The moves to this "first of its kind game" will be annotated by both sides in relatively live fashion (once it is "safe" to divulge one's analysis), thus hopefully making for a lively educational and entertaining discussion for all. The use of a computer to generate moves or check analysis has been voted against by the Gold team. However, after this game ends, I would like to play a game against a team using computers to assist them. This could be educational and hopefully entertaining. Also it could be a lot of fun ...but only if I still win! The moves to this game follows without annotations, followed by the game with annotations: White: NOST GOLD Black: Stephen Ham (USCF CC Senior Master) King's Indian Attack [A05] 1.Nf3 Nf6 2.g3 b5 3.Bg2 Bb7 4.Na3 a6 5.c4 b4 6.Nc2 e6 7.O-O c5 8.b3 Be7 9.Bb2 O-O 10.d4 d6 11.Nce1 Nbd7 12.Nd3 cxd4 13.Nxd4 Bxg2 14.Kxg2 Qb6 15.f3 d5 16.Rc1 Rac8 17.cxd5 Nxd5 18.Qd2 Bf6 19.e3 Ne5 20.Nf2 Nc6 21.Rfd1 Bxd4 22.exd4 Nce7 23.Rxc8 Rxc8 24.Rc1 Rd8 25.Rc5 Nf5 26.Nd3 e5 27.Qc1 exd4 28.Rc8 Nfe3+ 29.Kg1 Nc3 30.Rxd8+ Qxd8 31.Qd2 Qd5 32.Ne1 g6 33.Qd3 a5 34.Bc1 Qe5 35.a4 Ng4 36.Kf1 Nxh2+ 37.Kf2 g5 38.Nc2 g4 39.Nxd4 Qd5 40.Qc4 Qxc4 41.bxc4 gxf3 42.Kg1 Ng4 43.Kf1 f2 0-1. Stephen Ham NOST GOLD (Final position) White: NOST GOLD Black: Stephen Ham (USCF CC Senior Master) King's Indian Attack [A05] 1.Nf3 This move was unexpected. I told Ralph my plans versus the ubiquitous moves: 1.e4, 1.d4 and 1 c4 and suggested we keep play lively to entertain the masses. When Ralph pumped me for information on what I'd play against 1.Nf3 I didn't know if he was merely being thorough or if he was serious. Ralph later told me that he and the majority of the Gold team members prefer closed openings. Also I suspect that the answer I gave to his question about 1.Nf3 decided matters. I sure wish I could have read the e-mails as the Gold team conferred on what to play! Ralph later told me they initially planned to play 1.c4 Nf6 2.Nf3 until I revealed my response to 1.Nf3. 1...Nf6 2.g3 b5!? I dub this line "The Modern Polish Defense", since it's an improvement upon Polish Defense lines via 1.d4 b5?!. It is a great favorite of mine and was what I told Ralph would be my response to any King's Indian Attack. Although seldom encountering King's Indian Attack systems, I searched many years ago for a sharp system against it. Often in King's Indian Attack systems, White can close his eyes and play his first 7-8 moves without regard to Black's responses. Then the next 10 or so moves follow simple strategic recipe's, depending upon Black's position. But in this line, as early as the second move, Black dynamically altered the position so that White needs to be careful in his choice of options. Admittedly, "The Modern Polish Defense" has a poor reputation and published theory favors White, so I think this caused the Gold team to elect to play against it. However, I have tested this line in both serious correspondence games and in many friendly test games. I won all games to date, with the exception of one sloppy test game loss. Thus, as I wrote in Nostalgia #369, I think published theory is again wrong. One might ask that if Black's intent is the fianchetto of his light squared Bishop, why not play the more orthodox 2...b6, rather than putting the b pawn on a square where it's undefended by neighboring pawns? Defenses based upon 2...b6 are safe but often dull while 2...b5 is dynamically unbalanced. White now needs to think twice about playing either c4 or Nc3. Another way of illustrating my point about the dynamism inherent in "The Modern Polish defense" is to borrow Stephan Gerzadowicz's position assessment: the objective assessment your position is won, loses, or draws. Thus a Black middlegame position stemming from 2...b6 3.Bg2 Bb7 4.O-O e6 5.c4 Be7 might be considered: W 12%, L 13%, D 75%. Also, 6.Nc3 O-O 7.d4 , leads to a Queen's Indian Defense, a viable defense but not in my repertoire. However, after 2...b5, I believe chances for a decisive result increase noticeably while drawing chances decline. 3.Bg2 Bb7 4.Na3 The most common responses are: 4.O-O 4.d4 4.a4 and 4.c3 (preparing 5.a4). The text is also perfectly viable. Ralph wrote, "In the spirit of playing a more aggressive game, the text was chosen." While 4.c3 seems the most aggressive to me, the notion of aggression as a value is interesting. The text move should, however, create interesting possibilities for both sides. 4...a6 The text is better than allowing White to activate his Knight after 4...b4?! 5.Nc4. d5 6.Nce5 (threatening Ng5), h6 7.O-O when White has an advantage. Let's see if Black can keep that Knight out of the action. 5.c4 White follows the main line advocated by theory, and thus avoids 5.d3 c5 6.Bd2?! d5 7.c3 g6 8.O-O Bg7 9.Re1 (9.d4!?) Nbd7 10.Qc1 O-O 11.Ng5? (11. Bh6 was the only move that makes sense for White), e5 12.Nc2 Qc7 with a clear Black advantage in Norman-Ham, Corr. 1978 (My first game with "The Modern Polish Defense"). 5...b4 Black continues his policy of restricting White's Knight, although it's at the cost of potentially over-extending the b-pawn. Black needs to ensure that subsequent developments take into consideration the strengths/weaknesses of locking his pawn onto the b4 square. For example, will White ever gain an advantage by levering open the Queenside in playing a3? Since the Queenside is temporarily blocked, what should Black plan to do in the center? If Black occupies the center with his pawns, he generally should not block his Bishop on the a8-h1 diagonal, and must also prevent White from doing so. Black now needs to develop a long range strategy encompassing these issues/concerns. Both sides will watch each other's moves, committing their forces only when the objectives become clear. Black has a sharp alternative in 5...e5!?. The GOLD team acknowledged that Black scored well in the games they reviewed with this line. White has several responses now, but I was most worried by 6 b3, when the best I could find for Black was 6...Bc5!? 7.O-O Qe7 8.Nc2, and now I generated long streams of analyses for both 8...e4 and 8...O-O, assessing the final positions as unclear. This makes me question why they entered this line in the first place! Psychologically, I kept the old axiom, "Long analysis, wrong analysis" in the back of my mind, thinking I might have missed an improvement for White. Therefore, I chose the text line, knowing that my Chess Assistant database shows the position after my 6th move in 8 total games: 7 White wins and one draw. Why did I choose the text move when it historically generated poor results? Again, psychology played a role. I think I know my strengths/weaknesses. Given a choice between a tactically sharp but highly unclear line (i.e. 5...e5!?) or a slower and more technical line (i.e. 5...b4), I opted for the later. One mistake by Black after 5...e5!? could be immediately fatal, while my skills are more suited to closed and technical positions where I can try to exploit small advantages (assuming I have any to exploit). This was a controversial decision that forces me to improve on the theoretical lines created by Black's losses in the lines after Black's 6th move. Let's see if I can accomplish this or if NOST Gold will add another win to White's impressive record to date. 6.Nc2 Ralph informed me that a GOLD Team member initially considered 6.Qb3?, so the Knight wouldn't have to immediately move. This reasoning completely escapes me. Why misplace White's most powerful piece to ensure that it's Knight remains out of play on the edge of the board? Black can merrily play 6...e5 7.O-O, and now either continue to develop while ignoring White's folly, or play 7...Nc6 (7...Bxf3?? [Why trade off Black's best developed piece?] 8 Qxf3 [not 8 Bxf3??, e4 9 Qe3, Qe7 wins], e4 9 Qe3, Qe7 [9...bxa?? 10 Bxe4, Bc5 11 d4, Bxd4 12 Qxd4, Nc6 13 Bxc6 wins] 10 Nc2 and White has a clear advantage since Black lost his control of the a8-h1 diagonal and his Queen blocks his remaining Bishop, making Kingside castling cumbersome.) with prospects of ...Na5 at some point. Either way, Black has a clear advantage. 6...e6 Black had two other options: 6...e5? can be refuted by 7.O-O e4 8. Nh4 Nc6 9.d4 ed 10.ed Be7 11.Nf5 O-O 12.Ne7+ Qe7 13.d4 and after Re1 and Bf4 White has a clear advantage. Black's pieces are uncoordinated while White dominates the only open file, the center, and the long White diagonal. Black's other option of 6...c5?! is simply less flexible after an immediate 7.d4, as discussed later. 7.O-O c5 Both Ralph and Franklin were surprised by my last move, but I considered no other option. The text move is simply the most thematic, exerting influence over the d4 square at the expense of another pawn move. Move order is very important since less flexible moves can limit one's options. For example, 7...Be7 is a natural move that prepares to castle. However, 8.d4 c5 9.dc Bxc5 costs Black a tempo since the Bishop moves twice in going to c5. Although the above position may eventually occur, Black at least keeps other options open. 8.b3 Ralph Marconi felt the text move was more positionally sound than 8.d4 or 8.a3. Of the games they reviewed, Black got more Queenside activity after the alternatives than with the text move. I agree with NOST Gold that they have effectively minimized Black's potential activity and this probably is the best choice. However, 8.b3 is slower than the immediate 8.d4, and thus allows Black a tempo to play ...Be7 and castle while avoiding the problem mentioned in the notes to Black's seventh move. For example, after 8.d4, Black still has problems defending the c5 pawn while trying not to lose a tempo with ...Be7. But, if the Black squared Bishop doesn't move, Black won't be able to castle Kingside. For example, 8.d4 Be7 9.dxc (9.d5 Qb6 [9...exd 10.Nh4 O-O 11.Nf5 and White has an edge] 10.Ng5 h6 11.Nh3 is unclear), Bxc5 10.Be3 Bxe3 11.Nxe3 and White has the advantage since Black's b pawn is weakened by the removal of his dark squared Bishop, Black's development lags and he is uncastled. An alternative is 8...cxd but then White activates his inactive Knight with 9.Ncxd4 Bc5 (9...Be7? 10.Bf4 O-O 11.Rc1 or 11.a3 and White has a clear advantage and is a tempo ahead of most game lines) 10.Bf4 O-O 11.Nb3 (White exploits the weakness on d6), 11...Be7 12.Bd6 and White is better. Therefore, I planned to meet 8.d4 with 8...a5! (planning ...Na6, covering c5). Then 9.d5 exd (9...Qb6!?) 10.Nh4 g6 11.Ne3 (11 cxd d6 12.b3 Bg7 13.Bb2 O-O was unclear in Nicolaide-I. Armas, Romania 1987), 11...Bg7 12.Nd5 Nxd5 13.Bxd5 Nc6 14.Bg2 O-O or 14...Qe7 =. Yet another option was 13...Qc8 14.Rb1 (14.Ng2 O-O 15.Nf4 Re8 =) O-O 15.b3 Re8 16.Bb2 Bxd5 17. Qxd5 Qc6 =, as in Romanishin-Plachetka, Metz 1992. 8...Be7 Black's move order selection has been successful since now Black has several viable options at his disposal if White plays 9.d4, namely 9...O-O, 9...d6, 9...cxd, and 9...d5. Black needs to castle quickly and this is best done with an immediate 8 ...Be7. However, Nost GOLD team member Garry Reynolds wrote, "I am not entirely sure Steve will play the logical 8...Be7 as I thought the expansion tactic of 8...d5 looked equally good and perhaps a bit more imposing." Garry then analyzed four lines for White after that move but was happy with none of them. His primary line being 9.cxd exd 10.Ne5 Qc7 11.Bb2 Bd6 and he wrote, "...things were slightly better for Black". Actually I give White an edge after 12.d4 O-O 13.Ne3 since he threatens to isolate Black's d-pawn. However, 8...d5? is positionally flawed since any space gained in the center is at the cost of time, and the move blocks Black's powerful Bishop on b7. Further, White can isolate Black's d-pawn and permanently fix it on d5, turning the b7 Bishop into a big pawn. For example, 10.d4! Nc6 11.Bb2 Be7 (Black needs to castle) 12.dxc Bxc5 13.Bxf6 gxf 14.Ncd4 and White has a large advantage. Black's d-pawn is isolated and his f-pawns are doubled, making ...O-O unpalatable. Black's once powerful b7 Bishop is blocked and White's inactive Queen's Knight is now centrally posted on d4. Positionally, Black has a lost game. Black can try to wiggle out of getting his d-pawn isolated with 10...c4, but 11.bxc dxc 12.Nxb4 Bxb4 13.Qa4+ Nc6 14.Ne5 O-O 15.Nxc6 Bxc6 16.Bxc6 and White wins a pawn in a winning position. In summary, 8...d5? is a bad move that is incompatible with Black's present position. However, it's quite likely to be compatible with future positions. Black just needs to exhibit proper move order to carry out his strategy. 9.Bb2 0-0 10.d4 NOST Gold considered also 10.d3 (with a possible e4 advance later), 10.Nfe1, and 10.a3. The former was considered too passive while the other was out-voted in favor of immediate central action. I believe that any move other than the text abandons all hope for an opening advantage, due to passivity. For example, after 10.d3 Black can even play the previously maligned 10...d5 followed by 11.Ne5 Nc6 (or 10...Nbd7 or even 10...Qc7) with at least equality. Also 10.Nfe1 (this move has the merit of trying to exchange Black's powerhouse light squared Bishop) would be met by 10...Qc7 11.Bxb7 Qxb7 and White is passively placed while Black continues to dominate the a8-h1 diagonal and maintain a Queenside space advantage. Finally, I see no reason to lever open the a file with 10.a3 since Black is dominant on the Queenside. 10...d6 Black prepares 11...Nbd7, to complete development without obstructing his b7 Bishop with 10...d5 or 10...Nc6. This position was reached in the game Larsen-Ljubojevic, Teeside 1972. White won, although Black had a clear advantage prior to blundering. Now may be a good time to assess the position using the previously mentioned format. Objectively I'll assess my winning, losing, drawing chances as: W 30%, L 28%, D 42%. The position is objectively equal, although a minimal preference is given to Black due to the powerful light squared Bishop, the Queenside space advantage, and White's passive Knight on c2. Still, the position has dynamism and a decisive result seems more likely than a draw at this point. I'm curious how NOST Gold assesses this position. Stephen Ham NOST GOLD position after 10...d6 Click here to view Annotations to moves 11-20 | Annotations to moves 21-43.