A36 Symmetrical English vs ...g6: 4.Bg2 Bg7 (1.c4 Nf6 2.Nc3 c5 3.g3 g6 4.Bg2 Bg7 5.e4 d6 6.f4 Nc6 7.d3 O-O 8.Nf3 Bg4)

It is time once again for the last post of the week and for this one I found a new opening variation, well one that has not been featured here before that is. I went through my blitz games against a friend of mine and noticed that from time to time, they seem to provide something new to look at. The first move that should be reconsidered by the player who made it, is 9.Qb3. That move does not really solve the problems that White is facing. Then again the moves played before this one might be looked at as well, in order to spot improvements, but it was this 9th move that tipped the balance in my favor for the first time. Unfortunately for Kojjootti, he made things even worse for himself on the next move. However, I was not up to the task of making the most accurate moves, so I did not take the full advantage of my opponent's move. I remained slightly better until the huge blunder 15.Rb1, which turned out to be the losing move. After that I was able to finish the game with reasonable accuracy. It was shameful though that I missed 40...g5# in time trouble. I have added two mate in two, two mate in three and one mate in four puzzle today. Until Monday, my fellow chess and chess960 enthusiasts and other people.

[Event "Live Chess"] [Site "Chess.com"] [Date "2016.07.18"] [Round "?"] [White "Kojjootti"] [Black "Vierjoki, Timo"] [Result "0-1"] [ECO "A36"] [WhiteElo "1716"] [BlackElo "1795"] [Annotator "Stockfish 7 64 POPCNT (30s), TV"] [PlyCount "82"] [EventDate "2016.??.??"] 1. c4 Nf6 2. Nc3 c5 3. g3 {English Opening: Symmetrical Variation, Fianchetto Variation} g6 (3... d5 4. cxd5 Nxd5 5. Bg2 Nc7 {English Opening: Symmetrical Variation, Rubinstein Variation}) (3... Nc6 4. Bg2 e6 5. Nf3 d5 6. cxd5 exd5 7. d4 Be7 8. O-O O-O 9. Bg5 cxd4 10. Nxd4 h6 11. Be3 Re8 {Tarrasch Defense: Classical Variation, Main Line} (11... Bg4 {Tarrasch Defense: Classical Variation, Spassky Variation})) 4. Bg2 Bg7 5. e4 d6 6. f4 (6. Nge2 Na6 7. a3 O-O 8. O-O Nc7 9. b4 Rb8 10. bxc5 dxc5 11. d3 b5 12. cxb5 Nxb5 13. Bf4 Bg4 14. Qc2 Bxe2 15. Nxe2 Rc8 16. Qc4 Nd4 17. Nxd4 cxd4 18. Qa6 Nd7 19. Bh3 Rc3 20. Qxa7 Nc5 {Wadsworth,M (2290)-Warman,S (2130) London 2016 1-0 (36)}) 6... Nc6 ( 6... O-O 7. Nf3 Nc6 8. O-O Ne8 9. d3 Nc7 10. Be3 Nd4 11. Qd2 f5 12. Rab1 a5 13. Nd5 Nxf3+ 14. Bxf3 Ne6 15. Bg2 Nd4 16. Rbe1 Rb8 17. b3 e6 18. Nc3 Bd7 19. Rf2 b5 20. cxb5 Bxb5 21. Nxb5 {Andre,G (2317)-Schubert,T (2367) Germany 2004 0-1 (37)}) 7. d3 O-O 8. Nf3 Bg4 {A36 Symmetrical English vs ...g6: 4.Bg2 Bg7} (8... Rb8 9. O-O a6 10. a4 Bg4 11. h3 Bxf3 12. Bxf3 Nd4 13. Bg2 Ne8 14. Bd2 Nc7 15. Rb1 b5 16. axb5 axb5 17. cxb5 Ncxb5 18. Kh2 Na7 19. Nd5 Nac6 20. f5 e6 21. Ne3 Ne5 22. Bc3 Qg5 23. Nc2 {Grigoryeva,O (2166)-Sedykh,E (1899) St Petersburg 2013 1/2-1/2 (40)}) (8... a6 9. O-O Nd7 10. Kh1 Rb8 11. a4 Nd4 12. Be3 Re8 13. g4 Qb6 14. Rb1 Qb3 15. Bxd4 Qxd1 16. Rfxd1 cxd4 17. Ne2 Nc5 18. f5 b5 19. axb5 axb5 20. Nfxd4 bxc4 21. dxc4 Rb4 22. b3 Bb7 23. Nc3 {Meenakshi,S (2296)-Ram,A (1919) Chennai 2012 1/2-1/2 (50)}) 9. Qb3 {White threatens to win material: Qb3xb7} (9. O-O a6 {=}) 9... Rb8 10. Nd5 {?} (10. O-O a6 {=/+}) 10... e6 { Black threatens to win material: e6xd5} (10... b5 {!?} 11. Ne3 bxc4 12. Qxc4 Be6 {-+}) 11. Ne3 Bxf3 12. Bxf3 {White has the pair of bishops} Nd4 {Black threatens to win material: Nd4xb3. Black forks: b3+f3} 13. Qd1 Nxf3+ 14. Qxf3 b5 15. Rb1 {?} (15. O-O {!? =/+ and White could well hope to play on}) 15... Qa5+ {-+} 16. Ke2 {?} (16. Bd2 Qxa2 17. Qd1 {+/-}) 16... Qxa2 17. Bd2 bxc4 18. Nxc4 d5 19. exd5 (19. Ra1 Qb3 20. Nd6 e5 21. exd5 Nxd5 22. fxe5 Bxe5 {-+}) 19... exd5 20. Ra1 Rfe8+ 21. Kf2 Qb3 22. Ra3 (22. Ne5 {is still a small chance} h5 23. h3 {-+}) 22... Qb7 (22... dxc4 23. Rxb3 Rxb3 24. Bc3 Ng4+ 25. Qxg4 Bxc3 26. bxc3 Rb2+ 27. Kf3 {-+}) 23. Nd6 (23. Bc3 {doesn't change the outcome of the game} dxc4 24. Qxb7 Rxb7 {-+}) 23... Qxb2 24. Nxe8 (24. Rd1 {does not save the day} Qxa3 25. Nxe8 Rxe8 26. Kg2 {-+}) 24... Qxa3 (24... Ne4+ 25. Qxe4 dxe4 26. Rd1 e3+ 27. Kg2 Rxe8 28. d4 Qxa3 29. Be1 Qb3 30. Ra1 Qb2+ 31. Bd2 Qxa1 32. Bc3 Qxc3 33. Kh3 Qd3 34. Kg2 Qe2+ 35. Kh3 Qf1+ 36. Kg4 Bf6 37. h3 h5#) 25. Nxf6+ (25. Nxg7 {doesn't do any good} c4 26. Re1 Qb2 (26... Kxg7 27. dxc4 Rb3 28. Qe2 Qc5+ 29. Kf1 dxc4 30. Be3 {-+})) 25... Bxf6 26. Qxd5 (26. Rd1 {what else?} Bd4+ 27. Kf1 {-+}) 26... Bd4+ 27. Be3 Qxd3 28. Bxd4 cxd4 (28... Qxd4+ { ?!} 29. Qxd4 cxd4 30. Kf3 {-+}) 29. Re1 Rb2+ 30. Kg1 Rb1 (30... Qd2 31. Re8+ Kg7 32. Qe5+ f6 33. Qe7+ Kh6 34. Qe2 Qxe2 35. Rxe2 Rxe2 36. Kf1 d3 37. g4 Re8 38. h3 d2 39. Kf2 d1=Q 40. g5+ Kh5 41. f5 Qd2+ 42. Kg3 Re3+ 43. Kf4 fxg5#) 31. Qd8+ (31. Rxb1 Qxb1+ 32. Kf2 Qc2+ 33. Kg1 Qd1+ 34. Kf2 Qd2+ 35. Kf1 Qd3+ 36. Ke1 Qe3+ 37. Kd1 Qg1+ 38. Ke2 Qxh2+ 39. Kf1 Qxg3 40. Qd8+ Kg7 41. Qxd4+ Kh6 42. Qc4 {-+}) 31... Kg7 32. Rxb1 Qxb1+ 33. Kg2 Qe4+ 34. Kh3 d3 35. Qa5 (35. f5 { doesn't improve anything} Qxf5+ 36. Kg2 Qe4+ 37. Kf1 Qe2+ 38. Kg1 Qe3+ 39. Kf1 d2 40. Qd5 Qe1+ 41. Kg2 d1=Q 42. Qxd1 Qxd1 43. Kf2 Qd3 44. h3 Kf6 45. g4 Ke5 46. h4 Kf4 47. g5 Qf3+ 48. Ke1 Ke3 49. h5 Qe2#) 35... Qe2 (35... Qf5+ 36. Qxf5 gxf5 37. g4 d2 38. g5 d1=Q 39. Kg2 Qe2+ 40. Kg3 Kg6 41. h3 Kh5 42. h4 Qf1 43. g6 hxg6 44. Kh2 Kg4 45. h5 Kf3 46. h6 Qg2#) 36. Qc3+ (36. g4 {doesn't change anything anymore} Qf3+ 37. Kh4 Qxf4 38. Kh3 d2 39. Qc3+ Kh6 40. Qc5 d1=Q 41. Qf8+ Kg5 42. Qc5+ Kf6 43. g5+ Kg7 44. Qc3+ f6 45. Qxf6+ Qxf6 46. gxf6+ Kxf6 47. Kg2 Qe2+ 48. Kg3 g5 49. h4 gxh4+ 50. Kf4 Qd3 51. Kg4 Qg3+ 52. Kh5 Qg5#) 36... Kh6 37. g4 (37. Qf6 {does not improve anything} Qe6+ 38. Qxe6 fxe6 39. g4 d2 40. Kg3 d1=Q 41. Kf2 a5 42. h3 a4 43. f5 exf5 44. gxf5 gxf5 45. Ke3 a3 46. Kf4 Qe2 47. h4 a2 48. h5 Kxh5 49. Kxf5 a1=Q 50. Kf4 Qae5#) 37... Qf3+ 38. Kh4 Qxf4 39. Qxd3 (39. Qc7 {is not the saving move} Qxc7 40. Kh3 d2 41. g5+ Kg7 42. Kg2 d1=Q 43. h3 Qe2+ 44. Kh1 Qc1#) 39... Qxh2+ 40. Qh3 Qxh3+ (40... g5#) 41. Kxh3 { -+} Kg5 (41... Kg5 42. Kg2 a5 43. Kf1 a4 44. Ke1 a3 45. Kd2 a2 46. Kd3 a1=Q 47. Kc4 Kxg4 48. Kb3 Qd4 49. Ka2 Kf5 50. Kb3 Ke4 51. Ka2 Qb4 52. Ka1 Kd3 53. Ka2 Kc3 54. Ka1 Qb2#) 0-1

Chess960 SP159

It was quite hard to get a game of chess960 against another human today and one in a starting position that I had not played before. Finally I had to accept this casual challenge against Anonymous. There is never a real way to know who these unregistered players are and how strong they are. Based on the way that this particular Anonymous played, my opponent is probably either around my rating or maybe a bit stronger. The way this game started reminded me of a game I had previously played. I can't remember the exact game, but I am quite certain that the position after 5.g3 I had seen before. Well, the pawn structure and where the bishops originate from in this starting position seemed familiar to me, other pieces on the back rank probably were in a different order though. I should avoid getting into these kind of pawn structures where they lead to closed games as I am not that good in them. My need to open things up and make it easier for me to play may sometimes lead me into trouble like it did in this game when I played 13...Bxe5. Now this move seemed good to me because not only is fxe5 forced, I could continue with f4 myself and open things up that way. I also had the idea of playing Nd7 and maybe further weaken my opponent's pawn structure. Things did not go the way I had planned them though and my pieces started to run out of squares to go to.

Therefore it was rather surprising to see Anonymous play 17.Nxd7 because that freed more squares to my disposal. My opponent should have retreated with the knight to d3 and kept more pieces on the baord, making it harder for me to play decent moves. After that exchange it was easier for me to develop a plan. However, after the move 21.b4, I started to go for the wrong plan. I played 21...g5 with the idea of following it up with f4. Move that I actually never played because I got distracted with the play on the queenside and played 22...Qd7 with the crazy idea of playing c6 and opening the file in front of my king... It seemed like a good idea at the time. 21...g5 might have been the start for my troubles, but with 23...c6 my position really went down the drain and I should have been in a losing position after that. While Anonymous might have not responded with the most accurate move, my opponent was still clearly in the driver's seat. I made things even worse for me a few moves later when I played 27...Kd7. The idea behind that move was to get my king as far away from the queenside as possible because I thought that my king would be safer on the kingside. Luckily for me, Anonymous missed the strongest continuation once again, giving me new chances to possibly hold the game, but even in the game continuation I am on the worse side of the board. I could have been close to equality, had I taken my chance and played either 31...Rxa7 or 31...dxc4 in reply to the inaccuracy 31.Rea1. The game continuation lead me towards a path of defeat, which I followed for awhile, but then my opponent blundered and played 35.Rxa8 and that put me for the first time during this game properly in the driver's seat. My opponent even offered me an easy win by playing 37.Qf6+, but due to time pressure and some unexplainable reason I could not see that I can take the queen with my knight. I instead walked into a mate in one, which my opponent did not see... Whoops. In the final position I am actually losing again. The only thing that saved me was time, my opponent's clock ran out of it. I have added one mate in two, one mate in four and one mate in five puzzle today.

The game above may also be viewed with my live commentary in the video below.

Chess960 SP342

Chess960 is the most featured chess variant in this blog and I doubt that it will change anytime soon. It has also been taking the center stage both in this blog and at my Youtube channel lately more than chess or 3 check. The way things are going at the moment I think it will continue to be like that for some time. When I accepted the Chess960 challenge that my opponent had created, I did not realise who the opponent was, I only looked that the times were good for me. After the board was shown and the score between me and my opponent was revealed, I noticed that I had played quickcastle twice before this game and lost both of them. I was quite confident at the start of the game that this would not be a third loss, because my recent results in my games have been very promising. Already after I saw the move 2.Bc4 played, a little grin started to manifest itself on my face. I happily replied with 2...Nb6. Then quickcastle retreated to b3 with the bishop. I continued by playing 3...Bc5 thinking that now it would be playable since Nb3 is not possible. However, I soon realised that the bishop on c5 could turn into a real problem. Mainly because it basically hindered my development. The move 4.c3 was the first indication to me that my third move was not a good one. The plan Nc2, followed by d4, made it impossible for me to play d6, because the bishop on c5 would be trapped because of it. I did not want to admit the mistake just yet and played my knight to g6 instead. Then quickcastle played the innocent looking 5.d3, which during the game I thought would threaten Bg5, but of course as long as my bishop can retreat to e7, moving the bishop to g5 is not really a problem.

However, I answered 5.d3 with 5...Qe7, intending to castle short. When I first saw the starting position, I thought that I would like to castle long, but because it came quite difficult to get the light-squared bishop into play, castling short seemed like the more obvious choice. I knew right away after I saw the move 6.Ng3 to be played that the knight would jump to f5 and harass my queen. I though that I can't really stop Nf5, so I might as well castle and that is exactly what I did. While Nf5 did harass my queen, the knight did not do all that much else on f5. I went to d8 with the queen and I could have gone for d5 next, but at the time I was in the impression that I could not play it. Somehow the fact that Qd8 actually enabled the move, did not even cross my mind until I had already retreated with the bishop. I only moved the bishop so that I could finally move the d-pawn and continue developing my pieces, most notably the bishop on c8. When I did end up playing d5 on move 9, it started a series of captures that ended horribly for my opponent. At first when quickcastle played 10.Nxe7+, I thought that I am going to lose a pawn. Quite soon afterwards I realised that the pawn on e5 can't be taken without dire consequences. I did, however, miss my first opportunity to play Bg4+ on move 11. It might have been actually a good thing though because my opponent did take on e5 with the queen and then Bg4+ seemed even better. Admittedly, had quickcastle just played 12.Qe2, I might have needed to settle for a game that was evenly fought at that point. 12.Qxe5 was the final blunder that lost the game for my opponent. I have added three mate in two, one mate in three and one mate in five puzzle today. As you can see, I have also divided the mate in two puzzles into 100 puzzle sections. The newest added puzzles are always found in the section where the puzzle number is the highest.

There is also a Youtube video of this game with my live commentary and that is something you can view below.

D01 Veresov Opening (1.d4 d5 2.f3 Nf6 3.Nc3 Bf5 4.Bg5)

The game below is a 5 minute game I played at Chess.com on July 15th, 2016. The move order in the game is not the same as you might see for this variation in theory. The theoretical move order is 1.d4 d5 2.Nc3 Nf6 3.Bg5 Bf5 4.f3. Funnily enough, the first move that is not in theory, 4...e6, could have been already the losing move. I obviously was not alert enough at the start of this game to see the obvious problem with 4...e6, which is that after 5.e4 dxe4 6.fxe4 I will lose a piece for a pawn. Luckily for me, Kojjootti did not play 5.e4, but instead 5.h4. That gave me the opportunity to hang on in the game, but unfortunately I made a second awful move in a row. After the move 5...Be7 I was clearly worse, close to losing. I was not going to give up the fight though. When Kojjootti played 10.Kf2, I was quite happy as I thought that I can maybe get some counterplay because of it. We both kept making bad moves, but because of the move 13.Ned2, I was able to finally get enough compensation for the material lost in order to be in a position that was evenly fought. In order for me to keep the position even, I would have needed to keep making accurate moves.

Because this was a blitz game, it was very hard to do. Therefore it might not have been that surprising for me to play less than ideal move 15...Bh5. Because I was down on material, I did not want to trade the bishops. It seems as though that it was my best chance to stay in the game. With my 15th move my position started to go down the drain once again and I should have reached a losing position after my 17th move Qf6. The evaluation of the position can change a lot during a blitz game and due to some inaccurate moves, especially 20.Ned2, the position only slightly favored my opponent anymore. It only took one more blunder from my friend to change the outcome of the game and that was the move 22.b3. It was unfortunate for my opponent that being clearly better or even winning for the most of the game, this one move basically lost the game. I have added one mate in two, two mate in three and two mate in four puzzles today.

[Event "Live Chess"] [Site "Chess.com"] [Date "2016.07.15"] [Round "?"] [White "Kojjootti"] [Black "Vierjoki, Timo"] [Result "0-1"] [ECO "D01"] [WhiteElo "1717"] [BlackElo "1783"] [Annotator "Stockfish 7 64 POPCNT (30s), TV"] [PlyCount "62"] [EventDate "2016.??.??"] 1. d4 d5 2. f3 Nf6 3. Nc3 Bf5 4. Bg5 {D01 Veresov Opening} e6 5. h4 (5. e4 dxe4 6. fxe4 c5 7. exf5 cxd4 8. Nce2 e5 9. Nf3 Nc6 10. c3 Qa5 11. Nd2 O-O-O 12. Qb3 d3 13. Ng3 h6 14. Bxf6 gxf6 15. O-O-O Qa6 16. a4 Na5 17. Qb5 Qc6 18. Qxc6+ bxc6 19. b4 Nb7 {Binet Tapaszto,L (2265) -Sinclair,D Novi Sad 1990 1-0 (36)}) 5... Be7 {?? N letting the wind out of his own sails} (5... h6 6. Bxf6 Qxf6 7. g4 Bh7 8. Qd2 g5 9. hxg5 hxg5 10. O-O-O Nc6 11. Re1 O-O-O 12. Nh3 Be7 13. Bg2 Nxd4 14. e4 dxe4 15. Qf2 exf3 16. Bf1 Nxc2 17. Bc4 Qd4 18. Qxd4 Rxd4 19. Bb3 Nxe1 20. Rxe1 {Ivic,L (1543)-Krstic,Z Split 2010 0-1 (57)}) (5... h6 {and Black can hope to survive} 6. Bxf6 Qxf6 {=}) 6. g4 {+/-} Nxg4 7. fxg4 Bxg4 8. Bxe7 Qxe7 9. Nf3 Qd6 10. Kf2 (10. Qd3 Bf5 11. Qd2 Qg3+ 12. Kd1 Qd6 {+-}) 10... a6 { Controls b5} (10... Nc6 11. Qd2 {+/-}) 11. e4 (11. Bh3 Bxf3 12. exf3 Nd7 {+/-}) 11... dxe4 (11... O-O {!? +/=}) 12. Nxe4 {+/-} Qf4 13. Ned2 (13. Nc5 {!?} Bxf3 14. Qxf3 Qxd4+ 15. Qe3 Qxe3+ 16. Kxe3 {+/-}) 13... Nc6 {=} 14. c3 {Secures b4} O-O-O 15. Bh3 Bh5 (15... Bxh3 {!? would allow Black to play on} 16. Rxh3 e5 {=} ) 16. Qe2 {+/-} Kb8 17. Qe3 Qf6 (17... Qxe3+ {!?} 18. Kxe3 Rhe8 {+/-}) 18. Ne4 Qe7 (18... Qxf3+ 19. Qxf3 Bxf3 20. Kxf3 {+-}) 19. Bg2 {+-} e5 20. Ned2 { ?? there were better ways to keep up the pressure} (20. Nc5 {+- White has a promising position}) 20... f6 {+/= Prevents intrusion on g5} 21. Rae1 (21. dxe5 {!?} Rhe8 22. e6 {=}) 21... Rhe8 {=} 22. b3 (22. Nb3 {!? is a viable option} Qd7 23. Nc5 {=}) 22... Qa3 {+/-} 23. dxe5 {?} (23. d5 Rxd5 24. Nc4 {+/-}) 23... Nxe5 {-+} 24. Nxe5 Rxe5 ({Worse is} 24... fxe5 25. Kg1 {+/-}) 25. Nc4 {?? the position was bad, and this mistake simply hastens the end} (25. Ne4 Bg6 26. Rd1 {-+}) 25... Qxa2+ (25... Rxe3 {?! is easily refuted} 26. Nxa3 Rxc3 27. Kg1 {=}) 26. Re2 Bxe2 (26... Rxe3 {?! succumbs to} 27. Rxa2 Rxc3 28. Na5 {+/-}) 27. Nxe5 Bb5+ (27... Bf1+ {! and Black can celebrate victory} 28. Kxf1 Rd1+ (28... fxe5 {?! is not possible} 29. Kg1 {=}) 29. Qe1 Rxe1+ 30. Kxe1 Qxg2 31. Nd7+ Kc8 {-+} ) 28. Kg3 fxe5 29. c4 Bd7 (29... Bc6 {and Black has reached his goal} 30. Bd5 Bxd5 31. cxd5 Rf8 {-+}) 30. Rd1 Qb2 (30... Qa3 31. c5 Qb4 32. Bf3 {-+}) 31. Bh3 (31. Rd3 Qa3 {-+}) 31... Kc8 0-1

A85 Dutch Defence: 2.c4 Nf6 3.Nc3 (1.Nf3 f5 2.d4 Nf6 3.c4 c6 4.Nc3 e6)

Probably most chess players do not look their blitz games in detail afterwards, maybe they will look up the opening part, but most people are not likely to do even that. I, however, go through all of my games, no matter what was the time controls used in the games, in the same way. Well, all the games that have some sort of notation that is. I can't really go through my over the board blitz games because I do not write the moves down, nor can I remember them after the game in order to write them down then. Maybe if I could remember all the moves and had time to write them down after the games, I would even keep track of my over the board blitz games. Unlike maybe other people, I think that going through your blitz games is useful. Because the games are played reasonably fast, you must often play intuitively what you think is the best move. I would suggest that if you are able to learn what kind of bad moves you intuitively play, you could not only improve your play in blitz, but also with longer time controls and spend the time thinking about your moves more beneficially.

The game below was a part of a warming up to a hundred game blitz training session against a friend of mine. Whenever I have had the chance to play these 100 game matches, I usually change the openings I play reasonably often, so that I do not get bored of playing the same stuff over and over again. At times when I struggle in certain openings, I switch to another one and see if that works out better for me than the previous one. In the game below it was time to see what would happen after I play 1.Nf3. Now that the match is at its half way mark, I have already played 1.c4, 1.d4, 1.e4, 1.Nf3, 1.g3 and 1.b3 if I recall correctly. With the black pieces I usually play my favorite lines against whatever my opponent is playing and I am not so willing of trying new ways to play. Kojjootti replied with 1...f5, which is a move that Stockfish does not seem to like. Despite of that it should still be playable and it only gives White a small advantage. On my 5th move I made a small mistake that brought the position to equality. Instead of 5.d5 I should have played either 5.Qc2 or 5.Bf4, for example. I like to play open games, so I went for the move that may open some lines. It was a bit too early to play 5.d5, but I kind of wanted to make sure that this will not be a closed game. After eight moves I had succeeded in my plan of keeping the game quite open, but because I had also traded queens, there were not as much tactical possibilities anymore. I was actually quite happy about it, because the position seemed easy enough for me to play.

The game continued to be rather evenly fought until Kojjootti made a horrible move on move 16. After 16...Rg8, I immediately considered playing 17.Nxf5, however, I also wanted to make sure that it actually is as good as I thought it might be, so I spend some time thinking about it. I spend over 20 seconds considering the move, which is maybe a bit too much time to use for that move. However, it should have been the move that decided the outcome of the game. I was able to keep the advantage on my side to the end of the game, but after my last move, which was really bad, I only had a clear advantage anymore. It did not matter because I had spent over 40 seconds for my move 26.f3, after which I was down on time and could not get the time advantage anymore and I lost this game because I ran out of time. I have added one mate in two, one mate in three and three mate in four puzzles today.

[Event "Live Chess"] [Site "Chess.com"] [Date "2016.07.15"] [Round "?"] [White "Vierjoki, Timo"] [Black "Kojjootti"] [Result "0-1"] [ECO "A85"] [WhiteElo "1741"] [BlackElo "1727"] [Annotator "Stockfish 7 64 POPCNT (30s), TV"] [PlyCount "76"] [EventDate "2016.??.??"] 1. Nf3 f5 {Zukertort Opening: Dutch Variation} 2. d4 (2. d3 Nf6 3. e4 { Zukertort Opening: Lisitsyn Gambit Deferred}) (2. e4 e5 3. Nxe5 Qf6 4. d4 d6 5. Nc4 {Latvian Gambit Accepted, Bilguer Variation}) 2... Nf6 3. c4 c6 4. Nc3 e6 { A85 Dutch Defence: 2.c4 Nf6 3.Nc3} 5. d5 cxd5 6. cxd5 Bb4 7. dxe6 dxe6 8. Qxd8+ Kxd8 9. Bd2 Nc6 10. e3 Ke7 {N} (10... Bd7 11. Bc4 Ke7 12. O-O Rac8 13. a3 Bd6 14. Rac1 Ne5 15. Nxe5 Bxe5 16. Bd3 Rhd8 17. Rfd1 Bxc3 18. Bxc3 Ba4 19. Bb4+ Kf7 20. Rxc8 Rxc8 21. Re1 Nd5 22. Bd2 Rd8 23. Bb1 g6 24. h3 b6 25. e4 {De Carvalho, T (1413)-Kikuchi Cadilhac,M (1474) Itajai 2016 0-1 (54)}) 11. Bc4 h6 {Secures g5} 12. a3 {White threatens to win material: a3xb4} Bd6 13. O-O g5 14. Nb5 (14. Rfe1 Rd8 {=}) 14... Bb8 {=} 15. Bc3 a6 {Black threatens to win material: a6xb5} (15... e5 16. a4 {=/+}) 16. Nbd4 Rg8 {??} (16... Nxd4 {was much better} 17. Bxd4 b5 {+/=}) 17. Nxf5+ {! +- the logical end} exf5 18. Bxf6+ Kxf6 19. Bxg8 g4 20. Nd4 Ne5 (20... Nxd4 21. exd4 Bd6 22. f3 {+-}) 21. Bd5 h5 (21... Ra7 { a fruitless try to alter the course of the game} 22. f4 gxf3 23. Bxf3 {+-}) 22. Rac1 Bd6 23. Rc2 (23. Rfd1 {!? might be the shorter path} Rb8 24. Bb3 Bf8 {+-}) 23... Rb8 24. Rfc1 Bd7 25. Rd1 h4 (25... a5 {does not improve anything} 26. Ba2 Ke7 27. f4 gxf3 28. gxf3 {+-}) 26. f3 gxf3 27. Nxf3 Ba4 28. b3 Bb5 (28... Be8 { does not solve anything} 29. Bxb7 {! Discovered attack: d5, Rd1xd6} (29. Nxh4 { ?! is much weaker} Ng4 {+/-}) 29... Bxa3 30. Rc7 Nxf3+ 31. gxf3 {+-} (31. Bxf3 {?!} Rxb3 32. e4 fxe4 33. Bxe4 Re3 {+-})) 29. Nxe5 (29. a4 {keeps an even firmer grip} Be8 30. Bxb7 Nxf3+ 31. Bxf3 Be7 {+-}) 29... Bxe5 30. Bf3 f4 (30... h3 {doesn't do any good} 31. gxh3 Be8 32. h4 {+-}) 31. exf4 Bxf4 32. h3 (32. a4 {makes it even easier for White} Be8 33. Rc4 Bg5 34. Rd6+ Ke5 35. Rd5+ Kf6 {+-} ) 32... Be3+ (32... Bg3 {doesn't change the outcome of the game} 33. a4 Be8 34. Rf1 {+-}) 33. Kh2 (33. Kh1 {!? seems even better} Bf4 {+-}) 33... Bf4+ 34. Kh1 Bg3 35. Rcd2 Re8 (35... Be8 {doesn't improve anything} 36. Rd8 Rxd8 37. Rxd8 { +-}) 36. Bg4 (36. a4 {and White can celebrate victory} Bc6 37. Bxc6 bxc6 {+-}) 36... Re3 37. a4 Bc6 38. Rd8 {?? White is ruining his position} (38. Rd3 { and White wins} Re7 39. Bf3 {+-}) 38... Rxb3 {+/-} 0-1

3 check A04 Reti Opening #2

Lately chess960 games have taken over the blog a bit, but today it is time for a change in the form of 3 check. Whenever I play 3 check games, I want to end them so that the winner of the game is really decided with the third check and not by checkmating the other player. I think I have been successful in my attempts to do that so far. The reason for that is simple. If the 3 check games would end like chess games, there would be no point in playing this variant. That being said, it does change the way I handle the opening phase of the game. In chess games I am not that worried necessarily of giving my opponent a chance to give a check, but in 3 check games I obviously try to prevent the checking possibilities to the best of my abilities. Like usual, the main commenting of these 3 check games I have done in the notation and I am not going to type the same things in this part of the post. As far as this blog is concerned, the next post will see the light of day on Monday, but I am going to post one video to my YouTube channel later on today. I have added two mate in two, one mate in three, one mate in four and one mate in five puzzle today.

This game can also be viewed with my live commentary and the video for it can be seen below.

Chess960 SP863

Because the games from my reference database of chess960 games are not automatically added to the notation in the same way as chess games are when I go through the game with the Full Analysis functionality of Deep Fritz 14, I am now going to add most relevant games to the notation myself. To this game I only put one game in the notation because only one game in the database that consists of 169600 games had gone into the position after 2.f4. By the way, all of those games have been played between different engines and while I typed this I compared what Stockfish 7 64 POPCNT thought about the moves and it disagreed with a few moves, especially couple of the moves that Cheng4 0.38 64-bit (2834) did. That game was pretty much over after Cheng4 0.38 64-bit played 10...Qa4. It also did not like all of the moves that the other engine did either. As I have not really compared different engines before, it is interesting to me how they compare to each other.

I started this with a similar idea as the game I shared in this blog yesterday. I think opening the bishop diagonals at the start is a good way to begin the game because it is likely that other pieces are more easily developed and do not need the extra attention. While this was a casual game and no ratings were affected, I still tried to play as well as I can. I soon realised though that I was clearly the more experienced player of the two of us. However, as I do not really expect my opponents to blunder in the first two moves, I sometimes miss something obvious. For instance, I did not see at first that 2...Ned6 just lost a pawn. I can't really remember anymore, but I think I saw the pawn hanging after I had played my knight to b3 on move 3. It did not matter much that I was not paying enough attention on move 3, because Anonymous made an even worse move in reply, allowing me to get a winning advantage so early on. While it may not be all that beneficial to play games where the rating difference of the two players is quite high, this game was fun enough to play because I could get into positions that I normally would not be able to get. For example, the way that my knights jumped around was something I enjoyed. Even though I did try to come up with a mate pattern, I could not see one. I did have a mate in three after 8...Qf6, but unfortunately I missed the nice sequence of moves shown in the notation. It is probably the only thing from this game that I really regret of not being able to do. I have added three mate in three and two mate in four puzzles today.

The game above can also be viewed in the video below, in which I also try to commentate the moves while I play.

Chess960 SP435

This game was played in a team match called 960 Angels for 13th June. It is played on 43 boards between CLUB 960 and Space Angel Roast Acorns & Marshmallows In Andromeda's Cluster Of Infinite Bright Stars. I am playing on board 4 for Space Angel Roast Acorns & Marshmallows In Andromeda's Cluster Of Infinite Bright Stars. The match is not going that well for us at the moment, the current score is 30.5 - 23.5 in favor of CLUB 960.

I have lately mainly started my chess960 games by pushing a central pawn two squares forward, but I decided to go for a different approach this time and opened up the long diagonal for my bishop instead. I actually could have started this game by playing 1.O-O too, had I wanted to go for that one. I actually kind of want to do that the next time I end up in a similar starting position that allows me to do that. 1.g3 was met by 1...b5, so that the light-squared bishops were contesting each other immediately. Obviously I did not want to trade the bishops because it would have left the light squares around my king weak, so I played 2.e4 in order to block the long diagonal a bit. Up to move 5.Ne2, the game seemed to progress with quite natural looking developing moves. Dartnado's 5th move was a bit questionable because the purpose of the move seems only to be to prevent my knight from jumping to f5. Well, it might also help in the development of the queen, but it is not all that impressive according to Stockfish. I did not continue with the right idea and therefore let my opponent back into the game. Had I played 6.d4 I might have had a better game than in the game continuation. With the move 8...d5, my opponent's position started to go down the drain and I was able to win a pawn in the process. It might have been the start for the downfall, but after 12...Qd6 it started to be quite clear what was going to be the outcome of the game. I was up two pawns and fairly easy looking game ahead of me. I was able not to mess things up and Dartnado thought it best to resign after 23.Ne4. Admittedly I did not think that winning this game would have been easy from that position, so I was glad to see that the game ended before I needed to make use of my advantage and win the game. I have added three mate in one and two mate in three puzzles today.

Chess960 SP488

The game I am sharing today was played in a team match called 5.1.2016, Chess 960, A friendly match Labour Day - UNRATED! Despite what it says on the name of the match, in the details of the match it stated that this indeed is a rated match. The match is played on 11 boards between MY FRIENDS, International, Moji prijatelji&Φίλοι μου and Tortoise Chess Club. I am playing on board 1 for MY FRIENDS, International, Moji prijatelji&Φίλοι μου. I am happy that the rest of the team are getting better results than I am and we have actually already secured the win in the match as the current score 16.5 - 3.5 in favor of MY FRIENDS, International, Moji prijatelji&Φίλοι μου clearly demonstrates.

There might be a few good ways to start a game from this starting position, but I preferred 1.c4 to ensure an easy development of my bishop from the square b1. That bishop could have become a problem piece later on, had I neglected its development for some time. My opponent, FrankSimnel, responded with 1...f6, a move that seems quite horrible in my eyes. It is not, of course, a move that would lose the game for my opponent, but it does hand over the advantage to me. I continued with 2.d4 and thought that I can get my pieces easily developed. Basically I could play all the moves that I wanted to play, at least during the first few moves that is. The first move that I regretted of playing was 5.Bxg6. It was not a capture I had properly thought about. While it did double the kingside pawns, it also helped my opponent to get the rook from h8 into play and generate some pressure towards h2 alongside with the bishop on b8. Due to my poor judgement at the time, the position became even and the advantage I had before was a thing of the past. After 5...hxg6 I played 6.Qb1 in order to get my queen to a better diagonal and attack the pawn on g6. FrankSimnel replied with 6...g5 and then I realised the problem with how I had played.

The threat of 7...g4 seemed to win a pawn for my opponent no matter what I played on my 7th move. I decided to play 7.d5 and save my d-pawn as it seemed the more important pawn compared to the pawn on h2. Actually the pawn on h2 is not even under the threat because if 7...g4 8.Nd2 Rxh2 9.Rxh2 Bxh2 then 10.g3 and the bishop is trapped. I do not think that I looked far enough during the game to see that line, so I was somewhat surprised of the move 7...e6. I replied with 8.e4, so that I could take back on d5 with the e-pawn in case my opponent decided to take the pawn on d5. Finally on move 8 FrankSimnel played g4 and drove the knight away from f3. My opponent was more aware of the situation than I was and did not take on h2, but instead played 9...Bf4. I still was not paying attention and continued with 10.g3 in order to prevent my opponent taking on h2, which I now know would have been a mistake that could have lost the game for my opponent. After the bishop had retreated to g5, I had a plan of playing Rc3 followed by Ne3 in order to get my pieces into play in a way that I considered to be the best at the time. My plan was not good and the move 12.Ne3 put me in a slightly worse position. Despite of that the game continued to be played rather evenly, until my opponent blundered with 19...Rxh4 that is. I was not able to find the best reply and instead I also blundered by playing 20.Rf4. I had the opportunity to get a clear advantage, but due to my big mistake I gave that clear advantage to my opponent. On my next move I made a move that was even worse and ended up in a completely lost position. I played a few more moves, but I had to accept defeat after the move 23...Rxh4. I have added three puzzles to mate in 3 puzzles 601 - 700 page. I have also added two mate in four puzzles today. I organised the mate in 3 puzzles a bit yesterday and I will at some point do the rest of the puzzle pages as well.

Chess960 SP431

Last week I was able to get some of the reposting done, but it is still a long way to go before I have done all of them. I finally tested the video editing software I have and because I figured it out to a decent degree, I managed to edit some of my videos so that I feel that I could upload them to YouTube. I think that I will upload one video per day from Monday to Friday starting from today. Here is a link for my YouTube channel. We will see if the experience of doing the videos and editing them improves over time, but I do what I can to make it happen.

The game below was played in a team match called CHESS CORNER 960 vs. CHESS960 SOCIETY. The match consists of 5 boards and I am playing on board 1 for CHESS960 SOCIETY. Sadly this draw is the only game that has contributed to our score in the match. The score at the time I type this is 6.5 - 0.5 in favor of CHESS CORNER 960.

The first big mistake in the game below was played by my opponent on move 8. The move 8...Ne6 move was so bad that it could have lost the game, but because I made the wrong knight move, draw was the most likely outcome of the game. Well, in case both players were to continue with good moves that is. Romeolips made a huge blunder only a little bit later with 11...b5. After that I had a chance to take the winning advantage for the second time, but unlike the first time, this time I was able to take that advantage at first. When romeolips played 16...Rb8 I felt that I had a possibility to win the game, but unfortunately I could not find the correct sequence of moves. I played 17.Nef4, which should be only good enough for a draw. It was not as bad as my 18th move, however, because after the move 18.Nxc3, I was in a losing position. Then on move 20 I made a move that allowed a mate in two sequence to be played. Luckily for me, romeolips did not find the mate in two. However, the move my opponent played 20...Rxb2+ also would have lead to a forced mate, had my opponent found the correct continuation. We continued the game in a way that was very favorable for romeolips until my opponent played 24...Kd7. Due to that move romeolips only had a very small advantage, which remained to the end of the game. I think it was me who offered a draw after 28.Qxd3+ and my opponent agreed to that as there is no real winning chances left for either side. I have added one mate in two, three mate in three and one mate in four puzzle today.

Chess960 SP365

Sometimes the winner of the game is decided very quickly, even before the opening phase of the game is finished and this game is one example of situations like that. I played this game at https://chessrex.com/. The game started on June 19th, 2016 and finished on July 7th, 2016. It was possible for players involved in this game to use 5 days per move. Obviously neither player used all of that time to make their moves and the game was played in a faster pace.

Before I made my first move, I noticed an undefended pawn on a7 and because I had a bishop on g1, it made sense to me to open the game with 1.f4. With my next move I was threatening to take on a7 and possibly follow it up by taking the rook on b8. EOS1 saw the threat and played Nb6 in order to prevent me from taking on a7. Maybe 1...f5 is also an idea worth considering instead of the move played in the game. It would have, in a way, also stopped me from taking on a7, because it would have just ended in a few trades and I was not interested in trading too many pieces. 2.e4 seemed to me to be the easiest way to ensure easy development, so that is what I played. EOS1 replied with 2...e5, which looked to me as a small mistake during the game, but I guess there is actually nothing wrong with it. The reason I did not like that move was that after 3.fxe5 rook may need to take back if my opponent wants to keep the material even and that allows me to harass the rook on the following move, gaining some time. EOS1 did take back with the rook and in that position I considered basically only two moves, 4.d4 or 4.Bd4. I rejected the idea of playing 4.d4 due to the reply 4...Bg5+, which would have been really annoying to face. Therefore I developed my bishop to d4 instead. When I saw the reply to that I was very surprised and thought, well that was a bit too easy. I did at first look if there is something that I am missing, but then soon realised that my opponent indeed had left the rook in a square where I can take it for free... Giving me a free rook is usually very risky and most of the time it means that I am going to win the game. The rest of the game did not pose me any real problems and I was able to get the win rather easily after that unfortunate rook sacrifice. I did not play the rest of the game perfectly by any stretch of the imagination, but one thing especially bothers me with the way I played or rather just one move I made. On move 19 I had the opportunity to play Na6+ winning the exchange, but for some reason I did not see it and played 19.Nd3 instead. I have added four mate in one and one mate in three puzzle today.

I have decided that I am going to take a break from posting and my next post will be coming July 18th, 2016. The time away of making these posts is actually not a vacation because I plan on doing as much of the remaining reposts as I can during that time and see how far I can get with them. I have not been able to do the reposts as fast as I would have liked especially between Monday and Friday, so I think this time off from normal posts is necessary, so that I can focus on the updates without needing to worry most of the week what I am going to post about and how. I have also planned on starting a new project, to which I have not had enough time previously, but may concentrate on more next week depending on how much time I spent on the reposts.

Chess960 SP485

This game was played at lichess.org today in order to get something to post. I was not in my best form today and could not concentrate to the game all that well. Unfortunately that meant that I went back below 1900 with my chess960 rating. While my opponent has a low rating in chess960, I looked at Scarbody's other ratings and some of them were over 2000, so I faced a stronger player than the rating would imply. Scarbody had not obviously played all that many chess960 games before this one and actually Scarbody's rating increased by 245 points due to this win. My opponent offered me a rematch, but due to the time constraints I was in, I could not play another game. I think I played reasonable moves until I played 9.Qc3. It was a bad move that only put my queen to an even worse square, especially after Ne4 that drives the queen to e1. I had to go to e1 with the queen because otherwise my knight on f4 may run out of good squares to go to if it is driven back from f4. I had not blundered the game away just yet, but my questionable choices had made things uncomfortable for me. My 11th move was the first one that handed over the advantage to my opponent. My idea behind 11.Rb3 was to overprotect c3, so that when I move my knight away, I can take back on d1 with the queen. Had I not moved my rook, then Qxd1 would be replied with Nc3.

I did get into a slightly favorable position a few moves later when Scarbody played 14...Qf5. At first I replied correctly with 15.f3, but one move after that my position seemed to go worse once again. I had planned to play Nc5 for awhile because I wanted to jump to e6 with one of my knights. I did see of course that my opponent had covered the square sufficiently with the queen and the knight. I considered the move 16.h4 briefly during the game, but I was not sure of the consequences and therefore did not want to open my king position unnecessarily. My 17th move was the worst move of the game up to that point. Scarbody had the dominating position after that for a few moves. A slight mistake from my opponent on move 20 and I was able to get better into the game, but even after that Scarbody had to be favored in the position. Another inaccuracy from my opponent on move 22 that could have turned the tables, but I blundered and threw one more chance to hold the draw away. I blundered a second time in a row and played 24.Ne2, after which I should have been in a losing position. I did immediately get another chance to hold the draw, because my opponent played a horrible move 25...Nb5. Had my opponent played 25...Nc4, I would have been in huge trouble. I was not able to see the move 25.Ne5 that could have saved me from the loss and instead made the game losing move 25.a4. I have added two mate in two, two mate in three and one mate in four puzzle today.

E90 King's Indian: Classical: Early deviations and 6.h3 (1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 Bg7 4.e4 d6 5.h3 O-O 6.Nf3 c5 7.d5 Na6 8.Bg5)

I have lately changed the way I play against 1.d4 in order to find something that suits me better than what I have previously played against it. I need a change from time to time to keep the game a bit more fresh if that is even possible anymore since I have played so many games of chess. All the chess variants seem to me much more interesting than chess at the moment and partly for that reason I have not started anymore correspondence chess games. Actually I am more determined than ever to take a break from correspondence games and play more games in one sitting. The nature of the correspondence games is that the games may last for months, sometime years, though the time used to think each move might actually not be that much, especially when one is playing a lot of simultaneous games. It feels a bit more of a mandatory chore to move in my games every day than something I would like to do. When I play rapid games, for example, I enjoy the experience of moving the pieces more than the daily moving of pieces in correspondence games.

The game below was played in the atadros's mini-tournament V at GameKnot. I have finished 17 out of the 20 games that are part of this mini-tournament. I am currently on 10th place and because 11 players have taken part, my results have been quite bad. If I win all my remaining games, I have a chance to be 7th in the final standings. My opponent in this game, towa, has been more successful in his games and towa is currently on 4th place with a chance to be third in the final standings if the remaining games end favorably for him.

Based on the way that the game below went, I do not think I like this opening all that much for Black. Then again more experience in this line might be needed before I completely disregard it. I played quite well the first six moves, but then with my 7th move I started to go for the wrong plan. I wanted to get my knight to c7, bishop to d7 and try to play b5. The problem with that plan is that it took a really long time and when I finally played b5, it put me in a losing position. In that position after 7.d5 I may have considered the correct play, 7...e6, but I was a bit worried about my pawn on d6 as it would become weak after e6. I obviously misjudged the position, but I was not punished for it because towa played the inaccurate 8.Bg5. It was better to play 8.Bd3. I then continued with my plan of trying to play b5 and maybe activate my pieces on the queenside because of it, but it was a mistake to play Bd7 because the bishop is not well placed at d7. My best move would have been e6 once again. This was not the start for my downfall as towa replied with 9.Nd2 instead of the better option 9.Bd3, which would have given my opponent a clear advantage. The move played in the game kept towa slightly favored in the game.

I did get my chance to play b5 on move 11, but for some reason I dismissed my plan and started to do something else instead. I do not remember nor can I now think of a reason why I changed my plan, I know that I wanted to exchange the dark-squared bishops, which seems like a stupid idea as I now look at the position. However, I was able to keep myself relatively well in the game even after 11...Nfe8, at least until I played the horrible blunder 17...Rb8 that is. After that blunder I should be in a losing position with correct play. Towa did not find the strongest continuation and therefore I got a little bit better back into the game. I was clearly worse in the game continuation for awhile, but then I played 19...Qe8 and my position went down the drain again. After quite a lot of bad moves from both sides, I was able to climb from the losing position to a more evenly fought game after a bad move, 23.Rdg1, from my opponent. I was not able to maintain the even position and for one move I went towards a loss once again. The move 26...Qxe4 was a very risky choice from me that could have meant the final downhill for me in this game. However, towa played 27.hxg6, giving me another chance to hold on. At first I was able to navigate my way through the problematic situations, but then on move 29 I made my final mistake and the game ended quite quickly after that for towa's victory. I have added one mate in one, one mate in three, one mate in four and two mate in five puzzles today.

[Event "atadros's mini-tournament V"] [Site "http://gameknot.com/chess.pl?"] [Date "2016.06.27"] [Round "?"] [White "towa"] [Black "Vierjoki, Timo"] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "E90"] [WhiteElo "1936"] [BlackElo "1802"] [Annotator "Stockfish 7 64 POPCNT (30s), TV"] [PlyCount "63"] [EventDate "2016.??.??"] 1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. Nc3 Bg7 4. e4 d6 5. h3 {King's Indian Defense: Makogonov Variation} (5. Nf3 O-O 6. Be2 e5 7. Be3 {King's Indian Defense: Orthodox Variation, Gligoric-Taimanov System} (7. d5 a5 {King's Indian Defense: Petrosian Variation, Stein Defense} (7... Nbd7 8. Bg5 h6 9. Bh4 g5 10. Bg3 Nh5 11. h4 {King's Indian Defense: Petrosian Variation, Keres Defense}))) 5... O-O 6. Nf3 c5 7. d5 Na6 8. Bg5 {E90 King's Indian: Classical: Early deviations and 6.h3} Bd7 9. Nd2 (9. Qd2 Rb8 10. Bd3 Nc7 11. Bh6 b5 12. Bxg7 Kxg7 13. O-O e5 14. dxe6 Bxe6 15. cxb5 c4 16. Be2 Nxb5 17. Rfd1 Qa5 18. Ng5 Nxc3 19. bxc3 d5 20. Nxe6+ fxe6 21. exd5 exd5 22. Bf3 Qc5 23. Rab1 Rb6 {Plass,M (1981)-Fuchs,A (1976) Braunfels 2015 1-0 (62)}) 9... Nc7 10. Be2 a6 11. f4 Nfe8 {N} (11... h6 12. Bh4 b5 13. O-O Nfe8 14. Qc2 Rb8 15. Rae1 bxc4 16. a4 Na8 17. Bxc4 Nb6 18. b3 Nc7 19. g4 f6 20. e5 Be8 21. exd6 exd6 22. a5 Nxc4 23. bxc4 Qd7 24. Rb1 Bf7 25. Rb6 h5 26. f5 {Gervasio,R-Andrade,W Brasilia 1985 1-0}) 12. Nf3 Bf6 (12... b5 13. Qd2 {=}) 13. h4 Bg4 {Black has a cramped position} 14. Bh6 (14. Nd2 Bd7 {+/-}) 14... Bg7 15. Bxg7 Nxg7 16. Ng5 Bxe2 17. Qxe2 ({Instead of} 17. Kxe2 Nh5 18. Kf3 e5 {=/+}) 17... Rb8 {?} (17... h6 {!? =}) 18. g4 (18. h5 {!?} h6 19. hxg6 hxg5 20. gxf7+ Rxf7 {+-}) 18... f6 19. Nf3 Qe8 {?} (19... e5 20. dxe6 Ngxe6 21. Qd2 {+/-}) 20. O-O-O (20. h5 {seems even better} g5 21. h6 Nge6 22. dxe6 Nxe6 23. fxg5 fxg5 {+-}) 20... b5 {?} (20... h6 {+/-}) 21. f5 {?? a transit from better to worse} (21. h5 {!? makes it even easier for White} bxc4 22. h6 Rf7 23. hxg7 Nb5 {+-}) 21... bxc4 {?} (21... gxf5 22. exf5 bxc4 23. h5 { +/-}) 22. fxg6 {?? White has let it slip away} (22. h5 gxf5 23. gxf5 Nb5 {+-}) 22... hxg6 {?} (22... Qxg6 23. h5 Qh6+ 24. Qd2 Qxd2+ 25. Nxd2 {+/=}) 23. Rdg1 { ?? throwing away the advantage} (23. h5 {ends the debate} Nb5 24. Nxb5 axb5 25. h6 {+-}) 23... Nb5 {+/=} 24. Qxc4 (24. Qc2 Nxc3 25. bxc3 e6 {+/=}) 24... Nxc3 { =} 25. Qxc3 Qa4 {Black threatens to win material: Qa4xa2. Black forks: a2+e4} 26. h5 {White threatens to win material: h5xg6} Qxe4 (26... Qxa2 27. hxg6 Qa1+ 28. Kc2 Qa4+ 29. Kc1 Qxe4 30. Rh6 {=}) 27. hxg6 (27. Nd2 {!?} Qxd5 28. hxg6 { +/-}) 27... Rb4 {=} 28. b3 Qxg6 {Attacks the isolani on g4} 29. g5 f5 {?? forfeits the clear win} (29... Qf5 {the rescuing straw} 30. g6 Re8 {=}) 30. Rh6 {+-} Qf7 31. Rgh1 Qxd5 (31... Qh5 {a fruitless try to alter the course of the game} 32. R1xh5 Nxh5 33. Rh8+ Kf7 34. Rxf8+ Kxf8 35. Qh8+ Kf7 36. Qxh5+ Kg7 37. g6 Rh4 38. Nxh4 Kf6 39. Qxf5+ Kg7 40. Qf7+ Kh6 41. g7 Kg5 42. g8=Q+ Kh6 43. Qgg6#) 32. g6 (32. g6 Qd2+ 33. Nxd2 Rh4 34. R1xh4 c4 35. Rh8#) 1-0

B01 Scandinavian Defence (1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Nf6 3.d4 Nxd5 4.c4 Nb6 5.Nc3 Nc6)

The game below is my most recently finished game from Chess.com. This was played in a team match called Limitless Chess vs Команда ЦФО (Russia Central Federal District). I am playing on board 28 for Limitless Chess and the current score in this match that consists of 80 boards is 47.5 - 48.5 in favor of Команда ЦФО (Russia Central Federal District). Every game counts in this evenly fought match and I am happy to have helped our team with a win. My other game against Andrey-25 is still in progress and depending on the result of that game, I may be either satisfied with my efforts or slightly disappointed with the way I have played in the match. At least complete disaster has been already avoided with this win.

I was very happy to see that my opponent did not go for the Portuguese Variation of the Scandinavian Defense (1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Nf6 3.d4 Bg4), but played something that I had not faced before instead. 4.c4 seemed to me like the most natural reply to the move 3...Nxd5. Andrey-25 retreated to b6 with the knight, which is a good square for the knight to go to. Other option would be to play the knight back to f6. Going for the move 4...Nb4 is not something that should be considered, even though that variation has a name in opening theory, B01 Scandinavian Defense: Kiel Variation. White should be clearly better after the ill-advised knight advance. After the knight had gone to b6, I played 5.Nc3. I did also think about 5.Nf3, but I did not like my position after 5...Bg4. I thought that if I had continued with 6.Be2, then Bxf3 would make me take back on f3 with the pawn because if I take back with my bishop, then Nxc4 wins a pawn. However, I missed the fact that Nxc4 would have been a big blunder due to Qa4+ that wins the knight from c4. Andrey-25 blundered and played 5...Nc6, which allowed me to gain some advantage. With his 6th move, Andrey-25's position went more down the drain. His best option was to play 6...e5, it would have been the only move that could have kept my opponent in the game. The move played in the game closes the bishop behind the pawn chain and makes it more difficult for my opponent to activate his pieces, the bishop on c8 and the rook on a8, for instance. My advantage grew even bigger when my opponent decided to play 12...f5, after that I should have a winning advantage, at least according to Stockfish that is. While I did not find the best moves, I was able to keep the advantage on my side for the rest of the game. I renamed one of my posts today and added one game to that post. I did that in order not to make a mistake like I was typing about in the post yesterday. The post that has been renamed and has one more game is called C50 Four Knights Game: Italian Variation. I have added one mate in one, one mate in two, two mate in three and one mate in five puzzle today.

[Event "Limitless Chess vs ??????? ??? (Russia C"] [Site "Chess.com"] [Date "2016.05.28"] [Round "?"] [White "Vierjoki, Timo"] [Black "Andrey-25"] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "B01"] [WhiteElo "1849"] [BlackElo "1757"] [Annotator "Stockfish 7 64 POPCNT (30s), TV"] [PlyCount "57"] [EventDate "2016.??.??"] 1. e4 d5 2. exd5 Nf6 3. d4 Nxd5 {Scandinavian Defense: Marshall Variation} 4. c4 (4. Nf3 Bg4 {Scandinavian Defense: Modern Variation, Gipslis Variation} ( 4... g6 {Scandinavian Defense: Richter Variation})) 4... Nb6 (4... Nb4 { Scandinavian Defense: Kiel Variation}) 5. Nc3 Nc6 {B01 Scandinavian Defence} 6. Be3 e6 (6... Bf5 7. Nf3 e6 8. Be2 (8. a3 h6 9. h3 g5 10. g4 Bg6 11. h4 f6 12. hxg5 fxg5 13. Bxg5 hxg5 14. Rxh8 Qf6 15. Rh3 O-O-O 16. Qe2 Rxd4 17. Nxd4 Nxd4 18. Qd1 Nc2+ 19. Ke2 Bc5 20. Re3 Qf4 21. Qc1 Nxc4 22. Rf3 Nd4+ {Yenice,Y-Celik, E (1765) Manavgat 2015 0-1}) 8... Be7 9. O-O O-O 10. h3 Bf6 11. Qd2 e5 12. d5 e4 13. Nd4 Nxd4 14. Bxd4 Nd7 15. Rfe1 Re8 16. Bf1 c5 17. Bxf6 Nxf6 18. Qf4 Bg6 19. Rad1 a6 20. g4 Qb8 21. Qxb8 {Smith,R (2240)-Cruden,N New Zeeland 1991 1-0 (65)}) 7. Nf3 Bb4 8. Qc2 {N} (8. Bd3 Na5 9. a3 Bxc3+ 10. bxc3 O-O 11. Qc2 g6 12. Bg5 Qe8 13. Bh6 Bd7 14. O-O Naxc4 15. Ng5 Ba4 16. Qe2 e5 17. Bxc4 exd4 18. Qf3 Nxc4 19. Qf6 {1-0 (19) Gail, E (1524)-Behr,L (1236) Cologne 2011}) 8... O-O 9. Bd3 h6 10. O-O Bxc3 11. Qxc3 Ne7 12. Bc2 Nf5 13. Qd3 g6 14. Rad1 Nxe3 15. fxe3 Re8 {?? leading to a quick end} (15... Qe7 {+/-}) 16. Ne5 {+-} f5 17. Nxg6 Kg7 (17... Qf6 {doesn't change the outcome of the game} 18. Nf4 c5 19. Rf3 {+-} ) 18. Ne5 (18. Nf4 {might be the shorter path} e5 19. Nh5+ Kh8 20. Rxf5 Bxf5 21. Qxf5 e4 22. Bxe4 Rxe4 23. Qxe4 Qe8 {+-}) 18... Rg8 (18... Nd7 {desperation} 19. Nf3 Nf6 {+-}) 19. Rf3 (19. e4 {makes it even easier for White} Qf6 20. Qh3 {+-}) 19... Kf6 (19... Kh7 {the last chance for counterplay} 20. e4 Qf6 {+-}) 20. e4 Qe7 21. exf5 Qg7 (21... c6 {is no salvation} 22. fxe6+ Kxe6 23. d5+ Nxd5 24. cxd5+ Kd6 25. dxc6+ Kc7 26. Rf7 Bd7 27. Rxe7 Rxg2+ 28. Kxg2 Rg8+ 29. Kh1 Rg1+ 30. Rxg1 h5 31. Rxd7+ Kb6 32. Rxb7+ Ka5 33. b4#) 22. fxe6+ Kxe6 (22... Ke7 {doesn't get the bull off the ice} 23. Rf7+ Ke8 24. Rxg7 Rxg7 25. Qf5 c6 26. Rf1 Kd8 27. Qf8+ Kc7 28. c5 Nc4 29. Qxg7+ Kb8 30. Nd7+ Kc7 31. Nb8+ Bd7 32. Qxd7+ Kxb8 33. Rf8#) 23. Qf5+ (23. Rg3 c6 24. Rg6+ Ke7 25. Qa3+ c5 26. Rxg7+ Rxg7 27. Qxc5+ Kd8 28. Rf1 Bf5 29. Bxf5 h5 30. Qd6+ Nd7 31. Nxd7 h4 32. Nf6+ Rd7 33. Qxd7#) 23... Ke7 {+-} 24. Ng6+ Qxg6 25. Qxg6 (25. Re1+ {and White wins} Kd8 26. Qf8+ Rxf8 27. Rxf8+ Kd7 28. Bxg6 Nxc4 29. Be8+ Kd6 30. Rf6+ Kd5 31. Bf7+ Kxd4 32. Rf4+ Kc5 33. Rxc4+ Kb5 34. Re5+ Kb6 {+-}) 25... Rxg6 26. Bxg6 Bg4 (26... Be6 {does not improve anything} 27. Re1 Rf8 28. Rxf8 Kxf8 29. Rxe6 Nxc4 30. Be4 {+-}) 27. Re1+ Kd6 28. Rf6+ Kd7 29. h3 (29. h3 Nxc4 30. hxg4 {+-}) 1-0

D75 Fianchetto Grünfeld: Main Line with 7...c5 (1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 Bg7 4.Nf3 d5 5.cxd5 Nxd5 6.g3 O-O 7.Bg2 c5 8.O-O cxd4 9.Nxd4 Nxc3 10.bxc3 Qc7)

I almost published a game today that did feature an opening variation that had a different name to it than any that I had previously posted. The problem was that the variation had already been covered here, but under a different name. I only noticed that just before I was publishing that game. This was due to the fact that not all the sources name the same variation with the same name, which is very annoying and very confusing. When I was typing that other post, I did mention in it that I was convinced that I had already covered that variation, but because I could not find the name of the variation among my previous posts, I did not look further. However, before I published that game, I checked from the source material I used when I started doing this blog whether or not it called the variation by a different name and when it turned out that it did, I looked my posts with that name and I found a match. Luckily I had already analysed this game that actually featured a variation that I had not covered before, so that I was able to make the post before this day ended.

The game below was played in a team match called LC VC PRCC. It is played on 38 boards between Limitless Chess and Philippine Rizalian👴Chess Club. I am playing on board 15 for Limitless Chess. The current score looks a bit dire from our point of view, the score is at the moment I type this 9 - 25 in favor of Philippine Rizalian👴Chess Club. I made one small mistake in the game below when I played 11...Na6, it was better to play 11...Nc6. Before that the game was played evenly, after my 11th move my opponent could have had a slight advantage with correct play. 12.Rb1 or 12.Rd1 were moves that give White a small advantage. While the move that six_inchess played leads to a more even position, my inaccurate reply did give another chance for my opponent to be in a slightly favorable position. At first six_inchess was able to maintain the advantage, but then for some weird reason that I can't explain, my opponent played 15.Rd5, which loses the game immediately because I can take the queen with my knight. After I had taken the queen, my opponent resigned as there is no reason to continue the game.

Yesterday I finished reposting all my chess960 games, so all of them can now be viewed with the Chess.com's game viever or replayer or whatever you want to call it. I now only need to go through my chess games and after that the blog is fully ready for https. After that is done, I will likely make it so that viewers of the blog are redirected to the https version of the blog if they use the http version to view the blog. I think it might take the rest of the year to repost all my chess games that I have previously published with Chessbase 12's publish to web functionality, but I try to do that as fast as possible while maintaining my sanity... I have added one mate in two, two mate in three, one mate in four and one mate in five puzzle today.

[Event "LC VC PRCC - Board 15"] [Site "Chess.com"] [Date "2016.06.12"] [Round "?"] [White "six_inchess"] [Black "Vierjoki, Timo"] [Result "0-1"] [ECO "D75"] [WhiteElo "1771"] [BlackElo "1843"] [Annotator "Stockfish 7 64 POPCNT (30s), TV"] [PlyCount "30"] [EventDate "2016.??.??"] 1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. Nc3 Bg7 4. Nf3 d5 5. cxd5 Nxd5 6. g3 O-O 7. Bg2 c5 8. O-O {Neo-Gruenfeld Defense: Delayed Exchange Variation (#2)} cxd4 9. Nxd4 Nxc3 10. bxc3 Qc7 {D75 Fianchetto Grünfeld: Main Line with 7...c5} 11. Qb3 Na6 (11... Nc6 12. Nxc6 bxc6 13. Be3 Be6 {1/2-1/2 (13) Huebner,R (2595)-Karpov,A (2725) Bugojno 1978}) 12. Ba3 Re8 {N} (12... Rb8 13. Rac1 Nc5 14. Qb4 b6 15. Nc6 Rb7 16. Rfd1 e5 17. Qh4 Re8 18. Rd8 Rxd8 19. Nxd8 Rb8 20. Nc6 Rb7 21. Rd1 Bf8 22. Rd8 Kg7 23. Bc1 h5 24. Qg5 Ne6 25. Qh6+ Kg8 26. Rxf8+ Nxf8 27. Ba3 {Serafim Junior,A (1818)-Poeta,C (1967) Sao Paulo 2015 0-1 (51)}) (12... Bf6 13. Rab1 Rb8 14. h3 Bd7 15. e3 b5 16. Rfc1 Nc5 17. Qd5 Na4 18. Nxb5 Bxb5 19. Rxb5 Nxc3 20. Rxb8 Rxb8 21. Qd2 Rd8 22. Qc2 Qa5 23. Bxe7 Bxe7 24. Qxc3 Rd1+ 25. Bf1 Bb4 26. Qc8+ Rd8 27. Qa6 {Groebe,U (1845)-Reimche,V (2179) Illertissen 2005 1-0 (43)}) (12... Bf6 13. Rad1 {=}) 13. Rad1 Nc5 {Black threatens to win material: Nc5xb3} 14. Nb5 {White threatens to win material: Nb5xc7} Qb6 15. Rd5 {?? an unfortunate move that relinquishes the win} (15. Qc4 {is the best chance} Bd7 16. Nxa7 {=}) 15... Nxb3 {-+} (15... Nxb3 16. axb3 Be6 {-+}) 0-1

A01 Nimzowitsch-Larsen Opening (1.b3 e5 2.Bb2 Nc6 3.e3 Nf6 4.Bb5 d6 5.Nf3 Bd7)

It seems I am still finding new opening variations to cover in this blog from my games, but it obviously is quite rare these days. According to my current statistics, this is the opening variation number 509 that has been published in the blog. The game below was played on the first round of a tournament called EXPECT NO MERCY - NAZARETH TOUR!!! I played in group 7 on this first round and I was able to win my group by half a point difference to a player called csabiu (1673), whom I faced in my last game of round one. Because only the winner or winners of each group advance on to the next round, the last game from this round was very important as it determined which one of us was able to advance to the second round. The group consisted of five players, but because the fifth participant of the group closed his or her account before even finishing one game properly, it felt like there was only three actual opponents in the group. My opponent in the game below, marcverkinderen, finished fourth in the group with 3 points. Those 3 points came from 3 wins that marcverkinderen was able to get. I won 6, drew 1 and lost 1. These tournaments also keep track of the biggest upset in the tournament and it links to the game where that happened. It links to my only loss on round one... I lost a game against a player who was rated 1407 at the time and I was rated 1816. I basically made one horrible blunder in that game and decided to resign the game when I saw what my opponent played is response to that blunder.

I have to admit that the way the game below started seemed quite strange to me, but it seems that this opening is playable for both sides. The game was actually quite well played by both players until my opponent played 12.Nh2 that is. It would have been a better idea to play 12.d4, for example and try to generate some play in that way. After the move played in the game, 12.Nh2, marcverkinderen was not able to get back into the game, so this was the start for all the problems that my opponent faced. Because it seemed that my opponent was not interested in taking the initiave, I thought that I should take it and played 12...f5. Marcverkinderen replied with 13.d4, but now that move is a mistake, a move earlier it would have been still a good move to play. Unfortunately for me and luckily for my opponent, I did not take full advantage of that bad move, but instead played the inaccurate 13...exd4. I probably thought that if I take on e4, then my opponent takes on e5 twice and the material would be even. I did not see that after 13...fxe4 14.dxe5 I could play d5 and not take that pawn at all. In that case the material would also be even, but the pawn on e5 might get weak and I would have some interesting pawns on the center, while also being able to get my dark-squared bishop to c5 in order to generate more pressure towards f2. That continuation would have made my light-squared bishop look like a big pawn on c6, but it could get a better square later on. I probably played 13...exd4 due to a greedier option, had my opponent replied with 14.Bxd4, then I would have won a pawn on e4, with 14...fxe4. Obviously marcverkinderen did not go for that line, but instead played the correct capture 14.exf5. I did remain on the slightly better side of things in the game continuation. My opponent went further towards a loss with the normal looking 15.Bxd4. The problem pieces for marcverkinderen were the knights on h2 and d2. Had my opponent played 15.Ndf3, then one of his knights would been better placed and the knight would have also stopped blocking the queen on the d-file. Marcverkinderen could have maybe taken on d4 on the following turn, unless I would have found the line that you see in the notation, where I would have first taken on f3 and followed it up by playing c5 in order to protect the pawn on d4. The game losing move came when my opponent played 19.Ng4, after that the game ended quite quickly in my favor. I have added two mate in two, two mate in three and one mate in four puzzle today. Until Monday, my fellow chess and chess960 enthusiasts!

[Event "EXPECT NO MERCY - NAZARETH TOUR!!! - Ro"] [Site "Chess.com"] [Date "2016.03.23"] [Round "?"] [White "marcverkinderen"] [Black "Vierjoki, Timo"] [Result "0-1"] [ECO "A01"] [WhiteElo "1514"] [BlackElo "1808"] [Annotator "Tactical Analysis 2.10 (30s), TV"] [PlyCount "42"] [EventDate "2016.??.??"] 1. b3 e5 {A01 Nimzo-Larsen Attack: Modern Variation} 2. Bb2 Nc6 3. e3 Nf6 4. Bb5 d6 5. Nf3 Bd7 {0.37/24 A01 Nimzowitsch-Larsen Opening} (5... Be7 $11 { -0.24/26}) 6. O-O Be7 {0.74/25} (6... e4 $11 {0.07/26} 7. Nd4 d5) 7. d3 { -0.13/26} (7. d4 $16 {0.74/25}) (7. Be2 O-O 8. c4 Re8 9. Nc3 Bf8 10. d3 h6 11. a3 a5 12. Nd2 Ne7 13. Nde4 Ng6 14. Nxf6+ Qxf6 15. Bg4 Bxg4 16. Qxg4 c6 17. Rac1 Rad8 18. Rfd1 Re6 19. h3 Qe7 20. g3 Qd7 21. e4 Be7 {Larsen,B (2660)-Andersson, U (2535) Teeside 1972 1-0 (45)}) 7... a6 $146 (7... O-O 8. Nbd2 a6 9. Bxc6 Bxc6 10. e4 b5 (10... Re8 11. Re1 Bf8 12. Nf1 g6 13. Ng3 Bg7 14. d4 exd4 15. Qxd4 Nh5 16. e5 Nxg3 17. hxg3 Bxf3 18. gxf3 Rxe5 19. Kg2 Qf8 20. f4 Rxe1 21. Qxg7+ Qxg7 22. Bxg7 Rxa1 23. Bxa1 f5 24. Bd4 a5 25. Kf3 {Guedes Lopez,M (1614) -Sanchez Quintero,R (2137) Arucas 2012 0-1 (34)}) 11. Re1 Bb7 12. Nf1 c5 13. Ng3 Bc8 14. h3 Ne8 15. Qd2 f5 16. exf5 Bxf5 17. Nxf5 Rxf5 18. Qe3 Nc7 19. a4 b4 20. Rad1 Qf8 21. Bc1 Nd5 22. Qe4 {Coronado Iruela,M (2054)-Mato Bonany,J (1840) Palafrugel 2017 1/2-1/2}) 8. Bxc6 $1 {White has an edge.} Bxc6 9. e4 {-0.18/25} (9. c4 $14 {0.41/25}) 9... O-O 10. h3 {-0.52/21} (10. Re1 $11 {0.20/28}) 10... h6 {0.00/28} (10... Nd7 $15 {-0.52/21}) 11. Nbd2 Nh7 {0.47/28} (11... a5 $15 { -0.38/27}) 12. Nh2 $2 {-1.17/23 [#]} (12. d4 $1 $14 {0.47/28}) 12... f5 { -0.56/27} ({Better is} 12... Ng5 $17 {-1.17/23}) 13. d4 {-1.62/21} (13. exf5 $1 $15 {-0.56/27} Rxf5 14. Ng4) 13... exd4 {-0.29/28} (13... fxe4 $19 {-1.62/21 next ...exd4 is good for Black.} 14. dxe5 d5) 14. exf5 $1 $11 Rxf5 15. Bxd4 { -1.46/24} (15. Ndf3 $1 $11 {-0.18/26}) 15... Qd7 16. Qg4 {-2.39/25} (16. Qe2 $17 {-1.14/26}) 16... Bf6 $19 17. Bxf6 Nxf6 18. Qc4+ Kh8 19. Ng4 Nxg4 20. hxg4 Rg5 21. f3 Bb5 {Accuracy: White = 17%, Black = 35%.} 0-1 [Event "ICC 5 0"] [Site "Internet Chess Club"] [Date "2014.04.22"] [Round "?"] [White "ThePawnbroker"] [Black "Vierjoki, Timo"] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "A01"] [WhiteElo "1535"] [BlackElo "1458"] [Annotator "Tactical Analysis 2.10 (30s), TV"] [PlyCount "123"] [EventDate "2014.??.??"] {[%evp 9,123,-13,55,-26,17,-5,53,8,37,-113,70,37,58,42,93,36,67,38,80,45,115, 92,164,78,198,179,185,160,336,345,339,327,462,448,452,451,453,440,456,456,537, 530,570,570,622,602,633,612,638,576,634,617,604,585,739,749,708,709,1022,795, 1033,776,29979,29966,1317,1357,1270,1189,1117,1059,1745,1044,29982,29983,29988, 29987,29989,29988,29990,29990,29990,29991,29992,29988,29989,29985,29987,29987, 29988,29989,29989,29989,29989,29990,29990,29991,29991,29992,29992,29990,29990, 29990,29990,29991,29995,29993,29996,29994,29997,29995,29998,29997,29997,29997, 29997,29997]} 1. b3 e5 {A01 Nimzo-Larsen Attack: Modern Variation} 2. Bb2 Nc6 3. e3 d6 4. Bb5 Bd7 5. Nf3 Nf6 {0.55/25 A01 Nimzowitsch-Larsen Opening. LiveBook: 5 Games} (5... f5 $11 {-0.13/29}) 6. c4 {-0.26/26} (6. O-O $14 { 0.55/25} Be7 7. c4 O-O 8. Bxc6 Bxc6 9. d4 exd4 10. Nxd4 Nd7 11. Nxc6 bxc6 12. Nd2 Bf6 13. Bxf6 Qxf6 14. Nf3 c5 15. Qd5 Qe7 16. Rfe1 Nf6 17. Qd3 Ne4 18. Nd2 Nxd2 19. Qxd2 a5 20. Rab1 Rfb8 21. e4 {Karlsson,L (2465)-Matulovic,M (2490) Helsinki 1981 1/2-1/2 (43)}) 6... Be7 {0.17/25} (6... e4 $142 {-0.26/26} 7. Nd4 Ne5 8. Bxd7+ (8. O-O c6 9. Ba4 a6 10. b4 Nxc4 11. Bc3 d5 12. d3 exd3 13. Qxd3 Bd6 14. f3 Qc7 15. g3 Bh3 16. Nf5 Bxf1 17. Kxf1 O-O-O 18. Nxg7 Be5 19. Qf5+ Kb8 20. Kf2 Bxc3 21. Nxc3 Qe5 22. Qxe5+ Nxe5 {Farhat,M-Khalil,A Beirut 2014 0-1 (42)}) 8... Qxd7) 7. Nc3 Nb4 $146 {0.53/25} (7... e4 $11 {-0.05/27} 8. Bxc6 bxc6 (8... Bxc6 9. Nd4 O-O 10. Qc2 Qd7 11. Nxc6 Qxc6 12. O-O Rfe8 13. Rac1 Bf8 14. Ne2 Nd7 15. f4 Nc5 16. Ba1 f5 17. Ng3 Qd7 18. Nh5 Re6 19. Kh1 Rh6 20. Qd1 Qe7 21. g3 Nd7 22. Qe2 g6 23. g4 {Abdul Rahman,A-Hon Kah Seng,C Buenos Aires 1978 0-1 (36)})) 8. Bxd7+ $14 {White is slightly better.} Qxd7 9. d4 {-1.13/26} (9. d3 $14 {0.37/29 keeps the upper hand.}) 9... exd4 $2 {0.70/24 [#]} (9... e4 $17 {-1.13/26 ...Nd3+ is the strong threat.} 10. O-O exf3 11. Qxf3 d5) 10. Nxd4 (10. exd4 {is interesting.} O-O 11. O-O Rae8 12. a3 Na6 13. b4) 10... O-O 11. O-O Nc6 {0.93/22} (11... Rfe8 $14 {0.42/28}) 12. e4 {0.36/26} ({White should play} 12. Nc2 $16 {0.93/22}) 12... Nxd4 13. Qxd4 Rfe8 14. Rad1 {Black must now prevent e5.} Qc6 {1.15/23} ({Better is} 14... Qg4 $14 {0.45/26}) 15. Nd5 $16 Bd8 16. f3 {0.78/28} (16. Rfe1 $18 {1.64/23 is more deadly.}) 16... Qc5 { 1.98/26} (16... a5 $16 {0.78/28}) 17. Qxc5 $18 dxc5 {[%tqu "En","","","", "b2f6","",10]} 18. Bxf6 $1 Bxf6 $2 {3.36/27 [#]} (18... gxf6 $16 {1.60/30} 19. Ne3 Be7) 19. Nxc7 Bd4+ 20. Kh1 a6 {4.62/29} (20... a5 $142 {3.27/29} 21. g3 f6 22. Nxa8 Rxa8) 21. Nxa8 Rxa8 {[%mdl 4096] Endgame KRR-KRB} 22. b4 b6 23. bxc5 bxc5 24. Rb1 g6 25. Rb6 Ra7 26. Rfb1 Kg7 27. Rb7 Ra8 28. a4 a5 29. Rd7 Bc3 30. Rbb7 Rf8 31. Rb5 Bb4 32. e5 Kg8 33. f4 Re8 34. g3 h5 35. Kg2 Kf8 36. Kf3 Re7 37. Rxe7 Kxe7 {KR-KB} 38. h3 Ke6 39. Ke4 Ke7 40. Rb6 Kd7 41. f5 {White mates.} g5 42. Rf6 Ke7 43. Kd5 h4 44. gxh4 gxh4 45. Rh6 Be1 46. Kxc5 Bf2+ 47. Kb5 Be1 48. Ra6 f6 49. e6 Bc3 50. Rxa5 Bxa5 51. Kxa5 {KP-KP} Kd6 52. Kb5 Ke5 53. c5 { [%mdl 32]} Kxf5 54. c6 Kxe6 {K3P-KPP} 55. c7 Kd7 56. Kb6 Kc8 57. a5 f5 58. a6 f4 59. a7 f3 60. a8=Q+ Kd7 61. Qxf3 Ke6 62. Qe4+ {Accuracy: White = 69%, Black = 18%.} 1-0