Arizona, receiving draw odds in the match (they only needed a 2-2 tie to advance to the semi-finals) played a very strong Seattle team on Monday.

Here is Leo Martinez’s pre-match preview in blue – then I provide the game score and some post-game in red.

Board 1

Altounian – Akobian is an interesting matchup of two Armenians that immigrated to the US and are now both working at chess full time in their lives. GM Akobian needs no introduction as he just helped assist in the Olympiad for the US and is amongst the best players in the country year after year. He figures to be up at the top of US players for many years to come as he is fairly young still. IM Levon Altounian is perhaps not as high rated and as strong but he has great amount of experience on his side. He is also having a good season with a GM scalp against GM Amanov during week 8 to help Arizona beat the now #2 seed Chicago Blaze. He is also especially strong with White so this should make for an interesting matchup.

What actually happened?

Altounian – Akobian

1.e4 c5 2.c3

Not a guaranteed draw!  But a decent way to sidestep most of the grandmaster preparation.  Actually 1…c5 is already a surprise from Akobian.  He handles the opening phase in this game very well.

2…Nf6! 2. c3 expert GM Sergey Tiviakov considers 2…d5?  a grave mistake, and Akobian agrees!

3.e5 Nd5 4.Nf3 Nc6 5.d4 cxd4 6.cxd4 d6 7.Bc4 e6 8.0-0 Be7 9.exd6 Qxd6 10.Nc3 0-0 11.Re1 Rd8 12.Bb3 a6 13.Nxd5 exd5 14.Ne5 Nxe5 15.dxe5 Qb6 16.Qd3 Be6 17.Qg3 d4 18.Bh6 Bf8 19.Bg5 Rd7 20.Rad1 Bxb3 21.axb3 Re8 22.Rd3 f6 23.Bd2 Rde7 24.f4 fxe5 25.fxe5 Re6 26.h3 Qc5 27.Bf4 Qd5 28.Rf3 Bd6 29.Qg4 Bxe5 30.Bxe5 Rxe5 31.Rxe5 Qxe5 32.Qd7 Qe1+ 33.Kh2 Qe5+ 34.Kg1 Qe1+ 35.Kh2 Qe5+ 36.Kg1 Game drawn by repetition 1/2-1/2

My comments: a huge blow to Seattle’s chances.  Altounian neutralized Akobian (black looked like he had a very pleasant game the whole time with excellent control of the center and an annoying pawn on d4 (after 17…d4).   In fact, black was looking really good after the transformation 14. Ne5 Nxe5 15. dxe5 Qb6 already. The much higher rated Grandmaster certainly did not want to see a dead-drawn Q & R position (as actually occurred after move 32).  It turns out black must give a pawn back with absolutely no winning chances in the final position.

Board 2

Cozianu – Barcenilla is another interesting matchup of two players that have played mostly on board 1 for their teams this season. Both players are also fairly sharp and have had up and down seasons with good wins and not so good losses.  Cozianu has impressive wins against GM Benjamin and IM Martinez but has equally unimpressive losses this season against IM Bercys and especially against IM Pruess. However, Rogelio has had an up and down season as well beating FM Mikhailuk, GM Khachiyan, and drawing top 15 player in the world GM Nakamura while losing to Becerra, Gurevich, and Kraai. This should be the game to watch for the match as the winner could easily decide the team that wins the match.

What actually happened?

Cozianu – Barcenilla

1.d4 Nf6 2.Nf3 g6 3.c4 Bg7 4.g3 d6 5.Bg2 0-0 6.0-0 Nc6 7.d5 Na5 8.Nfd2 c5 9.Nc3 a6 10.Rb1 Bd7 11.Qc2 Qc7 12.b3 b5 13.Bb2 Rab8 14.Nd1 bxc4 15.bxc4 Rb4 16.Bc3 Rxb1 17.Qxb1 Ng4 18.Qa1 Bxc3 19.Qxc3 Rb8 20.h3 Nf6 21.Ne3 Rb4 22.a3 Rb8 23.g4 h6 24.f4 Nh7 25.Be4 Ba4 26.Bc2 Bxc2 27.Qxc2 Rb7 28.Rb1 Rxb1+ 29.Qxb1 Qb7 30.Qc2 Qb6 31.Kf2 Nb7 32.Ne4 Na5 33.Nd2 Nb7 34.Ke1 Nf8 35.Kd1 Na5 36.Qc3 Nd7 37.Kc2 Nb7 38.Nd1 Qa5 39.Qb3 Nd8 40.h4 Nb6 41.Nc3 Kh7 42.Kb2 Kg8 43.Ka2 Nd7 44.g5 h5 45.Qc2 Nf8 46.Nf3 Nd7 47.Nd1 Nb6 48.Nb2 Nd7 49.e4 Nf8 50.Qd3 Qc7 51.f5 Kh7 52.Nd1 Nd7 53.Qc3 Nb7 54.Nf2 Qa5 55.Qb3 Nd8 56.Nd3 Kg8 57.Qc2 Nf8 58.Nf4 Kg7 59.fxg6 fxg6 60.Qb2+ Kg8 61.e5 dxe5 62.Nxe5 Nf7 63.Nexg6 Nxg6 64.Nxg6 Qe1 65.Qb8+ Kg7 66.Qf8+ Kxg6 67.Qg8+ Kf5 68.Qxf7+ Kg4 69.Qe6+ Qxe6 70.dxe6 Kf5 71.Kb3 Kxe6 72.Kc3 Kf5 73.Kd3 a5 74.a4 e6 75.Ke3 Ke5 76.g6 Kf6 77.Kf4 Kxg6 78.Ke5 Kf7 79.Kd6 Kf6 80.Kxc5 Ke7 81.Kc6 Kf6 82.c5 Black resigns 1-0

My comments:  this must have been a really aggravating loss for Rogelio.  White had a space advantage and the typical “offside black knight on a5″ yet just started shuffling (playing on time or was he himself in time trouble?).   Black was completely OK after move 31. Everytime this “bad” knight went back to b7 it seemed like a bad choice for black even though white was just king wandering.  Then it went back to d8 and that was even worse!   Finally, black’s unfortunate knight maneuvers just resulted in a weakened king position (I imagine both sides might have been on increment in this marathon) and white cashed in during the wee hours.

Board 3

Adamson – Mikhailuk is another game to watch and challenges a strong board 3 player all season against a player (Mikhailuk) who normally plays on board 2 for Seattle. Robby has been very strong for the Scorpions having a solid +2 season at 3.5/5. He has not lost a game all season and beat FM’s Kiewra and Naroditsky to lead Arizona to wins in both matches by a 2.5-1.5 score. However, Mikhailuk is a dangerous opponent that is usually well prepared in the opening and is not afraid to mix it up with evidence from his recent victory against IM David Pruess.

What actually happened?  Just one of the most, if not THE most,  titantic battle ever witnessed in the USCL!

Adamson-Mihaliuk

1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.d4 cxd4 5.Qxd4 Nc6 6.Bb5 Bd7 7.Bxc6 Bxc6 8.Bg5 Qa5 9.0-0-0 e6 10.Rhe1 Be7 11.Kb1 0-0-0 12.Qd2 Kb8 13.Nd4 Bd7 14.Bf4 Qb6 15.Nb3 Bc6 16.Be3 Qa6 17.f3 d5 18.e5 Nd7 19.Bg5 Rhe8 20.Bxe7 Rxe7 21.Nd4 h6 22.Qf4 Nb6 23.Qg3 g5 24.h4 Nc4 25.hxg5 Rg8 26.f4 Rc7 27.Nce2 hxg5 28.f5 Qb6 29.b3 exf5 30.Nxf5 Bd7 31.Nfd4 Be6 32.Ka1 Na3 33.Qd3 Rgc8 34.Rc1 Bg4 35.c3 Bh5 36.Qd2 Qg6 37.Ng3 Bg4 38.Kb2 Qa6 39.Qxg5 Be6 40.Qd2 Nb5 41.Nxb5 Qxb5 42.Ne2 a5 43.Nd4 Qb6 44.Qe3 Rg8 45.Rc2 Qa6 46.Qe2 Qb6 47.Qb5 Qa7 48.Rf1 Rc5 49.Qd3 a4 50.b4 a3+ 51.Kc1 Rc4 52.Rf6 Qa6 53.Qf3 Rgc8 54.Qe3 Qa4 55.Kd2 Qe8 56.Rf2 Qh8 57.Nb5 d4 58.Nxd4 Qh1 59.Rc1 Qh7 60.Qd3 Qh6+ 61.Kd1 Bg4+ 62.Nf3 Ka8 63.Rcc2 Qb6 64.Ke1 Bh5 65.Qd2 Re4+ 66.Kf1 Rd8 67.Nd4 Rxe5 68.Qf4 Rde8 69.Rc1 Bg6 70.Kg1 Rh5 71.Rff1 Reh8 72.Rfe1 Rh4 73.Qe5 R4h5 74.Qf4 Rh1+ 75.Kf2 R1h4 76.Qe5 R4h5 77.Qe3 Qf6+ 78.Nf3 Rd8 79.Kg1 Qh8 80.Kf2 Rhd5 81.c4 Rd3 82.Qe5 f6 83.Qa5+ Kb8 84.Re3 Rxe3 85.Kxe3 Bh5 86.Qxa3 Qh6+ 87.Kf2 Bxf3 88.Kxf3 Qd2 89.Rc3 Rg8 90.g3 Qe1 91.Re3 Rxg3+ 92.Kf4 Rxe3 93.Qxe3 Qxb4 94.Qd4 Qe7 95.Kf5 Qh7+ 96.Ke6 Qg8+ 97.Kf5 Qh7+ 98.Ke6 Qg8+ 99.Kf5 Qc8+ 100.Kg6 Qe8+ 101.Kf5 Kc7 102.Qxf6 Qh5+ 103.Ke4 Qe2+ 104.Kd5 Qd2+ 105.Qd4 Qxa2 106.Qc5+ Kb8 107.Qd6+ Ka8 108.Qf8+ Ka7 109.Qc5+ Game drawn by mutual agreement 1/2-1/2

My comments:   what an incredible game!. Slava Mihaliuk battled long and hard for his team (he was in a must-win during this arduous wee-hours game) and found chances when it appeared none existed, time and time again.  Adamson stood solidly better in the opening.  His 14. Bf4 was not a move that would occur to me, but it worked out (both sides lost time and it moved again). In the early middle game, he “did all the right things” trading off dark squared bishops after getting the e5 pawn wedge.  This edge persisted, Mihaliuk kept confusing the issue, pressing on both wings, and white never had a clear win nor did he have a clear path to simplify and get out of complications.  What stress on both players’ nerves!  Finally after what seemed like the 20th transformation of position white *finally* simplified and black had to abandon winning tries giving Arizona the desired drawn match.  Wow!

Board 4

Wang – Thompson is a rematch of board 4 for Week 2 where both teams played each other with the same players. Wang had White in that game as well so it should be interesting to look at the opening in this game and see what improvements or ideas both players have compared to the former game. No doubt everyone will be prepping for such an important match and this game is almost certainly no exception. NM Thompson got the better of Wang in that game and Arizona needs to hope he can repeat the performance in order to advance to the Semifinals.

What actually happened?

Wang-Thompson

1.c4 e5 2.g3 Nf6 3.Bg2 d5 4.cxd5 Nxd5 5.Nf3 Nc6 6.0-0 Be7 7.d4 e4 8.Ne5 f5 9.Nxc6 bxc6 10.Nc3 0-0 11.f3 exf3 12.Bxf3 Be6 13.Nxd5 cxd5 14.Be3 Bd6 15.Qc1 Rb8 16.a3 Rb3 17.Bd2 Qf6 18.e3 Rfb8 19.Bc3 Qg6 20.Rf2 h5 21.Rg2 Qh7 22.Bd1 R3b7 23.b4 h4 24.Be1 h3 25.Rc2 Qh6 26.Bf3 Qf6 27.Qd2 a5 28.bxa5 c5 29.Rd1 c4 30.Ra2 Qd8 31.a6 Ra7 32.Qc2 Rxa6 33.Rda1 Rb3 34.Bd2 Rbxa3 35.Rxa3 Rxa3 36.Rxa3 Bxa3 37.Qa4 Bf8 38.Qc6 Qd6 39.Qxd6 Bxd6 40.Bd1 Kf7 41.Kf2 Ke7 42.Be2 g5 43.e4 fxe4 44.Bxg5+ Kd7 45.Bd2 Kc6 46.Ke3 Bxg3 47.Bb4 Bxh2 48.Kf2 Bf4 49.Kg1 Be3+ 50.Kh2 Bxd4 51.Kg3 Be5+ 52.Kf2 h2 53.Kg2 d4 54.Kh1 d3 55.Bd1 Bd5 White resigns 0-1

My comments:
Isn’t it funny how matches always seem to go the way of the 4th board?  In this game, white played 7. d4 which should be equal but followed it up very timidly.  Seattle only needed a draw (as it turned out) here, but in chess we all know that playing for a draw as white often leads to a worse result.  (strong Grandmaster Mikhail Gurevich once needed a draw playing white to advance to the Candidates in a last round Interzonal game against Nigel Short; opted for 1. e4 e6 2. d4 d5 3. exd5, and lost horribly).

After 16. a3 Rb3, it was clear black was very happy.  White held off the first wave and black locked it up with 24…h3 then went to the other wing with 27…a5 and 28…c5 to keep pressure on.  Then the rook arrived on b3 yet again (33…Rb3) and things started to drop off for white.  It never seemed like white’s bishops were working properly compared to their counterparts.  Black reached a winning endgame and white’s transformation engineered by 43. e4 didn’t change matters.

White then blundered with 46. Ke3 allowing 46…Bxg3! but it didn’t matter by that point.  Good game by our board 4 that set the stage for the titanic struggle on board 3!  Also credit our board 1 for neutralizing a strong Grandmaster!

So, in Week 10 we face an expansion team, the Los Angeles Vibe.  Arizona has already clinched the top playoff spot in the West (we will have draw odds in the playoffs; see the bottom of this article for more playoff rules information) while LA is out of contention. The first thing I noticed about the LA expansion team when consulting their website is that they have a goofy sunglasses logo. (Having said that, I am not a huge fun of the super-sized Arizona scorpion logo.  I would prefer maybe a scorpion in a slipper – much more ominous!). Maybe they want to re-think that to do better next season (many USCL pundits believe goofy logos, such as the misdrawn Seattle Punching Giggly Merry Go Round Horse, bestow a bit of a hex on otherwise good teams).  Some ideas for a new LA logo:   I.  Grolman’s Chinese Theater with a Photoshopped gigantic pawn sticking out of it.  2.  A traffic jam on the 101 with a Photoshopped Rook driving a gigantic tank through it.  3.  The letters “NY” with a circle and a diagonal line through it, as in No Parking signs.  4.  Some movie star’s home with a Photoshopped Queen jammed through the security gate.   Basically, anything that is far removed from the following image:

Here’s the tale of the tape.  LA has white on boards 1 and 3.

So, let’s break it down.

Board 1.

Altounian will have no problems against Kretchetov who is not a danger man.  However, can he win?  Or will it just be a draw?  Arizona’s expectation:  0.6.

Board 2.

Look to Warren to confuzzle Tatev, much as Danny did earlier in the season.  However it’s not so easy to win a chess game.  Again our expectation is 0.6.

Board 3. 

Casella is a bit more of a danger man than Kretchetov, so Robby has to stay alert.  Our expectation: 0.52.

Board 4.

The more experienced Yanayt has the edge here, so Arizona’s expectation is 0.42.

And When We Add It Up

In Other Playoff News

In the Championship Match neither team receives draw odds while the team with the better regular season record (using the same tiebreaks that were used to determine playoff seeding if necessary) gets color choice.”

  While the main goal for all these teams is clear, with only the top spot in the West being decided, the playoff seeding for the other spots is also anything but clear as margin of victory could also  potentially be quite important in determing the complete Western playoff picture. ”

Now that we are well into the season with X games already contested, here we are in week Y and what a thrilling week it promises to be.  Arizona is already comfortably in the playoffs but must contend with a super-strong stacked mercenary lineup (a constant irritant in chess competitions, do people remember the US Amateur Team GGGg debacle?).  Humorously, St. Louis often fields a pedestrian lineup and only when the planets align (i.e. the superstars are not traveling) does  their lineup become more than respectable…it’s kind of like the movie ‘Dodgeball’ where the good guys have to play the GloboGym hired goons. What chance does Arizona have?  Well, if you know how to dodge a wrench, you can dodge a ball.

Here’s the lineup; the proverbial tale of the tape:

Arizona Scorpions  vs St. Louis We’ve Fallen Between NY and LA and We Can’t Get Up

Arizona captains the white forces on boards 1 and 3.

What will occur, what will occur?  They’re paying me by the word, I ask again… what will occur? And why is a deranged chimp attacking Kansas City? (I only ask because it’s in Missouri too).

Board 1

A little history:  Barcenilla has had white before vs. Nakamura in USCL action.  And it did not go well.  Rogelio was unrecognizable, crawling into a passive shell and absolutely suffocating. It was eerily similar to my own disgusting performance vs Lenderman.  He must come out this time as the active, effervescent, opportunistic Rogelio we all know and love.  And besides, doesn’t America the sports nation love a good upset?  A draw qualifies as one.

Board 2

I am supposing that Yuri Shulman is one of those mercenaries (such as Akobian in … Seattle???) that we’ve all read about and disdain so much.  I guess you could say he’s a member of a mercentary “posse”.  In the movie ’3:10 to Yuma’,  Ben Foster says “I don’t like possies.”   I think the average USCL fan will concur.  If Yuri is indeed a bribe-accepting posse member, I hope he is getting a lot of money for the dismal drive from Chicago to St. Louis.  Or do they send him on a short flight?  If the weather is bad for the flight, he might arrive all nauseated and this could work for Arizona.  Or he might have to find alternate transportation. In Arizona’s favor:  we have a nutty wild guy Aldama playing black and it’s no holds barred with this guy, he’ll just play any move at all, close his eyes, and see if it works.  The bad news:  Grandmasters are usually able to calculate to detect flaws in that sort of play.  Ut oh.

Board 3

As I write this, Ben Finegold is hard at work memorizing lines where all the pieces come off and he can offer a draw early and then stroll around gawking and/or mocking at other boards or trash talking in ICC kibitzes.  Hopefully Danny Rensch can steer clear of the scary fearsome forced draws from the Finegold Endless Factory of Deadened Chess and make something happen as white.

Board 4

As I write this, Levon Altounian or another strong player of his ilk (I am pleased to be able to use “ilk” in this article) is hatching some brainiac opening scheme with cunning transpositions and hidden positional traps for Amanda to use with hopefully good effect. The scheme will go for naught when she forgets all the prep 10 minutes before the game, but  Amanda when feeling good in the opening phase builds up a head of steam and can hopefully do some damage against Spencer.  I don’t know Spencer’s chess, but his beard should get him into a good philosophy doctoral program.

And In Conclusion

Sure it’s true that Eva Longoria Parker has bought a third home in Switzerland. But we have to get back to the matter at hand. Arizona is a lock for the playoffs no matter what, so they’ll use this match as a spot of training for the Big Stage.  If they knock off St. Louis’s hodgepodge of pros, benefactors, acolytes, stoolies,  travelers, kids, con-men, grifters, and 3-card monte specialists then so much the better but I wouldn’t put money on it.  The safe predictions:  tasty snacks are brought to the Mesa playing site,  Ben Finegold finds time to ICC kibitz, Nakamura blitzes out the whole game, so does Aldama, and Danny burns a lot of time to try to keep any kind of chess game alive.    If Arizona doesn’t lose the match versus the St. Louis cat horders that would qualify as a huge upset.

If it’s not going well, spectators who are eating the food meant for the players please heed this warning: “Twice as many people die from a silent heart attack as compared to those that experienced a myocardial infarction with chess pain“.

Addendum: Simple Rules Change

One easy fix to the unpleasant GGGg dilemma affecting the USCL (to avoid the “Yankees” scenario where a team buys 3 2900′s and plays a 1400 on board 4)  is simply to require the third board to be within 300 points of the fourth board.

As per usual, let us study the bare bones situation first.

Now, what will occur?  Before going into details, I want to reveal two episodes that occurred to me when I was living on Pierce St. in Japantown (San Francisco) in 1999.

The first thing that happened is that my German girlfriend convinced me to learn how to ride a motorcycle, because apparently all Germans know how to do it and it’s second nature.  OK I went to Napa to learn. En route to the training course, I undertook a wobbly right turn.  A guy in a pickup truck yelled “Learn how to drive that thing!”  I screamed back over my shoulder, “Yes that’s where I am going!” but he was long gone. Rather ambitiously after the Napa training course I decided to traverse from Oakland to San Francisco on the Bay Bridge.  Well, there’s a toll booth.  Nobody in the course mentioned that tool booth stops are oil-slicked!  I couldn’t get a footing with my boots on the huge oil puddle!  After that scare I made it into San Francisco and got onto Market Street.  Nobody in the safety course mentioned that once a motorcycle gets into trolley car tracks (parallel thick tracks) it cannot get out!  So I am trapped in a “rail jail” and yes, about 150 yards opposite, there is a trolley car coming at me!  I come to a dead halt and after a brief freak out simply lifted the thing (a Honda Nighthawk 750) over the trolley tracks to freedom and home in Japantown.  Good times.

Astute readers will notice the above anecdotes are not material to the matter at hand. Back to the match.

On board one we have for SF a well-prepared guy Jesse Kraai with white.  In true Ben Finegold style, he has memorized a lot of “almost sterile equality but not quite” lines as white versus King’s Indians.  Barcenilla had better be on his most alert behavior to avoid some kind of Kraai sideline pitfall.   For example, a normally good player Bruci Lopez lost miserably to Kraai in a King’s Indian without a fight in a trappy “nothing” line from prior USCL action.  The good news is if the Finegoldian line fizzles out, Rogelio is quite positionally competent and has decent chances from any kind of middlegame start point that is not devoid of counterplay (see a prior season for Bercys-Barcenilla where he did, in fact, wind up with no counterplay in a KID/Benoni structure and lost horribly).   Based on the time-honored principle that good players learn, I give our expectation:  0.45.

On board 2 we have David Pruess for SF playing black.  He is much weaker as black, and Danny Rensch is much stronger as white.  There is no way Danny goes into passive mode as he did last week vs LK.  Those are two good things for Arizona, especially since aggressive chess pays off at the USCL time control.  Our expectation: 0.55.

On board 3, SF is playing Kid Genius Naroditsky and our IM-elect Robby Adamson has to be on his most circumspect game and avoid very bad time trouble (is that possible?)  Sometimes Naro plays quickly and superficially (over-confidently?) and if Robby is not in gigantic time trouble, he need not lose the thread. Our expectation: 0.45.

On board 4, SF has Yian Liou as black against our David Adelberg.    I am not sure, but Liou might be one of the gaggle of Bay Area kids that plays crappy Leningrad Dutches.  I dispatched one Bay Area kid in short order in Las Vegas not too long ago with an SOS Special of 1. d4 f5 2. Qd3! and after the kid’s rather lame response of 2…d6, after 3. g4 fxg4 4. h3 white has more than average compensation on the light squares (point being the usual declining move 4…g3 doesn’t work due to 5. Qxg3).  I won a miniature (as did the guy in Bundesliga “B” in the featured SOS article).  I’m not near a Megabase, but maybe a reader can find these games.

Our guy David Adelberg is pretty good with white if he can avoid the 4th hour “getting tired” lapses with a nutritious snack.  So our expectation is 0.52 right out of the gate and it goes up to 0.60 if a Leningrad Dutch appears on the board, because Adelberg is positionally competent.

We can’t assume that juicy treat, though, so let’s leave it at 0.52.

Our sum:  0.45 0.55 0.45 0.52 — we come in at 1.97, almost a dead heat (kudos to alert reader David Pruess; I originally had this sum at 2.07).

Multimedia Exposition

For readers who would prefer to follow along in pictures,

we are hoping that we are ’61 French Red (slightly better than ’66 French Red).

Photos of each:

Them

Us

Lucky Owl Day

Or, if you are superstitious, imagine Arizona has a Lucky Owl.

And we need that Lucky Owl to guide Barcenilla through the labyrinth of the opening.

If you are a schematic thinker, you would probably prefer to think of the match as a cow on fire.

We should want to be juicy portion 2 whereas San Francisco is the far less detectable rump portion.

The Mechanics are cut-rate rump roast

But when all is said and done, who really knows what will happen?

The glowing blue ball knows.

Landru Guide Us

And In Conclusion

Wash your hands thoroughly.

Players and Spectators Alike, Heed this Warning

The Bare Bones

Here’s the tale of the tape from the US Chess League web site in this inter-divisional Week 6 matchup:

Arizona Scorpions (4.0 – 1.0) vs Baltimore Kingfishers (2.5 – 2.5)

All Time Series Record:  (Baltimore leads 1 – 0)

Starts at 9:00 PM ET       Time Control – Game in 60 with 30 second increment

What will occur?

To answer, we need to channel Lev Alburt.  For the uninitiated, Alburt loves to predict things in a high pitched voice using absurdly precise percentages.  For example, if a player is struggling to hold a bad ending with reduced material, he will squeak “42% shons to draw.”  (“shons” being how you should pronounce “chance”).  You may have been treated to some of his scientific graphs in old Chess Life articles where these percentages floated about during a chaotic example game.   Or, maybe not.  On to the matchups at hand:

Barcenilla-Erenburg

Rogelio Barcenilla has built-confidence with the White pieces.  He has such fearsome systems as 1. e4 c5 2. c4! (don’t laugh, he wins with this).  The only time I saw him crawl into a shell as White was vs GM Nakamura in ARZ-SEA USCL action where he went very passive very early and got comprehensively suffocated; I don’t look for a repeat of that since good players tend to learn.   Sergey Erenburg is a formidable opponent, a dapper, suave, debonaire fellow who has good European chess training.   Erenburg tends to play quickly and confidently in the opening phase and it’s possible that Rogelio can achieve a formation that is in his comfort zone.     Arizona’s expectation in the game?   Channeling Alburt, “0.45″.  In other words, our game expectation is 0.45.

L. Kaufman – Rensch

Danny Rensch has been playing well this season.  He had a nice win as black in the ARZ-MIA match playing positionally after a risky opening choice.   However he must be careful.  Larry Kaufman is computer-prepped and some of Danny’s wilder openings won’t stand up to Larry’s solid scrutiny.  I am feeling good about the “new Danny” and think he’s up to the task.  Larry had a debacle vs. Charbonneau in recent BAL-NY USCL action but note Larry was black.  As white it’s a different story.   Our expectation: 0.49.  Look to the clocks here.  If Danny can get a time edge going into the early middlegame, bump this up to 0.50.

Harper – R. Kaufman

I am feeling very good about Arizona here.  Warren Harper is a Caissic genius who went from beginner to master in no time at all.  He won a bunch of games in the US Junior.  Of course, the losses are simply the “dark side of genius” – genius must balance the light and the dark.  Ray Kaufman is vulnerable in USCL time controls as well as trickable and confusable – just new ways of saying vulnerable.  I like Kid Genius here.  All Kid Genius needs to do is avoid over-thinking the situation and confusing himself as he did in an earlier ARZ-DAL match.  Our expectation: 0.71.

Zimmer – D. Adelberg

Ralph Zimmer is an experienced international competitor having been tested in the German Bundesliga.  Adelberg is a strong fourth board junior for us.  He has scored very well for Arizona.  In the past, Zimmer has upset GM Joel Benjamin so I know he’s dangerous.  Nevertheless, I think Adelberg is up to the task if he keeps up his blood sugar with a tasty snack such as a banana plus peanut butter.  I have noticed him lapsing after a few hours of good play before in USCL action and I am going to blame low blood sugar.   Our expectation:  0.50.

The Conclusion and the Lev Alburt Challenge

Time to sum up.  We add up the expectations and…. have 0.45 + 0.49 + 0.71 + 0.50; a total of 2.15 out of 4!  Not bad at all!  If you want to talk about Alburtian percentages, we have “54 percent shons” (you must say this in a high squeak).

Now, readers, it’s time for the Lev Alburt Challenge.  I ask you a question and you guess how Lev Alburt actually responded.

The question is, “What does cognac taste like?”  What did Alburt say?   Make a comment and choose among the following options.  The first winner wins a cognac at the next team victory celebration.

A.  Cognac tastes like tundra

B. Cognac tastes like cognac

C. Cognac tastes like <mumbled Russian phrase>

D. Cognac tastes like victory

E. Cognac tastes like checkmate

Multimedia Addendum

Some audio-visual tidbits to help you get through this tense upcoming encounter.

Nils Grandelius

Swedish crazyman Nils Grandelius has openings that are more nuts than Danny’s.

Antonaeta Stefanova

It is unlikely that former Women’s WC Stefanova is aware of the upcoming ARZ-BAL match; perhaps this photograph will change all that.

Ilya Nyzhnyk

The fates of  Ukrainian wonderboy Ilya Nyzhnyk and our juniors Adelberg and Harper are probably not intertwined.

An Award-Winning Photograph taken in Paris

The Dublin House on W 79 St in Manhattan

The Dublin House would be an excellent place to unwind after the match but it’s not convenient for either team.

In Conclusion

The two teams will have at it on Wednesday like a couple of fightin’ giraffes. All the Arizona fans hope we wind up being the hippo while the other side takes the role of the crocodile.

It’s going to be a real nailbiter!

Opening of the Week – Week 5

Pascal Charbonneau (NY) – Larry Kaufman (BAL) USCL Round 5  Caro Kann Advance - b2 Pawn Grab Variation

Week 5′s pick sees a topical Caro gambit where black essentially handed over his head early.  Still, there wee interesting moments, especially since earlier in the season Bryan Smith had reached a promising game vs Joel Benjamin in a related line.

1. e4 c6 2. d4 d5 3. e5 Bf5

In Round 1 USCL action Joel Benjamin shocked Bryan Smith with the disreputable 3…c5?!.   Joel later wrote that this was old Deep Blue prep stemming back a few decades.  Nevertheless, white should be better now.

That game continued 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 c5 4.dxc5 Nc6 5.Nf3 Bg4 6.Bb5 Qa5+ 7.Nc3 e6 8.Be3? This was the key misstep.  Smith missed the very nasty 8. Bd2! with a white edge.

To give you an idea how strong the move is, after 8. Be3 in the game 8…Nge7 was played, and now on move 9, the computer’s #1 recommendation for white is…
9. Be3-d2! amazingly enough.   After 8. Bd2!, white obviously threatens Nc3xd5.  A plausible continuation is 8…Qc7 9. b4! guarding c5.  Now, black should regain the pawn with 9…Bxf3 10. Qxf3 Qxe5+ 11. Qe2 Qxe2+ 12. Nxe2 and the smoke has cleared with white nursing a small but nagging edge.

4. Nf3

You can’t accuse Charbonneau of not learning.  Last year in Week 9 he played the incredible lemon 4. g4?. Needless to say, his opponent “The Inkblot” Enkbhat was so flummoxed by this astounding self-weakening he replied with 4….Bd7?? (missing 4…Be4! with a big edge) and white won that game as well!

e6 5. Be2 c5 6. Be3 Qb6 7. c4 Qxb2! There is no turning back now.  Weak is 7…dxc4 8. Nbd2 Bd3 9. O-O!  with a simple white edge.)

8. Nbd2

A key position in the gambit.

8….Nc6?!

The first of a couple of inaccuracies from the usually well-prepared Kaufman.  As GM Macieja has proven a couple of times, black needs to play 8…Ng8-e7! here.  He twice held the dangerous Andrey Volokitin to a draw.  It’s important to support the d5 point.

8… Ne7! 9. O-O Nbc6 10. Nb3 O-O-O 11. Nxc5 dxc4 12. Bxc4 Nd5 13. Nd3 Qa3 14. Rc1 Be7 (14… h6 15. Bxd5 exd5 16. Nc5 Bxc5 17. Rxc5 Kb8 18. Nd2 Qxa2 19. Qc1 Nb4 20. Qc3 Nd3 21. Ra1 Qb2 22. Qa5 Nxc5
23. Qxa7+ Kc7 24. Qxc5+ Kd7 25. Qxd5+ Ke8 26. Qa5 b6 27. Qa4+ b5 28. Qa7 Rd7 29. Qa5 Ke7 30. Ra2 Qc1+ 31. Nf1 Qc4 32. Nd2 Qc1+ 33. Nf1 Qc4 34. Nd2 Qc1+ 35. Nf1 Qc4 {1/2-1/2 Volokitin,A (2572)-Macieja,B (2634)/Istanbul 2003/CBM 096}) 15. Bxd5 Qxd3 16. Bxc6 Qxd1 17. Rfxd1 bxc6 18. d5 Rxd5 19. Rxd5 exd5 20. Nd4 Bd7 21. Nxc6 Bxc6 22. Rxc6+ Kb7 23. Rc2 Rd8 24. Bd4 Rd7 25. f4 g6 26. g4 Bd8 27. Kf2 Rc7 28. Rb2+ Kc8 29. Ke3 Rc4 30. Rb5 Ra4 31. Rc5+ Kd7 32. Rxd5+ Ke8 33. Rb5 Rxa2 34. Rb8 Kd7 35. Rb7+ Ke6 36. Ke4 Re2+ 37. Be3 f5+ 38. gxf5+ gxf5+ 39. Kd3 Rxh2 40. Rxa7 Be7 41. Ra6+ Kd5 42. Ra5+ Ke6 43. Kd4 Rb2 44. Ra6+ Kf7 45. Kc3 Re2 46. Kd3 Re1 47. e6+ Kg6 48. Bd4 h5 49. Be5 h4 50. Ra8 h3 51. Rh8 Bf6 52. Bxf6 {1/2-1/2 Volokitin,A (2493)-Macieja,B (2608)/Ohrid 2001/CBM 084})

9. cxd5

Now white is comfortable and black is left with one narrow path – see next note.

9…cxd4??

Another lemon and this one is simply losing.  Correct is 9… exd5 10. dxc5  and here black has a narrow path to live:  10…Nge7! (N)  11. O-O g6! 12. Nb3 Bg7 and, since his pieces are developed and his king is not in danger, he is all right.

10. Nc4! Did black simply forget about this elementary knight move (one of white’s only ideas in the variation?)  Now white is completely winning.  Black had a massive short-circuit.

10…Qc2 11. dxc6?

The best way to show the magnitude of black’s blunder on move 9 is the far simpler win for white here:  11. Qxc2 Bxc2 12. dxc6 dxe3 (12… Bb4+ 13. Bd2 wins) 13. cxb7 Rb8 14.
Rc1 Be4  (14…Ba4 is also met by Nd6+ and Rc8+ winning immediately) 15. Nd6+ Bxd6 16. Rc8+ Kd7 17. Bb5+ and black must resign.   The text move is far weaker and white converts a prosaic material advantage.

11… Qxd1+ 12. Rxd1 dxe3 13. Nd6+ Bxd6 14. exd6 bxc6 15. d7+ Kd8 16. Ne5 Nh6 17. Nxc6+ Kc7 18. d8=Q+ Rhxd8 19. Nxd8 Rxd8 20. Rxd8 exf2+ 21. Kxf2 Kxd8 22. Rc1 Ng8 23. Rc4 Ne7 24. Bf3 Nc8 25. Rb4 Nb6 26. a4 Kc7 27. a5 Nd5 28. Bxd5 exd5 29. Ke3 Bc8 30. Kd4 Kc6 31. Rb8 Kc7 32. Rb3 Be6 33. Kc5 g6 34. Rb4 h5 35. g3 d4 36. Rxd4 Bd7 37. Rf4 Be6 38. Rb4 Bc8 39. Kd5 Be6+ 40. Ke5 Kc6 41. a6 Kc5 42. Rb7 Bc4 43. Rxa7 Kb6 44. Re7 Kxa6 45. Kf6 Kb6 46. Rxf7 Bxf7 47. Kxf7 g5 48. Kg6 h4 49. g4 1-0

GM Sergey Erenburg (Baltimore) – GM Alex Stripunsky (Manhattan)

Sicilian Kan

1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 e6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 a6 5.Bd3 Nf6 6.0-0 Qc7 7.Qe2 d6 8.c4 g6?!

This setup is considered very risky for the obvious reason that d6 is a target already.

9.Nc3 Bg7

Kan with early provocative ...g6

10.Nf3(?!)

This retreat does not look like the best.  GM Ljubojevic showed the merits of the venomous and direct 10. Rd1! O-O 11. Bc2! already ganging up on d6, not seeing a need to move the knight on d4. The game Ljubojevic-Hulak Wijk aan Zee 1987 continued 11. Bc2! Nbd7 12. Nf3 b6 13. Bf4 Ne5 14. Nxe5 dxe5 15. Be3 and white was comfortably better and went on to win in 29 moves.  11. Bc2 Nc6 12. Nxc6 bxc6 also leaves white a bit better.

Interestingly this retreat was also chosen in the recent game Shirov-Wang Hao, Shanghai Masters 2010, and Shirov in that game did play the “Ljubo manoeuver” Bd3-c2 two moves later.  Still, Nd4-f3 does not seem necessary.

10…Nc6 11.h3 Nd7 12.Rd1 0-0 13.Be3 Bxc3!?

A concession, of course, but the move is well motivated to take some dynamics out of white’s game.

14.bxc3 f6 15.Rab1 Nd8?

15…Nc5! is much stronger and keeps black fully in the game.

16.Nd4 e5 17.Nc2 Nc5 18.Nb4 Be6 19.Nd5 Bxd5 20.cxd5 b5 21.c4?!

Correct was 21. Bc2! preparing this c3-c4 move and white is significantly better.

21…Nxd3 22.Qxd3 bxc4 23.Rdc1?!  Rc8?

A pair of miscues.  White should have played 23. Qc2! to keep the hopes of an edge, and Black misses a golden opportunity to play 23…cxd3 !(of course!) 24. Rxc7 f5! with equal chances!  For example, 25. Rb3 fxe4 26. Rc4 Nf7 27. Rxe4 Rab8 28. Rd3 Rb5! and black is very solid.  Black will wind up regretting not getting rid of the queens!

24.Qa3 Nf7 25.Rb6!

Now black is completely passive and succumbs to the pressure.

Qd7 26.Qxa6 f5 27.Rb7 Qd8 28.Rxc4 Rxc4 29.Qxc4 Qh4 30.Ba7 f4 31.f3 Qe1+ 32.Qf1 Qa5 33.Qf2 Ra8 34.Kh2 g5 35.Rb8+ Rxb8 36.Bxb8 h5 37.g4 fxg3+ 38.Kxg3 Kg7 39.Ba7 Qa3 40.Be3 Kf6 41.h4 gxh4+ 42.Kxh4 Qa8 43.Qg2 Qe8 44.Bg5+ Kg6 45.Qh3 Kg7 46.Qf5 Nh8 47.Bf6+ Kg8 48.Bxh8 Black resigns 1-0

Another game that caught my attention featured a nihilist, do-nothing approach as black… that worked!

Nihilist Nimzo-Indian

Denis Shmelov (Boston) – Tom Bartell (Philadelphia)

1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.f3 0-0!?

Black refrains from known moves such as 4…c5 (just tested in Shirov-Kramnik, Shanghai Masters 2010) and 4…d5 that Kramnik has also tried.  His play is flexible, not committing pawns in the center.

5.a3(?!)

Purists may argue with this choice.  White spends a tempo and doesn’t develop.  It weakens b3 (a black knight is likely to arrive later on a5).  What about e2-e4 right away?

5…Bxc3+ 6.bxc3 Ne8!?

This strange retreat in lieu of 6…c5.  In fact, black never plays ….c5!

7.e4 b6

What a weird position!  Can we say black is ahead in development because his rook on f8 is “developed”?

Black ahead?

8.Bd3 Ba6 9.f4(?!)

Not impressive.  I would lean toward some combination of Nh3 and e5 threatening black’s kingside.  Now black gets the simple play against white’s front c-pawn.  Note the knight touring from c6 to a5 also threatens the pesky leap into b3 in many lines.

9…Nc6 10.e5 Na5 11.Qe2 d5!

Things just happened too fast for white.

12.Nf3 Bxc4 13.Ng5 g6 14.h4 h6 15.Bxc4 Nxc4 16.Nf3 h5 17.g4 Ng7!

White just doesn’t have enough guys out to attack properly.

18.gxh5 Nxh5 19.Rg1 Kg7 20.Ng5 Rh8 21.f5 exf5 22.e6 Qe7 23.Nxf7 Qxh4+ 24.Kd1 Qe4 25.Nxh8 Rxh8 26.Ra2 Nf6 27.Qxe4 dxe4 28.Rag2 Ng4 29.Rxg4 fxg4 30.Rxg4 Kf6 31.Rxe4 c6 32.e7 Re8 33.a4 Nd6 34.Re2 Nf5 35.Ba3 Nxe7 36.c4 Kf7 37.a5 Nf5 38.axb6 axb6 39.Rf2 Re4 40.Bb2 Ke6 41.Kd2 Rg4 42.Kd3 Rg3+ 43.Kd2 Nd6 44.Re2+ Kd7 45.c5 Nc4+ 46.Kc2 b5 47.Bc3 Ne3+ 48.Kd2 Nd5 49.Bb2 Nf4 50.Rh2 Rg2+ 51.Rxg2 Nxg2 52.Kd3 Ke6 53.Ke4 Nh4 54.Bc3 Nf5 55.Bd2 Ne7 56.Bc1 Nd5 57.Bd2 Nf6+ 58.Kf4 Kd5 59.Bc1 Ne4 60.Ba3 Kxd4 61.Bb2+ Kd5 62.Ba3 Nxc5 63.Kg5 Nd3 White resigns 0-1

Round 1 Revisited – Dancing Some More with the Tango

I was pointed to a very interesting game in the 2 Knights Tango by IM Dave Vigorito where he scored a win as black for his new expansion team, the No’easters, vs. WGM Sabina Foiser (playing for the Baltimore Kingfishers in Round 1 USCL Action).  Hopefully readers will find the combination of both our notes interesting.

In a strange coincidence, Joel Benjamin annotated Shulman-Khachiyan on ICC as a “Game of the Week” in this same opening.

He analyzes it at Chess Cafe.

Foisor, Sabina (2367) – Vigorito, David (2524)
U.S. Chess League (1), 25.08.2010
2 Knights Tango
Notes by David Vigorito

Additional Notes by Mark Ginsburg

1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 Nc6!?

The “Tango” is not a common sight, but it is not such a bad opening. It suffers from the same problem as the Benko Gambit – it is only good against one move order (1.d4 and 2.c4). Had my opponent played 2.Nf3, however, there is no Samisch and I could happily enter into the King’s Indian.

I’ve tried the Tango but, frankly speaking it does not set white serious problems (despite IM Georgi Orlov’s best efforts in a Tango pamphlet).

3.Nf3

I had seen a couple of games where my opponent went for 3.Nc3 e5 4.d5 Ne7, but after studying Richard Palliser’s Tango book, I felt that Black could get adequate play in these positions.

Here, white can lunge ahead with 3. d5!? Ne5 4. e4!? taking advantage of 4…Nxe4 5. Qd4!.   The line is dangerous. This occurred in IM Pruess-GM Nakamura and white scored an impressive win. After 4. e4 d6? 5. f4! Ng6 6. Nc3! black is seriously short of space! I was very surprised that this had happened already a while before Pruess-Nakamura – in Jelen-Mestrovic, Ljubjana 1997 and one other game between lesser known players white also went on to win.  That makes 3-0!

Vigorito points out that black should play 4…e6!, not 4…d6?  – that is definitely the correct reaction to this aggressive line.

Promising! Position after 6. Nc3! (analysis)

This good position for white is only reached if black badly reacts with 4…d6?.

3…e6 4.a3

This is considered critical, as Black’s dark-squared bishop cannot develop on the a3-f8 diagonal. I was more concerned with 4.Nc3 Bb4 5.Qc2! when White has conveniently transposed to a 4.Qc2 Nimzo-Indian. This position would normally come about after 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3. Nc3 Bb4 4.Qc2 Nc6 (playable, but hardly Black’s best line) 5.Nf3. Despite the fact that I had written a book on this opening (for White!) Challenging the Nimzo-Indian, I was hoping to avoid this line, because 4.Qc2 was indeed part of my opponent repertoire. She was either unaware of this transposition or decided to go for more with the critical 4.a3.

Yes, 4. a3! is clearly a strong move.  But it should be coupled with a quick d4-d5! – read on!   As Joel Benjamin points out in the ICC lecture, 4. a3! was Kasparov’s choice in Kasparov-Yermolinsky where white won.   4. g3 Bb4+ is a Bogo-Indian as seen in Shulman-Khachiyan.  Actually after 5. Bd2 a5 6. Bg2 d5!? it actually became some sort of Catalan!

4…d6

Black must switch plans.

For adventurers, I recommend 4…g6! 5. Nc3 Bg7 6. e4 d5! with crazy complications!  This move I have tested in the crucible of ICC 5-minute blitz and gotten some pretty decent Gruenfeld positions out of it!  Black’s queen often goes to d7 to observe light squares later on.

5.Nc3 g6 6.e4

At this exact moment, the time seems good for 6. d5!.  This move, I think, gives white a comfortable edge and it occurred in M. Ginsburg – S. Higgins, North American Open 2009. After 6…Ne7 (what else?) 7. e4, black doesn’t have good choices.  In the game he went 7…e5  and now the computer likes best of all Bd3 and h3, solid Benoni style.  I chose 8. c5!? opening up possibilities of Bb5+ (shades of Jimmy Sherwin vs me, US Open 1976) and white was better there too.

Bg7 7.Be2 0–0 8.0–0    Again, white can go 8. d5! first before cackling. White is definitely better.

8…e5!?

The normal Tango move would be 8…Re8!?. The idea is that after 9.Be3 e5 10.d5, Black can play 10…Nd4 11.Nxd4 exd4 12.Bxd4 Nxe4 with comfortable equality. I was well aware of this, but White can also play 9.d5! with unclear play. I decided to go for the text move. The position after 8…e5 is identical to the King’s Indian Classical Variation that arises after 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 Bg7 4.e4 d6 5.Nf3 0–0 6.Be2 e5 7.0–0 Nc6. In the game White has the extra move a2-a3. This should be useful, but I believe that Black can minimize the value of this move if he chooses his defences carefully. The psychological point is that I have lured White into less familiar territory, and Foisor immediately makes a concession.

White waited too long in the center and missed several early chances for d5!.

Black is OK here already and Vigorito went on to win; I refer the reader to the Chess Cafe article for the rest of his notes.

*******

Readers -  supply a comment for an opening from USCL action that you would like researched further!

My role this season will be The Openings Guide.

I will round up interesting openings from each week.  Since the games are played at such a fast time control, it’s often the case that dubious openings (bluffs or semi-bluffs) work out.  Those are particularly interesting to me. I am checking things with Rybka 4 and Fritz 12 reference database 2010.

The first game of interest was an East Coast match-up, IM Bryan Smith  (PHI) – GM  Joel Benjamin (NJ).

IM Bryan Smith (PHI) – GM Joel Benjamin (NJ)

Caro-Kann, Advance Variation

1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 c5

A shocker on the third move!  This is supposed to be a bad move; black opens up the game after losing a full tempo!  Cagey veteran Benjamin shows things are not that simple.   3…Bf5 is much more common.  The text is a great choice at this faster USCL time control.

4.dxc5 Nc6 5.Nf3

The most popular statistically is 5. Bb5 but the text move scores better (58% to 54%).    Khalifman and Karpov have both defended successfully after 5. Bb5.

5…Bg4 6.Bb5 Qa5+ 7.Nc3 e6

8.Be3

We’re back in 5. Bb5 paths anyway.  For students of the game seeking improvements on white’s play due to the dismal outcome, I recommend the extremely venomous and rarely played move 8. Bd2! here!  The best surprise weapons are always the one that have tactical points and are little researched.

8….Nge7 9.a3

To show you how strong the idea in my previous note here was, the computer likes 9. Bd2! here (although white played 8. Be3) the best!

9…0-0-0

To illustrate the dynamics of black’s game (although clearly he has sacrificed a pawn) the computer awards equal chances to black in all lines now.

10.Bxc6 Nxc6 11.b4 Bxf3

11…Qa6 is good too.

12.gxf3

12. Qxf3?? Nxb4!  Now white’s position is a structural mess.  Benjamin has scored many points in his career exploiting such things.

12…Qa6 13.Bd4

13. b5? Qa5 14. Bd4 Nxe5! 15. Bxe5 d4! is a big edge to black.

13…Qc4 14.Ne2 g5!

Instructive!  Black keeps white’s pawns split.

15.Rg1 Rg8 16.Qd2 Bg7

Quiz time.  White has done the best he could and even at this stage can keep equal chances.  But his best move is hidden.  Do you see it?  His next move is a gross blunder, losing.  The fact that white can keep equal chances in this visually poor position reinforces GM Miguel Najdorf’s adage, “Chess not easy game.”

17.Rxg5??

I would suspect time pressure and a general depression about his structure caused this lemon.  See prior note; white had a surprisingly strong move to retain equal chances.

17…Nxd4!!

I also suspect this move did not take long to execute.  A very nice shot that wraps up the point.

18.Nxd4

18. Qxd4 loses to the same motif of 18…Qxd4 19. Nxd4 Bxe5! and wins.

18…Bxe5 19.Rxg8 Rxg8 20.0-0-0 Qa2 21.c3 Qxa3+ 22.Kb1 a5 23.Rc1 Kd7

23….Bxd4 right away was also crushing.  Everything wins.

24.Qd3 Bxd4 25.Qxd4 Qb3+ 26.Ka1 axb4 27.c6+ bxc6 28.Qa7+ Kd6 29.cxb4 Qxb4 30.Qa6 Qd4+ 31.Ka2 Qxf2+ White resigns 0-1

Our next interesting struggle was our very own Scorpion Danny Rensch taking on Eric Rodriguez.  Danny scored a key victory for Arizona and let’s see how.

Eric Rodriguez (MIA) – IM Danny Rensch (ARZ)

Catalan Gambit Line

1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nf3 d5 4.g3 dxc4 5.Bg2 b5?!

An unusual and extremely risky line, good for USCL surprise, but objectively white should like seeing this move.  Avrukh calls it ‘quite dangerous for Black’.

We will see where white went wrong (and it’s soon).  This is the key virtue of USCL surprise: a fast time limit can result in bad decisions, early.

6.a4!

Given an exclam in Boris Avrukh’s comprehensive 1. d4 Volume One book.

6…c6 7.0-0!?

Avrukh mainly analyses 7. axb5!? cxb5 (7…Bb4+? 8. Bd2 Bxd2 9. Nfxd2! with a big edge to white) 8. Ne5 Nd5 9. Nc3 but points out the interesting 9….f6!? here with chances for black to hold.

Position after 9...f6!? (Analysis)

The text move, curiously, is not covered by Avrukh but has been a big favorite with GM Khalifman. I don’t know why 7. O-O is not covered because it is clearly one of the critical moves.  In Avrukh’s lines without white castling, white has to constantly worry on every turn about black’s Bb4+ resource.

7…Bb7 8.Ne5

Following a few stylish Khalifman wins.

In “Khalifman’s Life and Games” by Gennady Nesis, this position is extolled as fantastic compensation for white.  Indeed, Khalifman scored a great win over GM Evgeny Sveshnikov (Elista 1996)  featured in that book  As the reader might tell, I really like that book!

The key source of the compensation according to former FIDE World Champ Khalifman is that he has craftily delayed his queen’s knight (where it’s exposed on the usual square c3) so white can later pry black open with a timely b3.

8….Nd5

One way to defend.  Khalifman roundly defeated Sveshnikov in the cited game after Svehsnikov tried 8…Qb6(!) and white went ahead with the planned 9. b3! with full compensation.

We now reach a critical moment.

Decision Time

9.b3?

In this altered picture, the b2-b3 lever is mistimed!  Black’s last move demands the white reaction 9. e4!.   Readers can work out the ramifications of further harassed black knight jumps on their own; in particular, the knight jump to b4 generates beautiful variations.   It’s fairly safe to say Sveshnikov was afraid of precisely this (9. e4!) when he chose to avoid 8…Nd5 and went with 8…Qb6 instead.  In Sveshnikov’s defense, the situation after 8…Qb6(!) 9. b3 was not altogether clear and he only went wrong later.

9…cxb3 10.Qxb3 b4 11.a5 Be7 12.Bd2 Ba6 13.Re1 0-0

Due to white’s failure to play e2-e4 at the right moment, black is fine here.   Of course, white manages to play it on the next turn – better late than never.

14.e4 Nf6 15.Bxb4 Qxd4 16.Bxe7 Qxa1 17.Bxf8 Qxe5 18.Qa3 Nbd7 19.Bd6 Qd4 20.Nc3??

A gigantic lemon overlooking black’s retort.  20. h3 kept good fighting chances with automatic compensation from the bishop pair and the outcome would be up in the air.

20…Ng4!

21.Nd1 Nde5

Black has full control now.  In fast time controls, the initiative is all-important.

22.h3 Nc4 23.Qc3 Qxd6 24.hxg4 e5 25.Bf1 Qd4 26.Bxc4 Bxc4 27.Qb4 Bb5 28.Qb1 Rd8 29.Ne3 Bd3 30.Qc1 g6 31.Qxc6 Bxe4 32.Qc7 Rd7 33.Qc8+ Kg7 34.g5 Bb7 35.Qc2 Qb4 36.Ra1 Rd2 37.Qb1 Rb2 38.Qf1 Qe4 39.Qh3 Rxf2 40.Rd1 h5 41.gxh6+ Kh7 42.Rf1 Rxf1+ 43.Nxf1 Qd4+ White resigns 0-1

If readers see another game from Week 1 they are curious about (from the openings standpoint), send in a comment.

–IM Mark Ginsburg

USCL Week 9 action sees a Caissic Horror Show brought out of the storage closet for Halloween!

Charbonneau, Pascal (NY) -Enkbhat, Tegshsuren (BAL)

Caro Hyper-Advance USCL Special

1. e4 c6 2. d4 d5 3. e5 Bf5 4. g4? LOL!  This move is not good! White ‘forgets’ to play the mainline 4. Nc3 first covering e4.  An ideal risky line in USCL fast time limit play unless black knows it (nightmare scenario).

LOL!

4…Bd7?! LOL again!  Black submits to white’s bully-boy ploy and transposes inadvisedly into an old Bronstein-Petrosian 1959 USSR Ch. game.  Note his game is not at all bad here, but students of the Nezhmet-Mackenzie Wars (striking similarities to TV’s Clone Wars) know that black should pop into the juicy square with 4… Be4! 5. f3 Bg6 and white is hurting in all variations.  For example, 6. h4 h5 7.  Bd3 Bxd3 8. Qxd3 e6 and ewww.  Or, 7. Ne2 hxg4 8. Nf4 Bh7 9. fxg4 e6 10. Nc3 c5! and black is faster.   The nice thing is that black doesn’t have to do anything special, white’s problems are all self-inflicted with the 4. g4? lunge. Consult the above link for full gory details.

In SOME Caro lines, but definitely not here, black doesn’t want to move off the c8-f5 diagonal in fear of a white sac e5-e6.  Here, though, that sac fails miserably but black didn’t know that, and this accounts for black’s mistake in the game. The reason it fails here is that white’s disgusting pawns on f3 and g4 open up the g3 square for black’s queen after Qd8-d6.

5. c4 Na6!?  A nice inventive move.  Black starts to redeem himself after the misstep last move. After the plausible but passive 5… e6 6. Nc3 Ne7 7. c5 (White might be better off not doing this) 7…b6! 8. b4 a5 9. Na4 Nc8! 10. Rb1 axb4 11. Rxb4 bxc5 12. dxc5 here Petrosian played 12…Qc7? and missed a great shot, namely: 12… Na6! 13. Bxa6 Qa5!! exploiting white’s uncoordinated army. After 14. Bd2 Qxa6 black is just better.  In the game Petrosian held on and drew, but Bronstein stood better with the space advantage (USSR Ch. Tbilisi 1959).

6. cxd5 After 6. Nc3 the move 6…Be6!? is very interesting.  For example, 7. Nh3 dxc4 8. Nf4 Qd7 9. Nxe6 Qxe6 10. f4 g6 11. b3 h5 12. f5 gxf5 13. Bxc4 Qg6 14. gxf5 Qg2 15. Rf1 Nb4 and it’s anybody’s game. Not for the faint of heart.  Even so, 6. Nc3 might be stronger; note black’s big improvement on move 6 in the game.

Knight Jump! Do it!

6… cxd5?! Boo!  Black doesn’t follow through on his nice last move!  Indicated was the logical and aesthetic knight jump 6…Nb4! exploiting the early g2-g4 opening of the c6-h1 diagonal. If  7. e6 (7. Qb3 Nxd5 8. Qxb7 Rb8 9. Qxa7 Nb4 10. Na3 Bxg4 11. Bd2 e6 and black is all right) 7…fxe6 8. Nf3 cxd5 and black is fine.  Another humorous line: 7. Nc3 Qb6!? (7…Nxd5 is dead equal) and black can always take on d5 with the knight later. This game was just one big set of black missed opportunities.

7. Nc3 e6 8. h4 h5 9. gxh5 Nh6 Here, the immediate 9…Qc7 10. a3!? Nc7!? makes sense, rerouting right away the problem knight on a6.

10. Bd3 Qb6 11. Nge2 Nc7 12. a3 a5? Last chance to be competitive with 12…O-O-O! unclear.

13. Na4 Qa7 14. Rg1 Bb5 15. Bc2 We’re far afield of the opening now, but just notice that the simple 15. Bxb5+ Nxb5 16. Bxh6 Rxh6 17. Rc1 leaves black with a completely dreadful game.  This is just to highlight that black drifted while white was purposefully developing.

15…Nf5 16. Bxf5 exf5 17. Ng3 Bd7 18. Be3 b5 19. Nc5 Bxc5 20. dxc5 Qa6 21. Rc1 O-O-O 22. c6 Be6 23. Qd4 g6 24. Bg5 Rde8 25. h6 Kb8 26. Ne2 Qa7 27. Qd2 Bc8 28. Bf6 Rh7 29. Nd4 Qb6 30. Rg3 Rxh6 31. Nxb5 Rxh4 32. Bxh4 Qxb5 33. Bf6 Ba6 34. Kd1 f4 35. Rgc3 d4 36. Rf3 Nd5 37. Kc2 Qxc6+ 38. Kb1 Qb6 39. e6 Nc3+ 40. Ka1 Qxe6 41. Qxf4+ Ka8 42. bxc3 Qb3 43. cxd4 Bd3 44. Rxd3 Qxd3 45. Qg3 1-0

Well, I hope next time we see the juicy 4…Be4! on the board!

In Other Week 9 News

I see Jan van de Mortel won Game of the Week with an interesting Dragon vs Bartholomew.  The variation as a whole does not have a good reputation.  I am still a fan of 14. Rc1! and am a) surprised Bartholomew did not play it and b) wondering how Jan would improve if Bartholomew had played it.  The full move order being

1.e4  c5  2.Nf3  d6  3.d4  cxd4  4.Nxd4  Nf6  5.Nc3  g6  6.Be3  Bg7  7.f3  0-0  8.Qd2  Nc6  9.0-0-0   Nxd4  10.Bxd4  Be6  11.Kb1  Qc7  12.Nd5  Bxd5  13.exd5  Rfc8  14.Rc1!.