Skype coaching session, 26 August 2018. The game discussed (35 moves) is given below with annotations and without annotations. Re-structuring of the sessions now offers the option for guests to bring their own games for group discussion. Recordings of some previous coaching sessions can be found at: http://www.open-aurec.com/Skype/PaulBenson/PaulBenson.htm Paul Benson. * * * White: I. Dal (Turkey), 1621. Black: P. Benson (Great Britain) 1928. Event: IBCA World Team Championship, Sofia 2018. Result: 0-1 in 35 moves. Opening: Queen's Pawn, A41, transposing into Dutch Defence, Staunton Gambit, A80. 1. d4 d6 | Preparation strongly suggested that, 1. ... f5, would receive, 2. e4, the Staunton Gambit. Black isn't worried about this as such, every player of the Dutch Defence must be ready for a host of offbeat 2nd moves, but simply wished to avoid letting the opponent have it their way. || 2. h3 | An unusual choice. White tends to play Queen's Pawn systems involving, 2. Nf3, against which black was thinking about, 2. ... f5, getting a Dutch without white having the Staunton Gambit. Perhaps white is fearing a specially cooked-up line of, 2. Nf3 Bg4, and throws in a quiet move which does no harm to his usual Queen's Pawn set-ups? Such is the psychological sparring of IBCA team chess. || 2. ... f5 | Does something about Leopards and Spots come to mind? Old habits die hard, the Dutch Defence has been in the repertoire since 1975, other systems must be available one supposes. || 3. e4 | White insists it will be a Staunton Gambit after all. Fine, but the inclusions of, pawn h3, and, pawn d6, create important differences to all lines. Instead, 3. g4, would be a full-blooded Korchnoi Attack, where white offers a pawn for an open kingside, careful study of how to play this gambit is recommended before giving it a go. || 3. ... fxe4 4. Nc3 Nf6 5. Bg5 | White could have hybridised the Korchnoi Attack and Staunton Gambit with, 4. g4, though perhaps, 4. ... h6, allows black to just about keep hold of the snatched pawn. || 5. ... Bf5 | There it is. The inclusions of, pawn h3, and, pawn d6, permit black the opportunity to defend the gambit-pawn before white can play the usual plan of, Bxf6, and then, Nxe4, regaining the pawn with some imbalances thrown in for good luck. If black can hang on to the pawn then the middlegame will be comfortable. White must think in terms of busting the black centre, the pieces must be given activity, and the sooner this happens the better. || 6. g4 Bg6 7. Bg2 d5 8. Nge2 | Those present in the coaching session unanimously agreed white should combine a central challenge of, pawn f3, with castling queenside. Against, 8. f3, black would have captured, 8. ... exf3, leaving white to decide which of 3 units should recapture. This would leave black with a backward e-pawn on a semi-open file and probably seeking some formation involving queenside castling, though quite how this should be organised had not yet been thought out. || 8. ... h6 | A difficult move to explain other than following an inner feeling on how white would respond to this challenge. Staunton Gambit strategy involves white playing, Bxf6, in order to undermine the e4 gambit pawn, so black assesses this will be the most likely reply. || 9. Bxf6 | A serious decision. This trade usually allows white to regain the gambit pawn but here this cannot be the case, which means white is losing control of the dark squares without any compensation whatsoever. Instead, 9. Bf4, seems sensible. || 9. ... exf6 | Cleaning up the pawn formation is a positional reply, allowing black to calmly complete development before deciding on how to take the fight to white. Since black seems to have snaffled a safe pawn in the opening there is no need to seek imbalances, so black keeps the option of castling on the same side as white chooses. Instead, 9. ... gxf6, is planning a later central break of, pawn e5, and this would require black to have first organise castling queenside, with all the risks that opposite-wing attacks bring. || 10. a3 | Perhaps white fears, 10. ... Bb4, pinning the c3 knight? This was not in mind, the dark square bishop is destined for unchallengeable kingside duty from the d6 square. || 10. ... c6 | Securing the d5 pawn while preventing an annoying white, Nb5, incursion, after the f8 bishop lands on d6. || 11. O-O Bd6 12. b4 a6 | Black is trying to keep everything under control across the complete width of the board. || 13. Na4 O-O 14. Nc5 Qe7 | Guards the weak b7 pawn and prevents the knight fork, Ne6. This arrangement of white knight forcing the black queen into defensive duties is temporary, black intends pushing the white c5 knight back and then getting on with a kingside campaign starting with, pawn f5, which also allows the black queen into the white kingside. || 15. Qc1 | A double purpose move. Firstly, the queen supports the only decent queenside break of, pawn c4. Secondly, some attempt is being made to strengthen the dark squares on the kingside. || 15. ... b6 16. Nb3 f5 17. Nf4 | This knight sortie is only temporary, so perhaps starting queenside activity with, 17. c4, should have been preferred. || 17. ... Bh7 18. gxf5 | White had to decide which kingside pawn formation offers the best chances for black to stray. Doing nothing about the tension between the white g4 and black f5 pawns would hand the decision over to black. The choice is between an open kingside with, 18. ... fxg4, and invade on the dark squares, probably more preferable than pushing past with, 18. ... f4, aimed at squeezing white across the full width of the board. Both options are good for black, it is only a question of preferring an open fight over a long-term squeeze. || 18. ... Bxf5 | Played with a specific light square idea in mind. Instead, 18. ... Rxf5, offers good prospects as well, just sensible developing moves such as, Nd7, Raf8, followed with the plan, Nf6 - Nh5 - Nf4, and then throw in, Qh4 with, Rg5 and finally, Bf5, and something should give somewhere. The game move of, 18. ... Bxf5, sets up a tactic against the white f4 knight which must now retreat. If it stands firm then black can win another pawn with, 19. ... Bxf4 20. Qxf4 Bxh3, unveiling an x-ray attack from the black f8 rook onto the white f4 queen, this is comfortably winning for black. Phase 1 of restricting white activity is over. Phase 2 of completing development and transferring forces over to the kingside begins. || 19. Ne2 Qh4 20. Qe3 Nd7 | Instead, 20. ... Ra7, intending to double rooks on the f-file, to be followed with transferring the b8 knight to the kingside was also good for black. || 21. Nd2 Rae8 22. c4 | The mutual manoeuvring has resulted in white hitting first, though black does not need to respond yet to any queenside pressure. In fact, black might be able to afford the luxury of losing a pawn or two over on the queenside as this would involve white not paying attention to the kingside. || 22. ... Bg4 | Oh dear. Sometimes a position offers too much and the imagination begins to run riot. The initial black plan was to lift the e8 rook with, Re6, swing it across with, Rg6, and wait for the white response. Pressure could then be further increased by throwing the d7 knight into the attack with, Nf6 - Nh5 - Nf4, and surely something should happen. Unfortunately when the time came to put the plan into operation black had a glance around, just to check if there was, "Something Better", available. Oh dear indeed. || 23. Rfe1 | Once you start to lose the thread it is very difficult to get back on track. Yes, mixing ideas is almost as easy as mixing metaphors. Black is not only executing a poor plan but is forgetting an couple of important points repeatedly emphasised during the coaching sessions: Point 1: "When a unit moves it vacates a square for someone else." Point 2: "Sometimes there can be more than one purpose for a move." Here the white rook is not moving to protect the e2 knight, no, it is moving to vacate the f1 square for someone else to occupy. || 23. ... Bxe2 | The poor plan just keeps rolling. Black should revert to the plan of pressuring the white h3 pawn with, 23. ... Bf5, then lift with, Re6, and swing across with, Rg6. || 24. Qxe2 Qf4 | And the supposed, "Master Plan", is completed. Black has removed the defender of the f4 square to set up what is believed to be an unstoppable invasion onto the h2 square. Unfortunately this is not the case. || 25. cxd5 | It appears white does not appreciate the dangers in the position. It is absolutely essential to protect the h2 square with, 25. Nf1, and only then think about queenside activity. || 25. ... cxd5 | The English language seems not to have a word combining the often too-closely-related concepts of, "Explanation", and, "Excuse". You decide which term applies as black offers, "Reasons", for playing, 25. ... cxd5, instead of the much stronger move order, 25. ... Qh2+ 26. Kf1 cxd5. "Reasons": Black thought the white centralisation of, Rfe1, was designed to recapture, Rxe2, giving sideways protection to the f2 pawn. Black totally failed to consider the white retreat, Nf1, dramatically strengthening the white kingside. Overlooking, Nf1, came about as this knight has always been a, "Queenside Player", shuffling around from, c3 - a4 - c5 - b3 - d2, and from d2 is supporting the, pawn c5, break, so it had no right to interfere with the kingside, right? So, there you have the, "Reasons", for permitting white to have another chance to strengthen the kingside. After, 25. ... Qh2+ 26. Kf1, black should probably take no risks and play, 26. ... cxd5, and leave white to work out how to prevent threats of, Bg3, combined with doubling rooks on the f-file. || 26. Nf1 | And now black must work hard to make dark square strategy into a success. Of course,black still stands better, the extra pawn, a mobile bishop, but if rooks and queens are traded off there is a potentially drawn opposite bishop ending on the horizon. Slipping back into, "Strategic-Mode", by safeguarding the queenside pawns, challenging for control of the fully open c-file, seeking pressure on the isolated white d4 pawn, must be rejected if black is thinking of playing for a win. So this game must be sorted out on the kingside, black gets back into, "Tactical-Mode". || 26. ... Nf6 27. Ra2 | White provides an extra defence to the f2 pawn, which means, Qxa6, is up for consideration. In the game it is black to play and make a serious decision: Keep everything under control or throw caution to the wind and commit to playing for a win. Clue: In an opposite colour bishop middlegame whoever is attacking is effectively a piece up, focus on dark square strategy. || 27. ... e3 | Not quite, "Punching The Chaos Button", but nevertheless setting off tactics based on judgement of what might happen in an open position rather than brute-force calculation. The idea behind this move is to create a means to eliminate that annoying white f1 knight, as if that piece goes the white kingside will be very vulnerable again on the dark squares. || 28. fxe3 | White has been handed a real stinker of a decision. The position is about to open up no matter what, it is black who is much more active, which means white must filter out the dangerous lines, and this all takes precious time. A sample of what was available if the time could be invested: (A). If, 28. f3 Qxd4, black has won another pawn, that black pair of centre-file passers are going to bury white quite quickly. (B). Or if, 28. Qxa6 fxe2+ 29. Rxf2 Qxd4 30. Rxe8 Nxe8, and white has no means to defend the pinned and doubly-attacked f2 rook, black would be winning. (C). Or if, 28. Qxa6 fxe2+ 29. Rxf2 Qxd4 30. Ree2 Nh5 31. Red2 Qa1, and the position is rich in possibilities for both sides, too many variations to try to offer here, just accept this one could lead to any of 3 results. (D). Or if, 28. Nxe3 (successful deflection) Qh2+ 29. Kf1 Ne4 30. Nxd5 (greedy) Ng3+ mate, would be amusing as it also wins the white queen. (E). Or if, 28. Nxe3 Qh2+ 29. Kf1 Ne4 30. Bxe4 Rxe4, threatening, Qh1+ mate, 31. f3 Qxh3+ 32. Kg1 Rxf3, with threats such as, Rexe3, and, Rg3+, very painful to examine. (F). Or if, 28. Nxe3 Qh2+ 29. Kf1 Ne4 30. Bxe4 Rxe4 31. f3 Qxh3+ 32. Kf2 Qg3+ 33. Kf1 Rxf3+, costs white the queen for the black rook, with surely worse to follow. Now can anyone remember that coaching session maxim: "When a unit moves it vacates a square for someone else." Here's another maxim to consider: "When a unit moves the network of, "Defences And Offences", must be re-assessed." Just what defences altered when white captured, 28. fxe3, and is there an opportunity to exploit a newly-created weakness? || 28. ... Qg5 29. Kh1 | Wishing to escape the black queen pin on the g2 bishop is very understandable. Unfortunately on the h1 corner square one feels there could be a possibility of the king having pushed himself into a mating net on the dark squares. Paraphrasing another coaching session maxim: "Sometimes one has a king too many", implying awkwardly pieces can try to exchange themselves off to escape difficulty or danger, this luxury is however not available for kings. Instead, 29. Rc1, seeking activity up the c-file, might allow, 29. ... Re4, intending, 30. ... Rh4, and the pin on the white g2 bishop becomes problematic. || 29. ... Kh8 | The black king similarly shuffles to the corner, this is anticipating both the f6 knight and g5 queen moving away and leaving the d5 pawn undefended. With the king now hiding on h8 there can never be any annoying, Bxd5+, captures with check, meaning whatever tactics taking place around the white king will not be interrupted. || 30. Qxa6 | This type of move can come in for a lot of criticism. However, take a look around and find an improvement. Beware, black is hatching a really nasty threat which must be anticipated. In the meantime white has grabbed a pawn and might consider swallowing another, such a queenside majority would guarantee a winning ending. || 30. ... Nh5 | The threat is hatched. Actually, there are quite a few threats for white to avoid, hardly surprising when you count up the number of active black pieces pointing into the white kingside. || 31. Qd3 | The position is rather tricky and white is not helped by being under time pressure. Some examples of the dangers just waiting to pounce: (A). If, 31. Qe2 Rxf1+, and no matter which way white recaptures, with queen, rook, or bishop, there follows a royal fork of, 32. ... Ng3+, and the white queen falls off. (B). Or if, 31. Ree2 Rxf1+ 32. Bxf1 Ng3+ 33. Kg1 Nxe2+ 34. Kh1 Qg1+ mate. (C). Or if, 31. Ree2 Rxf1+ 32. Bxf1 Ng3+ 33. Kg1 Nxe2+ 34. Kf2 Qg3+ 35. Kxe2 Qh2+ 36. Ke1 Qxa2, black would be a rook ahead. (D). Or if, 31. Raa1 Re6, intending, 32. Rg6, when white cannot defend the doubly-attacked g2 bishop without falling into one of the tactics. (E). Or if, 31. Qxb6, white will suffer the same problems as about to unfold in the game. In essence, without feeding this to Fritz, perhaps white is actually losing? Maybe so or maybe not. However, there is an idea which is so counter-intuitive that it might never get past the Fritz quality-control department. How about, 31. Kg1, deliberately walking into a pin up the g-file? The advantage of this move is that on g1 the white king can no longer fall into tactics involving, Ng3+. Perhaps black can exploit the need for white to keep a knight on f1 to avoid black invading with, Qg3, with Qh2+ mate to follow. This means white cannot easily place a rook on the f-file aiming to provide a flight route into the queenside for the king. So after, Kg1, back to that original plan of, Re6, then, Rg6, and wait for white to arrange a defence, or perhaps simply double rooks on the f-file and wait. There is also a slow re-arrangement for black, place the bishop on b8 with the queen forming a battery onto h2 from the d6 square. The threat then would be simply to double rooks on the f-file, capture with, Rxf1+, and, Qh2+ mate. These ideas might be rather long-winded, but how is white to counter the various threats once the black forces re-arrange themselves? || 31. ... Ng3+ 32. Nxg3 | This loses material. Perhaps more testing was, 32. Kg1, forcing black to find the following ideas: (A). If, 32. Kg1 Nxf1 33. Rxf1 Rxf1+ 34. Qxf1 Qg3 35. Qf3 Qh2+ 36. Kf2 Rf8, black wins the white queen for a rook. (B). Or if, 32. Kg1 Nxf1 33. Rxf1 Rxf1+ 34. Qxf1 Qg3 35. Qd3 Rf8, and white cannot stop, 36. ... Qh2+ mate. (C). Or if, 32. Kg1 Nxf1 33. Rxf1 Rxf1+ 34. Kxf1 Rxe3 35. Qd2 Bg3 36. Ra1 Rf3+ 37. Ke2 Rf2+, white is losing the queen for nothing. (D). Or if, 32. Kg1 Nxf1 33. Rxf1 Rxf1+ 34. Kxf1 Rxe3 35. Qd2 Bg3 36. Ra1 Rf3+ 37. Bxf3 Qxd2, and a mate on the dark squares must surely follow. (E). Or if, 32. Kg1 Nxf1 33. Rxf1 Rxf1+ 34. Kxf1 Rxe3 35. Qd1 Bg3 36. Re2 Rc3 37. Rd2 Bf4, when any white d2 rook other than, Rc2, loses the queen to Rc1, but if, 38. Rc2 Qf5+, picks of the hapless white c2 rook. || 32. ... Qxg3 | The black queen threatens a mate on h2 and attacks the undefended white e1 rook. || 33. Bxd5 Qxe1+ 34. Kg2 Qg3+ 35. Kh1 Rxe3 White lost on time, 0-1 * * * White: I. Dal (Turkey), 1621. Black: P. Benson (Great Britain) 1928. Event: IBCA World Team Championship, Sofia 2018. Result: 0-1 in 35 moves. Opening: Queen's Pawn, A41, transposing into Dutch Defence, Staunton Gambit, A80. 1. d4 d6 2. h3 f5 3. e4 fxe4 4. Nc3 Nf6 5. Bg5 Bf5 6. g4 Bg6 7. Bg2 d5 8. Nge2 h6 9. Bxf6 exf6 10. a3 c6 11. O-O Bd6 12. b4 a6 13. Na4 O-O 14. Nc5 Qe7 15. Qc1 b6 16. Nb3 f5 17. Nf4 Bh7 18. gxf5 Bxf5 19. Ne2 Qh4 20. Qe3 Nd7 21. Nd2 Rae8 22. c4 Bg4 23. Rfe1 Bxe2 24. Qxe2 Qf4 25. cxd5 cxd5 26. Nf1 Nf6 27. Ra2 e3 28. fxe3 Qg5 29. Kh1 Kh8 30. Qxa6 Nh5 31. Qd3 Ng3+ 32. Nxg3 Qxg3 33. Bxd5 Qxe1+ 34. Kg2 Qg3+ 35. Kh1 Rxe3 White lost on time, 0-1 * * *