Since I don't blog all of my games any more (this tournament aside) I'm going to let the reader in on a secret: my fabled six-year unbeaten stint as black in the Najdorf is over. In fact, after losing in the 4NCL just before the first lockdown, I then suffered another defeat in the final of the U-2050 County Championship this summer. All good things come to an end, and in some ways it is a weight off the shoulders - maybe I wouldn't have produced this game in different circumstances.
For round two, I had the black pieces against Sebastian Skalski, a student at Bristol University who I got to know over the course of my time in Torquay. Initially, all I could find in the database were a handful of irrelevant old games from the Online 4NCL. But a thought occurred to me: those games were played on Lichess, so he must have an account there. I found the Bristol University group, but none of the members appeared to be him. Finally though I plugged those Online 4NCL games into Lichess's database of games played on the server, which at last did the trick. This was something I would resort to repeatedly in the subsequent rounds, particular against younger opponents - I'd never considered online blitz games useful material, but to my surprise people happily play their OTB openings there. Dangerous...
Anyway, my sleuthing equalised what would have been a very uneven theoretical battlefield, since I discovered that one of the most theoretical Najdorf variations was coming up. I also realised that he has a higher blitz rating than a true 1615-rated OTB has any right to, and indeed it was a very hard-fought struggle. In the end I managed to produce the right result, but as Korchnoi said, when there is a genuine fight mistakes are inevitable...
[Event "Major Open"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2022.08.14"]
[Round "2.28"]
[White "Skalski, Sebastian"]
[Black "Young, Daniel J"]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "B90"]
[WhiteElo "1615"]
[BlackElo "2020"]
[Annotator "Young,Daniel J"]
[PlyCount "102"]
[EventDate "2022.??.??"]
{Having spent the week in my opponent's company (we have a mutual friend via
my Bristol University days) I can confidently state he is several hundred
points under-rated - to prepare at all I had to track down his Lichess account
and found he has a rating there of around 2100, i.e. similar to me. That
research also told me that this was going to be an intense theoretical duel,
and so it proved.} 1. e4 {(1:30)} c5 {(1:30)} 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6
5. Nc3 a6 6. Be3 e5 7. Nb3 Be6 8. f3 Be7 {Leading to one of the most deeply
investigated lines of the Najdorf.} 9. Qd2 O-O 10. O-O-O {(1:33)} Nbd7 {(1:33)}
11. g4 b5 12. g5 b4 13. Ne2 (13. gxf6 {is the main alternative; my view is
that Black is fine here but some sources (e.g. Shaw's 1. e4 series; Vigorito's
Najdorf book) are not so sure.}) 13... Ne8 14. f4 a5 15. f5 {(1:34)} a4 {(1:34)
} 16. Nbd4 exd4 17. Nxd4 b3 18. Kb1 bxc2+ 19. Nxc2 Bb3 20. axb3 {(1:34)} axb3 {
(1:35)} 21. Na3 Ne5 {This much is all well-known theory - both sides had
blitzed their way up to here, but now White went into thought for half an hour,
much to my relief. This variation has been worked out to drawn endings
everywhere, but with little scope for Black to try and win.} 22. Be2 $2 (22. h4
{is the usual move}) 22... Ra4 {I had never seen 22. Be2 before, but I quickly
realised the drawback: as g5 needs to be defended twice, White is unable to
use his queen to defend e4. Here again he thought for half an hour before
playing what I considered the only critical move,} 23. Rhg1 {,
counter-attacking with the threat of 24. f6.} Qa8 {Here I returned the favour
on the clock and burned 35 minutes, mostly deciding what to do after White's
next move, which I (wrongly) judged to be forced.} (23... Rxe4 $143 $2 {
was my other candidate when considering this on move 22, sacrificing a piece
for three pawns:} 24. f6 Nxf6 25. gxf6 Bxf6 {I fondly imagined that, with any
danger to my king eliminated and White's still very exposed, I would have good
play here, but the machine is unconvinced and offers} 26. Rg3 $16 {, freeing
the white queen to move. Thankfully I rejected this line as I couldn't see any
clear way to continue.}) 24. Qd5 (24. f6 $142 $5 {I thought that this lost
straightforwardly to} Qxe4+ 25. Bd3 Nxd3 {, but missed that White can play} 26.
Qxd3 {, or rather that this comes with an attack on b3. Black does still get a
pull, but only by finding} (26. fxe7 $4 Nb4+ 27. Ka1 Nc2+ $19 {mating was all
I considered}) 26... Bd8 (26... Qxd3+ $6 27. Rxd3 {gains a tempo on the b-pawn,
which is a mere weakness following the simplification.} Bd8 28. Rxb3 $14) 27.
Qxe4 Rxe4 28. Rg3 gxf6 29. gxf6+ Kh8 30. Bh6 Rg8 31. Bg7+ Nxg7 32. fxg7+ Rxg7
33. Rxb3 $15 {Black has nominal winning chances with an extra pawn, but his
forces are scattered.}) 24... Rxa3 $5 {Playing for the attack! This ...Qa8/...
Rxa3 mechanism was known to me from my earlier game S. Jones-Young, Surrey
League KO 2018, which I won in a miniature, but I would have been happier to
follow the less committal course if I felt it offered serious winning chances.}
(24... Qxd5 25. exd5 Re4 {White's position looked perilous but I couldn't see
how to crack} (25... f6 $144 {Stockfish enthusiastically recommends this
instead, but I don't think Black has anything after} 26. gxf6 Nxf6 27. Bd4 Rd8
28. Rg3 Rb4 29. Bxe5 dxe5 30. Bc4 $11) 26. Rg3 $11 {, with the point that} Bxg5
27. Bxg5 Rxe2 {doesn't win a pawn thanks to} 28. Be7 {(the engine agrees with
my analysis up to here but points out that Black does at least get a draw after
} Nd3 29. Bxf8 Rxb2+ 30. Ka1 Ra2+ 31. Kb1 Rb2+ 32. Ka1 $11 {)}) 25. bxa3 {(18)}
Qxa3 $44 {(49) Black has a dangerous attack that fully compensates for the
sacrificed material, but the pileup on his back two ranks complicates matters.
Still, I felt that with time trouble approaching it would be difficult for
White to find a defence, even if one existed.} 26. Rd2 b2 27. Qd4 $2 {Gifting
Black a precious tempo.} (27. Bd4 $142 {From memory, I was intending} Qa1+ (
27... Bxg5 {is another possibility, which I didn't notice. Obviously the
bishop can't be taken because of ...Qa1+, however} 28. Bxb2 Qe3 29. Rgd1 Nf6
30. Qd4 Nxe4 31. Rc2 $11 {produces an imbalanced position which the computer
evaluates with the dreaded sea of 0.00 (or rather, it declines to evaluate!)
Black has two pawns for the exchange and the safer king, but his d-pawn and
his minor pieces are not so secure.}) 28. Kc2 {and now could have improved with
} b1=Q+ (28... Nc7 $6 {I think this was my idea, but} 29. Qb7 {forces} b1=Q+ {
anyway; then} 30. Qxb1 Qa4+ 31. Qb3 Qc6+ 32. Kd1 Qxe4 33. f6 {- an important
difference, as by taking on b1 with the queen White retained control of the
g-file -} Bd8 34. Bd3 $14 {leaves Black still to solve the problem of
developing his pieces.}) 29. Rxb1 Qa4+ {Black has opened all the lines, but
there is only one piece in the attacking force and therefore it's not
surprising that he can do no better than a repetition of moves, for example
after} 30. Qb3 Qc6+ 31. Qc3 Qxe4+ 32. Bd3 Nxd3 33. Qxd3 Qc6+ 34. Qc3 Qe4+ 35.
Qd3 Qc6+ $11) 27... Nc6 $1 {Forcing White to decentralise his queen to
maintain defence of the e3 bishop.} 28. Qb6 $8 Qa1+ $6 (28... Bd8 $142 $1 {
This leads to a favourable exchange of pieces:} 29. Qxc6 Qxe3 30. Rgd1 Bxg5 31.
Rxb2 Bf6 $17 {Black has taken over the dark squares, and indeed the opposite
bishops are a help to the attacker here - Black's prelate has come to life,
and following ...Be5 and ...Nf6 the other pieces start to join in too.}) 29.
Kc2 Qa4+ 30. Kxb2 {(10)} (30. Kb1 $143 $4 {After the game, Sebastian suggested
he might have tried going back rather than exposing his king, however this
would have been instantly disastrous after} Nc7 $1 {(shades of the famous game
Karjakin-Anand, Wijk aan Zee 2006)} 31. Qxc7 Qa1+ 32. Kc2 Nb4+ $19 {and the
b-pawn promotes.}) 30... d5 $2 {(10) Very thematically opening the path for my
bishop, but apparently all bluff! Neither of thought he could take the pawn,
yet even so Black should have preferred 30... Nc7!.} 31. Ra1 $2 (31. exd5 $142
Ba3+ 32. Kb1 $18 {It's hard to accept, but there is no haymaker for Black, and
Bd1 is about to drive his queen off - the obstructing e8 knight really hurts
here.}) 31... Qxe4 32. Bd3 $4 {Overlooking my reply, although having let me
get away with ...d5 White was sliding into trouble.} Qe5+ 33. Kb1 Nd6 $1 {
Belatedly finding the right idea.} 34. Qxc6 Rb8+ $4 {This should have thrown
away the win! There was no need to be clever here; after the simple 34... Qxe3
all of Black's threats would have remained. I'd seen White's response, but the
problem is a few moves down the line.} 35. Bb6 {(2)} Qe1+ {(6)} 36. Qc1 Rxb6+
37. Ka2 $4 {A last mistake in mutual time trouble, after which things finally
settle down.} (37. Rb2 $142 {leaves Black with no choice but to seek a
perpetual check.} Rxb2+ 38. Kxb2 Qb4+ 39. Kc2 Qc5+ 40. Kd1 Qg1+ 41. Kc2 Qc5+
42. Kb1 Qb4+ $11) 37... Qxc1 38. Rxc1 Bxg5 39. Rcc2 Bxd2 40. Rxd2 {(0)} f6 $19
{(4) Black has two pawns for no compensation, and the white king is cut off.
Even so, I have failed to win better positions than this. But I'm pleased with
how I brought the point home; remembering my game against Bertie Barlow last
season, I strove to use my advantages proactively and kept my foot down this
time.} 41. Bc2 Nc4 $1 {Driving White's rook off the d-file, as he must keep
his bishop defended from ...Rb2+.} 42. Re2 Rb2+ 43. Ka1 Kf7 44. h4 h5 45. Rg2 {
(25)} Rb7 {(12)} (45... Ne3 $144 {was a chance to force a pawn ending that I
wasn't confident enough to take -} 46. Rxg7+ Kxg7 47. Kxb2 Nxc2 48. Kxc2 {
- but although he can reach the d-pawn White will always have to give ground.}
Kf7 49. Kd3 Ke7 50. Ke3 Kd6 51. Kd4 Kc6 52. Kd3 Kc5 53. Kc3 d4+ $19) 46. Ka2 {
Making it easy by letting me force exchanges - now the stranded White king
becomes even more telling.} Ne3 47. Re2 Nxc2 48. Rxc2 Ke7 49. Ka3 Kd6 50. Re2 {
(22)} d4 {(11)} 51. Rd2 Kd5 {It was a relief to get back on the scoreboard
after five losses in my previous six games - but I had to work so hard to beat
someone I outrated by 400 points! It was an exciting game, but not one that
did my nerves any good, and spoiled again by some major analytical errors.} 0-1
In my opinion, this was one of the most instructive games I played at the Major Open. As well as the pre-game skirmish mentioned above, I responded well to a new move, 22. Be2?, by logical comparison with the mainline. The idea of the ...Qa8/...Rxa3 construction only occurred to me because I remembered analysing one of my games*, and the climax beginning with 33... Nd6! has something in common with the famous Karjakin-Anand game in this line. On the other hand, parroting the classics is not sufficient: there is hardly a more thematic Sicilian move than 30... d5?, and yet in this case it doesn't actually work, because Black doesn't have enough pieces in the attack. And I was uncharacteristically assertive in bringing home the endgame, even if it was easily winning with a material advantage of two pawns and a king.
Most of all though, what this game reminded me was that chess is a two-player game. That is, continuing the theme of the first round, it is not necessary to play perfect chess to win games. Especially in a complicated battle like this, remember that you just have to play better than your opponent! In fact White defended rather well after coming off worse from the opening battle, except for losing precious tempi with 27. Bd4? and 32. Bd3??, but after passing through so many dangers he eventually stumbled on easy ground within sight of the goal thanks to the tactical oversight 37. Ka2??. This was a far cry from my miserable loss to Peter Large a few months earlier, and whilst my own play was far from perfect (with hindsight, 34... Rb8+?? is particularly excruciating) the respective outcome of the two games is perhaps a hint that I should embrace the chaos a little more.
In the third round, I got a pairing I have become very used to at the Major Open, but as in the past it wasn't one that I gained much joy from.
* Yes, I have even updated the old Flash viewer on this 2018 post!
No comments:
Post a Comment