Wallace-O’Dowd 2010
October 1, 2011 in Dan's Blog, Games
This was the second game in 2010 between Bruce and me. It was my sixth game of the season, in a run that led me to 7.5/10 and a pre-Xmas performance of 163. I hadn’t got any prep in against Bruce, so wondered if I’d be facing a Collé/Torré opening. Numbers in brackets are thinking time left per side in minutes.
1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nf6 3. d3 (88)
A very common move, but unambitious. Black has the choice between …Nc6, and …d5, and I prefer the latter, because it can lead to sharper play, and gives instant equality.
3…d5 4. Nbd2
White plays it cagily, like a Philidor in reverse. The advantage of this is that Black may become arrogant and overpush. Of course, with his e-pawn now defended, White forces Black to do the same.
4…Nc6 5. g3 (87)
White wants to develop his Bishop to the longest diagonal hoping to exchange on d5 and release it later on.
5…Bc5 (85)
Apparently this isn’t a theory move, but it seems eminently logical. Black develops his Bishop to the best square. Has the seal of approval from both Houdini and Fritz. For reference, I always annotate my serious games myself deeply, before letting engines touch them. Fritz is a more tactically touchyfeely beast, whereas Houdini is another level entirely, but which prefers a very positional approach, and can see tactics on a far deeper, omg what the hell sort of level.
6. Bg2 (86) 0-0 (83)
While I rejected 6…dxe4 7. dxe4 (7. Nxe4 Nxe4 8. dxe4 is much the same but drier), Houdini seems to like it more, on the logic that it permanently blunts White’s Bishop. I disagree with this however, since removing tension assumes one has a technical skill that I certainly don’t possess. It has been shown in similar Philidori/Lion endgames that the side with the Bishop in fianchetto can easily exchange or activate it as well.
7. 0-0 (85) Re8 (76)
If White does exchange on d5, I will want to be able to push e4, using my Kingside majority. He might also play Nc4, so we keep our pawn safely defended.
8. exd5 (78) Nxd5 9. Ne4 (77) Bb6 (66)
White opens up to use his Knight on the strong square e4, chasing my Bishop. This gave me a question to answer! I rejected Be7 on the grounds that this would lose tempo. Keeping the Bishop with an eye on d4 seemed also to tempt a potentially weakening a4.
10. a3 (72) Bf5 (63)
Black is denied the use of b4 for his Knight; which can only mean White wants to play the normally positional lemon, c4. Interestingly though, when I looked this over with Houdini, it thinks c4 is perhaps playable!
Houdini suggests the following odd line: 10. c4 Ndb4 11. c5 Ba5 12. a3 Nxd3 13. b4 which represents a case of complicating before the position gets any worse, and which would create an imbalance to work with.
11. Nh4 (68) Bxe4 (60) 12. Bxe4 (66) g6 (55)
White improves the vision of his Bishop and forces me to exchange my own. This didn’t make me uncomfortable though, since his Knight is now offside, and his Bishop is very blunted indeed. Black can keep his light Bishop instead, but he remains in control here anyways.
13. c4 (55) Nf4! (49)
I see c4 so often! Black obtains a permanent outpost on d4, a permanent target on d3, and probably intended that I play 13…Nf6 14. Bg5, when White has some pressure to speak of. Nf4 however is a lovely little wet move, winning a pawn. White’s options are none too pleasant.
a) 14. gxf4?? Qxh4 gives Black a commanding position, White’s King fractured and defenceless, and an attack swiftly coming.
b) 14. Nf3 Nxd3 gets very tactical and obtuse indeed, although I didn’t look as far as Houdini has shown me. 15. Qxd3 Qxe3 16. Bxd3 e4 17. b4 Nd4 18. c5 Nxf3+ 19. Kg2 Nxh2, which I think we can adequately sum up by saying oh dear God…
So, White bailed out with option 3, but quickly found himself in some sticky bananas.
14. Bxf4 (39) exf4 (48) 15. Bxc6 (37) bxc6 16. Qf3 (33)
To the untrained eye, this might look playable for White. Black has weakness on c6, and his Bishop doesn’t look so active. However, the asymmetry of the pawn structure (favouring the Bishop), the total passivity of the White Knight, and the outpost on d4 (again favouring the Bishop – someone promote him!) make this a rout. Black’s plan is as follows:
1. Restrain White’s pieces by tying them to the defence of b2 then d3 (since if White plays b4 he has some chances).
2. Manoeuvre so as to win the d3 pawn.
3. Exchange Queens, to reach a Rook+Bishop v Rook+Knight ending.
16…fxg3 (47) 17. hxg3 (32) Bd4 (42)
Black immediately sees that the exchange of b2-pawn for c6-pawn benefits him greatly, so he forces White onto the defensive while preventing the freeing d4 from ever being played.
18. Rab1 (30) Qd6! (28)
The exclam is just for the accuracy of this compared with the alternative Qd7, which fails to control c5 and b4. This is important later on.
19. Kg2 (27) Rad8 (26) 20. Qd1
Tricky and strong. He wants to come to a4, gaining play against my isolated pawn still, while suporting his Queenside pawns.
20…Bb6 (18.16)
This looks odd because the Bishop might become entombed, but that isn’t a problem. From here we ensure he has no point of entry for counterplay attacking a7, or by opening up the Queenside.
21. b4 (25) c5 (18.14)
Another paradoxical looking move! My Bishop is still better than his Knight, supporting my pawns which quell his counterplay.
22. Re1 (19.14) Rxe1 (17.03) 23. Qxe1 (19.04) Qxd3 (16.19)
Pawn number one has been eaten.
24. Nf3 (16.34) Qxc4 (14.46) 25. Qe7 (15.57) Qd5 (13.48)
White sensibly brings his pieces back into action and tries for an attack, so that if I go wrong he can reap maximum reward. Remember stage 2 of our plan though.
26. Re1 (14.24) c4 (12.47) 27. Re5 (13.21) Qd6 (12.29) 28. Ng5 (7.50) Qxe7 (10.04)
Second objective achieved, we now have the perfect endgame, and that c-pawn will accelerate the doom with a pretty sequence.
29. Rxe7 (7.46) c3 (8.11) 30. Re4 (6.09) Rd2 (7.25) 31. Kf1 (5.27) Rxf2+ (6.44) 32. Ke1 (5.14) c2 (6.26) 33. Rc4 (5.04) Be3! (5.55)
The killer returns from his holiday in the tropics.
34. Ne4 (4.33) Rh2 (5.18) 35. Rxc7 c1Q+ 36. Rxc1 (3.00) Bxc1 (5.02)
and Bruce graciously resigned. 0-1
Some pretty odd stuff in that game! …Nf4 is not the sort of move you can plan; a tactical radar is essential for seeing the initial idea, and then calculation power verifies the possible outcomes. White had no positive imbalances in the technical phase after this which helped. Note the usefulness of …Bb6 and …c5! Not the sort of thing you’d see in elementary positional textbooks, but quite often a concrete style, preventing counterplay and basing decisions on computer like logic (the Bb6 was still better than the Nh4, since it was doing more in the important area of the board) can work wonders on your game.
If you have any comments/questions/criticisms of any of this, do get in touch! Coming soon, a saunter through some of my games at the British Championships, including two ridiculous Rook endgame saves, a Petroff that actually turns interesting (get the medication!), and an extremely tense Collé-Zukertort against that most dreaded of creatures..the junior!
Kevin Southernwood said on October 1, 2011
A Petroff that turns intresting??? Shurely shome mishtake. I don’t mean that as I’ve seen one or two examples of late that certainly have!
Anyway, I for one think you are right. Posting games may seem ‘foolhardy’ but it makes you think more about what you and your opponent have played. You’ve taken the trouble to analyse, which should mean you understand the position a lot better – far more than any quick 5 minute ‘let’s have a look at what Dan plays’ merchant.
Secondly, I’ve always hankered after the idea that we chess players should be a more collabrative bunch… more interested in being a learning community (and obviously the drugs are having their effect). My real interest in chess is as a study – not so much the winning and losing; though, being human, I prefer the former.
I don’t have time this morning to look at the game seriously but I will try to.
One technical plea though – which probably should be addressed to John rather than you, Dan. Is there any way of trying to make sure that you can see the clickable board and the commentary/analysis at the same time. It’s a drag flipping backwards and forwards twixt the two.
Cheers
Kevin
admin said on October 1, 2011
with regards to the commentary and layout – Commentary can be placed directly within the pgn – eg. 1.e4 c6 {Oh no not the bloody Caro Kann!}
Example pgn post below:
[pgn][Event "F/S Return Match"]
[Site "Belgrade, Serbia Yugoslavia|JUG"]
[Date "1992.11.04"]
[Round "29"]
[White "Fischer, Robert J."]
[Black "Spassky, Boris V."]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 {This opening is called the Ruy Lopez.} 3… a6
4. Ba4 Nf6 5. O-O Be7 6. Re1 b5 7. Bb3 d6 8. c3 O-O 9. h3 Nb8 10. d4 Nbd7
11. c4 c6 12. cxb5 axb5 13. Nc3 Bb7 14. Bg5 b4 15. Nb1 h6 16. Bh4 c5 17. dxe5
Nxe4 18. Bxe7 Qxe7 19. exd6 Qf6 20. Nbd2 Nxd6 21. Nc4 Nxc4 22. Bxc4 Nb6
23. Ne5 Rae8 24. Bxf7+ Rxf7 25. Nxf7 Rxe1+ 26. Qxe1 Kxf7 27. Qe3 Qg5 28. Qxg5
hxg5 29. b3 Ke6 30. a3 Kd6 31. axb4 cxb4 32. Ra5 Nd5 33. f3 Bc8 34. Kf2 Bf5
35. Ra7 g6 36. Ra6+ Kc5 37. Ke1 Nf4 38. g3 Nxh3 39. Kd2 Kb5 40. Rd6 Kc5 41. Ra6
Nf2 42. g4 Bd3 43. Re6 1/2-1/2[/pgn]
Kevin Southernwood said on October 2, 2011
And there’s me still not knowin’ out how they make cotton…
PS
1.e4 c6 Nice analysis. So now we know what you like… Unless of course you’re just saying that… Oh my god, quickly nurse… the screens.
Kevin Southernwood said on October 2, 2011
Dan,
Here are some thoughts about the game (non-machine based). I’ve just gone for the idea of indicating moments when I’d basically do something pretty different if I was at a board. it may be wrong headed… it may not, but if it is I’d like to know why because it might help me not to be such an idiot (fat chance).
8. exd5 Surely white should (maybe could is a better word) go for more typical King’s Indain style moves, some kind of plan like h3, Kh2, move the knight (though not to e1 cos you might regret breaking communication between rook and queen if black goes exchanging) push the f pawn and move the knight back again. The whole set-up suggests playing on the Kside for white. Of course black can get into something like an exchange variation of the KI with colours reversed but would you really want to? It’s not the stuff of dreams and you’d probably be conceeding d5 as an outpost for white to get a knight to – whilst c3 keeps a black knight out of d4.
9…Bb6 I’m sure over the board I would have gone the other way to e7 most likely without even finding the line 10. c4 Ndb4 11. c5 Ba5 12. a3 Nxd3 13. b4 (which looks good to me). I’d probably think the Bishop had done a job on that diagonal - given that white’s changed the structure. In principle, I’m sure I’d be looking (however erroneous it would be) to push …f5 getting the knight off its perch – if it goes to g5? kick it, swing the ds bishop back to f6 and tuck the king in the corner (no naughties on that open diagonal thanky you). Then as black haven’t you got a nice centre you can try and build up behind? … Bb6 kind of invites white to go for it on the qside.
13…Nf4! Bing-bong! Looks more than just decorative. Please educate an old Fart… what is a wet move? Remember – keep it clean. As you say nothing looks nice for white.
19. Kg2 Rad8 I know at this point I’d be thinking rook lift – either e6 or e5 – probably the latter with ideas like doubling and getting down to the second rank (attacking f2) . White has problems challenging for the file. Is there something wrong with this idea that I’m not seeing? The pony also looks short on squares: there might be ways to exploit this.
24. I think they are playing the last post in the far distant hills.
OK – that’s it.
Dan O\'Dowd said on October 3, 2011
Heyyy, glad to have some comments!
First off; my intuition (since I have no knowledge yet of King’s Indian or other structures) is that since White is White, and playing e4, he would find it easier to play the early f4 before Nf3 in the first place. If we think of the position as a sort of Philidor reversed, White prefers to keep the position moderately closed as a mark of his style (Bruce after all is well-known for solidity), and so that if things get tactical he has insurance against his position going south more quickly than it otherwise might. Asides this I couldn’t tell you what I’d do against your plan, I’ll consider it in future!
…f5 is in general an idea in this line; yes – I’ve had sharp games online where I’ve played it in various cirucmstances, though always with Bb6, thus keeping an eye on that f-pawn. In fact, the pawn structure can get rather agitated if White plays exd5 and f4, and Black plays …f5. I suppose the logic is that if White wanted such a slow-burn position as that, he’d play 1. Nf3 or similar.
As far as a wet move, I just started using that term last season for any move which a) comes from no particular position of commanding strength, but b) turns things very tactically razor-edge, to achieve positional means. A couple of times last year I played intentionally wet moves to avoid a very dry, boring position (now you see the contrast implied), which was a mistake, but really it’s just a tactical function of my style.
Finally, I had no designs against f2 in the game because I knew that d3 was the most prevalent target. I suppose it’s target consciousness: White has more difficulty defending d3 than he does f2, and this also allows us to attack the weakness on b2 before White plays a do-or-die Queenside pawn expansion which in Bruce and my perpetual, mutual time trouble, might give me problems. As for the Knight’s being sidelined, I felt no need to do anything immediate, since my Bishop is already superior by some distance. If White had chosen to recalcitrate his Knight sooner, of course I’d have to take action, but I saw no reason to shake the bones of the half-dead.
Given your KI style comments when we meet next we should try something in that vein in a Petroff base-structure!