zenpawn's chessblog » endgame

Topalov Ties It Up

zenpawn — Wed, 05 May 2010 20:58:59 +0000

After holding Anand to two consecutive draws with the black pieces — the second being a real slugfest with a piece sac and all — Topalov slowly ground out the win in Tuesday’s game as white. Anand had just about proved the opposite colored bishop endgame a draw before blundering as Topalov made his final attempt at the full point. Here are those two games, the seventh and eighth. Only four remain in the now-tied match. It’s going to be a sprint to the finish. (Sure wish there wasn’t a game on Mother’s Day though! Probably have to miss the live action on the ICC on Sunday.)

Capablanca in Modern Day Endgame Play

zenpawn — Wed, 27 May 2009 15:03:08 +0000

First off, big congratulations are due our new US Champion, Hikaru Nakamura. Steady play throughout the recently completed tournament netted him clear first. And thanks to Jen Shahade and all involved in pulling off such great live coverage. A most enjoyable event from the spectator’s point of view, with lots of fighting chess.

One game from close second, Robert Hess, particularly impressed and made me happy to see the great World Chess Champion Capablanca had clearly left his mark on our youth.

And earlier this month, there was this one from Kramnik:

Any guesses as to which endgame of Capablanca’s both reminded me? This brilliant masterpiece, of course!

[Event "New York"] [Site "New York"] [Date "1924.??.??"] [Round "06"] [Result "1-0"] [White "Jose Raul Capablanca"] [Black "Savielly Tartakower"] [ECO "A80"] 1. d4 e6 2. Nf3 f5 3. c4 Nf6 4. Bg5 Be7 5. Nc3 O-O 6. e3 b6 7. Bd3 Bb7 8. O-O Qe8 9. Qe2 Ne4 10. Bxe7 Nxc3 11. bxc3 Qxe7 12. a4 Bxf3 13. Qxf3 Nc6 14. Rfb1 Rae8 15. Qh3 Rf6 16. f4 Na5 17. Qf3 d6 18. Re1 Qd7 19. e4 fxe4 20. Qxe4 g6 21. g3 Kf8 22. Kg2 Rf7 23. h4 d5 24. cxd5 exd5 25. Qxe8+ Qxe8 26. Rxe8+ Kxe8 27. h5! {This is the calamity–the Rook now enters the hostile camp. — Alekhine} Rf6 28. hxg6 hxg6 29. Rh1 {White plays logically to utilize his advantage on the K-side and very properly does not concern himself with the weakness of the Q-side. Black, on the other hand, makes a defensive move which he could perhaps have omitted. — Reti} Kf8 30. Rh7 Rc6 31. g4 {Anxious nature might have moved the King towards the queenside, but Capablanca adheres to the principle of aggression that governs rook endings. — Reti} Nc4 32. g5 {He gives his opponent the opportunity of winning a pawn. But Capablanca has confidence in the passed pawn which he obtains. — Reti} Ne3+ 33. Kf3 Nf5 34. Bxf5 {Simple and compelling. — Alekhine} gxf5 35. Kg3! {Decisive! White sacrifices material in order to obtain the classical position with King on f6, pawn on g6, and Rook on h7, whereupon the black pawns tumble like ripe apples. — Alekhine} Rxc3+ {It is extremely instructive to see how Capablanca is no longer in the least concerned about material equality, but thinks only of supporting his passed pawn. — Reti} 36. Kh4 Rf3 37. g6 Rxf4+ 38. Kg5 Re4 39. Kf6 {It is a frequently available finesse in such positions not to capture hostile pawns, but to pass them by in order to be protected in the rear against checks by the rook. — Reti} Kg8 40. Rg7+ Kh8 41. Rxc7 Re8 42. Kxf5 {Again the simplest. Kf7 would not yet have been disastrous because of Rd8, etc. — Alekhine} Re4 43. Kf6 Rf4+ 44. Ke5 Rg4 45. g7+ Kg8 {After exchanging rooks, White would win still more easily. — Alekhine} 46. Rxa7 Rg1 47. Kxd5 Rc1 48. Kd6 Rc2 49. d5 Rc1 50. Rc7 Ra1 51. Kc6 Rxa4 52. d6 {Capablanca’s management of the endgame gives the impression of being so natural that one easily forgets the difficulty of such precise play. The difficulty is chiefly psychological. In chess, as in life, one is so accustomed to place value on the material factors that it is not easy to conceive the idea of indulging in pawn sacrifices when there is so little available material. –Reti} 1-0

I first encountered this game in the excellent book Capablanca’s Best Chess Endings: 60 Complete Game by Irving Chernev, which I highly recommend. I’ve read it a couple times now, and it’s due for another.

What do these games have in common? In all three, the victor allowed his opponent to capture pawns WITH CHECK in order to advance his king into attacking position.

NH Open 2008 – Part 2

zenpawn — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 01:38:21 +0000

The results are in. Braden Bournival has won his fifth straight title as NH State Chess Champion, the first of which he shared with me in 2004. Congratulations, Brad. As for me, I tied for the U2000 prize with Winston Huang.

My last round game was a quick “grandmaster draw” assuring me of at least a piece of the cash, so let’s have a look at the far more interesting third round. I woke up with a migraine, due in no small part to the grueling effort the previous evening, and it was definitely a factor in my draw offer at the end. We were pushing a late lunch at that point, and I wanted to conserve energy. Indeed, I almost withdrew after this game to curl up in a ball in the dark at home, but somehow managed to at least sit at the board to vie for a portion of the U2000 prize. I’m glad I did, but ouch…

Some moments of note:

9.0-0 is a novelty. Previously, 9.Be3 had been played followed later by castling queenside. It certainly came under consideration. The same setup was used there as in the current game, i.e., f3, Be3, and Qe2. We just chose different homes for our kings.

After 21 moves, White has a dominating position, but care is still required. For example, both 22.Rc4 and 22.Qc4 would lose the Be3. Hence the king move.

Black’s 30…a5 is understandable given that White was threatening his own pawn push to that square with the idea of Bb6, etc.. White could take advantage of the pawn’s weakened post on the next move—or even as a correction on the 32nd—with the much better plan of Bf2-Be1. The Be3-c1 maneuver seemed good enough too as Black had to concede either the b-file or the second rank. I also liked it for the fact that it kept an eye on the f4 square where Black’s knight might post. More about this decision and a question for the reader below.

In the final position, I saw 51.gxh5 gxh5 left no route for my king into the kingside and felt the enemy king could keep me out of the queenside. Patrick Sciacca, who kibitzed with us afterward, was convinced the win was to be found in this line. Instead, I focused on the tricky 51.g5 fxg5 52.Bxg5 Ka7 53.Bd2 Nd6 54.Bc3 Nf7. My conclusion in either case was that sure I could punish him some more and maybe pull out the win, but with my headache, I wasn’t sure who I was really punishing.

Quick poll: Is it more painful to discover in post-mortem a winning move you missed entirely or that one of those you considered but ultimately rejected was a winner? Share your thoughts in the comments.

Maybe it’s because of how more frequently the latter occurs that it definitely has my vote. Maybe it’s because it feels like a sort of chessic cowardice to have not played it; you saw so many of the good lines arising out of it yet still couldn’t muster the courage.

Yes, I’m frustrated by this game. I was happy to have built up a position that reminded me of Botvinnik-Capablanca. I felt I was on my way to a beautiful middlegame squeeze capped by a grinding endgame. To have ruined it with unplayed-but-seen moves leaves me baffled for an explanation and saddened by the missed opportunity.