6/26/2010Queen versus rook is an important endgame to study, with definite practical value as it is far more common than the basic mates bishop & bishop versus king or bishop & knight versus king. The most likely scenario is a rook and pawn ending where one side queens a pawn but loses their rook in the process, so the new queen battles the opposing rook. The queen should always prevail due to her expanded powers over the rook, but the real challenge is the 50 move rule (pawn move or capture), therefore the queen has 50 moves to win the rook or else the game is declared drawn. Yet a single pawn on the board would dramatically affect the play both ways. For queen and pawn versus rook, the easiest win is to promote the remaining pawn, sometimes by sacrificing the queen for the rook to reach a won king and pawn endgame, and every pawn advance restarts the 50 move limitation. For rook and pawn versus queen, the defender attempts to create a safe position with the king, rook and pawn in a compact formation protecting each other where the queen cannot make any headway to win material; this drawing resource is called a fortress. So if you are down rook against queen, but still have one pawn around, try clustering your king, rook and pawn close together setting up a defensive fortress to draw by the 50 move rule (and don't move your pawn).
The winning technique for queen versus rook involves queen checks plus king advances, carefully maneuvering the other king to the side of the board (similar to the basic mates) and then toward a corner reaching this stock position (Philidor, 1777):
Note the White queen on d8 and the Black king on a7 would lead to the same play, so there are eight possible Philidor positions using all four corners of the board. Once the enemy king is forced to the side and the rook is on the second rank, it is important that the queen remains three squares away from the opposing king; two squares distance instead allows for some stalemate swindles where rook sacrifices earn a draw. (We'll see some examples coming up.) For Black to play from the diagram, the king cannot move (1 … Kc8? 2. Qa6 pins and wins the rook with mate soon) so the rook is forced away where it gets captured or forked. White to play wants Black to move instead: 1. Qe5+ Ka8 (1 … Kc8? 2. Qe8#) 2. Qa1+ Kb8 (2 … Ra7? 3. Qh8#) 3. Qa5 (also 1. Qe5+ Ka7 2. Qa1+ Kb8 3. Qa5) resets the key formation with Black on move. Before reading further, review the Philidor position again and try to visualize the wins for all potential rook moves, or else set it up on your board to figure everything out.
Rank moves:
1) 1 … Ra7 2. Qd8#.
2) 1 … Re7 2. Qd8+.
3) 1 … Rf7 2. Qe5+ Ka7 (2 … Kc8 3. Qe8#; 2 … Ka8 3. Qe8+) 3. Qe3+ Ka8/Kb8 (3 … Ka6 4. Qa3#) 4. Qe8+.
4) 1 … Rg7 2. Qe5+.
5) 1 … Rh7 2. Qb4+ Ka7/Ka8 (2 … Kc8 3. Qf8#) 3. Qa3+ Kb8 4. Qb3+ Ka7 (4 … Ka8 5. Qg8+) 5. Qa2+ Kb8 6. Qb1+.
File moves:
1) 1 … Rb3 2. Qd8+ Ka7 3. Qd4+ Kb8 (3 … Ka8 4. Qa4+) 4. Qf4+ Ka7/Ka8 5. Qa4+.
2) 1 … Rb2 2. Qe5+.
3) 1 … Rb1 2. Qd8+ Ka7 3. Qe7+ Ka8/Kb8 (3 … Kc6 4. Qa3#) 4. Qf8+ Ka7 5. Qf7+ Kb8 (5 … Ka8 6. Qa2+) 6. Qg8+ Ka7 7. Qh7+.
The furthest rook moves require the longest forks and the most preparation, but still the rook is quickly won in six or seven moves. Practice this procedure a few times so it would be routine over the board when needed. Once you capture the rook, you get another 50 moves to mate the enemy king.
Now let's turn it around where your rook is fighting their queen and you are trying to draw. Based on the Philidor position, you want your king centralized best you can, away from the sides and the corners of the board, while keeping your rook nearby so it won't be forked off. If your king gets nudged to the side, maintain your rook on the third rank (or third file) for as long as possible (the third rank defense) before retreating to defend along the second rank/file (the second rank defense). Don't spend time studying or developing any specific technique here; just remember that the defending side can resist the longest with your rook guarding the third rank, and then the second rank, and try to hold out for 50 moves. This famous study (Ponziani, 1782) is drawn using a second rank defense, primarily because the queen got too close to the defending king (two squares instead of three):
1 … Rh7+ 2. Kg2 Rg7+ 3. Kf3 Rf7+ 4. Kg4 Rg7+ 5. Kf5 Rf7+ 6. Kg6 Rg7+ 7. Kh6 (7. Kf6 Rg6+! 8. Kxg6 stalemate) Rh7+! 8. Kxh7 stalemate. Besides the cute stalemate opportunities sacrificing the rook to draw as shown here, the White king could never cross the e file due to … Re7 pinning and winning the queen so the lone kings draw immediately, and otherwise Black's rook would continuously check White's king to draw.
1) Lein-Tal (Vilnius 1955) after 88. Qe1:
The Philidor position out of a R&P endgame: 88 … Ra2 89. Qh4+ Kg1 90. Qg5+ Kh1 91. Qh6+ Kg1 92. Qg6+ 1-0. Notice White played 92. Qg6+ instead of 92. Qg7+!? Kf1 and there's no mate threat since the Ra2 covers a1, so White would have to set it up all over again.
2) Burn-Baird (New York 1889) after 83 … Qh5:
A Philidor position as Black: 84. Ra7 Qg4+ 85. Kh7 Qh3+ 86. Kg8 Qg3+ 87. Kh7 Qh2+ 0-1 (88. Kg8 Qg1+ or 88 … Qb8+). Again Black played 86 … Qg3+ instead of 86 … Qg2+!? 87. Kf8 spoiling it.
3) Shirov-Timman (Wijk aan Zee 2004) after 99. Kc4:
The queen blocks rook checks at c7 or g4, and is eager to fork off the rook: 99 … Rh7 100. Qd8 Rh2?? 1-0 (101. Qb8+). Better is 100 … Rh3, then 101. Qd2+ closes in.
4) Korchnoi-Kasparov (London 1983) after 72. Rg6:
Instructive technique to set up the win: 72 … Qa5+ 73. Kd7 Qa4+ 74. Ke7 Qh4+ 75. Kf8 Qd8+ 76. Kf7 Kf5 77. Rh6 Qd7+ 0-1. After 78. Kg8 Kg5 79. Rh7 Qe8+ 80. Kg7 Qe5+ 81. Kg8 Kg6 Black mates shortly (82. Rf7 Qe6 83. Kh8 Qe8+). Remember to keep the queen three squares away from the opposing king once the rook controls the second rank.
5) Taimanov-Barcza (Havana 1967) after 88 … Rb8:
A winning position involving a key quiet move: 89. Qa5+ Kb7 90. Qe5!:
a) 90 … Rg8 91. Qd5+.
b) 90 … Rf8 91. Qb5+ Ka7/Ka8 91. Qa5+ & 92. Qb4+.
c) 90 … Ra8 91. Qb5+ Ka7 92. Kc7.
d) 90 … Ka7 91, Kc7 Rb7+ 92. Kc8 and now
i) 92 … Ka8 93. Qd5.
ii) 92 … Ka6 93. Qa1+ Kb6 94. Qb2+.
iii) 92 … Rb6 93. Qa5+ Ra6 94. Qc7+ Ka8 95. Qb7#.
iv) Otherwise 93. Qa5#.
6) Gelfand-Svidler (Moscow 2001) after 85. Kh5:
The mighty Svidler missed 85 … Qc5+ winning immediately (85 … Qg7!?) and White surprisingly held the draw by the 50 move rule (1/2-1/2, 129).
7) Morozevich-Jakovenko (Pamplona 2006) after 111. Kf3:
Another draw since the queen got too close: 111 … Rf2+! 112. Ke3 (either capture is stalemate) Re2+! 113. Kd3 Rd2+! 114. Kxd2 1/2-1/2.
Queen versus rook is a straightforward win once you know the technique. Practice this ending a few times with a friend, alternating sides so you both learn how to win the rook plus how to potentially draw, then you will be much more confident either way when it shows up during play. Study endgames!
REFERENCES:
1) Muller & Lamprecht, “Fundamental Chess Endings.” Gambit Publications Ltd, London, 2002.
2) chessgames.com
6/9/2010The Giuoco Piano (“quiet game”) is one of the oldest chess openings, dating back to the fifteenth century in Italy, so it is also called the Italian Game. White aims to dominate the board right from the start by establishing pawns at e4 and d4, which is a classic center; meanwhile, Black aims for counterplay with standard development leading to the freeing … d5 move. I.A. Horowitz famously branded the Giuoco Piano “wild and woolly” due to the immediate clash in the center with tricks and tactics for both sides. The opening phase begins with 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Bc5 which is sound development all around; knights on their best squares, and bishops pointing straight at their opponent's weakness on f7 & f2. Now 4. c3 leads to the main line Giuoco Piano, while 4. d3 is known as the Giuoco Pianissimo (“very quiet game”) and 4. b4!? is the Evans Gambit.
After 4. c3 White intends to continue 5. d4 trading off Black's e-pawn which would greatly reduce Black's control of the center. A similar idea is seen in the Ponziani Opening (1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. c3), which is rarely played nowadays because this plan is slow; 3. c3 Nf6 4. d4 d5 and Black is already equal. But in the Giuoco Piano, the opposing bishop on c5 allows White to gain time with the d2-d4 advance, which makes all the difference. Black usually meets 4. c3 with 4 … Nf6, developing the knight and attacking White's e-pawn. Another plan for Black is 4 … Qe7 5. d4 Bb6 where Black maintains the e-pawn as a foothold in the center; this is called a Strong Point line. On 6. dxe5 Nxe5 the pawn trade helps Black equalize while defeating the purpose of 4. c3, also White's knight on b1 can't develop to its ideal square on c3. Or 6. 0-0 d6 7. d5 Nb8/Nd8 and the Strong Point on e5 is reinforced, plus the closed position benefits Black who would then play for the pawn breaks … f5 and … c6. So the best responses to 4. c3 are either 4 … Nf6 or 4 … Qe7 anticipating 5. d4 by White; for other fourth moves (like 4 … h6?!) White continues 5. d4 exd4 6. cxd4 with smooth sailing. Black must contest the center or else get clobbered.
4. c3 Nf6 5. d4 creates an immediate conflict in the center before White deals with the threat against the e-pawn. Not 5. 0-0?! Nxe4 6. d4 exd4 7. cxd4 d5 8. dxc5 dxc4 9. Qe2 Qe7 10. Qxc4 Nxc5 (Baird-Marco, Vienna 1898) and Black stands well with a solid pawn plus. This is an example of “mixing systems” - 4. c3 is fine, and 4. 0-0 is fine, but 4. c3 plus 5. 0-0?! is bad. After 5. d4 Black must respond 5 … exd4, since 5 … Bb6? 6. dxe5 Ng8 wins a pawn for White. Note the other options are far worse; 6 … Nxe4?? 7. Qd5 winning a piece due to the mate threat on f7, or 6 … Ng4? 7. Bxf7+! Kxf7 8. Ng5+ & 9. Qxg4, or 6 … Nh5?? 7. Qd5 (better than 7. g4!? d5) 0-0/Rf8 8. g4 traps the knight. Lastly 5 … Nxe4?! 6. dxc5 Nxc5 is an unsound sacrifice for Black, winning only two pawns for the bishop and White stands better.
Continuing 4. c3 Nf6 5. d4 exd4, now 6. cxd4 is a routine recapture for White, yet 6. 0-0!? has been tried before as a gambit. On 6. 0-0!? 0-0?! 7. cxd4 Bb6 8. e5 d5 9. exf6 dxc4 10. Bg5 (Bird-Pinkerley, London 1850 by transposition) is good for White, while 6. 0-0!? Nxe4 7. cxd4 d5 (the standard freeing move) 8. Re1 Be7 9. Bd3 f5 (From-Neumann, Paris 1867) is better for Black. After 6. cxd4 Black must use the forcing resource 6 … Bb4+ to hold the balance, as 6 … Bb6?! is strongly met by 7. d5 gaining space and time:
1) 6 … Bb6?! 7. d5 Ne7 8. e5 Ne4 9. 0-0 d6 10. Qe2 f5 11. e6 (Mortimer-Rosenthal, Paris 1867) and White won.
2) 6 … Bb6?! 7. d5 Ne7 8. e5 Ne4 9. 0-0 0-0 10. Qe2 Nc5 11. b4 Na6 12. d6 cxd6 13. exd6 Ng6 14. Bg5 Qe8 15. Be7 (Euwe-Jutte, Amsterdam 1927) and White won.
3) 6 … Bb6?! 7. d5 Na5?! 8. Bd3 h6 9. b4 (Babic-Wambugu, Calvia 2004) and White won.
The chessgames.com database of master games has 366 examples of the Giuoco Piano main line (C54); White responds 7. Bd2 58%, 7. Nc3 40%, and 7. Kf1 2%. These statistics are only for reference to show how often each line is played.
A. 7. Bd2
This is the most common line, expecting a bishop trade with 7 … Bxd2+ and then recapturing 8. Nbxd2 defends the e-pawn, but next Black plays 8 … d5 to fight for the center and gain space. By this point you know the danger if Black passively allows White to advance d4-d5. From a big picture perspective, note White played 1. e4 with the goal of a later d2-d4, while Black played 1 … e5 and only now d7-d5 to equalize.
After 7. Bd2, one variation for Black to avoid is 7 … Nxe4!? 8. Bxb4 Nxb4 9. Bxf7+! Kxf7 10. Qb3+ (Albin-Tarrasch, Dresden 1892) regaining the piece and Black can't castle. Yet after the trade 7 … Bxd2+ 8. Nbxd2, Black could also try 8 … Nxe4 (rather than 8 … d5) 9. Qe2 (9. Nxe4 d5 and the fork trick regains the piece next move) d5 10. Nxe4 0-0 11. 0-0-0 Bg4 (Mednis-Fischer, US Championship, New York 1963) with equal chances.
Returning to 7. Bd2 Bxd2+ 8. Nbxd2 d5, White typically continues 9. exd5 Nxd5 creating an Isolated Queen Pawn (IQP) for White which cannot be defended by other pawns, thus requiring pieces to defend it throughout the game. The IQP can be a middlegame strength but an endgame liability. After 9. exd5 Nxd5 there are three main continuations, all leading to approximate equality:
1) 10. Qb3 Nce7 11. 0-0 0-0 12. Rfe1 c6 13. Ne4 h6 (Van der Wiel-Karpov, Amsterdam 1980) with a level game.
2) 10. Qb3 Na5 11. Qa4+ Nc6 12. Qb3 Na5 13. Qa4+ Nc6 1/2-1/2 (Miles-Korchnoi, South Africa 1979) is a handy draw line, but not 12 Ne5?! 0-0! 13. Nxc6 Qe8+ (Smerdon-Sarfati, Brisbane 1998) and Black is better.
3) 10. 0-0 0-0 11. Re1 Nb6 12. Qb3 Na5 13. Qc3 Naxc4 14. Nxc4 Nxc4 15. Qxc4 Be6 (Khavin-Kholmov, Riga 1954) with an even position.
B. 7. Nc3
A century's analysis of 7. Nc3 has led to an unclear verdict in the key line 7 … Nxe4 8. 0-0 Bxc3 9. d5 (the Moeller Attack) Bf6! 10. Re1 Ne7 11. Rxe4 d6 12. Bg5 Bxg5 13. Nxg5 h6 (Barczay-Portisch, Ungarn 1969) as Black won that game leaving White to search for improvements. Anyone playing the main line out this far must research the latest theory for both sides.
More fun from White's standpoint are the ancient 7. Nc3 Nxe4 8. 0-0 Nxc3 lines where Black gets greedy, like 9. bxc3 Bxc3? 10. Qb3! Bxa1? 11. Bxf7+ Kg8 12. Bg5 (Greco-NN, Italy 1620) and White won. This rook sacrifice idea (“wild & woolly”) always wins for White, so don't try grabbing the rook as Black. A former suggestion for Black to equalize was 8. 0-0 Nxc3 9. bxc3 d5 attacking the bishop on c4, but here White gets very good play with 10. cxb4 dxc4 11. Re1+ Ne7 (11 … Be6?? 12. d5) 12. Bg5 (Leonhardt-Perlis, Vienna 1908). Thus the current consensus is that 8 … Bxc3 gives Black better chances than 8 … Nxc3.
After 7. Nc3 d5!? is playable for Black as in 8. exd5 Nxd5 9. 0-0 Bxc3 10. bxc3 0-0 (Steinitz-Schiffers, Rostov on Don 1896) giving White the bishop pair, but not 8. exd5 Nxd5 9. 0-0 Be6!? 10. Bg5 Be7 11. Bxd5 Bxd5 12. Nxd5 Qxd5 13. Bxe7 Nxe7 14. Re1 (Steinitz-von Bardeleben, Hasting 1895) and Black's King gets stuck in the center. Track down the brilliant finish to that game.
C. 7. Kf1
7. Kf1!? is an old school line sometimes played for surprise value, and on that level it always works. Black should respond 7 … d5 8. exd5 Nxd5 9. Nc3 Be6 with good play. Two reference games:
1) 7. Kf1!? Nxe4 8. d5 Ne7 9. Qd4 Nf6 10. Bg5 Ng6 11. Nbd2 h6 12. Re1+ Kf8 13. Bd3 (Marshall-Burn, Ostend 1905) and White won.
2) 7. Kf1!? d5 8. exd5 Nxd5 9. Nc3 Bxc3 10. bxc3 0-0 (Urusov-Petrov, St. Petersburg 1853) and Black won.
You won't find many recent Giuoco Piano games in your database. At the top level, this opening is widely thought to be played out, and it doesn't grant White enough solid chances for an advantage, provided Black is booked up on theory. But in chess, openings tend to remain dormant, not dead. Next time we'll cover some key alternatives to the Giuoco Piano main line. Good luck!
4/16/2010
The Four Knights Game is a double King Pawn opening (1. e4 e5) where both sides develop their Knights first, following the classic principle Knights Before Bishops. This means Knights typically do best on f3/f6 and c3/c6, while Bishops have several good squares available to develop. The usual move order is 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Nc3 Nf6, although this may be reached by transposition from the Vienna Game (1. e4 e5 2. Nc3). The Four Knights (4N) is a safe and solid choice for beginners and juniors, aiming for straightforward development, yet it is not common at the GM level since the quiet center and symmetrical piece play give White less of a potential opening advantage compared to more dynamic lines.
The chessgames.com database has 3,764 Four Knights games, with these statistics for White's fourth move: 4. Bb5 56%, 4. d4 27%, 4. Bc4 13%, and 4. g3 10%. Don't try to memorize these percentages, but it's helpful to consider how often the different main lines are played when studying openings.
A. 4. Bb5
This is the Spanish Four Knights, taken from the Ruy Lopez (1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5) which is also called the Spanish Game. White often chooses this move order so that Black can't defend the Pe5 with … f6 once the King Knight is on that square. After 4. Bb5 Black can play the symmetrical 4 … Bb4 (often leading to 5. 0-0 0-0 6. d3 d6), or the Rubinstein Variation 4 … Nd4 unbalancing the game. The play is very different from the Ruy Lopez since White cannot create a classic Pawn center with c2-c3 and d2-d4, plus the center remains quiet after d2-d3 instead.
B. 4. d4
The Scotch Four Knights is similar to the Scotch Game (1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. d4) with the extra Knight moves before White advances d2-d4. Here White wants Black to give up the center by trading the Pd4 for the Pe5, leaving White with the only center Pawn at e4. Black often trades … exd4 and later advances … d7-d6; the White Pe4 against the Black Pd6 is called a Scotch Center and assures White an advantage in space. One typical Main Line is 4. d4 exd4 5. Nxd4 Bb4 6. Nxc6 bxc6 7. Bd3 (defending the Pe4) d5 8. exd5 cxd5 with chances for both sides.
C. 4. g3
White will fianchetto the King Bishop on g2, leading to the Glek Line named after GM Igor Glek from Germany. This variation is very similar to a King's Indian Attack (Nf3, g3, Bg2 & 0-0) except White has already established a center Pawn with 1. e4. A primary drawback of 4. g3 is that Black can reply 4 … d5 opening lines for development while making White give up the center with exd5. Play usually continues 5. exd5 Nxd5 6. Bg2, and now Black gets a good game with 6 … Nxc3 or 6 … Nde7 (followed by 7 … g6 & 8 … Bg7), while 6 … Be6 (intending 7 … f6) scores worse as White can pressure Black's center with Re1 and d2-d4.
D. 4. Bc4
White's King Bishop usually does very well on c4, aiming at Black's weak point on f7, like the Giuoco Piano (1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4) and Bishop's Opening (1. e4 e5 2. Bc4). In the Four Knights, 4. Bc4?! is a mistake allowing Black to play 4 … Nxe4! which is a sham sacrifice as 5. Nxe4 d5 (Fork Trick) regains the piece and Black is better. Here 6. Bxd5 Qxd5 7. d3 Bg4 is common, or 6. Bb5 dxe4 7. Nxe5 Qd5/Qg5 and Black has more space. All 1. e4 e5 players should know this stock tactic, which also shows up in the Two Knights Defense (1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Nf6) after 4. Nc3?! Nxe4! with the same Fork Trick idea by transposition.
E. 4. Nxe5
The Halloween Gambit is a risky, uncommon line where White sacrifices a piece for an advantage in space and development, leading to an immediate attack against Black's King. After 4. Nxe5!? Nxe5 5. d4 Black retreats 5 … Ng6 6. e5 Ng8 and hopes to reach an endgame where the extra piece will prevail. Another plan is 5 … Nc6 6. d5 Nb8 7. e5 Ng8 hanging on, although here Black could play it safe and return the piece with 6 … Qe7 or 6 … Bb4 for an even game.
F. Other Fourth Moves
Passive moves like 4. d3, 4. Be2 and 4. a3 are met by 4 … d5 and Black has already equalized, thus they are rarely played. One move to avoid is 4. Bd3?! blocking the d Pawn and causing bad congestion in White's center.
The Four Knights is a great opening for all players starting out at chess, as it is easy to learn and gives both sides a very solid game. Good luck! 3/12/2010
This is an overview of recent endgames which required K&P technique. It is crucial for everyone to completely understand K&P endgames to improve at chess, first to close out a won game, and second because all endings ultimately break down to K&P fundamentals. Let's review some basic terminology:
1) Opposition. When two Kings directly face each other with one square between, for whomever is on move, the other King has the Opposition forcing the enemy King to give ground. This key feature often decides whether a game is a win or a draw, and even a single tempo can be decisive. Corollaries of this idea include Diagonal Opposition and Distant Opposition.
2) Rule of the Square. For a passed Pawn, the number of squares up the board before Queening is extrapolated laterally creating a square. If the enemy King is within that Square, the Pawn can potentially be stopped by the King with chances to draw. If the King is outside the Square, the Pawn will Queen to win.
3) Triangulation. The King takes two moves to reach a square it could have reached immediately, losing a move on purpose but winning a key tempo, typically to gain the Opposition against the enemy King and prevail based on the remaining Pawns.
4) Stock Position. This refers to the specific situation where the defending King is on the Queening square, the superior King is on the sixth rank, and the Pawn is on the fifth rank, all on the same file:
Here the Pawn will promote no matter whose turn it is. For White to move, 1. Kf6 Kf8 2. e6 Ke8 3. e7 Kd7 4. Kf7 wins, or 1. Kd6 Kd8 2. e6 etc. For Black to move, 1 … Kf8 2. Kd7 controls the Queening square, or 1 … Kd8 2. Kf7 etc. Note the Stock Position is a draw for Rook Pawns (a Pawn or h Pawn).
5) Knight Pawn Exception. When the Stock Position involves a Knight Pawn (b Pawn or g Pawn), the superior King must go to the side of the board to avoid stalemate possibilities:
After 1. Kf6!? Kh7 2. Kf7 Kh8 3. g6?? 1/2-1/2, or 2. g6+?? Kh8 3. g7+ Kg8 draws, or else 3. Kf5 Kg7 draws. Therefore the correct procedure is 1. Kh6 Kh8 2. g6 Kg8 3. g7 Kf7 4. Kh7 etc. keeping Black's King out of the corner.
6) Breakthrough. A Pawn advance in a K&P endgame involving a sacrifice which succeeds without needing the King's assistance since the candidate is so close to Queening. Everybody knows the standard example (Cozio, 1766):
1. b6! axb6 2. c6! bxc6 3. a6 and Queens, or 1. b6! cxb6 2. a6! bxa6 3. c6 and Queens. There is still some technique involved to clean up the remaining Pawns and close it out, but in practice this is an easy win.
1) Palmer-Levi, Michigan Open, Lansing 2009 after 76 … Kxe6:
White just gave back the exchange to reach a won K&P endgame. 77. Kh4 Kf6 78. Kh5 Kg7 79. Kg5 (Opposition) Kf7 80. Kh6 (Knight Pawn Exception) Kf8 (80 … Kg8 81. Kg6 Kh8 82. g5 Kg8 83. Kh6 Kh8 84. g6) 81. Kh7 Kf7 82. g5 1-0. Control of the Queening square is critical.
2) Peters-Palmer, Michigan Open, Lansing 2009 after 35. Kxf4:
Black just gave back the exchange, trading down to a won K&P endgame. 35 … h5 (Passed Pawns this far apart don't need the King's help) 36. a4 h4 37. Kg4 d4 38. Kxh4 d3 0-1. The White King is now outside the Square.
3) M. Chen-Tallo, US Junior Chess Congress, Indianapolis 2010 after 38. exf6:
An instructive example showing the value of the Opposition where White won a draw. Black should have played 38 … Kf7! drawing after 39. Kxf4 Kxf6 (Opposition) keeping out the White King, or 39. Kf3 Ke6 40. Ke4 Kf7 etc. waiting for White to capture the Pf4 before taking the Pf6 with the Opposition. Instead Black lost after 38 … Kxf6? 39. Kxf4 Ke6 40. Ke4 Kd6 (40 … Kf6 41. Kd5) 41. Kf5 Kc6 42. Ke5 Kb6 43. Kd5 a4 44. Kd6 (Triangulation) 1-0.
4) M. Chen-Leach, ABC Open, South Bend, 2009 after 44 … Kxe5:
White won with the Breakthrough 45. g4! hxg4 46. h5 f5 47. h6 f4+ 48. Kf2 Kf6 49. e5+! (Decoy) Kg6 (49 … Kxe5 50. h7) 50. e6 Kxh6 51. e7 Kg5 52. e8=Q and White won (1-0, 55).
The above game is similar to Ree-Ftacnik (Kiev, 1978) after 56 … g5:
57. g4!! hxg4 58. h5 Ke6 59. Kf2 Kf7 60. Kg3 Kg7 61. Kxg4 Kh6 62. Kf5 Kxh5 63. Kxf6 g4 64. e5 (Both sides Queen, yet White's will be with check) g3 65. e6 g2 66. e7 g1=Q 67. e8=Q+ Kh4:
68. Qh8+ Kg3 69. Qg7+ Kf2 70. Qxg1+ Kxg1 71. Ke5 and White won (1-0, 77).
5) Wickering-Chapman, King's Gambit Thematic, Spring Lake 2010 after 33 … a5:
Both sides have played very well to reach this endgame, which should be drawn with best play. Neither side has a Breakthrough available, since the enemy King is within the Square, except neither King can be too aggressive or else risk losing to a sound Breakthrough. The game went 34. Kf3 (better is 34. Kd3 gaining the Opposition; if 34 ... c4+ 35. bxc4 bxc4+ 36. Ke3 Kc5 37. a4 is even) a4 35. b4?! (better is 35. bxa4 bxa4 36. Ke3 holding the balance) cxb4 36. cxb4 Kd4 (suddenly Black's King position is decisive) 37. Kf2 Ke4 38. Kg3 g5 (no Breakthrough!) 39. hxg5 hxg5 40. f5 Ke3 (Opposition) 41. Kg2 Kf4 42. Kf2 Kxg4 43. Ke3 0-1. Excellent technique by Chapman.
Please let me know if you have an instructive K&P ending to review, or any questions about one of your games. Study endgames! 10/25/2009
The Caro-Kann Defense (1. e4 c6 2. d4 d5) was invented by Horatio Caro from England and Marcus Kann from Austria. The Main Line continues 3. Nc3 dxe4 4. Nxe4 Bf5, but here we will cover an interesting alternative called the Two Knights variation. It begins 1. e4 c6 2. Nc3 (instead of 2. d4) d5 3. Nf3 where White develops both Knights first and holds off on advancing d2-d4 for now. As of move 3, White could transpose back to the Main Line with 3. d4, but the Two Knights line (2. Nc3 & 3. Nf3) is good for White because it often gains the advantage of the Two Bishops right out of the opening. Black frequently trades 3 … dxe4 4. Nxe4 just like the Main Line, yet White may choose d2-d3 instead of d2-d4 and thus has more options and flexibility for play in the center compared to the Main Line. If Black plays 3 … Bg4 or 4 … Bg4 to trade Bishop for Knight, White’s early Queen development Qxf3 may lead to 0-0-0 which also unbalances the game.
In the Caro-Kann Two Knights, there is an important trap regarding Black’s QB. The Main Line is 1. e4 c6 2. d4 d5 3. Nc3 dxe4 4. Nxe4 and now 4 … Bf5 is correct. In the Two Knights line, Black should play 4 … Bg4 (or even 3 … Bg4) instead of … Bf5, as the QB might become misplaced on h7. Lasker-Radsheer, Netherlands 1908: 1. e4 c6 2. Nc3 d5 3. Nf3 dxe4 4. Nxe4 Bf5!? 5. Ng3 Bg6?! (Black should admit the error and play 5 … Bg4 or 5 … Bd7) 6. h4 h6 7. Ne5 Bh7 (avoiding 8. Nxg6 fxg6 which ruins Black’s Pawns) 8. Qh5 (mate threat) g6 9. Bc4! (mate threat) e6 (9 … gxh5? 10. Bxf7#) 10. Qe2 Bg7? (11 … Qe7) 11. Nxf7! 1-0.
On 11 … Kxf7 12. Qxe6+ Kf8 13. Qf7#, otherwise White wins the exchange. The trap line in this miniature shows why Black plays … Bg4 and not … Bf5.
The chessgames.com database has 1,050 games with the Caro-Kann Two Knights, and these statistics for Black’s third move: 3 … Bg4 55.5%, 3 … dxe4 34.3%, 3 … Nf6 4.3%, and a handful of rare sidelines.
After 3 … dxe4 4. Nxe4 there are 358 games, and this data for Black’s fourth move: 4 … Nf6 56.4%, 4 … Nd7 18.7%, and 4 … Bg4 14.8%.
Here are four reference games in the Caro-Kann Two Knights variation, two with 3 ... Bg4 and two with 3 ... dxe4:
1) Smyslov-Botvinnik, WC Match, Moscow 1958: 1. e4 c6 2. Nc3 d5 3. Nf3 Bg4 4. h3 Bxf3 5. Qxf3 Nf6 6. d3 e6 7. a3 Be7 8. g4 Nfd7 (Black has a cramped game) 9. d4 (This advance wasn't possible on the previous move since White would have lost that Pawn after ... dxe4) Nf8 10. Be3 Ng6 11. Qg3 Bh4 12. Qh2 (White maintains the Queen on the h2-b8 diagonal to support f2-f4) Nd7 13. 0-0-0 Qb8 14. f4 dxe4 15. Nxe4 Nf6 16. Nxf6+ Bxf6 17. Qf2 Bh4 18. Qf3 Ne7 19. Bd3 (White has harmonious development, whereas Black's pieces seem scattered) g6 20. f5 exf5 21. Bf4 Qd8 22. gxf5 Qd5 (Fritz 7 suggests 22 ... Qxd4 23. fxg6 hxg6 24. Bxg6 +/-) 23. Qg4 Bf6 24. Rhe1 h5 (24 ... 0-0!? would have been risky after 25. Rxe7! Bxe7 26. Bh6 & 27. fxg6) 25. Qg3 h4 26. Qg4 gxf5 27. Bxf5 Kf8 28. Be4 Qa2 29. c3 Rd8 30. Rf1 Nd5 31. Bd2 Rd6 32. Qc8+ Ke7 33. Qxb7+ Rd7 34. Rde1! Qa1+ (34 ... Rxb7 35. Bxd5+ & 36. Bxa2 wins a piece) 35. Bb1+ 1-0 (35 ... Kf8 36. Qxd7; 35 ... Kd8? 36. Qb8#).
2) Rabinovich-Ebralidze, USSR Championship, Tbilisi 1937: 1. e4 c6 2. Nc3 d5 3. Nf3 Bg4 4. h3 Bh5 (Instead of trading 4 ... Bxf3) 5. exd5 cxd5 6. Bb5+ Nc6 7. g4 Bg6 8. Ne5 (Forking the Nc6 and the Bg6) Qd6 9. d4 f6 10. Nxg6 hxg6 11. Be3 0-0-0 12. Qd3 g5 13. 0-0-0 e6 (White has more space and better development, but Black's position is solid) 14. Ne2 Nb4 15. Qb3 Qb6 16. Ba4 Qa6 17. Nc3 (Otherwise 17 ... b5 traps the Ba4) Nh6 18. f4 gxf4 19. Bxf4 Bd6 20. Bxd6 Qxd6 21. Nb5 Qf4+ 22. Kb1 Nc6 23. Rhf1 Qh2 24. Qc3 Kb8?? (White threatened 25. Nxa7+, so 24 ... Qb8 was forced) 25. Rd2 1-0 (The Queen is trapped.)
3) Tal-Portisch, Bled 1965: 1. e4 c6 2. Nc3 d5 3. Nf3 dxe4 4. Nxe4 Bg4 (Not 4 ... Bf5?! due to the trap line) 5. h3 Bxf3 6. Qxf3 Nd7 7. d4 Ngf6 8. Bd3 Nxe4 (Black often plays ... Nd7 & ... Ngf6 to trade Knights on e4 without risking doubled Pawns by Nxf6+) 9. Qxe4 e6 10. 0-0 Be7 11. c3 Nf6 12. Qh4 Nd5 13. Qg4 Bf6 14. Re1 Qb6 15. c4 Nb4 16. Rxe6+!? fxe6 17. Qxe6+ Kf8 (Fritz 7 gives 17 ... Be7 18. Bg6+ Kd8 19. Bf5 Qxd4 20. Bf4 and Black is slightly better) 18. Bf4 Rd8 (White threatened 19. Bd6+ but Fritz likes 18 ... Qd8 instead) 19. c5 Nxd3!? (A Queen sacrifice for 3 pieces) 20. cxb6 Nxf4 21. Qg4 Nd5 22. bxa7 Ke7 23. b4 Ra8 (23 ... Nxb4 24. Rb1 & 25. Rxb7+) 24. Re1+ Kd6 25. b5 Rxa7 (25 ... Rhd8 holds) 26. Re6+ Kc7 27. Rxf6! 1-0 (27 ... Nxf6 28. Qxg7+ forks the Rh8 and White will win the endgame).
4) Fischer-Panov, Skopje 1967: 1. e4 c6 2. Nc3 d5 3. Nf3 dxe4 4. Nxe4 Nf6 5. Nxf6+ exf6 6. Bc4 Bd6 7. 0-0 0-0 8. d4 Be6 9. Bxe6 fxe6 10. Re1 Re8 11. c4 Na6 12. Bd2 Qd7 13. Bc3 Bb4 14. Qb3 (Consider 14. Bxb4 Nxb4 15. Qb3) Bxc3 15. bxc3 Nc7 16. a4 (16. Qxb7?? Reb8 traps the Queen) b6 17. h3 Rab8 18. Re4 a6 19. Qc2 b5 20. axb5 axb5 21. cxb5 cxb5 22. Nd2 Ra8 23. Rae1 Qd5 24. Rh4 Qf5 25. Ne4 (White is playing for the attack and avoiding trades) e5 26. Re3 h6 (26 ... Kh8 would prevent creating weak squares on the Kingside) 27. Rf3 Qh7 (27 ... Qd7!? 28. Rxh6 Nd5 +- per Fritz 7 would avoid the quick denouement) 28. Nxf6+! gxf6 29. Rg3+ Kh8 (29 ... Kf8/Kf7 30. Qxh7) 30. Rg6 1-0 (White threatens 31. Rgxh6 winning the Queen; if 30 ... h5 31. g4 Rg8 32. Rxh5 Rxg6 33. Qxg6 wins).
The Caro-Kann Two Knights line is a very good variation for White, which unbalances the play with chances for both sides. Good luck!
REFERENCES:
1) chessgames.com database
2) Fritz 7
3) Fritz 10
This article was a collaboration between Tony Palmer and Anjan Kotekal. 2/16/2009These are still Easy. Solutions at the end:
1) White to play
2) Black to play
3) White to play
4) Black to play
5) White to play
6) Black to play
7) White to play
8) Black to play
9) White to play
10) Black to play
SOLUTIONS:
1) Palmer-Hershberger, Flint 1/19/02: 1. Qh5 g6 2. Qxh3 and White won (1-0).
2) dmkrasniqi-Palmer, Yahoo 5/12/05: 1 ... Qe3+ 2. Qd2 Qxg1+ and Black won (0-1).
3) Palmer-Nervy, FICS 9/7/06: 1. Qc2 Bb7 2. Qxh7+ Kf7 3. Ne5+ and White won (1-0). Full credit for 1. Bxh7+! Kxh7 2. Qc2+ & 3. Qxc6.
4) Williams-Palmer, Dearborn 11/13/82: 1 ... e5 2. Rh4 exd4 and Black won (0-1).
5) Palmer-dos Reis, QueenAlice 4/14/06: 1. Bxf7+! Kxf7 2. Qh5+ g6 (2 ... Ke7 3. Qe5+ Kf7 4. Qd5+) 3. Qd5+ Kg7 4. Qxa8 and White won (1-0). A Ruy Lopez trap.
6) Smelcer-Palmer, Plymouth 3/26/83: 1 ... Bxc2! 2. Nfxd4!? (2. Rxc2 Nxc2 3. Qxc2 d3) Bh7 3. Red1 Nd3 and Black won (0-1).
7) Palmer-Johnson, Flint 2/7/85: 1. Rxf7+ Kxf7 2. Re7+ Kf8 3. Rxa7 Bc8 4. Nb5 and White won (1-0).
8) Holt-Palmer, St. Joseph 11/19/08: 1 ... Bxh2+! 2. Kxh2 Qc7+ 3. Kg1 Qxa5 and Black won (0-1).
9) Palmer-Gurnaney, Boston 12/28/91: 1. Bd5 exd4 2. Bxd4! Qe7 3. Bxa8 and White won (1-0).
10) Adlerburg-Palmer, QueenAlice 8/15/05: 1 ... Bxd2+ 2. Kxd2 Qxd4+ 3. Bd3 Qxh4 and Black won (0-1). 2/15/2009
A Zwischenzug is an In-Between Move in place of a routine response or recapture, so it always carries inherent surprise value. One common Zwischenzug is a check, which is termed a Zwischenschach. Solutions at the end:
1) White to play
2) Black to play
3) White to play
4) Black to play
5) White to play
6) Black to play
7) White to play
8) Black to play
9) White to play
10) Black to play
SOLUTIONS:
1) Palmer-Gay, Flushing 2/3/83: 1. Qxb4 Qxb4?? (1 ... 0-0-0) 2. Bxc6+ Kf8 3. cxb4 and White won (1-0).
2) Diem-Palmer, Flushing 1/27/83: 1 ... Bxc3+ 2. bxc3 Qxc3+ 3. Bd2 Qxc6 and Black won (0-1).
3) Palmer-Lechineck, Chesterton 7/22/00: 1. Nxd5! Qd8 2. Nxe7+ Qxe7 3. Rg4 and White won (1-0).
4) Lindsey-Palmer, Toledo 10/14/95: 1 ... Qxc3+ 2. Bd2 Qg3+ 3. Kf1 hxg6 (3 ... Qxh2? 4. Bf4) and Black won (0-1).
5) Palmer-Groeller, Detroit 11/26/83: 1. b4! (1. Bxh3? Nf3+; 1. Kxh3 Nc4 threatening 2 ... Qh5#) Neg4+ 2. Kg1 Qxb4 3. Rab1 Qc4 4. Bxh3 and White won (1-0).
6) Avadiaev-Palmer, QueenAlice 7/26/07: 1 ... Qxe4+ 2. Qe2 Qxe2+ 3. Bxe2 axb6 and Black won (0-1).
7) Palmer-Jackson, Plymouth 9/2/84: 1. Bxf6 (1. Bxh3? Nf3+) Bxg2 2. Nd5! Qxb2 3. Nxe7+ Kh8 4. Bxg7+ Kxg7 5. Kxg2 and White won (1-0).
8) Bareev-Palmer, QueenAlice 12/31/06: 1 ... Nxe4 2. Bxe7 Nxf2! 3. Bxd8 Nxd3+ 4. Bxd3 Kxd8 and Black won (0-1).
9) Palmer-Murchalla, New Brunswick 12/30/85: 1. Bxg7! f5 2. Qh6 and White won (1-0). Black reached out to grab the Qc1 until noticing 1 ... Nxc1? 2. Nef6#.
10) A Scotch trap where Black already used the Zwischenzug 5 ... Qf6!, then White panics with 6. Be3? [Diagram] leading to 6 ... Bxe3 7. fxe3 Qh4+ 8. g3 (8. Ke2 dxc6) Qxe4 9. Rg1 Qxe3+ 10. Qe2 Qxe2+ 11. Bxe2 and now finally 11 ... bxc6 and Black is up 2 Pawns. 2/9/2009
I believe Weak Back Rank is the most common way to lose, especially considering how many novice games are won or lost that way. So we must mind our back rank every game. Solutions at the end:
1) White to play
2) Black to play
3) White to play
4) Black to play
5) White to play
6) Black to play
7) White to play
8) Black to play
9) White to play
10) Black to play
SOLUTIONS:
1) Palmer-Kotekal, Niles 2/16/08: 1. Qf8# 1-0.
2) Bale-Palmer, Detroit 8/31/08: 1 ... Rc1+ 0-1.
3) Palmer-Feldman, Providence 12/27/86: 1. Nxd6! wins material (1 ... Rxe1+ 2. Rxe1 cxd6? 3. Re8#). The game went 1 ... Be7!? (1 ... Rf8) 2. Nxe8 Rxe8 3. d5 and White won (1-0).
4) Chen-Palmer, St. Joseph 4/7/06: 1 ... Rh2+ 2. Kb1 Qf1+ 3. Qd1 Qxd1# 0-1.
5) Palmer-Alib, QueenAlice 4/3/06: 1. Rd8! wins a Rook and White won (1-0).
6) SleepyEye-Palmer, FICS 8/29/06: 1 ... Qf1+! 2. Rxf1 Rxf1# 0-1.
7) Palmer-Alessandrini, QueenAlice 3/21/06): 1. Rxd7! Bxe3+ (1 ... Rxb3 2. Rd8+; 1 ... Qxd7 2. Qxb8+) 2. Nxe3 1-0.
8) oldgz-Palmer, FICS 2/4/09: 1 ... Qd1+ 0-1 (2. Re1 Nxe1).
9) Palmer-Bojanovic, Wyoming 4/1/06: 1. Rxc5! Qd8 (1 ... Qxc5 2. Qxc5+ Rxc5 3. Rb8+) 2. Rxc8 Qxc8 3. Qa7 1-0.
10) Resende-Palmer, QueenAlice 8/15/06: 1 ... Qa1+ 0-1 (2. Kd2 Ra2+ 3. Rb2 Rxb2#; 2. Qc1 Qxc1#). 2/6/2009
The Giuoco Piano (1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Bc5) is an excellent opening for both sides: good development, early castling, and sound strategy with White advancing c2-c3 & d2-d4 to establish a classic Pawn center while Black plans ... d7-d5 to equalize. The Giuoco Pianissimo (4. d3) has White reinforcing the Pe4 without necessarily intending d3-d4 anytime soon, so Black's game is much easier; White often plays 5. c3 which may lead to d3-d4 later. Old Stodge is where White combines 4. d3 with 5. Nc3, hindering Black from any ... d7-d5 ambitions but also abandoning White's own d3-d4 idea, so the center remains closed and quiet. The Main Line Old Stodge is 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Bc5 4. d3 Nf6 5. Nc3 d6, yet this set position can be reached by other move orders.
Exeter Chess Club has a hilariously unfavorable take on Old Stodge, strongly recommending against it for beginners and juniors. "Whatever is happening in Old Stodge, it is most unlikely that lines are going to be opened very soon. Both sides clamp down on the opponent's Queen's Pawn, preventing the opening of the game. The whole position gets bogged down in a sticky toffee and both players are often bored and confused by the positions that come about. It's enough to put you off chess! The position is blocked, the sides are equal and it's hard to get things going. It can take a long time to beat worse players because things are so solid. Also, it may be that almost every game you play ends up something like this, and perhaps you would like some variety." http://www.exeterchessclub.org.uk/Openings/nomoregp.html
This article will focus on Black playing against Old Stodge, identifying ways to successfully break the symmetry:
1) Trade N for B with ... Na5 & ... Nxc4
2) Trade B for B with ... Be6 & recapture ... fxe6
3) Trade B for B with ... Bxe3, or retreat ... Bb6
4) Castle Queenside for a Kingside Pawn storm
5) Meet 6. 0-0 with 6 ... Bg4 pinning the Nf3
Let's begin with two stock traps that "every Russian schoolboy" (or schoolgirl) should know. The first is the Symmetry Trap, proving that Black can't just copy White's moves for long. Capablanca-NN, New York 1918: 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Nc3 Nf6 4. Bc4 Bc5 (4 ... Nxe4! Fork Trick) 5. 0-0 0-0 6. d3 d6 7. Bg5 Bg4(?) (Better is 7 ... Be6) 8. Nd5 Nd4 9. Qd2! Qd7 10. Bxf6 Bxf3
White ended the symmetry and the game with 11. Ne7+ Kh8 12. Bxg7+! Kxg7 13. Qg5+ Kh8 14. Qf6# 1-0.
Returning to the Symmetry Trap after 7. Bg5 Bg4(?), here are some alternate lines:
1) 8. h3 h6? 9. hxg4 hxg5 10. Nxg5 wins a Pawn.
2) 8. Nd5 h6? 9. Nxf6+ gxf6 10. Bxh6 wins a Pawn and opens Kingside lines.
3) 8. Nd5 Nd4 9. Qd2! (instead of 9. Bxf6 gxf6 10. Qd2 Kg7 holds for Black) Bxf3 10. Bxf6 (not 10. gxf3?? Nxf3+ & 11 ... Nxd2 and Black wins) gxf6? 11. Qh6 threatening 12. Nxf6+ & 13. Qxh7#, so Black loses the Queen after 12. Nxf6+ Qxf6 13. Qxf6.
4) 8. Nd5 Nd4 9. Qd2! Bxf3 10. Bxf6 Qd7? 11. Ne7+ as above, thus 11 ... Qxe7 12. Bxe7 and White wins.
5) 8. Nd5 Nd4 9. Qd2! c6 10. Nxf6+ gxf6 11. Bh4! Kg7 (11 ... Bxf3!? 12. Qh6) 12. Nxd4 with good attacking chances for White.
Given these potential outcomes, Black often plays 7 ... Be6 to meet 8. Nd5 with 8 ... Bxd5 avoiding such attacking lines, even at the cost of trading Bishop for Knight. My analysis is several years old so you are welcome to find improvements.
The second schoolboy trap is technically outside of Old Stodge but demonstrates Black taking advantage of White castling too early. ctydingco-Palmer, GameKnot 7/30/05: 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Nf6 (Two Knights Defense) 4. d3 Bc5 5. 0-0 d6 6. Bg5 (Canal Variation) h6 7. Bh4?! (7. Be3) g5 8. Bg3 h5! 9. Nxg5 h4 10. Nxf7 hxg3!
Did Tony just drop his Queen?! 11. Nxd8 Bg4 12. Qd2 Nd4 13. Re1 Nf3+! 14. gxf3 (14. Kf1 Nxh2+ 15. Kg1 Nf3+ 16. Kf1 Nxd2+ 17. Nxd2 Rh1#) Bxf3 0-1.
White has a spite check, then Black mates with ... gxh2+ & ... h1=Q#, or 15. hxg3 Rh1#. This Queen sacrifice idea is very old, dating back to Dubois-Steinitz, London 1862 (13. Nc3 Nf3+! 14. gxf3 Bxf3 15. hxg3 Rh1# 0-1) and Knorre-Chigorin, St. Petersburg 1874 (13. Nc3 Nf3+! 14. gxf3 Bxf3 0-1). Another Black win is 13. h3 Ne2+ 14. Kh1 Rxh3+! 15. gxh3 Bf3# 0-1 (Helin-Kiltti, Hyvinkaa 1996). The trap is based on 5. 0-0 combined with 6. Bg5 & 7. Bh4?! allowing Black to advance the Kingside Pawns with tempo, meanwhile White's undeveloped Queenside can't help the undefended Kingside. For my game, I thought White should try 12. Nxc6!? Bxd1 13. Rxd1 gxh2+ 14. Kh1 Ng4 giving the Queen back to avoid mate, yet Black is still winning.
After 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Bc5 4. d3 Nf6 5. Nc3 d6, the most common moves for White are 6. Bg5, 6. Be3, and 6. h3. Note 6. 0-0 scores very well for Black, especially after 6 ... Bg4.
For my reference games against Old Stodge. notice how Black breaks the symmetry:
1) Gandolfi-Palmer, Flushing 2/20/84: 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Bc5 4. Nc3 Nf6 5. d3 d6 6. Bg5 h6 7. Bh4 Na5 8. a3 Nxc4 9. bxc4 c6 10. Bxf6 Qxf6 11. Qd2 0-0 12. 0-0-0!? (Castling on opposite wings unbalances the board) Bg4 13. Qe2 Bd4 (Threatening 14 ... Bxc3 to weaken White's Pawn cover) 14. Rd3 b5!? (A Pawn sacrifice to open lines) 15. h3?! (Fritz suggests 15. cxb5 Bxc3 16. Rxc3 cxb5 17. Qxb5 Qf4+ 18. Re3 =) bxc4 (Zwischenzug) 16. Rd2 Bxc3 17. bxc3 Bxf3 18. Qxf3 (Major piece endgame) Qd8 19. Rhd1 Qa5 20. Re2 (20. Rxd6?? Qxa3+) Rab8 21. Kd2 Qxa3 22. Ke1 Rb2 23. g4 Rd8 24. h4 Qa2 25. Rdd2 Rb1+ 26. Rd1 Rxd1+ 27. Kxd1 Qb1+ 28. Kd2 d5 (Decisively opening the center) 29. exd5 Rxd5+ 30. Ke3
Black to Play and Win: 30 ... Rd3+! 31. cxd3 (31. Ke4 Rxf3 32. Kxf3 Qh1+) Qxd3# 0-1.
2) McAuliffe-Palmer, Flint 1/12/85: 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Bc5 4. Nc3 Nf6 5. d3 (No Fork Trick with a Bc4; 5. Nxe5?? Nxe5 6. d4 Nxc4) 0-0 6. 0-0 d6 7. h3 h6 8. Be3 Bxe3 9. fxe3 Na5 10. b3 c6 (Threatening 11 ... b5 to trap the Bc4) 11. d4 Nxc4 12. bxc4 Qa5 13. Qe1 Be6 14. d5 cxd5 15. cxd5 Bd7 (White's center Pawns become nice targets) 16. Rb1 b6 17. Rb2 (17. Rb3) Rac8 18. Rb3 Rc4 19. Kh2 Rfc8
The pressure is too much: 20. Nb1 Qxe1 21. Rxe1 Nxe4 22. Nbd2 Nxd2 23. Nxd2 Rxc2 and Black won (0-1).
3) Lopez-Palmer, Yahoo 8/24/04: 1. e4 e5 2. Bc4 Nf6 3. d3 Nc6 4. Nf3 Bc5 5. 0-0 d6 6. h3 a6 7. Nc3 h6 8. a3 (Old Stodge often has all four Rook Pawns advanced one square, which is quite boring) Ne7 9. Ba2 g5 10. Nh2 Ng6 (I like this particular Kingside formation) 11. Ne2 Nf4 12. Ng3 h5 13. Nf5 Bxf5 14. exf5 Qd7 15. Bxf4 gxf4 16. Qf3 0-0-0 17. b4 Bd4 18. Rad1 Rdg8 19. c4
Black has more space and wins a Pawn: 19 ... Qxf5 20. c5 Rg3 21. Qe2 Qxh3 (Yowza) 22. Qf3 Rxf3 23. gxf3? (23. gxh3 Rg8+ 24. Kh1 Rxh3 -+) Qg3+ 24. Kh1 Bxf2 and Black won (0-1).
4) CYKV-Palmer, FICS 3/17/06: 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Nf6 4. d3 Bc5 5. 0-0 d6 6. h3 h6 7. Nc3 a6 8. Re1 g5 9. Nh2 Ne7 10. Be3 Ng6 11. Bxc5 dxc5 (I'll take this trade as Black, controlling d4 despite living with doubled Pawns, then the Queen can support the center at e7) 12. Ne2 Nh5 13. c3 Nhf4 14. Qb3 0-0
Black's Kingside is airy but safe. Now White self-destructs: 15. g4? Nxh3+ 16. Kg2 Ngf4+ 17. Nxf4 Nxf4+ 18. Kg3!? c6 19. Qd1 b5 (Remove the Guard) 20. Bb3 Qxd3+ 0-1.
5) SleepyEye-Palmer, FICS 8/29/06: 1. e4 e5 2. Bc4 Nf6 3. Nf3 Nc6 4. d3 Bc5 5. Nc3 a6 6. Bg5 h6 7. Bh4 d6 8. Nd5 g5 9. Bg3 Nxd5 10. Bxd5 Ne7 11. Bb3 Ng6 12. c3 Qe7 13. 0-0 h5 14. d4 Bb6 15. dxe5 (15. Ba4+) dxe5 16. Nxe5!? (Mistake or sacrifice?!) Nxe5 17. Qd5 f6 18. Rfd1 h4 19. Bxe5 fxe5 (Black's Queen holds down the fort) 20. Rd3 c6 21. Qc4 Rf8 22. Rad1 Bxf2+ 23. Kh1 Bg4 24. Rd6?!
24 ... Bd4! (Interference) 25. cxd4 Qxd6 26. dxe5 Qxe5 27. Re1 0-0-0 (Now it's in the bag) 28. Qb4 Qd4 29. Qe7 Qf2 30. Rc1? Qf1+! (Weak Back Rank) 31. Rxf1 Rxf1# 0-1.
Old Stodge may be annoying to face, as the quiet center can lead to a dull and drab position. So Black should consider ways to unbalance the game and break the symmetry. Good luck! 2/2/2009
An Exchanging Combination wins material by trading pieces in a specific order, often with a temporary sacrifice. If it's an even swap, that is trading down, whereas an Exchanging Combination should win something. Solutions at the end:
1) White to play
2) Black to play
3) White to play
4) Black to play
5) White to play
6) Black to play
7) White to play
8) Black to play
9) White to play
10) Black to play
SOLUTIONS:
1) Palmer-Goldowski, Detroit 12/27/92: 1. Qxd7+ Kxd7 2. Nxc5+ Kc6 3. Nxb7 Kxb7 4. Kf2 and White won (1-0).
2) Diem-Palmer, Flushing 1/27/83: 1 ... Qxe3 trades down (2. fxe3 Nd2+) but this became an Exchanging Combination after 2. Rg2?? Qxe2+! 3. Kxe2 Nc3+ 4. Kf1 Nxb1 5. Rxb1 b6 and Black won (0-1).
3) Palmer-dos Reis, QueenAlice 4/14/06: 1. Qe8+ Qxe8 (1 ... Qf8 2. Qc6 & 3. Re8) 2. Rxe8+ Kg7 3. Rxc8 and White won (1-0).
4) Papou-Palmer, QueenAlice 5/31/05: 1 ... Qxc1+! 2. Rxc1 Rxc1+ 3. Qf1 Rfc8 and Black won (0-1).
5) Palmer-Forrester, Flint 2/19/83: 1. f3 a6 2. Rxe4! Rxe4 3. fxe4 axb5 4. Rxd5 Rxd5 5. cxd5 and White won (1-0).
6) Everett-Palmer, Detroit 11/27/83: 1 ... Nxb4! 2. cxb4 (2. Qxa7 Qc5+) Qxb4 3. Rac1 (3. Rf3? Bc5) Qxa3 and Black won (0-1).
7) Palmer-Chen, South Bend 9/25/08: 1. Rxe7! Qxe7 2. Qxg4 Nxg4 3. Bxe7 and White won (1-0).
8) Koteles-Palmer, Flint 9/27/83: 1 ... Rxe2+! 2. Rxe2 Nxc3 3. Rbe1 Nxe2 4. Rxe2 Kf8 and Black won (0-1).
9) Palmer-Mankiewicz, Lansing 9/3/01: 1. Rxd4! cxd4 2. Nxe7+! Rxe7 3. Qxc8+ and White won (1-0).
10) Brady-Palmer, Flint 2/7/84: 1 ... R8g5 2. Nxe5 Qxb5! 3. axb5 (3. Qxg5 Qxb1+; 3. Qxd7+ Qxd7) Rxf5 4. exf5 Nxe5 and Black won (0-1). |
|
|
|
|