvl-tr0 9zpp+-+pzpp0 9-+-+psn-+0 9+-zp-+-vL-0 9-+LzP-+-+0 9+-sN-zP-+-0 9PzP-+-zPPzP0 9tR-+QmK-sNR0 xiiiiiiiiy

I spent quite some time here, whether to go for an equal endgame and a likely draw, or to play a fully-fledged IQP middlegame.

I decided to play on as I thought the IQP would give me good chances.

6.¤f3 leads to equality after 6...cxd4 7.¤xd4 (7.£xd4 £xd4 8.¤xd4 ¥d7 9.¥xc4 ¥b4 with a likely draw.) 7...e5 8.¤f3 £xd1+ 9.¦xd1 ¤c6; Or 6.dxc5 £xd1+ 7.¦xd1 ¥xc5 8.¥xc4 where White has nothing.

6...cxd4 7.exd4 ¥e7 8.¤f3 0–0 9.0–0 ¤c6 10.a3 I knew this was a theoretical position usually arising from the Nimzo-Indian and I remembered the set-up for White of £d3, ¦ad1, ¦fe1 aiming for d5. I knew of this set-up from the game Yusupov-Lobron from 1996. The move 10.a3 makes sure

the queen can come to d3 to avoid ...¤a5 trapping the bishop.

10.¦c1 h6 11.¥h4 ¤h5 was the classical Korchnoi-Karpov game from Merano 1981 and the idea I wanted to avoid in the game.

10...b6 10...h6 11.¥f4! (11.¥h4 ¤h5! was the Karpov idea I wanted to avoid.)

11.£d3 ¥b7 13.¥xd5!

12.¦ad1

h6

12...¤d5

13.¥c1!?

XIIIIIIIIY 9r+-wq-trk+0 9zpl+-vlpzp-0 9-zpn+psn-zp0 9+-+-+-+-0 9-+LzP-+-+0 9zP-sNQ+N+-0 9-zP-+-zPPzP0 9+-vLR+RmK-0 xiiiiiiiiy

This move took me 15 minutes, but at least here he started to think.

13.¥xf6 led to equality so I discarded it.

After 13...¥xf6 14.d5 exd5 (14...¤a5! is even better. 15.dxe6 ¤xc4 16.£xc4 £c8 17.exf7+ ¦xf7 18.£xc8+ ¦xc8 with compensation for Black as in the game Kamsky,G (2695)-Karpov,A (2740) Monte Carlo 1994.) 15.¥xd5 £c7 looked acceptable for Black; 13.¥h4 ¤d5 was another move I couldn’t quite crack. (13...¤h5 I didn't quite like, though the engine gives 14.¥g3! ¤xg3 15.hxg3 ¥f6 16.d5 I saw all this, I just wasn't sure of the position when my piece landed on d5. The engine approves of it and gives White an advantage.) 14.¥xd5 ¥xh4 15.¥e4 ¥f6 I wasn’t sure about White’s prospects, for example 16.d5 ¤a5 (or 16...¤e5 17.¤xe5 ¥xe5 which is unclear.) 17.£b1 ¥xc3 BRITISH CHESS MAGAZINE | 357

06/141

18.dxe6 £e7 19.exf7+ ¦xf7 20.¥xb7 ¤xb7 21.bxc3 £xa3 with equality; 13.¥f4 ¥d6.

13...¦e8 14.¦fe1 ¥f8 15.b4!? I spent 25 minutes on this move. The idea is to prepare d5 so that White has £b3 later on, and also to tempt Black to play ...g6.

15.d5 was premature. 15...exd5 16.¦xe8 £xe8 17.¤xd5 ¤xd5 18.¥xd5 ¦d8 19.£b3 £d7 gave nothing; 15.¤e5!? £c7 …¦ad8,¤e5 (15...¤xe5 16.dxe5 £xd3 17.¦xd3 looked good for White as Black has problems with the knight on f6; 15...¦c8?! 16.£g3!); 15.h3 was a neutral move again hoping for ...g6, but if Black plays 15...¦c8 then the luft doesn’t improve White’s position that much.

15...a5 Black didn’t have many useful moves.

15...g6? 16.d5! was my idea. Now after the opening of the a2–g8 diagonal the pawn on g6 hangs. 16...exd5 17.¦xe8 £xe8 18.¤xd5 ¤xd5 19.¥xd5 threatening £g6, White is already winning here. 19...¢h7 20.¥b2 with a crushing position; 15...¦c8 16.d5 exd5 17.¦xe8 £xe8 18.¤xd5 ¤xd5 19.¥xd5 ¦d8 20.£b3 was my idea, the pawn on b4 restricting Black and avoiding ...¤a5, though Black remains solid after 20...¦d7.

16.b5 ¤e7 17.¦xe6!? This is the idea I had in mind when thinking over 15.b4.

Unfortunately this doesn’t work.

17.¤e5 ¤ed5 was unclear and in fact it would have felt like a failure of my play as I was playing to avoid Black achieving a blockade on d5.

17...¥xf3 17...fxe6? 18.¥xe6+ ¢h8 19.¤e5 winning, thanks to the unstoppable threat of ¤f7, was the main idea.

18.¦xf6 ¥xd1 19.¦xf7 358 | BRITISH CHESS MAGAZINE

XIIIIIIIIY 9r+-wqrvlk+0 9+-+-snRzp-0 9-zp-+-+-zp0 9zpP+-+-+-0 9-+LzP-+-+0 9zP-sNQ+-+-0 9-+-+-zPPzP0 9+-vLl+-mK-0 xiiiiiiiiy

19.¥xf7+? ¢h8 20.¦f4 with the idea of trapping the bishop on d1 and the rook on e8 doesn’t work in view of 20...¤d5 (or 20...¤g6).

19...¦c8!! He spent half an hour finding this move. After the game he called it the best one of his life! I noticed it, but I missed something in the lines. This move, coupled with the next, refutes White’s sacrificial idea.

From afar I had to see the cute move 19...¤d5!? and the reply 20.¥d2!? was my idea, covering e1, when play is unclear. 20...¤xc3 21.¥xc3 ¢h8 22.£xd1 I thought here I should have good compensation; 19...¢h8? was bad as 20.¤xd1 with the idea of ¥h6 wins for White.

20.¥d2 The same idea as after 19...¤d5, but Black has a pretty refutation.

20.¦xe7+ was the best chance objectively, but after 20...¢h8 21.¦xe8 £xe8 22.¥e3 but here Black has 22...¥c2 (or 22...¥h5) 23.£xc2 ¦xc4 when I didn’t see it too promising; 20.¦f4+ ¢h8 21.¤xd1 ¤d5 wins for Black with the threats of ...¦e1 and ...¤f4.

20...¥c2!

June 2021

XIIIIIIIIY 9-+rwqrvlk+0 9+-+-snRzp-0 9-zp-+-+-zp0 9zpP+-+-+-0 9-+LzP-+-+0 9zP-sNQ+-+-0 9-+lvL-zPPzP0 9+-+-+-mK-0 xiiiiiiiiy

The only move that wins.

I was hoping for 20...£c7 21.¥a2! when I thought White had good play.

21.¦xe7+ ¢h8 22.£xc2 What I missed was that after 22.¦xe8 ¥xd3 23.¦xd8 ¦xd8 24.¥xd3 ¦xd4 I lose one of the bishops.

22...£xe7 23.¥f1 £xa3 The rest is easy.

24.£g6 £d6 25.£g4 £e6 26.£h5 ¥b4 27.£f3 ¦f8 28.£g3 ¥xc3 28...£b3 29.¥xh6 was the last chance, but even that doesn’t work after 29...gxh6 (29...£f7–+)

30.£e5+ ¢g8 31.£g3+ ¢f7 and the king runs and hides easily.

29.¥xc3 £b3 30.¥d2 £xg3 31.hxg3 a4 32.¥d3 a3 33.¥b4 a2 0–1 All credit goes to my opponent who found two great moves to refute my rook sacrifice. Still, I enjoyed playing the game the way I did - I am not sure going for a draw and a tie-break would have increased my chances in view of my complete absence of practice when it comes to online games at quick time controls.

I lost the match, but it was an experience I thoroughly enjoyed. It reminded me how much I miss playing chess and now I feel a bit sad going back to the "usual routine".

As for hybrid chess, having experienced it personally, I am now more optimistic about its future than before. With proper technical preparation, like that we had in Skopje, and a stable online platform I don’t see a reason why there shouldn’t be more tournaments like this in the future.

Hardinge Simpole is delighted to announce the publication of

Fifty Shades of Ray Chess in the year of the Coronavirus Pandemic

Raymond D. Keene With an Introduction

by CJ de Mooi

BRITISH CHESS MAGAZINE | 359

06/141

EMPIRE OF THE MIND

By Grandmaster Raymond Keene OBE

No nation has ever poured such huge resources into the support of chess than the USSR during its, sub specie aeternitatis, relatively brief period of existence from 1922 until 1991. One publishing house in particular – Elk and Ruby - has specialised in documenting the organisations, championships, triumphs, setbacks and personalities of this gargantuan imperium of mental sport.

A glance at the publisher’s website will reveal the depth of this publisher’s interests, with, for example, individual tomes on 360 | BRITISH CHESS MAGAZINE

such luminaries as Bogoljubov, Bronstein, Korchnoi, Smyslov, Romanovsky, Petrosian and now the Wizard of Riga himself, Mikhail Tal. Alexander Koblenz was Tal‘s trainer.

His Mikhail Tal, the Streetfighting years, covers that most exciting period of Tal’s trajectory, when, in a whirlwind campaign, he annihilated the world’s leading Grandmasters and took the citadel of the Soviet Chess Empire by direct frontal assault.

June 2021

The book also covers the rebound, when, in 1961, the hereditary guardian of the empire struck back, and Mikhail Botvinnik regained the title he had lost to Tal the previous year.

7...f5 A Botvinnik favourite which also arose in the 1961 rematch, game 12.

This month, two extracts: a fascinating feature is the new computer analysis which casts fresh light on the quasi infinite possibilities concealed in the tactical masterpieces conjured up by the Wizard’s ever fertile creative imagination.

XIIIIIIIIY 9rsnl+k+r+0 9zppwq-sn-+Q0 9-+-+p+-+0 9+-+pzPp+-0 9-+-zp-+-+0 9zP-zP-+-+-0 9-+P+-zPPzP0 9tR-vLK+LsNR0 xiiiiiiiiy

Mikhail Tal - Mikhail Botvinnik [C18] World Championship Match Moscow URS (1), 15.03.1960 1.e4 Botvinnik, also after a minute’s thought, moves his king’s pawn as well, but only one square forward.

1...e6 Studying Botvinnik’s opening repertoire, we (Tal and Koblenz) of course paid most attention to his signature opening − the French Defence − which he played very successfully with black. We considered the possibility that the world champion would play the first game in a sharp style, to prove to his aggressive opponent that his hopes for success in a combination battle were futile. Eschewing quiet continuations, we concentrated our attention on the line that occurred in the game Gligoric vs. Petrosian at the previous year’s Candidates Tournament. This was precisely the line that occurred in the first game.

2.d4 d5 3.¤c3 ¥b4 4.e5 c5 5.a3 ¥xc3+ 6.bxc3 £c7 7.£g4

XIIIIIIIIY 9rsnl+k+ntr0 9zppwq-+pzpp0 9-+-+p+-+0 9+-zppzP-+-0 9-+-zP-+Q+0 9zP-zP-+-+-0 9-+P+-zPPzP0 9tR-vL-mKLsNR0 xiiiiiiiiy

8.£g3 ¤e7 9.£xg7 ¦g8 10.£xh7 cxd4 11.¢d1

11...¥d7 The World Champion uncorks a novelty in the very first game!

Petrosian played a much weaker move 11...¤bc6, and after 12.¤f3 ¤xe5 13.¥g5! got a difficult position. The purpose of 11...¥d7 is not just to complete development, but also, if possible, to launch a counter−attack with ...¥a4, threatening ...d4-d3.

12.£h5+ ¤g6 In the aforementioned 1961 rematch Botvinnik improved with ...¢d8.

He also lost that game , but only after some brain numbing complications.

13.¤e2 d3 14.cxd3 ¥a4+ It was better to play 14...¤c6 and then castle long.

15.¢e1 £xe5 16.¥g5 ¤c6 17.d4 £c7

XIIIIIIIIY 9r+-+k+r+0 9zppwq-+-+-0 9-+n+p+n+0 9+-+p+pvLQ0 9l+-zP-+-+0 9zP-zP-+-+-0 9-+-+NzPPzP0 9tR-+-mKL+R0 xiiiiiiiiy BRITISH CHESS MAGAZINE | 361

06/141

In the revenge encounter, Botvinnik struck back by imposing his strict strategic logic on proceedings. A key component of Botvinnik’s vengeance was a propensity to exchange queens, thus extracting tactical venom from the games. This practical lesson was not lost on Vladimir Kramnik, when he drew Kasparov’s tactical claws in their 2000 London contest, the battle which terminated Kasparov’s reign and crowned Kramnik as world champion.

Mikhail Tal

Mikhail Botvinnik - Mikhail Tal [E85]

18.h4! The pawn is not going to be promoted in the near future. The main purpose of this move is getting the h1 rook into play as soon as possible.

World Championship Remat Moscow URS (13), 17.04.1961

18...e5 Practically the best move.

19.¦h3! £f7 20.dxe5 ¤cxe5 21.¦e3 ¢d7 22.¦b1 b6 22...¥c6 was more resilient.

23.¤f4 ¦ae8 24.¦b4 ¥c6

XIIIIIIIIY 9-+-+r+r+0 9zp-+k+q+-0 9-zpl+-+n+0 9+-+psnpvLQ0 9-tR-+-sN-zP0 9zP-zP-tR-+-0 9-+-+-zPP+0 9+-+-mKL+-0 xiiiiiiiiy

25.£d1! Now White’s attack cannot be stopped.

25...¤xf4 26.¦xf4 ¤g6 27.¦d4 ¦xe3+ 28.fxe3 ¢c7 29.c4 dxc4 30.¥xc4 £g7 31.¥xg8 £xg8 32.h5

1.d4 ¤f6 2.c4 g6 3.¤c3 ¥g7 4.e4 d6 5.f3 0–0 6.¥e3 e5

XIIIIIIIIY 9rsnlwq-trk+0 9zppzp-+pvlp0 9-+-zp-snp+0 9+-+-zp-+-0 9-+PzPP+-+0 9+-sN-vLP+-0 9PzP-+-+PzP0 9tR-+QmKLsNR0 xiiiiiiiiy

7.dxe5 The queen trade does not objectively promise white much, but it is psychologically sound: it is hard for black to organise counterplay. In other circumstances, the capture on e5 would mean a refusal to play for an advantage in the opening, an intention to play for a draw. But each draw got Botvinnik closer to his aim!

1–0

7...dxe5 8.£xd8 ¦xd8 9.¤d5 ¤xd5 10.cxd5 This position had occurred in the game Boleslavsky vs. Najdorf (Candidates’ Tournament 1953).

The triumph of tactics, essentially the theme of the first Tal vs Botvinnik match.

10...c6 11.¥c4 b5 In the aforementioned game, Najdorf played 11...cxd5 12.¥xd5 ¤c6 and achieved a draw relatively easily.

362 | BRITISH CHESS MAGAZINE

June 2021

But Tal cannot be satisfied with such a result, so he tries to complicate the game.

12.¥b3 ¥b7 13.0–0–0 c5

XIIIIIIIIY 9rsn-tr-+k+0 9zpl+-+pvlp0 9-+-+-+p+0 9+pzpPzp-+-0 9-+-+P+-+0 9+L+-vLP+-0 9PzP-+-+PzP0 9+-mKR+-sNR0 xiiiiiiiiy

The struggle becomes more complicated, but white now has a strong passed pawn in the centre.

14.¥c2! ¤d7 15.¤e2 ¥f8 16.¤c3 a6 17.b3 ¦ac8 18.¥d3 ¤b6 19.¥e2 ¦d6 The rook is a bad blockading piece, but the b6 knight needed some protection.

20.¢b2! f5 Black is trying to activate his rook, but he weakens the e5 pawn.

21.¦c1 ¦f6

XIIIIIIIIY 9-+r+-vlk+0 9+l+-+-+p0 9psn-+-trp+0 9+pzpPzpp+-0 9-+-+P+-+0 9+PsN-vLP+-0 9PmK-+L+PzP0 9+-tR-+-+R0 xiiiiiiiiy

22.a4! bxa4 23.bxa4 a5 24.¢c2 c4 25.¦b1 ¥b4 26.¤a2! ¥c5 27.¥xc5 ¦xc5 28.¤c3 ¥c8 29.¦b2 ¥d7?

Mikhail Botvinnik

XIIIIIIIIY 9-+-+-+k+0 9+-+l+-+p0 9-sn-+-trp+0 9zp-trPzpp+-0 9P+p+P+-+0 9+-sN-+P+-0 9-tRK+L+PzP0 9+-+-+-+R0 xiiiiiiiiy

After 29...fxe4 30.fxe4!, white would still have needed some effort to win the game.

Now, black just falls apart. 30...¤xe4 looks strong , but is thwarted by the pin ...¥f5.

30.¦hb1 ¥xa4+ 31.¤xa4 ¤xa4 32.¦b8+ ¢g7 33.¦1b7+ ¦f7 34.d6 ¦xb7 35.¦xb7+ ¢f6 36.¦xh7 ¦c8 37.d7 ¦d8 38.¥xc4 ¤c5 39.¦f7+ ¢g5 40.¥b5 fxe4 41.fxe4 1–0 At the close of the second match Botvinnik led overall by 12 wins to Tal’s 11.

Five years later the two met once again and for the last time in a Soviet internal team competition. Tal equalised the score by refuting Botvinnik’s unsound opening, trading queens and creating a masterclass in iron strategic logic.

One of the supreme ironies of chess history!

BRITISH CHESS MAGAZINE | 363

06/141

Openings for Amateurs

The CARO-KANN with 1.e4 and 2.c4, Part IV

By Pete Tamburro ptamburro@aol.com This time we look at 5...¥d7 instead of 5...¤bd7. What goes into that decision?

You’ll find out here. There are also lessons to learn for both sides of the board as the game has some real fireworks!

Normunds Miezis – Adam Stahlberg [B10] Norrköping Open Budapest, 2010 1.c4 Yes, we’re once again going through "the English door" to get to the Caro-Kann.

1...c6 2.e4 d5 3.cxd5 cxd5 4.exd5 ¤f6 5.¥b5+ I much prefer active minor piece play to bringing the queen out early. It’s interesting that Steiner in the aforementioned 1930s article didn’t even mention the queen check as a possibility.

One very likely continuation could be 5.£a4+ ¤bd7 6.¤c3 g6 7.¤f3 ¥g7 8.¥c4 0–0 9.£b3 a6 10.a4 £a5 11.d4 b5! and, although White has played very forthrightly, Black’s counter makes a bit of a jumble of the queenside pieces that is not as harmonious as the 5.Bb5+ lines.

If you like an open game with "solid aggression," you can see how this line appeals to all sorts of players of that inclination 364 | BRITISH CHESS MAGAZINE

5...¥d7 6.¥c4 b5

XIIIIIIIIY 9rsn-wqkvl-tr0 9zp-+lzppzpp0 9-+-+-sn-+0 9+p+P+-+-0 9-+L+-+-+0 9+-+-+-+-0 9PzP-zP-zPPzP0 9tRNvLQmK-sNR0 xiiiiiiiiy

Nunn-Iclicki, Brussels, 1985, saw Black try another way: 6...£c7 7.d3 (7.£b3?? b5 8.¥xb5 £xc1+) 7...b5 8.¥b3 g6 9.¤f3 ¥g7 10.0–0 0–0 11.¦e1 ¥g4? (The bishop move when Black is fianchettoed is generally not good as Black either loses time retreating or gives White the two bishops in an open position. Better was 11...a5 12.a3²) 12.h3 ¥xf3 13.£xf3 ¤a6 14.¤c3 £d7 15.d6! An important idea to learn as it cements White’s advantage. There really is no good response to the pawn thrust.

15...£xd6 (15...exd6 16.¥g5+–; 15...e6 16.¥g5 ¤h5 17.¥e7 ¦fc8 18.g4 ¥xc3 19.bxc3 ¤g7 20.d4+–) 16.¤xb5±.

7.¥b3 ¤a6 Now we see Black’s idea. He needed to get the knight in the game via a6, but had to bump the bishop first. Then he could settle in at c7 rather than the usual d7

June 2021

because the bishop had taken that square.

The preference for 5...¤bd7 seems to come from Black having the bishop on b7 and the knight on d7 (and then b6) rather than having them on c7 and d7.

8.d4 g6 9.¤f3 ¥g7 10.0–0 ¥g4? See above comment. 10...0–0 11.¤e5 ¤c7 12.£f3².

11.h3 ¥xf3 12.£xf3 0–0 13.¤c3 ¤c7 14.¥g5

XIIIIIIIIY 9r+-wq-trk+0 9zp-sn-zppvlp0 9-+-+-snp+0 9+p+P+-vL-0 9-+-zP-+-+0 9+LsN-+Q+P0 9PzP-+-zPP+0 9tR-+-+RmK-0 xiiiiiiiiy

A time to pause and assess this position, reached quite easily by White. Each side has their minor pieces out. White’s queen is more actively placed and the white rooks will find it easier to find files to operate on, especially the e-file. Black’s plan will be to get the pawn on d5. The difference between the two plans is that White’s plan is aggressive and Black has a defensive plan of limited scope.

14...b4 15.¤a4

XIIIIIIIIY 9r+-wq-trk+0 9zp-sn-zppvlp0 9-+-+-snp+0 9+-+P+-vL-0 9Nzp-zP-+-+0 9+L+-+Q+P0 9PzP-+-zPP+0 9tR-+-+RmK-0 xiiiiiiiiy

15...¤cxd5!? There’s always a question in isolated queen pawn positions as to which knight should go to d5. If you have my past BCM columns on the IQP or my OFA-Next Steps book, you can see some of the ideas behind that decision.

Unless you’re doing engine-generated decimal evaluations, you might naturally conclude that 15 ...¤fxd5 leaves the ¤c7 in an awkward spot. I am inclined to agree from a practical standpoint for two reasons: having the knight on f6 fortifies the castled position and having the ¤c7 go to d5 allows Black to challenge with rooks on the c-file. In the eternal "which rook" question, one commentator joked that if the person moving the rook wins, you write "right rook". If that person loses, you write "wrong rook". That might be true here, too, with the "which knight" question, but I like the reasons for ¤cxd5.

16.¤c5 In exchange for the pawn, White gets a nice outpost on c5 and a possible path to e5 via d3.

16...¤b6 Even the engine likes this move, but think about it. If Black has to go back to the square he just came from, that doesn’t say much positive about his position.

17.¦ad1!? Putting the queen where it exercises influence on both sides of the board would be accomplished by 17.£d3!

Even though ¦ad1 is a good move, it seems the two white rooks belong on c1 and e1 for a presence on the open c-file and pressure on e7.

17...a5 18.a4 bxa3 19.bxa3 h6? One would think Black would play 19...¦c8 here for a possible operation along the c-file. Making pawn moves around the castled king creates weaknesses.

20.¥h4 ¦a7 White keeps an eye on e7 and Black defends it as further attacks on the bishop lead to nothing good: 20... g5 21.¥g3 e6 22.¦b1! a4 23.¥xe6! fxe6 24.¤xe6±.

BRITISH CHESS MAGAZINE | 365

06/141

21.¦fe1 £a8 Desperate to exchange queens, but this is wishful thinking.

26.£f3 Two other moves come to mind: 26.¦f3; 26.h4; the first of that pair is a logical follow-up to the rook lift.

22.£d3 Ah, finally!

26...¥e7??

22...¤bd5

XIIIIIIIIY 9q+-+-trk+0 9tr-+-zppvl-0 9-+-+-snpzp0 9zp-sNn+-+-0 9-+-zP-+-vL0 9zPL+Q+-+P0 9-+-+-zPP+0 9+-+RtR-mK-0 xiiiiiiiiy

Back again! A position with an unhealthy repetitiveness.

23.¥xf6?! A perfectly good continuation was 23.¥g3 e6 24.¥e5 ¦c8 25.¥c2 , but White wanders off in a speculative way a very instructive speculative way!

23...¥xf6 24.£e4 ¦d8 White’s pieces are centralised and actively placed with pressure on Black. Black needs to be exceedingly accurate in defence here.

The game is a demonstration of what happens when that is not the case.

25.¦d3 e6

XIIIIIIIIY 9q+-tr-+k+0 9tr-+-+p+-0 9-+-+pvlpzp0 9zp-sNn+-+-0 9-+-zPQ+-+0 9zPL+R+-+P0 9-+-+-zPP+0 9+-+-tR-mK-0 xiiiiiiiiy 366 | BRITISH CHESS MAGAZINE

XIIIIIIIIY 9q+-tr-+k+0 9tr-+-vlp+-0 9-+-+p+pzp0 9zp-sNn+-+-0 9-+-zP-+-+0 9zPL+R+Q+P0 9-+-+-zPP+0 9+-+-tR-mK-0 xiiiiiiiiy

A table turning possibility was 26...¥g7! because the sac on e6 doesn’t work here as it does with the bishop on e7: 27.¤xe6 (White would have to try 27.h4) 27... fxe6 28.¦xe6 ¢h7 29.£g4 (29.£g3 g5 30.¦f3 a4 31.¥c2+ ¢g8µ) 29...¤f6 30.£g3 ¦e8 31.d5 ¦xe6 32.dxe6 £e4 33.¦e3 £b1+ 34.¢h2 ¤e4 35.£f4 ¤d2 36.¥c4 g5 37.£g4 ¤xc4 38.£xc4.

27.¤xe6! Caro-Kann players, in this case an amateur, seem to forget these sacrifices in numerous games, even at grandmaster levels. Pay attention, lads!

27...fxe6 28.¦xe6 With the threat on g6 because of that lamented earlier h6 move.

28...¢g7 29.£e4 Another threat.

29...¥f6 30.¦g3 One more threat.

30...g5 31.¥c2 A different threat.

31...¢f7 32.¦f3 A pin threat.

32...¦a6 33.¦e5 The decisive threat! The rook is now protected so White can play the queen check.

33...¤f4 34.£h7+ Action rather than threats!

June 2021

34...¢f8 35.¥b3 Mate threat.

can see how this line appeals to all sorts of players of that inclination.

35...¦d5 36.¦xf4 Black sees any number of mates here and resigns. A likely one is: 36...gxf4 37.¥xd5 £xd5 38.¦xd5 ¦e6 39.¦xa5 ¦e1+ 40.¢h2 ¦e8 41.£g6 ¢e7 42.¦a6 ¦f8 43.£f5 ¦f7 44.£c8 ¦g7 45.¦e6+ ¢f7 46.£e8#.

1–0 In amateur play, and, indeed, even in grandmaster play at times, an equal position can be an advantage if one side is more comfortable in the position or understands the underlying ideas better. Thus, if you like an open game with "solid aggression", you

It is worth remembering how White prosecutes the attack from move 27 to move 34. Threat, threat, threat, followed by - action! You can’t afford to let your opponent take a breath. This game is also a cautionary note for Caro-Kann players.

Know the kinds of attacks White has in mind. Also, as for the opening for Black, the two games we’ve gone over in this line should give one pause.

Other Caro-Kann players have felt that way and headed to some interesting systems. In the next articles we will look at 2...e5 and 2...e6 replies.

▪ Book Review ▪ Book Review ▪ Book Review ▪ Book Review ▪

THE TURN OF THE SCREW REVIEW OF “MASTERPIECES AND DRAMAS OF THE SOVIET CHAMPIONSHIPS: VOLUME 1 (1920 -1937)”

by SERGEY VORONKOV. Elk and Ruby Publishing House, 2020

By Peter O'Brien, Brussels, 6 April 2021 “Distances divide, exclude us.

They’ve dis−welded and dis−glued us.

Despatched, disposed of, dis−inclusion They never knew that this meant fusion Of elbow grease and inspiration” Marina Tsvetaeva, Poem addressed to Boris Pasternak “Dramas” suggests both literary and actual themes. In this magnificent book, Sergey Voronkov is forever fusing the two. Every chapter title, from the Introduction (“Through the Lava of Time”) to the end (“Running into a Brick Wall”), is resonant with multiple meanings. Each is accompanied by a quote from Russian writers, starting with a citation from Dmitry Bykov’s biography of Boris Pasternak, and finishing with lines from Ilf and Petrov’s “The Twelve Chairs”.

BRITISH CHESS MAGAZINE | 367

06/141

As with everything else in the work, none of these words are wasted. For instance, take Bykov: “In Russia, when you talk about history, you are always alluding to current times, while a historian is a prophet who predicts retrospectively”. Or try this opening to chapter nine from the famous “Poem without a Hero” by Anna Akhmatova: “Like in a mirror of the horrible night, The man is so mad, he doesn’t want To recognize himself” The man in the book is Nikolai Vasilyevich Krylenko, former Army Chief in the war against the Tsarists, People’s Commissar for Justice of the USSR and described in “Shakhmaty v SSSR” (No.10, 1937) as the “Irreplaceable Leader of the Soviet Chess Organization”. As was to be expected of anyone warranting that grandiose adjective, within a year he had been executed.

Voronkov could justly claim to be the outstanding historian of Soviet chess. Over the years, his exceptional output of articles, monographs, books, editing of the efforts of others, places him at the heart of scholarship.

This volume, the English translation of the first of his three−volume series in Russian on the Soviet championships, fully reflects that wealth of knowledge. Yet it does far more. It presents countless fusions, makes numerous connections, seeks to remove the “dis” from the verbs so cleverly rendered in Peter Oram’s translation of Tsvetaeva shown above.

The core of the joining process is the inseparability of what happened to Russia, and what happened to chess in Russia, during the near 20 year period the book covers. The twin stories involve charismatic personalities, conflicting narratives of art and life, diverging forms of institutionalization, an abundance of “fake news” (in pretty much all of its current forms), and no lack of personal tragedies.

As the book begins, the country is in chaos.

368 | BRITISH CHESS MAGAZINE

But chess in Russia is in a rather different situation. Why? The one−word response is, of course, Tchigorin. The young players of 1920 are all devotees of Mikhail Ivanovich and his legacy. And that legacy has the perhaps unusual characteristic of being interpreted in the same way by all - it is the beauty of the game, the exhilaration of discovery and experiment. These young players, intriguingly enough, mostly see plenty of pluses in the wrecking balls of revolution and social change crashing through their lives. What’s needed so that they continue creating around the 64 squares is organization.

It’s not that organization was lacking prior to the violent international and internecine struggles. Since the first decade of the 20th century, an All −Russian Chess Union had been created, and by 1914 it had upwards of 800 members. It was a private body, relying essentially on private funding and voluntary efforts to carry out a program focused on competitions and teaching. There had also been an outstanding series of top level tournaments during those years, a series unparalleled in any other country.

Voronkov uses a piece published in Listok Petrogubkommuny, 9 October 1921, to summarize the situation: “ In just one decade (1905−1914) we witnessed a number of outstanding competitions: two international tournaments in 1909 and 1914 with the world’s strongest players taking part, the All−Russian tournaments of 1905,1909, 1911

June 2021

and 1913, where new Russian maestros came to prominence…….The storm of world war and revolution destroyed the fruits of many years of labor. The generation that created a whole era in Russian chess life stepped off the stage. Some are no longer with us, others are far away” (p.43).

Fortunately, the final sentence in the quote is not quite correct. The very young people (“millennials”) who had experienced some of the pre− war fervor were nearly all around. And they understood that the chess mantle they were taking on was not simply a cloth woven with playing the game - you had to organize everything. Though the problems were manifold, indefatigability was a resource in abundant supply. Today, a century later, there are several leading players devoting part of their efforts towards organizational entrepreneurship in the chess world. They operate from fairly secure financial bases. Then, like today, a figure who could command respect in the chess world and have the necessary links to tap into power (and money) was necessary.

Ilyin−Zhenevsky (IZh - the Genevois) was that person. A committed communist, a fine chess player, a very likeable individual, and in a position of influence, he managed to persuade the authorities that an “All Russian Olympiad” should be held already in 1920. Several of the other leading players (Romanovsky, Grigoriev, Levenfish) were also equally dedicated publicists, really hard workers, and determined to make things function. Thus it was that for just over 3 weeks in October 1920, the first type of championship took place in Moscow. Of the 16 invited contestants, 5 each were from that city and Petrograd.

For a modern player, the conditions would have seemed deplorable. More or less every participant had an arduous day time job.

Games were started in the evening, with a four hour session until 10pm, then an hour’s break, then a three hour continuation until 2am. Food was poor, the playing hall small, stuffy and smoke filled (players themselves often being serious smokers), and prizes

were derisory (they would get worse over time). Many of the problems and complaints during and after the tournament became a staple in subsequent events. Health was one of them. Virtually every championship registered people who, however gifted, were not physically fit enough to stand the strain for the duration. Several players had serious health conditions prior to the start of tournaments. For Romanovsky, his heart condition lasted his whole life even though he lived until the mid 1960s - but gifted men, such as Slavitsky who had stomach cancer, succumbed before reaching their thirties. Even IZh himself had been shell− shocked during the war, and in fact lost his memory due to a contusion (which forced him to relearn chess from scratch!).

Withdrawals were not uncommon, and fatigue was ever present. Blunders of major kinds were legion. There was no record of all games played. Nowadays a player can turn on the computer and find game data bases stretching into the millions. But in 1920, and indeed for most (though not quite all) of the 10 championships described by Voronkov, the number of games preserved for posterity was well below 50%. All that aside, the top trio was Alekhine, Romanovsky and Levenfish - class tells.

It was July 1923 before the next event, this time with the slightly altered name of All Russian Championship Tournament, could take place in Petrograd. Major changes had occurred in Russia. The violence of the Civil war was over, but the costs were to be seen everywhere. Voronkov frequently quotes at length from the writings of that splendid player Fyodor Parfenyevich Bogatyrchuk (a Ukrainian, and a prominent medical doctor). I’ll do the same: “ In March 1921, the Soviet citizens were stunned by the so− called “New Economic Policy” (NEP), which was proclaimed by Lenin out of the blue at the 10th Bolshevik conference. We couldn’t believe our eyes. Essentially, NEP was a blatant return to the very capitalism that the Bolshevik “social” revolution fought against…..Back then, the Russians could still believe the spoken word, so they took Lenin’s BRITISH CHESS MAGAZINE | 369

06/141

assurances that NEP was here “for the long haul” at face value….It was two years since the NEP had been introduced, and you could only imagine how horrible it (Petrograd) must have been before….I wanted to walk to the middle of the street and scream heartrendingly, “What were you fighting for comrades? This squalor?” (pp.43, 44).

The 1923 events effectively initiated a “New Chess Policy” (NCP). The needs for solid organization, financial resources and incorporation of chess into the “development program” for the cadres suggested a structured approach. The 1st Conference of the USSR Chess Union took place on 7 July 1923, the day before the opening of the All Russian Championship Tournament.

Crudely summarized, that Conference launched the institutionalization of State direction of chess in the USSR. From there on, and very sharply as of the late 1920s when the NEP was discarded, a State supported professionalization of players and chess learning became the guiding force. As the process unfolded, the leading Russian actors had to keep their eyes on both external and internal developments.

“International standards”, as set by Lasker and Capablanca, were norms for which the top players had to strive. At the same time, training efforts within the country aimed at producing large numbers of excellent performers who would steadily build up the position of the USSR as the world’s leading chess playing country. What we would now call “quality audits”, based on performance benchmarking, were introduced, with the award of titles (Master to Grandmaster) as recognition of achievement. On occasion, as in 1925 and 1935, absolutely top− level international tournaments were organized in Moscow as a means of measuring whether the best Soviet players were commensurate with international best practice.

Any herculean process of this kind was bound to create frictions. Some players, of whom perhaps Romanovsky was the most prominent, courageously voiced their opposition to the effects of this development 370 | BRITISH CHESS MAGAZINE

The Four Horsemen before the Apocalypse: Bogolyubov, Lasker, Capablanca, Marshall The cartoon showing Botvinnik knighting Levenfish after their 1937 Match

Bogatyrchuk

The struggle 1938

June 2021

on the artistic quality of the play. Standards are reached by a mechanical method of accumulating points and this, Romanovsky argued, was detrimental to creative achievement. Those whose political views or background were considered suspect were penalized severely. Perhaps the prime example is Petr Nikolaevich Izmailov.

At the 6th Soviet Championship, held in Odessa in September 1929, the Tomsk master, then barely 23, produced superb chess to reach the 4 person final (the championship was organized with qualifying groups and then a final group). But it seems he then had to return to Tomsk to take some exams. Subsequently he was less conspicuous in Caissa’s view, though not in that of the authorities who purged him from the ranks of chess master in 1934. In April 1936 he joined the Savitsky Memorial tournament in Leningrad, which was his last tournament. Not long after he was arrested in Tomsk under an accusation of being a member of a “counter revolutionary Trotskyist−fascist terrorist organization”. The case was held before a Military tribunal in April 1937, Izmailov was found guilty, and shot.

Semyon Levman

What happened? His son Nikolai investigated things 60 years after his father’s death. Petr Izmailov was the son of a clergyman. It turns out that this was mentioned numerous times in the file Nikolai consulted in the Tomsk FSB archives. The case documents in fact stated that Petr Izamailov descended from an alien stratum of society. “The son of a clergyman just couldn’t be a champion of our Soviet State of workers and peasants”. (p.431) Politicization at every level became the dominant feature of Soviet chess in the 1930s. The contortions this led to are shown in stark fashion by the events of 1933. In January of that year Hitler came to power.

The All−German Chess Union was formed with Josef Goebbels as Chairman. In the report to the Soviet chess conference of 1933, we find “The fascistization of German chess organizations is happening very quickly and exposes all the “charms” of

Ilyin Zhenevsky

BRITISH CHESS MAGAZINE | 371

06/141

the Hitler regime….The events of Germany serve as a great lesson in politics for those who think that chess cannot be used as a weapon of class struggle” (pp313 and 314).

Yet in 1924 Krylenko had stated, in his enthronement speech, that he “considered the chess art a political weapon” and that lemma remained in force at least throughout the life of Stalin. German totalitarianism was therefore simply copying the Soviet variety as far as chess was concerned (though the Nazis were far less successful).

Indeed, it was also at the beginning of 1933 that Stalin took the very unusual step, in January and February, of decorating Krylenko with both the Order of Lenin and the Order of the Red Banner. It seems that one of the side effects of Hitler’s ascension was to accelerate and intensify the doctrine of the 64 squares as practiced in the USSR. Voronkov operates as if he is a cinematic director as he works his way through the Championships. Without fail, some players describe the social context in which the event takes place. That context is mostly political and progressively more menacing.

Bogatyrchuk mentions an incident when he is on his way to the 9th Championship starting in Leningrad in December 1934: “an agitated man entered my train compartment and said, pointing at a newspaper, “Have you heard? Kirov has been murdered !”

He added grimly: Now it is starting..” It was clear what “it was - intensification of the terror…the dark prediction of my travelling companion fully came true..At first we thought the tournament would be cancelled, but it went ahead as scheduled”.

Yet there is also no shortage of delightful flashes of light context, from Chekhover’s entertaining musical evenings to the post dinner conversations among participants.

Local ambiance is never overlooked.

Levenfish, triumphant in Tbilisi in 1937, recounts how on a rest day (by the late 1930s tournament schedules were far more tolerant even if the politics wasn’t) he wandered around the city. He runs across carts with heavy barrels and is told that the 372 | BRITISH CHESS MAGAZINE

The Young Wolves of 1927: Botvinnik, Makogonov, Perfilyev, Rauzer

contents are 3 year old Khavanchkara wine.

He buys a dozen bottles. When they are delivered to his hotel, the manager happens to be there and learns what the wine is. At that the manager and most of the staff sprint off to buy the wine, leaving the remaining duty manager pleading with them to buy some for him as well. Levenfish continues: “When I asked this poor man, who had to stay at his post, what was going on and why there was such commotion, he looked at me like at a naïve boy and answered “Katso(friend)! Good wine for a Georgian is the same thing as a beautiful woman for a Frenchman!” (p.427).

Every character is drawn and his play in the championship assessed, usually by at least one of the other players. We are regaled with splendid group photos of the participants, as if seeing the whole cast before looking at the individuals. Yet the tell −tale sights are the wonderful cartoons and drawings in every chapter. Many of them are splendidly light −hearted. Thus the 10th championship in Tbilisi in 1937 also featured an All Union Young Masters Tournament. Since by then the young bloods were expected to know their theory, the gifted cartoonist Galba produced a sketch set in a rstaurant where the experienced Head Chef Rabinovich offers to the hungry Riumin, Alatortsev and others a menu containing a “Big Selection of French, Italian and Spanish openings” (p.418).

June 2021

For the Championships of the 1930s, Yuzepchuk’s brilliantly traced drawings not only highlight the individuals but also illuminate what is really happening.

None offers a sharper observation than the last one in the book (p.516), captioned “The Grandmaster’s Initiation”. It shows a kneeling Levenfish being knighted as Grandmaster by a standing Botvinnik after their epic 1937 tied match of 13 games (of which only 3 were drawn – Magnus and prospective challengers, please take note).

In reality most would agree that the victor was Levenfish, 20 years older than the “anointed” Soviet number one, Botvinnik.

Is it possible, desirable, legitimate to review a book on chess with scarcely a reference to the games contained in it? Its well worth a try – but I’ll relent and offer the reader something in the way of happenings over the board. A glance at the “game index” at the front of the book shows that Voronkov has chosen 107 items, of which 57 are positions from games and only the other 50 are full games. This is the way it should be – the audience is mostly interested in “critical moments” and not the whole play. For annotations, we have remarks made at the time, either by the protagonists or other contemporaries, and fairly often some computer aided precisions supplied by the author himself. Again my view is that this is a good way to present things. Any attempt to dis-flavor the atmosphere of the moment should be resisted.

For individual games, I recommend as fine examples: the tough struggle between Nenarokov and Rabinovich from the 1923 tournament; the splendid combinative victory of IZh against Botvinnik in the 1931 Championship (page 309 et seq); the elegant victory of Bogatrychuk over Goglidze in the same year (page 305 et seq). Yet there is so much to savor in some of the specific positions chosen by Voronkov. These illustrate the dreams (and nightmares) a chess player can have. In the 8th championship (Leningrad 1933) the following position was reached in the struggle between those splendid players and great rivals Levenfish and Romanovsky.

XIIIIIIIIY 9-+-+-+-+0 9+-zpQ+-+-0 9-+-+-+-+0 9+-zp-+-zpp0 9-+-+-+-mk0 9+-+-wq-+P0 9-+-+-+P+0 9+-+-+-+K0 xiiiiiiiiy

54......c4? 55. £xc7 £c1 + ? 56. ¢h2 £f4 + ??? 57. g3 + Curtains!

The latter had the upper hand throughout, yet his heart problem was especially bad at that time and his play was strewn with uncharacteristic blunders. The devilish 57.

G3 check is the kind of move that we often have difficulty envisaging – there seems to be a sort of “diagonal blindness” which perhaps has more to do with actual eyesight rather than chess insight (the same position is reproduced on p.64 of the 2014 edition of Van Perlo’s treasury “Endgame Tactics”).

The 10th Championship held in Tbilisi in 1937 produced a truly classic hallucination.

At move 40 the game Ebralidze-Ragozin reached the position shown here:

XIIIIIIIIY 9-+-+-+-+0 9zp-trRvlk+p0 9-+-+-+p+0 9+-+-+-+-0 9-+-sN-+-+0 9+P+-+-+-0 9P+-+-+-mK0 9+-+-+-+-0 xiiiiiiiiy

Ragozin had just played 40….Rc7 ?? As he later said himself, he instantly knew he had made a colossal error but somehow preserved an imperturbable look.

BRITISH CHESS MAGAZINE | 373

06/141

Petrograd 1923

Ebralidze had lots of time on his clock (the time limit for that championship was 48 moves in 3 hours), and at first just sat looking at the board. The Georgian player, who had been drafted into the tournament being played for the first time in his capital city, perhaps could literally not believe his eyes. Everyone knew that Ragozin was a talented tactician. Maybe there was a fiendish trap behind the rook manoeuver?

Ebralidze continued to scrutinize the position for 10 minutes while Ragozin remained hyper calm. Then Ebralidze responded with 41.Rd5 ?? Perhaps its only then that he realized he had been duped.

No doubt in a state of acute shock, he resigned a mere five moves later. A true coup in Georgia, worthy of any produced in its politics and theater.

There is yet another dimension. In some of the championships at least two of the famous three Kubbel brothers were involved. Leonid Ivanovich, surely one of the greatest study composers ever (as a kid this writer was entranced by the magnificence of his 374 | BRITISH CHESS MAGAZINE

invention), was on the lookout for actual positions that could generate compositions.

The 7th Championship (Moscow 1931) was particularly fertile for him. He found what he was looking for in the game Lisitsin− Yudovich where a knight and pawn ending revealed extraordinary possibilities. A couple of rounds prior to that, the game Goglidze−Budo could have produced a study like ending, which of course Kubbel spotted, though the actual finish was more prosaic.

In the ever changing formats and awards at the Soviet Championships, the notion of brilliancy prizes flitted in and out, according to circumstances. Of course such awards are based on subjective criteria of those who judge. The same applies to book reviews. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, relevance and teaching in the eye of the reviewer. In the case of this masterpiece of the drama and history of chess in the country which has most influenced it, I have no hesitation in nominating Voronkov’s tremendous achievement for the first brilliancy prize.

June 2021

When does the Endgame start?

By Tony Cullen Before I move on to discuss endgames, I would like to clear up a misconception about my book Chess Rivals of the 19th Century. The book is not about providing deep biographies of 19th−century chess personalities. I leave that to the chess historians, such as the excellent Tim Harding. Instead, it is about the competitive rivalries between the foremost masters of the period. The players selected for inclusion in Chess Rivals were selected according to a strict set of criteria - they had to have played a sufficient number of games against an opponent (e.g., La Bourdonnais − McDonnell) or opponents. There were no international tournaments in the first half of the 19th century. Those players selected for the second half of the century must have participated in international tournaments.

Buckle, for example, did not participate in a single one, so he did not qualify for inclusion. Boden, a player that I admire, is another that some think should have been included. Unfortunately, the majority of his games are either casual or provincial tournament games. Owen and other British masters were considered, but space dictated that I had to draw a line somewhere.

Cochrane, Staunton, Bird, De Vere, Pollock and Blackburne are included, as well as McDonnell and the Scottish American Mackenzie. So, I think fair coverage has been given to 19th−century British players.

The problem in defining when an endgame starts, and how it differs from an ending, was raised in a recent review of Chess Rivals.

“The one feature which somewhat confused me was the ‘endings’ at the end of most chapters. Many of them are indeed endgames, and fascinating they are as well, but some of them are game finishes with plenty of pieces still on the board, while a few serve as a basis for anecdotes.”

The implication is that finishes do not belong under the heading of “Endings.”

But finishes are endings! Edgar Cordingley around 1950 wrote in his Chess Students Quarterly that the word ending means the final moves concluding the game irrespective of whether these are in the opening, middlegame or endgame. But “Endgame” means an actual endgame (e.g., king and pawn).

In Chernev’s book: Capablanca’s Best Chess Endings:60 Complete Games, 38 are finishes (endings) with multiple pieces on the board. The rest are endgames with a maximum of four pieces.

In Freeborough’s Chess Endings, 1891, pp. 10−11 we read that the author chose to limit his choice of endings to those with no more than two pieces on either side with or without pawns. “We admit, however, as exceptions, some positions with more pieces on the board, in which the force of a winning or drawing combination can be shown to greater advantage than when the board is clear.” And the following position is an example.

No.183

XIIIIIIIIY 9rsnlwqk+-tr0 9zppzp-sn-vl-0 9-+-zp-+-zp0 9+-+-zp-vL-0 9-+LzPP+-+0 9+-zP-+-zp-0 9PzP-+-+-zP0 9tRN+Q+RmK-0 xiiiiiiiiy BRITISH CHESS MAGAZINE | 375

06/141

White mates or wins decisive material: 1.¥f7+ ¢d7 (1…¢f8 2.¥e6+ etc) 2.¥e6+ ¢c6 (2…¢xe6 3.£g4+ and mate next move) 3.¥d5+ ¢b6 4.£b3+ ¢a5 5.£b4+ ¢a6 6.¥c4+ b5 7.£xb5 mate. If this is a position from a game (unlikely), and it finished with £xb5+ mate, some reader would be bound to claim that Black lost in the opening and not in the ending! *

*

*

*

*

From the Chess Amateur 1908, p. 51:

“Brilliant and Instructive ENDGAMES” M. Kaiser - Rev. J. Owen

XIIIIIIIIY 9-+-tR-vlk+0 9zp-+-+p+-0 9-zpq+p+pzp0 9+-+nzP-+-0 9-+p+NzPPvL0 9+-+-+-+P0 9PzP-+-+-+0 9+-+R+-mK-0 xiiiiiiiiy

From a match between these two Liverpudlians a few years ago. 1.¦1xd5! exd5 2.¥e7! dxe4 3.¦xf8+ ¢g7 4.¦d8 f5 5.exf6+ ¢f7 6.f5 gxf5 7.gxf5 £e8 8.¦xe8 and wins. *

*

*

*

*

From Instructive Positions from Master Chess

by J. Mieses, 1951 (first published 1938):

“From the End- Game” Dr. M. Euwe (to move)

XIIIIIIIIY 9r+l+-trk+0 9+pvl-wqpzpp0 9-+p+-sn-+0 9zp-+-zp-+-0 9-+-zP-+-wQ0 9zP-+-zPN+-0 9LzP-vL-zPPzP0 9+-+-tRRmK-0 xiiiiiiiiy

M. Botvinnik

This position is from the World Championship Tournament 1948 and was won by Botvinnik sixteen moves later!

From Chess Rivals of the 19th Century:

Endings Wilfred Paulsen - M. Bier Hamburg 1885

XIIIIIIIIY 9-+-+-+-+0 9+-+-tRRzp-0 9-+-+-+-mk0 9+-+-+-+p0 9-+-+-+-zP0 9+-+-+-zP-0 9-+q+-zP-mK0 9+-+-+-+-0 xiiiiiiiiy

376 | BRITISH CHESS MAGAZINE

June 2021

“Researching Louis Paulsen’s games, this ending was found in which his brother was brilliantly swindled. White cannot capture on g7, as Black would draw by …£xf2+.

But with his next move Black sets a devilish trap for his opponent.”

“43…£c3! Black appears to have blundered by lifting the threat against White’s f2-pawn in a futile attempt to protect his g-pawn.” 44.¦xg7?? £xg3+!

And that was the end of Bier’s dreams of scoring the full point. A draw was agreed and was in any case unavoidable. 44.¦e6+ ¢h7 45.¦f5 was an easy win. Just two moves played, so one might insist it’s a finish and not an ending. Who really cares about semantics? I simply truncated the endgame to its amusing finish. Just enjoy it! *

*

*

*

From the preface to Portisch & Sarközy’s Six Hundred Endings: “Several problem composers hold that the endgame starts when the player who is about to move can force a win or a draw from the position against any variation.” That sounds more like the definition of an ending (finish!). Like Chernev and many other writers, I have not worried about the fine distinction between endings and endgames and have entered both under “Endings.”

There probably are no definitive criteria for determining when an endgame starts, but there is a good case for its starting when the number of pieces on the board is reduced to a maximum of four.

*

SIX TIMES PER YEAR

SUBSCRIBE TODAY A MAGAZINE THAT HAS TAKEN THE CHESS WORLD BY STORM! It’s like getting a book of instruction, news, and close-ups every second month – one you would be proud to casually lay out on your coffee table.

Treat yourself to quality.

CHESS JOURNALISTS

OF AMERICA

AWARDS

BEST OVERALL CHESS MAGAZINE

| BRITISH CHESS MAGAZINE 578

2019 2020

6 Issues for

$ 119.99 100 PAGES PER ISSUE UNITED KINGDOM: DELIVERY BY ROYAL MAIL

BRITISH CHESS MAGAZINE | 377

06/141

Endgame Studies

by Ian Watson ian@irwatson.uk

1

XIIIIIIIIY 9-+k+-vL-+0 9+-+-tR-+p0 9K+-+-+-zP0 9+-+-+-zP-0 9-+-+-vl-+0 9+-+-+-+-0 9-+-+-+-+0 9+-+-+r+-0 xiiiiiiiiy S Nielsen

2

XIIIIIIIIY 9-+-+-+-+0 9+-+k+-sNR0 9K+-+-+-+0 9+-+-+-+-0 9-+P+l+-+0 9+p+-+-+-0 9-+-+-+-+0 9+-+-+-+-0 xiiiiiiiiy M Minski

Shakhmatnaya Kompositsya 2021

Victory−70 Ty 2015

3 4 win

win

XIIIIIIIIY 9-+-+-+-vl0 9+-+-mK-sn-0 9-+-zP-+-+0 9mkp+-+-+-0 9Ptr-zp-+-+0 9+p+-+-+-0 9q+-+N+-+0 9+R+-wQ-+-0 xiiiiiiiiy

XIIIIIIIIY 9-+-+-+-+0 9zP-+-+-+-0 9-+-zp-mK-+0 9zp-+-+-+R0 9-+-+-mkp+0 9wqPzP-+l+-0 9-+-+-vL-zp0 9+-+-+-+-0 xiiiiiiiiy

ChessStar 2016

Schach 2021

win

wIN

M Minski & S Nielsen

378 | BRITISH CHESS MAGAZINE

S Nielsen & M Minski

June 2021

The Candidates …for the World Championship… of study composing. Last month’s column was about the current World Champion of study composing, Oleg Pervakov. There are several composers who might dethrone Pervakov, and this month’s column is about two of those challengers, two of those ‘Candidates’. I’ll introduce you to some others over the next few months, but for now we’ll look at some of the compositions of Steffen Nielsen and of Martin Minski.

They are both of the younger generation of study composers, like several of Magnus’ challengers for the Over−The−Board World Championship (although ‘younger’ in studies means middle−aged!) We know now who Carlsen’s next challenger will be, but the study Championship doesn’t work the same way as the OTB one. It’s done by giving scores to each study in a set of compositions by each composer, and then comparing the totals of each composer. So any composer could in principle win the title, but in practice only a handful have a serious chance, because they have to produce a full set of studies, all of the very highest standard.

Endgame studies for the World Championship are individual compositions, but many composers also make collaborative studies, and Nielsen and Minski often produce joint works, such as two we present here. All four of the studies are complex, but all are humanly solvable - a computer isn’t needed. Each of them happens to have been used in a recent solving competition. The first study was used in the Russian Championship in April; the second, also in April, in a monthly competition organised by solving Grandmaster Martynas Limontas of Lithuania; the third in the Russian RSSU Cup in February; and the last one in a German tourney in March. There have been numerous online solving competitions taking place during lockdowns; I know of at least thirty so far this year that have been open to everyone, and I guess there have been many more.

You probably know the drill by now, but if not, here it is again: You’ll need to set up these positions on a board. In solving events, you can use a chess set and you can move the pieces to try and help you solve. You solve against the clock; for these studies give yourself an average of 30 minutes for each one, so 120 minutes in total. Your solutions are marked by the competition’s supervisor. Points are awarded according to how much of the composer’s solution you find, with five points available for each study if you find it all. In the answers, I’ll show you where the points were awarded. You need to find the composer’s main line; you can also write down sidelines if you’re not sure what the main line is, but only the main line moves earn points. So look for the most artistic, elegant line.

The solutions are given on page 383.

BRITISH CHESS MAGAZINE | 379

06/141

QUOTES AND QUERIES

THE VIENNA GAME AND THE GREAT OLD MASTERS By Alan Smith 6198 The Vienna Game 1.e4 e5 2.¤c3 is a flexible opening which can transpose into many other openings and has several distinct variations of its own.

White can play 3.g3, 3.f4 or 3.¥c4. The Vienna has not really been trendy since the days of Steinitz.

Mieses, Blake and Spielmann all championed the white side and added new ideas. Later on Larsen used the opening with success at Candidates level.

The first game features a sideline of the Vienna Gambit. This gambit is suspect theoretically but poses real problems over the board. Chigorin and Mackenzie both lost to Gunsberg as Black in the Hamppe−Allgaier Gambit in the 1880’s and as a result 2...¤f6 gained in popularity.

A. B. Palmer – Keates London 1884 1.e4 e5 2.¤c3 ¤c6 3.f4 exf4 4.¤f3 g5 5.d4 5.h4 g4 6.¤g5 h6 7.¤xf7 ¢xf7 is the Hamppe−Allgaier Gambit.

5...g4 6.¥xf4 6.¥c4 is the Pierce Gambit while 6.d5 gxf3 7.¥xf4 is a forgotten gambit 7...fxg2 8.¥xg2 ¤ce7 9.d6 Max Dinge - Walbrodt 1898.

6...gxf3 7.gxf3 ¥h6 8.¥g3 d6 9.¥b5 ¥d7 10.¥xc6 ¥xc6 10...bxc6 is more active: Black will get immediate counterplay down the half−open file.

11.d5 ¥d7 12.f4 £e7 13.£d4 f6 14.0-00 b6 14...£e5.

380 | BRITISH CHESS MAGAZINE

15.¢b1 0-0-0 16.¦he1 £f7 16...¥g7 takes most of the sting out of the following break.

17.e5 ¥g4 17...¥e8 as suggested by Potter is a better defence.

18.e6 £g7 19.¦d3 ¤e7 20.¤b5 ¢b7 21.¦a3 ¦a8 21...a6 22.¦xa6 ¦a8! sidesteps the coming attack.

22.£c4 ¦fc8 23.¦a6! ¤xd5 23...¢xa6 24.¤xd6+.

24.£xd5+ ¢xa6 24...c6 25.¤xd6+ ¢xa6 26.¦d3 transposes.

25.¦e3 c6 26.¤xd6! b5 27.¦a3+ 27.£c5 wins more quickly, 27...£c7 28.¦a3+ £a5 29.¦xa5+ ¢xa5 30.¤xc8 ¦xc8 31.£xa7+.

27...¢b6 28.¤xc8+ ¦xc8 29.¥f2+ c5 30.£d6+ ¢b7 30...¦c6 31.¥xc5+.

31.¥xc5 ¦xc5 32.£xc5 ¢b8 32...a6 makes White’s task harder.

33.e7! ¥d7 34.¦xa7 34.£xa7+ ¢c8 35.¦c3+ is quicker.

34...¥xf4 35.£b6+ ¢c8 36.£d8# Land and Water, 21st June 1884 Tim Harding included a lot of Vienna lines in his 1973 book The Bishop's Opening.

He suggested a name for the following double−edged line: the Frankenstein Dracula Variation. The following is the stem game of the variation. Black is

June 2021

forced to give up the exchange early on, but gets reasonable compensation.

good for White. The next game features some typically elegant play from Black.

Joseph Henry Blake – W. Skillicorn

G. Gustafson – Carlos Torre

City of London CC Ch 1921

Marshall CC 1925

1.e4 e5 2.¤c3 ¤f6 3.¥c4 ¤xe4 4.£h5 ¤d6 5.¥b3 ¤c6 6.¤b5 g6 7.£f3 f5 Trying to improve on 7...¤f5 8.£d5 ¤h6 9.d4 d6 Mieses – Burn Paris 1900.

1.e4 e5 2.¤c3 ¤f6 3.f4 d5 4.fxe5 Steinitz preferred 4.d3 which is like a Philidor with colours reversed. White also has the option of 4.exd5 when 4...e4 transposes to a Falkbeer Counter-Gambit.

8.£d5 £e7 9.¤xc7+ ¢d8 10.¤xa8 b6 11.d3 ¥b7 12.h4! The first time this was played.

12...h6 12...f4 13.£f3 ¥h6 14.£g4 e4 15.¥xf4 exd3+ Ost Hansen – Nunn Teesside Student Olympiad 1974 was a later improvement.

13.£f3 ¤d4 14.£g3 £f6 14...f4 15.£xg6 ¦h7 is unclear, according to analysis

by Keres, 14...¥xa8 15.c3 f4 16.£xg6 Cherepkov – Korelov Leningrad 1964.

4...¤xe4 5.¤f3 ¥g4 Santasiere reckoned this was sufficient for equality.

6.d3 6.£e2 is better: that was Spielmann’s choice in this position. The text was adopted by Mieses in three match games with Rubinstein in 1909.

6...¤xc3 7.bxc3 ¤d7 8.d4 f6 9.¥f4 fxe5 10.dxe5 c6 11.¥e2 ¥c5 12.¤d4 ¥xe2 13.£xe2 £a5 14.£d3 0-0 15.0-0 ¦ae8 16.¦ae1 ¥xd4+ 17.£xd4 17.cxd4?? loses instantly to 17...¦xf4!

15.¤xb6 axb6 16.¤e2 f4 17.£h3 ¥xg2 18.£xg2 f3 19.£g4 ¤xe2 20.¥e3 ¢c7 21.¦h3 e4 22.dxe4 £xb2 23.¦d1 £c3+ 24.¢f1 £c6 25.¦xf3 Black did not have enough for the exchange but battled on.

17...¤c5 18.£b4 £xb4 19.cxb4 ¤e4!

20.h3 20.c4 g5 21.cxd5 cxd5 22.¥g3 ¦xf1+ 23.¢xf1 ¢f7!

25...¤c3 26.¥d4 ¤xd1 27.¥xh8 ¥e7 28.¦d3 ¤xf2 29.¢xf2 ¤xe4+ 30.¢e1 ¤c5 31.¦d4 £h1+ 32.¢d2 £h2+ 33.¢c1 g5 34.hxg5 ¥xg5+ 35.¢b2 £h1 36.¥e5+ ¢c8 37.¦d1 Black could resign here.

20...g5 21.¥h2 b5 22.¦f3 h5 23.¦a3 ¦e7 24.¦a6 g4 25.hxg4 hxg4 26.¦e3 ¦ef7 27.¦e1 He had to try 27.¥g3 ¦f1+ 28.¢h2 but Black wins a piece with 28...¦f7 29.¥h4 g3+! 30.¢h3 ¦1f4.

37...£c6 38.£c4 h5 39.£g8+ ¥d8 40.¦d6 £b5 41.£d5

27...g3 28.¥xg3 ¤xg3 29.¦xc6 ¢g7 30.e6 ¦f1+! 31.¦xf1 ¤e2+!

1-0

Cheltenham Chronicle, 9th April 1921

0-1 Queenslander 29th August, 1925

Skillicorn may not have been up to Blake’s standard, but he recorded wins against Adrian Conde and Victor Wahltuch.

The Vienna Game with 3.f4 is not really a gambit as 3...exf4? 4.e5 ¤g8 5.¤f3 is very BRITISH CHESS MAGAZINE | 381

06/141

Solutions to Problems This month’s originals You may be tempted to have a go at solving all four of this month’s originals, but there is no indignity in instead finding out the solutions by reading on! Although the problems are solver-friendly, I always find 3-movers with few pieces on the board (such as Nikolay’s) surprisingly difficult; and any helpmate in 9 (such as Ljubomir’s) will be challenging, though in his diagram, a complete contrast to Nikolay’s, the need to disentangle the white king and knight may at least suggest ways in which to start the solution. (Remember: Black plays first and does all he can to help White to mate him.)

Threat reduction… …is how David Shire describes the sequence of tries and key in his 2-mover.

It is a pleasant paradox that the stronger the key (in terms of the number of mates threatened) the less effective it is. We’ll see this as we go through the solution. First, we try 1.¤4g5, which threatens 2.£c3 and 2.£e2 and also 2.¤f7. The reply 1…fxg5 fails to 2.h8=£, but the reply 1…¤xd5 prevents all three mates and is the refutation. Next, try 1.¤g3. This time we just have two threats, 2.£c3 and 2.£e2, and we can meet 1…¤xd5 by 2.£xf5; but now 1…¥b3, pinning the white queen, is a successful defence. Eventually we move on to 1.¤d6, which threatens only 2.¤f7, and this one is indeed the key – 1…¥xd5 2.£c3 (an erstwhile threat!); 1…cxd5 2.£e2 (the other erstwhile threat!); 1…¤xd5 2.£xf5; and 1…¢xd5 2.¤c4.

A tricky 3-mover?

I don’t know whether others share my difficulties with 3-movers with light material, so in a way I shall be reassured if you too find the first 3-mover tricky.

One difficulty is that despite White’s commanding position it is difficult successfully to threaten any mates. The first try, 1.¢f5, has no threat but attempts to set up an effective Zugzwang. This move would be fine after 1…¢xg3 2.¤g4, leading to £h2/£f2 mates, but fails to 1…g4!. So try 1.¤f3. This does have a threat, 2.£h2+, and meets 1…¢g4 382 | BRITISH CHESS MAGAZINE

with the killing Zugzwang 2.£g2, but 1…¢xg3! is this time a refutation. The key is the nice sacrificial move 1.¤g4!

(Zugzwang) after which 1…¢xg3 is met by 2.¢f5 (Zugzwang) (…¢f3; 3.£f2; …¢h3, …¢h4 3.£h2) and 1…¢xg4 is met by 2.£g2 (Zugzwang) (…¢h5 3.£h3). Well done if you saw all this!

A provocative key move It’s always an attractive feature if the key move exposes the white king, previously well protected, to a number of possible checks (in chess problem parlance provoking those checks). In Steven’s 3-mover, we want to use the white bishop to administer mate, but 1.¥c5, threatening 2.¥f2, fails to 1…d1=¤. So we have to play 1.¥f4! (threat 2.¥g5), opening the a3-e7 diagonal. Black has a number of checking defences, but they all fail to keep him alive beyond move 3 – 1…¤a6+ and 1…¤a2+ are simply met by 1…a¦xa3, and 3.¥g5 is unavoidable; after 1…¤d3+ we have 2.¦xa3 ¤xf4 3.¦xf4; after 1…¤d5+ we have 2.¢f7 ¤xf4 3.¦axf4 (the other rook this time!); and after 1…¤c6+ it’s 2.¢e8 and 3.¥g5.

Return to the murky world of helpmates As hinted above, Ljubomir’s helpmate is a tough nut to crack, and would be so even for serious competitive solvers. After

June 2021

(See page 351) unscrambling the entanglements at the foot of the board, how do we arrange for the black king to enter the danger area in order to be mated there? Congratulations if you saw that the black king could get to b3 and there be mated by …¤d2!! The remarkable thing is that composers such as Ljubomir construct unique (computerverified) sequences of moves. The solution (with Black playing first) runs as follows:

1.¦d1+ ¢xd1 2.c2+ ¢c1 3.¤c3+ ¢d2 4.¢f7 ¢xd3 5.¢e6 ¢c4 6.b2+ ¢b4 7.¢d5 ¢a5 8.¢c4 ¤xf3 9.¢b3 ¤d2. An experienced solver will expect the black king to run to b3 because his path to any other square on the first three ranks has alternative routes and so would not be possible in a sound problem – but even so it is a big ask to visualise how the mate can be set up.

Solutions to Endgames

(See page 378)

Nielsen 2021

Minski & Nielsen 2016

1. g6 (1 point) ¥xh6 2.¦e8+ (+1 point = 2) ¢d7 3.gxh7 ¦f6+ 4.¢b7 (+1 = 3) ¢xe8 5.h8£ ¦f7+ 6.¥e7+ ¥f8 7.¢c8 (+1 = 4) ¦xe7 8.£h5+ ¦f7 9.£b5+ ¢e7 10.£e5 (+1 = 5) mate.

1.¦b2 (1 point) £xb2 2.d7 ¤e6 3.¢xe6 ¥f6 4.¢xf6 (+1 point = 2) d3+ 5.¤c3 ¦d4 5.¤d5+ (+1 = 3) ¢xa4 7.£a5+ (+1 = 4) ¢xa5 8.d8£+ ¢a4 9.£a8 (+1 = 5) mate. Unusual tactics.

4.¢b5? ¦f5+ 5.¢c4 ¥xf8 6.h8£ Kxe8.

1.¦b2 deflects the Black queen, so that … b2 won’t be check ( e.g. 1.d7? ¤f5+ 2.¢e6 b2+). In the main line, 2…¤f5+ 3.¢e6 and 3…¥f6 4.¢xf6 or 3…¤g7+ 4.¢f7 ¤e6 5.¢xe6, so if you wrote one of these variations, you get your points.

Minski 2015 1.¦h2 ¥c2 2.¦d2+ (1 point) ¢e7 3.¤f5+ (+1 point = 2) ¥xf5 4.¦b2 ¥d3 (+0.5 = 2.5) 5.¢b5 ¥c2 6.c5 (+0.5 = 3) ¢d7 7.¢b6 ¢c8 8.¢c6 (+1 = 4) ¥e4+ 9.¢b5 ¥d3+ 10.¢a5 (+0.5 = 4.5) ¥c2 11.¢b6 ¢d7 12.c6+ ¢c8 13.c7 (+0.5 = 5) wins.

Clever tempo play, while also preventing the Black king coming down the board and attacking the b2 rook.

Some sidelines: 1.¤f5+? ¢e6 2.¦h2 ¥xf5 3.¦b2 ¥c2 4.c5 ¢d5; 2.c5? b2 3.c6+ ¢d6 4.¦d2+ ¢e5 5.¦e2+ ¢d5; 2…¢c6 3.¤e6 b2 4.c5 b1£ 5.¦d6 mate; 6.¢b6? ¢d6 7.c5+ ¢d5 8.c6 ¢c4 9.c7 ¥f5 10.¦f2 ¥d7 11.¢a5 ¢c3 12.¦f7 ¥g4 13.¦g7 ¥f5 14.¦g3+ ¢c2 15.¢b4 b2 16.¦g2+ ¢c1 17.¢c3 b1¤+; 8.c6? ¢b8 9.c7+ ¢c8 10.¢c6 ¥e4+ 11.¢b6 ¥c2.

Nielsen & Minski 2021 1.¦f5+ ¢e4 2.¦d5 (2 points) £c5 3.¥xc5 ¢xd5 4.¥g1 (+2 points = 4) hxg1£ 5.a8£+ ¢c5 6.£a7+ (+1 = 5) ¢c6 7.£xg1 wins. 2.¦d5 is a delightful move (and truly tough to spot).

The main sidelines are: 2.a8£+? ¢d3 3.¦xf3+ gxf3 4.£xf3+ ¢c2; 2…¢f4 3.a8£ ¥e4 4.£f8; 4.¥f2? ¢e4 5.a8£+ ¢d3 6.£a6+ ¢c2; and 4…¢e4 5.a8£+ ¢d3 6.£a6+ ¢c2 7.¥xh2.

BRITISH CHESS MAGAZINE | 383

It´s now even easier to subscribe to British Chess Magazine An exclusive chess magazine!

Great news, BCM just got better! More content, more pages, more GM and IM writers (including top UK grandmasters), outstanding photography and design, and the regular features which have long been part of BCM’s tradition.

Now in partnership, American Chess Magazine and BCM have combined to re-launch BCM which now offers more high class, authoritative and in-depth coverage of major British chess events and leading players, a brand new look, and of course our much loved regular articles.

save

printed magazine

UK

Non-UK

£55

£85

12 issues per year postage included

subscribe

Purchase or renew your subscription and have BCM delivered to your door: On-line: visit our website www.britishchessmagazine.co.uk Email: contact support@britishchessmagazine.co.uk, we’ll get back to you right away By post: write to BCM at Albany House, 14 Shute End, Wokingham, Berkshire, England RG40 1BJ with a cheque payable to British Chess Magazine Limited, your post and email addresses (and if possible a contact phone number) Save time, go on-line. It’s more convenient and better for the environment, why not do it on-line. Enjoy priority support. No waiting for your turn, we are here for you 24/7. Anytime, anywhere. If you’re on the move, read digital BCM from your handheld or other device.

Thank you for your continuing support!

BRITISH CHESS MAGAZINE, the World’s Oldest Chess Journal