Another game on Thursday, I was White against guy rated 1937.  His rating exceeded 2000 on November 1,  then went down. I was worse most of the game, battled and missed my “golden bullet” – forced win shown me by my opponent after the game and “silver” one too – a draw 2 moves after that. Here is the game.
He played Pirc defense, opening I don’t know well and don’t like to play against.  My 6th move was not the best, with 2 losses for White in DB.  The best plan was probably to castle queenside, but I wasn’t ready for that.
I tried to make the play similar to the play in Rossolimo with exchanged bishop, stable center and attack on the kingside. I got worse after missing 18… Ng4, when because of Qb6+ threat I had to put for exchange my black-colored bishop.
After 22. Ng5 Bf6 23. Nf3 Bg7 I played 24. Ng5 thinking about Bf6 and possible 3-fold repetion, but I forgot that before move 22 bishop was on h8, so Bh6 with a pin was unexpected. I found a way to minimize my losses, losing a pawn.
He had less time than me and with my position being worse I decided to play sharp and try to get him into time trouble.  Pawn sacrifice ce on e4 was correct, but on e5 wasn’t.  Still he did’n make the exact moves and my knight went on e5 for 3 pawns.
A bit later his 40…Kf8 could cost him a game. I didn’t see 41. Re8+! and then I missed a draw after 43. Ke3!.  After he managed to exchange the queens, I found myself in completely lost endgame with him having about 2 minutes (I had about 5).  I played to the bitter end and he mated me with 1 minute remaining.

Here is a position from one of my correspondence games:

White to move,  win.  Just in case, the answer in in the comment.

Yesterday I played with an expert and won. It was a 16 year old boy.  I thought he is rated 1900+ until I came home and found out that after the last big tournament he got 2001 rating. After I read the pairings I got nervous,  because I thought it’s the 1900+ guy to whom I lost a year ago in Sicilian, Moscow variation. He finished me off  with a queen sacrifice.  It wasn’t him (it was his brother),  nevertheless I was still nervous since there was that feeling that my lucky streak (+1,=2) will somehow end.

OK, so I am White, Sicilian, my favorite Rossolimo –  1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5.  Here is the game. I decided to counter his f5/f4 with d4 and got a pretty good position. Recent reading of an excellent “Predator on the Chessboard” book on chesstactics.org site affected my play in this game. As soon as he played Ba6 I told to myself – this piece is loose. I could actually win a pawn right away, didn’t see it. Later I also noticed that his back-rank is weak, Ne5 is threatening with dangerous Nf7+, etc. So, these tactical motifs were kind of on the background of my mind all the time, not just appearing at some moment. I still missed a few chances related to Qb3+ to win a pawn .  Anyway, his 27. … Nc1 was a mistake and 29. Ra3  (Fritz’s choice)  finally used that looseness of Ba6, giving me an advantage.  He thought for about 15 minutes,  it erased his advantage in time,  still couldn’t find a good answer, not that there was one.  My nervousness at this moment disappeared,  I realized that I can win. I took on e5 with the knight, thinking that I don’t want to play the endgame.  Fritz would prefer to win an “a” pawn,  but again I wanted to use my chances in the middlegame,  having a bit more than 30 minutes left.

I missed winning a piece after 30…. Ne2+ 31. Kf1. Trying to counter-attack he didn’t play good moves, his position deteriorated, and he blundered under pressure.  He resigned after double-check 36. Ng6++, it was a mate in 2 – 37. Qh8+ Kf7 38. Ne5#.

So, I got my revenge in mafia style, good.

I am going to update my DB of missed tactics with a few “gems” from this game and will return to that chesstactics.org site. This is definitely the way to go.

Yesterday I started in a new chess club.   The old club was good, but I grew up and higher rated people stopped to come.

I got into Open section (there was also U1700),  down three quarters of the rating list.  My opponent was very old guy, rated 100 higher.  I was Black, he started with Nf3.  Here is the game.  I was almost ready to play Grunfeld, but then suddenly decided to transform to Benko. I saw that the guy likes positional play and didn’t want to compete with him on that ground.  He didn’t accept the pawn,  eventually I got some initiative.  My position on the queenside looked good and I managed to create a weak pawn – b2.  Then he forced exchange of the rooks pair and queens.  His sudden exchange on f6 took me by surprise and his pawns attack in the center required some measures from me. After that I didn’t see how I can strengthen my position and forced the rooks exchange, after which opposite-colored bishops made the result clear.  He offered a draw, I agreed.

I thought that I played pretty well, but Fritz at home spoiled my euphoria (as always ).  It found that I missed a nice little tactics at the very end – 28… dxe5 29. fxe5 Bc3 30. Rd1 Bxe5 winning a pawn, though winning this endgame won’t be easy (if possible at all).

I made the same mistake as I did in the previous Benko game (“No pain, no gain” post).  I didn’t think about the line I didn’t like. Why would I give him strong pawns in the center after dxe5 fxe5 – to  create a passed pawn?  But if I would see that his back rank is weak then these pawns would look differently.

I was playing blitz yesterday and got a position, where I delivered mate in 3 moves. Afterwards I ran the game through Fritz and Fritz said that my opponent didn’t chose the best continuation ( I knew that) , anyway there was a mate in 8  ( I didn’t know that). I found it interesting and made a calculation training exercise out of it.  I almost solved it, it was a wrong order of moves on the end. I offer you to try it, the answer is in the first comment. White to move:

The phrase in the title belongs to Savielly Tartakower.
The reason to quote him is that a few days ago in a blitz game I had a position which I considered hopeless and resigned.
Here it is, I am Black.

OK, so I decided to run the game through Crafty quickly, looked at something else, then returned to analysis when it was already done and was dumbfounded to see the estimate after the last White’s move 27. Nf5 – minus 4 something.  Hey, minus is me, Black. I looked at the line – yeah, Crafty was right. Another line was even better ( if you want, you can hide the rest and try to find the right moves).

It was funny, I laughed, but I don’t think I would be laughing if it would be a real OTB game.  So here the “magic survival”, Fritz 11 added a line with the same conclusion – White, not Black is lost.

27. … Qa4! 28. Bxg7  Qd1+ 29. Kg2 Bxd5+!  

30. cxd5 Qxd5+ 31. Kf1 Qxf5

Another Crafty’s line – 28. Nxg7 Qd1+ 29. Kg2 Qf3+ 30. Kg1 Qxf2+ 31. Kh1

31. …Qf3+ 32. Qg2 Qd1+ 33. Qg1 Bxd5+!

34. cxd5 Qxd5+ 35. Qg2 Rf1#

Here is the line from Fritz 11:  28. Qh5 Rxf5 29. Qg4 Rf7 30. Bxg7 Rxg7

31. Rg6 Qd1+ 32. Qxd1 Rxg6+ 33. Kf1 e6 with -4.79 estimate.

I just ran an OTB game that I played a year ago through Fritz 11 using “Blundercheck” mode and Fritz showed me an interesting possibility that I missed.  Here is the combination that I didn’t see.  I am White, the position arised from  Owen Defense – 1.e4 b6.

White to move,  I played 14. Qe4.  Fritz suggests better move,  quite paradoxical – 14. Rfd1! and after 14. … Bxd1 15. Rxd1 Rad8 Rad8 16. Bxh7+ getting ~1.50  advantage.

What about 15. … Rxd1 Rad8 16. Qe8 ? Then follows 16. Qe4 g6 17. Bb5

getting 2 pieces for the rook.

I just liked the combination of several tactical motifs here – discovered attack (Bh7+),  double attack ( Qe4, though literally the knight is still defended by the Queen) and pin (Bb5).  As for the weaknesses, we see:

1.  h7
2.  White occupies important b1-h7 diagonal,
3. White can occupy “d” vertical (by using sacrifice!).
4. Knight  on C6 not very stable,  can also be pinned

In the game I tried to use 1 and 2, then 4.   Fritz used all 4 at once.

I run some of my online blitz games through Fritz, using “Blundercheck” mode.

I run some of my online blitz games through Fritz using “Blundercheck” mode.  It finds not only blunders, but also any missing tactics,  actually anything at all that’s worse than Fritz’s preferable move by 0.75 pawn ( of course you can change that range).

Here is the combination that I didn’t see.  I am White, the position is from Caro-Kann defense, fantasy variation that was suggested by GM Bareev in his lecture – 1.e4 c6 2. d4 d5 3. f3.

White to move, computer suggests Bh6.  OK, but why the reply is Rf8? Strange, right? What if black plays,  let’s say,  Nc6?  Fritz says – Rxf7!

If Kxf7, then Rf1+  Kg8, Qxe6+

Kh8, Bg7#.

So, after Rf1+ Black has to give up on f6 first his bishop, then his queen, leaving Black with 2R+N vs. Q+B+N+P and score 7.45.

The second example is easier,  White to move and win material, just in case the solution is in the comment.

It was a last game of my regular tourney in the local club.  For the first time in OTB game I got French with White. Good, that’s  what I am trying to learn the last half year. My opponent was rated ~250 lower than me,  I learned that after the game as well as the fact that he overperformed and recently shared the first place in the big tournament  in U1600 category.  It took more than 30 moves and long maneuvering unless he finally opened up, that explains the title. The result was my best ever combination.  Here is the game:

1. e4 e6 2. d4 d5 3. Nd2 Nf6 4. e5 Nfd7 5. Bd3 c5 6. c3 Nc6 7. Ne2 Qg5 – not a book move and by my opinion not a good one.

8. O-O Qh4 9. Nf3 Qd8 10. Be3 c4 11. Bc2 Nb6 12. Qd2 h6 13. Ng3 Be7 14. Nh5 Bf8 – White is ahead in development, but the position is closed – Crafty’s estimate  - 0.90.

15. h3 Nd7 16. Nh2 g6 17. Ng3 b6 18. Ng4 h5 19. Nh2 Bb7 20. f4 –  ( Crafty likes  20. Bg5 Be7 21. Nf3 Bxg5 22. Nxg5 h4 23. Ne2 Qe7 24. Rad1 Rh5 25. Nf3 O-O-O with 0.81 estimate ), here – 0.08

20. … Qh4 21. Rf3 Qe7 22. b4 Bg7 23. a4 Nd8 24. Rff1 a6 25. Nf3 Nf8 26. Ne2 Nh7 27. Bf2 O-O 28. Bh4 – trying to penetrate deep  defense ( Crafty likes it too, estimate – 0.83)

28. … Qd7 29. Ng5 Qe8 30. Nxh7 Kxh7 31. Ng3 Kg8 32. Qe2 f5 – beginning of the end, Crafty doesn’t like it at all

33. exf6 Bxf6 34. Bxf6 Rxf6 35. f5!

35. … h4 – I didn’t like Nh1, so I started to think and soon saw fxg3.  I looked and looked and  almost gave up to find a forced win. But it was impossible to pass on this nice knight sacrifice, so it made me to find the decisive quiet  move . I spent 16-18 minutes calculating it all and then:

36. fxg6!! – forgive me if I am too generous, it’s actually the first time in my life I put 2 exclamation marks to my own move

36. … Rxf1+ 37. Rxf1 hxg3 38. Qh5 Qe7

39. g7! – this is a move I had to see before playing 36. fxg6. I also found here that I can play 39. Rf7 Qxf7 40. gxf7+ Nxf7, but it’s just material,  there was something better - 39. … Qxg7 40. Qe8+ – Black resigned – 41.  … Qf8 42. Qxf8#

Funny, that Crafty as usual spoiled a bit my euphoria,  noticing that  there was a mate in 2 earlier. Instead of 39. g7 - 39. Rf8+ Kxf8 40. Qh8# . So,  I could also sacrifice  a rook, almost  ”evergreen”  :).

Anyway, I was happy with this win giving me the first place, best ever result in any tournament  - 4 out of 5  (3 wins, 1 draw, 1 bye) and performance rating about 1800, which hopefully should bring my rating to ~1750.

Another G/15 on FICS,  I play Black, this time I found it. Interesting that first 3 moves I wanted to play were right,  then 4th move was actually leading only to perpetual, but there is a winning move here as well.  I didn’t get there because he played 3rd move differently,  it was move losing quickly.  I think OTB I would see the right continuation, maybe straight from the beginning.

Can you see the both lines,  winning and perpetual?  Just in case, the answer is in the comment. Black to move:

I played recently this game (G/15) on FICS,  had a good attack after sacrificing a bishop, but din’t find the winning move.  Can you see it?  White to move:

Just in case, the solution is in the comment.

I am reading the book  ”Combinations in the Middlegame” written by Igor Bondarevsky,  Soviet Grandmaster in both over-the-board and correspondence chess,  an International Arbiter, a trainer, and an author of chess books.  Bondarevsky shared the 1940 Soviet Championship title, and later coached World Champion Boris Spassky.  In the Chapter II: Combinational Ideas I found an interesting motif that I didn’t see ( and couldn’t find) anywhere else – seizing a point.

Sacrifice with this motif serves  purpose of, as the name says, seizing an important point, then having that point the active side plays some forced line(s).

The first example is from the game Razuvaev-Briem,  Puerto-Rico, 1971:

25. Qg5 – this one move threat forces Black to block his King. 25.  … Rg8 26. Nd6!

The queen is sacrificed to seize the decisive point. The knight creates the final threat, more exactly triple threat – mate on f7, Nxb7 and Nxc8, there is no defense.

Another example is from the game  Fisher-Sofrievsky, Scople, 1967:

The positon of the Black king is weak, it gives an idea to find some tactics to use it.  15. Nd5!  The knight is sacrificed to get for the rook square d5. After 15.. exd5 16. Rxd5

16. … Qa6 ( 16. … Qb4 17. a3 )  17. Rh5 White wins quickly.  

In the game Black didn’t accept the sacrifice, played 15. … Rfe8. Then followed 16.  Nxe7 Rxe7 17. Rxd6 and White got  easily won position.

This Sunday I played in the local club,  my regular G/90.

The game had the final similar to the one that I had with the same opponent 3 months ago ( his rating at that time was about the same as mine, now 130 less),  the opening was the same. The coincidence looked funny, so I decided to showcase both.

I played White, Sicilian, Rossolimo variation.

First game:

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6 4. Bxc6 bxc6 5. d3 d5 6. Nc3 Bg4 7. h3 Bh5 8. Bf4 e6 

9. Qe2 d4 10. Nd1 Nf6 11. b3 c4 12. O-O c3 13. a4 Be7

14. Kh2 O-O 15. Rg1 Bd6 16. Bxd6 Qxd6+ 17. Kh1 Nd7 18. g4 Bg6

19. Nh4 e5 20. f3 Nc5 21. Nf2 Ne6 22. Nf5 Bxf5 23. gxf5 Nf4

24. Qf1 f6 25. Ng4 Kh8 26. Kh2 c5 27. Qf2 a5 28. Rae1 Ra7 29. Qh4 Rb7 30. Nf2 c4 31. bxc4

Crafty thinks, that I made a mistake and 31. dxc4 is much better  ( I agree ) - 31. dxc4 Qa3 32. Ra1 Qc5 33. Rad1 Ne2 34. Rg4 Kg8 35. Nd3 -with estimate  0.75.  I didn’t like 31. dxc4 d3, but White just plays 32. Nxd3 Nxd3 33. Rd1 Qa3 34. Rxd3 – 3.51.

31. bxc4 Rg8 32. Rg4

I am clearly worse and trying this chance.  32. … Rb2  He doesn’t see it. 33. Qxh7+!  

33. … Kxh7 34. Rh4+ 1-0 ( 34. … Nh5 Rxh5#).

Second game:

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6 4. Bxc6 bxc6 5. d3 d5 6. Qe2 g6 7. O-O Bg7 8. Nbd2 e6

9. Nb3 Qb6 10. Rb1 Ne7 11. Bg5 a5 12. c3 a4 13. Nbd2 Ba6 14. Rfc1 Ra7 15. b4! – one of the plans in this variation, here it has also tactical ground. My opponent spent quite some time here.

15. … O-O 16. bxc5 Qa5 17. e5 Rc7 18. Be3 Nf5 19. c4 Rd8 20. Bg5 Rdd7 21. cxd5 Rxd5 22. Nc4 Bxc4 23. Rxc4 Rxc5

Crafty says it’s a big mistake  because of 24. Rb8+ Bf8 25. Bd2! Qa7 26. Rxf8+ Kg7 27. Ra8 Qxa8 28. Rxc5 Qf8 29. Rc4 a3 30. Bg5 – score 4.85.

24. Rxc5 - I don’t see it too. 24. …Qxc5 25. Rb8+ Bf8 26. Qb2 h6 27. Bd2 – now I see it. He sees it too and again spends essentual time.

27. Bd2 Qa7 28. g4 Ng7 29. Bxh6 Kh7??

30. Rxf8 Kxh6??  31. Rh8# 1-0

I think the time played it’s role (29minutes/19 minutes), still remembering the first game it all looks like some kind of blindness with regards to that specific vertical/type of mate,  chessloser used an interesting word – “chessblind” when he didn’t see the move.

This time it’s not about national and royal anthem of Canada, UK, Australia, etc.

It’s about trapping the queen in chess. Recently I had a couple of online  correspondence games where it happened.  The first game is French defense, I am Black.  1. e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3. e5 c5 4.c3 Qb6 5. Nf3 Nc6 6. a3 Nh6 7. b4 cxd4 8. cxd4 Nf5  9. Be3 Bd7 10. Bd3 Nxe3 11. fxe3 Rc8 12. O-O Be7 13. Nbd2 Nb8 14. Qe2 – it’s all “book”

14. … Rc3 probably not a very good idea 15. Rfc1 Qc7 16. Nb3 b6 17. Qd2

17. … Rxc1+ 18. Rxc1 Qb7 19. Qc2 h6  - I have to give up not only “c” line, but square “c7″ too, since I don’t want to give up a pawn ( computer agreed with me here, giving 0.58 estimate).

20. Qc7 Qa8 21. Bb1 Nc6! 

22. b5 Bd8 23. Qd6 Be7

24. Qc7 Bd8 25. Qd6 Be7 26. Qc7   1/2-1/2   My opponent called it “crazy finish”…

OK, another game with  more complicated trap.  Grunfeld defense, exchange variation, I am Black.  I am trying to learn it,  first serious game and as they say in Russian – “The first pancake is always a blob”. 

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. Nc3 d5 4. Nf3 Bg7 5. cxd5 Nxd5 6. e4 Nxc3 7. bxc3 c5 8. Be3 O-O 9. Be2 Qa5 10. O-O Qxc3 11. Rc1 Qa3 12. Rxc5 Qxa2 – you can take this pawn, but you should be very careful 

13. Bc4 Qa3 14. Qc2 Nc6 – Crafty evaluates it as 0.00 and suggests 14. … Na6 15. Bc1 Qb4 16. Bxa6 bxa6 17. Bg5 f6 18. Rb1 Qa3 19. Bf4 with -0.41 estimate   15. Rb1 Nb4 16. Qd1 

15. Rb1 Nb4 – mistake, better was 15. e6 with still 0.00, now it’s 1.50  16. Qd1 b5 – makes it worse – estimate 3.60. Two last moves were the  attempts to save the queen …

17. Bc1 Qa5 18. Rxb5 Qc7 19. R1xb4

Black resigned in a few moves.

An x-ray or x-ray attack is a tactic where a ranged piece supports a friendly piece ”through” an enemy piece.

I played some blitz yesterday on FICS and in the last 7-minute game I was lucky to reproduce (almost) the combination from Morphy’s famous “opera” game vs. Duke Karl / Count Isouard (1858).  The combination implements X-ray theme. 

 1. Rc8+ Nxb8 2. Qd8#

If it won’t be blitz, I would probably mate by rook to get closer to the original:

1.  Qb8+! Nxd8 2.  Rd8#

OK, it’s not about WW1, it’s just that French d5,e6/d4,e5 structure looks like trenches to me, so a correspondence game that I played in the thematic tournament goes under this title.  French defense, Tarrash,  I play White:

1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nd2 Nf6 4. e5 Nfd7 5. c3 c5 6. Bd3 Nc6 7. Ngf3 cxd4 8. cxd4 Qb6 9. Nb3 Be7 10. O-O O-O

11. Ng5 g6 12. Qg4 – following the game Jurcik (2285) vs. Ragger (2476) 1:0.  Black plays 12. … Kg7 here instead of 12. … Re8

13.  h4 – the last following move, 13. … h5 ( in the game was 13. … Nf8 ) 14. Nxe6!

The knight is untouchable because of Qxg6+ and Qh7#. 14. … Kh8 – more resilient was 14. … Kg8 15. Qg3 Nb4 16. Nxf8 Nxf8

15. Qf4 fxe6 16. Qh6+   1-0

I played my regular OTB game this Sunday. I played with a  boy rated 30 less than me and drew. Since I had a good attack in the middlegame, it left me kind of scratching my head. Of course, as I came home, the computer was merciless.  OK, so how it went? I was Black and he played  (as I learned later) Konstantinopolsky Opening.  It is a rarely played opening that begins with the moves 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. g3.  It was introduced in the game Konstantinopolsky–Ragozin, Moscow 1956.

Anyway, even more rare than the opening was the speed with which he played (90/SD). It was lightning first 12 moves, then blitz another 8-10 moves, then active the rest of the game.  I simply couldn’t get out of the table. After some not very good opening-middlegame phase (mostly half a pawn down according to computer) I was able to intercept the initiative with the move 19. ..f4.

White answered 20. gxf4 - big mistake.  20. .. Nxf4 21. Ng4 Bxg4 22. hxg4 Nxg2 23. Kxg2 Qg6

24. f3 Be7 25. Re4 Rf8 26. Qd1 Rf7 27. Qh1 Rbf8 28. Rf1 Bg5 29.
Bc3 Rf4 30. Qh3 Rxe4 31. dxe4 Be3 32. Qh4 Bg5 33. Qh5 Qf6 34. a4 Qf4 35. Qg6

Here I was glad that I can execute my long planned penetration of my Queen into the enemy’s territory - Qe3 and didn’t notice the winning move – Bh4.

36. Be1 Qe2+ 37. Kg1

37. … Rxf3 Another miss. Of course I saw Be3+, but I thought that White covers with the bishop not seeing that then Rxf3 wins.  38. Rxf3 Qxf3 39. Qf5 Be3+ 40. Kh2 Bf4+ 41. Kg1 Be3+ 42. Kh2  I saw that he has a perpetual check and didn’t see the win (there wasn’t already), so I traded queens.

42. .. Qxf5 43. gxf5 Bg5 44. Kh3 Kg8 45. Kg4 Kf7 46. Kh5  1/2:1/2

Allowing king there was a final mistake , though I don’t think there is a win here after 43… g5 44. hg Kg6. The bishop is bad, that’s it.

OK, I’ll just follow Dan Heisman’s rule: ”Losing can be a great motivator if it helps you identify and correct things you are doing that cause the loss”. Yeah,  if the position tells you there is a win, you should believe it and just find it.  Another Dan’s rule, that I didn’t fully followed:  “When looking for tactics – for either player – look for Checks, Captures, and Threats …”.

The good thing I managed my time pretty well, spending on the first 15 moves in the unknown opening 24 minutes.  OK, it’s 26.7% of all the time, not 20%, still good result for me.

8:25am EST.  Pairings are ready, so what’s for Canada? As I expected, our women got  a difficult opponent – Mexico with 4 WIM. Men got easier task, they play with Iraq, which have only 2 FMs. As for others,  pair Kamsky – Dominguez looks interesting, Dominguez recently won World Blitz Almaty Blitz Chess World Championships – went undefeated with 11.5 points, 8 victories and 7 draws against most of the major players in the world ranking.

9:30am. Dominguez plays White, Ruy  Lopez, quiet schema with d3 and c3. 10:25am.  Bad news – on the first board for men’s team our GM made a standard sacrifice Bxh7+, but overlooked  some defense and resigned.  Women look OK for now.  In Kamsky – Dominguez game they have e4,d4 – e5,d5, so the play will open.

11:00am. 3rd board for women sacrificed a bishop for 2 pawns, I hope she has compensation. 2nd board looks good.

12:00pm. Women – 1st board just won a pawn, 2nd board won, 3rd is losing badly, 4th in time trouble. Kamsky – Dominguez are close to a draw, i think.

12:20pm.  Our women are leading – 2:1! And the time trouble on the 4th board became mutual.

12:35pm. Men are losing 1:2 and the best 4th board can get is draw I think. Dominguez looks better to me now with pair of bishops. Women are simply blitzing, I like Canada’s position more.

12:55pm.  Suddenly, after exchange of tactical strikes Gata is remote passed pawn up, but with opposite colored bishops.

1:07pm.  Kamsky-Dominguez  - draw. Our Irina Barron went into R+3p vs. R+4p all on kingside endgame.  Isn’t it a draw?  Nikolay on the 4th board is trying to save the match, he is pawn down, but has excellent knight vs. bad bishop with queens.

2:20pm. Both Canadians drew, setting 2.5:1.5 for women and 1.5:2.5 for men, both results pretty surprising to me.

Here is how our 1st board, Yuan Yuanling, won with White:

Bxg7!  Kxg7 then Rg3+ – Black resigned.

After posting the game that went bad ( see “Lucena” post ), I decided to post something good . Here is the recent online correspondence game, played mostly “real-time”. After 14. f4 I looked at the different ways of saving the bishop, didn’t like h6, etc.. and decided to sacrifice a pawn by playing 14. … Be4.

I saw that I have a check Bh4+ and thought that it will give me sufficient compensation. 15. Nxe4 Nxe4 16. Bxe4 Bh4+ 17. Kf1 dxe4

Here white took the pawn, it proved to be wrong. 18. Qxe4 Re8 19. Qg2 Qd2 20. Rb1 Rad8 (with the threat Qd1+). 21. Qf3 Re3!  

White resigned ( 22. Qg2 Qd1+ 23. Rxd1 Rxd1#, so white has to give up the Queen). 

After the game I realized that final mating position reminds me the mate from the famous Morhy’s game at the Paris Opera with Duke Karl/Count Isouard. Many years ago I read a book about Paul Morphy, adored him and memorized a few games, including that one. Interesting, was it somewhere in my mind when I was playing this game? 

Destructive sacrifice – “sacrificing material to destroy the pawn cover or other protection around the enemy king. Usually a point of no return.” (dictionary).

Many of us are familiar with the bishop sacrifices – Bxh2/h7/h3/h6/… etc.  Rook sacrifice is a bit less common, maybe because it takes time and effort to get the rook into the striking position.

The first example is from my online game. My time was running out, and  after I made move Qd6-e6, I had 7 seconds left. Luckily for me, my opponent didn’t suspect anything and played c4-c5.

After Rxh3+, gxh3, Qxh3# I still had a few seconds.

Second,  more complicated example is also from my online game. Frankly it was a blitz game and I saw just a first few moves, it looked bad enough for white, so I went for it, then found the rest. Mate in 8 – can you see and calculate it (if not, see the comment)?

Op de site Chess Tactics zijn een aantal erg goede schaaklessen (in het Engels) te volgen. Grofweg komen hier dezelfde begrippen aan de orde dan uit de stappenmethode, zoals dubbele aanval, penning, blokkeren, lokken, uitschakelen van de verdediging. Na de introductie bestaat de site uit vijf delen, overeenkomend met wat men hier als de grootste tactische bouwstenen ziet. Zo’n deel bestaat weer uit hoofdstukken, waarin verschillende topics aan bod komen.

De site heeft als doel het meest complete overzicht te bieden van de tactische elementen in het schaakspel. Tot dusver zijn ze hier redelijk in geslaagd.

Ik zou zeggen: kijk zelf even.