Just another site

Archive for the ‘3-Movers’ Category

Paul Keres (1916-1975)

with 2 comments

-“How is that you never managed to become Chess World Champion?”.-

-“Because, like my country, I had bad luck” (Paul Keres)

(Curiously enough, the first time I saw this statement was in Spassky´s words. Both were friends, so …)


I hardly remember when I began to admire him. Perhaps everything began when I managed to get a copy from Anthony Saidy´s book “The Battle of Chess Ideas”(around 1980). In this book the author confess he wants to follow Reti´s path and chose ten modern super GMs, wrote a biographical summary and included games and positions. He also wrote about the history of Chess and the Chess ideas/schools. The GMs Saidy´s analized were: Botvinnik, Reshevsky,Keres, Bronstein, Smyslov,Tal, Petrosian, Larsen , Spassky and Fischer. He also regretted having to pass over names like Korchnoi, for instance.

Or , perhaps like Keres, I have never had good luck either…

Years later, one of my CC opponents from Estonia sent me, as a present, the famous book -in Estonian- “Meie Keres” by V Heuer. And I managed to get other books by Keres : “The Art of Analysis”, “Practical Chess Endings” and an invaluable one: “My Chess Style” (aka “Chess As I play It“). (By the way, Keres is perhaps the only Chess GM who appears in a banknote. He is also a Estonian hero).

(I have written about Keres previously in this blog, so you can find other posts in this site.)

I cannot explain why I am so fond of Keres… Perhaps it is because his personality, his personal history and fate ,or perhaps because I was deeply moved by the images included in that Estonian book “Meie Keres”. What follows is a personal interpretation of the topic.

Keres was born in Estonia. But his country was annexed to the Soviet Union after WW2. The territory has a complex history (it is a borderland) . An independent state, with links to Sweden,the Russian Empire, invaded by the Nazi’s during WW2,later invaded by the USSR,…and so on. Anyway, Keres managed to survive the Stalinist terror regime, played for Estonia and later for the USSR (he died in 1975 being, officially , a Soviet citizen. For more information, please find those other posts in this blog). 

In 1938 Keres won the AVRO Tournament ahead of Alekhine,Capablanca,Botvinnik Euwe, Reshevsky ,Fine and Flohr. The winner of the event would be the official challenger to play for the World Championship (in the hands of Alekhine). But the outburst of WW2 frustrated the possibility of such a match. Estonia was invaded by the Germans and Keres had to survive accepting the new rules. At the end of the war, Estonia fell in Stalin’s iron claws and he had to survive again but being under a severe stress for many years.He managed to survive and protect his family again. Being a Soviet citizen he played for the USSR for the rest of his life , taking part in seven Chess Olympiads in which the USSR Team won the gold medal one after another. Keres can be considered among the ten best ever chessplayers of his time with victories over eight out of nine World Champions and drawing in two games against Anatoly Karpov, for instance. As an anecdote, he had an excellent score against Korchnoi, and Viktor once complained that “It is always the same: I always manage to beat Tal and Keres always manage to beat me”. Keres’ last tournament was in Vancouver (Canada) in 1975. When he was going back home via Helsinki, he suddenly died in the Finnish capital. Botvinnik stated that Keres’ death had been the greatest loss for the Chess world since the death of Alekhine. And Botvinnik very well knew what he was talking about.

(White side)


This position appeared in Smyslov-Keres, USSR Chess championship 1951. Black to move. Could you find the plan/moves Keres found to beat his extremely dangerous opponent?

(White side)

ranviir-keres .

And this comes from a relatively unknown game played in 1947 between Randviir (White) and Keres.

Smyslov Keres went:

36…, Bb1! 37. a3  a5! 38. Bd1 Kg6  39. Kg2  Kf5  40. Kf3  Ke5

 41. a4  g5  42. Ke2  Bf5  43. g4  Bb1  44. Kf3  f5  45. gf5  Kxf5  46. Kf2  Be4  47. Kg3  Kg6  48. Kf2  h5  49. Kg3  h4  50. Kf2  Bf5  51. Kg2  Kf6  52. Kh2  Ke6!   /White resigned in view of 53. Kg2  Ke5  54. Kh2  Bb1  55. Kg2  Ke4  56 Kf2  Kd3 (Suetin)

Randviir-Keres : Keres to move, what would your first move be?: (Remember this is a Pawn endgame, so the basic technique is that of “opposition”)

1… Kb5!! (the only way to avoid a draw according to Keres)2. a4  Kb6  3. Kc4  a5  4. d6  Kc6  5. d7  Kxd7  6. Kxc5  Ke7  7. Kd5  Kf7  8. Ke4  Kf8!!  9. Ke3  Ke7  10. Ke4  Kd6  11. Kd4  h6!  12. Ke4  Kc5  13. Ke3  Kd5!  14. Kd3  Ke5  15. Ke3  h5  16. gh5  Kxf5  17. Kf3  Ke6  18. Kg4  Kf7  19. Kf5  Kg7 / White resigned.

To end this post and for the lovers of  3-movers, perhaps you would like to have a try at the following mate in 3 moves “specially composed” by H. Alton:





Written by QChess

February 7, 2015 at 10:02 am

Positions to Solve

with 2 comments


Mate in three moves by J.W. Abbott

Some time has passed since I last wrote a post here… I have been playing CC, reading, thinking and sunk into depression,trying to survive to it, trying to find solution to problems both in Chess and in life… (these grey, rainy,cold,glum,winter days kill me one year after another…).

One of the solutions I found was to engage in more and more ICCF games. Apart from that, I proceeded to re-read Rudolf Reinhardt’s: Aron Nimzowitsch 1928-1935. A superb book of over four hundred pages with a wealth of information, annotated games, and so on. Unfortunately, its author passed away without seeing his wonderful masterwork published.

Well, many Chess writers insist on the idea that to learn Chess one must study and play. Everybody understands what “playing Chess” means. And for “studying”?. Of course you should study games, openings, interesting endgames, technique, and so on. When you are alone (I mean with no trainer) you may find it drab or boring. Anyway you should do it.

My two favourite methods are : 1) to solve mate in 3/4 move problems and 2) to choose games played by my favourite players, play the opening moves on a board (NEVER on the computer screen), cover their moves and try to find them on my own. Everybody knows these methods. It is very interesting to cross-check the move you want to play against the actual one played by the GM. And when I do not understand something, I make a tick on the move: when the process is over I replay the games and analyse the why’s and the why not’s. Incidentally, another good way to develope your analytical skills. So two birds with the same stone…  My only advice to you would be that though this method can be used with any GM, I would recommend you to use the players you feel most at home with. Not all “positional” players play the same way and not all “attacking” players play similar Chess. (among other considerations because although we use those words to classify chessplayers ,it is too broad, too vague and imprecise ,etc. The matter of the chessplayers’ styles I think it is an absolutely complex matter, with many sides, many shades, many details.)

These gloomy days I have been thinking about life (or rather my Chess life). I was taught the game in 1971: Bobby Fischer, Boris Spassky, Viktor Korchnoi, Anatoly Karpov,Tigran Petrosian etc. were young. Today Bobby and Tigran are dead, Korchnoi and Spassky can no longer play and what is worse: illness has confined them to wheelchairs. Only Karpov seems well though he is no longer playing Chess.


Mate in three moves by O. Wurzbrg 

The following position is from Keres-Petrov, Moscow 1940. How would you continue as White?


In this position Keres played:

19. e6! and the game continued with 19…, Nd5 / 20.exf7 , Rxf7 /21. Bc4!, c6/ 22. Rxd5 , Qxc4 / 23. Qe8 and Black resigned. 


Written by QChess

January 11, 2015 at 5:07 pm

CChess is a Jungle…

leave a comment »

CChess is a jungle. Let me explain: you like CC and perhaps you are playing in any  ICCF official event. This is my case. Of late, I have realized that most of my opponents are not only armed to the teeth with databases, and the rest of CC paraphernalia: many of them seem to be connected to the webserver  perpetually: I work hard on my move, find it, check and recheck it well , not always…- send it and “voilà” , I have not written it down yet and   the answer flashed on the screen. Believe me: I have sent moves at the oddest and infamous hours. It doesn´t matter: there is always someone with their move or conditional move ready  and deciding s/he is not going to give you any respite. And it is not a matter of different time zones… Some days ago I told an opponent -and friend of mine from Sweden- that I saw today’s CC as a jungle full of lions, panthers, tigers … and me. The problem is that I saw myself as a kitten and the rest of felines instead of considering me a fellow-feline companion considered me as their food… Then, do I lack the famous “killer instinct”?. Or perhaps am I more an artist and not a fighter and so on?. The answer to both questions is in the negative. No, I want to win all my games, to beat all my opponents, I like fighting and winning. So, I do not know why I see myself as a kitten and the rest as a wild group of big felines out for blood. -And please, do not suggest I should need a psychiatrist 🙂 🙂 –

I have found the following position and notes (do not know where it appeared or wrote the accompanying legend) in my archives:


“J. Mendheim. 19th century. This 5-mover is a great example of stormy power play. The solution usually contains sparkling combinations, and positions resemble actual games”. (So mate in five moves)

How is Boris Spassky? Since he fled to Mother Russia already some time ago the only things that have come out are that he is recovering slowly from a stroke, that he made brief public appearances and that he decided to be inscribed as a Russian -instead on a French- chessplayer again. I have been unable to get in touch with him as I did before (you can read about all this in previous posts in this blog). Well, I frequently remember that July 2007 when we met in my hometown, and spent several days together… This episode was the second stroke he suffered in the space of several years. He managed to recover quite well from the first one, but experts say that a repetition is usually terrible. When I read about him and Fischer sometimes it seems as if the early seventies of the past century were placed two centuries ago, belonged to a  part of my life lost in the mists of time. Curiously enough, unknown snaps featuring Bobby Fischer keep appearing: the last one (“Spraggett on Chess” Blog) depicts Fischer giving  lecture at Hart House in Toronto, Canada. It is very curious but Fischer seemed to have been always doing something on my very birthday date along the years…

Those who regularly follow this blog may have realized that changes in the system have erased several images and positions. I do not know why this has happened…-the gremlings???- One of those images corresponds to a mate in three moves problem by Tavariani  (level: difficult):


I think these problems are enough to make you feel the pangs of devoting your lives to playing Chess…Or not.


Written by QChess

November 8, 2013 at 8:29 am

War Diary

with 2 comments

I have engaged myself into too many ICCF official games. These days, with most opponents armed to the teeth with programs, databases etc ,one can see that new “features” have crop up. Let’s see some of them:

In the past, when we had to use postcards and stamps, only a few diehards continued playing in clearly lost positions. Today, playing through the server, I have games where my opponents keep on playing with a lot of material down and no compensation, even whole Rooks and Queens… Why?… Because rating points have become absolutely valuable and nobody wants to lose a single one (after all, your opponent may die in the process of trying to beat you -or at least some of my opponents may believe this idea…).

Games keep on being won, lost and drawn, with perhaps a growing number of drawn games and a lot of people complaining because “they are stronger and now even rivals with less ratings than them manage to make a draw”. Yeah! : in CC many people make a funny mistake taking “rating points” (a relative and changing value) for “chess strength” ( perhaps a more permanent value). I suppose their process of reasoning is: “since I have 100 more points than my rival he must  lose against me, forgetting  that in Chess, as in any other sport, you must beat your opponents because they will surely fight for their lives trying to spoil your fun. In any case, in today’s games  you must be ready to accept they are likely to be very long…

Today everybody is very dangerous, with the changing ratings indicating nothing: in one game you beat an opponent 100 points above you and in another one, you lose to another opponent 100 points below you. Be more careful (I can tell you from sad experience… The ICCF produce rating list every three months. A bit too often??.- I don’t know.

With the wonderful invention of the webservers /play through the Internet you may -if you and your opponent follows suit exchange many moves a day. Or not. In my ICCF events, with 50 days for 10 moves and some specifications to make the players send their moves on a regular basis (the system has different controls to do so) I usually play the first ten moves relatively quickly and then I usually slow down a bit.

My last results show that I have just won a tournament, have another one in my pocket but I have sheepishly lost a game because I fell in a theoretical hole: I was following the book, but the line was wrong in the database, I did not check it out and lost. Shame on me. Another sin of mine is trying to employ openings I do not usually play “for the sake of changing”. A capital sin if you have too many games. The Grünfeld Defence was my last “Waterloo” . 

I began to play CC in 1986. CC may become terrible since the games may last for many months. Everything is OK if you get hold of the “right” end of the stick… If you end up on the “wrong” end the pains and sufferings awaiting you may be unbearable.

Apart from many other considerations, I suppose people play Chess perhaps not professionally, but on a serious basis because, in the end, we tend to think that the joy provided by winning may compensates the pains of losing. And everybody believes s/he is going to win “the next game I am going to play“.  The question is : is the feeling left by the victory the same as the feeling creates by the loss???. If your answer is in the affirmative, tend apply it to real life, to the good and the bad moments you have been through …: are they still the same?.- Over to you!.

Now a problem for this ugly, cold, grey November days:

mate in 3

E.B. Cook 1856. Mate in three moves.

(This blog is approaching the 4,000 visits. Thank you very much indeed. I don’t know how long I will be writing it, but any comment will be welcome.- It would be great if the readers decided to express their views too. )


Written by QChess

November 4, 2013 at 7:08 pm

Quest (Chess)-tions?

leave a comment »


pos1  Mate in  3 moves. ( Bergstrom)


There are 4 questions I try to answer to myself with different degrees of success ( in fact no success since they seem to be always there…):

1.- Why am I still playing correspondence Chess since everybody uses programs to find/check his / her moves?

2.- Why do I so much like Nimzowitsch  and the Hypermodern period around him (1910-1935)?

3.- Why do I like the Soviet Chess School and the Chess between 1940 and 2000 .

4- Why am I writing this blog?

Since writing may constitute a sort of cathartic experience, let’s deal with them.

Q1.: The use of strong Chess programs has changed the way CC is played. When you win you are happy, when you lose you wonder what use all this is… I learn the game around 1971 and began to devote nearly all my spare  time to Chess in 1978.  In the past I did some sport: swimming and cycling. Only swimming remains. So I devote my spare time to reading (10%), other activities (10%)  and to Chess (80%). Of course this is an average calculations: while on holidays “other activities” are the 90%!

Well, if I gave up Chess, what more could I do?. On one occasion, Bobby Fischer accepted a draw in one game. Later he regretted it : “I should have adjourned the game. What should I do with myself tomorrow?” Bobby has no life outside Chess. It is not my case, but try to ask (and answer) yourself the same question…

Q2.: This is easy. Freud and Jung would be delighted: my first Chess book was O’ Kelly’s book on Petrosian. The second was Nimzowitsch “Chess Praxis” and the third a small book with all Reti´s compositions. So my “Chess infancy” marked my “Chess adulthood”. Psychoanalysis at its best.

Q3.: In 1978 , when I began to seriously study Chess the most important event was the Baguio match between the Anatoly Karpov (USSR) and the Soviet dissident Viktor Korchnoi. The impact on the media was enormous. The Soviet Union had been the driving Chess force since WW2, everybody admired the Soviets, everybody tried to get Russian Chess literature, etc. In 2000 in my opinion the world and the world of Chess were suffering complicated changes.The Soviet Union was slowly disappearing, Karpov one of my all-time idols began to decline. To me it was as if everything had changed forever. Perhaps it was me who changed…In any case, I see it as a turning point in my life. The period 2000-2005 was a terrible personal period for me.

Q4.: This is the worst one… When I began to write this blog I did it because I wanted to  keep a  record of my Chess experiences mainly a sort of “Diary of an ex Chess Deputy Arbiter”, etc. Also, I wanted to write about Chess as I see it in a sort of attempt to show my gratitude to Chess. After the first few posts, the blog seemed to acquire a sort of own independent life. Now I do not know what to do. 64 is a magical number ( Mercury’s magical square has this number of squares, as the chessboard, and so on.) So, perhaps when I reach the number of 64 posts I will have to decide what to do. But so far, nothing is decided yet…

Perusing other Chess blogs one can find interesting ideas, byassed analyis of this and that matter, etc. One of my defects is trying to be objective from a subjective vision… One of the recurring topics is that of “The Ten Best Chessplayers in the History of Chess”. One can find as  many list as writers.I have nothing against it. In fact I think you can always found a lot of interesting explanations concerning why / why not this or that player is or is not in the list. The only problem I find is how to compare players from different periods of time…

I am going to tell you one of my biggest doubts:  Period 1930 – 1972. Events: Soviet Union  Championships  – USA Championships : which of the two were the strongest?????? 

I guess I will have to devote some more space to this particular question…In a future post.

W.: A. Karpov (1)

B.: T. Petrosian (0)

Tilburg 1982

1. e4  c6  2. d4 d5  3. Nd2  de4  4. Ne4  Nd7  5. Bc4   Ngf6  6. Ng5  e6  7. Qe2  Nb6  8. Bb3  a5  9. a3  a4  10.   Ba2  h6  11. N5f3  c5  12. c3  Bd7  13.  Ne5  cd4  14. cd4  Be7  15.  Ngf3  0-0  16. 0-0  Be8  17. Bd2  Nbd5  18. Rfc1  Qb6  19. Bc4  Bc6  20. Re1  Nc7  21. Nc6  bc6  22. Bf4  Ncd5  23. Be5  Rfd8  24. Rad1  Bd6  25. Rd2  Be5  26. de5  Nd7  27. g3!   Nf8  28. Red1  Rd7  29. Qe4  Rb7  30. Rc2  Rab8  31. Rdd2  Ne7  32. Kg2  Qa5  33. h4  Rd7  34. Be2  Rd5  35. Rd4  Rd4  36. Qd4  Nd5?   37.Rc6  Qa8  38. Rc4  Qb7  39. Rc2!  Nb6  40. Bb5  Ng6  41. Qd6  Qa8  42.  Bc6 , Black resigned.


Written by QChess

December 6, 2012 at 6:57 am

Fear of Losing

leave a comment »

I have met all sort of players. Some of them are eager to play and eager to beat you. The idea of being defeated by you is alien to them. They think they are the best and “you” (whoever s/he is) are worse than him. (I suppose they never fear losing) . Others, are “neutral” : they never speak about his/her feelings. (I suppose , to them, losing is only a possibility) And the third type I call them “philosophical”. They are always considering psychological matters, philosophical nuances, are affected by his/her daily feelings . They fear losing like the plague!. (Of course this cannot be applied to professional Chess, I think…but am not sure…)

Nevertheless, losing is one of the possibilities when you play Chess. At professional or super-professional levels , apart from the psychological blow involved, it may also imply losing a tournament, losing money or both. At non-professional and CC (remember CC = Correspondence Chess)  levels the psychological blow may be devastating or not, it depends!.

When you are a CC player and have also played OTB Chess, you began to feel that the same things are not always “the same” things… I am going to mention only two of them:

1.- Wrong Opening Choice.

2.- Defending bad (even very,very bad ) positions.

Before a game, haven’t you ever let your imagination fly and instead of your customary opening/defence you have played “something different” because you were in good spirits?. And perhaps most of us CC players have done the same… And after that “merry moment” you came back to this world and contemplated a terrible situation on the board: in fact your opponent knew the line better than you ,because  you have even  forgotten even the main line continuation or if in CC the position looks horrid… The long, drab, nearly humiliating task of defending the mess is in front of you.

Well, here appears the difference between OTB and CC. In OTB Chess, your misery will last from some minutes to some hours. At the end of the day you will have to go home with a draw or with a painful defeat and the as of calling yourself an ass while licking your wounds.

But in CC, your miserable state may last for weeks or months, who knows if a whole year or more… Week after week you have to analyse that wreckage created by your stupid flight of the imagination, day in day out you swear to yourself never to play such stupid line again; day after day the game and the position nearly wake you up, sweating cold,  in the middle of the night; day after day you wish to receive the proper smack in the face as your opponent’s greeting message, always thinking about resigning with every move you send… Yes! This is a horrible self-inflicted torture!.

(And in CC unbelievable as it may seem, there is a nother source of defeat: you are playing twenty-thirty games. You have the moves and the positions in the webserver and , moreover, you have written down the moves in a notebook. All in all, you set up the wrong position , choose your move,and  now comes the worst : you send it  only realizing your mistake when you receive the answer…!. Yes, this happens…)

So, my dear CC colleagues, the next time you decide “to make a little experiment”, think twice or re-read this post, because you could be on the brink of turning yourself into your worst, most harmful enemy.

(End of post. Try to solve the problems no matter the time you need.)

(Solutions to problems:

(1)  1. Bg2! (the only square that works) Now mate in 3 follows 1…, Bh3 /2. Bxh3 ba6 3. Bg2 // 1. Bg2  , B-moves 2. c8=Q Bxc8  3. Nc7 mate. Please note that g2 is the only valid square to avoid the Black Bishop checking with …Bh3- …Bg2+  spoiling the task.

(2) A lovely position in which every Rook,King Knight or Pawn move allows the Black King to escape or be stalemated. After seeing another problem I realised there is a move I never had never considered though perfectly legal if not stipulated again. I had a look at the position and so the pieces duly placed for…:   1. 0-0-0!! (Wonderful)  If  1…, Kxa2 / 2. Kc2 , Ka3 3. Ra1 mate!  If 1…Kxc3 2. Ra4  Kg3 3. Re3 mate. I got an immense delight solving this problem after so many months. It´s so easy when you see it…


Written by QChess

October 4, 2012 at 5:55 am

Horizon Effect

leave a comment »

How long do top chessplayers calculate?. Non players believe that the best chesslayers are  able to calculate many many moves in advance. This is but a “cliché”  (in the same way that many people believe that if you, a chessplayer, plays against a less-skilled or ocassional opponent you have to win in a few moves…).

Steinitz declared that the matter depended on the level of his rival. Kasparov said that in positions with forced lines he could calculate around ten even fifteen moves. In other cases -complicated positions- he said that one has to rely upon his/her intuition + the positional understanding and in these case perhaps only from 5 to seven moves can be calculated. Some experts warn of the famous “two move principle” (the name is mine).

Well, the mind of a professional does not work so strictly  (I mean they do not care about these “scholastical” matters…) .They have a position in front of them and , generally speaking, know the plans associated to the opening played. Then,  in an unconscious way, they begin to apply their knowledge of the position, the pattern recognition, their intuition, their ability to perceive immediate tactical nuances , their strategical knowledge and their positional insight. They are able to use a sort of goal-oriented thinking to take advantage of the assets or to determine that the opponent’s threats are more dangerous than his own and consequently he has to define a plan of defence.

The term “horizon effect” appears related to artificial intelligence. In short: when evaluating possible future positions and decide where to stop the calculation, what would happen if the engine stops on move 10 and on move 11th there is a mate in one?. This tries to be avoided introducing what is known as “quiescence search”.

In OTB Chess there are hundreds of  examples where both players reach an opening position where both parties believe the advantage is on their respective sides. The ensuing play and the post-mortem analysis will prove who was right. In other cases  one of the players has a better vision, calculates one step ahead ad is able to beat his opponent who had stopped calculating one or more steps behind his rival.

Chess is  very complicated, with many absolutely different factors intervening (even top GMs and World Champions have been defeated in less than 20 moves, for instance).

Abrahams wrote that “the very best players very rarely make any perceptible tactical error. They lose by choosing a bad strategical line and persisting in it. They lose, in effect, by trying to do too much (or too little).” .- “The Chess Mind”  (Of course all this under normal circumstances I add).

Kotov wrote that you could find that some leading players might overlook a combination, but that you would never find one who calculated variations badly.

W.: E. Geller (1)

B.: Y. Anikaev (o)

Minks 1979

1. e4 c5  2. Nf3 e6  3. d4 cd4  4. Nd4: Nf6  5. Nc3 d6  6. Be2 Be7  7. 0-0 0-0  8. f4 Nc6  9. Be3 a6  10. a4 Bd7  11. Bf3 Na5  12. Qe2  Qc7  13. g4 Rfc8  14. g5 Ne8  15. f5 Nc4  16. Bh5 g6  17. fg6  fg6  18. Qf2! Ne5  19. Nf3!  Ng7  20. Ne5: Rf8  21. Nf7! Nh5:  22. Nd5!! ed5  23. Nh6 Kg7 24. Qf7! Rf7:: 25. Rf7: Kh8  26. Bd4 Bf6  27. Rf6!  and Black resigned.  What a thrashing!

W.: L. Portisch (0)

B.: J. Pinter (1)

Hungarian Chess Championship 1984

1. d4 Nf6  2.c4 e6  3. Nf3 d5  4. Nc3 c5  5. cd5 Nd5:  6. e4 Nc3:  7. bc3 cd4  8. cd4 Nc6  9. Bc4 b5 10. Be2 Bb4  11. Bd2 Qa5  12. Bb4: Qb4:  13. Qd2 Bb7  14. a3 Qd2: 15. Kd2: a6  16. a4 b4  17. a5?! Rd8  18. Ke3 f5!  19. ef5 ef5  20. Bc4 Ke7  21. d5  Kf6!  22. dc6 Rhe8  23. Kf4 Re4  24. Kg3 Bc8!  25. Rac1  Rg4  26. Kh3  f4  27 Ne5? (The losing move. It was necessary 27 Ba5:) 27. … , Kg5  28. Nf7  Kh5  29.Be2 Rd3  30. g3  f3  31. Rc5  Rg5  32. g4  Bg4:  33. Kg3  fe2  and White resigned.


Written by QChess

May 8, 2012 at 7:28 am

The Blog

The latest news on and the WordPress community.

%d bloggers like this: