Chess Club of the Golden Crescent Welcomes You!

Thanks for stopping by the official website of the Chess Club of the Golden Crescent! Feel free to send us an e-mail if you have any questions or comments: goldencrescentchess@live.com We also invite you to leave comments on our postings or at our official club forum (click here to access the forum). And of course, feel free to come by Jason's Deli on Monday nights to get a game or two in with us!

09 December, 2009

An Addition to "In Defense of Latvians and Their Gambits", Part One

When I got a look at the game Henkleman - J. DeVries, I was more than a little bit taken with it - I wanted to see if my analytical powers were up to the task of improving either side's play. Of course, I thought John played a wonderful game, but could he have played even better? Did white miss a game-saving defense?

What I'm doing, then, is offering a two-part analysis. This first entry is my original analysis of the game Henkleman - J. DeVries. The second analysis will be done by Fritz 7 and posted here a week from today. This week will allow you ample time to review the game and my notes first before reviewing Fritz's work. I will be utterly deflated if it turns out I missed something major, but to be honest I'm expecting it.

On to the game!

  • 1. e4 e5
  • 2. Nf3 f5
  • 3. Nxe5 Qf6
  • 4. d4 d6
  • 5. Nc4 fxe4
  • 6. Nc3 Qg6
  • 7. f3 Nf6
  • 8. Qe2 Be7
  • 9. fxe4 Bg4! - This is one annoying bishop!
  • 10. Qe3 0-0
  • 11. Be2 Nc6

I haven't had much to say about the opening - that's because I know the Latvian Gambit about as well as I know folk singer Joan Armatrading. (I'm always perfectly willing to discuss my ignorance on any topic) But I can look around the board and discuss the relevant features of the position.

Black is castled and all of his pieces are developed to good squares, especially the g4-bishop. It is this bishop which needs to be chased away ASAP - the white king can't escape the center with that bishop barreling down the d1-h5 diagonal, obviously. But white is a pawn up for all of his trouble, so wouldn't it be great to just play 12 Be2 Bxe2 and get rid of that scary bishop? Yes it would - except white is going to be a pawn down in the middlegame instead of a pawn up ([A] 13 Qxe2 Nxd4 14 Qd3 Qxg2! [B] 13 Nxe2 Qxg2). And that's fine if that's the best we can do - but I can't see why white can't simply play 12 h3 here (12...Qh5 13 Be2 Bxe2 14 Nxe2) and white will be able to castle and go into that middlegame with his extra pawn.

White instead preferred to play for the attack.

  • 12 Nd5? Nxd5
  • 13. exd5 Bf6

In my opinion, more to the point is 13...Bh4+ 14 g3 Rae8 15 Ne5 Nxe5 and white can rescue the queen but he's in a pit no matter what he does.

  • 14. Qg3 Nxd4
  • 15. Bd3 Rad8+

I like the look of 15...Nxc2+ but it loses thanks to the now hanging g4-bishop after 16 Bxc2 Qxc2 17 Qxg4.

  • 16. Ne3 Nf5! - Piling on!
  • 17. Bxf5 Qxf5
  • 18. c3

The counterattacking try 18 Rf1 comes up short: 18..Bh4 19 Rxf5 Bxg3+ 20. hxg3 Rxf5.

  • 18...Bg5

This move, I think, showed DeVries' alertness and good judgment in this game more than any other move. I could easily see myself, and many other players in my class, slapping down the tempting 18...Be5. After all, look at the possibilities! The reflexive defense 19 Nxf5 gets mated: 19...Bxg3++ 20 Kf1 Rxf5+ 21 Kg1 Bf2+ 22 Kf1 Bd4+. Well, let's guard that dangerous f2 square, then: 19 Qh4 Bxh2! (mate on f1 or f2 is the punishment for grabbing the h2-bishop) 20 Bc1 (vacating d2 for the white king) 20...Rxe3+ (20...g5 also appears to win - for fun, play around with it) 21 Bxe3 Qe4 (The h2 bishop is still untouchable because of ...Qxe4+ and ...Qe2#; therefore, white can defend the beleaguered bishop with) 22 Qg5 Bg3+ 23 Kd2 Qxg2+ 24 Kd3 Qe2+ 25 Ke4 (25 Kd4 Be5+ 26 Ke4 Bf3#) 25...Bf3+ 26 Kd4 Be5+ and white must swap queen for bishop.

Pretty stuff, but not exhaustive - white could have willingly given up queen for bishop before he was forced to and made black's task a little messier. No, there is a reason black rejected 18...Be5 and that's the absurdly simple 19 Qxg4. So why bother with all those lines? For one, I think they're kind of fun; but two, and what is far more important, they illustrate how important it is to remain alert to every possibility. John DeVries undoubtedly saw that 18...Be5 was a strong-looking move, but many won games are blown at the exact moment the player in question chose not to sit on his hands? Yes, 18...Be5 is refuted simply, but not many of us would have exercised the patience and judgment to resist playing it. Stronger players could have resisted, but when we all learn when and when not to pull the trigger, we will get a little bit closer to their level. John DeVries certainly did so in this game.

  • 19. h3 Bxe3

I'm nitpicking here, but 19...Qd3 removes all doubt - either 20 hxg4 or 20 Qxg4 are answered by 20...Bxe3 and there's just no way to deal with all the threats without losing scads of material.

  • 20. Bxe3

John thought that perhaps 20 hxg4 might have saved the position, but black's position is too strong for that: 20...Bf2+! 21 Kd1 Qxd5. The black queen scampers away while the white queen remains in peril.

  • 20...Bh5
  • 21 Kd2 Qxd5
  • 22 Kc1

22 Bd4 threatens mate in one - remarkable in that white has been going backwards for almost the entire game - but the defense is simple: 22...Re2+ 23 Kd3 Qf5+ 24 Kc4 b5+ 25 Kb3 Qc2+ 26 Kb5 c5+.

  • 22...Qd3
  • 23 Re1 Bg6, 0-1

And there it is. We'll see one week from today just how good my analysis was. That aside, I enjoyed playing through this game. It was a lot of fun.