INTERACTIVE CHESS GAME 2

White: NOST GOLD
Black: Stephen Ham (USCF CC Senior Master)
King's Indian Attack [A05]

NOST sees that the point of Black's last move is that 21 Ne4?? is refuted by 21...Nxe3+ 22 Qxe3, Bxd4 23 Bxd4, Nxd4 when White loses a pawn without compensation. Similarly 21 Nxc6?, Bxb2 22 Ne7+ (22 Qxb2?, Nxe3+ 23 Kg1, Rxc6 24 Rfe1, Rfc8 25 Rxc6, Rxc6 wins for Black), Nxe7 23 Qxb2, Qxe3 loses a pawn too. NOST's text move renews the threat of 22 Ne4 because now White has adequate coverage of d4. However, I believe NOST had a stronger alternative in 21 Rc4!, Nxd4 22 Bxd4 (22 Rxc8?, Nxe3+ 23 Qxe3, Rxc8 24 Rd1, e5 25 Ng4, Rc2+ 26 Rd2, Rxd2 27 Qxd2, Qc5. Black has an extra pawn), Bxd4 23 exd4, Rcd8!? 24 Nd3, a5 25 Qf2, Ne7 26 Rfc1, Rd6 27 Ne5, Rfd8 28 Rc7, Kf8 29 R1c4, f6 30 f4, Nd5 when Black's advantage has been minimized to merely an edge. Black keeps the initiative and so perhaps can improve his chances somewhere, but I don't see it yet.

21...Bxd4!

White's threat of 22 Ne4 seems to force Black into this exchange if he is to retain his advantage. For example, 21...g6 22 Rxc6, Rxc6 23 e4, Nc3 24 Nxc6, Qxc6 25 Ng4, Bg7 allows White equality. The primary alternative is 21...Nxd4 22 Bxd4?, Bxd4 23 exd4 (23 Qxd4??, Nxe3+ 24 Kh3, Qxd4 25 Rxd4, Rxc1 wins) transposes to the note to White's 22nd move. However, White can improve with 22 exd4, Qb5 23 Rxc8 (23 Ne4!?), Rxc8 24 Rc1, Ra8 25 Ng4, Be7 26 Ne5, Bg5 and Black's edge is minimal. This convinced me that my dark-squared Bishop was destined to become a target and was best exchanged, thus forcing White to make a difficult decision.

22.exd4

NOST Gold correctly voted unanimously for the text move, voluntarily giving White a bad Bishop locked behind its d pawn. Ralph wrote, "We think we would be in big trouble if we captured with the Bishop". I then examined 22 Bxd4?, Nxd4 23 exd4, Nc3 24 Re1, Rfd8 25 Ne4, Rxd4 26 Qe3, Qd8 27 Nxc3, Rd3 28 Rcd1, Rcxc3 with a large Black advantage.

22...Nce7

As mentioned in the note to Black's 20th move, White has been forced into a pawn weakness...the isolated d pawn on an open file. Black now intends to load up on it with ...Nf5, preparing to place a Knight on e3 that invades deep into White's position. Black can play this maneuver in a number of different ways. For example: 22...Rfd8? (too slow!) 23 Rc5, Nce7 24 Rdc1, Rxc5 25 dxc5, Qc7 26 Ne4, Nf5=. Also 22...Qa5?! 23 Ba1, Nce7 24 Ne4 (If White tries to prevent ...Nf5 with 24 g4?!, then 24...Ng6 25 Nd3, Rfd8 26 Rxc8, Rxc8 [Black threatens ...Rc2 followed by ...Ne3+] with a large Black advantage), Nf5 and Black has an edge since White's Queen is immobilized by the threat to his a pawn. I thus thought it best to play the ...Nf5 maneuver immediately.

23.Rxc8 Rxc8 24.Rc1 Rd8

Black voluntarily abandons the c file to White in order to load up on White's isolani on the open d file, following with ...Nf5. Ralph Marconi wrote, "Exchanging off both Rooks would have given you very little chance at mounting a decisive advantage."

I think it's now appropriate to comment upon the relative advantages of NOST's ability to confer as a group...one of the several items that make this event unique and historical. Here are my thoughts. The first Interactive Challenge was structured so that the greatest number of votes for a move from NOST became the chosen move. Due to the law of averages, the strongest and weakest player's moves were out voted by the "masses" in the median range. That result was: NOST played at the average strength of the group. Now, however, NOST Gold is stronger as a group than its strongest member. All players, strongest and weakest, state their case for their plan/move. Everyone has the opportunity to correct each other's analyses, so tactical shots, technical maneuvers, and positional strategies are less likely to pass unnoticed. Each individual's strengths in certain positions can be leveraged to the group's advantage. Thus I believe NOST Gold to be stronger than its highest rated player. Although momentary fatigue experienced by an individual is largely negated by the group, the only weakness in being a group is a possible lack of continuity due to everyone have a say in the ultimate course of action. Still, as long as a convincing case is made for the proper course of action, this concern is minimized. Therefore NOST Gold (constituted by four experienced master rated players) represents a formidable opponent for anyone in the world.

Garry Reynolds wrote, "Perhaps we are stronger as a team than the strongest player on the team, but not on every move! I think that we have all had our analysis shown to be incorrect at some point in this game by another player and it has saved us. However, on a couple of variations when we were split, we took the wrong path. I was against the f3 move but could not mount a strong enough argument to convince the group since the alternative seemed equally attractive from a square control perspective. On other lines I missed something that my fellow team mates found and vice-versa. I am now convinced that white will have to fight very hard to hold the draw in the present position. The two black knights are better than white's two minor pieces and the pawn structure is also in Black's favor. There is still some fight in the 'white tuna' and perhaps he can escape the hook and swim free but chances now are 57-43% in favor of a black win." Ralph Marconi however wrote, "I think we have enough play to hold. I'm very confident of it." Franklin Campbell wrote, "There is much in what you said about the strengths of our type of team. I think one strength is in the area of encouragement. Some players have an overwhelming desire to win, but everyone will have moments of weakness, when they see all the bad elements of their game and may become pessimistic. During these moments of doubt it can be a real strength to have teammates to encourage you and find positive elements to work on." Franklin continued, "I believe a team can perform at a much lower than expected level, perhaps even weaker than its weakest individual player. I believe there is a strong psychological element here. Where individuals may feel a strong identification with their personal games and work consistently on maintaining their level of play, they may not feel so strongly about a team effort. It's all too easy to let the game slip, allowing your strong teammates to make the decisions, perhaps also based on minimal analysis. Of course, there is the mixing of playing styles. I know that I was uncomfortable from an early stage in our game. There's a lack of consistency, which may contribute to an overall lessening of effectiveness. To summarize why I think team play may lead to a lower standard:

1. less dedication to success (game not considered a "serious" game)
2. less "ownership" of the game (less personal feeling of success or failure)
3. "let the other guys do it" attitude
4. mixture of chess styles

Of course, in the best of worlds (for team competitions) the team would realize its potential and play stronger than any individual. I think this ideal is very difficult to achieve in practice. Strong leadership would appear to be a must (I must compliment Ralph in this regard ... he's done a remarkable job with a difficult assignment). I think playing the opening and maneuvering in closed positions may be extremely difficult for a team ... forming a consensus under these circumstances can be very difficult where the choice of a plan may come more from personal preference than precise analysis. I think in more concrete situations, such as complicated tactical situations, the strengths of the team may be maximized." Franklin concluded, "I think you are in a real fight in our game with the real potential of the NOST team realizing its potentials. It's also possible that we are at our best when facing adversity. Give us an isolated pawn or a weakened King position and we'll all be encouraging each other and searching for the key to survival. I also predict that a slip by you could lead to a feeding frenzy like a pack of sharks smelling blood. We may be smaller fish but you know what a pack of piranhas can do given an opportunity. A player facing a consulting team appears to have a difficult opponent to gauge. Depending on the exact situation the team can be awesomely powerful or something much more wimpy. Perhaps the opponent of a consulting team should focus on the potential weaknesses of team play, such as Kasparov did when he attempted to play in an "anti-computer" fashion against Deeper Blue. But, then, you know what happened to him!" Wow! Franklin's thought provoking material now convinces me that some of my earlier thoughts were nave and idealistic. However, I don't play with an anti-team strategy. I play the board, not the player(s). In correspondence chess, I always try to play the objectively "best" move, regardless of my opponent.

25.Rc5 Nf5

Black continues with the plan advertised by his 22nd move. The alternative of 25...e5? 26 Qe1, exd4 27 Bxd4, Qd6 28 Rc4 (28 Ne4?, Nf4+ gives Black a clear advantage), Nf5 29 Bc5, Qd7 leads to an unclear position that evaporates Black's advantage. Ralph Marconi instead advocated 26 Qc1, exd4 27 Bxd4, Qd6 28 Ne4 (Ralph and I later concluded that 28 Rc4 may be the most precise move),28...Qg6 (28...Qb8?? loses to 29 Qg5, g6 30 Nf6+, Nxf6 31 Bxf6) 29 Bb2 when 29...Nf5?? loses to 30 Rxd5. However 29...f5 30 Nf2, f4 looks approximately equal to me. Another black line is 28...Nf4!? 29 Qxf4, Qxf4 30 gxf4, Rxd4 31 Rc4, Rxc4 32 bxc4, a5 33 Kf2 when initially I thought White's King could menace Black's Queenside pawns. However 33...f5 looks like Black is OK in an unclear endgame. Black's Knight protects the pawns. Regardless, we both agree that ...e5 and ...exd4 allows White to activate his Bishop and thus free his game. I spent minimal time on this position, only checking to ensure that nothing stronger than my planned move existed for me.

26.Nd3?!

The sharpest move was suggested by Tony Gardner and completely overlooked by me, namely the immediate 26 Qc1!?. NOST provided no further analysis/commentary, but I subsequently found 26...Nde7 (26...Qb7?! 27 Ne4, h6 and Black has only an edge) 27 Ne4, Nxd4 28 Bxd4, Rxd4 29 Rc7, Kf8 30 Nc5, Qb5 (30...Qxc7?? 31 Nxe6+ wins) when Black has a clear advantage. Instead, a Knight move to either d3 or e4 is logical since White's Rook is held only by its d pawn, presently under severe attack. But after 26 Ne4??, e5 27 Kh1 (27 g4, Nxd4 28 Bxd4, exd4 29 Rc1, Nc3 gives Black an extra pawn in a won position, while 27 Kf2, Nxd4 28 Bxd4, exd4 29 Qxd4, f5 30 Nd2, Nf4 31 Qc4, Rd5 wins for Black), h6! (Black avoids back-rank mate. The alternative was 27...Nxd4? 28 Bxd4 [28f4??, f5 wins for Black], exd4 29 Qxd4, Nc3 30 Qf2, Nxe4 31 fxe4, g6 32 Kg2, Qb7 and Black's edge is microscopic) 28 Rc4, Nde3! 29 Rxb4, Qg6 30 g4 (30 Ra4, Rc8 31 Nc3, exd4 32 Rd4, Qh5 33 Rg4, Qh3 34 Qf2, Rd8 wins for Black), Nxg4 31 Qg2 (31 d5??, Rxd5 32 Rb8+, Kh7 33 Qxd5, Ng3+ 34 Kg1, Ne2+ 35 Kf1, Ne3+ wins White's Queen), Nge3 32 Qxg6, fxg6 33 Rb6, exd4 34 Rxa6, d3 35 Bc3, Nf1 36 Bd2, Nxd2 37 Nxd2, Re8! when Black wins. Seeing the amount of damage Black's...e5 inflicts upon White, NOST's 26 Nd3 thus prevents 26...e5.

26...e5!

Or does it? NOST Gold missed this shot. I believe Steinitz wrote that when one has a positional advantage, one must then attack. Black's pieces are in their ideal positions while White has a weak and overloaded d pawn. Black thus offers a pawn to further load up on d4, calculating that his pieces will gain greater activity if the pawn is captured. Black simply had no alternatives that retain his advantage. For example 26...f6 (preparing 27...e5) or 26...Qb7 or 26...a5 (preparing 27...Qa6) lack the punching power of the text, thus likely allowing White to equalize without risk.

27.Qc1!?

White evacuates his Queen from the pressure on the d file, instead dominating the c file in exchange for the loss of his d pawn. The reasons that Black's e pawn is poisoned are: 27 Nxe5??, Nde3+ 28 Kg1, Qxc5 29 Qxe3, Nxd4 wins and 27 dxe5??, Nde3+ 28 Kg1, Qxc5 wins. With this move, NOST Gold became an international power due to the inclusion of Hans-Juergen Isigkeit from Germany. This is a very difficult position to assess, but Black is threatening to invade with a Knight check on e3 with a gain of tempo. Therefore if White proactively maneuvered his King out of checking range with 27 Kh1, exd4 (27...Nxd4? 28 Qf2, a5 [28...Nc3 29 Bxc3, bxc3 30 Rxc3 is unclear] 29 Bxd4, exd4 30 Qxd4, Nc3 31 Qc4, h6 32 Ne5 =) then White has four options:

• 28 Rc4!, Nc3!? 29 Rxb4, Qe6 (29...Qf6!?) 30 g4 (30 Bxc3?, dxc3 wins for Black), Ne3 31 Bxc3, Qc6 32 Qe2, Qxc3 and although Black has a clear advantage, this line seems to be White's best hope for survival from this group of options.
• 28 Qe1, Nde3 (28...Qe6!?, 28...Qd6!?) 29 Re5, f6 30 Rc5, Ne7 31 Qe2, Qd6 and Black has a clear advantage.
• 28 Qg5, g6 29 g4, h6 30 Qc1, Nh4 31 Bxd4 (31 Qxh6?, Qf6 wins), Nxf3 32 Rxd5, Nxd4 33 Qc4, Ne2 34 Rxd8+, Qxd8 35 Ne5, Qd1+ 36 Kg2, Qg1+ 37 Kf3, Nd4+ 38 Ke4, Ne6 and Black has a clear advantage, perhaps already decisive.
• 28 Qc1? transposes into the note to White's 28th move.

27...exd4 28 Rc8?!

NOST Gold plans Qc6. However the best move was analyzed by Franklin Campbell, namely 28 Rc6!. Franklin then examined 28...Qb5 29 Rc8, Rf8 and NOST didn't like White position. However it seems to me 30 Qc5!, Qxc5 31 Rxc5, Rd8 32 Rc6, g6 33 Rxa6, Re8 reduces Black's advantage to an edge. Therefore, I would have played Tony Gardner's recommendation of 28...Qb7! when I then examined 29 Qc5 (29 g4??, Nde7 30 Rc5, Nh4+ 31 Kg1, Qxf3 wins), Re8 30 Kf2, Nc3 31 Bxc3, bxc3 with a clear Black advantage, although it is less significant than the advantage Black now gets in the game. Clearly move order is so important here. For example, the proactive retreat of White's King was best done on the 27th move because now 28 Kg1? (28 Kh1?, Qe6 [28...Nde3+!?] 29 Qg5 [NOST considered 29 Rc6?? but missed 29...Nxg3+! 30 hxg3, Qh3+ 31 Kh1, Qxg3+ 32 Kh1, Qxf3 wins], f6 30 Qd2, Qe3 31 Qxe3, dxe3 32 Ne1, Nde7 33 Kg1, Rd2 wins for Black), Qe6 29 Qf1 (29 Rc6, Qe3+ 30 Qxe3, dxe3 31 Rxa6, Nc7 32 Ra7, Rxd3 33 Rxc7, Rd1+ wins), Qe3+ 30 Kh1, Qd2 31 Bc1, Qxa2 32 Nxb4, Nxb4 33 Rxf5, d3 wins for Black. A third proactive retreat was recommended by Ralph Marconi. Ralph saw that 28 Kf2, Qe6?? 29 Rc6, Qe3+ 30 Qxe3, dxe3+ 31 Ke2 allows White to regain his pawn while diminishing Black's advantage to an edge. Ralph also correctly assumed that I would have responded with 28...Nde3. I calculated that if White continued as in the game with 29 Rc8, then 29...Nd1+ 30 Kg1, Nc3 31 Rxd8+, Qxd8 32 Qe1, Qb8 33 Kf2, Ne3 gives Black a nearly decisive stranglehold on White. Instead, after 29 Re5!? matters get extremely complex. I first considered a Kingside breakthrough with 29...Qh6? 30 Kg1, Nh4 (30...Nxg3?! 31 hxg3, Qg6 32 Qe1, Qxd3 33 Bxd4, Qxd4 34 Qxe3, Qxe3+ 35 Rxe3, f6 36 Re2, Kf7 and although Black retains his extra pawn in the endgame, the presence of Rooks and the relatively balanced pawn islands make a Black victory difficult) 31 Ne1 (31 gxh4??, Qg6+ 32 Rg5, Qxd3 33 Kf2, Nd1+ 34 Kg3, Nc3 wins for Black), Ng6 (31...Qf6?? loses to 32 Rxe3) 32 Qc7, Rf8 33 Bxd4! (33 Rc5??, Qh3leads to checkmate), Nxe5 34 Qxe5, Nd1 35 Nd3, Nc3 36 Nxb4, Nb5; a complex position where again Black's advantage is reduced to an edge. Clearly Black's tactical assault on White's Kingside results in Black misplacing his Queen. Later I found 29...f6 30 Re4, Nd6 (30...Qb5!?) 31 Re7, Nb5 32 Bxd4, Nd1+ 33 Qxd1, Nxd4! 34 Kg2, Nf5 with an immediate win. In summary, 28 Kf2?! was not objectively strong, but it lead to the greatest complications yet seen in this game. Thus it offered great practical chances for a White draw or even victory if Black is not careful.

28...Nfe3+

As advertised, Black invades with gain of tempo.

29.Kg1

White's options look bleak and limited. For example, 29 Kf2 (29 Kh3??, Qh6 Checkmate), Nd1+ (29...Rf8?? 30 Rxf8+, Kxf8 31 Ne6 is unclear) 30 Kg1, N5c3 31 Rxd8+, Qxd8 32 Bxc3, Nxc3 33 Kf2, Qa5 wins. Also Garry Reynolds calculated that 29 Kh1, Nc3 30 Rxd8+, Qxd8 31 Nxb4, Qa8 wins for Black.

29...Nc3 30.Rxd8+ Qxd8

Ralph wrote to his team, "Looks like Steve can tie our troops up behind our own lines without much hope of breaking out...'the old slow death' tactic". As has been my custom every 10 moves, it's time to assess the present position in terms of percentile chances for a Black win, loss, or draw. I believe the trend from move 10 (30%, 28%, 42%) to move 20 (35%, 25%, 40%) has at move 30 become (80%, 1%, 19%). Although NOST Gold made a magnificent effort to date, I think Black can only lose now due to a horrendous tactical oversight. While I can not yet find a forced win for Black, Black's advantage is so very large that White hopes to find a draw.

31.Qd2 Qd5

This move is justified by the adage regarding late-middlegame/early endgame technique: "It is more important to smother your opponent's counterplay than to gain material." This is a good example since Black now prevents any forward advance by White's Knight and centralizes his most powerful piece while attacking f3. Meanwhile, White's Bishop is no better than a pawn. Instead the materialistic option of 31...Nxa2?? is met by 32 Nxb4, Nxb4 33 Qxb4, d3 34 Qd2, f6 when Black's stranglehold has been loosened. Then the presence of Queens on the board and the newly activated White Bishop makes a Black win technically difficult in spite of his pawn advantage.

32.Ne1

White's choice is forced since 32 Kf2 (32 Nxb4??, Qxf3 checkmates), Qf5 (Black threatens 33...Ne4+) 33 Bxc3, bxc3 34 Qe2, Qa5 35 a4, Qd5 and Black wins easily.

32...g6

Black needs to create an exit for his King that avoids allowing White a draw by perpetual check on the White squares.

33.Qd3

Franklin and Ralph analyzed 33 Bc1?, when Ralph saw that it loses another pawn to 33...Qb5! 34 Nd3, Nxa2 when Black wins immediately.

33...a5

I confess I planned all along to land a knock-out punch with 33...Qe5?, after calculating the following wins:

1. 34 Qxa6, Ned1 35 Bxe3, Qe3+ 36 Kg2, bxc3 37 Qf1, Qd2+ wins
2. 34 Bc1, Nxa2 35 Qxa6, Nxc1 36 Qc8+, Kg7 37 Qxc1, Qb5 wins
3. 34 Bxc3, bxc3 35 Qxa6, Nc4!! (a difficult move for me to find) 36 Qa8+ (36 bxc4, Qxe1+ 37 Kg2, c2 wins), Kg7 37 Qe4, Qxe4 38 fxe4, Nb2 wins. Fortunately, after checking my analyses just before bedtime, I saw 34 Qd2! Then 34...Ned1 (34...Qf5?? 35 Qd3, Qxd3 36 Nxd3, Nc2 37 Kf1, Nxa2 38 Ke2, a5 39 Kd2 and White regains a pawn with a likely draw) 35 Ba1, Qe3+ 36 Qxe3, Nxe3 (36...dxe3?? 37 Bxc3, Nxc3 38 Nc2, Nxa2 39 Nxe3, Nc1 40 Nc2, Nxb3 41 Nxb4, a5 42 Na2 draws) 37 Kf2, Kg7. Although Black's advantage remains large, there's no clear path to victory. Black can also try 34...a5 35 Ba1, Ned1 36 Bxc3, Nxc3 37 Kf2, Qc5 38 Kf1, Nd5 39 Ke2 when Black still has difficulty proving a decisive advantage.

In summary, 33...Qe5? merely misplaces Black's Queen. Instead, I'll opt for squeezing White's position further and save ...Qe5 as a future threat, depending upon White's response.

Per usual, NOST Gold did a better job of scouting out candidate moves than I did. Ralph suggested I might play 33...Nxa2??. Instinctively I dismissed that move because 34 Qxd4 (White threatens checkmate. Instead 34 Qxa6??, Nc3 [34...Qxb3?? 35 Bxd4 wins for White due to his mating threats] 35 Qb6, Ned1 36 Ba1, Qxb3 37 Qd8+, Kg7 38 Qxd4+, f6 39 Qc5!?, Qa2 40 Qc7, Qf7 41 Qc5, Qb7! wins for Black due to the subsequent advance of the b pawn), Qxd4 35 Bxd4, Nf5 36 Bb2, Nc3 37 Nc2, a5 38 Kf2 gives White strong drawing chances. Franklin also thought I might force the exchange of Queens with 33...Qb5 34 Qxb5, Nxb5. I don't think this idea is effective since 35 Nd3, a5 36 Kf2, Nc3 37 Bc1, Nc2 38 Bf4, Nxa2 39 Nc5, Nc3 40 Bc7 allowed White to break free from the stranglehold with a now active piece tandem and improved drawing chances. In summary, Black objectively now has a huge and probably decisive advantage, but must be careful because one seemingly innocent mistake may allow White drawing chances.

34.Bc1

White finds prospects for his Bishop by threatening an exchange on e3, netting a pawn. An alternative was 34 Qd2? (marking time and forcing Black to find a decisive plan of action), 34...a4 (the decisive plan!) 35 bxa4, Qc4 36 Nd3, Nxa4 when Black wins. Black would like to use his time to slowly squeeze White to death by centralizing his King via ...Kg7-f6-e6 et cetera in order to liquidate into a won pawn endgame. If White tries to wriggle free, they may experience zugzwang. NOST correctly forces Black to commit to a plan of action before he has centralized his King.

34...Qe5

Black to some extent gains a tempo on the lines analyzed after 33...Qe5, since that line was inadequate because ...a5 had not been played yet. Now it has. Black had no attractive alternative though since 34...Qf5? (34...Nxa2?? 35 Bxe3 bestows the advantage upon White!) 35 Qxf5! (the alternatives all lose), Nxf5 36 Bg5! (the dead Bishop reincarnates!), Nxa2 37 Nd3, Nd6 (37...Kg7 38 Bd8, a4 39 bxa4, b3 40 a5, Nb4 41 Nb2, Ne3 43 Kf2, leaves Black with minimal winning chances) 38 Nc5, Kf8 39 Bd8, a4 40 bxa4, h6 (Black plans ...Nc1) 41 Bf6, Nc1 42 Kf2, b3 43 Bxd4, Nc4 44 a5, Nxa5 45 Ke1, Ke7 when Black has an advantage but I can't find anything decisive. Another Black alternative was 34...Qb5? 35 Qxb5, Nxb5 36 Bxe3, dxe3 37 Nc2, e2 38 Kf2, Nc3 39 Nd4, Kf8 40 Nxe2, Nxa2 41 Ke3, Ke7, when any Black advantage is minimal.

35.a4?!

At the expense of weakening b3, White protects his threatened a2 pawn while planning an exchange of "bad" Bishop for "good" Knight on e3. The immediate exchange 35 Bxe3?, Qxe3+ 36 Qxe3, dxe3 37 Nc2, Nxa2 38 Kf1, Nc1 loses, hence White's choice to first protect the a pawn. Ralph Marconi originally considered hitting Black's Queen with 35 f4, but I had analyzed 35... Qc5 36 Bd2 (36 Bb2, Qh5 37 Bxc3, bxc3 "and Black has mating threats in the pipeline", Garry Reynolds.), Nxa2 37 Qe4, Nc1 38 Qb1, Ne2+ 39 Kf2, Nc3 when Black's two pawn advantage plus the initiative is lethal. Garry Reynolds also showed that 35 a3, Nc4 36 Kf2, Nxa3 37 Bf4, Qe6 wins easily for Black.

However, White could more effectively accomplish the same goal with 35 Bb2, as advocated by Hans-Juergen Isigkeit, since Black wants to retain his passed d pawn. For example, 35 Bb2 (35 Bd2?, Nxa2 36 f4, Qc5 wins for Black, as does 35 Qd2?, Qb5 36 Qd3, Qxd3 37 Nxd3, Nxa2) now gives Black a choice between three attractive candidate moves: 35...Ned1, 35...Nf5, and 35...Nc4. I only performed general analysis of each of these candidates to outline Black's options. For example 35...Nc4 36 Bxc3, dxc3 37 Nc2 when Black has four more attractive candidate moves: 37...Nb2, 37...Na3, 37...Nd2, and 37...Qd6. I then analyzed these moves to some extent. Most lines seemed to win for Black, but some lines still weren't clear. However, I didn't spend a great deal of time on these positions since Black has so many attractive options to consider and there was no assurance White would play 35 Bd2. Subsequently NOST shared with me their reason for not playing 35 Bb2, namely 35...Ned1 36 Bxc3, Nxc3 37 Nc2, a4!! found by Franklin Campbell. I doubt if I could have ever found this brilliant solution. My original analyses only examined 37...Nxa2 and 37...Qb5!? when Black keeps a clear advantage but nothing decisive is in view. After 37...a4!! I then examined 38 Nxd4 (this is forced because 38 Nxb4? [38 Qxd4??, Ne2+ wins immediately], Qe1+ 39 Kg2, Ne2 40 bxa4, Qg1+ 41 Kh3, Qf1+ 42 Kg4, f5+ 43 Kh4, Qf2 44 Qc4+, Kg7 and Black checkmates), Qxd4 39 Qxd4, Ne2+ 40 Kf2, Nxd4 41 bxa4, Nc6 42 Ke3, Kf8 43 Ke4, Ke7 44 Kd5, Kd7 45 f4, Kc7 46 Kc5, f5 when Black should win due to having the only piece in this endgame.

35...Ng4!

Unlike the lines following 35 Bd2, all the lines I now examined for Black lead to wins after the text move. White's last move threatens the Knight on e3 so it's logical to look for candidate moves where Black moves it. The notes to Black's 33rd move reveal Black's threats when that Knight is moved. I examined first 35...Ned1 36 Kf1, Qe6 37 Nc2, Qxb3 38 Qxd4 (38 Nxd4?, Qxa4 39 Ne6!, Qe8! [39...fxe6?? 40 Qd8+, Kf7 41 Qc7+, Ke8 42 Qc8+, Ke7 43 Qc7+ draws by repetition] 40 Nc5, a4 wins), Qd5 39 Qxd5, Nxd5 40 Nd4, N1c3 41 Nb3, Nxa4 42 Ke1, f5 43 Kd2, Kf7 44 Kd3, Ke6 45 Nxa5, Kd6 when Black has the advantage but no clear win in sight. Black can consider not removing the Knight from e3 to instead attack b3 with 35...Qe6, but 36 Bxe3, Qxe3+ 37 Qxe3+, dxe3 38 Kf1, Nb1 39 Ke2, Nd2 40 Nc2, Nxb3 41 Nxe3, Kf8 42 Kd3, Ke7 43 Nc4, Ke6 when again no clear victory for Black is seen. Finally, 35...Nf5 36 Bd2, Ne3 37 g4, Ne3 38 Bxe3, Qxe3+ 39 Qxe3, dxe3 40 Kf1 transposes into the 35...Qe6 lines with White's g-pawn advanced one square.

36.Kf1

NOST Gold expected my last move since their reply was instantaneous. However, their reply surprised me since I expected the tricky complexities of 36 Bd2 (36 fxg4??, Qxe1+ 37 Kg2, Qxc1 wins), Ne2+ 37 Kg2, Nxh2 38 f4, Qh5 39 Qb5, Ng4 40 Nf3, Qxb5 41 axb5, Nf6 42 Ne5 (42 b6?, Nd7 43 b7, f6 44 Kf2, Nc3 45 Nxd4, Ne4+ wins for Black) when White frees the advance of his b pawn while also threatening Ne5-c6-a5 winning back a pawn. Black must then find 32...Ne4 43 b6, Nc5 44 Nc6, Nb7 45 Kf3, Nc3 46 f5, f6 47 Nxd4, Nd5 48 fxg6, hxg6 49 g4, Nxb6 50 Bf4, a4 51 bxa4, Nc5 52 a5, Nc4 winning for Black

36...Nxh2+ 37.Kf2 g5

White's only hope for compensation in being down two pawns is to immobilize or trap Black's Knight on h2. Therefore Black's last move sets it free after ...g4, when the f3 square is attacked. Black then envisages exchanging that Knight in a capture on f3. The text move also has the secondary benefit of constricting White's Bishop. A sharper alternative was expected by Hans-Juergen Isigkeit, namely 37...Qe6!?, when he analyzed 38 Qxd4? (38 g4?, Qxb3 39 Qxd4, Qa2+ wins),Qe1+ 39 Kg2 (39 Kxe1, Nf3+ wins), Nxf3 40 Kxf3, Qf1+ 41 Ke3, Qxc1 wins. My notes included 38 Bd2, Qh3 39 Qxd4, Qf1+ 40 Ke3, Qe2+ 41 Kf4, Qe7 when Black has mating threats after ...g5+. Ralph Marconi found the trickiest line in 38 Nc2, Qxb3 39 Kg2 (39 Nxd4?, Qd5! wins), Qb1 40 Bf4 (Hans-Juergen Isigkeit analyzed 40 Bd2? [40 Bh6?, Nxf3 41 Kxf3, Qh1+ wins], Nxf3 41 Kxf3, b3 42 Qxd4, Qf1+ 43 Qf2, Qxf2+ 44 Kxf2, bxc2 wins), b3 41 Qxd4, Qxc2+ 42 Kh3 when I found 42...Nxf3! 43 Qd8+, Kg7 44 Bh6, Kxh6 45 Qf8+, Kh5 46 g4+, Kg5 47 Qe7+, Kf8 48 Qxf7+, Ke3 49 Qa7+, Ke2 when White runs out of checks and thus is lost.

In summary, both lines seem to win for Black but I only gave brief consideration to 37...Qe6!? because it is a complex tactical solution where it's easy to miss a shot. Since 37...g5 is a simple strategic solution that offers White no chance of counterplay, it seems the prudent choice. Most importantly, it suits my positional style of play. Again, one of my beliefs is that when one has a "won" position, one should try to minimize the opponent's counterplay while executing winning technique. Continued tactics can leave the opponent too much counterplay...one of the many reasons that "won" positions are often not won.

38.Nc2

NOST saw that if Black's 38...g4 was prevented by 38 g4, then 38...h5 (38...Kg7 39 Bd2, f5also wins) 39 gxf5, g4 wins quickly for Black.

38...g4 39.Nxd4

Immediate activation of White's Bishop is hopeless. For example, 39 Bf4, Qd5 40 Ne1, gxf3 NOST Gold's options were also unattractive: 42 Nxf3 (42 Ke1, Nxa4 43 Nc6, b3 wins immediately), Nxf3 43 Kxf3, Nxa4 wins immediately for Black.

39...Qd5

It seems inefficient to shuttle the Queen from d5 to e5 and then back to d5 within the last 5 moves. However Black targets White weaknesses on b3 and f3 while also pinning White's Knight to his Queen.

40.Qc4 Qxc4 41.bxc4 gxf3

In general, Black's material advantage and off-side Knight suggest the standard endgame technique of trying to exchange pieces via 41...Nxg3. Although this wins too, the text move is yet more lethal because if White does not recapture on f3, then Black's 3:1 Kingside pawn majority creates another potential passed pawn in addition to the one already on b3. As has been my custom every 10 moves, it is time to objectively asses Black's percentile chances for a win, loss, or draw. The trend has improved from move 10 (30%, 28%, 42%) to move 20 (35%, 25%, 40%) to move 30 (80%, 1%, 19%) to the present (98%, 1%, 1%). Objectively Black wins baring any horrendous blunder. However having a won position and actually winning it can be two entirely different matters, as we have all learned.

42.Kg1

NOST Gold's options were also unattractive: 42 Nxf3 (42 Ke1, Nxa4 43 Nc6, b3 wins immediately), Nxf3 43 Kxf3, Nxa4 wins immediately for Black.

42...Ng4 43.Kf1

If White tries to advance his passed pawn via 43 c5, then 43...Ne2+ 44 Nxe2,fxe2 45 Bd2, b3 wins for Black because he Queens first and with check.

43...f2 0-1.

NOST Gold team captain, Ralph Marconi wrote, "We've concluded that the game is now beyond any hope for White...Therefore we extend our resignation". My concluding notes were, 44 Nf5 (44 c5?, Ne4 threatens ...Nxg3 or ...Nh2+ and ...f1/Q+), Ne4 (44...Nxa4 should also win) 45 Kg2, b3 (White is in Zugzwang!) 46 Ne7+, Kf8 47 Nf5 (forced, to prevent ...Ne3+ when either the f or b pawn Queens), Nd2 wins for Black.

I thus wish to thank all members of the NOST Gold team for their friendly competition and the high level of their play. This team of masters played on a higher level than most of my individual master level opponents and presented a real challenge. Finally I wish to especially thank the NOST Gold team captain, Ralph Marconi, for taking the time to captain this fine team and to also post the game at his fine web site. I consider all of the participants in this Interactive Chess Challenge to be good chess friends of mine as well as real gentlemen.

Back to annotations to moves 1-10.
Back to annotations to moves 11-20.