My last game before I head off for vacation

Played last week, at the start of the new league season. Previous games against the same opponent are here, here, and here. Last week’s game is here (I am black).

1. e4 c5 2. Nc3 e6 3. f4 d5 4. e5 Nc6 5. Nf3 Nh6 6. Be2 Qb6 7. a3 Bd7 8. d3 Be7 9. Na4??
Completely misses my next move, loses a couple of pawns and gives me a monster passed a-pawn.

9… Qa5+ 10. Nc3 d4 11. b4 cxb4
11… Nxb4 12. Bd2 Nxd3+ 13. Bxd3 dxc3 14. Be3 was possibly even stronger!

12. Ne4 bxa3+ 13. Bd2 Qc7 14. O-O b5 15. c3 Qb6?!
Nothing wrong with my move, though the idea is flawed – my idea leads me to lose a piece though I still have good chances due to the strong, advanced connected passers. (15… dxc3 16. Nxc3 b4)

16. Kh1 Nf5?
(16… dxc3 17. Nxc3 b4)

17. cxd4 Nfxd4?
(17… O-O 18. g4 Nfxd4 19. Be3 Rad8 20. Rc1 b4 21. Rc4 Be8)

18. Be3 b4
(18… O-O)

19. Rc1 Rd8
(19… b3)

20. Rc4 O-O 21. Nxd4 Nxd4 22. Bxd4 Qa5 23. Bc5
(23. Nd6 Bxd6 24. exd6 Bb5 25. Rc1 Rxd6 26. Bc5 Rc6)

23… Bxc5 24. Rxc5
(24. Nxc5 Bb5)

24… Qb6 25. Qb3
25. d4! is very strong instead, activating the bishop. My pawns are not yet ready to go marching down.

25… Bc6 26. Rc4?
(26. Rfc1! Bd5)

26… Bd5 27. Qxb4
(27. Nd6 Qe3 28. Bf3 Bxc4 29. Qxc4 Rb8)

27… Bxc4 28. Qxc4
Now, I am definitely better and the a-pawn cannot be stopped. 28. Qxb6 axb6 29. dxc4 Rd4 was an option.

28… Qb2 29. Re1
(29. Bh5 a2)

29… Rc8 30. Qa4
( 30. Nc5 a2)

30… Qxe2
I fully expected my opponent to resign here. I was shocked when he played on for a few more moves!

31. Ra1 Rc2
(31… Qb2 32. Qd1 Rc2 33. Qf1 a2)

32. Rg1 Qxd3 33. Nd6 a2 34. Qxa7 Qb3 35. h3 Rb2 36. Ne4 Rb1 37. Nd2 Rxg1+ 38. Kxg1 Qd1+ 0-1

Testing log statements

Of late, this blog has become an almost exclusive chess blog. Let me redress that balance, at least for one post.

Unit testing your log statements is unusual, but not unheard of. There might be many reasons for this – you might have a separate process monitoring your log files and taking action on certain log messages…or, you might be handling an event which you choose to ignore except to log its invocation and you want to test that you are logging properly. Whatever the reason, there isn’t any easy way (at least in Java) to test your log statements.

One way of testing is to read from the log file and ensure the log statement gets written out. But we don’t ideally want to be reading from log files in our unit tests. Here’s what you could do, if you were using log4j:

First, have a class called VectorAppender.java:

import java.util.Vector;

import org.apache.log4j.AppenderSkeleton;
import org.apache.log4j.spi.LoggingEvent;

public class VectorAppender extends AppenderSkeleton {
 private static Vector <String>messages = new Vector<String>();
 public static final boolean VECTORAPPENDER_SYSOUT = false;

 @Override
 protected void append(LoggingEvent arg0) {
  if (VectorAppender.VECTORAPPENDER_SYSOUT)
   System.out.println(arg0.getLoggerName() + "  - " + arg0.getRenderedMessage());
  messages.add(arg0.getLoggerName() + "  - " + arg0.getRenderedMessage());
 }

 public void close() {}

 public boolean requiresLayout() {
  return false;
 }

 public static void clear() {
  messages = new Vector<String>();
 }

 public static Vector<String> getMessages() {
  return messages;
 }
}

Then, we invoke initLogging() in the setup to our unit test:

public static void initLogging() {
 Properties p = new Properties();
 p.put("log4j.rootCategory", "DEBUG, stdout, LOGFILE");
 p.put("log4j.appender.LOGFILE", VectorAppender.class.getName());
 p.put("log4j.appender.stdout.Threshold", "DEBUG");
 p.put("log4j.appender.stdout", "org.apache.log4j.ConsoleAppender");
 p.put("log4j.appender.stdout.layout", "org.apache.log4j.PatternLayout");
 p.put("log4j.appender.stdout.layout.ConversionPattern", "%d %-5p [%C{1}.%M() %L] - %m%n");
 org.apache.log4j.PropertyConfigurator.configure(p);

 VectorAppender.clear();
}

Now, VectorAppender.getMessages() gives you everything that’s been logged and you can assert to your heart’s content!

An ugly (and undeserving) win

My fourth game against the same opponent (3 previous games) – I should have lost this in spectacular fashion but my opponent failed to spot the opportunities presented to him. He then proceeded to hang a rook in an endgame he should have been able to convert. My play certainly needs some improvement. Replay.

1. e4 d6 2. d4 Nf6 3. Nc3 g6 4. Be3 c6 5. f3 b5 6. Qd2 Nbd7 7. g4 Nb6 8. Bd3 Nc4 9. Bxc4 bxc4 10. O-O-O Rb8 11. Nge2 Qa5 12. e5 Qb4 13. b3 Qa3+ 14. Kb1 Nd5 15. Nxd5 cxd5 16. exd6 e6 17. Bg5 Bxd6 18. Bf6
Like my previous game with white against the same player, we head into a Pirc. The position is quite even until this point and here the mistakes start.

18… Bb4? 19. Qf4?
I briefly looked at 19. c3 here but was too worried that after the bishop sacrifice, my king would come under an indefensible attack. But I needed to to do two things differently: 1. Realize this was a crucial juncture of the game and regardless of the situation on the clock, spend a considerable chunk of my time here, and 2. Not think in abstractions about my exposed king but rather calculate concrete variations to determine if 19. c3 was playable here. And in fact, it was very much playable, giving me a healthy advantage!
(19. c3! Ba5 (19… cxb3 20. cxb4 Ba6 21. Nc1 bxa2+ 22. Nxa2) 20. Be5 Rb6 21. b4)

19… c3 20. Qc1 Qxc1+ 21. Kxc1 O-O 22. h4 a5 23. a4 Bd7 24. Rd3 Rfc8 25. h5?
25. Kd1 and the bishop capture on a4 doesn’t work. I can just capture the bishop with an advantage. I totally underestimated the strength of the attack, assuming that it wouldn’t work with no queens on the board. Oh how wrong I was!

25… Bxa4 26. hxg6 fxg6 27. Kd1 Bb5 28. Re3 a4 29. Nc1 axb3 30. Nxb3 Bc4 31. Rh2
(31. Nc1)

31… Ra8 32. Nc1 Ra1 33. Rxe6 Ba3 34. Bg5 Rf8
(34… Ra8 35. Rb6 Re8!! 36. Rh1 Bxc1 37. Bxc1 Be2+)

35. Rb6??
Opening the door for 35…Re8 with the line above. Part of the reason I played Rh2 on my 31st move was that I prevent Be2+ winning, if black moved his rook to e8. What I missed was that it now opens up the possibility of capturing twice on c1 and then Re1 is mating! So, after Re8, I’m forced to play Rh1, which then allows Be2+ again! The computer gives this position a -12(!). But there really wasn’t much else I could do. I was close to zugzwang.

35… Rxf3??
Throwing away an easy victory! (35… Re8)

36. Rb8+ Bf8 37. Rh1 Rf2 38. Bh6 Ra7 39. Re1 Raf7 40. Ne2 Rh2 41. Rxf8+ Rxf8 42. Bxf8 Kxf8
42… Bxe2+ 43. Rxe2 Rh1+! 44. Re1 Rxe1+ 45. Kxe1 Kxf8 46. g5 Kf7 47. Ke2 Ke6 48. Kd3 Kf5 49. Kxc3 Kxg5 50. Kd3 h5 51. c4 dxc4+ 52. Kxc4 h4 53. d5 Kf6 and winning – trade all pieces, allowing black to win in the endgame. But it required my opponent to see several good moves, not at all easy in time trouble.

43. Nxc3 Rg2 44. Rh1
(44. Nb1 Rxg4 45. c3 h5 46. Nd2 Bb5)

44… Kg7 45. g5 Rxg5 46. Ne2 Rg2 47. Nf4 h5??
(47… Rg4 48. Ne6+ Kf6 49. Re1 h5 50. c3 Rg3)

48. Nxg2 1-0
Though grateful to win, I can’t take much joy from this game.

Do I need some tactical practice?

Though I won this game, it was a lot harder than it looked. I played the same opponent I played 2 weeks ago (in which I had no trouble at all) – but while that game was totally one-sided, this was a much more open affair. We both missed several chances and I am getting a bit nervous about my perceived strength – the tactics. I have always preferred playing sharp lines with lots of tactics and generally avoided quiet positions – after my past few games where I’ve missed several tactics that I would normally back myself to find, maybe I need to work on my tactics again? Anyway, here’s the game (and I was black):

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 a6 6. a4 Nc6 7. h3 Qb6 8. Nxc6 bxc6 9. Bd3 g6 10. a5 Qc7 11. Bd2 Bg7 12. O-O Rb8 13. Na4 Nd7
Playing the Najdorf is still new for me and I’m not used to the various ways white can tackle it on. Even though I had never played against 6. a4 before and I wasn’t sure how to play it, I came up with a reasonable plan and played quite well in the opening. Here, I looked at both O-O and d5 and finally settled on the text move, to try and discourage the white knight from settling into b6. I was also hesitant about playing d5 without first castling, though Fritz seems happy enough about it!

14. Rb1 O-O 15. Qe2 Qa7 16. b4 Bb7
16… Ne5 17. Nb6 Nxd3 18. Qxd3 Be6 and the position is equal.

17. c4!?
After our previous game, I was somewhat surprised by this very active plan. The computer also suggests 17. Be3 c5 18. bxc5 dxc5 19. Nb6

17… c5
I thought long and hard here. I was worried that I was opening the door for 18. b5 and white has a strong passed pawn. Then I realized that as long as I don’t trade on b5 (giving him connected passers), I can still hold the position and he’s not queening just yet.
(17… Bd4)

18. f4?
You could see from his expression that he realized his mistake as soon as he picked up the f-pawn. By then of course, it was too late and he was committed to the move.
(18. b5 Qa8)

18… cxb4+ 19. Kh2
(19. Be3)

19… Bc6 20. Nb6 Nxb6 21. Be3 Qa8?
(21… Qc7 22. Bxb6 (22. axb6 Rxb6 23. Bxb6 Qxb6 just transposes) 22… Rxb6 23. axb6 Qxb6)
The computer suggests the line above where I give up the rook for his bishop to gain connected passers on the a and b files. I did have a long think about the line in the game but wasn’t able to evaluate if it was the right choice. Apparently, it was!

22. Bxb6 Bc3 23. c5 dxc5 24. Bxc5 Bb5?!
(24… Rfd8 25. Rf3 Rd7)

25. Bxe7 Rfe8 26. Bc5
(26. Bd6 Rbd8 27. Bxb5 Rxe4 28. Qf3 Rxd6 29. Bd3 Re8 30. Qxa8 Rxa8)

26… Bxd3 27. Qxd3 Rxe4 28. f5 Qc6 29. Bb6 Rbe8 30. fxg6 hxg6 31. Rf2 Qc4 32. Qf3
(32. Qxc4 Rxc4)

32… Rf4
(32… Re1 33. Rxe1 Bxe1 34. Rf1 Bc3)

33. Qg3 Be5
(33… Rxf2 34. Qxf2 b3)

34. Kg1 Re4 35. Qg5
(35. Qf3 b3)

35… Bd4?
Time control made with less than a minute to go. 35… Bf4! 36. Rxf4 Rxf4 was very strong! 35… b3 was also much better.

36. Bxd4 Qxd4 37. Rbf1?
Here my opponent missed that his rook on f2 is pinned! This wasn’t necessarily the losing move – the next one was – but this is already quite bad. (37. Qf6 Qc4 38. Rbf1 R8e7)

37… Re1 38. Qf4??
Now this is definitely a huge blunder!
(38. Kh2 Rxf1 39. Rxf1 b3 40. Qf4 Qxf4+ 41. Rxf4 Rb8 42. Rf1 b2 43. Rb1 Kg7)

38… Rxf1+ 0-1

Despite my far from perfect play, I have now seemingly turned the tide from my long winless streak at the beginning of the year. I have only lost 2 games in my last 14 (with 3 draws), and both my losses were against higher rated players (along with one of the draws). At least I have been beating the players I am expected to beat!

A tactical slugfest

I wouldn’t say that the game was perfect – far from it. But I played well in some critical moments and despite some ups and downs, was able to pull out the win. My third game against the same opponent (I had earlier played one black and one white against him) was with black:

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 a6 6. f4 e5 7. Nf3 Nbd7 8. a4 Be7 9. Bd3 O-O 10. O-O b6
Having played against him before and knowing what to expect, I had looked into the theory of the Najdorf with 6. f4. Here, the main line went 10… Nc5, but considering he played this line quite regularly and would be more familiar with it, I chose a more offbeat variation that probably suited my style of play a bit better.

11. Qe1 Bb7 12. Qh4!?
This move caught me by surprise. I now had to figure out if the capture on e4 was flawed:

12… Nxe4!
I first considered 12… Nxe4 13. Ng5 Bxg5 14. fxg5 but that doesn’t work because now my knight on e4 is threatened thrice (and protected only once); moving the knight to f6 or capturing on g5 with it loses the knight; and moving it anywhere else results in mate on h7. But then I looked at the variation 12… Nxe4 13. Ng5 Nxg5! 14. fxg5 g6 and that seemed good for black.

13. Qh3! Ndc5 14. Nxe4 Bxe4 15. Bxe4 Nxe4
I had worked my way to this position when I played my 12th move. Here, I was expecting white to capture on e5, but he first played an intermezzo.

16. Qf5 d5! 17. fxe5 Bc5+ 18. Kh1 g6 19. Qh3
When I played d5, I calculated until this position and knew I could win the exchange with Nf2+. If I did play it, white would get serious attacking chances using the weak dark squares around my king. Unfortunately, I made the wrong choice and went for the material. I couldn’t see a forced win for white (and the computer still shows a slight edge for black), so I figured I could pick up the material – but I should have anticipated that my position wouldn’t be easy to play and that the slightest error on my part would be fatal. Instead what I should have focused on was that I had two very powerful minor pieces on the board and that I could play on normally with a distinct advantage.

19… Nf2+?
(19… Qe7 20. c3 a5)

20. Rxf2 Bxf2 21. Bg5 Qc7 22. Bf6 Be3?!
When I played Nf2+, I had intended to play 22… h5 in this position. But I couldn’t see a way forward after 23. g4 Qd7 24. Qg2. I thought that white was probably better in this position. In fact, the computer shows that the line leads to a draw by repetition.
(22… h5 23. g4 Qd7 (23… Qxc2 24. gxh5 Qf5 25. Qxf5 gxf5) 24. Qg2 hxg4 25. Qxf2 Qf5 26. Qh4 Qxf3+ 27. Kg1 Qe3+ 28. Kh1 Qf3+)

23. Nh4 Bd2?
A flawed idea – I will lose my bishop shortly. I should have realized that the knight now blocked the queen’s access to h6 and should have taken the opportunity to re-route my bishop to the f8-h6 diagonal instead where its much safer and better placed.
(23… Bc5 24. Nf5 h5 25. Qg3 Rfe8)

24. Nf5 h5
(24… Rfe8)

25. Qd3 Bf4
(25… Bg5 26. Ne7+ Qxe7 27. Bxe7 Bxe7)

26. Ne7+ Kh7 27. Nxd5 Qd7 28. Nxf4 Qxd3 29. Nxd3 Rac8 30. c3 Rc4 31. Kg1 a5 32. Kf2 Re8?! 33. Rc1? Rxa4 34. h3 Kh6 35. Ke3 g5 36. Rf1 Kg6 37. Rf2 Rc8 38. Bxg5?
(38. e6 fxe6 39. Be5)

38… Kxg5 39. Rxf7 Re8 40. g3 Re6 41. Rg7+ Kh6 42. Rf7 Kg6 43. Rb7 Kf5 44. Rf7+ Kg5 45. Rg7+ Kh6 46. Rf7
I took this repetition of position to be an implicit draw offer from my opponent. I realized I was worse here, but felt I should push for a win. This was round 3 of a 5 round Swiss tournament, and I had a 1.5/2 score. With 4 of us tied at 1.5 and 2 others having won both their games so far, I felt I needed to win this game to be in with a good chance at winning the tournament. In addition, my opponent was down to less than 5 minutes on his clock while I still had more than 10. Despite these factors, I probably made the wrong decision to go for it

46… Ra1? 47. Ke4 Rg6 48. Nf4 Rxg3 49. Rf6+ Kh7 50. Rxb6 Re1+
50… Ra4+ 51. Kf5 Rf3 52. Rb7+ Kh6 53. b4 Rxc3 54. e6 Rxb4 55. Rxb4 axb4 56. e7 Rc8 57. Kf6 b3 58. Nd3 leads to a draw.

51. Kf5 Rge3 52. e6 Rf1 53. Kg5??
Game losing blunder, and my gamble pays off!
(53. Rb7+ Kh6 54. e7)

53… Re5+ 0-1

My new chess rating

My new published ECF rating is 152. Not bad, considering I went through a very rough stretch of 4-5 months. Going by the conversion tables, that translates to 1866 on the FIDE scale and 1816 on the rating scale of other countries.

While living in the US, 2000 USCF was always a big target for me – the highest I got to was the low 1600s. This is the closest I’ve ever gotten to that magic number. I need to get to 175 (a big ask without a doubt) to make it. But first things first – I can hit FIDE 2000 if I get to 170! With the English federation publishing ratings only once a year, I can make a serious run to get into the 160s over the next year.

My most recent games

Here, here, and here.

As black against a higher rated opponent, I did just fine throughout the entire game until my very last move. Though one is never happy with a loss, I felt I was in good form and wasn’t too discouraged by the game.

1. e4 c5 2. c3 d5 3. exd5 Qxd5 4. d4 Nf6 5. Nf3 e6 6. Na3 Nc6 7. Be3 cxd4 8. Nb5 Qd8 9. Nbxd4 Bd7 10. Be2 Be7 11. O-O O-O 12. c4 a6 13. a3 Qc7 14. Rc1 Rac8 15. h3 Rfd8 16. b4 Ne5 17. Nxe5 Qxe5 18. Qb3 Bc6 19. f4 Qb8 20. Nxc6 bxc6 21. c5 a5 22. f5 e5 23. Bc4 Nd5 24. Rfe1 axb4 25. axb4 Qxb4?? 26. Bxd5 1-0

Again, as black. Playing someone who has given me trouble in the past (I have now played him thrice, each time with black), I felt that his endgame play was the weakest and where he was very indecisive. So my plan was to play …c5 as early as possible – a lesson learnt from my previous game (the second game on that post) with him – and to try and get into an early endgame with him. Once there, I was able to outplay and outmaneuver him to win the game. In fact the position was quite drawish (he offered me a draw after his 32nd move) and there would’ve been nothing wrong in accepting the offer. On the other hand, I felt I couldn’t lose the position and decided to play on to see if I could break through. Eventually, he made a couple of inaccuracies and allowed me to win! There was only one move in the game where I missed a pretty tactic to gain a small advantage in the endgame.

1. d4 d5 2. c4 c6 3. Nc3 Nf6 4. e3 e6 5. Nf3 Be7 6. Bd3 dxc4 7. Bxc4 b5 8. Be2 O-O 9. O-O Bb7 10. Ne5 a6 11. Bf3 Qc7 12. Ne4 Nxe4 13. Bxe4 c5 14. Bxb7 Qxb7 15. Qf3 Qxf3 16. Nxf3 Nc6 17. dxc5 Bxc5 18. Bd2 Rac8 19. a3 Rfd8 20. Rac1 Bb6 21. Rc2 Ne7?

21…Nd4 22. Rxc8 Nxf3+ 23. gxf3 Rxc8

22. Rfc1 Rxc2 23. Rxc2 f5 24. g3 Rc8 25. Rxc8+ Nxc8 26. Bc3 Nd6 27. Ng5 Ne4 28. Nxe4 fxe4 29. Kf1 Kf7 30. Ke2 g6 31. Kd2 Ke7 32. Bd4 Bc7 33. Kc3 Kd6 34. Kb4 Kd5 35. Bc3 Bd8 36. Bd4 h5 37. h3 Kc6 38. Kb3 Be7 39. a4 Bd6 40. Bc3 Kd5 41. Bd4 Bc7 42. Bc3 bxa4+ 43. Kxa4 Kc4 44. Bd4 Kd3 45. Kb4 Ke2 46. Kc5 Kxf2 47. g4 e5 48. gxh5 exd4 49. hxg6 Be5 50. exd4 Bf6 51. d5 e3 52. d6 e2 53. d7 e1=Q 54. g7 Qe7+ 0-1

Very rare for me to have a game which is totally one-sided. Playing the white side of a Pirc with opposite side castling, I was able to attack on the kingside without any defensive worries. My opponent made no efforts to complicate play by initiating counter-play on the queenside or in the center. I could therefore just focus on my attack and despite one move which nearly threw away all my advantage, I was able to wrap up the game in short order.

1. e4 g6 2. d4 Bg7 3. Nc3 d6 4. Be3 Nf6 5. f3 O-O 6. Qd2 e5 7. O-O-O exd4 8. Bxd4 Re8 9. g4 a6 10. g5 Nh5 11. Bxg7 Nxg7 12. Nge2 Nc6 13. Ng3 Be6 14. h4 Ne7 15. h5 Rf8 16. Qh2 f5 17. gxf6 Rxf6 18. hxg6 hxg6 19. e5 Rf8 20. Nce4 Nef5 21. f4 Kf7 22. Qh7?

At the time it seemed like a strong move. But after 22…Rh8, most of my advantage disappears. 22. Nxf5! was much stronger and the way to maintain the winning attack. But my opponent failed to take advantage of my error and it was smooth sailing from there.

22… Ne7? 23. Ng5+ Ke8 24. Qxg7 Bg4 25. Nh7 Rxf4 26. Nf6+ Rxf6 27. exf6 Kd7 28. fxe7 Qxe7 29. Qxe7+ 1-0

A visit to the Staunton Memorial

On Friday, I went down to the Howard Staunton Memorial tournament for a few hours. It was easily the strongest chess tournament I’ve been to. All in all, a mixed experience:

The good points:

• Entry was free!
• Being in the same room as 3 world championship challengers was  a first for me. Especially being in the same room as Korchnoi was a privilege.
• I moved a lot between the playing hall and the bar area outside where people outside could discuss and analyze the games being played.
• When David Howell blitzed out 28.Qh8+ against Sokolov, Nigel Short, who had been sitting on a couch, jumped up and said, “Wow. I need to go get myself a drink. I didn’t see that coming.” What a thrilling moment!
• Watching Korchnoi play against Timman was like going back in time. More than any other player in the hall, you could feel the energy emanating from him. It was incredible to see a 78 year old man focus on the board for more than 5 hours without for a moment resting his eyes. In fact, about 3-4 moves before Timman resigned, you could spot a gleam in Korchnoi’s eyes and his fingers started playing with a couple of the captured pieces. Even if you knew nothing about chess or you couldn’t view the board, you knew this wily warrior had victory in his grasp.

The bad points:

• The playing hall was very spectator unfriendly. The boards were positioned so that the spectators couldn’t get a good view of most boards. The salvaging fact was that the closest table to the spectators was the Timman – Korchnoi game.
• To add to that, the boards on the wall (meant for the spectators) were way too far and way too small. While I could see there was a white piece on e4, I couldn’t identify the piece.
• Out in the bar area, a laptop was used to project the games onto a screen. Unfortunately, only one game could be viewed at a time and one of the organizers would periodically cycle through the games. It surely can’t be that hard to have more games up simultaneously.
• It would have been really nice if they had someone to provide master commentary and analysis and channel some of our discussions.

Random observations:

• The two players who never even got up to view the other games in progress: Korchnoi and Adams.
• If I had any doubts before, I have none now. I am definitely going to the super-tournament in December for at least 2 or 3 days!

More chess!

I wonder if I will spend all my life in catch-up mode.

The following game is against a player rated more than 200 in the BCF – my guess is approximately 2200 FIDE! So no wonder then that I lost, but I thought I did reasonably well considering…

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 a6 6. Bg5 e6 7. f4 Be7 8. Qf3 Qc7 9. O-O-O Nbd7 10. Bd3 b5 11. Rhe1 h6?

Here I got my theory mixed up. 10…h6 would’ve been just fine. After 10…b5, 11…Bb7 was the right approach.

12. Bxf6 Bxf6 13. e5 Bb7 14. Be4 dxe5 15. Nxe6 fxe6 16. Bxb7 Rd8 17. fxe5 Nxe5 18. Rxd8+ Qxd8?

Interestingly enough, Fritz says that after 18…Kxd8 black is absolutely fine and the position is dead even. I keep looking at the position after Kxd8 – it just doesn’t feel right!

19. Qh5+ Kf8?

19…g6 and the position is still somewhat playable. My opponent was quite shocked that I played Kf8 with nary a thought; he was expecting g6. Well…I played Kf8 instantly because I thought the move was forced. And now I’m lost.

20. Rxe5 Bxe5 21. Qxe5 Qg5+ 22. Qxg5 hxg5 23. h3 b4 24. Ne4 g4 25. hxg4 Rh4 26. Nf2 a5 27. Kd2 Ke7 28. Kd3 Kd6 29. Kc4 Kc7 30. Bf3 Kb6 31. Kd4 Rh6 32. Ke5 Kc7 33. g5 Rh4 34. Kxe6 Rd4 35. Be4 Rd2 36. Nh3 a4 37. Nf4 b3 38. axb3 axb3 39. cxb3 Rxb2 40. Bd5 Rf2 41. g3 Rc2 42. Kf7 Rc3 43. Kxg7 Rxg3 44. Kf6 Kd8 45. g6 1-0

My next game, in contrast, was played against someone rated well below me. I was white:

1. e4 d5 2. exd5 Nf6 3. d4 Bg4 4. Be2 Bxe2 5. Qxe2 Qxd5 6. Nf3 e6 7. O-O c6 8. c4 Qd8 9. Nc3 Be7 10. Bf4 O-O 11. Rad1 Qa5?

In an opening unfamiliar to me (I have never previously faced 3…Bg4 in the Scandivanian, even in online blitz), my opponent was the first to deviate from theory with 6…e6 (my database had 4 games until my 6th move – all those games continued 6…Nc6). I just kept playing natural moves to gain a very comfortable position. Black’s last move allows me to open up the center with a pawn break in the center – his bishop is now unprotected.

12. d5 cxd5 13. cxd5 Qa6 14. Rfe1 Nh5 (Qxe2) 15. Bxb8 Raxb8 (Qxe2) 16. dxe6 Qxe6??

He should have traded queens on each of the last two moves, but here it was absolutely crucial. He could have survived a lot longer with fxe6 as well, but the actual move in the game allows for a quick finish!

17. Qb5 Qf6 18. Nd5 1-0

Carrying right on to my next game, a very tactical one and lots of fun to analyse:

1. e4 d6 2. d4 Nf6 3. Nc3 g6 4. Be3 c6 5. f3 b5 6. g4 Nbd7 7. Qd2 Nb6 8. Bh6 Bxh6 9. Qxh6 Nc4 10. O-O-O Qa5 11. Bxc4 bxc4 12. Nge2 Rb8

I love playing against the Pirc – not that its not a sound opening. I tend to play exactly as I would against the Dragon – with f3, g4, etc. Typically this leads to opposite-side castling and a pawn race to pry open the opponent’s defences. The plans are simple, but one has to keep his eyes open for all sorts of tactical possibilities. With his last move, my opponent gave up his change to castle queenside. With my queen preventing castling on the kingside I felt it was time to open up the center and take aim at his king.

13. e5 dxe5 14. dxe5 Qxe5?!

I really didn’t think he would go through with this move. In his position, I would have tried to leave the e-file closed, move my knight away (maybe to d5), and bring the queen to the b-file to press home my attack. Now I have more than ample compensation for my sacrificed pawn.

15. Rhe1 Nd5 16. Nd4 Qf6 17. Ne4?

From here onwards, I miss wonderful tactical possibilities on every move! Unbelievable really – I was so sure when I played my thirteenth move that I would have these opportunities. Yet, move after move left me dismayed that I wasn’t finding them, despite trying ever so hard. Here 17. Nxc6 Qxc6 18. Nxd5 is devastating.

17… Qe5 18. c3?

Here, the immediate Nxc6 fails because of the weakness on b2 (hence c3, blocking the diagonal). But after 18. f4, the queen is forced off the diagonal and now: 18… Qc7 19. Nxc6 Qxc6 20. Rxd5! and winning. 20… Qxd5 is not possible because of 21. Nf6+!

18… Qc7 19. Qg7?!

Again, the tactic mentioned in the note to my 18th move works. 19. Nxc6 Qxc6 20. Rxd5!

19… Rf8 20. Nf6+?

Again: 20. Nxc6 Qxc6 21. Rxd5!

1-0

My opponent resigned prematurely at this point. I was quite worried about 20… Nxf6 21. Qxf6 Rb6 when I was unsure how I could maintain my advantage. The computer suggests 22. a4!! which is very powerful. It still leaves a fair bit to be done but the initiative is definitely with white. I doubt I would have seen this over the board but its incredible to me that despite my making sub-par efforts on my last 4 moves, I was still winning the game. Very satisfactory, especially because my opponent and I are rated very similarly.

OK, so I will throw in one more game into this post. Again, I am white, playing against someone just getting back to serious chess. Another good effort on my part:

1. e4 e6 2. d4 c5 3. d5 exd5 4. exd5 d6 5. c4 g6 6. Nc3 Bg7 7. Nf3 Bg4 8. h3 Bxf3 9. Qxf3 Nd7 10. Be2 a6 11. O-O f5 12. Bf4 Ne5 13. Qe3 Qe7 14. Rfe1 Nf6

Until this point, I have made very natural moves in a slightly unfamiliar opening. My opponent has made a few unforced moves which have put him under a little bit of pressure. He took an inordinate amount of time (35-40 mins!) to make his last move, one that is actually quite natural.  Speaking to him after the game, he felt like his pieces had been in good position – his bishop on g7, his knight on e5 etc. But all of a sudden he felt that though they occupied good squares, his position was very static and he was struggling to come up with a plan!

15. Bf1 Kd7?!

I was almost sure he was going to castle here. Admittedly, he would have been down a pawn after all the trades on e5 (he avoids it with this king move because he can win the exchange with an eventual Ne4). Now, with his king stuck in the center and his forces mainly on the kingside, I switch my attentions to opening up the queenside.

16. b4! b6

16… cxb4 17. Na4 is strong for white. Not only is Nb6+ a threat, forking the rook, but it also opens up the diagonal for the queen to invade on the queenside.

17. Rab1

There is no rush for me to trade pawns just yet. I can build up my forces on the b-file and open it up when it best suits me!

17…Rab8 18. Rb3 Rhe8 19. Reb1 Kc7 20. Na4 Nfd7 21. Qd2! b5 22. bxc5!

With my opponent’s mishandling of the clock to this point, he was down to less than 10 minutes to make the time control at move 35. The sacrifice is sound and I’m winning if he accepts it. But since he had not considered it earlier, he has to take even more time out to calculate variations before declining it.

22…Nxc5 23. Nxc5 dxc5 24. Qa5+ Kd7 25. Qxa6 b4 26. a3 Rec8 27. axb4 cxb4 28. Qa4+ Kd8 29. Rxb4 Rxb4 30. Rxb4 Nd7??

With barely seconds left on his clock, he picked up his knight to play Nd3. After picking it up he realised that it would just fall to the bishop and moved it to d7 instead. I didn’t need another invitation to push my rook to the seventh rank!

31. Rb7 Bd4? 32. Bg5! Bxf2+ 33. Kxf2 1-0

More catching up…

My next two games then. The first, with white, played on April 30th, was against the same person I had this unfinished game with, and it was a repeat of the Pirc we saw in that one:

1. e4 d6 2. d4 g6 3. Nc3 Bg7 4. Be3 Nf6 5. f3 O-O 6. Qd2 c6 7. O-O-O Nbd7 8. g4 e5 9. h4 h5 10. gxh5 Nxh5 11. Nce2 Qc7 12. Bh6 b5 13. Bxg7 Kxg7 14. Nh3 Ndf6 15. Rg1 Be6 16. Kb1 Rh8 17. Bg2 Rad8 18. f4 Bxh3 19. Bxh3 exf4 20. Nxf4 Nxe4 21. Rxg6+?! fxg6 22. Ne6+ Kh7 23. Qe3 Qe7 24. Qxe4 Rde8 25. Rg1 Rhg8 26. b3 Qf6 27. Rf1 Ng3 28. Rxf6 Nxe4 29. Rf7+ Kh6 30. Kb2 Rh8 31. Rxa7 Nf2 32. Ng5 Nxh3 33. Nxh3 Kh5 34. Nf4+ Kh6 35. Rc7 Rc8 36. Rd7 d5 37. Rd6 Rhg8 38. h5 Kg5 39. Nxg6 Kxh5 40. Ne7 Rcd8 41. Rxc6 Rge8 42. Ng6 Re4 43. Kc3 Ra8 44. Kd3 Rg8 45. Rd6 Re1 46. Nf4+ Kh4 47. Nxd5 Rd1+ 48. Kc3 Rg3+ 49. Kb4 Rxd4+ 50. Kxb5 Rg5 51. Kc6 Rg2 52. Ne3 Rxd6+ 53. Kxd6 Re2 54. Nf5+ Kg5 55. Nd4 Rd2 56. Kc5 Kf4 57. a4 Ke4 58. c3 1/2-1/2

I was very very low on time by this point and stopped recording moves. The time trouble was mainly caused while taking the decision to play my 21st move – it isn’t easy for me to play such sacrifices without concrete compensation. The computer says I have a 3.5 pawn advantage here. Of course in trying to deliver mate before time ran out, I allowed my opponent to first win my c-pawn, then give up his rook for my other two pawns and thus force a draw!

So, on to the next game, played on May 7th, with black:

1. e4 c5 2. Bc4 e6 3. a3 d5 4. exd5 exd5 5. Ba2 Nf6 6. d3 Be7 7. Ne2 O-O 8. O-O Nc6 9. c3 Bf5 10. Nf4 d4 11. h3 Qd7 12. c4 Bd6 13. Bb3 Rfe8 14. Ba4 Re5 15. Qf3 Qc7 16. Ne2 Bg6 17. Bf4 Rf5 18. Bxc6??

I was already much better coming out of the opening but this blunder puts me firmly ahead.

Bxf4 19. Nxf4 Rxf4 20. Qg3 bxc6 21. Nd2 Nh5 22. Qh2 Qe5 23. Rfe1 Qg5 24. g3 Bxd3 25. Qg2 Rf6 26. Nf3 Qf5 27. Ne5 Rg6?!

After a few very average moves, I have to give up the exchange to retain the advantage.

28. Nxg6 Qxg6 29. Re5 Bxc4 30. Rae1 h6 31. Rxc5 Bd5 32. Qf1 Nf6?

Missed the brilliant shot 32…Nxg3!!

33. Rd1 Ne4 34. Qd3? Nxc5 35. Qxd4 Qh5 0-1