Playing to the gallery

Onto the final round of the Guildford Open then, and the all too predictable pairing against my 2275-rated friend Peter Lalic. Our last standardplay game had been less than successful for me, but with the white pieces I was at least able to make it out of the opening in this one. Unfortunately, with little time to prepare I couldn't make the most of his stubbornly predictable opening choice.

In Secrets of Practical Chess, Nunn argued that the cumulative effort to hold together a patchwork of dodgy lines is more than it would take to learn some proper openings in the first place, and with less of an end result. I've always considered this a compelling argument, but Peter apparently does not. He has gone through several phases in opening selection the last couple of years, but if something unites them then it is creativity at the expense of objectivity - from 1. h3, to Nc3/...Nc6 against everything, to some very questionable gambits, to seeking immediate queen trades everywhere. Perhaps it is simply an attention-seeking style, and at the time of this game that was showing in the middlegame too with some very contrived 'brilliancies'. This game is a prime example: after misplacing my pieces I allowed a strong attack against my king, but rather than take a fairly simple win he decided to sacrifice a piece...

[Event "Guildford Open"] [Site "?"] [Date "2023.04.02"] [Round "5.9"] [White "Young, Daniel J"] [Black "Lalic, Peter D"] [Result "0-1"] [ECO "B01"] [WhiteElo "2011"] [BlackElo "2275"] [Annotator "Young,Daniel J"] [PlyCount "52"] [EventDate "2023.??.??"] [SourceVersionDate "2023.04.07"] {As I've said many times before, I do not enjoy playing people I know well, so I'd hoped to avoid this final-round pairing. Peter continues to go his own way in the openings but was going through a rough patch of form at the time because he insisted on trying to create a brilliancy in every game.} 1. e4 {(1:30)} d5 {(1:28) The time usage was from a (wholly unsuccessful) attempt to pretend he was improvising, rather than arriving late. He was playing mostly 1... Nc6 at the time, but following up with ...d5 and going into the ...O-O-O lines of the Scandinavian, so this amounted to nothing more than changing the move order.} 2. exd5 Qxd5 3. Nc3 Qd6 (3... Qa5 {In this case I probably would have played} 4. d4 {, since I know this line a lot better and} Nc6 $2 {is not the way for Black:} 5. d5 Nb8 (5... Nb4 $4 {is by far the most-played move, but Black is already losing here!} 6. a3 Na6 7. Bb5+ Bd7 8. Bxd7+ Kxd7 9. Be3 {Threatening to trap Black's queen with 10. b4, so} Nb8 10. Qd3 $18 {and he is left hopelessly disorganised.}) 6. Nf3 Nf6 7. Bd2 c6 {A necessary bolt-hole, but} 8. dxc6 Nxc6 9. Nb5 Qb6 10. Be3 Qa5+ 11. Qd2 {gives White a decisive lead in development.} Nb4 (11... Qxd2+ 12. Bxd2 Kd8 13. Ng5 $18 {resembles a well-known trap line in the Smith-Morra Gambit of all things.}) 12. O-O-O $18 {Even though Black can win a pawn and trade queens,} Nxa2+ $2 13. Kb1 Qxd2 14. Rxd2 {renders Black defenceless against Nc7+.}) 4. Nf3 {I knew well that Peter had won a lot of games by simply rounding up White's d-pawn after ...Nc6, ...Bg4 and ...O-O-O, so I deliberately delayed d2-d4, correctly guessing that he would transpose back into my preparation (i.e. 1. e4 Nc6 2. Nf3 d5 3. exd5 Qxd5 4. Nc3 Qd6).} Nc6 5. d4 Nf6 (5... Bg4 $143 $2 {does not work in this position because of the stunning} 6. d5 Ne5 7. Qd4 $3 $146 {, when Nb5 is coming up and Black simply cannot hold everything together.} Nxf3+ (7... Bxf3 {At first sight, this trivially wins a piece since White loses his queen if he recaptures, but Black's queen is overloaded after} 8. Nb5 Qb6 9. Qxe5 O-O-O 10. gxf3 $18 {, and in fact Black is the one who loses a piece.}) 8. gxf3 Bxf3 (8... Bd7 9. Nb5 {and Black can't defend c7 any more - if} Bxb5 10. Bxb5+ c6 11. Bf4 Qd7 12. dxc6 $1 $18 {wins everything}) 9. Nb5 Qd7 10. Qf4 Bxh1 11. Nxc7+ Kd8 12. Nxa8 $18 {White will complete his development much faster than Black ever will, and this is not a position where one's king should camp out in the centre.} Qd6 (12... Bxd5 $2 13. Qb8+ Qc8 14. Qxa7 $18 {gives White access to the important b6 square}) 13. Qa4 Nf6 14. Qxa7 Nxd5 15. Be2 e6 16. Bd2 Ke7 17. O-O-O {Black's kingside speaks for itself.}) 6. Nb5 Qd8 7. c4 {White more often plays 7. d5, but I had judged this a simpler route to a plus, just banking a healthy space advantage in the centre rather than trying to blow Black off the board. Peter likes to find obscure but very forcing variations which he can memorise computer analysis of, so trying for an immediate knockout would play right into his hands.} a6 8. Nc3 Bg4 9. d5 Ne5 10. Be2 {(1:29) This line has only been played in a handful of games, but both sides had independently concluded it was critical - indeed, later I discovered that Negi analysed all of this in his repertoire series too. White has given away some squares in the centre, but in return he has stopped d4 coming under siege, cramped Black's position and sped ahead in development.} Bxf3 {(1:31)} 11. Bxf3 Qd7 {Now I was on my own. Black decides to leave me with the light-squared bishop, hoping it will prove to be a bad piece with the central pawns on light squares.} (11... Nxc4 $143 $4 {I realised at the board that Black needs to avoid this in view of} 12. Qa4+ b5 13. Nxb5 $1 $18 {. One can reasonably argue that I should have checked this when preparing, but in a weekend tournament you can only do so much.}) (11... Nxf3+ {was all I had looked at, when White gets a healthy plus by simple means.} 12. Qxf3 g6 13. O-O Bg7 14. Bf4 O-O 15. Rad1 $16 {Black's problem is simply that he has no counterplay whatsoever.}) 12. Be2 $6 {This timid move dissipates my opening advantage, giving Black time to catch up in development. I was too attached to the bishop pair, and didn't appreciate that is still risky for Black to take the c-pawn even if it is now tactically possible.} (12. O-O $142 {Is the way to go, when I think Black should play} O-O-O (12... Nxc4 $2 13. Re1 {carries no immediate threat at all, but Black cannot finish his development in peace.} Nd6 14. Na4 {Homing in on Black's dancing queen once again.} g6 (14... b6 $143 $2 {covers c5 but exposes c6 instead.} 15. Bf4 g6 16. Rc1 Bg7 {Having now brought all of his pieces into play, White can break through in attractive style with} 17. Bxd6 Qxd6 18. Rc6 Qd8 19. d6 $1 cxd6 20. Rxd6 {when Black loses material.}) 15. Nc5 Qd8 16. Bf4 Bg7 17. Qa4+ b5 18. Qd1 O-O 19. Rc1 $16 {Having provoked the weakening ...b5, White enjoys more than enough for a solitary pawn - after Nd3 the whole c-file, and especially c6, is his for the taking.}) 13. Re1 Nxf3+ (13... Nxc4 $2 {is definitely off-limits now because of} 14. Qb3 Nd6 15. Be3 $18 {with a strong queenside attack to come - Black's kingside pieces are completely excluded from the game.}) 14. Qxf3 Qg4 {Black needs oxygen. If he tarries for too long White might start to seriously think about going for the jugular with c4-c5(-c6).} 15. Qxg4+ Nxg4 16. h3 Nf6 17. Bf4 $14 {Despite the simplification, White's more active pieces and the slightly vulnerable e-pawn would have given me the better of it.}) 12... e6 13. O-O $6 {Castling is always the most natural move, but I can still make something of my lead in development if I start by bringing my other bishop out. As will be seen, my king is not as safe here as I fondly imagined.} (13. Bg5 $142 {Now I can inflict a positional injury after} exd5 (13... Be7 $6 14. f4 Ng6 15. Qc2 $16 {allows White to unexpectedly castle queenside, with a big attack to come. If} h6 $2 16. dxe6 Qxe6 17. f5 {wins a piece.}) 14. Bxf6 gxf6 15. Nxd5 O-O-O 16. O-O $14 {and the f-pawns are no adornment to Black's position, whilst White's knight is for the present untouchable.}) 13... exd5 14. cxd5 Bd6 $6 {I was a bit suspicious of this move when I saw it - to me the bishop belonged on e7, and Stockfish agrees, but Black has more aggressive intentions.} 15. Re1 $6 {(1:13) I was going to play Bg5 and Re1 and didn't think the move order mattered, but it does - as good as the rook might seem on an open file, it needs to stay at its post for the defence of my kingside.} (15. Bg5 $142 {White will take on f6 if allowed, and the engine can't find anything better than} Be7 {admitting the loss of a tempo.} (15... Neg4 16. h3 $16 {is pointless here since f2 is defended. In the game, alas...}) 16. Re1 {The lost move is costly, and Black has to surrender a pawn to complete his development.} O-O (16... Ng6 {avoids this fate, but} 17. Bxf6 gxf6 18. Bg4 f5 19. Bh3 O-O-O 20. g3 $16 {can't be considered an improvement - Black's kingside is ruined and White will get an easy attack on his king down the c-file.}) 17. Bxa6 Qf5 18. Bxf6 Bxf6 19. Be2 $16 {It's true that Black has gained a measure of activity for his pieces, but a pawn is a pawn!}) 15... O-O $11 {(50) Later on I was interested by how differently we viewed the strategy of this position. I saw it in terms of an IQP where I have more space than usual but Black has good squares for his pieces, so was slightly gloomy about creating enough activity to compensate for the structural weakness. Peter was focussed on proving my light-squared bishop to be bad. As the game goes, we are both wrong - Black suddenly gets a lightning attack out of nowhere.} 16. Bg5 Neg4 {Whilst he was thinking it suddenly dawned on me that Peter was going to play this. As I mentioned earlier, he had been striving for artificial brilliance in a lot of his recent games, and now Black's pieces combine for a fierce - but defensible - attack on the white king.} 17. h3 $2 {I thought for a long time without finding a satisfactory way to defend, however the position is by no means as hopeless as I thought.} (17. Bxg4 $142 {changes the position a great deal because of a subtle point, namely that White's queen can now reach f3.} Nxg4 18. h3 Nxf2 {This is now the best Black can do, but it isn't worth any more than a draw.} (18... Bh2+ 19. Kf1 Nxf2 $2 {now loses material to} 20. Kxf2 Qf5+ 21. Qf3 Qxg5 22. g3 $18 {and the bishop is trapped. It isn't best practice to annotate games months after playing them, but from memory this is the line I overlooked.}) 19. Qd2 Nxh3+ 20. gxh3 Qxh3 21. Ne4 {As in the game, White should be able to defend his king with pieces - Stockfish gives Black no more than a draw after} f6 22. Be3 $8 {(only not 22. Bf4?? Qg4+)} Rae8 23. Nxd6 cxd6 24. Bf4 Qg4+ 25. Kh1 Qh3+ 26. Kg1 Qg4+ $11) 17... Nxf2 $2 {Neither player in this game could be described as a calculator, but I was still surprised that I got away with this, as I considered 17... Bh2+ to be much stronger - Peter was playing to the gallery a bit here since, as flashy as it looks, this only amounts to trading three pawns for a piece, in a position where White can cover his king adequately with the pieces.} (17... Bh2+ $142 $1 18. Kf1 {I correctly thought this was a better continuation for Black, but for the wrong reason.} Nxf2 $1 {By starting with the bishop check, Black has driven the white king onto the g-file so that if} (18... Qf5 $4 19. hxg4 Qxg5 {looked like positional ruin to me, but once again I forgot about the bishop nestled in the corner.} 20. g3 $18) 19. Qd4 {he doesn't need to sacrifice the knight at all and can instead play} Qf5 $1 20. Qxf2 (20. Bxf6 {loses an exchange to} Nd3+ 21. Bf3 Nxe1 22. Rxe1 Qxf6 $19) 20... Qxg5 $19 {, with an extra pawn, all of the dark squares and the enemy king in his sights.}) 18. Qd4 $1 {Clearly the knight cannot be taken, but Black's last move wasn't a surprise to me and I played this instantly.} Nxh3+ {(With my king on the g-file, 18... Qf5 carries no threat so White simply plays 19. Bxf6)} 19. gxh3 Qxh3 {After the game the general view of the spectators seemed to be that I was winning, which I found - and still find - hard to credit. There is no snap mate for Black, but I can't see how White can actually win with his king so open.} 20. Bf4 {(48) One of two playable moves.} (20. Qf2 {is the other one, offering an exchange to eliminate the danger to the king.} Bg3 (20... Rfe8 {If Black refuses the transaction then} 21. Qg2 {, and with White on the point of shutting up shop around his king it is time to take a perpetual with} Bc5+ 22. Kf1 Qf5+ 23. Bf3 Qd3+ 24. Be2 Qf5+ $11) 21. Qg2 Qxg2+ 22. Kxg2 Bxe1 23. Rxe1 {White has two bishops against a rook, but on the other hand Black has a lot of pawns. The engine considers this tenable but I would prefer to play Black.}) 20... Qh4 {(19)} 21. Rf1 $8 {Peter said later that he had overlooked this move, counting only on 21. Be5?? (my original intention) Qg5+.} Rfe8 22. Rad1 {I felt that I should be able to defend here, with all of my pieces now contributing, but Black is not out of resources yet.} Ne4 23. Bxd6 Qg5+ 24. Kh1 Nxc3 $6 {Clearing the way to the second rank, however White can cover all of the important squares once the rook gets there.} (24... cxd6 $142 25. Nxe4 Qh4+ {recovers the piece, but also forces White's king up to the third rank after} 26. Kg2 Rxe4 27. Qf2 Qg5+ 28. Kh3 $8 {, the only defence against ...Rh4+.} Re3+ 29. Bf3 g6 $15 {Black has nothing concrete, but it is hard to feel comfortable as White here with the king where it is.}) 25. bxc3 $4 {(30) Of all the weird and wonderful things I managed to overlook around this time in my hapless efforts to calculate, not noticing a mate in one (again!!) is certainly up there with the strangest. And with half an hour on the clock no less.} (25. Qxc3 $142 Rxe2 26. Qf3 {plugs the holes, and attacking the rook denies Black time to capture my bishop.} Qh6+ 27. Kg1 Qg6+ 28. Bg3 Rae8 29. Rd3 Rxb2 {Black gains a fourth pawn for the piece, but with} 30. Qf5 $11 {White achieves the bliss of a queen exchange, eliminating the danger to his king.}) 25... Rxe2 {(9)} 26. Bh2 {Yes, really... a pity for an interesting game to end like this, but I am lost by now in any case.} Qg2# {Catastrophic failures of calculation would prove to be the dominant theme of the rest of the season too.} 0-1

Although it ultimately ended in disaster, I was pleased by the initial accuracy of my defence after 17... Nxf2?, because I play positions where I am forced to rely on calculation very poorly. If there is a lesson for the attacker, it is that if there is a series of only moves then you have to assume the defender will keep finding them. That is why I am critical of 17... Nxf2?, because it entailed great risk when a simpler path was available in the shape of 17... Bh2+ (and the even more straightforward 17... Qf5 wasn't bad either.) Overlooking 21. Rf1 could have been very expensive for Black, and why rely on 8-ply calculation when you don't need to?

Returning to the opening very briefly, the most instructive moment was 12. Be2?!, losing the initiative and the advantage. My decision to retain the two bishops was too slow; as the main line of the 12. O-O variation shows, White can get a comfortable edge without them. When your opponent plays a passive system like this, making no real attempt to equalise, it's often necessary to play energetically to make the most of it.

Overall a mixed bag of a tournament then, but a definite case of what might have been. After this, with the league season winding up, I played only a handful of games over the next few months and none of them were notable. As such I'm going to move straight onto my main tournament of the year, the Major Open, played in Leicester at the end of July. I started feebly with 0/2, throwing away a win and a draw respectively with one-move blunders, then beat an unrated opponent in round three and had the better of a draw in the fourth round. We'll pick up the action in round five, which turned into a grand battle.