Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Senior Editor:
Gary K. Gifford penswift@yahoo.com
Contributors to UON 21
D. Rozzoni, IM Gerard Welling, Antonio Torrecillas, Perego Domingos, Jack Appelmans,
Brian Wall, G. K. Gifford, Dany Snchaud, Anthony Whalley, Clive Hill, Rick Kennedy,
Rober Bona, Dorothee Luik, Anke Raum, David Robert Lonsdale, N. Earl Roberts.
The newer UON list does not generate e-mail messages, except for UON-related messages
from the editor. Subscription to the new group listing is free.
UON 21 May 2008 by Gary K. Gifford Cover Art: Bishop on the Beach by Gary K. Gifford
Please forward UON comments, games, and article submissions to: penswift@yahoo.com
Note: A special thanks to Microsoft for their "fish" clip-art used in the Fishing Pole article.
ii
UON 21 May / June / July / Aug 2008
Contents
10. Fishing Pole Pros and Cons, by Antonio Torrecillas, Perego Domingos,
Jack Appelmans, Brian Wall, & G. K. Gifford 81-99
iii
UON 21 May / June / July / Aug 2008
I originally sent UON 21 out on May 15 th. But due to some unexpected editorial issues it was removed
from its posting. It now reappears without too much being different. Some contributors suggested edits,
and hopefully I made them all. Ive added page numbers to the footers and table of contents. The Fishing
Pole article has several more games than it did in the first run of UON 21, and underwent additional
editing.
Work has been extremely busy and I also continue to spend time creating problems for Chessville, and I
just wrapped up my participation in a long on-line chess variants tournament, which I won with 12.5 out of
13 points. In my last game I actually ended up spending 4 days on a very critical move. It was not chess,
but was similar. Anyway, it was a tough game and I needed the win or I would tie for first with a strong
variants player from France. I did not want to tie for first.
I also ended up playing in a Shogi play-off against two others. Each of us were clear winners in separate
group round-robins in 2007. Our games are still in progress as I write this.
I ended up playing in an Amar (1.Nh3) thematic opening. Interesting is that the Krazy Kat and Old Hippo
which I like a lot (1 Nh6 for black) was inspired by the Amar, and yet I do not like the Amar. I just dont
care to place the knight on the rim for White yet with Black I find it quite comfortable. Speaking of the
Krazy Kat & Old Hippo book, (which I worked on with Bill Wall and former UON Editor and current
contributor Davide Rozzoni) that book is being reviewed in London for possible publication by a chess
house there. Creating that book has been a long process and I still dont see the end it sight though it
could be as early as this summer.
iv
UON 21 IM Gerard Welling Interview
IM Gerard Welling
by D. Rozzoni
Questions and answers have been given by e-mail.
Rozzoni (R): Well Gerard, when did you learn to play chess and how did it happen?
Welling (W): That is an easy question Davide, but it is a long time ago. Back in 1968,
when I was 9 years old my family went on vacation to the Costa Brava in Spain. On the
same camping we bumped on my fathers colleague Toon Kok and his family. Toon was a
member of the VOJ chess club in Eindhoven and won the club championship several
times. His son Paul Kok was about my age, and already a member of the junior
department of the club run by Toon Kok and ( the late ) Piet Roelen. Paul was looking for
opponents, and that is why father and son taught me the rules. I was so interested in this
"new" game that I wanted to play it all the time.. At one point it was even to much for Paul,
and in return for a game of chess I also had to play a game of petanque with him ! After
that vacation I joined the VOJ chess club junior department where I played two seasons
before my family moved abroad for my father's work - which lead to a two year pause in
my chess playing. The famous Spassky-Fischer match in 1972 was a restart, when back
home in the Netherlands, Paul Kok persuaded me to join the chess club again. This simple
question also brings back sad memories because back in 2006, after a difficult life my old
friend Paul Kok died tragically at the age of 46.
(R): As a teenager which side of chess did you find more fascinating?
(W): My teenage years were long before chess programs and chess DVD's came on the
market, and the market for chess books was much more limited. In the earlier question I
talked about the two guys who organised the junior department of the club and - although
they did not train me in the literal sense of the word - both inspired my chess from the day
I rejoined the chess club in 1972 until today.
Toon Kok was - and in his mid-70ties still is - a dedicated Gambit player, who liked the
Fajarowicz Gambit ( 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e5 3.dxe5 Ne4 ) and Skandinavian Gambit ( 1.e4 d5
2.exd5 Nf6 ) and thus triggered my feeling for dynamics versus material. And Piet Roelen
was a tricky player, specialist in the Budapest Gambit ( 3..Ng4 ) and Jnisch Gambit (1.e4
e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 f5 ) and did not open with any other move than 1.b4. He inspired me
to trust in other Openings than the mainlines. Books by Gunderam, Grob, Borge Andersen
and Sokolsky provided lots of ideas for my Opening repertoire and I played many things
such as the Latvian Gambit ( 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 f5 ), Sokolsky's Opening ( 1.b4 ), the Grob (
1.g4 ) and 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Qe7!?. Later in my chess career I was able to evaluate these
Openings critically but those were the days of youthful optimism. Major inspirations for my
middle game play were the games of Adolf Anderssen with his Evans Gambits and great
attacking games. Here as well my taste changed in later years.
UON 21, May / June / July / Aug. 2008 IM Gerard Welling Interview by Davide Rozzoni 1
UON 21 IM Gerard Welling Interview
Reading the question again I notice that there is also another side to it besides the matter
of chess style, and that is the type of chess. For many years I preferred to play blitz chess
over club and league games. I can understand the legendary Chepukaitis when he wrote
that blitz is "the sprint in chess". As a 13-year old I was already battling out endless blitz
marathons with my chess friend Johan van Mil who for some years lived around the corner
( he later became an international master ). After school, and when homework was done
we started our matches. In the weekends I often played in blitz tournaments in our
province and got good results in this type of play. Eventually I had some real success,
finishing 3rd in the last official Philips Duphar Dutch championship in 1978. That same
year, I won the Dutch championship in blitz for players under 20 with a large margin. And it
was a strong tournament, considering that John van der Wiel, who won the European
junior championship one year later, did not make it to the final. When my years as a junior
where nearing the end I slowly lost interest in blitz chess, mainly because of the changing
etiquette. A new generation of blitz players, not interested in chess but on hammering the
clock, not understanding that in certain positions it is of no use to play on time when the
opponent has any skill. Blitz was degenerating into something I did not want to play
anymore...
(R): You know, your last answer has given me the opportunity to literally jump into the
UCO world, nevertheless before asking questions about that side of your chess, could you
show us a Gambit game played by a teenager Gerard Welling?
(W): Yesterday I have tried to reconstruct a game from my youth, one that sticked in my
memory although it is an old one. It shows the delightful optimism of a little boy, even after
losing a piece. I misplaced the score sheet so I have reconstructed it out of my memory..
UON 21, May / June / July / Aug. 2008 IM Gerard Welling Interview by Davide Rozzoni 2
UON 21 IM Gerard Welling Interview
(R): I guess that the most of UON readers came to know you by your early contributions
to the Myers Openings Bulletin (MOB). According to my researches, you wrote your first
article for the MOB in the Vol. 1 N 9 August 1980 issue. On that occasion Hugh Myers
wrote: One of our most valued contributors has been Gerard Welling, a young Dutch
Openings expert who I predict will also soon be known internationally as a player. That
very first article was called Enterprising Play in the Slav Defense, but later you wrote
various MOB articles on UCOs.
For instance:
De Bruycker's Defense 1.e4 c6 2.d4 Na6; 1.d4 Na6; 1.d4 c6 2.e4 Na6
After more than 25 years, now what do you think of those articles?
(W); These article were written by a young and very enthusiast chess player.
Looking back nowadays my feelings are mixed [for example]:
From the positive viewpoint there is originality, and pleasure involved in those
writings
From the negative viewpoint there is a certain naivety, and lack of substance in
most of it. For example the articles on 1.a4.. and 1.h3.. ( this last on was not meant
as an article but a set of short variations in a letter to Hugh Myers ) have a few short
pointers, but there is no good backing material. Nowadays I think an article should
be more than a simple idea ( and short variations ), either;
That is why today I consider the article on "De Bruycker's Defense" very clearly the best
effort. That is mainly due to Mr. Bernard de Bruycker having played some good games
with it which easily stood the test of critical examination!
(R): Hugh Myers is quite a famous personage in the UCO world and his MOB contains a
mine of ideas for the UCO player: what can you tell us of your encounters/correspondence
with him?
(W): In 1977 I played my first international open and got acquainted with the Wind
brothers. They told me about Hugh Myers' book on the Nimzovich defence 1.e4 Nc6 and
naturally I did my best to get that book. Then, in 1978 or 1979 I found some of his booklets
advertised, "Exploring the chess Openings" and "Mengarini's Opening". I do still consider
"Exploring the chess Openings" as Hugh Myers' magnum opus, although I know that Hugh
likes his autobiography best. "Exploring the chess Openings" has a whole range of
UON 21, May / June / July / Aug. 2008 IM Gerard Welling Interview by Davide Rozzoni 3
UON 21 IM Gerard Welling Interview
Opening ideas, many UCO, illustrated by a good selection of Hugh's own games. There
are lots of suggestions in the notes. I can recommend you to get this book - if you do not
have it already. Hugh Myers is not an analyst like Mike Basman, who tries to change the
borders of chess strategy, but his chess-style is essentially classic the center,
development.
But he is a true master in finding ways to incorporate unusual ideas into solid settings.
One of the ways of doing that is to play with colours reversed; consider 1.Nf3 d5
2.a4!?..Now 2..c5 3.e4 dxe4 4.Ng5 leads to a Budapest Gambit where the extra move a4
comes in handy. And 2..Nf6 3.b4 e6 3.b5 a6 4.Bb2 leads to a branch of the Sokolski
Opening. There is little risk involved in playing this "bizarre" 2.a4 because even after 2..e6!
White can play a Kings Indian or Old Indian where the move a4 is at least semi-valuable (
not a lost move ).
Another strategy is to apply an unusual idea under the best possible circumstances and
that is another specialty of Hugh Myers'. We all know the Grob 1.g4.., and as it gives Black
a free hand there is considerable risk involved. But after 1.d3.. ( with reversed Pirc or
Kings Indian Openings in mind ) 1..c5 or 1..g6 White can play 2.g4!? with less risk,
reasoning these Black moves do not fit in the theoretically most effective counters to the
Grob.
The same idea can be applied after 1.c4 g5!?, as the extra move can even be counter-
productive in 1.g4 structures. Being so enthusiastic about the books, and a regular UCO
practitioner myself, I sent Hugh Myers a letter with some ideas and games. This was the
time span when Hugh was starting his preparations for "Myers Openings Bulletin" and that
is how it all started. It eventually lead to a correspondence that has been lasting for more
than 25 years. Hugh has visited the Netherlands on two occasions. Back in 1986 he was
hired as a bulletin editor for the Dubai Olympiad and a personal assistant of Florencio
Campomanes who was preparing for the elections for Fide presidency.
Shortly before Hugh had written an article in defence of Campomanes, which was noticed
by the president of FIDE who could use some friends as there had been considerable
criticism on him through the years. Hugh was essentially hired to write pamphlets for
Campomanes, which he did for some time. Eventually Hugh did not do editorship of the
bulletin because some sheikh in the organizing committee preferred one of his friends to
do the job. But he was there as a guest, and on his return visited Amsterdam. We spent
some time together - played some blitz as well ( I remember the first game where Hugh
had the White pieces started 1.b3 f5 2.Bb2 e6 3.e4!? Qh4!? ). He liked Amsterdam
except for two apparent "dangers"; being overrun by women on bikes or stepping into dog
droppings.. Two years later, Hugh Myers visited the Netherlands again, this time staying in
the Hague in order to do research in the Royal Library. In the last issues of the "New
Myers Openings Bulletin" there was a lot about chess politics, I would rather have
preferred that pages to have been filled with chess but that is my personal taste.
In recent years Hugh has been researching his ancestors, there was an important branch
stemming from the Netherlands, so I sent him some material from books on Dutch
families. But at one point about two years ago my letters were not answered anymore.
UON 21, May / June / July / Aug. 2008 IM Gerard Welling Interview by Davide Rozzoni 4
UON 21 IM Gerard Welling Interview
Around the turn of the millennium Hugh Myers had a bypass operation to fix his heart
condition, but he was complaining about his walking problems in later years. These health
problems were probably the main reason that the letters ceased to come...
(R): "Can you elaborate a bit more on your correspondence and meetings with
Hugh Myers ? "
(W): "Yes, I did not really answer your question and tell about my correspondence and my
meetings with Hugh Myers. But in that respect there is not much to tell. Regarding the
correspondence we discussed some Openings, sent each other tournament games and
that is it. Hugh is someone who can suddenly come up with an idea. An example from the
early letters, where we discussed 1.f4.. and how to counter From's Gambit 1...e5 in style.
He suggested 2.Nh3.., "an attempt to drive Black crazy". After 2..d5 3.g3 this transposes
into the Paris Gambit but no one ever thought of it before in this position...In 1986 and
1988(?)
Hugh was in the Netherlands and what we did was to be expected: some tourism, some
dinners, some chess analysis, some blitz. Considering the blitz games, Hugh had a very
hard time. But when we entered a blitz tournament at the D.D. chess club in the Hague he
had a good evening and won it ! During his second visit, he was intending to research in
order to write a book about the historical development of chess Openings. But he ran
quickly out of money. Hugh was then invited to stay a few weeks at the house of the Wind-
family but unfortunately nothing ever came of the book."
(R): Besides Myers, you have met other legendary figures in the UCO world including
Emil J. Diemer and GM Suttles. Can you tell us more about these meetings?
(W): I met Diemer on several occasions. The first time was in a tournament in Strasbourg
where he came as a spectator. That particular day I won a game after sacrificing two
knights on the same square f5 and Diemer was paying me a compliment for the game. He
wrote it down and published it in the magazine "Europa Rochade", adding that it was
played by Gerard Welling, a pupil of Emil Josef Diemer !
Diemer was a very interesting person, but a bit strange as well. After a tournament I
played in Biel I was invited to stay in Offenburg on the way back. This was an offer from a
mutual chess friend who suggested we visit Diemer in Gengenbach, which was very near
to Offenburg. The old master lived in a home for the elderly, where he shared a room with
a kleptomaniac. That is why Diemer preferred the daily long walk to his favourite pub,
staying there most of the time, also keeping his chess material there. He still had some
original ideas in chess.
One of the things he showed me in Gengenbach was his attempt to refute the Benoni.
After 1.d4 c5 2.d5 e5 he recommended 3.d6 as such. After 3..Qf6 4.Nc3 Qxd6 5.Qxd6
Bxd6 6.Nb5 Ke7 7.f4 exf4 8.Nxd6 Kxd6 9.Bxf4 his conclusion was that White has a very
strong attack. Strange variation, maybe not correct, but at least it shows imagination. In
those years however, the early 1980s, he had lost a lot of his playing strength and his
ideas became more surrealistic and dubious than before. I do not believe that he would
have taken a Gambit like 1.Nf3 g5?! so seriously in his better days.
UON 21, May / June / July / Aug. 2008 IM Gerard Welling Interview by Davide Rozzoni 5
UON 21 IM Gerard Welling Interview
But in a way the story of Emil Josef Diemer as I have known him is also a sad story. At
that time he was schizophrenic, which showed most clearly when he switched moods and
began to talk about his prophecies. He believed that letters of the German alphabet had
some mystic value (" Do you know by the way that German is spoken in heaven" )
and helped him to understand the past and 'calculate' the future.. And in his later years
Diemer's eyesight was rapidly deteriorating, which caused him problems in playing chess.
And our mutual friend told me that: When Diemer must stop playing chess, he will die.
Duncan Suttles has been a favourite player of mine since the 1970s. I liked his mysterious
1.g3 and 1..g6 setups where the kings knight never seemed to land on the usual squares
( f3 and f6 respectively ), and the resulting amorphous positions. He gave up chess in
1975 for the stock market, started again in 1981 but then stopped for good, as it seems, in
1985. So it was very interesting, when I visited the Western Canadian Open in 2004, to
have spoken with Duncan Suttles (who was a spectator at the tournament). Nowadays he
is into software for computer games and does no longer plays chess. But it still seems to
have a place in his heart, and we even got thus far to have him play a few blitz games on
ICC. One of the Openings went:
http://www.classicalgames.com/Merchant2/merchant.mvc?Screen=PROD&Product_Code=002493
UON 21, May / June / July / Aug. 2008 IM Gerard Welling Interview by Davide Rozzoni 6
UON 21 IM Gerard Welling Interview
And let us not forget Michael Basman. In the 1970s I played over his 1.b3 and 1..b6
games and he had other interesting ideas as well. But in Biel 1979, my first tournament
abroad, I witnessed the changes. There was a player walking around in the tournament
with a beard and a green T-shirt that read "I am a lovely mover" on the back. This man
played 1.g4 on one of the top-boards, and on closer inspection he turned out to be Michael
Basman. As he later told me he was very close in giving up chess at the time, but found a
new goal in trying to make these new Openings work, which gave him a lot of pleasure.
And that is what he did in Biel. The first game he was blown of the board,
and ridiculed by some of the other players.
1.e4 e6 2.d4 a6 3.Nf3 b5, 1.a3 e5 2.e3 d5 3.b4, 1.a3 g6 2.g4 etc.
One game after another, and in round 10 he defeated GM Yehuda Grunfeld who seemed
to be the clear winner two rounds before the end, with the Black pieces. In the last round
he won again, with 1.g4 against Joksic, and shared 1st place with Grnfeld. A triumph for
his new approach to chess. Two years later at the Liege tournament in Belgium, Mike
Basman was around again, this time playing the Grob-Opening with White and Black in 8
of his 9 games. His wife and little son were also there, which explains that I witnessed a
game Basman-Basman starting out with 1.e4 Nc6 2.Bb5, with Mike not even involved.
In this tournament, Michael Basman once again shared 1st. Through the years we have
corresponded about some of his ideas, and the last time I spoke him in person was in
1995, at the Donner memorial in Amsterdam. In that tournament Basman played nothing
but 1.h3 and 1..h6, In the last decade, he has been concentrating on organising a chess
competition for school kids, and it has become a tremendous success. Due to Mike
Basman there is a lot of chess at schools and many thousands of young kids start to play
chess every year. There is only one negative side to this all: the creative genius has
virtually stopped playing.
(R): You have narrated your experiences with these exceptional personages in such a
clear way that it really seems we can see these events in front of us. Well, back to your
chess, in 1982 a 23 years old Gerard Welling played a tournament game against the
former Vice World Champion. You played 1...Nc6 against 1.e4 and you won. Here's the
game:
1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 f5 4.c3 e6 5.f3 d7 6.h4 g6 7.xg6 hxg6 8.b5 ge7
9.d2 a6 10.a4 f5 11.f3 e7 12.f4 f6 13.e2 g5 14.g3 g4 15.d2 xg3 16.fxg3
f5 17.000 b5 18.c2 a5 19.h3 gxh3 20.xh3 000 21.g4 g6 22.dh1 xh3 23.xh3
g5 24.b3 g7 25.b2 fxg4 26.h1 h8 27.xh8+ xh8 28.b4 xd2 29.bxa5 h6
30.xg4 e3 31.xe6+ b8 32.h3 xc3+ 33.b3 xh3 34.gxh3 xd4 35.e6 f6
36.xg6 c5 37.c2 c7 38.d3 d6 39.e8 d8 40.f7 c4+ 41.e3 g5+ 42.f3 d4
43.e4 d3 01
UON 21, May / June / July / Aug. 2008 IM Gerard Welling Interview by Davide Rozzoni 7
UON 21 IM Gerard Welling Interview
(W): Some strange things happened with regard to this game. In some sources it is given
as a regular tournament game, and in a Russian book on 1..Nc6 as a win by Victor
Kortschnoj with Black ! This is all incorrect, because this was a simultaneous game with
clocks on 10 boards, with the grandmaster facing the first team of the strong Eindhoven
chess club.
The year before, Kortschnoj won with 6-4 but was very unhappy with the score and asked
for a revanche. This time he won 7 1/2 - 2 1/2, with wins for Rudy Douven and me, and a
draw for Peter Scheeren. Consider that the Eindhoven chess club finished runner-up in the
Dutch club championship and won it next season 1983-84 and you can judge Kortschnoj's
great achievement. Rudy Douven was Dutch champion in 1988. Peter Scheeren was
already an IM, competed several times in the Dutch championship (with a 2nd place as
best ) and even played in the Wijk aan Zee A tournament, with stars as Kortschnoj, Hort,
Browne, Andersson,Olafsson Ribli and many others. I must also add that the score is not
complete, as the game went on until one point where I was a piece up. Unfortunately I do
not have the game score anymore myself. One last point to mention was that my opponent
was very angry when I declined his draw offer in the endgame.
(R): As you know this interview will be published in UON, I am quite sure that UON
readers want me to ask you to show us your own favourite UCO/Gambit games you
played and why you chose them. Also, I propose to show you a list of UCOs/Gambits and
you give us your opinion on the playability of these Openings and whatever you feel like
saying in connection with them. What do you think about it?
(W): That is a difficult question. I have played many games in a time span of more than 35
years, and through the years I have been anything but cautious with my game scores. As
a result a lot of the games got lost. From the 1970ties, when I have played dozens of
games with 1.g4.. there is not a single one that survived...
What I have done instead is looked in a selected games file that I did two or three years
ago, with games that by one reason or another sticked in my memory ( and did NOT get
lost ).
UON 21, May / June / July / Aug. 2008 IM Gerard Welling Interview by Davide Rozzoni 8
UON 21 IM Gerard Welling Interview
From that particular file, I offer you 8 games with Openings that are not mainstream. And
why did I make this particular choice ?
* Welling-Wrobel; a funny sacrificial game where an unusual mate with two bishops
was possible on both sides of the board ( mirror-image ) (see UON 17 for complete game)
* Welling-Ashton; because I scored few wins near Waikiki beach the week before
and was quite hungry for a win at Kona ; this one was quite brutal (see end of this article
for complete game)
* Welling-Chapman; with fond memories of the hospitality that I found among the
Australian chess players (see UON 17 for complete game)
* Welling-Michiels; for no particular other reason than that at the time I was happy to
have played this game. (see end of this article for complete game)
Considering your question to comment on a list of UCO / Gambits, I am not sure if that is
of interest. My opinion on these Openings is personal, and I try to be as objective as I can
about it. In general I try to rely on sound judgment, without being prejudiced by
appearances. A good Opening should not sin against some laws of central strategy, and
development, but these can be explained flexibly. With a Opening like 1.Nh3 or 1.Na3,it is
still possible to play for central control and to get a harmonious development, and
therefore I consider them playable.
An Opening move like 1.g4 makes a claim for control of central White squares, and
prepares development of Bf1. It is also weakening which means in my opinion that it can
well be playable, but involves danger. Whereas an Opening like 1.h4..,doing nothing for
the center or development ( not even indirectly ) and weakens the kingside, or 1.Nf3 g5 -
giving a pawn and weakening the kingside as well, without concrete compensation, both
give the opponent more chances for an advantage than a practical Opening should.
UON 21, May / June / July / Aug. 2008 IM Gerard Welling Interview by Davide Rozzoni 9
UON 21 IM Gerard Welling Interview
(R): Well, I will just limit my curiosity to your opinion of a couple of Gambits and a UCO:
- Latvian Gambit: 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 f5
- Elephant Gambit: 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 d5
- North Sea Defense: 1.e4 g6 2.d4 Nf6 3.e5 Nh5
(If I am not wrong you have been on of the inventors of this Opening..right?)
(W): Out of these three systems I have played two more or less regularly in practice
myself. Let me start with an Opening that I have played a lot as a junior, and that I still
played on occasion when I was a higher rated player. That is the Latvian Gambit 1.e4 e5
2.Nf3 f5.
In my early days as a chess player it was difficult to make a choice between this and the
Jnisch Gambit in the Ruy Lopez 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 f5. Eventually my first choice
was the Spanish version, because in some variations the slightly exposed bishop on b5
can help Black's counter play ( like 4.d4 fxe4 5.Nxe5 Nxe5 6.dxe5 c6! and White loses a
pawn unless he sacrifices a piece with 7.Nc3!?, or 4.Nc3 fxe4 5.Nxe4 d5 6.Nxe5 dxe4
7.Nxc6 Qg5 ). That is why I regard the Jnisch Gambit as a quite respectable defence,
although White might be able to prove slight something in the lines with 4.Nc3 (on the
contrary, I think 4.d3.. is nothing for White).
But what about the Latvian ? It gives White some freedom of choice, but both 3.exf5 e4,
3.d4 fxe4 4.Nxe5 Nf6 and 3.Bc4 fxe4 4.Nxe5 d5!? ( the Svedenborg line ) lead to
positions where Black's counter play is irrepressible. White also runs dangers and that is
what a player of the White pieces does not want. Unfortunately the simplest move is best,
3.Nxe5 offers White the better chances, both after 3..Nc6 4.d4 ( or maybe 4.Nxc6 ) and
3..Qf6 4.d4 d6 5.Nc4. This last line probably is the mainline, and leads to positions that
may be playable for Black but are a bit sterile. But White has some advantage, and Black
must be very careful to keep his disadvantage to a minimum. My personal conclusion
therefore was that the Latvian is not a practical choice - it is no fun do be thrown on the
defensive every game by prepared opponents. But as a surprise weapon it can work, if
Black knows what he is doing worst what can happen is a disadvantage that is not so big,
a calculated risk, but no real gamble.
There is an interesting idea played by the Dutch master Prins in a correspondence game
against the readers of the Dutch newspaper "Parool" that might give the reader and
Latvian fan a suggestion. Prins played 3.Nxe5 Qe7!? inviting 4.Qh5+ which gave him a
complicated game for the exchange. At least this also gives White something to think
about and some practical problems to solve. And that is what chess is all about. Secondly
there is 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 d5 that did not have a name until a booklet came out nicknaming it
"Elephant Gambit". I do not think I ever played it although I read David Bronstein's
suggestion in his book, 200 Open Games. Here 3.Nxe5 is somewhat better for White, but
Black remains with a playable game. In my opinion 3.exd5 is critical. Now Stefan Bcker
has analysed 3..Qxd5 in some depth, the old Cozio defence which he nicknamed
"Comfortable defence". His deep analysis proved that Black can just hold but he has to
play very accurately throughout and there is no winning chance at all. That makes this
Cozio-defence totally unfit for practical play in my opinion. Black can play actively with
3.exd5 e4 and did not do so badly in practical games.
UON 21, May / June / July / Aug. 2008 IM Gerard Welling Interview by Davide Rozzoni 10
UON 21 IM Gerard Welling Interview
Stefan Bcker did some research in this territory as well. Unfortunately Tim Breyer, a club
player from Eindhoven, suggested a clever move order trick 4.Qe2 Nf6 5.d3 Be7 6.dxe4
0-0 7.Qd3! and Black has not been able to prove compensation. This is what also scared
Stefan away from 2..d5 3.exd5 e4.
Finally there is the North Sea defence. You are right that I have some role myself in the
creation of this defence. One day I noticed a game Nimzowitsch-Alekhine, in "Chess
Praxis". This game started 1.Nf3 Nf6 2.b3 d6 3.g3 e5 4.c4 e4 5.Nh4!? and this inspired
me to look at 1.g3 e5 2.Nf3 e4 3.Nh4 as well as 1.e4 g6 2.d4 Nf6 3.e5 Nh5. The knight is
sidelined - but only temporarily -, and the opponent has weakened his e-pawn and some
squares. I tried it out a few times to research if this idea in the style of Alekhine's defence,
luring the pawns forward, gives enough compensating counterplay. The matter was not
resolved. Several years later at a tournament in Dinard, France, Jonny Hector told me
about the Swedish theoretician Rolf Martens and his original ideas. It turned out this
researcher looked at this..Nh5 idea independently and baptised it Norwegian defence.
Later he changed that to North Sea defence, to credit the Dutch version.
Rolf had done more than I did, really working out mainlines, like the Gambit 1.e4 g6 2.d4
Nf6 3.e5 Nh5 4.Be2 d6!?. How can we evaluate this defence now ? Even if it has been
played by titled players such as Miles and Day I still had my doubts. Very recently Michiel
Wind, "retired" Fide master and old friend used this idea in Freestyle chess. He analysed
the resulting positions very deeply, checked extensively with the best engines, and his
results seem to indicate that the North Sea defence is playable. He mentions 4.Nf3 d6
5.Nc3! as a critical line. Besides, according to Michiel, 3.Nc3 d5 4.e5 Nh5 maybe
possible, but he considers 4..Ne4 instead the right move to level out the chances. So for
the time being, the theoretical stand of the North Sea defence seems to be reasonable.
Remains the question if the potential player of this defence is willing to memorize quite a
lot of concrete lines in order to play it with chances of success. But didn't we play
unorthodox ideas instead of very theoretical mainlines, for one reason to escape the
memorization and reproduction of long concrete lines and play creative chess? So there
is also some impractical side to the North Sea defence. Correspondence chess might be
a better platform to experiment with this idea.
(W): I do not have one single method of studying chess Openings, but I can mention the
two methods that I have been using in most cases [when] I worked on Openings. What I
like very much are books with a good introduction to an Opening, such as the current
"Starting out" series. Because first of all it is important to know the strategic ideas about
the Openings, what they are all about. Then it is good to see a few of the most important
lines, and play over some good illustrative games, that is what these books tend to do as
well. This gives an indication how the ideas are worked out in practice. Having reached
that level of understanding the moves of the Opening are logical, and it is easier to
understand what to do if the opponent sidesteps. It is a starting point for players willing to
dive deeper. I cannot understand players skipping this part and plunging right into
Opening encyclopaedias and highly specialised Opening books. That way the knowledge
"hangs in the air" and is not effective. There is another method that I have used, when I
UON 21, May / June / July / Aug. 2008 IM Gerard Welling Interview by Davide Rozzoni 11
UON 21 IM Gerard Welling Interview
already had some basic knowledge about the Opening. This was very instrumental in
getting the master title eventually. A good example is the defence to the Catalan Opening.
A part of my Opening repertoire that needed work. I was looking for an approach that
would give me decent chances, and not the danger of excessive changes in theory. So I
looked at high level players who are used to play classical chess with Black. Thus I
bumped on Spassky's handling of the closed Catalan, an approach he invariably choose
for decades. A selection of his games, checked against the modern theory showed the
reliability of Spassky's play and I had found a long lasting system.
(R): As a chess player which books have been most helpful to increase your
understanding of the game?
(W): There is one book in particular that sticks in my mind, and that is Edmar Mednis'
Practical Endgame Lessons. Many players do not give attention to the endgame. And I
can assure you, you can not "escape" the endgame. Trying to sidestep that stage of the
game harms the general level and the playing strength. Besides, when I understood that I
discovered a whole new world of chess beauty. There is much more in chess than
sacrificing a knight on f7 in the Blackmar Diemer Gambit, for the 30th time. That is a
message I want to pass to all players [who are] willing to improve; even if your strongest
point is otherwise. You cannot ignore other parts of the game altogether.
Then there are a few books that I liked because they pass on those little pieces of chess
wisdom that are so valuable in practical chess. Capablanca's books are great in that
respect, Lasker's Common Sense in Chess. There are modern books as well, but I like
the simple approach in these old books [that] do not make chess even more difficult than
it is.
For inspiration it is interesting to read The Hypermodern Chess Game by Tartakower, but
with a critical eye. This is by the way one of the ultimate classics of chess literature in my
opinion. Finally there is a small series of Danish books written by Larsen in the late
1970s. The part on planning ( "Find Planen" ) has also been a major help in improving my
understanding of chess. The first four booklets (of which the planning book was one ) have
been translated into English but are out of print as far as I know, the title was Bent
Larsen's Good Move Guide.
(R): Once you told me that while you were growing up as a chess player you reached a
plateau around Elo 2.000, but then something happened: would you like to share with us
that secret?
1. Playing more seriously. Before that I played nothing but blitz chess and always
moved very fast in my "normal" games as well (sometimes you have to concentrate a bit ! )
UON 21, May / June / July / Aug. 2008 IM Gerard Welling Interview by Davide Rozzoni 12
UON 21 IM Gerard Welling Interview
(R): [Who is] the chess player you admire the most (living or dead) and why?
(W): There are several players present and past that I admire. Many years ago I made a
choice and thinking it over nowadays I still believe that is a right choice. First place is
shared by two players. My favourite past player is Savielly Tartakower, and my favourite
"contemporary" player (because I have been playing chess for a long time he is a veteran
as well now ) is Bent Larsen. Both very strong players were among the world elite. Both
gifted technical players, but foremost both players with their own ideas and own approach
to chess, both also known for creating their own brand of Opening systems.
(W): To be honest I do not know exactly. The first grandmaster that I have ever managed
to beat was Evgeny Vasiukov, and it was in convincing style as well. That is more than 20
years ago and he was quite strong back then. After that game I have been able to beat
maybe two dozen other grandmasters, and naturally lost many, many more games to
them. Rating wise probably the strongest was Pavel Tregubov, a former European chess
champion who at the time I played him still had a rating in the 2630s. This was also a
convincing game and I am quite proud that Hans Ree wrote that playing over the game it
is not apparent who is the grandmaster as White wins with simple moves in the style of a
simultaneous display. My last win against a grandmaster is one year old and was a bit
lucky as my opponent walked into a trick in a drawn endgame; that was a win over
Viacheslav Eingorn, with the Pri-Opening 1.d4 e6 2.a3!?
(W): This was probably during a game at Cappelle la Grande against Ukrainian
grandmaster Brodsky. My Opening was a complete failure and I had to use huge
quantities of time to prevent immediate loss. At one point there was no other choice than
go all out risk and sacrifice a few pawns. At one point I had 2 minutes left for more than
20 moves and the position had become completely confused. Then I suddenly saw
something. Calculating at lightning speed I could not believe my eyes. With one minute on
the clock I played my move.
Then some checks and instead of letting me give perpetual check he walked out. That was
my most exciting moment, as I had seen something. Very quickly I played my combination.
His face grew desperate and at the end I was two pawns up in the endgame. Bashing out
my remaining moves I just made the time control, and he resigned. After the game I was
stunned when it turned out that it was a combination that was 12 moves deep. This
proves people can achieve a lot when under immense pressure!
UON 21, May / June / July / Aug. 2008 IM Gerard Welling Interview by Davide Rozzoni 13
UON 21 IM Gerard Welling Interview
(W): Two days at the Dutch championship in 1985.. I qualified for the 12 player final of the
Dutch championship in December 1984, but because I was in the process of finishing my
studies there was no time at all for preparation. A few days before the start of the
tournament - the most important in my chess career up to that point - I was ready with my
Master of History degree.
In the tournament I was a bit unlucky, but kept my fighting spirit until two blows of destiny
killed my enthusiasm.
(1) Against grandmaster John van der Wiel I played creatively, sacrificed two rooks and
should have won in "hurray-style", one move before the end I was still better ( at
least a draw ) but blundered a piece and had to resign.
(2) Against Peter Gelpke (who later became an IM) I sacrificed two pawns and the
game was adjourned. Analysing with my friends we concluded that I had good
winning chances. When we resumed the game it turned out Gelpke had put a
different move in the envelope. I slipped up and lost in only three moves after
adjournment. This destroyed my last hopes and although I did not finish last, for
several months my intention was to give up chess, that "game of gambles and
sheer luck" !
(W): Nowadays after family, friends and work (necessary for a decent living), it remains
an important part of my life. I like the game, its culture and history. Most of my friends
come from the world of chess players. And for 30 years I have been spending most of my
vacation days to play in international chess tournaments. That says it all I guess.
(R): Chess projects for 2008?
(W): As always, many plans and see what will materialize. In January 2008 I will play in
the Gibtelecom tournament at Gibraltar, a tough open with many strong grandmasters.
http://reports.chessdom.com/nakamura-gibtelecom-2008 [Link added by editor, -gkg]
And in April 2008 I have entered the GM-B group of the Gausdal classics in Norway, which
is a reasonably strong tournament with players competing between 2150 and about 2550.
http://www.bergensjakk.no/gausdal/classics2007/ [Link added by editor, -gkg]
But surely I will play more than that. Besides there are other things related to chess that I
intend to do. The famous Ukrainian trainer Adrian Mikhalchishin has published two DVD's
on chess training topics that I cannot wait to look at. Maybe in 2008 I will have time to look
critically at a new scientific approach to chess, Alexander Bangiev's Squares Strategy. He
is an international master and originates from the Ukrane, where he was "master of sports
of the USSR" and trainer. And.. well you know, too much to do and too little time. Did I tell
you that I have finished my article on the chess of Philip du Chattel? Stefan Bcker will
probably publish it in March/April 2008.
UON 21, May / June / July / Aug. 2008 IM Gerard Welling Interview by Davide Rozzoni 14
UON 21 IM Gerard Welling Interview
(R): That is quite an interesting program for 2008! And yes..I am really excited to read your
upcoming article on du Chattels chess. Well, can you tell us what a chess dream is for
you?
(W): When I was a junior I used to have these chess dreams. A spectacular breakthrough
in a tournament, or playing at the Olympiad in the national team.. or..
Nowadays I know better as through the years I have been able to learn about my
boundaries. Miracles do not exist in chess. But there is one thing I have been thinking
about, that is beating three grandmasters in a row. At the Monarch assurance open, Isle of
Man in 2002 I was able to beat Michael Ulibin in round 7 and Normunds Miezis in round 8.
That is two, and then I was halted by Sarunas Sulskis. Yes, a dream is that next time I will
be able to beat three in a row, when the opportunity presents itself. For one moment I was
considering to tell you my chess dream was becoming world champion among seniors in
12 years from now, but a German chess friend has already claimed that so it would feel
like plagiarism.
(W): Well Davide, that is a difficult question. Do you mean to point out a woman that I
admire, or the kind of woman I would spend my life with or something else ? A woman I
admire is the British singer Kate Bush for her musical originality. And we should realise
that she wrote many of the songs on her first album when she was only 14 or 15 years old.
What a talent she has that "something" that can make a woman exciting. On my scale
a friendly character and intelligence score very highly, these are two very important
components of my personal picture of a dream woman. Naturally, some looks do add to
the overall positive impression, and when she is funny she can easily come close of being
irresistible... (Think of the roles that the actress Meg Ryan usually plays.. sweet dreams )
(W): "The Trap" with Oliver Reed and Rita Tushingham, an old fashioned romantic story. I
did not see it for at least 25 years but maybe that is better to keep the myth intact.
(R): And to conclude this interview, is there anything you would like to say to
all UCO players in the world?
(W): Keep up the good work, be creative in your chess. But do so with a purpose in mind
and a critical eye. As Hugh Myers once told me he dislikes "devil may care eccentrics",
players who play UCO in order to make a show... These people give unorthodox Opening
systems an undeserved bad name.
And remember, it is possible to be creative in nearly every position. World class players try
to be creative in Openings that give them a certain security (well developed in
grandmaster practice up to a point ) but they very often have brilliant ideas. Do not judge
them negatively for the fact that they do not often innovate within the first few moves.
UON 21, May / June / July / Aug. 2008 IM Gerard Welling Interview by Davide Rozzoni 15
UON 21 IM Gerard Welling Interview
Section Appendix:
IM Gerard Welling Games, Annotated by IM Welling
11...hxg5 [It was not necessary to take the bait, on the other hand
after the natural 11...e7 White can strengthen his position with
12.h5 f6 13.g4 and develops a strong attack.; But 11...d8!? was
to be considered.] 12.hxg5 g6 13.f3 e7 [13...e7 14.g3 g7
15.h4 wins, that is why the queen must stay at the back rank.]
14.e3! g7 15.e2 e6 [Another point of White's play is revealed
after 15...h8 16.xh8 xh8 17.xf7 f8 18.h1+ g7 19.h6 and
Blacks position falls apart.] 16.xe6 fxe6 What to do now ? The
following blow gains the necessary tempo to prevent Black from
consolidating.
UON 21, May / June / July / Aug. 2008 IM Gerard Welling Interview by Davide Rozzoni 16
UON 21 IM Gerard Welling Interview
21.h5 [21.exf6 xf6 intending to post the queen on g7 and the queens rook to f7.] 21...d7 22.hxg6 hxg6
23.g5?! [Maybe it was time for 23.g4!? ] 23...d8! 24.a3 e8 25.g4 f7 26.xf7 xf7 27.gxf5 exf5!
Now the position is far from clear. 28.g2 h8 29.f3 e6 30.g1 [30.h1] 30...d8 31.f1 h4 32.e2
h6?! [Time trouble, better was 32...h5 33.xh5 xh5] 33.h1 g4 34.xg4 fxg4 35.ab1 xb1
36.xb1 c8 37.b5 f4!? Develops some vicious counterthreats. White has to act fast. 38.c5! g3!
39.c7+ e8 40.xc8+ d7 41.xh8 g2 Blacks point, he is tons of material down but cannot be stopped
from queening. However, his lone king is beyond salvation.
After 41. g2
1.e4 e5 2.c3 f6 3.a3!? A waiting move that might come in handy in Openings with colours reversed.
After 3. a3
UON 21, May / June / July / Aug. 2008 IM Gerard Welling Interview by Davide Rozzoni 17
UON 21 IM Gerard Welling Interview
1.f4 d5 2.f3 f6 3.g3 c5 4.g2 g6 5.d3 g7 6.00 00 7.e1!? [Or 7.c3. It is hard to find good use for
the extra tempo in this reversed Leningrad defence anyway.] 7...c6 8.a3 b6 [White's idea; 8...d4 9.c4;
or 8...d4 9.e5!?] 9.h3!? b7 10.g4 d4 11.c4 d7 [11...dxc3 12.bxc3 d5 13.d2 is not clear. Now
White gets a grip on the position.] 12.f5! de5?! 13.g5 h6 14.e4 d7 15.d2 [A direct 15.fxg6 fxg6
16.h4 xf1+ leaves king or bishop misplaced.] 15...g5 16.h4 f6
After 16.... f6
17.g3?! [The time was ripe to sacrifice 17.hxg5 fxg5 18.xg5! hxg5
19.xg5 a5 20.h4 f6 21.xb7 xb7 22.e6 e8 23.f3 with a
large advantage. White proceeds cautiously instead.] 17...de5
18.f2?! [Once again 18.hxg5 fxg5 19.xg5! hxg5 20.xg5 is
advantageous.] 18...d7 19.af1 f7 20.h3 ce5 21.g3 xg2
22.xg2 c6 23.h2?! a6 24.e4 ab8 25.b3 b7 26.hf2 a7
27.hxg5 xg5 [27...fxg5 28.f6!? opens some alleys around Black's
king.] 28.xg5 fxg5 29.b1 d7?! 30.bd2 f6 31.xf6+ exf6
32.g2 xg2+ 33.xg2 ff7 34.e4 f8 35.f3 After the
manoeuvring stage and the resulting exchanges,White's longterm
plan has worked. An ideal good knight versus bad bishop. Even so,
there is some work ahead. 35...g7 36.h2 a8 37.f2 e8 38.a3
[Directly going for h6 does not improve White's winning potential; 38.fh1 g8 39.xh6 xh6 40.xh6 ef8]
38...d8?! Losing a vital tempo and giving White the opportunity to open a second front. 39.fh1 g8 40.b4
cxb4 41.axb4 a5 42.bxa5 bxa5 43.a1 a8 44.a4 g7 45.h1 [45.c5!?] 45...b4 46.b1 h8?! 47.g3
e7 [47...a7 48.bxb4; 47...b8 48.xa5]
- end -
UON 21, May / June / July / Aug. 2008 IM Gerard Welling Interview by Davide Rozzoni 18
Analysis around Alapin's Lopez
by N Earl Roberts
UON 21 May / June / July / Aug. 2008 . Alapins Lopez by N. Earl Roberts 19
9.Bxc6+ bxc6 10.Nxb6 cxb6 11.Qxd4 Nf6 12.Bg5
XHGFEDCBAY
1R+-mK-+-tR0
2zPPzP-+-zP-0
3-+N+-zP-+0
4+-+PwQ-+P0
5-vL-+-+-+0
6+-sn-zppzpp0
7pzpp+-+-+0
8tr-+kwql+r0
xiiiiiiiiy
As its main line, given supposedly by no less then Paul Keres and Efrim Geller.
Their assessment on the above position on its face value seemed fair enough.
It would be about a year or so later, when the next tome to be consulted was the
1983 Batsford book, Batsford Chess Openings written by Gary Kasparov and
Raymond Keene.
Their opinion, in BCO, was somewhat different:
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 Bb4 4.00 Nge7 5.c3 Ba5 6.Bxc6 Nxc6 7.b4 Bb6
8.b5 Na5 9.Nxe5
XHGFEDCBAY
1-mKR+QvLNtR0
2zPPzP-zP-+P0
3-+-+-zP-+0
4+-+P+-+-0
5-+-sN-+Psn0
6+-+-+-vl-0
7pzpp+pzppzp0
8tr-+kwql+r0
xiiiiiiiiy
as , on the strength of the famous game Geller-Taimanov, Zurich C 1953.
UON 21 May / June / July / Aug. 2008 . Alapins Lopez by N. Earl Roberts 20
The puzzling thing here is that the aforementioned ECO also mentions the same
game but goes on with: 9.Nxe5 00 10.d4 d5?! 11.Nd2 as being as well; but
provides an improvement in 10Qe8 intending d6 as being = , as given by a
Levenfis.
Even a quick study of the assessments mentioned in ECO on the line given in
BCO 1, it does appear that the opinion on 5.00 (rather than 5.Na3) is that it
offers white no more than the standard to = /
Who is right? Who is wrong? Paul Keres and Efrim Geller? Or Kasparov and
Keene?
The next book I was to try and seek any sort of wisdom from was the 1987
Batsford book, Unorthodox Openings, by Joel Benjamin and Eric Schiller.
Probably wisdom [in this case] was not the right word.
While I do not think this book was as bad as some were to make it out to be, the
short piece on Alapins 3Bb4 very much missed the mark in providing any sort
of definitive assessment. Specifically on 3Bb4, e.g., they cite the game
Hansen - Dreyev, Kiljava 1984.
The opening moves are the same as given in the BCO I line ( , remember?).
XHGFEDCBAY
1-mKR+QvLNtR0
2zPPzP-zP-+P0
3-+-+-zP-+0
4+-+P+-+-0
5-+-sN-+Psn0
6+-+-+-vl-0
7pzpp+pzppzp0
8tr-+kwql+r0
xiiiiiiiiy
From the diagram, there followed: 9...00 10.d4 Qe8! That Levenfis suggestion!
11.Nd2 d6 12.Nd3
UON 21 May / June / July / Aug. 2008 . Alapins Lopez by N. Earl Roberts 21
XHGFEDCBAY
1-mKR+QvL-tR0
2zPPzP-sN-+P0
3-+-+NzP-+0
4+-+PzP-+-0
5-+-+-+Psn0
6+-+-zp-vl-0
7pzpp+-zppzp0
8+ktrq+l+r0
xiiiiiiiiy
Here Dreyev played 12...Qxb5 and the game was subsequently drawn in 40.
Messrs. Benjamin and Schiller also make mention of notes provided by Hansen
in Informator 38 on this game, that 12f5 first followed by 13.e5 Qxb5 wouldve
allowed white but a small advantage.
While this in itself is clear enough, what isnt made clear is Messrs. Benjamin and
Schiller overall assessment of 3Bb4. Simply after beating the one drum of the
BCO I line (which they subsequently show is playable with the Qe8
improvement), they cap their review off by repeating ECOs main line complete
with all its assessments. The one blazing unanswered question was Is it
playable or isnt it? On what the authors present, it is a dollar each way, Yes, if
white castles, allowing that one extra move for Black . No, if white simply plays
4.c3 Ba5 5.Na3
Next on the list for consultation was Batsford Chess Openings 2, an updated
version of the original single volume chess opening manual, again authored by
Gary Kasparov and Raymond Keene.
This time however any mention of Alapin's line is cast into the hell hole of
obscurity that is a footnote. In which the previously cited game of Hansen -
Dreyev, Kiljava 1984 is given to move 14.
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 Bb4 4.00 Nge7 5.c3 Ba5 6.Bxc6 Nxc6 7.b4 Bb6
8.b5 Na5 9.Nxe5 00 10.d4 Qe8 11.Nd2 d6 12.Nd3 Qxb5 13.c4!
UON 21 May / June / July / Aug. 2008 . Alapins Lopez by N. Earl Roberts 22
XABCDEFGHY
8r+l+-trk+(
7zppzp-+pzpp'
6-vl-zp-+-+&
5snq+-+-+-%
4-+PzPP+-+$
3+-+N+-+-#
2P+-sN-zPPzP"
1tR-vLQ+RmK-!
xabcdefghy
and is assessed as .
Interesting, is the fact that this is the same conclusion drawn by Schiller and
Benjamin regarding the very same game.
UON 21 May / June / July / Aug. 2008 . Alapins Lopez by N. Earl Roberts 23
On the subject of the apparent refutation line given by ECO and duly regurgitated
by Shiller and Benjamin, Mr. Welling mentions:
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 Bb4 4.c3 Ba5 5.Na3 Bb6 6.Nc4 d6 7.d4 [7.a4 Be6!
8.Qe2 Chigorin (8.Ncxe5?! dxe5 9.a5 Bc5 (9.Nxe5 Qg5!) 10.Nxe5 a6) 8...a6
9.Nxb6 cxb6 10.Bc4 Bxc4 11.Qxc4 b5!] 7...exd4 8.a4 Be6! (Instead of the 8a6
given by ECO and S/B)
XABCDEFGHY
8r+-wqk+ntr(
7zppzp-+pzpp'
6-vlnzpl+-+&
5+L+-+-+-%
4P+NzpP+-+$
3+-zP-+N+-#
2-zP-+-zPPzP"
1tR-vLQmK-+R!
xabcdefghy
is given by Alapin himself.
Then we have that Levenfis suggestion 10Qe8! from ECO
XABCDEFGHY
8r+l+qtrk+(
7zppzpp+pzpp'
6-vl-+-+-+&
5snP+-sN-+-%
4-+-zPP+-+$
3+-zP-+-+-#
2P+-+-zPPzP"
1tRNvLQ+RmK-!
xabcdefghy
As Mr. Welling points out, this was seen in the game Schlechter - Alapin, Berlin
1897 (84 years before the said ECO volume was published) which continued
11.Qd3 f5! 12.Qg3 Kh8 13.exf5 d6 14.Nf3 Qxb5 15.Be3 Bxf5
UON 21 May / June / July / Aug. 2008 . Alapins Lopez by N. Earl Roberts 24
XABCDEFGHY
8r+-+-tr-mk(
7zppzp-+-zpp'
6-vl-zp-+-+&
5snq+-+l+-%
4-+-zP-+-+$
3+-zP-vLNwQ-#
2P+-+-zPPzP"
1tRN+-+RmK-!
xabcdefghy
with a good game for Black (which was eventually drawn).
The other book I found while browsing the web filling in time (as you do), was the
booklet Die Alapin-Variante in der Spanischen Eroffnung by Bernhard Lach on
the Chess Central web site.
Mr. Lach expands greatly (as much as one can on a relatively unexplored idea)
on the ideas laid out so well in Gerard Wellings article and some of the analysis
given on those lines already mentioned is very interested.
Take ECOs 5.Na3 line for instance:
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 Bb4 4.c3 Ba5 5.Na3!? Bb6 6.Nc4 d6 7.d4 exd4 8.a4
that ECO line again!
XHGFEDCBAY
1R+-mKQvL-tR!
2zPPzP-+-zP-"
3-+N+-zP-+#
4+-+PzpN+P$
5-+-+-+L+%
6+-+-zpnvl-&
7pzpp+-zppzp'
8trn+kwql+r(
xhgfedcbay
8...Be6! Alapins own move to the rescue again.
UON 21 May / June / July / Aug. 2008 . Alapins Lopez by N. Earl Roberts 25
Following a the example of Ferdinand Hellers (2490) - Jonny Hector (2435)
Malmo Schacknytt, Malm played in December of 1988, Lach sites:
9.cxd4 d5 10.a5 dxe4 11.Nfe5 Bxc4 12.Nxc4 Bxd4 13.a6 Qf6 14.00 Rd8
15.Qg4 Nge7 16.axb7 00 17.Qxe4
XHGFEDCBAY
1-mKR+-vL-tR!
2zPPzP-+-zP-"
3-+-+-+-+#
4+-+QvlN+-$
5-+-+-+L+%
6+-wq-+n+-&
7pzppsn-zpPzp'
8+ktr-tr-+-(
xhgfedcbay
Deviating at the error 17...Rb8?? as played Hector
XHGFEDCBAY
1-mKR+-vL-tR!
2zPPvl-+-zP-"
3-+-+-+-+#
4+-+Q+N+-$
5-+-+-+L+%
6+-wq-+n+-&
7pzppsn-zpPzp'
8+ktr-tr-+-(
xhgfedcbay
Pointing out the strength of 17...Bxf2+! 18.Kh1 (18.Rxf2 Rd1+ 19.Rf1 Rxf1#)
18...Qe6 19.Qxe6 fxe6 ..Isnt it amazing what resources can miss!
In conclusion, what does this all mean? I supposed I could have culled detailed
analysis from the final two books to provide ample evidence as to their worth and
that of Alapins idea.
UON 21 May / June / July / Aug. 2008 . Alapins Lopez by N. Earl Roberts 26
However, while it I personally believe that the system out lined in this article is
quite playable (even against strong opponents) that was not the object of this
exercise.
Since time immemorial, chess has relied on one form or another of media to
increase its presence and scope to the world at large.
Certainly if one has read the fine works of the American chess author, Wendell
John Lutes, then it would be known that chess has we more or less know it now
has existed in print since circa1590 from the manuscripts of Giuio Cesare
Polerio.
Now, some four hundred and eighteen years later with the explosion of
technology, on top of the written word from books, magazines and newspapers,
the chess world has to deal with the internet & web sites, DVDs and CD ROMs
as well spreading the gospel of chess.
But along with this explosion in technology, the world has had an explosion of
people. There are a lot more people around these days, both inside and outside
of the chess playing halls of the world at large. With those from the inside
demanding more and more information to be able play our great game better (or
at least, with a greater confidence) and this is where in lies, the point
The quality of the information being provided, I have shown examples of briefly
above. After the Encyclopedia of Chess openings, subsequent authors have
relied on its gospel. With one set of authors even going so far as to ask (in
relation to Alapins 3Bb4 line) what a certain players improvement is on the
ECO 5.Na3 line is. A certain amount of historical research would have shown
that an improvement of sorts had been around for about eighty years. In short, a
lot of big names from the chess world have apparently leant their opinions on the
viability of Alapins line. I have shown in this brief article, some of them have
been less than accurate and some have simply been confusing.
And so I suggest that if you have a proven pet line, stick with it (of course, if it
can be refuted concretely out right, whats the point?) and if you are going to
invest your hard earned cash on getting the opinion of some titled player from an
obscure part of far flung Asia minor (or a well known player from around the
corner for that matter) on your favorite opening, just remember one thing, his
opinion is exactly that, an opinion.
-- N Earl Roberts
UON 21 May / June / July / Aug. 2008 . Alapins Lopez by N. Earl Roberts 27
UON 21 GAMBITS FROM FRANCE (IX)
UON 21, May / June / July / Aug. 2008 GAMBITS FROM FRANCE (IX) by Dany Snchaud 28
UON 21 GAMBITS FROM FRANCE (IX)
On the french gambiteer Pierre Morra (1900-1969) and his gambit you can read
my article into 2007 January's issue of Europe-Echecs (n 562).
UON 21, May / June / July / Aug. 2008 GAMBITS FROM FRANCE (IX) by Dany Snchaud 29
UON 21 GAMBITS FROM FRANCE (IX)
LOUISON L. - De CASTET A.
French Championship, Besanon, 2006
LOUISON L. - LAGARDE B.
French Championship, Besanon, 2006
UON 21, May / June / July / Aug. 2008 GAMBITS FROM FRANCE (IX) by Dany Snchaud 30
UON 21 GAMBITS FROM FRANCE (IX)
UON 21, May / June / July / Aug. 2008 GAMBITS FROM FRANCE (IX) by Dany Snchaud 31
UON 21 GAMBITS FROM FRANCE (IX)
1. e4 e5 2. d4 exd4 3. Qxd4 Nc6 4. Qe3 Nf6 5. Nc3 Bb4 6. Bd2 O-O 7. O-O-O d6
8. Qg3 Kh8 9. Nge2 Ne8 10. Nf4 Ne7 11. a3 Ba5 12. Bc4 c6 13. h4 b5 14. Bb3 b4
15. axb4 Bxb4 16. f3 a5 17. Qf2 a4 18. Nxa4 Bxd2+ 19. Qxd2 Ba6 20. Qe3 Bb5
21. Nc3 Qa5 22. Kd2 Nc7 23. Ke1 d5 24. Kf2 dxe4 25. Qxe4 Ng6 26. Nxg6+
fxg6 27. h5 g5 28. h6 Qa7+ 29. Kg3 Nd5 30. Nxd5 cxd5 31. hxg7+ Qxg7 32.
Qd4 Bc4 33. Qxg7+ Kxg7 34. Bxc4 dxc4 35. Rd7+ Rf7 36. Rxh7+ Kxh7 37.
Rxf7+ Kg6 38. Rc7 Rb8 39. Rxc4 Rxb2 40. Kg4 Rb5 41. Rc6+ Kf7 42. c4 Re5
43. Rd6 Rc5 44. Rd5 Rxc4+ 45. Kxg5 Rc3 46. g4 Rc7 47. Re5 Rc6 48. f4 Rg6+
49. Kh5 Rg8 50. Ra5 Rb8 51. Ra7+ Kf6 52. g5+ Ke6 53. Ra6+ Kf7 54. g6+ Kg8
55. Kh6 Rf8 56. f5, 1-0.
UON 21, May / June / July / Aug. 2008 GAMBITS FROM FRANCE (IX) by Dany Snchaud 32
UON 21 GAMBITS FROM FRANCE (IX)
1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. d4 exd4 4. Nxd4 Bc5 5. Nxc6 Qf6 6. Qf3 [ 6. Qd2 Qxc6 7.
Nc3 Bb4 8. Qd4 Bxc3+ 9. bxc3 Nf6 10. Bd3 O-O 11. O-O d5 12. e5 Ne4 13. c4
Be6 14. cxd5 Bxd5 15. c4 Qc5 16. Qxd5 1-0. GIROUX F. (2200) - LAI A. (2020),
21st Avoine Open, 2006.07 ]
6dxc6 7. Nd2 Be6 8. Nb3 Bxb3 9. axb3 Qxf3 10. gxf3 Ne7 11. Be3 Bxe3 12.
fxe3 O-O 13. Bc4 Rfd8 14. b4 Kf8 15. Ke2 Rd6 16. f4 a6 17. e5 Rh6 18. h4 Nd5
19. c3 f6 20. Raf1 Re8 21. e4 Nb6 22. Bb3 Ke7 23. e6 Rg6 24. Rfg1 Rxg1 25.
Rxg1 g6 26. f5 Rg8 27. c4 Nc8 28. c5 Na7 29. Bc4 Nb5 30. Bxb5 axb5 31. h5 g5
32. Rd1 Rd8 33. Rxd8 Kxd8 34. Ke3, 1-0.
1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. d4 exd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 Bb4 6. Nxc6 bxc6 7. Bd3 d6 8.
O-O Ng4 9. Na4 O-O 10. c4 d5 11. Be2 Qh4 12. h3 Nf6 13. e5 Nd7 14. a3 Be7
15. cxd5 Nxe5 16. f4 Ng6 17. f5 Bd6 18. fxg6 Bxh3 19. gxh7+ Kh8 20. Qe1 Bg3
21. Rf4 Bg4 22. Qxg3 Qxg3 23. Rxg4 Qe1+ 24. Bf1 Rae8 25. Nc3 f5 26. Rf4 g5
27. Rf2 g4 28. Rb1 g3 29. Rf3 Qe7 30. Bf4 Qc5+ 31. Kh1 cxd5 32. Rd1 Rf7 33.
Bxg3 Rxh7+ 34. Bh2 d4 35. Ne2 Qc2 36. Rxd4 Rxe2 37. Rd8+ Kg7 38. Rd7+,
.
1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. d4 exd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nxc6 bxc6 6. e5 Ne4 7. Qf3 Qh4 8.
g3 Ng5 9. Qe2 Qd4 10. Bg2 Be7 11. O-O O-O 12. Rd1 Qb6 13. b3 f6 14. Be3
Bc5 15. Qc4+ Ne6 16. Bxc5 Qxc5 17. Qxc5 Nxc5 18. exf6 Rxf6 19. Nc3 Rb8 20.
Re1 a5 21. Re5 d5 22. Re8+ Rf8 23. Re7 Ne6 24. Nxd5 cxd5 25. Bxd5 Rf6 26.
Rxc7 Kf8 27. Ra7 Nd4 28. c4 Ba6 29. Re1 Re8 30. Rxe8+ Kxe8 31. Rxg7 Ne2+
32. Kg2 Nc3 33. Rxh7 Nxa2 34. g4 Nc3 35. g5 Rb6 36. c5 Rb5 37. Bf7+ Kf8 38.
g6 Bb7+ 39. f3 Nd5 40. Kg3 Rxb3 41. Be6, 1-0.
UON 21, May / June / July / Aug. 2008 GAMBITS FROM FRANCE (IX) by Dany Snchaud 33
UON 21 GAMBITS FROM FRANCE (IX)
CANONGE J. HUREL C.
Salon de Provence Open, 2006
UON 21, May / June / July / Aug. 2008 GAMBITS FROM FRANCE (IX) by Dany Snchaud 34
UON 21 GAMBITS FROM FRANCE (IX)
1. d4 f5 2. e4 fxe4 3. Nc3 Nf6 4. Bg5 e6 5. Bxf6 Qxf6 6. Nxe4 Qh6 7. Bd3 Nc6 8.
c3 b6 9. Nf3 Be7 10. Qe2 a5 11. O-O Bb7 12. Rad1 O-O 13. Ne5 Nxe5 14. dxe5
d6 15. exd6 cxd6 16. Ng3 Rae8 17. Qh5 Qxh5 18. Nxh5 g6 19. Ng3 d5 20. Bb5
Rd8 21. Rfe1 Bc5 22. Re2 Rf6 23. Ne4 Rdf8 24. Nxf6+ Rxf6 25. a3 e5 26. b4
Bd6 27. Ba4 axb4 28. axb4 e4 29. Bb3 Rf5 30. Rxe4 Kg7 31. Red4 Be5 32. R4d3
Ba6 33. Rxd5 Kf6 34. c4 Rg5 35. f3 Bb7 36. R5d3 h5 37. Ba4 h4 38. h3 Bf4 39.
Bd7 Re5 40. Rd6+ Kg7 41. Bg4 Kh6 42. Re6 Rxe6 43. Bxe6, 1-0.
UON 21, May / June / July / Aug. 2008 GAMBITS FROM FRANCE (IX) by Dany Snchaud 35
UON 21 GAMBITS FROM FRANCE (IX)
UON 21, May / June / July / Aug. 2008 GAMBITS FROM FRANCE (IX) by Dany Snchaud 36
UON 21 GAMBITS FROM FRANCE (IX)
UON 21, May / June / July / Aug. 2008 GAMBITS FROM FRANCE (IX) by Dany Snchaud 37
UON 21 GAMBITS FROM FRANCE (IX)
1.d4 d5, 2.Nc3 Nf6, 3.e4 Nxe4, 4.Nxe4 dxe4, 5.Bf4 [5.Bg5] 5...Nd7, [5... g6]
6.Qe2 Nf6, 7.O-O-O c6, 8.f3 exf3, 9.Nxf3 e6, 10.Ne5 Be7, 11.g4 Nd5, 12.Bg3
Qa5, 13.Kb1 Bd7, 14.Bg2 b5, 15.Rhf1 f6, 16.Nxd7 Kxd7, 17.Rfe1 Nc7, 18.Bxc7
Qxc7, 19.Qxe6+ Kd8, 20.d5, 1-0.
WICKS K. - LECCIA C.
Salon de Provence Open, 2006
1. e4 e5 2. f4 d6 3. Bc4 Nf6 4. Nc3 Nc6 5. Nf3 Na5 6. fxe5 dxe5 7. Nxe5 Be6 8.
Bxe6 Nc6 9. Nxf7 Qe7 10. Nd5 Qxe6 11. Nxc7+ Ke7 12. Nxe6 Kxe6 13. Nxh8
Bd6 14. d4 Nxe4 15. d5+ Kd7 16. Qg4+ Ke7 17. Qe6+ Kf8 18. Qf7# 1-0.
1. e4 Nf6 2. Nc3 e5 3. f4 d6 4. Bc4 Be7 5. d3 O-O 6. Nf3 Nc6 7. Be3 Ng4 8. Bd2
Na5 9. f5 c6 10. Ng5 Nxc4 11. dxc4 Nf6 12. Qf3 h6 13. h4 h5 14. O-O-O a6 15.
Rdg1 Ng4 16. Nd1 d5 17. cxd5 cxd5 18. exd5 Qd7 19. Rf1 Bc5 20. Be3 Bxe3+
21. Nxe3 e4 22. Nxe4 Nxe3 23. Qxe3 Qxd5 24. Nc3 Qc6 25. f6 gxf6 26. Ne4 f5
27. Qg5+ Qg6 28. Nf6+ Kh8 29. Nxh5 Rg8 30. Nf4 Qxg5 31. hxg5+ Kg7 32.
Rd1 b5 33. Rh6 Bb7 34. Rd7 Rgb8 35. Nh5+ Kg8 36. Nf6+ Kg7 37. Nh5+ Kg8
38. Nf6+ Kg7 39. Rh7+ Kg6 40. Rdxf7 Kxg5 41. Rhg7+ Kf4 (=) 42. Rxb7 Rh8
43. b3 Rh6 44. Nd5+ Ke5 45. Nb4 Rc8 46. Nd3+ Kd4 47. Kb2 Rcc6 48. Rgf7
Rh2 49. Rbd7+, 1-0.
UON 21, May / June / July / Aug. 2008 GAMBITS FROM FRANCE (IX) by Dany Snchaud 38
UON 21 GAMBITS FROM FRANCE (IX)
UON 21, May / June / July / Aug. 2008 GAMBITS FROM FRANCE (IX) by Dany Snchaud 39
UON 21 GAMBITS FROM FRANCE (IX)
UON 21, May / June / July / Aug. 2008 GAMBITS FROM FRANCE (IX) by Dany Snchaud 40
UON 21 GAMBITS FROM FRANCE (IX)
AYALA B. CANONGE J.
Salon de Provence Open, 2006
UON 21, May / June / July / Aug. 2008 GAMBITS FROM FRANCE (IX) by Dany Snchaud 41
UON 21 GAMBITS FROM FRANCE (IX)
1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 f5 4. d3 fxe4 5. dxe4 Nf6 6. O-O Bc5 7. Qe2 Nd4 8.
Nxd4 Bxd4 9. Nd2 Qe7 10. Nf3 Bb6 11. Bc4 d6 12. Be3 Bg4 13. Bxb6 axb6 14.
Qe3 Be6 15. Qb3 Nxe4 16. Bxe6 Nc5 17. Qb5+ c6 18. Qxb6 Nxe6 19. Qb3 Nc5
20. Qe3 O-O 21. Nd2 Ne6 22. c3 Nf4 23. g3 Ne6 24. a3 Rf5 25. Rae1 Raf8 26. f4
g5 27. fxe5 Rxe5 28. Qd3 Rxf1+ 29. Qxf1 Nc5 30. Nf3 Rxe1 31. Qxe1 Qxe1+ 32.
Nxe1 Na4 33. Nd3 d5 34. Kf2 Kf7 35. Ke3 Ke7 36. Kd2 Kd6 37. b3 Nb6 38. a4
Nd7 39. a5 Nf6 40. b4 Ne4+ 41. Kc2 g4 42. Nf4 Ng5 43. Kd3 Ke5 44. c4, .
UON 21, May / June / July / Aug. 2008 GAMBITS FROM FRANCE (IX) by Dany Snchaud 42
UON 21 GAMBITS FROM FRANCE (IX)
UON 21, May / June / July / Aug. 2008 GAMBITS FROM FRANCE (IX) by Dany Snchaud 43
UON 21 GAMBITS FROM FRANCE (IX)
1.d4 d5, 2.c4 e5, 3.dxe5 d4, 4.Nf3 Nc6, 5.a3 Bg4, 6.Bf4 f6 ?! 7.Nbd2 g5, 8.Bg3
f5, 9.h3 Bh5, 10.Nb3 ?! f4, 11.Bh2 Qe7 ! 12.Nbxd4 !? O-O-O, 13.e3 Bxf3,
(13Nxe5, 14.Be2) 14.gxf3 ?! (14. Qxf3 Nxd4, 15.exd4 Rxd4) 14Qxe5,
15.Qe2 Nxd4, 16.exd4 Qxd4, 17.h4 Nf6 !!? (17h6, 18.Bh3 and 0-0) 18.hxg5
[ 18.Bh3 g4 !!? 19.Bxg4 Nxg4, 20.fxg4 Bb4+ (20Bxa3 !?), 21. Kf1
Re8]18...Re8, 19.Bh3+ Kb8, 20.Rd1 ? [ 20.Be6 Qb6, (20.Qd6 ? 21.Rd1 ! and
22.Qxd6 Rd8+ !) ]
20Rxe2+, 21.Kxe2 Qxc4+, 22.Ke1 Bb4+ ! (22Nd5, 23.Be6), 0-1.
[An. S. Schmitt]
1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e5 3. dxe5 Ng4 4. Bf4 Bb4+ 5. Nd2 Nc6 6. Ngf3 Qe7 7. a3 Ngxe5
8. Nxe5 Nxe5 9. e3 Bxd2+ 10. Qxd2 d6 11. Be2 O-O 12. O-O Be6 13. c5 Rfd8
14. cxd6 cxd6 15. Rac1 Rac8 16. Qd4 Nc6 17. Qa4 d5 18. Rfd1 d4 19. exd4 Bd5
20. Bf1 Qe4 21. Bg5 f6 22. Be3 g5 23. Qc2 Qg4 24. h3 Qe6 25. Bc4 Rc7 26.
Bxd5 Rxd5 27. Re1 Qf7 28. Qb3 Rcd7 29. Red1 Kg7 30. Rc3 h6 31. f3 f5 32.
Rcd3 f4 33. Bf2 Qf5 34. Re1 Qf6 35. Re4 h5 36. Qc3 Qf5 37. Rd2 Qf6 38. Qc4
a6 39. Qc3 Kf7 40. Qb3 Kg7 41. Qb6 $4 Rb5 42. Qxb5 axb5 43. d5 Qf7 44. d6
UON 21, May / June / July / Aug. 2008 GAMBITS FROM FRANCE (IX) by Dany Snchaud 44
UON 21 GAMBITS FROM FRANCE (IX)
Qf6 45. Bc5 b6 46. Bd4 Nxd4 47. Rexd4 Qe5 48. Kf1 Qc5 49. Ke2 Kf6 50. Kd1
Qf5 51. Ke2 Qb1 52. Kf2 Qc1 53. Ke2 Qc5 54. Ke1, .
JOUET P. CANNONGE J.
Salon de Provence Open, 2006
WOLFANGEL J. - PERRAUT A.
Salon de Provence Open, 2006
UON 21, May / June / July / Aug. 2008 GAMBITS FROM FRANCE (IX) by Dany Snchaud 45
UON 21 GAMBITS FROM FRANCE (IX)
UON 21, May / June / July / Aug. 2008 GAMBITS FROM FRANCE (IX) by Dany Snchaud 46
UON 21 GAMBITS FROM FRANCE (IX)
More informations on gambits : Mieux Jouer Aux Echecs, http://www.mjae.com. My book on Emil Diemer and B.-
D.G., Diemer-Duhm gambit, Latvian gambit, Bogart gambit, Fajarovicz gambit, Boden gambit, David Gedult, etc.
[ and Chess history, Chessbooks... ]
Dany Snchaud
UON 21, May / June / July / Aug. 2008 GAMBITS FROM FRANCE (IX) by Dany Snchaud 47
UON 21 The Gunsberg Errata
UON 21 May/ June / July / Aug. 2008 Gunsberg Errata Gifford, Whalley, Hill, & Kennedy 48
UON 21 The Gunsberg Errata
The Gunsberg article suggests 4.Bc5 as the equalizing line. Is this not the equivalent the
Tarrasch mistake? Mentioned by Pinski in his four knights book with colors reversed?
I then realized that my article was flawed and regretted having ever
created it.
I responded to Anthony:
Thanks Anthony, for the question and the link. The chess video there is
very good and I highly recommend it to everyone who wants to review
this issue. The lesson is animated.
Yes Anthony, you are correct. Instead of the 5.b4 plan there is the better
line with 5.Nxe5 as follows.
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.a3 Bc5 5.Nxe5 Nxe5 6.d4 which is the
trap... and now if 6....Bd6 7.f4 looks great.
UON 21 May/ June / July / Aug. 2008 Gunsberg Errata Gifford, Whalley, Hill, & Kennedy 49
UON 21 The Gunsberg Errata
Thanks Gary I didn't mean to sound short in the previous mail but I was busy at work but
didn't want to "leave it til later." I appreciate the article and the effort that you put in and
to be fair I had never really thought of 5.b4 before you mentioned it.
As a Gunsberg player the troublesome/ equalizing line for me is the 4..a6 variation as White
has now lost the option of the Spanish Four Knights and if 5.d4 Black can now enter into the
Scotch Game with the possibility of playing the Qh4 lines when the inclusion of a6 prevents
the more testing Nb5 lines, although there are still possibilities for White in other
variations. Also on the scotch transposition issue Black can also opt for the Bc5 Classical
Scotch variations when again the inclusion of a3 and a6 only seems to give Black more
good options as he has the extra retreat square of a7 if required.
As I remember the SOS article recommends transposing to a Belgrade Gambit in the case of
4..a6
Going off Isidors performance at Hastings I would suggest not; but in the game below he
attempts the b4 variation discussed in the newsletter but a tempo down with disastrous
consequences. A.W.
UON 21 May/ June / July / Aug. 2008 Gunsberg Errata Gifford, Whalley, Hill, & Kennedy 50
UON 21 The Gunsberg Errata
14. Qe3 Re8 15. Qa7 Ne7 16. Rhe1 Nc6 17. Qe3 h5 18. f4 h4 19. Bf2 g6 20. Nd5 Bg7
21. h3 f5 22. Qd3 fxe4 23. Rxe4 Rxe4 24. Qxe4 Qf5 25. Qe3 Kb8 26. Kb1 Qh5 27. c3
Bh6 28. a4 g5 29. axb5 gxf4 30. Qd3 axb5 (Next Diagram)
31. Nxc7! Rd8 32. Nxb5 Ba6 33. Bd5 Qe8 34. c4 (White has secured his loose forces
and has no worries - editor) Bxb5 35. cxb5 Nb4 36. Ba7+ 1-0
Ill have a think about this tonight and let you know if I find anything. Anthony
UON 21 May/ June / July / Aug. 2008 Gunsberg Errata Gifford, Whalley, Hill, & Kennedy 51
UON 21 The Gunsberg Errata
After viewing the preceding game, Clive Hill (clivebeard1999) added this comment:
If Black plays 5...d5, White can go down the same path as in the 1895 game but with an
extra tempo; and if Black keeps up the symmetry with 5...b5, then 6.d4 and Black does
not have Bishop to c5 as in a Scotch. I'm not a Gunsberg player, so this is just
speculation, but I thought I would ask. Clive :-)
And finally, Rick Kennedy wrote the following (up through page 54) as an attempt to
cheer me up in regard to my flawed Gunsberg article:
I wouldn't sweat it over your UON Gunsberg article. You have merely participated in what
my dad used to call "the Scientific American method" of research. He said the "method" is
simple: send a Letter to the Editor at Scientific American, outlining some basic idea, and
putting forth a few conclusions. The readers - geniuses all and certainly smarter than any
Letter writer - will fall over themselves trying to meet the magazine's next deadline, with
missives such as "X was a bit off. I ran an experiment, and here is my data which suggested
..." or "Poppycock! The following proof demonstrates the way the author should have
developed his thesis..." Of course the Editor will choose the wisest responses to publish -
thereby setting off a second round of responses, from those who have worked harder than
the first group to gather more data, refine more proofs, further or refute the argument, etc.
After the sixth month or so, the first writer needs only gather up and synthesize the
responses...
It would be unfair, though, for me to bypass my bookshelf and pass up my role in the
Scientific American method-as long as I can avoid that I'm-smarter-than-you stuff.
UON 21 May/ June / July / Aug. 2008 Gunsberg Errata Gifford, Whalley, Hill, & Kennedy 52
UON 21 The Gunsberg Errata
Interestingly enough, IGM Larry Evans' "Chess Openings Ideas & Analysis Four Knights'
Game & Belgrade Gambit" (1972) does not include the move, 4. a3.
After 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bb5, IGM Evans writes:
"The fact that White's QN is already developed makes this order significantly different
from the Ruy Lopez, as can be seen from the next note. Weaker is 4 B-B4, NxP! (4...B-B4
transposes to the Giuoco Piano). And a normal reaction to 4 B-K2 (or 4 P-KN3) is P-Q4"
Neither does L.M. Picket's "Four Knights and Belgrade Gambit" (1976) have 4. a3,
although you can read in the booklet after the move order 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Nc3 Nf6
4.Bb5, the following:
"Since White has already developed his QN this line is considerably different from the Ruy
Lopez as is indicated in the note to Black's next move. If say 4 B-B4 then NxP! equalizes
quickly and the most active reply to 4 B-K2 and P-KN3 is P-Q4."
John Nunn's "New Ideas in The Four Knights" (1993) does not cover 4.a3, but perhaps
that's because the move is not a "new idea."
Jan Pinski's "The Four Knights" (2003) has one annotated game with 4.a3, Blehm -
Socko, Warsaw 2002 (0-1,47). That game continues 4...d5, although Pinski looks at
4...g6 (transposing to a reversed Glek system), 4...Be7 ("too passive to equalize fully") and
4...Bc5 "(A provocation!) 5.Nxe5!? Nxe5 6.d4 Bd6" and after 7.dxe5 [7.f4 Nc6! leads to
equality] Bxe5 8.Bd3 d5 9.exd5 Bxc3+ 10.bxc3 Qxd5 11.0-0 0-0 "and White is probably
very slightly better here."
After 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.a3 d5 5.Bb5 d4 6.Ne2 Bd7 (6...Nxe4!? leads to
unclear play) 7.d3 Bd6 8.0-0 h6 headed toward equality.
All of this is prologue to the real resource, Hugh Myers' "Reversed King Pawns:
Mengarini's Opening" (1977). The main lines follow 1.e4 e5 2.Nc3 Nf6 3.a3. Larry
Evans, writing the Foreword, notes "A perverse opponent might even consider 3...P-QR3..."
"In this I think that my most valuable contribution is in the "Reversed(?) 'Four Knights
Opening' " going well beyond the variation 1 P-K4 P-K4 2 N-KB3 N-QB3 3 N-B3 N-B3 4 P-
QR3 P-Q4, which is as far as MCO-10 and ECO go with this sort of thing. They attribute 4
P-QR3 to Gunsberg, saying that 4...P-Q4 equalizes. But in that position... I don't think that
anything except 5 PxP has been considered up to now. I've found that 5 B-N5 makes better
use of 3 P-QR3."
UON 21 May/ June / July / Aug. 2008 Gunsberg Errata Gifford, Whalley, Hill, & Kennedy 53
UON 21 The Gunsberg Errata
Myers looks at
==================================
====================================
A last minute addition which is related to Gunsberg, but not to the variation that bears his
name.
UON 21 May/ June / July / Aug. 2008 Gunsberg Errata Gifford, Whalley, Hill, & Kennedy 54
UON 21 The Gunsberg Errata
Gunsberg, I A Steinitz, W
New York, NY (Manhattan Chess Club) Evans Gambit January 1981 Match Game
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.b4 Bxb4 5.c3 Ba5 6.O-O Qf6 7.d4 h6 8.Qa4 Bb6 9.Bb5
Nge7 10.Ba3 exd4 11.e5 (Diagram) "The only way to continue the attack." - Gunsberg
Qg6 12.cxd4 Nd5 13.Re1 Nf4 14.g3 Qg4 15.Nbd2 Nh3+ 16.Kg2 Ng5 17.Bb2 Ne7
18.Be2 Ne6 19.Kh1 Qf5 20.Nh4 Qxf2 "An error which loses the queen." - Gunsberg
End of Errata
UON 21 May/ June / July / Aug. 2008 Gunsberg Errata Gifford, Whalley, Hill, & Kennedy 55
Hippo Corner I
Robert Bona, Dresden, Germany
Copyright:Dorothee Luik, Anke Raum - www.luik-und-raum.de Used with permission of the artist.
May I introduce you to the Hippo Corner? I know there are some friends of this opening in
the big UON-Universe. Maybe only a few...
Do you remember this situation? As a practitioner or aficionado of certain openings you are
watching out for games played by your favourite role model players. If these specialists get
problems with their - and yours of course - pet openings you get some doubts if there maybe
fundamental problems with the opening. This seems to happen with my pet opening during
2007 - the Hippopotamus (aka Scorpion, aka Robatsch ...). GM Pavel Blatny and FM Alessio
de Santis were defeated, GM Blatny during the Foxwoods Open two times - in one of the
games by the twelve year old FM Ray Robson! And this year the German FM Bernd Feustel
who is playing this opening since decades defeating several GMs with it lost.
But: Don't worry! Looking at these games in some detail you will see that the opening itself
was not the reason for the loss but smaller or bigger inaccuracies during the game. In fact in
all cases the positions after the opening phase were roughly even and full of play. O.K. you
sometime have to accept "ugly" looking positions, but thats a matter of taste and how
familiar you are with these positions. And: the Hippo is playable against the e4, d4, c4 pawn
centre too! No problem with that, you have not to switch to the King's Indian if you don't
want to.
On the other hand there were recently also many games played even on the highest Super-
GM level where Black had the upper hand. The most spectacular examples are from the last
year world blitz championship where Gata Kamsky played the Hippo several times with great
success. And there is a seldom exemplar of the species in the collection a Hippo with the
White pieces played against Ruslan Ponomariov.
Let's hear what GM Kamsky has to say about this: "I saw you regularly used the Scorpion
Defence... (A set-up where a good part of Black's initial moves consists of pushing pawns to
g6, d6, c6, a6 and h6 - ed.) Yes, but I have great experience in this opening as both White and
Black. I played it against computers. And in blitz against humans it gives you a huge
advantage - you can flash out your first 10 moves, and you are already winning on time. Then
you play ...b5, g5, then ...b4, and his e4-pawn suddenly hangs. I am ready to repeat it next
time, so the guys can start preparing (laughs)!"
I hope you enjoy these games and some other games from 2007 too which I have added.
With apologies to Monty Python (and the Spanish Inquisition) I have to wonder how many
Unorthodox Openings Newsletters readers expected another article after the ones in Issue #17
and Issue #18 on the Jerome Gambit: 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ ? Yet, here we
go.
I was spurred to write about this unorthodox and seriously disreputable opening again when my
chess friend, Pete Banks of England (handle: blackburne), organized a 13-player, double-round
robin thematic tournament at www.chessworld.net starring the Jerome Gambit.
On top of that, Pete bravely tossed Grandmaster Gary Lane a question about the opening, which
the Chess Caf (www.chesscafe.com) author addressed in his most recent Opening Lanes
column.
Before diving into some of the lessons to be learned from the 156 games of the Jerome Gambit
Tournament, I wanted to share something from GM Nigel Davies fantastic book, Gambiteer I.
This wisdom is relevant to the tournament under consideration, where players ranged from
the1200s to the1800s according to chessworlds rating system, and where knowledge of the
book lines of the Jerome Gambit ranged from a good bit to not very much at all. We are not
going to be looking at masters searching out the ultimate truth of the opening, we are going to
see how it is played at club level.
Please remember, too, that we are not looking at the Ruy Lopez, or even the Blackmar Diemer
Gambit. We are looking at the duck-billed platypus of the chess opening world.
In fact, I have to say that my first prediction for the result of the competition was a 13-way tie for
first place, with the players losing all of their games with the white pieces and winning all of
their games with the black pieces. After all, the Jerome Gambit has a number of clear refutations
how could it be otherwise?
UON 21 May / June / July / Aug. 2008 Nobody Expects the Jerome Gambit, by Rick Kennedy 62
UON 21 Jerome Gambit
After some thought, however, I realized that there was more to consider than just White vs
Black. As I wrote in UON #17, the Jerome Gambit is playable in the way that giving odds is
playable. So I looked at all of the match-ups in the tournament, and when White was rated
several hundred points above Black, I predicted a win for the first player. Carrying this re-
evaluation through all of the games, I estimated that the tournament winner would score 18
points out of 24.
As it turns out, blackburne (Pete) scored 18 points, winning 10 out of 12 times with white!
This was only good enough for fourth place, however, as SIRMO, who won a still-impressive 8
times with white and drew twice, won every game he played with the black pieces, for a total of
21 points! This allowed him to place ahead of savage13 and drewbear, each who won 9 times as
White, scoring 20 and 19 points each.
Contrary to my initial impressions, White won 63 games in the Jerome Gambit Tournament, lost
90, and drew 3, for a score of 41% this is unimpressive in comparison with legitimate chess
openings, but a bit surprising for an opening that GM Keene once wrote should never be
played.
Analysis of the results shows that the difference in ratings between White and Black (ratings rose
and fell during the tournament after wins and losses) was a significant factor in the outcome of
the games, with the correlation being about .7 (that is to say about of the variance in the results
was due the difference in strength of the players).
Charting each win and loss against a range of strength differences between the players White is
0-100 points higher (or lower) than Black, White is 101-200 points higher (or lower) than Black,
White is 201-300 points higher (or lower) than Black, etc. shows that in this Jerome Gambit
Tournament, White needed to be rated only 200 points higher than his opponent to overcome the
handicap of giving Jerome Gambit odds and have strong winning chances.
Lets take a step-by-step look at how the Jerome Gambit was played out in the games and some
relevant examples.
UON 21 May / June / July / Aug. 2008 Nobody Expects the Jerome Gambit, by Rick Kennedy 63
UON 21 Jerome Gambit
I was shocked to find that in 17 games Black did not capture the Bishop, preferring instead
4Kf8?! or 4Ke7?. (I have not seen this idea in classical Jerome Gambit games or analysis,
only fairly recently.) The only explanation that I can think of is that the second player reasoned
that If he wants me to take the Bishop, then I wont! Sometimes this is a good strategy, but not
now.
In the case of 4Kf8, the simplest idea is for White to withdraw the Bishop to a safe place (e.g.
5.Bb3), remaining a pawn up with Blacks King unable to castle. Instead, 5 times White left the
Bishop to be captured later and this decision accounted for three losses, despite the fact that
Black, in taking two moves to capture the piece instead of one, was playing the Jerome Gambit a
tempo down. In all, the 4Kf8 line scored 9-3 for White.
The move 4Ke7 falls to 5.Bxg8 Rxg8 6.d4 TN, using the threatened x-ray attack (7.Bg5+) on
the Black King and Queen to win the Bishop at c5, as shown in drewbear AAlekhine. Whites
stratagem was found only in that game, however; over all, after 4Ke7, White scored 4-1.
drewbear AAlekhine
(not to be confused with the former world champion - editor)
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Ke7 5.Bxg8 Rxg8 6.d4 h6 7.dxc5 d6 8.cxd6+ cxd6 9.h3
Kd7 10.a3 Kc7 11.b4 Rf8 12.b5 Na5 13.Qd2 Kb8 14.Bb2 Nc4 15.Qc3 Nxb2 16.Qxb2 Qa5+
17.Nc3 Bd7 18.00 a6 19.bxa6 Rxa6 20.Rab1 b6 21.Nd5 Bb5 22.Rfc1 Ka7 23.Nc7 g5 24.Nxb5+
Kb8 25.Nxd6 Qc5 26.Qxe5 Qxe5 27.Nxe5 Rh8 28.Ndc4 b5 29.Rxb5+ Kc7 30.Rd1 h5 31.Rd7+
Kc8 32.Nb6+ Kb8 33.Nc6#
5.Nxe5+
[with Ne5] I believe White is taking a big gamble.... and that "The Jerome Gamble"
may be a more appropriate name. If there is any soundness to be found in the
Jerome, then I believe it involves replacing 5. Nxe5+ with a different move.
- Gary Gifford (UON 17)
In almost 2/3 of the games in the Jerome Gambit Tournament, the players agreed with Giffords
opinion, avoiding the capture 5.Nxe5+ 102 times, scoring 31wins, 68 losses and 3 draws. Instead
of sacrificing further, White focused upon development and a hope to eventually out-playing his
opponent.
The downside of this modern idea for White the oldest games in my database without 5.Nxe5+
are only 10 years old is that Blacks King was safer than in the classical lines, and it had the
opportunity to castle by hand with Kg8 after Re8 or ...Rf8.
The most popular alternative was 5.d3 (56 games, scoring 34%), followed by 5.0-0 (21 games,
scoring 37%), 5.c3 (14 games, scoring 21%), 5.Nc3 (6 games, scoring 17%), 5.d4 (3 games,
scoring 33%), 5.Ng5+ ? (1 game, scoring 0%) and 5.h4 (1 game, scoring 100%). It is clear that
many of the lines can transpose into each other. It is not clear that they are markedly better than
the classical move 5.Nxe5+.
UON 21 May / June / July / Aug. 2008 Nobody Expects the Jerome Gambit, by Rick Kennedy 64
UON 21 Jerome Gambit
Three examples give some of what both White and Black are aiming for:
karmmark - manago
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.d3 h6 6.00 Nf6 7.Nc3 Rf8 8.Nd5 Kg8 9.Nxf6+
Qxf6 10.a3 d6 11.Re1 Nd4 12.Nxd4 Qxf2+ 13.Kh1 Bxd4 14.c3 Bh3 15.g3 Qg2#
savage13 - Ratscales
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.d3 h6 6.00 d6 7.Nc3 Qf6 8.Be3 Qg6 9.Bxc5 Bh3
10.Nh4 Qg5 11.Qf3+ Nf6 12.Qxh3 dxc5 13.Nf5 g6 14.Ne3 Ke8 15.Qe6+ Ne7 16.Ned5 Nfg8
17.Nxc7+ Kf8 18.Nxa8 h5 19.Nc7 h4 20.Ne2 h3 21.g3 Qd2 22.Rae1 Qg5 23.f4 exf4 24.Rxf4+
Nf6 25.Rxf6+ Kg7 26.Qxe7+ Kh6 27.Nf4 Rg8 28.Nce6 Qe5 29.Rxg6+ 10
drewbear - savage13
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.00 d6 6.d3 Nf6 7.Bg5 Rf8 8.Nc3 Be6 9.Nd5
Bxd5 10.exd5 Nd4 11.Nxd4 Bxd4 12.c3 Bb6 13.Qf3 Kg8 14.h4 Qd7 15.Bxf6 Rxf6 16.Qe2 Raf8
17.Kh1 Rxf2 18.Rxf2 Rxf2 19.Qe1 Qg4 20.d4 01
5Nxe5 6.Qh5+
This is Whites usual continuation of the attack, although in seven games of the Tournament 6.d4
(once a favorite of Alonzo Wheeler Jerome) was played, with White scoring 4-3. (The strongest
response for Black is 6Qh4! which players did not discover in the Tournament.)
savage13 - karmmark
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.d4 Qf6 7.dxc5 Ne7 8.00 Re8
9.Nc3 Kg8 10.f4 Nc4 11.e5 Qf5 12.b3 Na5 13.Bb2 Nac6 14.Nd5 Nxd5 15.Qxd5+ Qf7 16.Qd3
Nb4 17.Qc3 a5 18.Rae1 Nd5 19.Qd4 c6 20.f5 Nb4 21.Qe4 Nd5 22.c4 Nc7 23.f6 g6 24.Bc1 Ne6
25.Bh6 Nc7 26.Bg7 Ne6 27.Bh6 Nc7 28.Rd1 Na6 29.Qd4 Nc7 30.Rd3 Ne6 31.Qe4 Nxc5
32.Qd4 Ne6 33.Qh4 g5 34.Bxg5 Nc5 35.Rg3 Rxe5 36.Bf4+ Kh8 37.Bxe5 Ne6 38.Rf5 d5 39.Rg7
Nxg7 40.fxg7+ 10
6Ng6
In 7 games Black played instead the adventurous 6Ke6. Although objectively the move leads
to an advantage for the second player, it is uncomfortable step for someone unfamiliar with the
Jerome Gambit to play (and defend afterwards), so it is not surprising that in the Tournament that
White scored 6-1.
Also quite playable for Black is the alternative 6g6, as Joseph Henry Blackburne played in his
miniature against the Jerome Gambit in London in 1885. Knowing how to follow up the move
7.Qxe5 Qe7! is important, however, or the impending loss (actually a strong sacrifice) of a
Rook may cause Black to panic.
UON 21 May / June / July / Aug. 2008 Nobody Expects the Jerome Gambit, by Rick Kennedy 65
UON 21 Jerome Gambit
Blackburne - Karmmark
(Here, and in other games in this article, this Blackburne (Pete Banks) is not to be confused with Joseph H. Blackburne - editor)
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ke6 7.f4 Nc6 8.Qxc5 Qe7?
9.Qd5+ Kf6 10.Qf5#
Blackburne - Plummy
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ke6 7.f4 Nf6 8.Qxe5+ Kf7
9.Qxc5 d6 10.Qg5 Re8 11.d3 Kg8 12.00 Ng4 13.f5 Qxg5 14.Bxg5 h6 15.Bd2 h5 16.Nc3 b6
17.Nd5 c6 18.Nc7 Ba6 19.Nxa6 Kf7 20.Nc7 h4 21.Nxa8 Rxa8 22.Rf4 Nf6 23.Rxh4 c5 24.Rf1
Rc8 25.Rf3 c4 26.Bc3 Ne8 27.Rg3 a5 28.Rh7 Kg8 29.Rh4 [29.Rgxg7+ Nxg7 30.Rxg7+ Kh8
31.Rc7+ Kg8 32.Rxc8+ Kf7 33.f6 cxd3 34.Rc7+ Kg8 35.f7+ Kf8 36.Bd2 Kg7 37.Bh6+ Kxh6
38.f8Q+ Kg5 39.Rg7+ Kh6 40.Qh8#] 29...a4 30.Rhg4 [30.Bxg7 Nxg7 31.f6 Kf7 32.fxg7]
30...Rc7 31.h4 Ra7 32.Bd4 a3 33.b3 cxb3 34.cxb3 Rc7 35.f6 g6 36.Rxg6+ Kf7 37.Rg7+ Ke6
38.Rxc7 Nxc7 39.Rg7 Ne8 40.Re7#
Blackburne - Bullit52
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ g6 7.Qxe5 Bxf2+ 8.Kxf2
Qf6+ 9.Qxf6+ Nxf6 10.Nc3 b6 11.d3 d6 12.Rf1 Rf8 13.Kg1 Kg7 14.Bg5 Nd7 15.Nd5 Rxf1+
16.Rxf1 c6 17.Nc7 Rb8 18.Ne6+ Kg8 19.Bh6 Ba6 20.Kf2 Nc5 21.Nxc5 bxc5 22.Ke3 Re8 23.b3
d5 24.Rf4 Bc8 25.Kd2 dxe4 26.Rxe4 Rxe4 27.dxe4 Kf7 28.h3 Kf6 29.Ke3 g5 30.g4 Kg6 31.Bf8
h5 32.Bxc5 a6 10
7.Qxc5
A bit more accurate might be 7.Qd5+ followed by 8.Qxc5, first forcing Blacks King back and
delaying the emergence of his Kings Rook. This is a nuance, and nuances are hard to find in a
Jerome Gambit Tournament!
By the way, with the text move White scored 6 wins and suffered 13 losses.
7d6
This was the most popular response, although one game saw 7Ng8e7 and another 7Qe7. In
either case (Black won both games), Whites plan should be to develop and get his pawns
moving against Blacks King.
Bullit52 - savage13
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ng6 7.Qxc5 N8e7 8.00 Rf8
9.d3 Kg8 10.Bg5 d6 11.Qc4+ Kh8 12.Nc3 c6 13.Ne2 b5 14.Qc3 Be6 15.Nf4 Bg8 16.Nxg6+
hxg6 01
8.Qe3
Queen checks from d5 (two wins for Black) or c4 (one win for White) were also played as was a
retreat to c3 (two wins for Black and one win for White). In each case, the goal is the same: to
make something out of Whites 2 pawns vs Blacks piece before the Black King gets to safety.
UON 21 May / June / July / Aug. 2008 Nobody Expects the Jerome Gambit, by Rick Kennedy 66
UON 21 Jerome Gambit
Nestor250168 - NMTIGER
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ng6 7.Qxc5 d6 8.Qc3 Nf6
9.d3 Re8 10.00 b6 11.Bg5 Ne5 12.f4 Neg4 13.h3 Ne3 14.Rf3 Nd1 15.Qb3+ Be6 16.c4 Nxb2
17.Qxb2 h6 18.Bxf6 Qxf6 19.e5 Qh4 20.Nd2 a5 21.f5 Bd7 22.e6+ Bxe6 23.fxe6+ Kxe6 24.Qxg7
Rg8 25.Qf7+ Ke5 26.Qd5#
8Nf6 9.0-0
Blacks move is the most consistent to focus an attack on the pawn at e4. White does best to
move his King out of the line of fire.
Bullit52 - SIRMO
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ng6 7.Qxc5 d6 8.Qe3 Nf6
9.Nc3 Re8 10.00 d5 11.Nxd5 Nxd5 12.Qb3 Rxe4 01
blackburne - savage13
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ng6 7.Qxc5 d6 8.Qe3 Nf6
9.Nc3 Re8 10.d3 Kg8 11.00 Bd7 12.Qg3 a6 13.Bg5 Qc8 14.Bxf6 gxf6 15.Nd5 Kf7 16.f4 Bc6
17.Ne3 Rg8 18.f5 Ne5 19.Qh4 Rg7 20.Qh5+ Kg8 21.Rf4 Qd7 22.Rh4 Rg5 23.Qh6 Nf3+ 24.Kf2
Nxh4 25.Qxh4 d5 26.Ng4 Rg7?? 27.Nxf6+ Kh8 28.Nxd7 Bxd7 29.Qf6 dxe4 30.dxe4 Bc6
31.Kf3 Re8 32.Re1 Kg8 33.Qd4 Rf7 34.Kf4 h5 35.Re3 h4 36.g3 Rfe7 37.e5 h3 38.g4 Bg2 39.g5
10
Black has defended well, and now White will need a little help from his friend to succeed
which in this case, he does.
Nestor250168 - plummy
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ng6 7.Qxc5 d6 8.Qe3 Nf6
9.00 Re8 10.f3 d5 11.d3 dxe4 12.dxe4 Bd7 13.Qb3+ Be6 14.Qxb7 Re7 15.Be3 h5 16.Nc3 a5
17.Bc5 Rb8 18.Bxe7 Nxe7 19.Qa6 Qd2 20.Rf2 Qe3 21.Qxa5 Rxb2 22.Nd1 Qd4 23.Nxb2 Qxb2
24.Rd1 Qxc2 25.Rxc2 10
There you have it: a modern look (and 156 games is a pretty big look) at an ancient gambit. I
hope it brings you a few chuckles, either at or with the Jerome.
Rest assured, the editors at Gambit or Everyman Chess or Batsford will not come calling looking
for a book from me on the Jerome Gambit. (However, some time this year I still have hope
the German chess magazine Kaissiber may run a historical article based on my research.)
Does the Jerome Gambit still have more secrets to give up? Sure it does! My friend AB was
inspired by my tales of this Jerome Gambit Tournament, and played some online games that
UON 21 May / June / July / Aug. 2008 Nobody Expects the Jerome Gambit, by Rick Kennedy 67
UON 21 Jerome Gambit
touch on JG theory. I quickly gave him the nickname the unluckiest Jerome Gambit player in
the world.
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bxf7+ Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ Nxe5 6.Qh5+ Ke6 7.Qf5+ Kd6 8.f4 Qh4+
Planning a remarkable Queen sacrifice. The move has been seen before, but not the follow-up.
The line has a computer-like feel to it, but the game was played at a no-computer venue.
9.g3 Nf3+ 10.Kd1 Ne7 11.e5+ Kc612.Qe4+ d5 13.exd6+ Nd5 14.gxh4 Bg4 15.Qa4+ b5
16.Qa6+ Nb6 17.c4 Nd4+ 18.Ke1 Rhe8+ 19.Kf2 Nf5+ 20.Kf1 Bh3#
Not to lose hope, AB jumped back up and found another snare almost immediately:
This is Whistlers Defense, not very well known at all, but in my opinion the sharpest way to
counter the Jerome Gambit. If White now takes the Rook, he dies screaming
8.Qf4+ Nf6
However, if youre going to play any refutation, you have to play it correctly. The proper move
for Black is 8Qf6! Now my pal gets out of trouble and then quickly outplays his opponent.
9.e5 Re8 10.d4 Bxd4 11.Qxd4 Qxe5+ 12.Qxe5 Rxe5+ 13.Be3 Nd5 14.00 Nxe3 15.fxe3+ Kg7
16.Nc3 a6 17.Rf3 b5 18.Raf1 Bb7 19.Rf7+ Kh6 20.Rxd7 Rxe3 21.Rxc7 Be4 22.Re7 Rd8
23.Rxe4 Rxe4 24.Nxe4 Rd4 25.Re1 a5 26.h3 a4 27.c3 Rd5 28.Rf1 Re5 29.Nd6 Re2 30.Rf2
Re1+ 31.Kh2 Re7 32.Nxb5 g5 33.c4 Kh5 34.c5 Re8 35.c6 Rc8 36.c7 h6 37.Rf7 Kg6 38.Rd7
Kh5 39.Rd8 Rxc7 40.Nxc7 Kh4 41.Rd6 g4 42.g3+ Kg5 43.h4+ Kf5 44.Rxh6 Ke5 45.Re6+ Kf5
46.h5 a3 47.bxa3 Kg5 48.h6 Kf5 49.h7 Kg5 50.h8Q Kf5 51.Qf6#
As ever, I am always interested in any Jerome Gambit games you may find or play. Feel free to
email them to me at richardfkennedy@hotmail.com.
UON 21 May / June / July / Aug. 2008 Nobody Expects the Jerome Gambit, by Rick Kennedy 68
UON 21 Lisitsyn Gambit
LISITSYN GAMBIT
by David Robert Lonsdale
1. Nf3 f5
I signed up for a thematic chess tournament, which started after 1. Nf3 f5, at the
ChessWorld website last June. After playing 2. e4!? in all my games as White, I
was planning to write a chess monograph about the Lisitsyn Gambit last year.
But my busy schedule kept me from finishing it. So I decided to contribute this
small collection to the UON magazine. Enjoy!
2. e4
UON 21 May / June / July / Aug. 2008 Lisitsyn Gambit by David Robert Lonsdale 69
UON 21 Lisitsyn Gambit
2. fxe4 3. Ng5
3. Nf6 4. d3
A) 4. e5
UON 21 May / June / July / Aug. 2008 Lisitsyn Gambit by David Robert Lonsdale 70
UON 21 Lisitsyn Gambit
B) 4. Nc6
C) 4. e3
D) 4. exd3
E) 4. d5
F) 4. d6
A) 4. e5 5. dxe4
B) 4. Nc6 5. Nxe4
UON 21 May / June / July / Aug. 2008 Lisitsyn Gambit by David Robert Lonsdale 71
UON 21 Lisitsyn Gambit
C) 4. e3
UON 21 May / June / July / Aug. 2008 Lisitsyn Gambit by David Robert Lonsdale 72
UON 21 Lisitsyn Gambit
D) 4. exd3 5. Bxd3
E) 4. d5
UON 21 May / June / July / Aug. 2008 Lisitsyn Gambit by David Robert Lonsdale 73
UON 21 Lisitsyn Gambit
F) 4. d6
UON 21 May / June / July / Aug. 2008 Lisitsyn Gambit by David Robert Lonsdale 74
(3rd part) by D. Rozzoni (1st part see UON 16 2nd part see UON 18)
Do not confine yourself to h6 or your opponents would be able to prepare for you. - du Chattell
See diagram
UON 21 May / June / July / Aug. 2008 Nh6 Hero, Part 3 (du Chattel) by Davide Rozzoni 75
Timmerman - du Chattel [B00] 09.02.1985
See diagram
See diagram
See diagram
UON 21 May / June / July / Aug. 2008 Nh6 Hero, Part 3 (du Chattel) by Davide Rozzoni 76
Schwartz,Arie - du Chattel [B00] 18.04.1985
UON 21 May / June / July / Aug. 2008 Nh6 Hero, Part 3 (du Chattel) by Davide Rozzoni 77
Masmeijer - du Chattel [B00] 01.06.1985
1.e4 h6 2.b3 c6 3.b2 d5 4.exd5 cxd5 5.f3 c6 6.e2 f6 7.d4
e6 8.00 d6 9.c4 00 10.c3 e7 11.cxd5 exd5 12.h3 e6
13.e1 f7 14.d3 g5 15.b5 b8 [15...b4] 16.xe7 [16.a3]
16...xe7 17.a3 d7 18.xf8 xf8 19.c2 a6 20.c3 a7
21.d2 g7 22.e1 c8 23.xg5 xd4 24.xf7 xf7 25.e2
e5 26.f4 d6 27.h1 e8 28.d1 h5 29.f1 f5 30.f3 h4
31.g3+ f8 [31...h8] 32.c3 f7 33.g4 f5
See diagram
See diagram
See diagram
UON 21 May / June / July / Aug. 2008 Nh6 Hero, Part 3 (du Chattel) by Davide Rozzoni 78
v Gaalen,Bas - du Chattel [A01] 05.09.1985
See diagram
Van der Fliert,W - du Chattel,P [B00] 19.09.1985 See UON 16, page 13 for game.
See diagram
See diagram
UON 21 May / June / July / Aug. 2008 Nh6 Hero, Part 3 (du Chattel) by Davide Rozzoni 79
Piket,Jeroen - du Chattel [A40] 09.11.1985
1.d4 g6 2.e4 h6 3.c4 c6 4.c3 g7 5.h4 d6 6.e2 f6 [6...f5!?] 7.f4
f7 8.e3 a6 9.f3 a5 10.a3 e5 11.fxe5 fxe5 12.d5 c5 13.h5
d8 14.d2 d7 15.h3 f6 16.000 c7 17.df1 e7 (Diagram)
18.d1 000 19.f2 e8 20.g3 g5 21.g4 g8 22.f2 h6
23.xd7+ xd7 24.d2 c7 25.cd1 b5 26.a5 g4 27.c3 g5+
28.b1 bxc4 29.xc7 xc7 30.xc4 b8 31.c3 b6 32.d3 b8
33.a2 a8 34.g3 bb8 35.h2 e3 36.a6 b6 37.a4 xa4
38.xa4 a6 [38...b7=] 39.b3 b8 40.db2 g5 41.c4 g8
42.hf2 g7? 43.f8+ b7 44.c3 e7 45.e8 c7 46.b5+ d7
47.b8 f7 48.xf7 xf7 49.g8 g5 50.c3 f3 51.d1 g5
52.f2 h6 53.xg4 d2 54.xg5 hxg5 55.h6 xc4 56.bxc4 b6
57.h7 b8 58.f6+ 10
UON 21 May / June / July / Aug. 2008 Nh6 Hero, Part 3 (du Chattel) by Davide Rozzoni 80
Fishing Pole Pros and Cons Ruy Lopez: Berlin Defense (3 f6)
A UCO group poll resulted in a 7:3 ratio in favor of having a Fishing Pole Pros and Cons article.
In March of 2008 Antonio Torrecillas was kind enough to send his highlights of criticisms of the Fishing Pole.
CON # 1
Antonio provides a line from GM Nigel Davies which lead to an advantage for White.
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 Nf6 4.0-0 Ng4? 5.c3 a6 6.Ba4 Bc5 7.d4 Ba7 8.h3
h5 9.Na3 b5 10.Bb3 d6 11.Bg5 f6 12.Bc1 Nh6 13.Nh4...
XABCDEFGHY
8r+lwqk+-tr(
7vl-zp-+-zp-'
6p+nzp-zp-sn&
5+p+-zp-+p%
4-+-zPP+-sN$
3sNLzP-+-+P#
2PzP-+-zPP+"
1tR-vLQ+RmK-!
xabcdefghy
Antonio stated he is in agreement with GM Nigel Davies who stated that, The whole problem stems from
the fact that Black will never get an attack with a knight on g4 alone. White just has to exercise restraint,
keep his pawn on d4 (shutting out the bishop on a7) and play useful moves before trying to capture it [the
knight]. Sooner or later that knight will want to beat a miserable retreat leaving Black's game in tatters.
Editors Note to Con # 1: On May 6th 2008 I met with Master Alexander Kitsis, former chess champion from
Moldova and founder of Vivacity Chess Camps in Cleveland, Ohio. We discussed many chess issues and I
brought up the Fishing Pole at one point. Alex pretty much echoed GM Nigel Davies comment.
But despite that mutual agreement Life Master Brian Wall has offered complete games that appear to be to
the contrary (see UON 19, also Mr. Walls website information appears at the end of this article).
UON 21 May / June / July / Aug 2008 Fishing Pole Pros and Cons 81
I fed the GM Davies line into Fritz6. After move 6, Fritz agreed with trio by stating, White gets the
initiative. But also it should be noted that, according to Fritz, White lost the initiative at move 11 because
he should have captured the knight. - gkg
XABCDEFGHY
8r+lwqkvl-tr(
7+pzpp+pzpp'
6p+n+-+-+&
5+-+-zp-+-%
4L+-+P+n+$
3+-zP-+N+-#
2PzP-zP-zPPzP"
1tRNvLQ+RmK-!
xabcdefghy
White gets the initiative. 6...c5 7.d4 a7 8.h3 h5 9.a3 b5 10.b3 [10.hxg4 hxg4 11.g5 f6 12.xe5
xe5] 10...d6 [10...exd4 11.hxg4 dxc3 12.gxh5 cxb2 13.xb2 xh5+-] 11.g5??
XABCDEFGHY
8r+lwqk+-tr(
7vl-zp-+pzp-'
6p+nzp-+-+&
5+p+-zp-vLp%
4-+-zPP+n+$
3sNLzP-+N+P#
2PzP-+-zPP+"
1tR-+Q+RmK-!
xabcdefghy
With this move White loses his initiative [11.hxg4 and White could have gained the advantage 11...hxg4
12.g5+-]
UON 21 May / June / July / Aug 2008 Fishing Pole Pros and Cons 82
11...f6 12.c1 h6 13.h4 f7 14.d5
XABCDEFGHY
8r+lwqk+-tr(
7vl-zp-+nzp-'
6p+nzp-zp-+&
5+p+Lzp-+p%
4-+-zPP+-sN$
3sN-zP-+-+P#
2PzP-+-zPP+"
1tR-vLQ+RmK-!
xabcdefghy
With a 0.81 advantage awarded to White by Fritz 6.
CON # 2
Antonio states, The Fishing Pole teaches bad habits, i.e.,
Editors Note to Con # 2: To me, the knight at g4 must be taken seriously, and it really isnt in a corner; but
likely Antonio means it can be driven into a corner later in the game. In the book, Art of Attack in Chess,
author Vladimir Vukovic mentions the . Ng4, h3 h5 technique and shows how it can be a potent attack. I
have seen it work and I believe the concept should be understood by all serious players. As a last minute
note, I played my first Fishing Pole on 4 May and will present that game shortly. I played my second against
Fritz6 on 7 May and will also present that game. I even played a third Fishing Pole during the writing of
UON 21s edition revision I will add that at the end. - gkg
On a somewhat positive note, Antonio wrote, Fishing Pole games can be interesting for students.
o Black victories can be used to discover Whites mistakes and to understand better when a piece
sacrifice is justified.
o White victories can be studied to discover that "Black play can not be improved" when White uses a
correct planning.
UON 21 May / June / July / Aug 2008 Fishing Pole Pros and Cons 83
Editors Note: Of course, if White does not commit an error in a game, regardless of opening, he wont lose.
But assuming White somehow plays very good chess, I am certainly not convinced that Black will loose due
to the Fishing Pole. I just dont know for me, the jury is still out.
I did receive two sets of Fishing Pole games. The first appears below; however, the second set appears to
consist of blitz games, in which Black loses every game while using the Fishing Pole. I just played over the
first three games from that set and we are talking Blunder City Oversight Hills speed chess. We see
things like dropping queens and piece forks with pawns. I do not have time to go through all of those games
now without holding up UON 21 further; but I will play through all of them between now and UON 22 to see
if any are instructional. The blitz games I looked at certainly offer no true reflection on the Fishing Pole;
they do offer a view of horrible oversights in fast games. If you give your opponent your queen on a silver
platter, free of charge, dont blame the Fishing Pole.
[Event "Chess.com - Online Chess"][Site "Chess.com - Online Chess"][Date "2007.09.10"][Round "?"][White "Johhan"]
[Black "gbsalvio"][Result "0-1"][ECO "C65"][WhiteElo "1884"][BlackElo "1868"][PlyCount "46"][EventDate "2007.??.??"]
[TimeControl "1"]
UON 21 May / June / July / Aug 2008 Fishing Pole Pros and Cons 84
[Event "Online Chess"][Site "Chess.com"][Date "2007.11.24"][Round "1"][White "Izo"][Black "gbsalvio"][Result "0-1"]
[ECO "C65"][WhiteElo "2064"][BlackElo "2237"][PlyCount "36"][EventDate "2007.??.??"][TimeControl "1"]
1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 Nf6 4. O-O Ng4 5. Bxc6 dxc6 6. d4 exd4 7. Qxd4
Qxd4 8. Nxd4 Bc5 9. c3 Bd7 10. f3 Ne5 11. Rd1 f6 12. Kf1 g5 13. Nd2 O-O-O 14.
N2b3 Bb6 15. Ke2 c5 16. Nc2 Bb5+ 17. Ke1 Nd3+ 18. Rxd3 Bxd3 19. Ne3 c4 20.
Nd4 Bxd4 21. cxd4 Rxd4 22. Nd5 Rxd5 23. exd5 Re8+ 24. Kf2 Re2+ 25. Kg3 Kd7
26. Kh3 Kd6 27. g4 Kxd5 28. Kg3 Re1 29. h4 h6 30. hxg5 hxg5 31. Kf2 Rf1+ 32.
Ke3 a5 33. b3 Re1+ 34. Kf2 Re2+ 35. Kg3 c3 36. f4 Re1 37. fxg5 fxg5 38. Kf2
Rd1 39. a3 Ke4 40. b4 a4 0-1
UON 21 May / June / July / Aug 2008 Fishing Pole Pros and Cons 85
[Event "Team Game"][Site "?"][Date "2008.04.03"][Round "?"][White "Ordinary Day"][Black "gbsalvio"][Result "0-1"]
[ECO "C65"][WhiteElo "2173"][BlackElo "2168"][PlyCount "94"][EventDate "2008.??.??"]
1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 Nf6 4. O-O Ng4 5. Bxc6 dxc6 6. h3 h5 7. Qe2 Bc5 8.
c3 Qe7 9. d4 Bb6 10. a4 a6 11. Rd1 Be6 12. g3 f6 13. a5 Ba7 14. hxg4 hxg4 15.
Nh4 Qf7 16. Be3 g5 17. d5 cxd5 18. exd5 Bd7 19. Bxa7 gxh4 20. Bc5 Qh7 21. Nd2
hxg3 22. Qe4 gxf2+ 23. Kxf2 Qh2+ 24. Ke1 f5 25. Qe2 Qh4+ 26. Bf2 Qf6 27. Bg1
Rh1 28. Qf2 f4 29. Ne4 Qf5 30. Nc5 O-O-O 31. Kd2 e4 32. Kc1 e3 33. Qg2 Rdh8
34. Qe2 Re8 35. Ne6 Bxe6 36. dxe6 Qxe6 37. Ra4 f3 38. Qxe3 Qxe3+ 39. Bxe3
Rxd1+ 40. Kxd1 Rxe3 41. Rxg4 f2 42. Kd2 Rf3 43. Rg8+ Kd7 44. Rg7+ Kc6 45.
Rg6+ Kb5 46. Rg5+ c5 47. c4+ Kb4 0-1
1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 Nf6 4. O-O Ng4 5. h3 Nf6 6. Bxc6 dxc6 7. Nxe5 Nxe4
8. Re1 Qd4 9. Nf3 Qxf2+ 10. Kh1 Bxh3 11. Rxe4+ Be6 12. d4 O-O-O 13. Bf4 Bd5
14. Nbd2 Bd6 15. Re2 Qxe2 16. Qxe2 Bxf4 17. Re1 Bg3 18. Rf1 Rhe8 19. Qd3 f6
20. c4 Be6 21. Ne4 Bxc4 22. Qxc4 Rxe4 23. Qf7 g6 24. Qxh7 Rg4 25. Kg1 b6 26.
Rc1 Kb7 27. Qf7 f5 28. b4 a6 29. a4 Bf4 30. Rc3 Bd6 31. Qe6 Rg3 32. Rc1 b5
33. axb5 cxb5 34. Ne5 Re3 35. Qd5+ Kb8 36. Ra1 Rxe5 37. dxe5 Be7 38. Qc6 Bg5
39. Qxa6 Be3+ 40. Kf1 c6 41. Qxc6 Ba7 42. Qxb5+ Ka8 43. Qa6 Kb8 44. Qxa7+ 1-0
1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 Nf6 4. O-O Ng4 5. h3 Nf6 6. Bxc6 dxc6 7. Nxe5 Bd6
8.Nf3 Be7 9. Nc3 O-O 10. d4 a5 11. Re1 a4 12. a3 Nd7 13. d5 cxd5 14. Nxd5 Bc5
15.Bf4 c6 16. Bc7 Qe8 17. Nf4 Qe7 18. e5 Nb6 19. Bd6 Bxd6 20. exd6 Qf6 21.
Nh5 Qh6 22. Ng3 Be6 23. Ne5 Rad8 24. Qd4 Nd7 25. Rad1 f5 26. f4 Nxe5 27. Rxe5
b5 28. Qc3 Bd7 29. Ne2 Qf6 30. Qc5 Kh8 31. Nd4 g5 32. fxg5 Qxg5 33. Nf3 Qf6
34. Re7 Be8 35. Qa7 Kg8 36. Ne5 f4 37. Ng4 Qg5 38. Rxh7 Rf7 39. Nh6+ Qxh6 40.
Qxf7+ Bxf7 41. Rxh6 Bd5 42. Rf6 Kg7 43. Rxf4 Rxd6 44. c4 bxc4 45. Rxc4 1-0
UON 21 May / June / July / Aug 2008 Fishing Pole Pros and Cons 86
[Event "gbsalvio's mini-tournament"][Site "http://gameknot.com/chess.pl?"][Date "2008.05.07"][Round "?"][White "gbsalvio"]
Black "wthoward"][Result "1/2-1/2"][ECO "C65"][WhiteElo "2259"][BlackElo "2136"][Annotator ",08.08.04"][PlyCount "107"]
[EventDate "2008.??.??"][TimeControl "432000+172800"]
1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 Nf6 4. O-O Ng4 5. h3 Nf6 6. Bxc6 dxc6 7. Nxe5 Be6
8.d3 g5 9. Bxg5 Rg8 10. h4 h6 11. Bf4 Bd6 12. Qf3 Ng4 13. Nxg4 Rxg4 14. Bxd6
cxd6 15. Nc3 Qxh4 16. g3 Rg7 17. Rfe1 O-O-O 18. Re3 Qg5 19. d4 f5 20. exf5
Bxf5 21.d5 c5 22. Ne4 Qg6 23. Qf4 Rf7 24. Qh4 Rdf8 25. Rf1 Kc7 26. c4 Bd7 27.
Nc3 a6 28. Re4 Qg7 29. Kg2 h5 30. f4 Rg8 31. f5 Rgf8 32. f6 Rxf6 33. Rxf6
Rxf6 34. Qxh5 Rf8 35. Rh4 Rg8 36. Qf3 Rf8 37. Qe3 Rf7 38. Qh6 Qe5 39. Qh5 Qg7
40. a3 b6 41. Qe2 Qg5 42. Ne4 Qe5 43. Qd2 a5 44. Qc3 Qf5 45. Qd3 Qe5 46. Nc3
Qg7 47. Qe3 Qg6 48. Qe4 Qg7 49. Rf4 Re7 50. Qc2 Qg5 51. Qf2 Qg6 52. Rh4 Qd3
53. Rf4 Qg6 54.Kg1 1/2-1/2
Now we will look at an annotated game. The analysis is by Fritz6 and you may find yourself disagreeing with
some of the silicon thinkers comments. -gkg
Ordinary Day (2173) - gbsalvio (2168) [C65] submitted by Perego Domingos (gbsalvio)
1.e4 C65: Ruy Lopez: Berlin Defence (3...Nf6), unusual lines and 4 00 Bc5 1...e5 2.f3 c6 3.b5 f6
4.00 g4
XABCDEFGHY
8r+lwqkvl-tr(
7zppzpp+pzpp'
6-+n+-+-+&
5+L+-zp-+-%
4-+-+P+n+$
3+-+-+N+-#
2PzPPzP-zPPzP"
1tRNvLQ+RmK-!
xabcdefghy
After 4. Ng4
[4...c5 5.xc6 dxc6 6.d3=] 5.xc6 dxc6 6.h3 h5 7.e2 [Not 7.hxg4 hxg4 8.g3 gxf3 9.xf3 d6] 7...c5
8.c3 Consolidates b4+d4 [Worse is 8.hxg4 hxg4 9.g3 gxf3 10.xf3 d7+] 8...e7 9.d4
UON 21 May / June / July / Aug 2008 Fishing Pole Pros and Cons 87
XABCDEFGHY
8r+l+k+-tr(
7zppzp-wqpzp-'
6-+p+-+-+&
5+-vl-zp-+p%
4-+-zPP+n+$
3+-zP-+N+P#
2PzP-+QzPP+"
1tRNvL-+RmK-!
xabcdefghy
After 9.d4
[9.hxg4? doesn't work because of 9...hxg4 10.g3 gxf3 11.xf3 e6+] 9...b6 [9...d6 10.bd2 (10.hxg4
hxg4 11.g5 f6) ] 10.a4 a6? [10...exd4 11.cxd4 (11.hxg4 is the weaker alternative 11...hxg4 12.g5 dxc3+)
11...a5 12.e1] 11.d1 [11.a5 a7 12.a3 exd4 13.xd4 c5] 11...e6? [11...exd4 12.xd4 f6 13.e5
xd4 14.xd4] 12.g3?? forfeits the advantage [12.a5 a7 13.hxg4 hxg4] 12...f6 Covers g5 [12...h6!?
should be investigated more closely 13.a5 a7 14.xe5 xh3 15.xh5 e6] 13.a5 a7
Black is in command 14.hxg4 hxg4 15.h4 f7 16.e3 [16.d5 cxd5 17.exd5 xd5] 16...g5 17.d5 cxd5
18.exd5 d7 19.xa7 [19.xg5 b5 20.e1 000] 19...gxh4 20.c5 Traps the king in the center 20...h7
21.d2 hxg3 Threatening mate... how?. 22.e4 [22.fxg3?? capturing this pawn is a mistake 22...h1+
23.f2 h2+ 24.e3 xe2+ 25.xe2 xd5+] 22...gxf2+ 23.xf2 h2+ 24.e1 f5 25.e2 h4+ 26.f2
f6 27.g1 h1 28.f2 f4 Black gets more space 29.e4 f5 30.c5 000 31.d2 e4 32.c1 e3 33.g2
dh8 34.e2 [34.xd7!? xd7 35.d6] 34...e8+
XABCDEFGHY
8-+k+r+-+(
7+pzpl+-+-'
6p+-+-+-+&
5zP-sNP+q+-%
4-+-+-zpp+$
3+-zP-zp-+-#
2-zP-+Q+-+"
1tR-mKR+-vLr!
xabcdefghy
After 34. Re8
35.e6 [35.xd7 xd7 (35...xd7?! 36.d6) 36.e1 h5+] 35...xe6 36.dxe6 xe6 [36...xe6 37.g2
h5 38.a4+] 37.a4 f3 38.xe3 xe3+ 39.xe3 xd1+ 40.xd1 xe3 41.xg4 f2 42.d2 [42.f4
praying for a miracle 42...e1+ 43.d2+] 42...f3 43.g8+ d7 44.g7+ c6 45.g6+ b5 46.g5+ c5
47.c4+ b4
UON 21 May / June / July / Aug 2008 Fishing Pole Pros and Cons 88
XABCDEFGHY
8-+-+-+-+(
7+p+-+-+-'
6p+-+-+-+&
5zP-zp-+-tR-%
4-mkP+-+-+$
3+-+-+r+-#
2-zP-mK-zp-+"
1+-+-+-+-!
xabcdefghy
After 47. Kb4 and White Resigns 0-1
[47...b4 48.g3 f1 49.xf3 xf3 50.c2 e2+ 51.c1 b3 52.b1 xb2#] 01
My own Fishing Pole, my very first, was played on 4 May 2008. I wanted to experiment with the Two
Knights Defense, but my opponent played a Ruy Lopez. I hesitated a moment and then thought, Since Im
wrapping up a UON article on the Fishing Pole, why not give the Fishing Pole a try? It is the first time I
ever played the Fishing Pole from a Berlin Defense (actually, this is the first time Ive ever played a Berlin
Defense). Time control was 10 minutes each, plus 5 seconds per move. I have never studied the Fishing
Pole, but have played over some of the games that LM Brian Wall shared with UCO readers.
1.e4 C65: Ruy Lopez: Berlin Defence (3...Nf6), unusual lines and 4 00 Bc5 1...e5 2.f3 c6 [2...f6 3.xe5
e7 4.f3 xe4+ 5.e2] 3.b5 While wondering what to play against the Ruy, I decided to try the Fishing
Pole since I was wrapping up the UON article. 3...f6 [3...a6 4.xc6 dxc6 5.c3=] 4.00 [4.d3 d6=] 4...g4
[4...c5 5.d3 e7 6.c3=] 5.h3 [5.d3] 5...h5 [5...f6]
6.hxg4??
? hxg4 ?
UON 21 May / June / July / Aug 2008 Fishing Pole Pros and Cons 89
XABCDEFGHY
8r+lwqkvl-tr(
7zppzpp+pzp-'
6-+n+-+-+&
5+L+-zp-+p%
4-+-+P+P+$
3+-+-+N+-#
2PzPPzP-zPP+"
1tRNvLQ+RmK-!
xabcdefghy
Fritz6 states, White loses the upper hand.
Yes, White has taken the bait fresh from the pail.-gkg
[6.d4 f6 7.d5] 6...hxg4 7.xc6 [7.c3 gxf3 8.xf3 h4] 7...dxc6 [7...gxf3 8.g3 f6 9.d4 xc6 10.xf3
exd4 11.c3] 8.g3 [8.xe5?? White will not be able to digest the pawn 8...h4 9.f4 g3 10.h5 xh5 11.xf7
h2#] 8...gxf3 [8...f6 9.d4 xf3 10.xf3 gxf3 11.d2+] 9.xf3 h3 [9...d6 10.d3+] 10.e1 d7
11.c3 [11.c3 d6] 11...000 12.e3 [12.d3 b8] 12...b6 [12...g4 13.e2 g6 14.f3+]
13.g5? [13.f3 g4 14.g2 e6+] 13...e7?? [I disagree with Fritzs ?? gkg]
XABCDEFGHY
8-+ktr-+-tr(
7zp-zpqvlpzp-'
6-zpp+-+-+&
5+-+-zp-wQ-%
4-+-+P+-+$
3+-sN-+-zPl#
2PzPPzP-zP-+"
1tR-vL-tR-mK-!
xabcdefghy
With this move Black loses his initiative, according to Fritz6. The program gives this move two question
marks. But I disagree with that poor rating. I believe that White's capturing of pawns will only open lines for
the bishop and the d8 rook. But Fritz6 states, 13...g4 and Black can look forward to a comfortable game
14.g2 h5+]
UON 21 May / June / July / Aug 2008 Fishing Pole Pros and Cons 90
as things went, the game was quite comfortable anyway. -gkg
14.xe5 d6 [14...g4 15.g2 f6+] 15.xg7= Fritz sees things as equal. I still prefer Black. 15...dg8
16.d4
And now, at my move 17, I am sad to have missed Qf3! with mate to follow, which I had envisioned earlier in
the game [17...f3 18.xh8 g2#]. But I saw something else in a flash and it looked so good to me that I
looked no further. 17...c5 What I saw in this position (following diagram)
XABCDEFGHY
8-+k+-+rtr(
7zp-zp-+p+-'
6-zpp+-+-+&
5+-vl-+-+-%
4-+-wQP+q+$
3+-sNP+-zPl#
2PzPP+-zP-+"
1tR-vL-tR-mK-!
xabcdefghy
was the White Queen moving off of the g1-a7 diagonal on move 18; perhaps to c4.
XABCDEFGHY
8-+k+-+rtr(
7zp-zp-+p+-'
6-zpp+-+-+&
5+-vl-+-+-%
4-+Q+P+-+$
3+-sNP+-wql#
2PzPP+-zP-+"
1tR-vL-tR-mK-!
xabcdefghy
19.h1 g2# Instead, Instead White played 18. Qe3??? (which I thought was unthinkable) and so I played
Bishop takes Queen and won in a few more moves. 01
UON 21 May / June / July / Aug 2008 Fishing Pole Pros and Cons 91
On the 9th of March 2008 Jack Appelmans wrote:
Regarding an article on the Ruy Lopez (RL) FP in the UON, there are some very good sources for games that
have been played in correspondence since 2000, though the opening has been played in correspondence
since at least 1974. I would point you (or others) to the following illustrative game, annotated by Roberto
Alvarez:
It was published in the Correspondence Megabase 2004. In it, Alvarez refers to this as the Krol Defense,
since Wladyslaw Krol has been actively using it in correspondence for nearly 10 years. The correspondence
player who first used it (according to my data) was a P. Mariotti (also an Italian, micmoc!).
I am ignoring any lines other than: 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6 4. Ba4 Nf6 5. O-O Ng4 6. h3
Notice the inclusion of 3... a6 4. Ba4 - this makes the opening a mainline Ruy Lopez variation, I think... I had
to vary for this line because, simply put, there are two few games with 4.. Ng4 to work with (2) in my
database, including correspondence games.
The defense (offense?) 6. c3 is addressed in Schoonhoven, J-Krol,W 1-0 /IECG 2001/Telechess CBM 87 (24),
and Sacerdotali, S-Krol,W 0-1 /IECG 2001/Telechess CBM 87 (57) (so you only need one CBM!) which I think
were annotated by Konikowski.. .
If the UON article will deal only with the immediate 4... Ng4, then I'm afraid can't help. Good luck!
XABCDEFGHY
8r+lwqkvl-tr(
7+pzpp+pzpp'
6p+n+-+-+&
5+-+-zp-+-%
4-+L+P+n+$
3+-zP-+N+-#
2PzP-zP-zPPzP"
1tRNvLQ+RmK-!
xabcdefghy
After 6. Bc4!?
UON 21 May / June / July / Aug 2008 Fishing Pole Pros and Cons 92
Brian Wall Comments:
For some reason 99% of humanity plays 6. Ba4, even when they trade on c6 they play Ba4 first.
One of my first tournament Fishing Poles was against Vance Aandahl, former Denver Champion and
he had a knight on g5 and a bishop on c4 and I went crazy and sacced the h8-rook. That was the
game where Vance compared capturing the g4-knight as "opening the gates of Hell." Jack Young,
another Harvard Square buddy explained the Fishing Pole to me 7 years ago, then dropped out of
Chess leaving me holding the bag! I talked to him recently and he was shocked that Fang and
Vigorito are IMs and that my animal book honors his inventions. One more thing-
Regarding 6. Bc4 attacking f7 point and Ba4 making difficult for Black to complete his
development with...Bc5 followed by...d6 because the pin after d4-d5.
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 Nf6 4.0-0 Ng4 5.c3 a6 6. Bc4!? Bc5 7.d4 Ba7
XABCDEFGHY
8r+lwqk+-tr(
7vlpzpp+pzpp'
6p+n+-+-+&
5+-+-zp-+-%
4-+LzPP+n+$
3+-zP-+N+-#
2PzP-+-zPPzP"
1tRNvLQ+RmK-!
xabcdefghy
UON 21 May / June / July / Aug 2008 Fishing Pole Pros and Cons 93
and here there is the extra option: 8.Bxf7 Kxf7 9.Ng5 followed by 10.Qxg4. That line is impossible
after: 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 Nf6 4.0-0 Ng4 5.h3 h5 6.c3 a6 7.Bc4!? Bc5 8.d4 Ba7
XABCDEFGHY
8r+lwqk+-tr(
7vlpzpp+pzp-'
6p+n+-+-+&
5+-+-zp-+p%
4-+LzPP+n+$
3+-zP-+N+P#
2PzP-+-zPP+"
1tRNvLQ+RmK-!
xabcdefghy
un saludo, Antonio Torrecillas
I thought I would end this section with the above comment, but then last night while waiting for the
wife to come downstairs so we could watch Das Boot I decided to kill some time by playing a
Fishing Pole against Fritz6. If the Fishing Pole was truly bad, then Fritz should be able to show me
how White has a correct path to victory.
1.e4 C65: Ruy Lopez: Berlin Defence (3...Nf6), unusual lines and 4 00 Bc5 1...e5 2.f3 c6 3.b5 f6
[3...a6 4.xc6 dxc6 5.c3=] 4.00 [4.d3 d6=] 4...g4 [4...c5 5.d3 e7 6.c3=] 5.d3 c5 [5...e7 6.c3]
6.h3 h5 [6...xf2 7.xf2 xf2+ 8.xf2]
UON 21 May / June / July / Aug 2008 Fishing Pole Pros and Cons 94
7.c3
XABCDEFGHY
8r+lwqk+-tr(
7zppzpp+pzp-'
6-+n+-+-+&
5+Lvl-zp-+p%
4-+-+P+n+$
3+-zPP+N+P#
2PzP-+-zPP+"
1tRNvLQ+RmK-!
xabcdefghy
[7.c3 d6] 7...a6 [7...xf2!? 8.xf2 xf2+ 9.xf2 a6 10.xc6 dxc6] 8.xc6+- dxc6 9.c2 [9.d4 exd4
10.cxd4 b6] 9...e6 [9...d6 10.b4 (10.hxg4 hxg4 11.h4 xh4+) 10...xf2+ 11.xf2 xf2 12.xf2
xd3 13.xe5 d1+ 14.f1 xf1+ 15.xf1] 10.d4! keeping the advantage 10...exd4 [10...xd4 11.cxd4
Discovered attack] 11.cxd4 Discovered attack [11.hxg4 hxg4 12.g5 e7 13.xd4 xg5 14.xe6 fxe6]
11...b6 [11...e7 12.hxg4 hxg4 13.e5] 12.hxg4 hxg4 13.g5 f6 [13...xd4 14.d1 (14.xe6??
would be a terrible mistake 14...h4 15.h6 xh6 16.xc6+ bxc6 17.xg7+ xg7 18.f4 d4+ 19.f2 xf2#)
14...f6 15.e5 xe5 16.xe6 xe6 17.f4=] 14.d1 xd4 15.e5 h6
XABCDEFGHY
8r+-+k+-tr(
7+pzp-+pzp-'
6p+p+l+-wq&
5+-+-zP-sN-%
4-+-vl-+p+$
3+-+-+-+-#
2PzPQ+-zPP+"
1tRNvLR+-mK-!
xabcdefghy
The mate threat is h1 16.h3 h5 17.xd4 Black cannot castle queen side 17...gxh3 Do you see the mate
threat? 18.d1 g6 [18...xe5 19.f4 f6 20.xc7 hxg2 21.xg2] 19.g4 h2+ [19...c5 20.f4] 20.h1
c5 21.f4 d8 Threatening mate: xd1 22.d2 h6 [22...g5 23.f3 d5 (23...xe5?! 24.e4 d5
25.e2) ] 23.e4 [23.a4!?]
UON 21 May / June / July / Aug 2008 Fishing Pole Pros and Cons 95
23...d5+
XABCDEFGHY
8-+-trk+-tr(
7+pzp-+pzp-'
6p+-+-+-wq&
5+-zplzP-+-%
4-+-+R+P+$
3+-+-+-+-#
2PzP-sN-zP-zp"
1tR-vLQ+-+K!
xabcdefghy
The mate threat is xe4 24.e2 h3 Threatening mate... how? [24...xe4+?! 25.xe4 e6 26.f4]
25.f3 xe4 26.xe4 g2+!!
XABCDEFGHY
8-+-trk+-tr(
7+pzp-+pzp-'
6p+-+-+-+&
5+-zp-zP-+-%
4-+-+N+P+$
3+-+-+P+-#
2PzP-+Q+qzp"
1tR-vL-+-+K!
xabcdefghy
Theme: Double Attack 27.xg2 Plans f4. Decoy to g2 [27.xg2+ Theme: Deflection from d1 27...d1]
27...h1+ 28.g3 d1 29.f4 [29.d6+ doesn't change the outcome of the game 29...f8 (29...cxd6?!
30.exd6+ f8 31.e7+ g8 32.e8+ h7 33.xf7 g1+ 34.f4 h6+ 35.e4 e1+ 36.d5 d1+ 37.c4
xc1+ 38.xc1 xc1+ 39.d5+) 30.e4 e1+ (30...xc1 31.xc1 xc1 32.d2 g1+ 33.f4+) ]
29...h6+ 30.g3 g1+ 31.f2 h1 32.e3 e1 [Weaker is 32...xc1 33.xc1 xc1+ 34.d2 g1+
35.f2+] 33.xe1 xe1+ 34.f4 g1 35.f5 h1 36.g5 f6 37.exf6 gxf6 38.xf6 00+ 39.f7 [39.e6
cannot change what is in store for ? 39...h6+ 40.d5 d6+ 41.c4 d4+ 42.b3 d3+ 43.a4 c4+
44.a5 b6#] 39...xf7+ 40.e5 e1+ [40...h8+ 41.e6 f6+ 42.d5 d4+ 43.e6 d6#] 41.d5 d7+
42.xc5 e5+ [42...a5 43.a3 e5+ 44.c4 d5+ 45.c3 d3#] 43.b4 d4+ 44.c3 c5+ 45.b3 c4+
46.a3 b4# 0-1
UON 21 May / June / July / Aug 2008 Fishing Pole Pros and Cons 96
XABCDEFGHY
8-+-+-+k+(
7+pzp-+-+-'
6p+-+-+-+&
5+-+-+-+-%
4-wq-tr-+P+$
3mK-+-+P+-#
2PzP-+-+-+"
1tR-vL-+-+-!
xabcdefghy
Final Position
In this game White does not take the bait; however, he still ends up in a bad way - gkg.
1.e4 e5 2.f3 c6 3.b5 f6 [3...a6 4.xc6 dxc6 5.c3=] 4.xc6 [4.d3 d6=] 4...dxc6 5.00 [5.d3 d6=]
5...g4 [5...g4!?= has some apparent merit] 6.h3 h5 [6...f6 7.xe5 xe4 8.e1] 7.d4 [Inferior is 7.hxg4
hxg4 8.g3 gxf3 9.xf3 d7] 7...d6 [7...exd4 8.hxg4 hxg4 9.h2 (9.xd4?? taking the pawn will cause
White grave problems 9...h4 10.f3 g3 11.xc6 h2#) ] 8.d3 [8.e1!?+-] 8...exd4 9.g5 [9.e5!? is
worth looking at 9...c5 10.hxg4 hxg4 11.g5] 9...f6 Covers e5 10.e5 [10.hxg4!? deserves consideration
10...fxg5 11.e5] 10...xe5
XABCDEFGHY
8r+lwqk+-tr(
7zppzp-+-zp-'
6-+pvl-zp-+&
5+-+-sn-vLp%
4-+-zp-+-+$
3+-+Q+N+P#
2PzPP+-zPP+"
1tRN+-+RmK-!
xabcdefghy
[10...fxg5 is the less attractive alternative 11.exd6 f6 12.e1+ f8 13.dxc7 (13.xd4 xd6 14.e3 g4=;
13.xd4?! cxd6 14.c3 g4=) 13...xc7 14.xg5] 11.xe5 xe5 12.f4 d6 [12...fxg5?! 13.g6+ e7
14.fxe5=] 13.h4 f7 [13...c5 14.c3] 14.d2 b6 Setting up the posion pawn for the possibility of 15.
Qxd4?? Bc5 winning the queen. gkg [14...c5 15.b3 d5 16.xc5 xc5 17.fe1] 15.c4+ [15.f3 xf4
UON 21 May / June / July / Aug 2008 Fishing Pole Pros and Cons 97
16.xd4 d6] 15...e6 16.xc6 [16.xd4?? taking the pawn is naive 16...c5 17.xc5 bxc5+] 16...c5
17.b4? Most likely played to buy a little time on the clock while not being sure how to procede. [17.b3!?
xb3 18.axb3 d3+ 19.f2] 17...xb4+ 18.f3 d5 19.b5 [19.a4 c3 20.ad1 e8 21.xe8+ hxe8
22.xd4 xd4+ (22...xa2?! 23.b5) 23.xd4 xa2+] 19...c5 [19...c3!? 20.ad1 c5 21.d3+] 20.d3
xf3 [20...e8 21.h7 e2 22.ae1 xf3 23.xf3 xe1+ 24.xe1 d3+ 25.f1+] 21.xf3 d5 22.g3 f5
23.e1 [23.a3 ae8+] 23...ae8 [23...he8 24.ge3 xe3 25.xe3+] 24.c1 [24.ge3!? d6 25.c3]
24...e4+ 25.f1 [25.a3 xf4 26.xg7+ xg7 27.g3+ g4 28.xc7+ g6 29.hxg4 d3+ 30.f2 xf2+
31.xf2 d4+ 32.f1 hxg4 33.xb6+ axb6 34.cxd3 xd3+ 35.f2 g3+ 36.g1 e3+ 37.f1 h1#]
25...he8 [25...xa2 26.h1+]
26.g5 g6 27.a4
XABCDEFGHY
8-+-+r+-+(
7zp-zp-+k+-'
6-zp-+-+p+&
5+-vlq+ptRp%
4P+-zprzP-vL$
3+-+Q+-+P#
2-+P+-+P+"
1+-+-+RmK-!
xabcdefghy
[27.g3 xa2 28.gf3 c6+] 27...e3
In the above position, with the bishop on the same diagonal as White's king I was inclined to keep it on c5 and
thus never considered Be7! However, maybe the bishop is worth more than that rook in this position? - gkg
28.d2 [28.d1 is not much help 28...e4+] 28...d3 [28...e4 makes it even easier for Black 29.g3+]
29.h2 e4 [29...e2!? seems even better 30.xd3 xd3 31.cxd3+] 30.cxd3 xd3 31.b2 [31.a2+
d5 32.a1 e7+] 31...d4 [31...e7 keeps an even firmer grip 32.a2+ d5 33.c2+] 32.xd4?
[32.b1+] 32...xd4 33.g3 xa4 34.d3 d6 35.g3 [35.g3 does not win a prize 35...a5+] 35...ee4
[35...a5 might be the shorter path 36.c3+] 36.h1 [36.f2 is not the saving move 36...e6+ (36...xf4
37.xf4 xf4 38.xf4 xf4 39.d7+ f6 40.xc7+) ]
UON 21 May / June / July / Aug 2008 Fishing Pole Pros and Cons 98
36...b5
XABCDEFGHY
8-+-+-+-+(
7zp-zp-+k+-'
6-+-vl-+p+&
5+p+-+p+p%
4r+-+rzP-+$
3+-+R+-vLP#
2-+-+-+P+"
1+-+-+R+K!
xabcdefghy
And I went on to win with little effort by managing to queen a pawn gkg
[36...b5 37.b1 b4+; 36...a2 and Black can already relax 37.f2 xf2 38.xf2 xf4 39.g3+]
01
Brian Wall (the following e-mail and websites are associated with Brian Wall)
BrianWallChess3@Taom.com
http://games.groups.yahoo.com/group/BrianWallChess/join
http://www.taom.com/mailman/listinfo/brianwall-chesslist
www.Walverine.com
UON 21 May / June / July / Aug 2008 Fishing Pole Pros and Cons 99