INTERACTIVE CHESS

Dear Readers, while my previous column covered the game through White's 11th move, this column continues the coverage to the present game status. Some NOST participants expressed curiosity about the merit of certain moves (i.e. Black's 7th move) so I will now attempt to provide greater depth of coverage. Once again, you are challenged to spot any annotational errors. The game to date proceeds as follows:

1. d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3. Nc3 Bb4

The Nimzo-Indian Defense. Stylistically, one can say that Black's plan is Hypermodern. Rather than employing classical techniques to combat White's pawn center with his own, Black allows White to establish a pawn center with hopes of countering with piece activity. In so doing, White is enticed to overextend his center while Black undermines its support (i.e. attacking the Knight on c3). Black is thus willing to part with his Bishop pair to restrain White from playing e4. His compensation for giving White the Bishop pair is rapid development and often the doubling of White's c pawns. Black also retains strategic options of playing ...c5 to dissolve White's center, or ...b6 and ...Bb7 followed by ...Ne4 and ...f5 to control or "over-protect" the e4 square.

4.Qc2

White has many moves at his disposal, most popular being Rubinstein's 4. e3. Since playing e4 has been prevented, White thus builds a modest pawn center that originally planned to follow with 5 Ne2 and 6. a3 to win Black's Bishop and avoiding weakened doubled pawns. White later found greater dynamics by playing 5 Bd3 and 6 Nf3 . I however have had success with the older text move since White renews the threat to play 5. e4 while trading Black's Bishop for his Knight and avoiding doubled pawns.

4 ... d5 5.a3 Bxc3 6 Qxc3 Ne4 7.Qc2 c5

Tony Gardner: "Is this really a book move? It seems to do nothing other than kill time". Ralph Marconi: "Theory suggests it's best for Black to follow up the aggressive 6...Ne4 with another aggressive move. To this end, Black has 7...Nc6, 7...e5, and 7...c5 since 7...O-O is not considered aggressive enough. It was a toss up between 7...Nc6 and 7...c5. I like the idea of 7...Nc6 , developing a piece and attacking the d pawn, but don't like blocking my c pawn. Therefore I'll play 7...c5 . Black thus pins all hopes on his lead in development. White meanwhile must catch up in development and then open up the position where his Bishop pair is his asset". I agree with Ralph. Black has a lead in development which is accentuated by this pawn sac. It attacks d4 while freeing Black's Queen to play ...Qa5. Finally, a review of ECO shows the text is the most popular line, although it also shows all lines leading to at least a White edge. I however think ECO and other texts have mis-assessed some of these lines, one of which we will examine later. Thus I also think 7...Nc6 and 7...b6 are playable in spite of ECO's assessments.

8.dxc5 Nc6

8...Nxc5? received some votes, but White gets a clear advantage after 9 cxd5 . Then if 9...Qxd5?? White wins with 10. b4 due to the pin of the Bishop on c8. Also some votes were seen for 8...Na6? but 9 Nf3 Naxc5 10 b4 Nd7 11 Bb2 O-O 12 e3 gives White a clear advantage.

9. cxd5 exd5

In exchange for Black's isolated pawn, the previously trapped Bishop is now freed. So why did White allow this? In general, the side with the Bishop pair desires open positions where his Bishops' mobility prove their superiority to Knights. Surprisingly 9...Qxd5? received some votes. White then gets a clear advantage after 10 Be3 and 11 Rd1.

10. Nf3 Bf5

Correctly, NOST chose not to recover their pawn with 10...Qa5+ . White would respond with 11 Bd2 and demonstrate an edge. Black's rapid development is best.

11. b4 Ng3?

Although this was NOST's elected move, it was subsequently universally condemned. Black uses his superior development to win material. The problem is, he wins an undeveloped Rook at the expense of his two most developed pieces and a shattered Kingside. Dear readers, please examine this position without looking at my subsequent notes. Can you spot the refutation? The game line demonstrates that Black should instead retain the option of winning the Rook while first protecting his Kingside via 11...O-O . The following theory, published in GM Taimanov's book and subsequently elsewhere, is analysis by Katetov: 12. Bb2 b6 13. b5 bxc 14. bxc Qa5+ 15. Nd2 and now Black plays 15...Ng3 . He concludes White has better chances after 16. Qc3 Qxc3 17. Bxc3 Nxh1 18. g4! Bxg4 19. Bg2 Rae8 20 .e3 d4 21. Ba5 Nxf2 22. Kxf2 de+ 23' Kg3 I think there are serious flaws in his analysis. For example, in the final position, Black has a clear advantage after either 22...Be2 or 22...exd . Thus White must replace 20. e3? with 20. f3 Bf5 21. e4 with an unclear position. If my assessment is correct, then opening theory is turned upside down as Black has quite an attractive position. Remember, "you saw it first" in Nostalgia , (and at this website) so feel welcome to try this line on your non-Nostalgia reading opponents. If I'm mistaken, please let me know.

Finally, Jacob Kemp Jensen demonstrated Black can utilize his active pieces to win White's Rook in a fashion similiar to, but supieror to 11...Ng3?, namely 11...Nxf2. He then offers: 12.Qxf5 Nxh1 13.g3 (I initially planned 13.g4?! , but then saw 13...a5 14.Bg2 axb 15.Bxh1 0-0 16.Ng5 g6 17.Qxd5 Qxf6. While Jakob prefers White due to the Bishop pai and the open position, I'll assess the position as unclear)13...a5 14.Bg2 Nxg3 15.hxg3 axb. Now Jakob said, "White can make good use of his Bishop pair. It's not a bad position though" (for Black). I continued with 16.Ng5 Qf6 17.Qxf6 gxf6 18.Nh3 (18.Nf3 Rg8 19.Kf2 Rg4 is unclear) 18...Nd4 19.Ra2 Ra5 20.Nf4 Rxc5 21.Bd2 and White has at least an edge, due to the Bishop pair and Black's weak squares.

12. Qb2 Nxh1 13. Qxg7 Rf8 14. Bh6 Qe7

There was some support for the logical 14...Kd7 from Stephen Wead and Ray Gardner. However, this is met by 15. g4 Be6 16. Qxf8 Qxf8 (16...Qf6?? 17. Qg7 wins) 17. Bxf8 Rxf8 18. Bg2 Nxf2 19. Kxf2 Kc7 (19...Bg4?? 20 b5, Bxf3 21 bxc+ wins) 20. h3 f5 21. g5 and White's clear advantage is even greater than in the game line.

15. Qxf8+ Qxf8 16. Bxf8 Kxf8 17. g3

The premature 17.b5? throws away White's advantage after 17...Nd8! 18. Nd4 Bd7 19. g3 Ne6=

17...Be4

This position is still "Book", but 5 other moves received votes too, including the surprising 17...b5?! suggested by Larry Green. The move looks highly illogical strategically because it immediately grants White a passed c- pawn. However the strategic loss is nearly offset by tactics based upon attacking b4 and weakening White's pawn chain. For example, 18. Bg2 a5 19. bxa5 Rxa5 20. Nh4 Be6 21. Bxh1 b4 22. a4 Rxc5 23. Kd2 (White plans Rc1) Na5 =. Also 18. Nh4 Nd4! 19. Bg2 Be4 (19...Nc2+?? 20 .Kf1 Nxa1 21. Nxf5 Nxf2 22 Kxf2 wins) 20. Kf1 a5 21. f3 Bc2 22. Rc1 axb 23. axb Nc6! with an unclear position. The refutation is 18. e3! Be4 19. Bxb5 Bxf3 20. Bxc6 with a clear White advantage. Congratulations Larry on finding a clever and imaginative trick with good "practical" chances for White to err! Objectively though, the text move is best.

18. Bg2 Nxf2!?

My books recommend 18...a5, but give no analysis, although I favor White after 19.b5 with a clear advantage. Jakob Kamp Jenson felt Black's 18th move was the crucial mistake and advocated 18...a5 19.b5 Nd4 20.Nxd4 Bxg2 suggesting Black at least equal, perhaps because Black has a Bishop pair versus a Knight endgame. However, 21.f3! (locks in Black's Bishop while covering the g4 square. Thus White has future options of Kd2 and Black's Knight can only escape to h3)21... Rc8 22.c6 bxc6 23.Nxc6 a4 24.Rb1 Rc7 25.b6 Rb7 26.Na5 and wins. Also 21...Ke8 (to get closer to White's passed pawn) 22.Kd2 Rc8 and now White wins with either 23.c6 bxc6 24.Nxc6 Nf2 25.Rg1 Bh3 26.g4 f5 27.Ke3 or 23.Rg1 Rxc5 24.Rxg2 Rc4 25.Nc2. Thus NOST is to be commended for improving upon my books!

19.Kxf2 Re8

At this point several NOST members began considering resignation, saying Black has no chances. Yet, the group found 9 different candidate moves from 14 players! This suggests a lack of fighting spirit and probably a lack of endgame technique in the group. There simply should not be that many equivalent candidate moves in this position. The two best moves here are 19...Re8 and 19...Ke7 (to centralize Black's King). Black needs to avoid committal moves and piece exchanges, while pawn exchanges are encouraged. Thus Pat Donlon's 19...a5? is met by 20. b5 and Black's Knight is prevented from ...Na5 from which it can invade via ...Nc4 or ...Nb3. Thus 20. b5 Ne7 21. Nd4 Bg2 22. Kg2 and White's extra pawn becomes a "monster" passed pawn after 23. c6 with a won position.

20. Rd1 a6

Dr. Howard Trimpi said it best with, "Black just needs to wait and force White to find a winning plan". Along these lines, Ralph Marconi's 20...f6 was equivalent in value to the text. Ralph said, "The best Black can hope for is to get his King into position to blockade the potential passed pawn on the Queenside. Of course, Black's Kingside pawn structure remains a liability."

21. Bh3

This move frees the Bishop from the pin , i.e. 21 Ng5?? Bxg2 22. Kxg2 Rxe2+ . Also it controls the potential Queening square at c8 while preventing a Black piece from landing along the h3-c8 diagonal. Black is thus constricted. White now has a large advantage and most NOST players considered it a winning advantage.

21... Rd8

NOST also suggested 7 other moves, some of them far too committal. One player complained that the text move "lost a tempo". However, the text move is as good as any since Black simply must "tread water" until White commits to a plan.

22 .Nd4

In short, White has all the trumps here. The text move centralized and thus improved the Knight's position. Further, if all the pieces were removed from the board, the King and pawns endgame is won for White. Thus Black should generally avoid piece exchanges while trading pawns in the hope that the remaining pawns are isolated and thus vulnerable. White can also "sit on the position and squeeze" with 22. e3 followed by a delayed Nd4 as an option to the text.

22... Nxd4?

In light of what was previously said, I think Black should have avoided exchanges with 22...Ne5 , to which I would have replied 23. Bf5 to try to exchange Bishops. The game position should now be objectively lost for Black. I've told the NOST players we will have a rematch with NOST playing White next time. Many players are ready to resign now.

23. Rd4 Ke7 24. Ke3 (see diagram)

I confess I was originally planning a weaker move. In my desire to remove pieces, I planned 24 Bg2? , expecting 24...Bxg2? 25 Kxg2 Ke6 26. Kf3 Rh8 (26...Rg8?! 27. Rg4 Rxg4? 28 Kxg4 wins immediately) 27. Rh4 h6 28. Ke3 f6 29. Kd4 with a won position. Then reality dawned upon me when I realized Black need not play so weakly when he has 24...f5 25 Bxe4 fxe 26 g4 Rf8 27 Ke3 Ke6 28 Rd1 Kd5 and Black has legitimate drawing chances. My text move plans 25 Rd1 and 26 Kd4 when Black should not be able to defend against White's threats.

In summary, the game to date was educational for me and hopefully for the participants and readers. Personally I've learned valuable information. For example, I've long debated what to play against the Nimzo-Indian, or whether I should return to avoiding it with 3. g3. My analysis of Black's 11th move shows Black has a fully viable line available, therefore I don't plan to play into this line again. Meanwhile, NOST is getting ready for the re-match when they will have the White pieces. Stay tuned to this column and web sites for developments.