|
|
CCLA Portraits
|
The following column was originally published in the January-February 1997 issue of The Chess Correspondent, Vol. 70, No. 1. |
Gary L. KubachICCF IM Gary L. Kubach graced the front cover of the September/October 1992 issue of The Chess Correspondent for his achievement in winning the 1985 Grand national. He once again returns in triumph to our pages; this time for his first place tie with National Master Alan Savage in the 7th North American Invitational Correspondence Chess Championship (NAICCC). Alan Savage also earned his ICCF IM title for his performance in this event. For the benefit of newcomers to the CCLA, Gary has agreed to share with us an updated version of his personal story that appeared four years ago. "I'm 50 years old, a widower now, with two daughters and one grand-daughter. I've lived in Macon, Georgia for 26 years working as a special Agent for the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco & Firearms. My job focuses on enforcement of arson and explosives laws, to include prosecution of armed drug traffickers and armed career criminals. "With time constraints due to job, family, and other interests, I found few opportunities for OTB chess. I began correspondence chess with the USCF in the 19880 Golden Knights tournaments, finishing in 1984, but waiting until 1991 to learn that I'd won! Tom Friedel was winning Golden Knights tournaments before and after me, and I believe he came close to winning here as well. In the CCLA, I got into the 53rd (1985) Grand National, squeaking past Johan "Skip" Hansen and Erik Osbun. Erik and I have now played each other several times and each one is a royal battle. At about the same time as starting with the Grand National, I began play in an ICCF master class grand tournament. There I finished tied for first. I also played in team matches representing the U.S. versus Norway, West Germany, The Netherlands, New Zealand, Great Britain, Sweden, and the Ukraine. I picked up my first half IM norm in the Pacific Area Team Tournament II. "My first 'big' tournament was the Horowitz International Memorial, where I was tossed in amongst some players over 2500 strength and the rest over 2400. I finished tied for second with Joe DeMauro and picked up my IM (ICCF) title. I think Joe got his IM title there as well. I've since played in the CC Olympiad XI Final, the Finland Jubilee 30 IM, the Ljubomirov Memorial (Russia), the 7th NAICCC, and the ICCF three quarter Final XVII. Some of these tournaments are still underway, but I was fortunate to finish the 7th NAICCC tied for first with Allan Savage. Now, as before, I play correspondence chess as an enjoyable hobby. Studying and preparing notes and analysis keeps me occupied with something other than television. "Here's a couple of games from the 7th NAICCC (1993-1994)." |
|
White: Gary L. Kuback (USA) (2500)
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Bxc6 The exchange variation, a favorite of Fischer's, RPM. 4...dxc6 5.0-0 I choose this line when I'm unsure of my opponent's "history." At that time, I knew nothing of Pouliot, so I proceeded cautiously. Jean Poulito, from Quebec City, Quebec is a former Canadian Correspondence Closed Chess Champion (K-45) and one of the CCCA's strongest cc players from Quebec, RPM. 5...Qd6 (Diagram) Black has three main alternatives here: 5...f6; 5...Ne7; 5...Bg4. With the text Black normally plans to castle long, RPM. 6.d3 On the more aggressive 6.d4 there followed 6...exd4 7.Nxd4 Bd7 8.Be3 O-O-O 9.Nd2 Nh6! 10.h3 Qg6 11.Qf3 f5 12.Rad1 fxe4 13.Qxe4 Nf5 14.Nc4 Re8 15.Ne5 Rxe5= {Suetin}, Naidenov-Sregiev, corr. 1982, RPM. 6...f6 7.Be3 c5 Suetin recommends 7...Bg4 8.Nbd2 Ne7 9.b4 Ng6 10.h3 Be6 11.d4 Qd7 12.a3 Be7 13.c4 O-O 14.Qe2 Qe8 15.Rfd1 Qf7=, RPM. 8.Nbd2 Be6 9.Qe2 We're still in book here, but I considered and passed on 9.Nc4 Qc6?! (9...Bc4=) 10.Nfe5! Van der Wiel-Nikolic, Wijk aan Zee (Open) 1993, Inf 56/361. 9...Ne7 10.c3 Nc6 Pouliot stays with the main line, avoiding 10...O-O-O 11.d4 cxd4 12.cxd4 exd4 13.Nxd4 Nc6 14.Nxc6 Qxc6 15.Rfc1! +/= Dvoretsky-Romanishin, 1975. 11.a3 Also to be considered are: 11.Nb3 Bxb3 12.axb3 Rd8 {12...Be7; 12...O-O-O} 13.Rad1 Qe6 14.Nd2+/-. Kir. Gerogiev-Short, 1984; and 11.Rfd1 Qd7! 12.Nb3 Bxb3 13.axb3= Dvoretsky-Ivanov, 1991. 11...Rd8 Avoiding 11...a5?! 12.b4 Rd8 13.b5 Nxd4 14.cxd4 cxd4 15.Bxd4 exd4 16.e5! Brunner-Fahrner, 1991. 12.Ne1 Be7 13.b4 cxb4 14.axb4 0-0 15.f4 f5? (Diagram) At least one other move provided more resistance. On 15...Kh8 16.f5+/=; 15...exf4 16.Bxf4 Qd7 {16...Ne5 17.d4 Qb6 18.Nc2 Bd6 19.Ne3 Ng6 20.Bxd6 cxd6 21.Qh5!? +/-} 17.N2f3!? Bd6 Bxd6 Qxd6 19.d4+/-. Castling on the 14th also needs to be looked at. 16.fxe5 Nxe5?! 16...Qxe5 17.d4 Qf6 18.b5! +/-. 17.Bc5 Qd7 18.exf5 1-0 As 18...Bxc5+ 19.bxc5 Bxf5 20.Qxe5 Bxd3 21.Nxd3 Qxd3 22.Nf3 wins. |
Kubach - Pouliot
Kubach - Pouliot
|
|
White: Gary L. Kubach (USA) (2500)
1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Nf6!? The so-called "modern variation," perhaps a bit more popular and more analyzed than 2...Qxd5, PRM. 3.d4 The most common response. White can, of course, try to hold onto the pawn with 3.c4, but Black has the option of playing the interesting gambit line starting with 3...c6!?, with excellent chances for counterplay. And on 3.Bb5+ Bd7 is best according to theory, RPM. 3...Nxd5 4.c4 Nb6 More aggressive than 4...Nf6, since it immediately puts pressure on the c-pawn. 4...Nb4 is considered inferior according to Smith & Hall after 5.Qa4+ N8c6 6.a3!, RPM. 5.Nf3 g6 Smith & Hall consider 5...Bg4 better, RPM. 6.Be2 6.h3!?, preventing the Bishop from coming to g4, RPM. 6...Bg7 7.Nc3 0-0 8.0-0 Bg4 9.h3 Bxf3 10.Bxf3 Nc6 11.c5 Nd7 Here, 11...Nc4 12.d5!? {12.Be2 N4a5 13.d5 Nd4 14.Bd3 c6 15.b4 Nb5 with an eventual draw in Palac-Stefannsson, 1991.} 12...Nd4 13.Be4 c6 14.dxc6 Nxc6 15.Qe2 N4a5 16.Rd1 Nd4 17.Qd3 +/=. 12.Bxc6 At this point, I chose to go my own way. If 12.d5 Nce5 13.Be3 c6 14.Be2 cxd5 15.Qxd5 Qc7 we're following Genda-Brodsky, 1994 where Brodsky's transition to a favorable endgame earned him the point. The obvious issue is the doubling of Black's c-pawns. I'm trying to create an endgame edge, though risking middle game counterplay. 12...bxc6 13.Qa4 e5 Black reacts sharply to disrupt White's center. 13...Nb8?! has an anti-positional look, ie: 14.Rd1 Qc8 15.Bf4. 14.dxe5 Nxc5?! Black continues very sharply. 14...Nxe5 appears to slow things down to Black's benefit, ie: 15.Rd1 {15.Bf4 Rb8} 15...Qe7 16.Be3 +/=. 15.Qxc6 Nd3 16.e6! (Diagram) Further trying to enhance an endgame advantage. Black now has two isolated pawns and may possibly wind up with three. 16...Qe8 17.Qe4 Nc5 18.exf7+ Qxf7 19.Qe2 Chosen to complete development while only offering Black a poor Knight vs. Bishop endgame. 19...Ne6 20.Be3 Nd4 21.Qg4 Nc2 22.Rac1 Nxe3 23.fxe3 Qe7 24.Nd5 Black chooses to hold onto his Bishop to increase endgame chances on an open board, but White's e-pawn is strong. White could also play 24.Qc4+ Kh8 25.e4 +/-. 24...Qe5 25.Qc4 Kh8 26.Rxf8+?! Rxf8 27.b4 Qg3 28.Qe4?! Black's Bishop finally gets into the fray - better was 28.Rf1. 28...Be5! 29.Nf4 (Diagram) Only move, RPM. 29...Bd6?! With the idea of 30...g5, however it seems to me that 29...Bxf4!? deserved some consideration, eg: 30.exf4 Rxf4 31.Qe5+ Kg8 threatening 32...Rf1+! winning. Readers, find a better answer for White?, RPM. 30.Rf1 Admitting it should have been played earlier. 30...Qg5 31.Qd4+ Kg8 32.a3 h6 33.Rf3 Qh4 34.Qd3 Avoiding 34.Qh8+ Kxh8 35.Ng6+ Kh7 36.Nxh4 c5! when Black appears to get counterplay. I failed to find 37.b5! +-. 34...Rf6 35.Qb3+ Kh7 36.Qc3 Rf5 37.Qh8+ Kxh8 38.Nxg6+ Kh7 39.Nxh4 Rd5 For if 39...Rxf3 40.gxf3 c5 41.b5 c4 42.Kf1 Bxa3 43.Ke2 wins. 40.Nf5 1-0 (Diagram) |
Kubach - Desforges
Kubach - Desforges
Kubach - Desforges
|
