MEMBERS' GAMES

The 5th QOCCC Final finally got under way on 15 January 1999, with the following participants: Simon Berube, Clement Blanchet, Michel Bolduc, Alec Goudreau, George Marchand, Murray Marchant, Louis Raymond, Michel Robidoux, and Louis G. Tremblay. Michel Robidoux, however was forced to withdraw due to illness, and Simon Berube also withdrew. Unfortunately, Michel Lauzon and Penka Apostolov, co-winners of the 4th QOCCC, declined their invitation to participate in this Final.

As of this writing our team in the 12th CC Olympiad Final has posted 2 more results: 1 win and 1 loss, bringing the total to 2/5. Our team in the 13th CC Olympiad Preliminaries has posted 10 more results: 1 win, 6 draws and 3 loses for a total of 4/11. A reminder for those with internet access, you can keep track of the progress of our Olympiad teams by going to my website page at: http://correspondencechess.com/marconi/ccolympiad.htm As mentioned in my previous column I am featuring games from the 4th QOCCC Championship in this column. Michel Lauzon and Penka Apostolov have kindly submitted brief, but interesting bios. and annotated games. So without further ado, let me introduce them to you in their own words, and through their games.

Michel Lauzon writes: "I am a 43 year accountant (CGA); I do cost accounting. I am divorced without children, and the proud owner of a nice golden retriever (Lancelot).

I learned the moves of the game when I was around 10 years old, with a friend; played a few games and almost never played again until I went to CEGEP Ahuntic at 18. After a few weeks of playing cards I decided to try chess. I was a member of the CEGEP's chess team when we won the 1976 provincial championship. I remember IM Jean Hbert was playing that year and he won the 1st board award. I played a few OTB tournaments, obtaining a rating of 1706.

I started my CC career in December 1983 in the USCF`s Golden Knights tournament because I saw an ad in Chess Life and Review. I subsequently joined the CCCA in February 1985. I have no real achievements other than the my first place finish in the 4th QOCCC Final. I really enjoy playing in the CCCA because of the friendly atmosphere. It is always a pleasure to have contact with peopla like Ken MacDonald, Manny Migicovsky, William Roach, and many others. I wrote a column on the King`s Gambit in CHECK! around 1990. It was a lot of work, but it was fun.

My other interests include: Tennis, 2 to 3 times a week and a new found passion since two years, playing the electric bass. I play in a small jazz and blues group once a week for the pleasure only. I am currently looking for a drummer. Anyone interested?"

The following is a selection of Michel's games. Michel confided in me that he is a big devotee of the Center-Counter Defense (Scandinavian), hence 3 of the following games are Scandinavians. First up are two games from the 4th QOCCC Final.

White: Valori Ethier
Black: Michel Lauzon
4th QOCCC Final 1996-98
Center-Counter Defense (Scandinavian) B01

1.e4 d5 2. exd5 Qxd5

(CC-IM Michael Melts wrote a very interesting and thorough 3 part series on the so-called Gubnitsky-Pytel Variation 3...Qd6!? in CHESS MAIL issues 6-8&9/98'. )

3.Nc3 Qa5 4. d4 Nf6 5.Nf3

(Alternatives are 5.Bc4, 5.Bd3, 5.h3, and 5.Bd2. The text is considered the main line and best.)

5...Bf5

(This is former US CC Champion David Taylor's favorite move. He and co-author Alex Dunne wrote a thorough book outlining this line called Center-Counter Uprising. 5...c6 is an interesting alternative, and according John Grefe and Jeremy Silman this move is more accurate, but transpositions back to the 5...Bf5 line are possible, unless White deviates with 6.Bd2.)

6 Bc4 e6 7. Bd2

(7.0-0!?)

7...c6

(An important move, providing an escape route for the Queen.) 8.Qe2

(The most aggressive reply according to David Taylor.)

8...Bb4 9.O-O-O

(9.Ne5 is seen in the next game.)

9...Nbd7

(This is Taylor's improvement over 9...Nd5?! )

10.Ne5

(On 10.a3 Bxc3 11.Bxc3 Qc7 12.d5 cxd5 13.Bxd5 0-0 14.Ba2 Ne4 15.Bb4 Rfc8 16.Nh4 Qf4+ 17.Kb1 Qxh4 0-1, Connor-Taylor, Region VII Final 1982. The text prevents Black from castling queenside, Black's intended goal, if feasible.)

10...Nxe5 11.dxe5

(Better than 11.Qxe5)

11...Nd5!

(This centralizing move is best and is David Taylor's patented move. After 11...Nd7 we have 12.a3 b5 13.Ba2 Bxa3 14.bxa3 Qxa3+ 15.Kb1 0-0 16.Bc1 and White was better, Jansa-Taulbut, Copenhagen 1981.)

12. 12. Bxd5

(Both 12.Nxd5 and 12.Ne4 lead to equal play. According to Taylor the exchange of Bishop for Knight is an attempt by White to go for more, but there may not be anything to gain by this move.)

12...exd5!

(This is forced, since on 12...cxd5? 13.Qb5+ Qxb5 14.Nxb5 Bxd2+ 15.Rd2 with a clear advantage for White (Taylor), eg: 15...Kd7 16.Nd6 Bg6 17.Nxb7 and White is winning.)

13.g4!?

(13.Kb1 d4 14.Ne4 Bxe4 15.Bxb4 Bxc2+ 16.Qxc2 Qxb4 17.Qe4 0-0-0 and Black is better, Rohricht-Taylor, APCT. If 13.a3 Bxa3!? 14.bxa3 Qxa3+ 15.Kb1 Qb3+ 16.Ka1 Bxc2 17.Rc1 d4! 18.Na2 d3 19.Ne4 a5! and Black is better according to Taylor. However, on 13.Rhe1!? Bxc3 14.Bxc3 Qxa2 15.e6! Bxe6 16.Bxg7 Rg8 17.Be5 unclear (Taylor)).

13...d4!

(The only move to keep Black's chances alive. 13...Bg6 14.f4 with the threat of f5. Or if 13...Be6?! 14.f4! e4 15.Ne4. White's strong centralized Knight compensates for any attack on Queenside by Black.)

14.Nb5!?

I was in my book up to move 14. The book moves for me are 14.Nb1, 14.Ne4 and 14.gxf5. (This move appears to be new. According Taylor 14.Nb1 is forced. 14.Ne4 Bxe4 15.Qxe4 Bxd2+ 16.Rxd2 Qxa2 -/+ {Taylor}; or 14.gxf5 dxc3 15.Bxc3 bxc3 16.Qxa2 17.c4 Qa1+ 18.Kd2 0-0-0+ 19.Ke1 Rxd1+ 20.Qxd1 Qxe5+ - + {Taylor}. For a thorough examination of the lines after 14.Nb1 readers should consult Center-Counter Uprising.)

14...d3! 15.cxd3

(If 15...Nd6+ Bxd6!? 16.Bxa5 dxe2 17.Rxd6 Bxg4 18.Rg1 Bh5!? and Black has a pawn plus, but the game seems unclear to me.)

15...cxb5 16. Bxb4 Qxa2!

(16...Qxb4 17.gxf5 Qf4+ 18.Kb1 Qxf5 unclear.)

17.Bc3

I think that improvements are possible for17.Bc3. (Perhaps 17.gxf5!? is better, Qa1+ 18.Kc2 {18...Kd2 Qxb2+} Qa4+ 19.Kb1 Qxb4 20.e6 unclear.)

17...b4! 18.Bd4!?

(If 18.Bxb4? Qa1+ 19.Kc2 Qa4+ 20.Kb1 {forced; since 20.Kd2 loses to Qxb4+; 20.b3 loses to Qa2+; and 20.Kc3 loses to Rc8+} Be6 20.Bc3 b5 with idea of 21.Qe1 a5 22.Kc1 Bb3 -/+; 22.d4 Ba2+ 23.Kc1 b4 24.Bd2 Rc8+ - +.)

18...Be6 19.Kd2 Qd5 20. Qe3 O-O 21. Bxa7 b3 22. Bd4

(Appears forced because of the threat ...Qa5+)

22...Rfc8 23.Rhf1??

(I believe 23.Rc1 was necessary. Allowing the Rook to occupy c2 is losing.)

23...Rc2+ 24. Ke1 Qa5+ 25. Bc3 Qa1!

(Nice! The Queen is immune to capture because of mate in 2. Now Black, however, threatens 26...Qxd1+ 27.Kxd1 Ra1+ 28.Qc1 Rxc1 #.)

26.Bd2

(Only move.)

26...Qxb2 27. h3 Qa2 28. Ke2 b2 29. f4 0-1

(Since 29...Bd5 with the idea of Rac8 gives Black a clear advantage. Or 29...Qa6 with the idea of 30...Ba2)

White: Sylvain Laplante
Black: Michel Lauzon
4th QOCCC 1996-98
Center-Counter Defense (Scandinavian) B01

1.e4 d5 2. exd5 Qxd5 3. Nc3 Qa5 4. d4 Nf6 5. Nf3 c6 6. Bc4 Bf5 7. Bd2 e6 8. Qe2 Bb4 9.Ne5 Nbd7!?

(Best according to Taylor.)

10.Nxd7 Kxd7!?

(10...Nxd7 11.a3 Nb6 12.0-0 +/- Chandler-Rogers, 1983.)

11.O-O-O Rad8 12. a3 Bxc3 13. Bxc3 Qc7 14. f3 Kc8

(With equality according to Taylor.)

15.Be1 b5 16. Bb3 h5 17. Bg3 Qb6 18. c3 Rd7 19. Be5 Rhd8 20. Rhe1 Kb7 21.h3 h4 22.Qf2 Rh8 23. Rd2 Rdd8 1/2 - 1/2.

Michel Writes: "Now I would like the help of our readers because I used the same variation in M-96 and I lost against a better player than me, Andre De Vriendt (see game below). Still I think that Black should be able to improve somewhere after 10...Kxd7. For now I use 10...Nxd7 until I improve on that game. I work really hard on the Center-Counter Defense. I exchange annotations with an an English theoritician, Mr Otto Hardy who writes in Gambit Review, Pergamon Chess, etc. I also had the good fortune to exchange annotations with Mr. David Taylor who won the 8th USCC Championship using the Center-Counter Defense as Black and wrote a book on it, with otb master Alex Dunne. If a reader is interested I would appreciate exchanging notes on this opening, and in particular an improvement to my play after 10...Kxd7 in my game with Andre De Vriendt. Please don't quote book analysis, I think that I have almost all the books on the Center-Counter Defense, even an old 1919 book by J. du Mont."

You can write to: Michel Lauzon, 3750 Des Oeillets, St-Hubert, Qubec, J3Y 8S3, or email me your comments and annotations to: marconi@pandore.qc.ca and I will forward them to Michel. Thank you.

White: Andre De Vriendt
Black: Michel Lauzon
M-96 1998
Center-Counter Defense (Scandinavian) B01

1e4 d5 2. exd5 Qxd5 3. Nc3 Qa5 4. d4 Nf6 5. Nf3 c6 6. Bc4 Bf5 7. Bd2 e6 8. Qe2 Bb4 9. Ne5 Nbd7 10. Nxd7 Kxd7 11. O-O-O Rad8 12. a3 Bxc3 13. Bxc3 Qc7 14.f3 Kc8 15.g4 Bg6 16. Be1 b5 17. Bg3 Qb6 18. Bd3 Bxd3 19.Rxd3 Rd7 20. h4 Rhd8 21. Be5 Nd5 22. h5 h6 23. Re1 Kb7 24. Qd2 Rg8 25. Rb3 a5 26. a4 b4 27. c4!

27...Nf6 28. Rd3 Rgd8 29. Bxf6 gxf6 30. Re4 e5 31. Qxh6 Rxd4 32. Rdxd4 Rxd4 33. Qe3 Rxc4+ 34. Kb1 Qxe3 35. Rxe3 Rd4 36. Kc2 Rd8 37. Rd3 Rf8 38. Rd6 f5 39. h6 fxg4 40. fxg4 f6 41. h7 Rh8 42. Rd7+ Kb6 43. Kd3 c5 44. Rf7 Kc6 45. Kc4 1-0.

White: Michel Lauzon
Black: Martial Larochelle
4th QOCCC 1996-98
Dunst Opening A00

1.Nc3 d5 2. e4 e6 3. g3 dxe4 4. Nxe4 Nf6 5. Nxf6+ Qxf6 6. Bg2 Bc5 7. Qf3 Qe7 8. Ne2 e5 9. O-O O-O 10. d3 Nc6 11. Be3 Be6 12. Nc3 Rad8 13. Qh5 Bxe3 14. fxe3 g6 15. Qh6 f5 16. Bxc6 bxc6 17. a3 Bd5 18. Rf2 e4 19. d4 c5 20.Nxd5 Rxd5 21. c4 Rd7 22. d5 c6 23. dxc6 Rd6 24. Raf1 Rc8 25. g4 g5 26. Qh5 f4 27. exf4 e3 28. Re2 gxf4 29. Rxf4 Rcxc6 30. Kg2 Rd1 31. Rxe3!!

31...Rd2+

(Obviously not 31...Qxe3?? 32.Qf7+ Kh8 33.Qf8#)

32. Kf3 1-0.

(Since on 32...Re6 33.Rxe6 Qxe6 34.Qg5+ Qg6 35.Rf8+ Kxf8 36.Qxd2 and White has a two pawn advantage which should win.)

Penka Apostolov writes: "I was born in Sofia, Bulgaria in 1965. My father taught me the rules of chess at the age of 10. One year later I started to beat him, and decided to play in competitions. I was champion for cadets of Sofia. As a junior I played twice in the women semifinals of the Bulgarian championship. In 1985, however, because of family and professional obligations I left the chess scene.

In 1990 I came to Canada. The following year I started playing OTB again, and in 1992 I was already the second highest rated woman in Canada. In 1994 I played on the Canadian Women's Olympic Team at the Moscow Chess Olympiad and turned in the second best result on the team. In 1996 I was awarded the title of FIDE Master.

I started playing correspondence chess in 1994 to improve my analytical skills and find a way to reduce blunders in my OTB games. I love it very much! The results came - I tied for first place with Michel Lauzon in the 4th Quebec Open Correspondence Chess Championship Final. I find correspondence chess very entertaining and useful. On the other hand, it is a time consuming. Usually, I am playing in one, maximum two tournaments at a time in order to concentrate fully. Recently, I declined an invitation to play in Canadian Closed Championship because of pressure from my professional duties."

The following is a selection of Penka's games from the 4th OCCC Final.

White: Penka Apostolov
Black: Marc Bergeron
4th QOCCC 1996-98
King's Indian Defense/ Fiancheto Variation E68

1.d4 Nf6 2.Nf3 g6 3.c4 Bg7 4.g3 0-0 5.Bg2 d6 6.0-0 Nbd7 7.Nc3 e5 8.e4 exd4

So, the opening strategy of both sides becomes clear. I choose the solid fiancheto variation against the King's Indian. This early exchange, however, by Black in the center deprives him some flexibility.

9.Nxd4 Re8 10.h3 Nc5 11.Re1 c6 12.Bf4 a5 13.b3 Qc7

Here theory recommends 13...h6 14.Qc2 Nfd7 15.Rad1Ne5 (not 15...d4?! 16.Rd4 Ne6 17.Rd6 Nf4 18.gf4 Qh4 19.Qd3! Qf4 20.Rd7 Bd7 21.Qd7+ - Quinteros - Li Zunian, 1985) 16.Be3 a4 17.f4 axb3 18.axb3 Ned7 with some advantage for White.

14.Qc2 Nfd7 15.Be3 Qb6

An ambitious move which exerts pressure on d4 and also has the idea of Qb4, a4 aiming at b3 and c4.

16.Rab1

This natural move withdrawing the Rook from the a1-h8 diagonal, supports the b-pawn and at the same time sets up a beautiful trap, which I discovered while analyzing the position.

16...Qb4? 17.Ncb5!!

Now Black loses the Queen. The rest is clear without explanation.

17...cxb5 18.a3 Qxa3 19.Nxb5 Qb4 20.Bd2 Qxb5 21.cxb5 Ne5 22.Re3 g5 23.Bc3 1 - 0.

A beautiful miniature which I will remember for a long time!

White: Penka Apostolov
Black: Robert Giroux
4th QOCCC 1996-98
Queen's Gambit Declined/Slav Defense D11

1.d4 Nf6 2.Nf3 d5 3.c4 c6 4.g3 Bf5 5.Bg2 e6 6.0-0 Nbd7 7.b3 h6 8.Bb2 Be7 9.Nc3 0-0 10.Nd2 Bg6 11.e4 dxe4 12.Ndxe4 Nxe4 13.Nxe4 Nf6 14.f3?! Qb6 15.Kh1!

After a modestly played opening we have a equal position on the board. I did not want to waste time in this position, so I offered a draw. Black refused.

15...Rfd8 16.Qe1! Nxe4 17.fxe4 e5?! 18.d5 Bd6 19.Rc1 c5?!

Black successfully makes a pawn of his dark-squared Bishop.

20.Qe2 Qc7 21.h4!

The signal for attack on the kingside. The text forces the next reply, which further deteriorates Black's position.

21...f6 22.Bh3! Bf7

(We have now a unique position with two good bishops against two bad bishops. Both of Whites' bishops are participating in the attack, while the Blacks' have only defensive functions and in reality they impede the maneuvering of the rest of the Black's army.)

23.Rc3!

For the last few moves Black completely misses his play on the queenside and now after the inclusion of the White Rook in the attack the pressure is becoming unbearable.

23...h5

Dejection! This helps White to open files for attack against Black's King, but it is already hard to find a good moves for Black.

24.g4 hxg4 25.Qxg4 Kh8 26.Rg3 Bf8 27.Rf5!

This is stronger than 27.Qf5. The threat is Rh5+ with a fast mate.

27...Rd6 28.Qf3!

I like moves like this - serving two purposes. The obvious threat is 29.Bxe5 - you see now how the dark-squared Bishop participates in the attack - and also Queen moves to make room for the light-squared Bishop to f5 for the decisive blow.

28...Re8 29.Rh5+ !

(29...Bxh5 30.Qxh5+ Kg8 31.Bf5! g6 (only move) 32.Rxg6+ (or 32.Bxg6) Bg7 33.Rxg7+ Qxg7 34.Qxe8+ Qf8 35.Bh7+! Kg7 36.Qg6 mate.)

29...Kg8 30.Bf5 g6 31.Bxg6 Bxg6 32.Qf5! 1 - 0

White: Andre Lorrain
Black: Penka Apostolov
4th QOCCC 1996-98
Sicilian Defense/Richter-Rauzer Variation B66

1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 d6 6.Bg5 e6 7.Qd2 a6 8.0-0-0 h6 9.Be3 Bd7 10.f3

This move prepares a pawn storm by g4 and h4, so White mades clear his attacking intentions.

10...b5 11.g4 Nxd4

Trying to reduce the pressure in the center and to win few tempi for attack of the White's castle position.

12.Bxd4 b4 13.Ne2 e5 14.Be3 Qa5 15.Kb1 Be6 16.b3??

Probably the decisive mistake after which, with precision and fantasy Black should be winning. Theory recommends: 16.Nc1 d5 17.Nb3 Qc7 18.exd5 Nxd5 19.Bd3 unclear.

16...d5! 17.g5 hxg5 18.exd5 Nxd5 19.Bxg5 f6! 20.Be3 Rd8 21.Qc1 Bf5!!

Very strong, but not an obvious move which prepares the final assault on the White's castled position and particularly on c2. A move like this is difficult to find OTB. It shows the beauty of correspondence chess when you can find the "absolute truth" in the silence of your den.

22.Bf2 g6! 23.Bg2

This surrenders the game but there is no escape already.

23...Rc8 24.Rd2 Bh6 25.f4 Nxf4 26.Be3 Nxg2 27.Bxh6 Rxh6 28.Qg1 Rxc2 29.Rxc2 Bxc2+ 30.Kxc2 Qxa2+ 0 -1

White: Valori Ethier
Black: Penka Apostolov
4th QOCCC Final 1996-98
Birds Opening A03

1.f4 d5 2.b3 Bg4

I played Ethier in the preliminary round again with the Black pieces and after a prolonged battle he held a draw. This time I decided to play a bit differently. The only reference that I had in mind was Kupreichik - Usupov, Erevan 1982 Inf 33/1 which continued: 3.Bb2 Nc6 4.g3?! e5!? 5.fe5 f6 6.Bh3 Bh3 7.ef6! Nf6 8.Nh3 Bc5 with compensation.

3.h3 Bh5 4.g4 Bg6

In the above mentioned game Usupov gives 4...e5 5.Nf3 e4 winning, but after carefully examining the position I disagree with this evaluation. Now I realize that I am playing reverse Dutch 2.Bg5 with a tempo less which was not exactly my plan.

5.Nf3!

(Of course, 5.f5 is refuted by 5...e6! Now, however, f5 is a threat,RPM)

5...e6 6.Bb2 h5 7.Bg2?!

A mistake, 7.g5 was the correct move. Now the opening of the h-file and exchange of the rooks makes Black's game easier.

7...hxg4 8.hxg4 Rxh1+ 9.Bxh1 Nh6 10.g5 Nf5 11.e3 Nc6 12.Ne5?

A blunder. Black was already better and White had problems with development. First, this move violates the principles of the opening: Don't move the same piece twice! Second, it forces the exchange of Nc6 for Ne5 which facilitates Black's development. Third, it places the Bishop on the extremely inconvenient square e5.

12...Nxe5 13.Bxe5 c6!!

A very subtle move of which I am proud. It opens the diagonal d8-a5 for the Queen, prepares to castle long, and closes the h1-a8 diagonal for any speculations. Now White cannot develop the Knight because of the vulnerable position of Be5; the d-pawn cannot be moved, and what's left are only moves with the Queen or the retreat of the Bishop.

14.Qg4

I still prefer 14.Bb2.

14... Bd6

After all I said before I am now going to offer the exchange of this bishop?? Well, don't be stuck with dogma. First, I have no better place for my Bishop. Second, I am doing the exchange with tempo because my Queen will be placed at the ideal square of d6.

15.Bxd6 Qxd6 16.Qh3?!

Again the same mistake - second move with the same piece. But the position is very tough, there is no clear way how to finish the development. For example, 16.Nc3?? would be met by 16...Nxe3!! 17.dxe3 Qb4 winning. I hope you understand now how good the d6 square is for my Queen.

16...0-0-0 17.d4 c5 18.c3 cxd4 19.cxd4 Qc7!!

The winning move. White cannot parry all the threats. The Bishop on g6, waiting in ambush, is playing a crucial role in Black's attack.

20.Kd2 Nxd4! 21.Nc3

If 21.exd4 Qc2+ 22.Ke1 Qc1+ 23.Ke2 Qb2+winning.

21...Bf5!

Accuracy until the end! It is necessary to remove White's Queen from the third rank, from the defense of c3 square. If 22.Qg3 Qc3+ 23.Kc3 Ne2+ winning.

22. 22.Qg2 Nc2 23.Rc1 d4! 24.Rxc2

If the Queen was on the third rank it would be possible to 24.e4 dxc3+ 25.Kc2 which prolongs the agony. Now on 24.e4 follows Qc3+ winning immediately.

24...dxc3+ 25.Ke1 Bxc2 0-1.

Following is an additional selection of games from the 4th QOCCC Final.

White: Al Fichaud
Black: Martial Larrochelle
4th QOCCC Final 1996-98
A25

1.g3 e5 2.Bg2 Nc6 3.c4 g6 4.Nc3 Bg7 5.e4 d6 6.d3 Nge7 7.Nge2 0-0 8.0-0 f5 9.Rb1 Be6 10.Nd5 h6 11.b4 Qd7 12.b5 Nd8 13.Nec3 Nc8 14.Bd2 c6 15.bxc6 bxc6 16.Nb4 f4 17.f3 g5 18.Na6 Ne7 19.Qa4 Ng6 20.c5!

Hitting at the core of Black's position!

20...Nf7 21.Qa5 Rfc8 22.cxd6 Qxd6 23.Nc5 Nd8 24.Nd1 Bf8 25.Nxe6 Nxe6 26.Bh3! Qc5+

This move is ineffective because White is not obligated to swap Queen's.

27.Nf2 Re8 28.Bf5! Qxa5?!

Best was 28...Nh8, although it still leads to a won position for White, eg: 29.Kg2 Qxa5 30.Bxa5 Nd4 31.Ng4 Bg7 32.Rb7 Nf7 33.Bg6 Nd6 34.Rd7 Re6 35.Bb4 Rxg6 36.Bxd6 Re6 and White is much better and winning.

29.Bxa5 Kg7?

(Only move was 29...Nh8.)

30.Rb7+ 1-0.

White: Andre Lorrain
Black: Al Fichaud
4th OCCCC Final
Caro-Kann Defense B17

1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.Nd2 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Nd7 5.Bc4 Ngf6 6.Ng5 e6 7.Qe2 Nb6 8.Bb3 h6 9.N5f3 c5 10.Bf4 Nbd5 11.Be5 Qa5+ 12.Nd2 b5 13.dxc5 Bxc5 14.Ngf3 0-0 15.0-0 Ba6 16.Bxd5 Nxd5 17.Nb3 Qb6 18.Nxc5 Qxc5 19.Rfd1 Rac8 20.Nd4 Nc7 21.Rd2 b4 22.Qe3 Rfd8 23.a3 Bb7 24.axb4 Qxb4 25.c3 Qb6 26.Rad1 Ne8 27.h3 Rd5 28.Nf3?!

Exchanging Queens was not a prudent decision.

28...Qxe3 29.fxe3 Rcd8 30.Bd4 a6 31.c4 R5d6 32.Kf2 f6 33.Ke2 e5 34.Bc3 Rxd2+ 35.Bxd2 Nc7 36.Ra1 Ne6 37.b4 Rc8 38.c5 Bc6 39.Nh4 Bb5+ 40.Ke1 Bd3 41.Nf3 Nc7 42.Kd1 Kf7 43.Ne1 Bb5 44.Nc2 Rd8 45.Kc1 Ke6 46.g3 Bc6 47.Ne1 Kd5 48.Ra3 Ke4 49.Bc3? Nb5! 50.Rxa6

(If 50.Rb3 Bd5.)

50...Nxc3 51.Nc2??

( However on 51.Rxc6 Na2+! 52.Kb2 Nxb4 53.Rc7 Rg8 and Black has a clear advantage in the endgame, if not a winning one.)

51...Bb5 0-1.

White: Martial Larrochelle
Black: Andre Lorrain
4th QOCCC Final 1996-98
French Defense/ Advance Variation C02

1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 c5 4.c3 Nc6 5.Nf3 Qb6

(Alternatives: 5...f6; 5...Nge7; 5...Bd7!?; 5...Nh6!?)

6.a3 a5

(6...c4)

7.Bd3 Bd7 8.0-0 a4! 9.Bc2

No more theory after the text. (After 9.dxc5 Bxc5 10.Nbd2 f6 11.Qe2 Neg7!, "with complications" {Watson}, Dowden-Belyavsky, Lucerne 1982.)

9...Qa7

(With the idea of ....b5 to reinforce the a-pawn.)

10.Be3 b5 11.Ng5 g6 12.Qf3 Bc8 13.dxc5?

(Better was 13.Nd2.)

13... Nxe5!

(White was obviously hoping for 13...Bxc5?? 14.Bxc5 Qxc5 15.Qxf7+ {or 15.Nxf7 + - } Kd8 16.Qb7 + -.)

14.Qg3 f6 15.f4 Bxc5 16.Bxc5 Qxc5+ 17.Kh1 Nf7! 18.Nxh7?! (This move I don't understand, giving up a piece for a pawn. White is now lost. Martial's play in this tournament seems to have been way below his real strength. Perhaps he was concentrating his efforts in our other tournaments. If only I had this kind of luck with Martial in my own games with him.)

18...Rxh7 19.Qxg6 Rh8 20.Nd2 Qf8! 21.Nf3 Qh6 22.Qd3 Bd7 23.Rae1 Ne7 24.h3 Nd6 25.Nd4 Kf7 26.Qe2 Rae8! 0-1.

White: Andr Lorrain
Black: Robert Giroux
4th QOCCC Final 1996-98
Caro-Kann Defense B17

1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.Nd2 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Nd7 5.Nf3 Ngf6 6.Nxf6 Nxf6 7.Bc4 Bf5 8.Qe2 e6 9.Bg5 Bg4 10.d5 Bxf3 11.gxf3 cxd5 12.0-0-0 Be7 13.Bxf6 Bxf6 14.Rxd5 Qe7 15.Bb5+ Kf8 16.Rd7 Qb4 17.c3 Qf4+ 18.Kb1 Rb8 19.Rhd1 g6 20.Bd3 Kg7 21.Qxe6 Rhf8 22.Be4 b5 23.Rxa7 b4 24.c4 b3 25.Qd6 bxa2+ 26.Rxa2 Be5 27.Qd2 Qf6 28.Qc2 Rb4 29.b3 Rfb8 30.Ra3 Qe7 31.Ra2 Bxh2 32.c5 Be5 33.Qc1 Rd4 34.Rxd4 Bxd4 35.c6 Qb4 36.Bd5 Qb5 1/2 - 1/2. White: Valori Ethier
Black: Andr Lorrain
4th QOCCC Final 1996-98
French Defense/Advance Variation/Milner-Barry Gambit C02

1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 c5 4.c3 Nc6 5.Nf3 Qb6 6.Bd3 cxd4 7.cxd4 Bd7 8.0-0 Nxd4 9.Nxd4 Qxd4 10.Nc3 a6 11.Qe2 Qb6 12.a4 Bc5 13.Bf4 Ne7 14.Rac1 Rac8 15.Qc2 h6 16.Ra1 Nc6 17.Qd2 Bd4 18.Rfe1 Na5 19.Ra3 Nc4 20.Bxc4 Rxc4 21.Be3 Bxe3 22.fxe3 0-0 23.Rf1 Rg4 24.Kh1 Bc6 25.a5 Qc7 26.Rf4 Rg5 27.e4 Rxe5 28.exd5 Bxd5 29.b4 Rg5 30.Rf2 Rd8 0-1.

The next game appeared in an IECC newsletter. It's a nice minature by Quebec member Emile Gosme.

White: Emile Gosme
Black: Trevor Varley
IECC (email) M-1339-2
Queen's Pawn Game/Blackmar Gambit D00
Annotations by Erhard Frolik.

1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 Bf5 4.f3 exf3

4...e3 5.Bxe3 e6 6.Bd3 Bg6 7.Nge2 a6 8.0-0 Nf6 9.Ne4 Be7 10.c3 Nc6 11.Qc2 Nd5 12.Bf2 0-0 13.a3 a5 14.Rae1 Nb6 15.Bg3 a4 16.Nf4 Na5 17.Kh1 Qd7 18.h4 Nd5 19.Nxg6 Schmikli-Lendvai, Hungary 1993 1-0 in 46.

5.Nxf3 e6 6.Bc4

Seems to be a novelty. 6.Bd3 Bg6 7.0-0 Nf6 8.Bg5 Be7 9.Qd2 Nbd7 10.Rae1 Nb6 11.Kh1 c6 12.Ne5 Nbd5 13.Nxd5 Qxd5 14.c4 Qd6 15.a3 Rd8 16.Rf4 Nh5 17.Bxe7 Qxe7 18.Bxg6 hxg6 19.Rxf7 Qh4 20.Nf3 Rxd4 21.Rxb7 Rxd2 22.Nxh4 0-0 23.Nf3 Rc2 24.b3 a5 25.a4 Nf4 26.Nd4 Rd2 27.Nxc6 Nxg2 28.Rg1 Nh4 29.Ne5 Rff2 30.Rb8+ Kh7 31.Ng4 Rf4 32.Re8 Nf3 33.Rf1 Rxg4 0-1 Markley-Frenkel US Open, Concord 1995.

6...Bb4

Maybe 6...Nf6 7.0-0 Be7 was better, eg: 8.Ne5? Bxc2.

7.0-0 Nf6 8.Bg5 0-0 9.Ne2 Nbd7 10.Ng3 h6

Better seems 10...Bg4. It would have avoided the weakness on h6.

11.Bd2 Bxd2 12.Qxd2 Ne4 13.Nxe4 Bxe4 14.c3 Nf6

14...Bxf3 15.Rxf3 Ne5 16.Rg3 Qd6 seems playable for Black: 17.Qh6? Nf3+!.

15.Ne5 Qd6 16.Rae1 Bd5?

16...Bf5 would have avoided the following sacrifice.

17.Rxf6!

A devastating blow.

17...gxf6

Loses immediately. 17...Bxc4 was the only try, but after 18.Nxc4 Qa6 19.Re3 White has also a winning position: 19...gxf6 {19...Qxc4 20.Rg3} 20.Rg3+ Kh7 21.Rh3.

18.Qxh6 fxe5 19.Qg5+ Kh8 20.Re3 1-0.

We end with a game from the NATT 4 event. Our team's current total is 52 points out of 93 completed games, with 7 remaining. This keeps us solidly in 3rd place at the moment. The following game is our hard working, President, Manny Migicovsky's game against his English opponent. Manny finished in 2nd place with an undefeated score of 6 1/2 /10. Ratings indicated are ICCF at the time this game was played.

White: Mike J. Donnelly (ENG) (2375)
Black: Manny Migicovsky (2235)
Queen's Indian Defense/ Petrosian System E12
NATT IV/Bd 10 1995-98
Annotations by Mike J. Donnelly

1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nf3 b6 4.a3

The Petrosian system, a long time favourite of mine before Kasparov adopted it.

4...Ba6

The most active reply. The old fashioned reply 4...Bb7 leads to problems for Black eg: 5.Nc3 Be7 6.d5 0-0 7.e4 exd5 8.cxd5 d6 9.Bd3 Nbd7 10.0-0 Ne5 11.Bc2 Nxf3+ 12.Qxf3 Nd7 13.Qh3 g6 14.Bh6 Re8 15.f4 Bf8 16.Rae1 Ba6 17.Rf3 Bc8 18.f5 Ne5 19.Rg3 Bg7 20.Ba4 Bd7 21.Bxd7 Nxd7 22.Bxg7 Kxg7 23.Rf1 Ne5 24.f6+ Kg8 25.Qh6 1-0 M.J. Donnelly-R.G. Jones, Coventry League 1994.

5.Nbd2 d5 6.Qa4+ c6 7.Qc2 Be7 8.e4 0-0 9.Bd3 h6 10.0-0 Nbd7 11.b3 Rc8 12.Bb2 c5

Black has defended well against White's early lead in development and now opens up the way to pressure the c4-pawn.

13.exd5 exd5 14.Rac1 Rfe8 15.Rfd1 dxc4 16.bxc4 cxd4 17.Nxd4 Bd6 18.Nf5 Be5

With Black on the verge of a serious initiative White must now defend accurately.