Human Interaction In Correspondence Chess - III

Stephan, Ulrich (2579) - Neto, Horacio (2566)

Result: 1-0

Site: ICCF

Date: 2007.12

W. STEFAN (Germany) - J. NETO (Portugal)
FINAL 23rd WORLD , 2007-2010
Benoni defense A67

Commented by the world champion Stefan Ulrich

ICCF Grandmaster, Professor of Computer Science Horacio Neto, from Lisbon, using multiple computers for analysis in this tournament, as he himself admitted at the end of the party. [...] 1.d4 ¤f6 2.c4 e6 3.¤c3 c5 4.d5 exd5 5.cxd5 d6 6.e4 g6 7.f4 ¥g7 8.¥b5 ¤fd7 9.a4 O-O 10.¤f3 ¤a6 11.O-O ¤b4 (Alternative is 11...¤c7) 12.¦e1 ¦e8?!

(12...a6 13.¥f1

(If 13.¥c4 then 13...¤b6 followed by 11...Bg4)

13...¦e8)

13.h3 a6 14.¥c4! By preventing 14 ... f5 because of 15.e5. In the case of possible 14.Bf1 was 14 .. . f5!?
14...¦b8 15.¥e3 b5 16.axb5 axb5 17.¥f1 Taking on b5 is unprofitable

(Neither by Bishop 17.¥xb5 ¥xc3 18.bxc3 ¦xb5 19.cxb4 ¦xb4 20.e5 dxe5 21.¥d2 e4 22.¥xb4 cxb4 23.¤e5 ¤xe5 24.fxe5 ¥b7 (24...¦xe5? 25.¦a8ќ) 25.¦xe4 ¥xd5 26.¦xb4 (26.¦d4 £b6) 26...¦xe5)

(Nor by Knight. 17.¤xb5? ¤b6 18.¥d3 c4³) 17...c4 18.¥a7! A very strong interim move. 18.Bf2 was played in the party Tsebalo-Gaudens, Caorle, 1984.

(If 18.£d2 Then 18...¤c5 19.¥xc5 dxc5 20.e5 ¥f5)

18...£c7 (18...¦b7 19.¥f2 ¤c5 20.¥xc5 dxc5 21.¦a8!) 19.£d2 Black rook is immune, after 19.Bxb8 Qxb8 irreparable way weaken the black field, black threatens to play Nc5 followed Nbd3.
19...¦b7 (19...¤c5 20.e5 dxe5 21.d6!) 20.¥f2 ¤c5 21.e5 ¦f8? Black protected from the threat of 22.exd6 but not the best way.
(21...dxe5? 22.d6)

(21...¥d7 22.¤e4 ¤xe4 23.¦xe4 ¤d3 24.¥xd3 cxd3 25.£xd3? ¥f5!)

22.¤d4 £d7 23.¤cxb5!! White seemed to pick up a secure pawn, breaking the fragile structure of black.
23...¤bd3

(Alternatively, proving the correctness of white: 23...¦xb5 24.e6 £b7 25.exf7 ¦xf7 26.¥xc4 ¦b6 27.¤c6! ¤xc6 28.dxc6 £xc6 29.¥d5! ¦xb2 30.£d1 £d7 31.¦a8 And black has back rank weakness, for example
31...¦xf2 32.¢xf2 ¥f8 33.£d4 Zugzwang £f5 34.¥xf7 ¢xf7 35.¢g1! h5 36.£h8±)

24.e6 fxe6 25.dxe6 £e7

(25...¤xe6 26.¤xe6 £xb5 27.¤xf8 ¤xe1 28.¦xe1 ¥xf8 29.b3 d5 (29...£xb3 30.¦e8ќ) 30.bxc4 dxc4 31.£d8ќ)

26.¤c6 £e8 27.e7 £xc6 (27...¦f6 28.¦a8ќ) (27...¤xe1 28.exf8=£ ¥xf8 29.¥xc4 ¥e6 30.¦xe1 £xc6 31.¤d4ќ) (27...¦xb5 28.exf8=£ £xf8 29.¤e7 ¢f7 30.¦a8ќ) 28.exf8=¦ ¢xf8 29.¤a7 £c7 30.¤xc8 £xc8 31.¦a2 ¦xb2 32.¦xb2 ¥xb2 33.¥xd3 ¤xd3 34.¦b1 ¥f6

(34...£a6 35.f5 with an irresistible attack)

(34...c3 35.£xd3 c2 36.£xd6 ¢g7 37.¥d4! ¢h6 38.¦xb2!! c1=£ 39.¢h2 threatening 40.Qa6 matt attack 39...£1c7 40.£d5 £xf4 41.g3 £fc7 42.£e4ќ White wins)

35.¢h2!! Chess program unanimously recommended 35.Qe3? Nxf2! 36.Qa7 , Promising white decisive advantage.

(However After 35.£e3? ¤xf2! 36.£a7

(36.£xf2 c3 37.£b6 c2 38.¦c1 £c3 39.£xd6 ¥e7 40.£e5 £d2 41.£b8 ¥d8 42.¦xc2 £xc2 43.£xd8 And black quietly draws.)

(36.¢xf2 c3 37.£e4 d5 38.£b4 ¢f7 39.£b7 £xb7 40.¦xb7 ¢g8 Similar pawn structure arose in the party Botvinnik - Zyuydema, Amsterdam, 1966. Botvinnik won the post-g4-g5 and breakthrough f5, creating a matte threat on black king. However in this position after
41.g4 Black holds the position by 41...g5!! and prevents a threat to break.)

36...¤xh3 37.¢h2 (37.gxh3 £c5 38.£xc5 dxc5) 37...¤xf4 38.¦b8 £xb8 39.£xb8 Black keeping defenses by building a fortress with the help of an elephant, a horse and kingside pawns. Construction, to which they aspire, as follows: horse on e5, an elephant on g7 or h8, g8 or king on h7. Black pawn h inhibits white pawn g. Misunderstanding of the fortress - a weak point of all modern chess programs.)

35...£f5

(35...¤xf2? 36.£xf2 c3 37.£b6 c2 38.¦c1 £c3 39.£f2! ¥d4 40.£xc2ќ)

(35...d5? because of 36.£a5)

36.¥g3 c3 37.£a2 At this point I have not found a winning plan, it was right to 37.Rb8 +!
37...£c8

(37...¤xf4? 38.¦b8 ¢g7 39.£g8 ¢h6 40.£f8 ¢h5 41.£xd6 ¤e2 42.¦b7 g5 43.¦f7 ¢g6 44.¦xf6 £xf6 45.£d3 £f5 46.£xe2ќ)

38.£c2 £f5? Misguided desire to save time to think through the repetition of moves.
(38...£c4! 39.¦b7 h5 40.f5 £d5 41.¦c7 h4=) 39.¦b8! ¢g7 40.£a2 ¢h6 41.£g8 £d7 Now I was sure that'll go in the tournament of its main competitor - Winckelmann.
42.£c4 ¤c5 (42...£a7 43.¦b3! £c5 44.£f7 c2 45.¦b7ќ) 43.¦b4 £e6 44.f5! gxf5 45.£xe6 ¤xe6 46.¥xd6 White remains a pawn to eliminate c3, to get a technically won endgame.
46...¤g5 47.¦c4 ¢g7 48.¢g1 ¢f7 49.¦c6 h5 50.¢f1 h4 51.¢e2 ¤e6

(51...¤e4 52.¥f4 ¢g7 53.¢d3 ¢f7 54.¥e3 ¢e7 55.¥d4! leads to loss of a pawn or exchange of the C3 elephants. In both cases, the black is not to hope for.)

52.¢e3 ¥g5 53.¢d3 ¥f6 54.¦c4 ¢g6 55.¥b4 ¥e5 56.¦c6 ¢f7 57.¥xc3 ¥f4 (57...¤f4 58.¢d2 ¥xc3 59.¦xc3 ¤xg2 60.¦f3 ¢g6 61.¦f2ќ) 58.¢e2 ¥g5 59.¦a6 ¤f4 60.¢f3 ¤e6 61.¦a4 ¢g6 62.¥d4 ¢h5

(62...¤xd4? 63.¦xd4 followed by g2-g3 brings the game to a 6-figure ending, in which white mates in 40-50 moves according to the Nalimov tables.)

63.¥e3 Black resigned in view of the option 63 ... Be7 64.Ra6 Ng5 + 65.Kf4. 1-0

Powered by Aquarium

My First AICCF Tournament Games

IDeA On Rescue!!

Khan, Shams - Mohanty, Om Prakash

Result: 0-1

Site: AICCF

Date: 2011.11.29

This was my first game in All India Correspondence Chess Federation against a Player who is so called a "Natural Player" Shams Khan who is playing Chess for past 63 years. He is a advert player of kings gambit. As myself a player of Kings Gambit I was not Amazed when I faced my favorite opening again and that from Shams Khan. [...] 1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.¥c4 £h4? As far as I have seen this is a bad move. As white if black had played this move. But I was in a mood of testing computer analysis to its best. As many engines suggest Qh4 I played it.
4.¢f1 d6 5.d4 ¤f6 6.¤f3 £h6 In Kings Gambit If black can hold the f4 pawn he will win , which eventually never happens. Still all try to do that including me!
7.¤c3 ¥e6 8.£d3 ¤bd7 9.¤e2 ¤h5 10.¥xe6 fxe6 11.h4! Here I was in dillemma. Qg6 or Qf6 ? White has equalized easily. But Engines at high depths stick to Qg6 which I had a bad feeling. So I planned to take help of IDeA, A feature in Aquarium GUI which Convekta boasts to be best tool in correspondence chess. After 3 days long analysis on my hexa core with 6 houdinis finally My intuition came out to be better than Engine in IA. Theory says try to save f4 pawn as long as u can. So Qf6.
11...£f6 12.£b5 c5 13.£xb7? First Chance missed to equalize the position completely. At this point It is not easy to pin point the difference between first dxc5 and Qxb7 or first Qxb7 and then dxc5 (which is not possible). But With IDeA you can store all your analysis and minimax to find the best. Although its a very waste of cpu time but its worth trying in crucial matches.
(13.dxc5! dxc5 14.£xb7 ¦b8 15.£xa7 ¥d6 16.¦h3!?) 13...¦b8 14.£xa7 cxd4! 15.¤fxd4? (15.£xd4!) 15...d5 16.e5! Tactics at its best. 16...£f7! 17.£a6? (17.¢e1!?) 17...¤g3 18.¢e1 ¤xh1 19.¤xe6 ¥e7! IDeA's best suggestion. 20.¤c7 ¢f8 21.e6 £f5 22.exd7 f3! 23.gxf3 ¥xh4 24.¢d2 £xd7 25.¤d4 ¢f7 26.£c6 £xc6 27.¤xc6 ¦bc8 28.¤e5 ¢e7 29.¤b5 ¥g5 30.¢d1 ¤f2 31.¢e1 ¥h4! 32.¢f1 ¥f6 33.c3 ¥xe5 34.¢xf2 ¦a8 35.b4 ¢d7 36.a4 ¦hb8 37.f4 ¥f6 38.¥b2 ¦e8 39.¢f3 ¦e4 40.¦a2 g5! After this The concluded in style. 41.¥c1 h5 42.a5 g4 43.¢g3 ¦g8 44.¢g2 h4 45.¦c2 h3 46.¢g3 ¦e1 47.¦d2 ¦e3 48.¢f2 g3!! 49.¢xe3 g2 50.¦xd5 ¢e7 51.¦d1 h2 52.¢d3 h1=£ 53.¢c2 g1=£ 54.¦xg1 ¦xg1 55.¥d2 £e4 56.¢b3 ¦b1 57.¢a3 £c2 Mate in next move. A game with which I am happy to get away with the win from a equal position. Mr Shams Khan without computers did a great job in not missing any tactics which is admirable for a 63 old chess player. when all my analysis method failed it was IDeA which came to rescue to find the best move and I feel it really fulfils its Idea of Creation!!. Its worth a try.

Powered by Aquarium